Appropriation of ancient athens via greek channels for the sake of

Appropriation of ancient athens via greek channels for the sake of

ANOTHER KIND OF HELLENISM?
APPROPRIATION OF ANCIENT ATHENS via GREEK CHANNELS
FOR THE SAKE OF GOOD ADVICE AS REFLECTED IN TARİH-İ
MEDİNETÜ’L-HUKEMA
INAUGURALDISSERTATION
zur
Erlangung des Grades einer Doktorin der Philosophie
in der
FAKULTÄT FÜR GESCHICHTSWISSENSCHAFT
der
RUHR UNIVERSITÄT BOCHUM
vorgelegt
von
Gülçin TUNALI
Referent: Prof. Dr. Markus Koller
Korreferent: Prof. Dr. Fikret Adanır
Tag der mündlichen Prüfung: 10.01.2012
Veröffentlicht mit Genehmigung der Fakultät für Geschichtswissenschaft
der Ruhr Universität Bochum
© by Gülçin Tunalı, 2013. All rights reserved.
ABSTRACT
My dissertation focuses on the perception and representation of Athens in the eighteenth
century Ottoman history text, Tarih-i Medinetü’l-Hukema (History of the City of the
Philosophers), which was compiled by Mahmud Efendi who lived in Athens for several years
as a religious authority. To understand the text, first, I try to shed light on the mentality of an
Ottoman scholar in the context of eighteenth century Ottoman atmosphere and Athens under
Ottoman Empire. Before giving the transcript of the manuscript (folios 1b-241a), I aim to
look into the narration of Mahmud Efendi deeper. Its sources, especially Istoria of Gregory
Kontares with the medium of Greek monks from Athens and the way he receives them is
analyzed in terms of concept of appropriation. As mufti of Athens had a purpose for
attempting such a difficult task, at the end of the dissertation, I focus on the Mirrors for
Princes aspect of his narration. I claim that while giving examples from a distant time, he
gives lessons to his listeners, between the lines. Another argumentation of the thesis is to
show the differences between the Hellenism of Tanzimat era and the text of Mahmud Efendi.
Within the broader context, however, this study contributes to the literature of cultural
encounters considering the unpredictable value of Mahmud Efendi‘s History.
i
List of Abbreviations:
TMH
Tarih-i Medinetü’l-Hukema
EI2
Encyclopedia of Islam, 2nd Edition. Leiden: Brill
TDVIA
Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı İslâm Ansiklopedisi
TALID
Türkiye Araştırmaları Literatür Dergisi
M. A.
Mora Ahkâm Defterleri
TTK
Türk Tarih Kurum
ii
NOTES ON TRANSLITERATION
Arabic words have been transliterated according to Encyclopedia of Islam, second edition. For the
Ottoman and Turkish words, the modern Turkish orthography was used. Arabic words that
appeared in the Ottoman context have been also transliterated according to the modern Turkish
orthography such as Keşfüz-zünun.
As to the transcription of the Tarih-i Medinet‘ül- Hukema, Ferit Devellioğlu‘s transcription
system in his Osmanlıca-Türkçe Ansiklopedik Lügat. OKTAY transcription font program was
used to as displayed below.
For the quotations of Ottoman texts through the dissertation, transcription was not used, instead
quoted parts were transliterated according to modern Turkish orthography.
iii
TABLE OF CONTENT
ABSTRACT..............................................................................................................................................................i
List of Abbreviation ................................................................................................................................................ ii
Note on Transliteraiton .......................................................................................................................................... iii
INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................................................1
Travelers and the Emergence of Greek Space..........................................................................................................4
Philhellenism..........................................................................................................................................................10
CHAPTER 1: UNDERSTANDING MAHMUD EFENDI....................................................................................17
1.1. A Panoramic view of the 18th century ..........................................................................................................17
1.1.1. Phanaroits ...........................................................................................................................................23
1.2. Mahmud Efendi’s intellectual horizons.........................................................................................................27
1.2.1. Primary education ..............................................................................................................................32
1.2.2. His Transfer to Istanbul for madrasa education..................................................................................34
1.2.3. Madrasa years and books ...................................................................................................................36
1.2.4. What is mulazemet?............................................................................................................................38
1.2.5. His appointment to Athens as a mufti.................................................................................................39
1.3. Athens under the Ottoman domination..........................................................................................................43
1.3.1. Venetian Interlude ..............................................................................................................................59
1.3.2. Mahmud Efendi’s Athens...................................................................................................................61
1.3.3. Ottoman sources about Athens...........................................................................................................64
1.4. Mahmud Efendi’s Neo-Hellenic Networks ...................................................................................................67
1.4.1. G. Sotiris and T. Kavallaris ................................................................................................................75
1.4.2. G. Kontares.........................................................................................................................................78
CHAPTER 2: READING THE HISTORY OF MAHMUD EFENDI ....................................................................83
2.1. Content of Tarih-i Medinet’ül- Hukema........................................................................................................83
2.2. Sources ..........................................................................................................................................................89
2.2.1. Detailed table of Kontares’ Ίστορίαι ..................................................................................................90
2.3. Historiography of the history of Ancient Athens.........................................................................................103
2.3.1. Greek Histories and selected works regarding the Greek world.......................................................115
2.4. Analysing the Text.......................................................................................................................................117
2.4.1. Translation Turn...............................................................................................................................117
2.5. Theseus ........................................................................................................................................................126
2.5.1. The Story of Theseus........................................................................................................................127
2.5.2. Theseus in the narration of Mahmud Efendi ....................................................................................130
2.5.3. Images of Theseus............................................................................................................................140
2.6. Alexander the Great.....................................................................................................................................143
2.6.1. Islamic heritage ................................................................................................................................148
2.6.2. What is Persian Influence? ...............................................................................................................153
2.6.3. Alexander the Great in the Ottoman context ....................................................................................154
2.6.4. Mahmud Efendi’s Alexander the Great............................................................................................158
2.7. Constantine the Great ..................................................................................................................................161
2.7.1. Constantine in the Ottoman context .................................................................................................163
2.7.2. The construction of Hagia Sophia ....................................................................................................167
2.7.3. Talismans of Istanbul .......................................................................................................................169
2.8. History as “Mirrors for Princes”..................................................................................................................175
CONCLUSION....................................................................................................................................................186
Philhellenism among Tanzimat Intellectuals .......................................................................................................189
Translations from Greek world ............................................................................................................................191
Translations on Greek history ..............................................................................................................................195
Establishment of the museums.............................................................................................................................200
Appendix 1: Introduction of Mehmed Tevfik Paşa’s Esatir-i Yunaniyan............................................................206
Appendix 2: Transcript of the Tarih-i Medinet’ü-l Hukema ................................................................................208
BIBLIOGRAPHY................................................................................................................................................359
INTRODUCTION
In 1974, Cengiz Orhonlu published an article entitled “Bir Türk Kadısının Yazdığı
Atina Tarihi (Tarih-i Medinetü’l-Hukema)” (The History of Athens by a Turkish Judge) and
introduced a unique manuscript that had been preserved in Topkapı Palace.1 This text, which
was composed by a mufti (juristconsult) of Athens beginning in 1715,2 was based on the
counseling stories told during friendly gatherings (meclis) of the guardian of Nauplion
Muhsinzade Mehmed Paşa in the year 1738.3 Mahmud Efendi was originally from Southern
Greece where his relatives lived in Thebes, Euboea and Athens.4 He asserts that he left his
homeland in the year 1094 (1682/83) for the sake of education. After staying sixteen years in
the capital of the Empire and marrying there, he was appointed as a mufti of Athens in 1110
(1698/99). In 1122 (1710/11), he translated from Arabic to Turkish a book on jurisprudence,
Tuhfetü’t-Tüccar and one on the value of holy war, Tuhfetü’l- Guzat. He notes that he began
to compile the History, in 1127 (1715) with the help of two “very profound” Greek abbots,
Kavallaris and Sotiris, actually Theophanis Kavallaris and Grigoris Sotiris. Their main source
was probably Ίστορίαι παλαιού και πάνυ ωφέλιμοι της περίφημου πόλεως Άθήνης (Ancient and
Useful Stories of the Famous City of Athens) of Gregory Kontares, which was published in
1676 in Venice.5 Mahmud Efendi mentions that they translated the sources from the
“unused/dead languages” (ancient Greek and Latin) and French for him, he took notes and
1
2
3
4
5
Cengiz Orhonlu, “Bir Türk Kadısının Yazdığı Atina Tarihi (Tarih-i Medinetü’l-Hukema)”, İstanbul
Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Güney-Doğu Avrupa Araştırmaları Dergisi 2-3 (1973-4), pp. 119-136.
Throughout the manuscript, the author does not mention his name. Cengiz Orhonlu finds his name in a
document in the Prime Ministery Archive İbnülemin Evkaf No. 7393. However, Nejat Göyünç refuses this
claim, and argues that the name of the author must be Hüseyin, on the basis of the document registered in
Prime Ministery Archive, Maliye Defterleri No: 1360, p. 18: “XVIII. Yüzyılda Türk İdaresinde Nauplia
(Anabolu) ve Yapıları,” in İsmail Hakkı Uzunçarşılı’ya Armağan (Ankara: TTK, 1975), pp. 460-485, p. 477.
Nevertheless, after research in the Prime Ministery Archive, I have found that the date of the document is for
50 years later and actually registered in Cevdet Maarif, No. 171/8537. Hence, I share the same thought on
the name of the author as Orhonlu since I have also found a small risale from late seventeenth century in the
Süleymaniye Library Ali Nihat Tarlan Collection, number 144 between 57b-60a folios. This pamphlet was
translated by Atinalı Mahmud b. Hasan and it is about prophet Muhammad mentioned in the Bible, the
Torah and the Psalter by a former monk, converted to Islam. However, Orhonlu wrongly defines Mahmud
Efendi as kadi. Mahmud Efendi himself asserts that he was appointed as a mufti to Athens. Orhonlu gives
the term ifta the meaning of being kadi, but it normally refers to the position of mufti.
Tarih-i Medinetü’l Hukema, Topkapı Sarayı Emanet Hazinesi no: 1411, 2b. (hereafter referred as TMH) For
detailed information on Muhsinzade Mehmed Paşa, see: Yuzo Nagata, Muhsinzade Mehmed Paşa ve
Ayanlık Müessesesi (Tokyo: Institute for the Study for of Languages and Culture of Asia and Africa, 1976).
TMH: 267a: “…gerçi vatan-ı asıllarımız olan İstefe ve Ağriboz ve Atina’da vaki akraba ve ta’allukat …”
Ίστορίαι παλαιού και πάνυ ωφέλιμοι της περίφημου πόλεως Άθήνης was not republished and remains as an
unedited copy in the libraries which will be mentioned below. Dr. Dimitri P. Drakoulis from Aristotle
University of Thessaloniki has kindly send the photos of the beginning pages of Kontares’ book to me.
1
translated these notes into Turkish, sometimes with the intermediary help of another
translator. In the beginning of the book, interestingly Kontares also talks about the same issue:
“Therefore we will narrate the facts simply, without exaggerations, how I found them in old
Greek and Italian books, which I translated into the common language.” On 14th of July
17156, he also met with Damad Ali Paşa, supporter of the scholars and collector of the books,7
while he was preaching a Friday sermon to the soldiers in Thebes where the Ottoman army set
down a military camp at the beginning of the month. Simultaneously the news of the conquest
of the island of Tinos (İstendil) reached them while they were listening to his prayers in the
mosque. Good news brought Mahmud Efendi many golden coins. And the secretary of the
Paşa, Habeşizade, informed him, “that the Sultan had ordered this humble person (Mahmud
Efendi) to follow him to the Peloponnese”.8 After reconquering Corinth (Gördes), the army
arrived in Nauplion (Anabolu), where he was appointed by Damad Ali Paşa as a preacher to
his endowed mosque, as a professor to the Dar-ül Kurra (Quran school of madrasa) of his
kethüda (chamberlain) İbrahim Ağa and as a supervisor of these two endowments with a daily
wage of 120 akçe. Mahmud Efendi mentions that parallel to these, Damad Ali Paşa did not
abolish his duties in Athens, as a mufti and müderris.9 This means that he held several
positions at the same time.
Since Cengiz Orhonlu, as far as is known, no historian has focused on the Tarih
although it is known among academic circles.10 This fact might be attributed first, to the text’s
difficulty; because it contains the ancient history of Athens in an Ottoman context, it is very
hard to comprehend what the manuscript narrates. Second, as intellectual history is the
weakest branch in Ottoman historiography, the manuscript itself has not aroused enough
interest. Third, as the history written between Greece and Turkey has been based on
6
7
8
9
10
Mehmet Yaşar Ertaş, Sultanın Ordusu: (Mora fethi örneği 1714-1716) (İstanbul: Yeditepe Yayınları, 2007),
p. 26.
On the life and deeds of Damad Ali Paşa, see: Abdülkadir Özcan, “Şehid Ali Paşa”, Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı
İslam Ansiklopedisi (TDVİA), vol. 38, pp. 433- 434. Besides his reconquest of Morea, Şehid Ali Paşa was
widely known as a bibliophil. Even he prohibited exportation of the books from Istanbul. He also founded a
library which bears his name. His books were confiscated after his death. See: İsmail Erünsal, Şehid Ali
Paşa’nın İstanbul’da Kurduğu Kütüphane ve Şehid Ali Paşa’nın Müsadere Edilen Kitapları” in İstanbul
Univ. Edebiyat Fakültesi Kütüphanecilik Dergisi 1 (1987), pp. 79-89.
TMH: 273b.
TMH: 285b.
Johann Strauss, “Ottoman Rule Experienced and Remembered: Remarks on Some Local Greek Chronicles
of the Tourkokratia,” in The Ottomans and the Balkans: A Discussion of Historiography, (ed.) by Fikret
Adanır. (Leiden: Brill, 2002), pp. 194-221; Machiel Kiel, “Atina,” (TDVİA), vol. 4, pp. 74-76; Speros
Vryonis, “The Ghost of Athens in Byzantine and Ottoman Times,” Balkan Studies 43 (2002/1-2), pp. 5-115,
p. 54 and Nejat Göyünç, “XVIII. Yüzyılda Türk İdaresinde…”.
2
nationalist paradigms with conflicts and wars, the History of Athens written by an Ottoman
mufti might be considered “exceptional.” On the other hand, the Ottoman historians in Turkey
consider the Greek lands as peripheral to that of the huge Ottoman Empire as a whole.11
Hence, they do not consider this region worth studying thoroughly. This fact raises
psychological barriers between Greek and Turkish historians.
Apart from these, more specific problems that I confronted were: First, I experienced a
kind of “cultural literacy” problem similar to that described by Suraiya Faroqhi, in her
Approaching Ottoman History. She writes that as “…Ottoman civilization is no longer with
us, even though its impact is. …Given these circumstances, appreciating a piece from an
eigteenth century collection of poetry (divan) is an arduous skill to learn. This applies even to
a Turkish student knowing Ottoman, to say nothing of anyone else.”12 My problem was
doubled for even though I was not dealing with poetry, what I had to solve belonged not just
to the Ottoman world. At the same time “cultural literacy” doubled because I was looking at
the Ancient world as described by an Ottoman. The fundamental problem I had to face was
that as a student of Ottoman history I do not know ancient history. And as far as I know,
classicists do not know Ottoman history. There exists a huge wall between the two disciplines
and in this case, “Oh, East is East, and West is West, and never the twain shall meet”,
Kipling’s (1865- 1936) famous verse from his Ballad of East and West, is true. As a result, at
first I could not even grasp the content deeply. It is about ancient times, I understood that
much, but what about the details?
Parallel to this, on the issue of first-hand narratives, Cemal Kafadar claims that many
manuscripts have been ignored and not taken as first-hand personal narratives through which
the life of the individual can be uncovered.13 This fits the Tarih, too. The Turks have always
been seen and accused of burning and destroying antiquities, treating ancient information
badly and of not protecting this for hundreds of years. As Wunder says, “…and to the
Renaissance European, a love of antiquity was a fundamental marker of civility, and it
11
12
13
John Bennet and Jack L. Davis, “A Reconstruction of the Human Landscape of the Kaza of Anavarin” in A
Historical and Economic Geography of Ottoman Greece: the Southwestern Morea in the 18th century
(Hesperia Supplement 34), (eds.) Fariba Zarinebaf, John Bennet and Jack L. Davis (Princeton: American
School of Classical Studies at Athens, 2005), pp. 111- 150, p. 113.
Suraiya Faroqhi, Approaching Ottoman History: an Introduction to the Sources (Cambridge: Cambridge
Univ. Press, 1999), p. 28.
Cemal Kafadar, “Self and Others: the Diary of a Dervish in 17th c. Istanbul and First-person Narratives in
Ottoman Literature,” Studia Islamica 69 (1989), pp. 121-150, p. 124.
3
became one of the most important criteria by which Western Europeans judged the Turks.”14
For this reason, written works in the manuscript libraries concerning ancient wisdom may
have been overlooked.
Another difficulty is to find a meaningful place for Tarih-i Medinet’ül Hukema as part
of Western intellectual tradition. As it was written just before philhellenism, an important
question for me is whether the traces of a pioneering attitude towards the Antique lands can
be detected or not. For example such a long narration on Theseus reminds me the of the
“rediscovery of Athens” because Theseus is accepted as the “founder-hero” for Athens.
During Mahmud Efendi’s judiciary service travelers did not frequent Athens as much as they
did when philhellenism was at its peak.
The burgeoning philhellenism, Augostinos tells us, “which is the vision of a re-born
and liberated Greece coming closer to the West by virtue of its Hellenic lineage,”15 emerged
with the help of travelers and the Romantic Movement. The literature of the Western
travellers mainly was constructed as a basis for the “Rediscovery of Greece.”16
Travelers and the Emergence of Greek Space
It is generally accepted that the roots of the Hellenic revival date back to the
seventeenth century. The revival started in 1610, but bigger steps were taken later, in 167576. It was around that time when Jacop Spon and George Wheler travelled to Greece. Then
the journey of the architect James Stuart and the painter Nicholas Revett17, who were
members of the Society of the Dilettanti, to Greece in 1751-1755 played an important role in
this revival. They made measured drawings of the ancient monuments of Athens, offering to
the British public their four-volume work Antiquities of Athens, contributing substantially to
the revival of the Greek ideal.18 The most widely known trip made to Greece is the one by
14
15
16
17
18
Amanda Wunder, “Western Travelers, Eastern Antiquities, and the Image of the Turk in Early Modern
Europe,” The Journal of Early Modern History 7 (2003), pp. 89-119, p. 91.
Olga Augustinos, French Odysseys: Greece in French Travel Literature from the Renaissance to the
Romantic Era (Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press, 1994), p. xii.
Fani-Maria Tsigakou, The Rediscovery Of Greece: Travellers and Painters of the Romantic Era (London:
Caratsaz Bros., 1981)
Molly Mackenzie, Türk Atinası: Unutulan Yüzyıllar(1456- 1832), (çev.) Mehmet Harmancı, (İstanbul:
Aksoy yay., 1999), pp. 69-70.
The Dilettanti Committee was established in 1751. The presentation of historical works and detailed
drawings of works appeared in the 1762. For detailed information on them, see David Watkin, “The Impact
of Stuart over two Centuries,” in James “Athenian” Stuart 1713- 1788: The Rediscovery of Antiquity, (ed.)
4
Richard Chandler between 1764 and 1766. There was a number of British and French (no
German) who travelled there, but the journey was dangerous, poorly organized, wildly exotic
and the place was regarded as an “Eastern” province of Ottoman Empire, in addition, the
number of travelers were surprising. Many of the travelers wrote countless books about
Greece, the demand for Greek travel books were innumerable.19 With respect to Greece and
the Levant, there were fifty-three French and forty-four English publications. German
travelers were conspicuous by their absence, with only nineteen works published between
1700 and 1810. These were particularly on the lands of the Ottoman Empire, or on Greece.
Twelve of these were the products of “autopsy” or of the writer’s own travels and his own
observations.20
A doctor from Lyon and epigraphist as a hobby, Jacob Spon, being the first traveler to
take on this task is based on a nice coincidence. Spon had got the notes of a Jesuit father,
Jacques Paul Babin who had visited Athens in the autumm of 1672 from Smyrna. Spon edited
and published these notes in 1674 in Lyon under the title of Relations de l’état present de la
ville d’Athénes, ancien capital de la Grecé. Impassioned by Babin’s writings, he decided to
travel to Greece. In Rome he encountered a botanist George Wheler from Oxfrod and they
decided to travel together. They came to Constantinople on 20 June 1675 from Venice. They
met the French ambassador Macquis de Nointel. He welcomed them warmly, showed them
antiquities and the sketches of the Parthenon that he ordered when he visited Athens on his
way back from Jerusalem to Constantinople to prolong France’s trade contracts with the
Sublime Porte.21
Spon’s voyage was not only the most important one of the seventeenth century, but it
represented the first classically-oriented voyage, distinguishing it from the explorations
during the Renaissance. Within this framework, the traveler tried to reconnect past events
with their spatial origin and emphasized the physical markers surviving them. Through this
process Hellenism transformed Athens textually and geographically into an emblem and a
microcosm of ancient Greece. So, classical antiquity was turned into an immobile and
19
20
21
Susan Weber Soros (London and New Haven: Yale University Press for the Bard Graduate Center for
Studies in the Decorative Arts, Design and Culture, 2006), pp. 515-48.
Louis A. Ruprecht, “Why the Greeks?,” Agon, Logos, Polis: the Greek Achievement and Its Aftermath, eds.
Jóhann Páll Árnason, Peter Murphy (Stuttgart: Franz Steiner, 2001), pp. 29-55, p. 44.
Constanze Güthenke, Placing Modern Greece The Dynamics of Romantic Hellenism, 1770–1840 (Oxford:
Oxford Univ. Press 2008), p. 51.
Robin Middleton, “Introduction”, in David Le Roy, The Ruins of the Most Beautiful Monuments of Greece,
(trans.) David Britt (Los Angeles: Getty Publications, 2004), pp.30-31.
5
changeless model for a dynamic world. Interestingly, Spon ignited the flame of the great leap
of the imagination for the transformation of the ancient monuments of Acropolis, and through
these classical Greece, into the prefiguration of modern Europe.22 According to Augustinos,
Spon’s study of antique objects identified and described the ruin’s present condition rather
than its evocation of the distant past. He brought up new methods of historiography for the
reconstruction and understanding of the past that emphasized observation, analysis of
evidence from various sources, and their critical evaluation before reaching any conclusions.
He was the first traveler to rigorously examine the antiquities of Athens using physical and
textual evidence.23
Spon’s methodology gave more space to objective observation than to rapturous
admiration. He started to integrate the past’s material remains with Hellenism’s textual
construction. For Leal “it is revealing that Spon seeks connections to the classical past even in
the clothing of the current Greek inhabitants of the city once known for its ‘Philosophers’.”24
Another interesting distinction between the depictions of modern and ancient Greeks is visible
in the travel book of botanist Tournefort in the early eighteenth century. He referred to the
Greeks as “the present day Greeks” and the “great Greeks,” which clarified the new attitude
towards them. However, the vocabulary remained uncertain.25 According to him, the Greeks
that he knew were like living texts, recreating the ideas and approaches of their ancestors. He
describes it, by quote:
I regarded the Brain of these poor Greeks, as so many living Inscriptions, serving to
retain the Names quoted by Theophrastus and Dioscorides; these, though subject to
diverse Alterations, will doubtless last much longer than most solid Marble, because they
are every day renew’d, whereas Marble wears off, or is destroy’d.26
According what to the merchant and antiquarian Pierre Augustin Guys read, the
eigtheenth century modern Greeks as well were the living commentaries on the ancient texts.
Just like Tournefort, Guys also underlines the continuations of the early past, both in terms of
knowledge and manner and character. He also analyzed the works of the past in details, he
22
23
24
25
26
Augustinos, French Odysseys, p 16.
Ibid., p. 17.
Karen Alexandra Leal, The Ottoman state and the Greek Orthodox of Istanbul: Sovereignty and Identity at
the Turn of the Eighteenth Century, (Unpublished PhD Thesis: Harvard University, 2003), p. 468.
Yokavaki, “‘Ancient and Modern Greeks’ in the late 18th century,” p. 204.
Joseph Pitton de Tournefort, A Voyage into the Levant: Perform’d by the Command of the Late French King,
trans. John Ozell (London, 1718), vol. 2, p. 68 cited from Karen Hartnup, ‘On the Beliefs of the Greeks’:
Leo Allatios and Popular Orthodoxy (Leiden: Brill, 2004), p. 48.
6
both interpreted the classical and early church writers and described his experience through
their words:
It is among the common people I always look for ancient manners. Those refine but little,
and a re ever tenacious of the traditions handed down to them by their forefathers, and
are so much attached to their customs that they bear with them the force of so many
ancient laws.27
Yakovaki claims that this book is an epistolary essay rather than a travel account due
to its title and organization in thematic chapters, or letters. The subject of this two-volume
essay is declared in the second part of the French title: Letters sur les Grecs anciens et
modernes, Avec un parallèle de leurs Moeurs. Specifically, the author aimed to depict a
panorama of modern Greek everyday life, which was structured upon “manners”.
Systematically, he presented a variety of modern Greek manners: either he drew directly from
Ancient Greek (and Latin) texts or he offered observations from everyday contemporary
Greek life. The innovation of this book is that it was the first book ever written about modern
Greeks. For the first time, modern Greeks were considered to be worthy of study and raised to
a level to rival “the lure of the ruins” and thus brought to the attention of European observers.
This new placement coincides with the emergence of the contemporary gaze.28 Before this
new placement they had been seen in religious terms. The church and the rites had been the
most visible aspects of their existence, rendering them disposable; in other words, this made
them different from the Christians of the West, i.e., from the Latins. The meaning of the term
“Greeks” in the early modern context contradicted that of the term “Latins.” At that time, it is
possible to observe a shift from religion to culture that ushered in a new acknowledgement of
kinship, through origin. Here lies the significance of Guys’ book.29
So for the Greek space, historical prescription shaped geographical description.
Because the first Western travelers based their ideas, as Augustinos says, “more on the
ancient geographers Pausanias, Pliny, and Ptolemy and less on present political realities,”
when they entered Greek lands, they did not feel that they were walking in the Ottoman
domain.30 Greek space was constructed around two perspectives: the imagined one and the
one that held the supposed Ottoman tyranny. This context provides the first appearances of
the Greek landscapes in the “voyages pittoresques” and then in Romantic prose and poetry.
27
28
29
30
Pierre Augustin Guys, Sentimental Journey, vol. 1, p. 146, cited from Hartnup, ‘On the Beliefs of the
Greeks’, op.cit.
Yokavaki, “‘Ancient and Modern Greeks’ in the late 18th century,” p. 202.
Ibid., p. 203.
Augustinos, French Odysseys, p. 13.
7
The process of Greek Hellenization was further deepened and enriched by the depiction of the
landscape with ruins. Thus, history entered the place of aesthetic contemplation. At the end of
the eighteenth century the ruin was seen as an object of analysis and as a unit of analysis for
moral-aesthetic evaluation. Its space of origin became ambiguous as though it hung between
art and nature, existence and non-existence. The ruins turned into a metaphor for human life
with its fragility and resilience, remembrance and oblivion.31
Athens looked very much like a provincial Eastern town featuring mosques, Turkish
baths, bazaars and coffee shops as well as historical ruins where Turks and Greeks lived along
with small Albanian and Catholic communities at that time. This was a very disappointing
experience because, as Leontis tells us, “the topos of Hellas is the site of myth: a place . . . to
which they may return to reflect on their own [cultural] origins.”32 And ultimately, the ruin
became the emblem of the Romantic imagination.33 The Romantics imagined Greece as a
world representing an important alternative to the degenerate modern times. Ruprecht thinks
that the Greece of the Romantics’ was, “in many important ways, a fantasy-world that had
never really existed.”34
Their gratitude for the above-mentioned travelers’ accounts can be best expressed by
these words:
Often, when I had wandered long among the ruins of ancient Greek architecture
and among the sheer number of broken marble architraves, cornices, and column
drums, under the guidance of Tournefort, le Roy, Choiseul-Gouffer, and Stuart,
often I then rejoiced to see some people between the ruins. And how grateful was I to
the travellers, Spon, Wheler, Guys, Chandler, Savary, and the others, that they had
made those people still more familiar to me! With delight I recognized the features of
the ancient Greek spirit in them, which had persevered, despite millenia of barbarity.35
In the 1770s, Greece appeared in the West as a familiar and recognizable country, with
its centre, Athens, and an identity regardless of the Ottoman domination. This is the crucially
significant context within which Guys’ publication functions: presenting his work as a travel
account, it refers to the tradition of travel to Greece that flourished from the 1670s to 1770s,
31
32
33
34
35
Güthenke, Placing Modern Greece, p. 61.
Artemis Leontis, Topographies of Hellenism: Mapping the Homeland (Ithaca and London: Cornell Univ.
Press, 1995), p. 105.
Agustinos, op. cit.
Louis A. Ruprecht, Was Greek thought religious?: On the Use and Abuse of Hellenism, from Rome to
Romantics (New York: Palgrave, 2002), p. 157.
Cited and translated from Gerhard von Halem, Blüthen aus Trümmern (Bremen, 1798), p.7, Güthenke,
Placing Modern Greece, p.61.
8
from Spon to Chandler.36 From then on, Greece became an attraction for European diplomats,
intellectuals, and gentlemen for, as Leontis notes, “…their desire to amuse themselves, and,
more than occasionally some spiritual drive: ‘All of us on this strange boat… haunted by a
dream, a yearning, a madness.’”37
Apart from the travelers’ texts, there are numerous literary texts depicting this turn of
interest towards Greece. Thus, J. J. Heinse wrote his epistolary novel Ardinghello und die
glüchseligen Inseln (1787) in contemporary Greece. He negotiated in this work poetically the
issue of dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire, i.e., the expulsion of the Turks “from that
land with the happy climate”.38 In the lyrical, similarly epistolary, novel Hyperion: oder Der
Eremit in Griechenland (1797) by Fr. Hölderlin, many hopes for the Greek political
renaissance were expressed.39 For Draulia, the author found all of the answers he sought in
Classical Hellas and also the way to illuminate the darkness of the modern world. Voyage du
jeune Anarcharsis en Grèce (4 vols., 1787) by Jean Jacques Barthlemy (1716-1795) had a
deep impact on the European public audience.40 In the book, although Barthlemy had never
visited Greece, the book’s hero, who was a young Scythian and the descendant of the famous
philosopher Anacharsis, played a role in the restoration of Greece as his instruction in early
youth. After a tour of the republics, colonies and islands of Greece, he returned to his country
and there wrote his book in his old age. This took place after the Macedonian hero overturned
the Persian Empire. In the manner of modern travelers, he listed the customs, governments
and antiquities of the country he supposedly had visited. In his introduction, he presented the
historical details. And in different places he wrote about the music of the Greeks, the
literature of the Athenians, and on the economy of the places he had visited in detail.41
Thomas Hope followed the fashion of his time and made a tour of the Mediterranean
countries together with Greece. He published, anonymously at first, then a three-volume
36
37
38
39
40
41
Nassia Yakovaki, “‘Ancient and Modern Greeks’ in the Late 18th Century: A Comparative Approach from a
European Perspective”, in Ausdrucksformen und Internationalen Philhellenismus vom 17.-19. Jahrhundert,
in the series Philhellenische Studien, vol. 13 (Frankfurt/ NewYork: Peter Lang Verlag, 2007), p. 207.
Artemis Leontis, Topographies of Hellenism Mapping the Homeland (Ithaca & London: Cornell Univ.
Press, 1995), p. 46, cites from Le Corbusier, Journey to the East,( trans.) Ivan Žaknic (London: The MIT
Press, 1989), p. 208.
Loukia Droulia, “The Revival of the Greek Ideal and Philhellenism. A Perambulation”, p.7:
http://rea.teimes.gr/byronlib/media/files/phil_paper_pdf/ L.Droulia-Philhellenism-Poland%20ed.pdf
For a deep analysis of the narrative of Hölderlin, see Güthenke, Placing Modern Greece, pp.71-92.
See for the effects of this work in English romanticisim, see: Timothy Webb, English Romantic Hellenism,
1700-1824 (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1982), pp. 188- 193.
There were three partial (two by Georgios Sakellarios, and one by Rhigas Velistinlis) and one complete
translation (by Chrysoverges Kouropalatis) into Greek between 1797 and 1819; see Augustinos, French
Odysseys, p. 39.
9
novel Anastasius, or the Memoirs of a Greek, in London in 1820. The background for this
story combines the “the entertainment of a novel with the information of a book of travels”42
and especially “tries to reconcile his image of the ideal Greek as the liberator of himself and
of Europe, with the much-less exalted lives of the Greek communities in the Ottoma
Empire.”43 However, Winckelmann, Lessing, Goethe, Schiller, Nietzsche and Heidegger, who
were renowned Hellenists, imagined the Hellenic ideal through texts and decontextualized
statues, even though they did not witness these monuments in their natural environments.44
For the German-educated man, as Suzanne Marchand notes, German Graecophilia was
widespread before the Greek War of Independence. For them, she says, “the Greeks
represented the following values: beauty, friendship, secularism, simplicity, rational
discourse, seriousness, individual liberty, meritocracy, unity, idealism, nostalgia, and
purity.”45 Many German intellectuals, especially the art historian and archaeologist J. J.
Winckelmann (1717- 1768), preached the “return to Greek” in his books Gedanken über die
Nachahmung der Griechischen Werke in der Mahlerey und Bildbauer-Kunst (1755) and
Geschichte der Kunst des Altertums (1764) because the Greeks had achieved the peak of
artistic beauty and scientific genius, the ultimate perfection humans can attain even though he
had not visited Greece.46 He had discovered this beauty of Greek art in Italy and opened a
new line in the studies of Classical Archaeology.
Philhellenism
The above mentioned neo-humanistic and Romantic atmosphere with the emergence
of travellers contributed to the emergence of philhellenism.47 The most famous liberal British
Romantic poet, Lord Byron (1788- 1824), was considered from the beginning the main
42
43
44
45
46
47
T. Hope, Anastasius ..., vol. I, Paris 1831, ix; cited by Droulia, “The Revival of the Greek Ideal and
Philhellenism. A Perambulation”, p. 8.
Reşat Kasaba, “The Enlightenment, Greek Civilization and the Ottoman Empire: Reflections on Thomas
Hope’s Anastasius,” Journal of Historical Sociology 16 (March 2003), pp. 1-21, p.3.
Leontis, Topographies of Hellenism Mapping the Homeland, p. 55, f.n. 51.
Suzanne Marchand, “What the Greek Model Can, and Cannot, Do for the Modern State: the German
Perspective,” in The Making of Modern Greece: Nationalism, Romanticism, and the Uses of the Past (1797–
1896), (ed.) Roderick Beaton & David Rick (London: Ashgate, 2009), pp. 33- 42, p. 34.
Hellmut Sichtermann, Kulturgeschichte der klassischen Archaeologie (Munich: Beck, 1996), p. 200,
described 19th century scholarship as “Winckelmann’s heritage”. For an account of what Winckelman said
about the effect of Greek art, see Esther Sophia Sünderhauf, Griechensehnsucht und Kulturkritik: die
deutsche Rezeption von Winckelmanns Antikenideal 1840 - 1945 (Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 2004) and
Ludwig Uhlig, Griechenland als Ideal: Winckelmann und Seine Rezeption in Deutschland (Thübingen: Max
Niemeyer, 1988).
For the detailed summary of philhellenism with a bibliography, see: “Graecomania and Philhellensim”
article by Evangelos Konstantinou: http://www.ieg-ego.eu/en/threads/models-and-stereotypes/graecomaniaand-philhellenism
10
instigator and expresser of philhellenism. After his role as instigator, the action began: the
harsh, national liberalist struggle, the Greek Revolution. It roused sensitive public opinion.
Without this political action, it would not have been possible for “Hellenism” –
antiquarianism, neo-humanism, neo-classicism - to evolve into a dynamic philhellenic
struggle, which was a complex cultural, political and military phenomenon. This is
“philhellenism” identified with the Liberal and Romantic movement, maybe with Byronism,48
spreading to the ends of the earth. Byron as an idol then reached North America, and aroused
Greek Fever, which invigorated liberal manifestations there.49 According to St Clair, this
Greek Fever had been for a long time present among Europeans. When the Greek Revolution
broke out in 1821, Europe’s intellectuals were influenced by three attractive ideas: that
Ancient Greece had been a paradise inhabited by supermen, that the Modern Greeks were the
true descendants of the Ancient Greeks, and that a war against the Turks was necessary to
“regenerate” the Modern Greeks in order to restore their former glories.50
In the Ottoman Empire, a man named Adamantios Korais (1743-1833) led the
movement.51 Born in 1748 in Smyrna (Izmir), he studied medicine in Montpellier, although
he never practiced it. From 1788 he lived in Paris, where he witnessed the revolution. As
Gourgouris says, since he “devoted himself to a massive pedagogical project with an eye to a
Greek nation independent of Ottoman rule,”52 he translated and edited voluminous ancient
Greek books into Modern Greek. He even developed a different dialect, katharevousa, which
was accepted as the cultivator of the Hellenic ideal.53 His Mémoire sur l’état actuel de la
civilisation en Grèce (Memoir on the Present State of Civilization in Greece) is “a compelling
and multilayered piece of nationalist propaganda and an elaboration of Korais’ concept of the
48
49
50
51
52
53
David E. Roessel, In Byron’s Shadow. Modern Greece in the English and American Imagination (Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 2002), pp. 81-83.
Ibid., pp. 93-94.
William St Clair, That Greece Might Still Be Free: The Philhellenes in the War of Independence
(Cambridge: Open Books Publishers, 2008), p. 19.
For the impact of Korais see: Maria Vassilaku-Mantuvalu, Adamantios Korais (1748 - 1833), der Verfasser
der Schrift „Die griechische Nomarchie oder Rede über die Freiheit, von einem Anonymen Griechen, in
Italien 1806“ - die ideologische Begründung des neuen Griechentums (im 18. und 19. Jahrhundert)
(Humbolt Univ., Dissertation, Berlin 1984).
Stathis Gourgouris, Dream Nation: Enlightenment, Colonization and the Institution of Modern Greece
(Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1996), p. 90.
For the modernization of Greek and the Greek language problem among Greek scholars, see Michael
Kreutz, Modernismus und Europaidee in der Östlichen Mittelmeerwelt, 1821- 1939, (Ph.D. Diss., Ruhr
Univ. Bochum, 2005), pp. 93- 101.
11
evolving direction of modern Greek civilization.”54 For Korais, of course, the true ancestors
of the modern Greeks were the ancient Hellenes. He called the ancient Greeks “Hellenes” and
the modern Greeks “Graikoi” – a name he claimed to be a term for the Greeks older even than
the word “Hellenes,” “as well as being the term by which the Greeks are known in Europe.”55
Byzantium fitted the vision of Greater Hellenism enshrined in the Great Idea, since it
provided the model for ‘the expansion of the State in geographical space and historical
time’.56 Later, Eugenios Voulgaris (1716-1806), one of the most influential “teachers”57 of the
eighteenth century, tried to convey the ideas of the European Enlightenment to Greek
Orthodox cultural intellectuals, through translations, especially those of Voltaire,58 who wrote
to Frederick of Prussia in 1769, that he wished “passionately that the barbarous Turks be
chased at once from the country of Xenophon, Sophocles and Plato.”59 Born in Corfu,
Voulgaris held education in his hometown and later in Italy. He taught various subjects
especially modern philosophy in Ioannina, Kozani, Mt. Athos, and Constantinople. He was
using in his lessons his own translations. After Patriarchal Academy at Constantinople, he
went to Halle and Leibzig where his books were published including Logic in 1768. In 1772,
he was invited by Catherina the Great and he became the librarian and adviser of Russian
court at St. Petersburg. After being an archbishop in newly founded archbishopric in Ukraine,
he returned to St. Petersburg again and stayed at Monastery of Alexander Nevskii until his
death.60
Iosipos Moisiodax (1725-1800), whose biography according to Kitromilides “…is a
study in the social meaning of the ‘Orthodox Commonwealth’”61, born on the Northern shores
of Danube and not Greek in ethnic origin, widely influenced the Greek-speaking world with
54
Olga Augustinos, “Philhellenic Promises and Hellenic Visions: Korais and the Discourses of the
Enlightenment,” in Hellenisms: Culture, Identity, and Ethnicity from Antiquity to Modernity, (ed.) Katerina
Zacharia (Ashgate: Variorium, 2008), pp. 169- 200, p. 183.
55
Mackridge, “Byzantium and the Greek Language Question in the 19th Century,” p. 50.
56
Idem., p. 54, quoted from Agapitos, Byzantine literature, 239.
57
The term “teachers of the nation” is used by the Greeks for the scholars as the forerunners of the Greek War
of Independence. See C. A. Trypanis, “Greek Literature since the Fall of Constantinople in 1453,” in
Balkans in Transition, (eds.) Charles and Barbara Jelavich, (California: University of California Press,
1963), pp. 227-257, p. 240.
58
On the effect of Voltaire on the mental world of the Greeks, see K. Th. Dimaras, La Grèce au temps des
Lumières (Études de philologie et d'histoire, no 9) (Genève: Librairie Droz, 1969), pp. 61- 102.
59
Kasaba, “The Enlightenment, Greek Civilization and the Ottoman Empire”, p. 1.
60
Athanasia Glycofrydi-Leontsini, “Teaching Princes: A Vehicle of Moral and Political Education during the
Neohellenic Enlightenment”, Classical Russia 1700- 1825 3-5 (2008- 2010), pp. 71- 90, here pp. 86-88.
61
Paschalis M. Kitromilides, “The Enlightenment and the Greek Cultural Tradition” in History of European
Ideas 36 (2010), pp. 39–46, p. 43.
12
his thoughts. In 1753-1754 Moisiodax went to the Greek schools in Thessalonica and Smyrna
and later to Mounth Athos where Voulgaris was teaching.62 After studying at the University
of Padua between 1759 and 1762, Moisiodax became the Director of the Princely Academy of
Iaşi, and its professor of philosophy. In 1790 he published his most important work, The
Apology in Wien. In 1800 he died while he was a professor at the Princely Academy of
Bucharest. His main argumentation can be summarized that Hellenes must turn their direction
to their ancient heritage and to Western Enlightenment and he praised modern civilization and
its technological achievements. 63
The most extreme republican aspirations were expressed by Rhigas Velestinlis or
Feraios (1757- 1798), a Greek patriot, who internalized the ideas stemming from the
Enlightenment and French Revolution. He also sought the implantation of those ideas in the
political life of Southeastern Europe. He was the author of a manual on physics, the translator
of works by such authors as Montesquieu, Marmontel and Restif de la Bretonne. He tried to
contribute to the awakening of his contemporaries both politically and intellectually and was
the first to project a radical political alternative for all of the Southeastern European people,
embedded in his republicanism.64
It was in this way that ancient Greek history was nationalized.65 St. Clair addresses
that even “the custom grew of adopting ancient names instead of the traditional saints’ names.
At Athens in 1813, the schoolmaster conducted a ceremony with laurel and olive leaves and
formally exhorted his pupils to change their names from Ioannes and Pavlos to Pericles,
Themistocles, and Xenophon.”66 In short, for Greeks, feeling like a nation meant internalizing
their relationship with ancient Greece.67 The Greek population started to define itself with
reference to the ancient times. Thus, “the ancient world would no longer be simply that of the
62
63
64
65
66
67
Nicolaidis, Science and Eastern Orthodoxy, p. 159. Even he referred to Voulgaris as the “illustrious
Eugenios” and repeats his admiration throughout the Apologia sarcastically: Dean Kostantaras, Nationalism
and the Culture of Self- Contempt, p. 167, f.n. 78.
Paschalis M. Kitromilides, The Enlightenment as Social Criticism: Iosipos Moisiodax and Greek Culture in
the Eighteenth Century (Princeteon, N. J: Princeton University Press, 1992), p. 327.
Paschalis M. Kitromilides, “Republican Aspirations in Southeastern Europe in the Age of the French
Revolution” in The Consortium on Revolutionary Europe 1750-1850: Proceedings, Donald D. Horward,
(ed.) (Athens: [s.n.], 1980), pp. 275-285, p. 279.
Margarita Miliori, “Europe, the Classical polis, and the Greek Nation: Philhellenism and Hellenism in
nineteenth century Britain,” in The Making of Modern Greece, pp. 65- 80, here p. 69.
St. Clair, That Greece Might Still Be Free, p. 20.
Antonis Liakos, “The Construction of National Time: the Making of the Modern Greek Historical
Imagination,” (eds.) Jacques Revel & Giovanni Levi, Political Uses of the Past: The recent Mediterranean
experience, (London: Frank Cass, 2002), pp. 27- 42, here especially p. 30-35.
13
ancestors but the defining pole of national existence: ‘the Hellenizing of the Romioi’ might
sum up the ideological significance of the 1790s.”68 They rejected Byzantium because it
diminished their basic advantage at a national level: the possession of glorious ancestors.69
This fact, however, caused some trouble among Greek intellectuals shortly after the War of
Independence. Thus, Zambelios and Paparrigopoulos formulated the dogma of the continuity
of Greek culture from ancient to modern times by way of Byzantium in the early 1850s. This
led to the proliferation of the idea that Byzantine literature was an integral part of the
continuous history of the Greek language. This fact was called by Agapitos “the rehabilitation
of Byzantine” and by Elli Skopetea “the complete Hellenization of Byzantium’.”70
It is very important to note that decades before Philhellensim and nationalistic history
writing, Kontares in 1670s wrote the history of Ancient Athens. The emergence of Mahmud
Efendi’s work was due then to an amalgam of information. As he had been educated in the
madrasa system, he was familiar with Arabic Hellenism. The knowledge produced by the
Ottomans in addition to the Arabic one can be observed in his narrative of the history of
Hagia Sophia. In addition, he lived in the period just before the starting point of the rise of
tourism to Athens by Western travelers. Two Greek priests from whom he acquired assistance
in writing his work represented not only Byzantine and later Greek traditions, but also the
Western intellectual heritage they had gained from Italy. Therefore, just before the
Philhellenistic era, Mahmud Efendi collated this knowledge and wrote his Tarih-i Medinetü’lHukema (History of the City of the Philosophers). Thus, the era which History of Mahmud
Efendi emerged gains importance in terms of these developments. In short, in this
dissertation, I attempt to bring this long-time neglected book into the light of day in its
historical context, while asking questions about Ottoman mentality.
Chapters
In the first chapter, to place Mahmud Efendi in a clear context, the Ottoman world in
the eighteenth century is discussed including Phanaroits, a time during which profound
changes took place. After establishing the big picture, the focus will move to Mahmud Efendi.
68
69
70
Alexis Politis, “From Christian Roman Emperors to the Glorious Greek Ancestors,” in Byzantium and the
Modern Greek Identity, eds. David Ricks and Paul Magdalino (Ashgate: Variorum, 1989), pp. 1-15, p. 8.
Ibid., p. 14.
Panagiotis A. Agapitos, “Metamorphoseon permulti libri: Byzantine literature translated into modern
Greek,” in Byzantium and the Modern Greek Identity, pp. 63-74; and Mackridge, “Byzantium and the Greek
Language Question in the 19th century,” p. 53.
14
As there is not enough information about him, I was forced to use a prosopographical method
in order to understand his mental map better. So I focus on the education of a müfti at the end
of seventeenth century parallel to the general scholarly attitude towards ancient Greece before
Mahmud Efendi. While examining these features, I call attention to Katip Çelebi, Hezarfen
Hüseyin and Esad Efendi from Ioannina. After that I try to draw a picture of Athens at the
time of Ottoman domination and Mahmud Efendi’s period. The unique characteristic of this
chapter is the fact that this is the first time that ahkam (imperial orders) registers for Athens
are introduced. Paralelly, I also try to convey Mahmud Efendi’s direct and indirect intellectual
networks via his Greek collaboraters from Athens, namely Gregory Sotiris and Theophanis
Kavallaris and Gregory Kontares. Because there is a vivid interaction between the scholars
especially studied in Italy, some names such as Korydaleus, Notaras, Nectarios of Jerusalem,
Meletios of Athens were given. This chapter tries to show how such a work could emerge
from a müfti and preacher like Mahmud Efendi, especially in the early eighteenth century of
Athens within the network of Greek scholars. With this, the position of Tarih-i Medinetü’lHukema (History of the City of the Philosophers) can be understood within its historical
context. The invention of a classical period 71 in the Greek case was based on a long historical
process in which Mahmud Efendi took part via two Greeks, whose contribution will be
discussed at greater length in the next chapter. This chapter provides a background to the
History book of Mahmud Efendi.
Even before Mahmud Efendi’s text appeared, the level of knowledge on that period
was nothing compared to the large number of commentaries produced by Arabic scholars
many centuries earlier. The second chapter takes as its subject Mahmud Efendi’s book, and
deals with features of its text such as its sources, its translational peculiarities and its
intercultural dimensions. To do this, focus is given to the sources which Mahmud Efendi used
in his History, especially Kontares’ Istoria. Although he did not give the name of Kontares, I
claim that he translated Istoria via the channels of Sotiris and Kavallaris, actually. For the
sake of comparison the content pages of two texts are given. Additionally, for placing Tarih
among other history books dealing with Ancient Athens, a historiographical outline is given.
Then the characteristics of the text, its translational and/or intercultural properties is
discussed. For giving detailed examples from the narration itself, three different plots are
71
Antonis Liakos, “Canonical and Anticanonical Histories” in Ethnographica Moralia: Experiments in
Interpretive Anthropology, eds. Neni Panourgiá and George E. Marcus (New York: Fordham University
Press, 2008) pp. 138-167, p. 148.
15
considered in terms of interculturality. Firstly ‘the founding hero’ of Athens, Theseus is
focused on with comparison to classics. Secondly a death scene of Darius is given in
Alexander the Great’s story for showing the effects of Shahnama literature. And thirdly for
giving attention to its Turkish sources, I try to reveal the perception of Constantine the Great
and the construction myths of Hagia Sophia before Mahmud Efendi. In the last section, I
argue that the manuscript itself had an agenda: While relating the history of a distant past,
Mahmud Efendi in particular may have been inspired by the nasihatname tradition that had its
deep roots in Ottoman statecraft. The “mirror for princes” literature is presented first, then
with the quotations from the text itself.
In conclusion, I argue that “Hellenism” of Tanzimat era was different from Mahmud
Efedni’s curiosity on Ancient Athens as he did not attempt to create a new civilization from
the ancient ruins. The enthusiasm for the ancient world which emerged in the nineteenth
century and continued through the twentieth century was a consequence of the intellectual
interest and exchange with the Western world, as much of the information on the Ancient
world entered the region through translations from French. I claim that during the Tanzimat
period, a cultural memory was created because it had public and state mediators such as
journals, books and a newly founded museum for support. However Mahmud Efendi’s
narration did not reach to a wide public and he stood alone.
16
CHAPTER 1
UNDERSTANDING MAHMUD EFENDI
1.1 A Panoramic view of the 18th century
In the first decades of the eighteenth century, the Ottomans increased their contact
with Europe in in military, political, and commercial fields. During this period, Ottoman court
increase their interest in European cultural and social life. Yirmisekiz Mehmed Celebi (d.
1732), the former director of the Ottoman mint, and ambassador to France were authorized to
improve Franco-Ottoman relationships and to offer alliance against Habsburgs. He visited
health and scientific institutions and palaces and the opera in Paris, he also visited a military
hospital and its pharmacy, the Jardin du Roi, the Gobelin tapestry and mirror factories, the
observatory, as well as the zoo.72 Mehmed Said Efendi (d.1761), the son of Mehmed Çelebi,
was in his company and showed interest to a printing press he visited. Having became
politically supported by of Mehmed Said Efendi and the Grand Vizier Damat İbrahim Pasha
(1662–1730) , with the religious permission of Şeyhülislam Abdullah Efendi from Larissa and
with the royal ferman of Sultan Ahmet III 1673- 1736), Ibrahim Müteferrika (1674-1747) set
up the first printing press in around 1727.73 Having born to a Hungarian family around 1672
and 1675 in Koloszvar, which is now located in Cluj, Romania, he came to Istanbul as a
captive in 1692 or 1693 and following this he converted to Islam and called himself
Ibrahim.74 However, he became known as Müteferrika (court steward). The people who
served as assistants to the Ottoman rulers used to earn this title. He both contributed to the
Ottoman empire in terms of conveying the western scientific knowledge to Turkey thanks to
his translation on these matters, and by founding the first Turkish printing press with the use
of Arabic characters and publishing books on linguistic, scientific, historical, and military
issues he brought new dimension to the cultural life of the Empire. For example he described
the magnetic pieces of the magnet stone and he explained his works he conducted in Europe
to ascertain latitudes and longitudes based on magnetic properties in the Füyuzat-i Miknatisiye
72
73
74
For Yirmi Sekiz Mehmet Çelebi and his embassy mission to Paris, see: Beynun Akyavaş, Yirmisekiz Çelebi
Mehmed Efendi’nin Fransa Sefaretnamesi (Ankara: Türk Kültürünü Araştırma Enstitüsü, 1993)
Orlin Sabev, İbrahim Müteferrika ya da İlk Osmanlı Matbaa Serüveni 1726-1746 (Istanbul: Yeditepe,
2006), p. 154.
Franz Babinger, Müteferrika ve Osmanlı Matbaası: 18. Yüzyılda İstanbul’da Kitabiyat, trans. by N. KuranBurçoğlu (Istanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yurt Yayınları, 2004), pp. 14-15.
17
(Properties of Magnetism) published in 1732. Müteerrika stated that this work was a summar
of his dissertation that was published in 1721 in Leipzig. By making additional supplements
with new information on astronomy and Ottoman geography and maps, he printed Katib
Çelebi’s (d.1657) prominent book which were about geography and cosmography Cihannüma
in 1732. By doing this, he counted particularly on Ebu Bekir b. Behram el-Dimaşki’s (d.
1691) work on the Cihannüma.75 Under the order of Sultan Ahmed III, Müteferrika in 1733
started to work on another project, since Sultan Ahmet III was highly interested in the arts and
books. The most spectacular celestial atlas of seventeenth century Europe, the Harmonia
Macrocosmica (first edition 1660, reprint 1661) was ordered to him to translate into
Turkish.76
A naturalist and priest from Halle, Johann Friedrich Bachstrom (1688- 1742) gives
information on Damad Ibrahim’s era while he was staying in Istanbul for three years from
1728 to 1731.77 He describes the intellectual atmosphere at Istanbul in his letter to Johann
Christian Kundmann (1684- 1751) as such:
He (Damad İbrahim) held mathematics in particularly high esteem. He often refereed
(referiren) physical experiments (experimenta physica) and mathematical demonstrations
from the French Journal des Sçavans. At the same time, he wondered if such a society
could not be sustained in Istanbul. And, indeed, the Director (Mehmed Said Efendi, 28
Mehmed Celebi’s son) had brought in a few learned Frenchmen, and also those Turks
78
who were better acquainted with such studies.
The period in which Mahmud Efendi lived was known as the Tulip Era79 because it was
influenced strongly by a phenomenon called tulip mania.80 During that “Tulip period” (171830) sultans used sophisticated means to renovate their legitimacy, such as the excessive
consumption of not only tulips, but also art, cooking, luxury goods, clothing, and the building
75
76
77
78
79
80
Fikret Sarıcaoğlu, “Cihannüma ve Ebubekir b. Behram ed-Dımeşki-İbrahim Müteferrika,” in Prof. Dr. Bekir
Kütükoğlu’na Armağan (Istanbul: Istanbul Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Arastirma Merkezi, 1991), pp.
121-142, p. 138.
Feza Günergün, “Science in the Ottoman World” in Imperialism and Science: Social Act and Interaction,
(eds.) George Vlahakis et al., (Santa Barbara, California: ABC-CLIO, 2006), pp. 85- 86.
Harun Küçük, Early Enlightenment in Istanbul (Unpublished PhD diss., Univ. of California, 2012), p. 22.
Kundmann, Rariora naturae et artis, pp. 710-11 cited and translated by Harun Küçük, ibid., p. 172.
Lale Devri or theTulip Age is the name given to this era by Turkish historians of the twentieth century. For
an historiographical account of the development of the Tulip Age phenomena, see Can Erimtan, Ottomans
Looking West? The Origins of the Tulip Age and Its Development in Modern Turkey (London: Tauris
Academic Studies, 2008).
For the role of the tulip in the consumerist patterns among eighteenth century Ottomans, see Ariel Salzmann,
“The Age of Tulips: Confluence and Conflict in Early Modern Consumer Culture (1550- 1730)”, in
Consumption Studies and the History of the Ottoman Empire, 1550-1922: An Introduction, (ed.) Donald
Quataert (New York: SUNY Press, 2000), pp. 83-106.
18
of pleasure palaces like those of the court of King Louis XIV at Versailles.81 Its effects were
visible in the architecture82 and in all codes of conduct.83 Given the wealth spent on palaces,
waterfront palaces (yalı), gardens, mansions and chalets, it can be argued that consumerism
appeared among the Ottomans at that time. Rahimi says that, “the Ottoman elite was very
much part of this early modern, transnational, consumerist culture and the fervent cultivation
of and decoration with tulips.”84
From early in the second half of the seventeenth century, poets and musicians moved,
alongside various commodities, across the central Asian “frontier.” Cultural goods such as
poetry and music connected the Muslim world from Mughal Delhi to Ottoman Sarajevo.
Transregional poetry schools, such as the “Indian style” (sebk-i Hindi) of Persian poetry
introduced a “fresh style” as well as a consumer culture.85 Salzmann notes the example of
Grand Vizier Köprülü Fazıl Ahmet Pasha (1661-1676), who “requested the Venetian bailo,
Giacomo Quirini, to commission a special commedia dell’arte for the Ottoman festival of
1675.”86 Artan asserts that contrary to the manners of the Ottoman classical age, flamboyant
Ottoman men and the aristocratic wives of high ranking officials exhibiting the imperial code
of conduct in impressive palaces erected along shores of the Golden Horn and Bosphorus
indeed sought justification of their status in terms of the particular collective understanding of
power in the eighteenth century.87
At the same time, a flowering of music proved to be as great as that of poetry, which
produced the great Divan poet Nedim,88 and architectural works such as the Hekimoğlu Ali
Pasha mosque. Great artists lived in the same era, too. For instance, Hafız Post was dead by
1689. Ebu Bekir Ağa was only twenty five when Itri passed away in 1759. Galata
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
Quataert, The Ottoman Empire 1700- 1922 (Cambridge & New York: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2005), p. 4.
Doğan Kuban, Türk Barok Mimarisi Hakkında Bir Deneme (Istanbul: İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi Mimarlık
Fakültesi, 1954); Ayda Arel, Onsekizinci Yüzyıl İstanbul Mimarisinde Batılılaşma Süreci (Istanbul: İstanbul
Teknik Üniversitesi Mimarlık Fakültesi, 1975).
Fatma Müge Göçek lists in her work the materials imported from the West: East Encounters West: France
and the Ottoman Empire in the 18th Century (New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 1987), pp. 103- 115.
Babak Rahimi, “Nahils, Circumcision Rituals and the Theatre State,” in Ottoman Tulips, Ottoman Coffee:
Leisure and Lifestyle in the Eighteenth Century, (ed.) Dana Sajdi (London: I. B. Tauris, 2007), pp. 90-116,
p. 113.
Salzmann, “The Age of Tulips”, p. 90.
Ibid., p. 91.
Tülay Artan, “18.yy’da Yönetici Elitin Saltanatın Meşruiyet Arayışına Katılımı,” Toplum ve Bilim 83
(1999/2000), pp. 292-321, here p. 307.
Ali Budak, Batılılaşma ve Türk Edebiyatı: Lale Devri’nden Tanzimat’a Yenileşme (Istanbul: Bilge Kültür
Sanat, 2008), pp. 107- 224. This work discusses the changes and modernisation process in literature.
19
Mevlevihane’s shaikh Osman Dede, the composer of “Segah Miraciye,” which is regarded as
the greatest example of Turkish music to date, passed away in 1730. The artist Levni died in
1732.89 All of them breathed the same challenging eighteenth century atmosphere. The ideas
and forms in the eighteenth century in Istanbul could travel or be used in any direction. The
forms and ideas were appropriated and interpreted differently everywhere. The oral and
popular tradition of şarkı in literature became canonized in the main flow of court poetry by
Nedim. The urban tradition of wood construction was made suitable by the imperial court in
the field of architecture, which led to a new phase of historical Ottoman palatine architecture.
Likewise, old courtly culture was not simply copied, as the garden pleasures of urban society,
Ottoman public gardens also played a crucial role as the prime avenue in the public sphere.
These gardens flourished as new forms and channels of sociability, resulting in diminishing
elite and popular spheres. According to Nedim, Enderunlu Fazil and their contemporaries,
these are places where people often gather and live in urban life, test and demonstrate new
social habits, desires and forms of distinction.90
The eighteenth century, welcoming all these scholars, poets and composers and
diplomatic relations, also witnessed establishment of translation committees during the Tulip
Era for the translation of important books into the Ottoman language. The source language of
the translated books was mostly Arabic and they were mainly non-literary pieces. Grand
Vizier Nevşehirli Damad İbrahim Pasha patronized these translation activities and supported
them fully.91 Many of the books translated during this time were either history books or books
which were relevant to history, such as travel accounts. It was well-known at that time that
Ibrahim Pasha praised knowledge and scholarship and read many books. Especially, he either
read books on history or had scholars read history books to him.92 His special interest in
history stemmed from his post as statesman. Thus, Nedim mentions this fact in the
introductory part of his translation of Müneccimbaşı Tarihi with the following words: “(he)
89
90
91
92
Esin Atıl, Levni and Surname. The Story of an 18th c. Ottoman Festival (Istanbul: Koçbank, 1999).
Shirine Hamadeh, “Public Spaces and the Garden Culture of Istanbul in the Eighteenth Century,” in The
Early Modern Ottomans: Remapping the Empire, eds. Virginia Aksan and Daniel Goffman (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2007), pp. 277-312, 312.
There are some works concerning scholarly activities during the Tulip Era. Most of them focus on the
personality of the Grand Vizier İbrahim Paşa and the role he played during this period both in the political
and cultural spheres. Salim Aydüz approaches the issue analytically in his article “Lale Devri’nde Yapılan
İlmi Faaliyetler,” Divan: İlmi Araştırmalar 3 (1997), pp. 143-170, here 170. On the role of translations, see
idem, “The Role of Translations in the Eighteenth Century in Transferring Modern European Science and
Technology to the Ottoman State,” Akademik Araştırmalar Dergisi 4-5 (2000), pp. 499-511. See also Suat
Karantay, “Tercüme Bürosu: Normlar ve İşlevler,” Metis Çeviri 16 (1991), pp. 96-101.
Salim Aydüz,“Lale Devri’nde Yapılan İlmi Faaliyetler,” p.144, f.n.4 cited from Mirzazade Mehmed Salim,
‘İkdü'l-cüman mukaddime, Süleymaniye Ktp., Lala İsmail, nr. 318, fol. 3a.
20
has a natural tendency to the science of history because of the necessity of history for viziers
and governors.”93 This is the reason behind the choice of history books or works from the
auxiliary sciences to history. On the other hand, even Mirzazade Salim Efendi noted that the
translation of History of Ayni was “for the governing class a big service and an appealing
banquet.”94 Retired judges were appointed to translate Arabic books whereas poets or Sufi
sheiks were preferred for Persian books. An interesting and different book among these was
the Physics of Aristotle. Below mentioned Esad Efendi (d. 1730) from Ioannina, prepared the
Arabic translation of Johannes Cottunius’s Commentarii lucidissimi in octo libros de physico
auditu Aristotelisthis, a commentary of Physica from Greek into Arabic.95 Historian Abdi
regarded Ibrahim Paşa and his contemporaries in the court merely as hedonistic spendthrifts
so much so that “Even if the Ottoman lands had been occupied by the enemies, they would
probably have continued their pleasure.”96
The new medical knowledge reached to the empire, while Ottoman physicians were
practicing medicine in the eighteenth century, in compliance with the medieval Islamic texts.
Adrien Mynsicht (1603–1638), Jean Baptiste van Helmont (1577-1644), Daniel Sennert
(1572-1637), and other seventeenth-century iatrochemists and physicians were all utilized for
compiliation of medical books, as a resource. Hermann Boerhaave (1668-1738) and Anton
von Stoerck (1731-1803)’s well-known works were translated into Turkish in the mid
eighteenth century. The physician and sufi Ömer Şifai (d. 1742) from Bursa, by putting
additional information, translated the Arabic version, made by a native of Aleppo Salih bin
Nasrullah, known as Ibn Sellum’s(d. 1669) from Paracelsus (1493-1541)97, into Turkish early
93
94
95
96
97
Ibid., p. 144, f.n. 5 cited from Müneccimbaşı Ahmed Dede, Sahaifü'l-ahbar fi Vekayi‘i'l-a‘sar, (İstanbul
1285), vol. I, p. 5: Ba-husus selatin-i izam ve havakin-i kiram ve vüzera-i fiham hazeratına elzem-i lüzum
olan fenn-i tarihe bi't-tab‘ mail olmağla”.
Ibid., p. 145, f.n. 6 cited from Salim, ‘İkdü'l-cüman, fol. 2b.: “erbab-ı devlete bir ziyafet-i cemile ve hizmet.”
Küçük, Early Enlightenment in Istanbul, p. 30. Aydüz informs us that this book was translated via a
committee. This information did not exist in other references. Also, the full name of the book was given by
Aydüz as “Kitabü’s-semaniye fi sımai’t-tabii.’ Salim Aydüz, “Lale Devri’nde” p. 151.
Selim Karahasanoğlu, A Tulip Age Legend: Consumer Behavior and Material Culture in the Ottoman
Empire (1718-1730) (N. Y.: State University of New York, 2009), p. 14: “Ehl-i mansıp olanların ekseri leyl
ü nehar zevk u safa ve çeng ü cegane ile meclis araste idi. Memalik-i ali Osman harab olmak değil, canib-i
erbaasını düşman neuzu billah zabt eylemek sadedinde olsa belki biz zevkimizde olalım derlerdi.” Cited
from Abdi Tarihi: Süleymaniye Kütüphanesi, Esad Efendi, 2153: 28a.
Referred as “Baracelsus”, “Barakelsus” and “Baraklisus” and presented as “Cermani” (German) hakim
(philosopher) from Nemçe, Paracelsus was widely used by seventeenth century Ottoman scholars: Nil Sarı
and M. Bedizel Zülfikar, “The Paracelsusian Influence on Ottoman Medicine in the Seventeenth and
Eighteenth Centuries” in Transfer of Modern Science and Technology to the Muslim World, (ed.)
Ekmeleddin İhsanoğlu, (Istanbul: IRCICA, 1992), pp. 157- 179, p. 157. Kolta claims that Ibn Sellum did not
translate Tıbb al-cedid al-kimyai directly from Paracelsus, however he compiled the works of Paracelsus,
which was enhanced by Sellum’s own experiences and own views on treating the diseases: K. S. Kolta,
21
in the century. Şifai pointed out the fact that, on one hand, Paracelsus suggested that diseases
could be treated with the help of minerals, on the other hand, physicians like Senners believed
it was a dangerous therapy and suggested to use minerals from weakened animal drugs and
plants.98
With reference to the European books and by consulting the European physicians that
lived in Istanbul, Ottoman physicians wrote books about iatrochemistry and they called it the
“new medicine” (tıbb-i cedid). Daniel Sennert, Jean Fernel (1497–1558), and Sieur de la
Rivière (d. 1605) the French alchemist and the Paracelsian physician of Henri IV (r.1589–
1610) is mentioned in the Jewish in origin, chief-physician Hayatizade Mustafa Feyzi (d.
1692)’s book called Hamse-i Hayati (Five Books of Hayati), which deals with the diseases
and their treatments. Particularly, the diseases and the new therapeutics were explained in Ibn
Sellum’s and Hayatizade’s books and Ottoman physicians’ interest in practical knowledge
was shown, which is similar to the interest of Ottoman astronomers in zijs.99 Paracelsian
medicine and Copernican astronomy explained the underpinning theory in these fields, still
Ottoman physicians and astronomers accepted them as a part of their practice. Through
several channels the Ottoman court physicians were able to access to the European medical
knowledge in the seventeenth century, however the principal conveyors were the European
physicians that were working in Ottoman cities and Ottomans who studied in European
medical schools. Below mentioned Alexandre Mavrocordato (1641–1709), for example, is
known for his thesis on on the circulation of the blood titled Pneumaticon instrumentum
circulandi sanguinis (1664). Şemseddin Itaqi’s Risale-i Teşrih-i Ebdan (Treatise on the
Anatomy of the Human Body, 1632) combined the the traditional Islamic and sixteenthcentury European knowledge with regard to introducing the anatomical knowledge. He used
the schematic figures from the fourteenth century Persian physician Mansur ibn Muhammad
ibn Ahmad’s Teşrih-i Mansur (Anatomy of Mansur), was also demonstrated and the plates
were shown, which was an inspiration from the De Humani Corporis Fabrica of Andreas
Vesalius.100 Jewish physicians and surgeons from Spain and Portugal brought the European
98
99
100
“Hekimbaşı Salih b. Nasrullah b. Sellum'un Görüşüne Göre Paracelsus”, Türk-Alman Tıbbi Ilişkileri
Sempozyum Bildirileri, haz. Arslan Terzioğlu, (İstanbul: Istanbul Univ. Tıp Fakültesi, 1981), pp. 93- 100, p.
97.
Günergün, “Science in the Ottoman World”, pp. 86-87. For a general survey of Ottoman medicine see also:
Esin Kahya, Ayşegül Demirhan Erdemir, Medicine in the Ottoman Empire and Other Scientific
Developments, (Istanbul: Nobel Tıp Kitapevleri, 1997) and Miri Shefer-Mossensohn, Ottoman Medicine:
Healing and Medical Institutions, 1500-1700 (Albany, N.Y. : SUNY Press, 2009).
Günergün, “Science in the Ottoman World”, p. 83.
Kahya and Erdemir, Medicine in the Ottoman Empire, p.105.
22
anatomy texts of sixteenth century, via Antwerp and Venice. These Jewish physician and
surgeons from Spain and Portugal, as stated before, were refugees from the Inquisition and
Reformation in the Ottoman Empire.101 Physicians Ibn Sellum and Ali Efendi and Adrien
Mynsicht’s (1603–1638) works were the reason why the new medicine entered the court, and
these works were likely to have been studied by the Ottoman physicians. Bidaet ül-mübtedi
(Introduction for beginners) was the name of the court physician Bursali Ali Efendi’s
pharmacopoeia, in which he wrote about Mynsicht in 1731. He also prepared a formulary
namd as Kitab-i Mynsicht Tercümesi (translation of Mynsicht’s book). The remedies of
Mynsicht’s Thesaurus and armamentarium medico-chymicum, were the two books common
among European pharmacists in the mid eigtheenth century.102
1.1.1
Phanaroits
Though the seventeenth century witnessed a blossoming of the Greek people in
cultural and intellectual fields in which the Phanariots played a prominent role, the succeeding
century observed a kind of intellectual movement with the naming of “Neo-Hellenic
Enlightenment”. Anna Tabaki claims that this term, which corresponds to Diaphotismos
(Διαφωτισμός) in Greek was possibly created in 1862 in connection to German term
Aufklärung.103 K.Th.Demaras (1904- 1992) has been remembered as “the scholar of Modern
Greek Enlightenment”104 and the study of Enlightenment in Greek speaking worlds gain
importance among academic circles with his book La Grèce au temps des Lumières in
1969.105 This neologism, in Effi Gazi’s words, “…considered to have played an important
101
102
103
104
105
Günergün, “Science in the Ottoman World”, p. 84.
Günergün says that “New medicine” reached its peak when two-volume encyclopedia Düstur ül-Vesim fi
Tibb ül-Cedid ve’l- Kadim (Vesim’s Codex of New and Old Medicine) was published by Abbas Vesim
(d.1759 or 1761): “Science in the Ottoman World”, p. 87.
Anna Tabaki, “Les Lumières néo-helléniques. Un essai de définition et de périodisation”, The Enlightenment
in Europe, Les Lumières en Europe, Aufklärung in Europa. Unity and Diversity, Unité et Diversité, Einheit
und Vielfalt. Edited by /édité par / hrsg. von Werner Schneiders avec l’introduction générale de Roland
Mortier, [European Science Foundation] Concepts et Symboles du Dix-huitième Siècle Européen, Concepts
and Symbols of the Eighteenth Century in Europe, (Berlin: Berliner Wissenschafts - Verlag, 2003), pp. 4556, p. 45.
Tabaki writes that he already used the term since 1945 in his article entitled “The French Revolution and
Greek Enlightenment” in the journal Dimokratika Chronika (Democratic Chronicles). See: Anna Tabaki,
“K.Th. Dimaras”, p. 4: http://uoa.academia.edu/AnnaTabaki
Before the work of Demaras, there was Raphael Demos’ “The Neo-Hellenic Enlightenment 1750-1821: A
General Survey”, Journal of the History of Ideas 19, (4/ 1958), pp. 523-541. It is also important to mention
G. P. Henderson, The Revival of Greek Thought 1620–1830, (Edinburgh and London, 1971).
23
role in the revival of interest in ancient Greece & in the gradual detachment of educated
individuals and groups from religious values and practices.”106
Phanariot, literally meaning resident of the Fener district near the Golden Horn, was
used for the members of notable Orthodox families107 who generally held the position of
princes of Wallachia and Moldavia between 1711 and 1821 due to their wealth, education and
knowledge of Western languages. In her thesis, Christine Phillou states that the reason for
their rise, instead of local rulers, might also be “the rising power of Phanariot merchants and
ecclesiastics in the Istanbul Court policies from the Treaty of Karlowitz and the pre-existing
connections of the Phanariots with Church and monastic affairs in the Principalities”.108
During the time of the Phanariots, the Romanian Principalities underwent a series of
transformations in the socio-cultural and educational domains. The Greek academy of St.
Sava in Bucharest and soon after its rival academy of Jassy were established in the 1670s and
modeled on the University of Padua where the new Aristotelianism had the distinguishing
character. The curricula of these schools promoted the cultural life of the principalities with
the study of classical Greece: in that academy in 1707, Homer, Focilide, and Pythagoras,
Aesop, Sophocles and Euripides, Pindar, Xenofon, Thucydides, Plutarch, Demosthenes,
Isocrates and from Greek literature, Gregory of Nazianz, Sinesius and from the Byzantine
literature, Agapet and Symocata were taught just like the Academy in Constantinople did.109
From Ioannina to the monastery of Saint John the Theologian on the island of Patmos; from
Mount Athos to Bucharest, through the medium of the Greek language nevertheless these
schools sustained an intellectual culture which became the shared patrimony of educated
individuals in Southeastern Europe. This common, Greek-speaking intellectual culture of the
Balkans, which originally was intimately connected with the work of the Church, later
provided the appropriate channels for the reception of the ideas of the Enlightenment and the
gradual secularization of Balkan thought.110 According to Leal, these “academies promoted an
106
107
108
109
110
Effi Gazi, “Revisiting Religion and Nationalism in 19th century Greece”, in The Making of Modern Greece:
Nationalism, Romanticism, and the Uses of the Past (1797– 1896), (ed.) Roderick Beaton & David Rick
(London: Ashgate, 2009), pp. 95- 108, p. 96.
For the geneological study of Phanariot families, see: Mihail-Dimitri Sturdza, Dictionnaire Historique et
Généalogique des Grandes Familles de Gréce d’Albanie et de Constantinople, (Paris: Chez l'auteur, 1983).
Christine M. Phillou, Worlds, Old and New: Phanariot Networks and the Remaking of Ottoman Governance
in the First Half of the Nineteenth Century, (Unpublished PhD Thesis: Princeton, 2004), p. 27, fn. 29.
Nicolae Iorga, Byzantium After Byzantium, trans. by Laura Treptow, (Iasi, Portland: Center for Romanian
Studies, 2000), p. 204.
Paschalis M. Kitromilides, “Orthodox Culture and Collective Identity in the Ottoman Balkans during the
Eighteenth century,” Deltio Kentrou Mikrasiatikon Spoudon 12 (1997- 98), pp. 81-95, p. 87.
24
interest in a Greek-oriented Byzantine culture”111 and several Phanariot families argued that
they belonged to Byzantine nobility and they spent great efforts to vindicate this.112
One of the most well known representatives and promoters of this new intellectual
culture was the Phanariot prince of the Danubian province, Alexander Mavrocordatos (16701730) who was son of a affluent Chiote trader in Istanbul. Before he was appointed as a
Grand Dragoman by Sultan Ahmet III and took part in the Karlowitz negotiations, he first
studied at the Greek College in Rome and then received his education in medicine at the
universities of Padua and Bologna. After returning to Istanbul, he became a teacher at the
Manolaki Kastoriani School from 1665 to 1671-2113, and he replaced Nikousios in the post of
Grand Dragoman in 1673. Nicholas Mavrocordatos was born in Istanbul in 1680 and was
educated in Istanbul, unlike his father. He could read ancient Greek, Latin and was fluent in
Ottoman, Arabic, Persian, French and Italian. Like his father, Nicholas became Grand
Dragoman in 1698 until he was assigned as prince of Moldavia in 1709. He was imprisoned
during the Austro-Turkish war (1716- 1718) by the troops of Prince Eugene of Savoy. After
being freed, he was appointed as ruler of Wallachia, where he continued until his death in
1730. The prince was a bibliophile and the books bear his father’s nameplate, Ex biblioteca
Alex[andri] Maurocordati de Scarlatti Constantinopolitani.114 In his pioneering novel, Loisirs
de Philothée (Philotheos’ Diversions), while the story teller Philotheos is walking through the
Byzantine Hippodrome of Istanbul with some friends, he makes a critique of philosophical
systems (Aristotle, Plato, Stoicism, Epicureanism), discusses political theories, contemporary
political circumstances, religious discussions and literary questions. For Leal, the book
“touches on many points which highlight the place of the Greek Orthodox as individuals and
as a community within Ottoman society.”115 She underlines Philotheos’ usage of references to
classical Greece in his portrayal of the Sultan and comments that alongside making use of the
classical title vasileis, rather than Sultan, to indicate Ahmed III, Philotheos, the story-teller
also makes a comparison with Zeus, from whom originated the goddess of wisdom,
Athena.116 By doing this he argues that the Ottomans are the true successors of Antiquity. So
111
112
113
114
115
116
Leal, The Ottoman state and the Greek Orthodox of Istanbul, p. 422.
Damien Janos, “Panaiotis Nicousios and Alexsander Mavrocordatosp”, p.190.
Elif Bayraktar Tellan, The Patriarch and the Sultan: The Struggle for Authority and the Guest for Order in
the Eigtheenth Century Ottoman Empire, (Unpublished PhD Thesis: Bilkent, 2011), p. 113.
Leal, The Ottoman state and the Greek Orthodox of Istanbul, p. 508.
Ibid., p. 512.
Ibid., p. 516.
25
to speak, “in Mavrocordatos’ world view, the relationship between the Ottoman and Hellen
was not as distinct as one might initially think.”117 Alongside a mixture of Oriental and
Occidental taste was the common aspect of this romance,118 “the battle of books” was
mentioned and discussed explicitly.119 This debate, named by Charles Perrault “the Quarrel
between the Ancients and Moderns”, concerns the superiority of the authors of antiquity as a
model for imitation or not.120 It is known that Nicholas kept up a correspondence with the
Huguenot scholar from Amsterdam, Jean Le Clerc. Le Clerc sent him recent maps of central
Europe and the Eastern Mediterranean and the books of Newton beside other scientists and
John Locke’s Two Treaties of Civil Government (1690). Additionally, Nicholas requested on
the recent developments in the Western answered
answering his incessant requests for
information about new developments in the intellectual circles.121 It is very possible that
Mavrocordatos had informed on the Quarrel via these letters from Le Clerc.
Another influential person of arts and letters was Dimitri Cantemir (1673- 1723).
Polymath, polyglot and prince, Dimitri Cantemir received his education in Jassy. In 1710, the
Ottomans assigned Cantemir as prince of Moldova taking the place of Nicholas
Mavrocordatos. After Moldova continued as a sovereignty of the Ottoman empire according
to the Treaty of Prut held in 1710/11, Cantemir was forced to go to Russia where he became
an active supporter of the reforms of Peter the Great until his death in 1723.122 Cantemir is
known for his contribution to Ottoman music for which he designed a notation system.123 In
addition to this, he authored on matters of logic and ethics and published the Divan in which
he compiled traditional Ottoman poets in 1698. In 1705, he composed an allegorical
monograph which depicted the power struggles of the local families of the principalities.
Dimitri Cantemir wrote his works in Russia which gained him international fame. His most
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
Ibid., p. 524.
Anna Tabaki, “Au carrefour des civilisations: Phanar et Phanariotes,” Balkan Studies (Etudes balkaniques),
no. 1 (2002), pp. 96- 109, p.103.
Leal, The Ottoman state and the Greek Orthodox of Istanbul, p. 452.
For a discussion of “Ancients and Moderns,” see Douglas Lane Patey, The Cambridge History of Literary
Criticism, Volume 4: The Eighteenth Century, (ed.) H. B. Nisbet and Claude Rawson (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1997), pp. 32-74.
Peter Rietbergen, Europe: A Cultural History, second edition, (New York: Routledge, 2006), p. 298.
For his service in Russia, see: Stefan Lemny, Les Cantemir: L'aventure européenne d'une famille princière
au XVIIIe siècle, (Paris: Editions Complexe, 2009), pp. 105- 126.
Cantemir’s Kitabü İlmi'l musiki ala vechi'l hurufat was prepared in 1976 and then in 2001 by the same
person: Musikiyi Harflerle Tesbit ve İcra İlminin Kitabı:Ttıpkıbasım-Çevriyazı-Çeviri-Notlar, (haz.) Yalçın
Tura, (İstanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları, 2001). For the contribution of Cantemir to the Ottoman music, see:
Eugenia Popescu-Judetz, Prens Dimitrie Cantemir: Türk Musıkisi Bestekarı ve Nazariyatçısı, (trans.) Selçuk
Alimdar, (Istanbul: Pan Yayınları, 2000).
26
known work is called Historia incrementorum atque decrementorum Aulae othomanicae,
which was created between 1714 and 1716. It is translated into English as History of the
Growth and Decay of the Ottoman Empire and was published in 1735.124 This work, written
in Latin, is a sort of explanation of the Ottoman empire composed for a European audience.
According to Leal, although Cantemir was an Orthodox Christian, spent half of his life at
Ottoman Court meeting scholars at different mansions along the Bosphorus, he viewed the
Ottoman Empire as an outsider.125 Cantemir explains that he calls only the people who
brought the learning and cultural life (scientias et vitam cultum) of Hellenes to the present
time Greeks and that he does not call the rest of the people Greek, simply because they were
born within Greek territory. Cantemir mentions Isocrates, who once stated in the Panegyrics
that people who share blood are not called Hellenes, rather those who share the culture.126
1.2 Mahmud Efendi’s Intellectual Horizons
This section focuses on Mahmud Efendi’s education and his intellectual background
which enabled him to produce a unique work such as The History of the City of Philosophers.
Knowing Mahmud Efendi’s intellectual background will give us the chance to read into the
text and comprehend the implicit and/or explicit messages he wanted to convey. Although we
have a shortage of resources on Mahmud Efendi, taking a look at the times Mahmud Efendi
lived in and the ilmiyye (religious) establishment will give an idea about his intellectual
world. In the last quarter of the seventeenth century, a significant number of scholarly circles
produced works on positive and religious sciences in the Ottoman Empire. To name a few:
İznik’li Ali Çelebi (d.1696), Aksaraylı Ali Şaban (d.1696), Rodosizade Mehmed
Efendi (d.1701), Müneccimbaşı Derviş Ahmed b.Lütfullah (d.1702), Ayaşlı Şa’ban Şifai
(d.1704), İznikli Ömer İbn Sinan (d. After 1705), Mosdarlı Mustafa Efendi (d.1707), Nuh İbn
Abdülmennan (d.1707), İshak Hocası Ahmed Efendi (d.1708), Kara Halil Efendi (d.1711),
Buhurizade Mustafa (Itri) (d.1712), Paşmakcızade Ali Efendi (d.1124/1712), Hayatizade
damadı Süleyman Efendi (d.1715), Naima Mustafa Efendi el-Halebi (d.1716), Nazmizade
Hüseyin Murtaza bin Ali (d.1720?), Halil Faiz Efendi (d.1721), Osmanzade Taib (d.1724),
İsmail Hakkı Bursevi (d.1725), Mirzazade Salim Efendi (d.1726), Ahmed ibn İbrahim A’rec
(d.1727), Beliğ İsmail b. İbrahim el-Bursevi (d.1729), Nedim (d.1730), Saçaklızade
124
125
126
Leal, The Ottoman state and the Greek Orthodox of Istanbul, p. 435.
Ibid., p. 436.
Ibid., p. 443.
27
Muhammed ibn Ebi Bekr el-Maraşi (d.1732), Şeyhülislam İshak Efendi (d. 1147/ 1734),
Es’ad b. Ali b. Osman el-Yanyavi (d.1736?), Raşid Mehmed Efendi (d.1735), Seyyid Vehbi
(d.1736), Şeyhi Mehmed Efendi (d.1732), Maraş’lı Abdürrahim paşa (d.1736), Üsküdarlı
Mehmed Emin Efendi (d.1736), Mestçizade Abdullah Efendi (d.1736), Mirzazade Salim
Efendi (d.1743), İbrahim Müteferrika (d.1674-1745), Çelebizade Asım (d. 1173/1760),
Damadzade Feyzullah Efendi (d.1175/1761), Ebu Sa’id Muhammed el-Hadimi (d.1762),
Koca Ragıb Paşa (d.1765), Tanburi Mustafa Çavuş (d.1770), Pirizade Osman Sahib Efendi (d.
1184/1770), Erzurumlu İbrahim Hakkı (d.1780), Müstakimzade Sadeddin Süleyman Efendi
(d.1202/1787) and Şeyh Galib (d.1799) 127
Given the intellectual activity in the Muslim world in the same century,128 it is very
likely that Mahmud Efendi was in touch with the intellectual circles in Istanbul, where he
received his education and visited later on. Mahmud Efendi’s time was also a significant
period in terms of the life of the Sufi order among the Ottomans. The leading figures were
Murad-ı Buhari (1640-1720), who introduced the Nakşibendi branch of Müceddidi in
Anatolia, and his followers, Mehmed Emin Tokadi (d.1745) and also from a little earlier
period Niyazi Mısri (d.1694).129
Before these scholars, a prominent Ottoman scholar of the seventeenth century,
famous Katip Çelebi/Hadji Khalifa (1609-1657) 130 is considered to be one of the first scholar
who tried to understand the cultural, historical and geographical world of Europe. The
masterpiece of Ottoman geography, Cihannüma, was written twice by him because of the fact
that he noticed the inadequacy of his knowledge about Britain, Ireland and Iceland he
considered the project unfinished. After translating Gerhard Mercator’s book Atlas Minor
with the help of Mehmed İhlasi, a French renegade, he wrote his book twice until his death in
1657. He also used other European sources such as Cluverius’ Introductio in Universam
127
128
129
130
Bekir Karlığa, “Yirmi Sekiz Mehmet Çelebi’nin Yeni Bulunan Bir Fizik Kitabı Tercümesi ve 18. yy’ın
Başında Osmanlı Düşüncesi,” Bilim Felsefe Tarih I (1991), pp. 294-304.
For general intellectual life and scholarly mobility in the eighteenth century Islamic World outside of
Istanbul and Anatolia and for discussions about the concept of “Islamische Aufklärung/Islamic
Enlightenment,” see Stefan Reichmuth, “Arabic Literature and Islamic Scholarship in the 17/18th Century:
Topics and Biographies,” Die Welt des Islams 42/3 (2002), pp. 281-288 and Khaled El- Rouayheb, “The
Myth of ‘The Triumph of Fanaticism’ in the Seventeenth- Century Ottoman Empire,” Die Welt des Islams
48 (2008), pp. 196- 221.
Derin Terzioğlu, “Sufi and Dissidant in the Ottoman Empire: Niyazi-i Mısri. (1618-1694)” (Unpublished
Ph.D. diss., Harvard University, 1999).
For the detailed biography of Katip Çelebi, see: Gottfried Hagen, Ein osmanischer Geograph bei der Arbeit:
Entstehung und Gedankenwelt von Kātib Čelebis Ğihānnümā, (Berlin: Klaus Schwarz Verlag, 2003), pp. 778.
28
Geographiam besides Mehmed İhlasi’s famous Tarih-i Hind-i Garbi.131 He translated the
political terminology from Latin to Ottoman Turkish, and looked for its equivalent terms
within the Ottoman Empire. In this context, his works, which he started writing in 1654,
İrşadu’l- Hayara ila tarihi’l- Yunan ve’r-Rum ve’n- Nasara (Guide for the Perplexed on the
History of the Greeks and the Romans and the Christians), makes up the first step. Katip
Çelebi explained the reasons why he wrote these works. He said that Muslim history was
related to lies and fables about European Christians, although European Christians were
indeed numerous and powerful. So as to make his fellow Muslims realize the truth and end
the negligent attitude.132 More importantly, he says that no sources in Arabic, Persian and
Turkish would give information. The work constitutes two parts. The first part is about
Christianity and its doctrine, while the second part is a short summary of regimes in Europe,
and looks for equivalent concepts in the Ottoman world. Monarchy, aristocracy and
democracy are told attributed to Platon, Aristotales and Democritos.133 Lists of popes and
rulers are given by him from the folios 9a- 18b.134 Katip Çelebi was known to make use of
Greek sources such as Ionannes Zonaras from twelfth century, above mentioned Michael’s
brother Nicetas Choniates (d.ca.1215-16), Nicephorus Gregoras (d. 1360) and Laonikes
Chalcondyles from Athens (d.1490).135 He translated the Chronicon of Johann Carion,
published in Paris in 1548 as Tarih-i Frengi Tercümesi (Translation of the History of the
Franks), with the help of French convert Mehmed İhlasi.136
Hüseyin b. Cafer from Cos Island, also known Hezarfen (d.1691) had in his entourage
Nicousios Panaiotis, Alexander Mavrocordatos , Ali Ufki Bey (Wojciech Bobowski), Comte
de Marsigli, Demetrius Cantemir, Nointel’s secretar Fr. Pétis de La Croix, Antoine Galland
and Marquis de Nointel.137 When he wrote the Byzantine section of his History, Ali Ufki Bey
translated for him the sources he had received from Panaiotis and then reconsidered the
subjects carefully before writing them in a style which was open to the historian to explain his
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
Gottfried Hagen, “Katip Çelebi and Tarih-i Hind-i Garbi” in Güneydoğu Avrupa Araştırmaları Dergisi 12
(1982-1998), pp. 101-115, p. 106.
Bilal Yurtoğlu, Katip Çelebi (Ankara: Atatürk Kültür Merkezi, 2009), p. 224, from İrşadu’l- Hayara ila
tarihi’l- Yunan ve’r-Rum ve’n- Nasara, Türk Tarih Kurumu Y-15, 1b.
Ibid., p. 225, İrşadu’l- Hayara ila tarihi’l- Yunan ve’r-Rum ve’n- Nasara, 6a.
Ibid., p. 226.
İbrahim Solak, Tarih-i Kostantiniyye ve Kayasıre (Katib Çelebi) (Konya: Gençlik Kitabevi, 2009), p. 10,
from Tarih-i Kostantiniyye ve Kayasıre, Konya İzzet Koyunoğlu Kütüphanesi 14032, 271b.
Hagen, Ein osmanischer Geograph bei der Arbeit , p. 67.
Bernard Lewis, “The Use By Muslim Historians Of Non-Muslim Sources,” Historians of the Middle East
(London: Oxford University Press, 1962), pp. 180-191, pp. 186-187; Franz Babinger, Die
Geschichtsschreiber der Osmanen und ihre Werke, (Leipzig: Otto Harrassowitz, 1927), pp. 228- 231.
29
“aim.” According to Hezarfen’s record, Ali Ufki Bey also knew history and was able to
“rephrase” the above-mentioned Latin and Greek works into Turkish.138 Born in 1603 in
Istanbul, Nicousios Panaiotis received his primary education from the Jesuits in Chios and
then he became the pupil of Meletius Syrigus from the Patriarchal Academy in Istanbul.
While he was studying medicine at the University of Padua, he had learned Italian, German
and French. When he returned to Istanbul, he was commissioned as a translator in the
diplomatic negotiations with Austria where he attracted the attention of the grand vizier
Köprülü Mehmet Pasha. According to the will of Köprülü, he was appointed grand dragoman
in the year 1669 and until 1821-22 the Phanariots held both the monopoly and official status
over this highly prestigious position139 as it is explained above. Panaiotis even served as the
private physician of Fazıl Ahmed Pasha, son of Mehmed Pasha and took part in the Crete
expedition with him. They were such close friends that it is even said that Ahmed Pasha made
him his confidant, respected him much and hoped that Nikosious would convert to Islam.140
Antoine Galland (1646- 1715), who introduced A Thousand and One Nights to Europeans,
and Luigi Ferdinando Marsigli (1658- 1730), an Italian naturalist came to Istanbul during this
period and got to know Hezarfen Huseyin. The reason why these persons were interested in
Hezarfen Huseyin and engaged in cultural exchange with him was that Hezarfen Huseyin
generally attracted great attention because of his scholarly knowledge. Galland, especially,
even mentioned him in his diaries, as well as having good relations with him. According to
Galland, Hezarfen was a tall and educated man, living close to Kilise Camii, who gave his
universal history, Tenkihü’t- Tevarih to him for the French ambassador M. de Nointel.141 He
begins the first chapter with ancient Persian states. In the second and third chapters, he goes
on to the life of Prophet Muhammad and the four caliphs. Then in the fourth chapter he gives
the details on the famous fifty Muslim dynasties. From this chapter onwards, he narrates the
138
139
140
141
Kerim Özdemir, Hezarfen Hüseyin Efendi’nin “Tenkihu't-tevarih” adlı eserinin Selçukluların zuhurundan
Osmanlı Devleti'nin kuruluşuna kadar geçen bölümlerinin transkripsiyon ve değerlendirmesi (MA thesis,
Manisa 2007), p. 25. For Ali Ufki Bey, see Cem Behar, Ali Ufki ve Mezmurlar (İstanbul: Pan Yayıncılık,
1990); Ali Ufki, Mecmua-i saz ü söz, haz. Şükrü Elçin, 2. ed. (Ankara: Kültür Bakanlığı yay., 2000) and
Stephanos Yerasimos & Annie Bethier, Albertus Bobovius ya da Santuri Ali Ufki Bey’in Anıları- Topkapı
Sarayı’nda Yasam (Istanbul: Kitap Yayınları, 2002).
Damien Janos, “Panaiotis Nicousios and Alexsander Mavrocordatos: The Rise of the Phanariots and the
Office of Grand Dragoman in the Ottoman Administration in the second half of the Seventeenth Century”,
Archivum Ottomanicum 23, (2005), pp. 177- 196, p. 182.
Heidrun Wurm, Der Osmanische Historiker Hüseyn b. Ga’fer, genannt Hezarfenn, und die Istanbuler
Gesellschaft in der zweiten Hälfte des 17. Jahrhunderts (Freiburg: Klaus Schwarz Verlag, 1971), pp. 41-42,
f.n.3.
Antoine Galland, Journal d’Antoine Galland pendant son, (ed.) Fuat Sezgin, reprint of the edition Paris
1881, pp.150-151.
30
history of the Ottoman State. In the sixth and seventh chapters, he narrates Roman and
Byzantine history. On the last two chapters, he talks about the islands in Chinese and Indian
seas, the discovery of the Americas. He ends his book declaring his opinions on the issues of
state and society.142 Between Roman history and Byzantine history, Hezarfen dedicates a
chronologically misplaced part to the Greek philosophers with short biographical information
about them. These philosophers are: Askilinus (Esculapios or Aeselepius), Fisagoris
(Pythagoras), Sokrat (Socrates), Bukrat (Hippocrates), Solon (Solon), Eflatun (Platon), Aristo
(Aristotle), Batlamyus (Ptolemaios) Cãlinus (Galenus), Dimekratis (Democritus), Diyucanis
(Diogenes) Enkyisanis (Anaximenes) Efritun (probably Orpheus) Zitõn (Sidon), Enkisagoris
(Anaxagoras) Basilinus (Belinas, also known as Apollonius) Sales (Thales) Safertis, Saferistis
(Theophastus) and Ferforyos (Porphyrius)143
Marsigli had close relations with Hezarfen as well. Hezarfen introduced him to a
summary of his official works, which included lists of Ottoman army forces and navy, as well
as their revenues. Marsigli also shared geographical findings with other scholars like
historians and astronomers of his time, namely Müneccimbaşı. We see similar tendencies in
world history of Müneccimbaşı also.144 For Müneccimbaşı’s work Cami’ül Düvel, because of
its original sections on pre-Islamic and non-Islamic states, Lewis comments that, “we may get
some idea of the far-reaching curiosity and meticulous scholarship of Müneccimbasi.”145
Coming to the early eighteenth century, Esad Efendi, a Greek-speaking Muslim from
Ioannina, was the first translator of Aristotle among the Ottoman Turks. Esad Efendi, after the
appointment of the Grand Vizier Damad İbrahim Paşa, started to translate Aristotle’s Physica
into Arabic.146 While the translation available today comprises only the first three books of
the work, it is not only a translation, but a translation with commentary. Actually, Esad Efendi
consulted the Commentary of Ioannis Cottunius (d. 1657), the founder of the Orthodox
college at Padua, on Aristotle’s Physics while translating the same work into Arabic.147 Thus,
prominent intellectual scholars, Hezarfen Huseyin, Müneccimbaşı, and Esad Efendi, utilized
142
143
144
145
146
147
Wurm, Der Osmanische Historiker Hüseyn b. Ga’fer, pp. 93, 95-98.
Cumhur Bekar, A New Reception of Rome, Byzantium and Constantinople in Hezarfen Hüseyin’s Universal
History (unpublished MA Thesis: Boğaziçi Univ. 2011), pp.74-75.
Hatice Arslan Sözüdoğru, Müneccimbasi als Historiker: Arabische Historiographie bei einem Osmanischen
Universalgelehrten des 17. Jahrhunderts: Gami‟ad-duwal, Klaus-Schwarz, 2009: pp. 5-12.
Bernand Lewis, “The Use by Muslim Historians”, p. 183-184.
Salim Aydüz, “Lale Devri’nde Yapılan İlmi Faaliyetler,” Divan İlmi Araştırmalar 3 (1997/1), p. 151.
A. Adnan Adıvar, Osmanlı Türkleri’nde İlim (İstanbul: Maarif Matbaası, 1943), p. 140.
31
Western sources and collaborated with a wide group of intellectuals so as to form their works
as a culmination of new tendencies in the seventeenth century. The cultural milieu that
Hezarfen belonged to is one of Wurm’s study topics, as well as relations of patronage to this
milieu. Europeans in Istanbul in the seventeenth century and Hezarfen’s cultural exchange
played great role for Wurm. He explains that he was generally interested in novel and foreign
things, and the openness towards non-Muslim influence, and states that this was not a special
characteristic of Hezarfen. Katip Çelebi, Evliya Çelebi, Ebu Bekir El-Dımaşki, Müneccimbaşı
and Hezarfen, according to Wurm, were the most prominent figures interested in foreign
people, cultures and countries. The figures aforementioned were influenced by each other in a
way and Wurm denotes the cultural and intercultural connections between Hezarfen’s century
and the following century were closer than believed.148
It is impossible for Mahmud Efendi not to have been influenced by the Zeitgeist that
cultivated these men of letters. The general intellectual atmosphere could be better understood
by the quote of Muhammed Saçaklızade (1679-1732). He criticises the tendency of scholars at
his time in such words:
Philosophy has become widespread in the Ottoman lands in our times, the year
1130/1717. Before that by some eighty years or more the Christians conquered many of
the Ottoman lands and defeated the soldiers of the Sovereign (malik) of Islam several
times and took countless Muslims and their families captive. It is now feared that there
will be a general conquest of the Christians, and so we ask of God that He remove this
cause from [the realm of ] the Sovereign of Islam and his viceroys, and thus that the
scholars desist from teaching philosophy and that those who do not desist are
punished.149
1.2.1 Primary Education
Everyone receives their primary education in the family into which he is born.
Therefore, it is vitally important to know a person’s family in order to project to the horizon.
It is unknown what kind of conditions Mahmud Efendi was born into, save this excerpt
“though we have departed from the relatives and relations in Istefe/Thebes, Egriboz/Euboia
and Athens which happen to be our original hometowns.”150 Given that he was sent to
148
149
150
Wurm, Der Osmanische Historiker Hüseyn b. Ga’fer pp. 36-65. For the intellectual circles of Fazıl Ahmed
and Fazıl Mustafa Pashas, see: pp. 161-166.
El- Rouayheb, “The Myth of ‘The Triumph of Fanaticism’ in the Seventeenth- Century Ottoman Empire,”
p.205.
TMH: 267a: “…gerçi vatan-ı asıllarımız olan İstefe ve Ağriboz ve Atina’da vaki akraba ve ta’allukat sılası
ecr-i cezilden ihraz eyledik.”
32
Istanbul for higher education, referring to the charts of Klein, it is possible to think of his
family background as having been outside the ilmiye hierarchy. This is because of the fact that
between the years 1085-1099 (1674-5/1687-8), 71% of learned people who are originally not
from Istanbul, come from non-ulema families.151
There is an approximate answer as to what constituted the education he received
before arriving in Istanbul. However, a general lack of interest or information is observed in
the language employed by both sources describing this stage of his life. Apart from the
occasional mention of his teachers under whom he then studied, virtually no information is
provided about his preparatory studies which had qualified him for entrance into the madrasa
in Istanbul.152 Understandably, the madrasa institutions and their scholars, as well as the
voluminous intellectual and scholarly output they produced, received more attention than
basic or elementary education pupils received.153
Although an in-depth analysis is not available, it is generally known that from the
thirteenth to eighteenth centuries, elementary education took place in the maktab/kuttab
(elementary school), or in the mosque if not in the home of the sheikh or teacher, in numerous
locations in the Muslim world, in the Mediterranean region, in Africa and in Asia.154
Given that some of the boys who went to these schools ended up as scholars in
madrasas or colleges, they must have learnt at least basic reading and writing in their
schooling. Nonetheless, for the majority of these young boys, education was focused
essentially on recitation and memorization.155
151
152
153
154
155
Denise Klein, Die Osmanischen Ulema des 17. Jahrhunderts: eine geschlossene Gesellschaft? (Berlin:
Klaus Schwarz Verlag, 2007), p.98. The overall picture we have indicates the fact that a high percentage of
scholars had scholars in their family as well. See Fahri Unan, “Osmanlı Medreselerinde Ulemanın Sosyal
Tabanı ve Bunun İlmi Performans Üzerindeki Etkisi” (The Social Background of the Ulema in Ottoman
Madrasas and Its Influence on the Scholarly Performance), XIIth Turkish History Congress (Ankara, Sep 1216 1994, paper) [The article was also published in the following journal: Türk Yurdu, XVI/l01 (Ankara, Jan
1996), pp. 115-119]
Ali Uğur, The Ottoman Ulema in the mid-17th Century: An Analysis of the Vakaiu'l-fuzala of Mehmed Şeyhi
Efendi (Berlin: Klaus Schwarz Verlag, 1986): p. xxxvii-viii.
Nelly Hanna, “Literacy and the ‘Great Divide’ in the Islamic World, 1300–1800,” Journal of Global History
2 (2007), pp. 175–193, p. 175.
Ibid., p. 179.
Ibid., p. 181.
33
Mahmud Efendi probably attended elementary school in the family’s neighborhood,156
or else in the mosque or maybe even in his home. According to Yaşar Sarıkaya, following the
ilmihal (Islamic catechism)157 tradition, elementary education in Ottoman Konya focused on
topics such as ablution, prayer, articles of faith, and the five pillars of Islam. Among the
Ottomans it was customary for each and every Muslim child to receive religious education
concerning faith, creed of belief, forms of worship and morality and to learn by heart certain
chapters and prayers from the Quran. Particularly, Amentu, which articulated the requirements
of faith in Arabic came at the top of the religious knowledge acquired by a child in Anatolia
back then as well as now. This brief piece was formulated out of 1/285: Quran....Various
books would have been used to impart ilmihal information to the young. According to an
eighteenth century source, the Turkish Akaid Risalesi (Religious Principles) by Birgivi Efendi
was quite popular for teaching. Also the Vasiyetname by Birgivi and the Mızraklı Ilmihal by
an anonymous author were used widely in Anatolia. Apart from the alphabet, the Quran and
ilmihal information, basic math was also part of the curriculum in elementary schools in
Konya.158 This common practice in Konya and Anatolia would have extended to southern
Greece, as well.
1.2.2 His Transfer to Istanbul for Madrasa Education
The first issue to be addressed is the motive behind Mahmud Efendi’s transfer to
Istanbul for madrasa education. It was primarily because, as Zilfi says, “in the seventeenth
century and thereafter, a young man reaching for a career as a hierarchy professor or judge
had to pursue Istanbul’s educational track.”159
Istanbul at that time offered numerous intellectual and career opportunities. Among
them was the chance to form an association with people in government who could grant a
156
157
158
159
For
these
schools,
see
Bir
Eğitim
Tasavvuru
Olarak
Mahalle/Sıbyan
Mektepleri:
Hatıralar/Yorumlar/Tetkikler ,(ed.) İsmail Kara, Ali Birinci (İstanbul: Dergah Yayınları, 2005). From sijil
records of Bursa and foundations in the sixteenth century: Kur’an, calligraphy, ilmihal, sarf-nahiv, ethics,
arithmetic and in some of them history of religion (ilm-ül edyan). Mefail Hızlı, “Osmanlı Sıbyan
Mekteplerinde Okutulan Dersler (Klasik Dönem Bursa Örneği),” in Osmanlı Dünyasında Bilim ve Eğitim
Milletlerarası Kongresi (12- 15 Nisan 1999), Tebliğler, (Istanbul: IRCICA, 2001), pp. 109-115.
The word ilmihal, derived from the Arabic language, literally meaning knowledge of circumstances, refers
to a book written to teach principles of religion.
Yaşar Sarıkaya, Merkez ile Taşra Arasında Bir Osmanlı Alimi: Ebu Said El- Hadim (Istanbul: Kitap
Yayınevi, 2008), p.53.
Madeline C. Zilfi, “The Otoman Ulema,” in The Cambridge history of Turkey: The Later Ottoman Empire
1603-1839, (ed.) Suraiya N. Faroqhi (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), p. 216.
34
young scholar a position.160 Therefore, as Zilfi writes, Istanbul was the center “for quasiulema – madrasa students, professorial novices, sub-hierarchy officials on rotation and pious
foundation supernumeraries – the ulema per se formed an elite group within the ruling
elite.”161
As madrasa education has not changed much since then, we can guess the nature of
Mahmud Efendi’s education. Of the style of teaching, it can be said that, throughout the
Muslim world, from Yemen to Anatolia, the same education method based on recitation and
memorization was taught. As Messick writes pedagogical activity involves an oral recitation
or dictation by the teacher firstly, and listening to students lastly. The student, until he
memorizes the text segment, repeats it in his head. At the end, the student approaches the
teacher and attempts to reproduce the original recitation. So as to facilitate the work of
repetition, the procedures are interspersed with writing. 162
Additionally, since the books that were read under their supervision contained the
teachers’ names, the icazatnames (traditional diploma)163 can be found in this system.
Unfortunately, Mahmud Efendi’s has not survived till today; however, from the Tarih-i
Medinet’ü-l Hukema itself, we can follow the track of what he read during his education.164
Mahmud Efendi states at one point that he had studied sarf (morphology), nahiv (syntax),
adab (elocution), logic and Quranic interpretation. Moreover, he made passing mention of his
mentors and courses as follows:
160
Uğur, The Ottoman Ulema in the mid-17th Century, p. xxxix.
Madelince C. Zilfi, The politics of piety: the Ottoman Ulema in the Postclassical Age: 1600-1800
(Minneapolis: Bibliotheca Islamica, 1988), p.83..
162
Brinkley Messick, The Calligraphic State (Berkeley: Univ. of California Press, 1993), p. 22.
163
On Ijazatnames, see Mesut Idriz, “Ijazah: A Muslim Educational Tradition in the Late Balkans,”
Proceedings of the Second International Symposium on Islamic Civilisation in the Balkans, Tirana 4-7
December 2003, (Istanbul: IRCICA, 2006), pp. 69-114, at 69-79.
164
On the general character of Ottoman madrasa system, see Halil İnalcık, The Ottoman Empire: The Classical
Age, 1300-1600 (London: Weidenfeld and Nicholson, 1973), pp. 173-185; İsmail Hakkı Uzunçarşılı,
Osmanlı Devleti’nin İlmiye Teşkilatı (Ilmiye System of Ottoman Empire) (Ankara: TTK, 1965); Cevad İzgi,
Osmanlı Medreselerinde İlim (Scholarship in Ottoman Madrasas) (Istanbul: İz Yayıncılık, 1997); and Hans
Georg Majer’s Vorstudien zur Geschichte İlmiye im Osmanischen Reich: Uşakizade, seiner Familie und
seinem Zeyl-i Şakayık (München: Rudolf Trofenik, 1978). Moreover, Dursun Hazer mentions the following
sources as a reference to madrasa curriculum in his article on Arabic education in Ottoman madrasas:
“In terms of autobiography, the apologia of Taşköprüzade (d. 968/1561) and the apologia of Ahmed Cevdet Paşa
(d.1312/1895) as a chapter to Tezakir (c.IV/s.7-13); in form of pamphlet, Nazmu’l-‘Ulum by İshak b. Hasan
et-Tokadi (d.1100/1689); Tertibu’l-‘Ulum by Saçaklızade Muhammed b. Ebu Bekr el-Mar‘aşi
(d.1145/1732); Tertibu’l-‘Ulum by Erzurumlu İbrahim Hakkı (d.1194/1780)”: Dursun Hazer, “Osmanlı
Medreselerinde Arapça Öğretimi ve Okutulan Ders Kitapları”(Arabic Education and the Textbooks in
Ottoman Madrasas), in Gazi University Çorum Theology School Journal 1 (2002), 274-293, at 276. For the
madrasa education of El-Hadimi, a contemporary of Mahmud Efendi, see Sarıkaya, pp.59-73.
161
35
... Mustafa Efendi`den ve mümaileyhden feraiz ve bi’l-cümle cüz’iyyat, Hulasa-yı Hesab
ve rub’-ı daire ve usturlab görülmüştür. Fıkıh ve hadis (266b) ve ma’ani nüshaları
Bıçakçı Mescidi imamı Sofu Abdullah Efendi`den görülmüştür. Mutavvel ve Hayali ve
Buhari ve Tefsir-i Kadı Ayasofya şeyhi Fazıl Süleyman Efendi`den165 tea’llüm olunmuştur
ve Molla Cela(l) Devvani ve İsbati’l- Vacib ve Hikmet’il-’Ayn ve Muhtasar müntehaları
Yek-çeşm İsmail Efendi`den te’allüm olunmuştur…
Mahmud Efendi mentioned his mentors and the textbooks from which he
studied particularly because in the Islamic tradition knowledge was transmitted from teacher
to student. Robinson says that, “Person to person transmission through time was the most
reliable way of making up for the absence of the original author in the text. It enabled the
student to read the white lines on the page, as the Muslim teachers used to say, as well as the
black lines.”166 Therefore, a student going through this education obtained his degree from his
professor rather than from the education institution itself.167
1.2.3 The Madrasa Years and Books
This section considers what Mahmud Efendi might have read during his madrasa years
by looking at the books that were mentioned by him.168
Farā’iḍ (lit. obligations, term. descendant’s estate law), which is the first work he
mentions, deals with inheritance in general, including topics such as the settlement of the
deceased’s debts, wills, who will inherit the deceased’s estates and who will not, and how
much each heir will inherit. The farā’iḍ, a branch of Islamic jurisprudence gradually
developed to finally constitute a science itself. al-Farā’iḍ al-Sirādjiyya was written by the
165
166
167
168
Mehmed Süreyya, Sicill-i Osmani, v. 5, pp. 1536-7: “Born in Demirkapi, Istanbul, he was the son of Ahmed
b. Mehmed Fakih. He traveled to Arabia accompanying Köprülüzade Mustafa Pasha and Amcazade Hüseyin
Pasha. He performed hajj and got ijazah from the hadith in Egypt. He attended the court of Mehmed IV and
contented with the sheikhdom of Qatar. He became a court professor between 1130/1718. He passed away
on 24th Rebiülahir 1134 (11 Feb 1722). Being an honorable learned man, he had taught the master texts ten
to twelve times. He had read Bukhari ve Qadi Al-Bayḍāwī from cover to cover twice. He had also read
Mesabih, Meşarık ve Şifa-yı Qadi İyaz cover to cover several times. He had authored a pamphlet on
Miftahü’l-Felah and halvet in addition to a commentary on Hadis-i Erbain and Akaid-i Adudiye. He had a
son named Yahya Sıddık Efendi.” For the time of death: “…during 1134 in the demise of Fazıl Sheikh
Süleyman Efendi, Friday preacher of the Great Hagia Sophia Mosque…” Şekayık-ı Numaniye ve Zeyilleri:
Vekayiü'l-fudala, (ed.) Abdülkadir Özcan (İstanbul: Çağrı, 1989), pp. 401-2.
Francis Robinson, “Technology and Religious Change: Islam and the Impact on Print,” Modern Asian
Studies 27, no. 1, (1993), p. 238.
Baki Tezcan, “The Ottoman Mevali as ‘Lords of the Law,” Journal of Islamic Studies 20 (2009), pp. 383407, p. 388.
For the education of an alim, see Fahri Unan, “Bir Alimin Hayat Hikayesi ve Klasik Osmanlı Eğitim
Sistemi”, OTAM 8 (1997), pp. 365-391, at 384-391; Richard L. Chambers, “The Education of a 19th
century Otoman Alim, Ahmed Cevdet Pasha”, International Journal of Middle Eastern Studies 4 (1973), pp.
440-464. For an excellent construction of the education of an Ottoman statesman from the 18th century, see
Henning Sievert, Zwischen Arabischer Provinz und Hoher Pforte: Beziehungen, Bildung und Politik des
Osmanischen Bürokraten Ragıb Mehmed Paşa (st. 1763) (Würzburg: Ergon Verlag, 2008), pp. 387-430.
36
Hanefi scholar, al- Sadjāwandī [d. 596/(1200)]. It is widely known as al-Sirādjiyya. It covers
Islamic inheritance law only and is accepted as the best of the books on the subject.169
Mahmud Efendi also mentions Ḵolāṣat al-ḥesāb. This book on mathematics was
taught until the eve of the twentieth century in various madrasas of the Islamic world. There
are nearly 100 copies of it in Turkish libraries. Among them, the oldest one dates back to
1654, and the most recent to 1886. It was written by Muḥammad b. Ḥusayn Bahā’ al-Dīn al’Āmili (1547-1621), who was a prolific writer and scholar during the period of Shah Tahmasb
b. Şah İsmail el- Erdebili, emperor of the Safavi state.170 It was translated into German,
French and Turkish in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries and there are several
commentaries in the libraries.171
Sharḥ al-Talkhīṣ al-muṭawwal, another book Mahmud Efendi mentions, is a rhetoric
commentary by Sa’dal-Dīn Mas’ūd b. ‘Umar al-Taftāzānī (1322-1390), whose works served
as primary textbooks in Anatolian madrasas for many centuries.172
Anwār al-tanzīl wa-asrār al-ta’wīl, which is largely a condensed and amended edition
of al-Zamakhsharī’s Kashshāf, or tafsīr-i Bayḍāwī by Shafii scholar ‘Abd Allāh b. ‘Umar b.
Muḥammad b. ‘Alī Abu’l-Ḵhayr Nāṣir al-Dīn al-Bayḍāwī, (d.1286) was one of the most
famous interpretations of the Quran among the Sunnis. It was preferred at madrasas because
of its concise yet compelling language. The ḥāshiya and talkhis in it numbered more than two
hundred and fifty.173
Hayali, also known as The Commentary of Hayali, served as a creed textbook for
higher scholars and madrasa students for centuries. It was a ḥāshiya written by Şemsettin
Ahmet b. Musa İzniki (1481) alias “Hayali,”, a scholar of Mehmed II’s era, on the
Commentary of ‘Aḳā’id al-Nasafī. The madrasa educators wrote further explanations on it
that would make it easier for the students to learn by heart. This was a common practice
performed on master texts.174
169
170
171
172
173
174
R. Sellheim, “Sadjāwandī,”, Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition, vol.8, pp. 739- 740.
E. Kohlberg, “Bahā’ al-Dīn al-‘Āmili,” Encyclopedia Iranica. Available online at:
http://www.iranica.com/articles/baha-al-din-ameli-shaikh-mohammad-b
Cevad İzgi, “Osmanlı Medreselerinde Aritmetik ve Cebir Eğitimi ve Okutulan Kitaplar,” Osmanlı Bilimi
Araştırmaları 1 (1995), pp. 129-158: esp.139-148.
Madelung, W. “al-Taftāzānī, Sa ‘dal-Dīn Mas ‘ūd b. ‘Umar.”
J. Robson, “al-Bayḍāwī, ‘Abd Allāh b. ‘Umar b. Muḥammad b. ‘Alī Abu’l-Ḵhayr Nāṣir al-Dīn”,
Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition eds. P. Bearman, Th. Bianquis, C.E. Bosworth, E. van Donzel and
W.P. Heinrichs (Leiden: Brill, 2011).
Adil Bebek, “Hayali,” TDVIA 17, pp. 3-5.
37
Mahmud Efendi also cites al-Bukhārī, Muḥammad b.Ismā’īlb. Ibrāhīm b. al-Mughīra
b. Bardizbah Abū ‘Abd Allāh al-Ḏju’fī, known simply as al-Bukhārī. He was a famous
traditionalist, an al-Muḥaddith, who lived between 810-870. His best-known work was the
Ṣaḥīḥ . It took him sixteen years to compile this huge work, which was arranged in ninetyseven books containing 3,450 chapters. The material was arranged according to subject
matter. By the tenth century Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī was placed at the head of collections of the
Sunni tradition.175
Mukhtaṣar al-Muntahā fi ‘l-uṣūl is a work by Ibn al-Ḥādjib Ḏjamāl al-Dīn Abū ‘Amr
‘Uthmān b. ‘Umar b. Abī Bakr al-Mālikī (d.1249) regarding the methodology of Islamic
jurisprudence.176 It became a major textbook in the madrasas during the author’s lifetime and
established itself as the most famous script on methodology of Islamic jurisprudence. It was
also among the major texts taught at Ottoman madrasas and thus had a major influence on
Ottoman scholars of Islamic jurisprudence.177
Muḥammad b. As’ad Ḏjalāl al-Dīn al-Dawānī (d.1502) was born in a village called
Dawān. Those students later became the pioneers of the “school of al-Dawānī.”178
Müeyyedzade Abdurrahman Efendi, the kadıasker (the chief military judge) of Rumelia and
Anatolia during the reign of Beyazid II was one of the students who studied in Shiraz for
seven years before returning to Istanbul. He played a major role in the dissemination of his
professor’s ideas and the high reputation of his works. al-Dawānī’s works integrated
philosophy and ‘ilm-i kalām which was one of the characteristics of the time.
1.2.4 What is mülazemet?
Mülazım is defined as someone who has completed madrasa education and obtained a
degree.179 Upon completion of the seven years of course work it took to become a mülāzi̊m,
candidates to become lecturers then sat an exam. Those who failed the exam or successful
candidates not wanting to be lecturers could choose the profession of kaza and become
judges.180 In scholarly jargon, a mülāzi̊m was a madrasa graduate waiting to be appointed to
175
176
177
178
179
180
J. Robson, “al-Bukhārī”, El², vol. I, pp. 1296-97.
H. Fleisch, “Ibn al-Ḥādjib”, El², vol.III, p. 781.
For the commentaries, see Keşfüzzunün, vol. II, 1853-57 in Recep Cici, Osmanlı Dönemi İslam Hukuku
Çalışmaları (Bursa: Arasta Yay., 2001), 267ff.
Ann K.S. Lambton, “al-Dawani”, El², vol.II, p. 174.
M. Zeki Pakalın, Osmanlı Tarih Deyimleri ve Terimleri Sözlüğü, (Ottoman Historical Terms and
Expressions) vol. 2 (Istanbul: Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı, 1951), p. 612.
On mülāzemet system, see the article by Yasemin Bayezıt, ”Osmanlı İlmiye Bürokrasisinde
Şeyhülislamlığın Değişen Rolü ve Mülāzemet Sistemi (XVI. - XVIII. Yüzyıllar)” (The changing role of
38
an office, meanwhile acquiring experience and starting his office by making use of certain
quota.
If the candidate wished to hold office in Anatolia or Egypt he had to attend the court
of Anatolia’s Kadıasker, who were the highest judicial authority of the Empire after the
Sheikh-ul Islam. If he wished to hold office in the Balkans he would then attend the court of
the kazasker of Rumelia on certain days and register his name in the mülazemet book and then
wait his turn for appointment. This anticipation was called “nöbet” and a person in this
situation continued to be called mülāzi̊m. However, we do not know under whose supervision
̊ spent this period of time or if he received a stipend during that
or mentorship the mülāzim
time. It is generally understood that he who wished to pursue career as judge submitted to a
judge and he who wished to pursue a career as lecturer submitted to a lecturer. Some say
those professorial novices received no money while others claim that they received 10 akçe
daily. Uğur writes that, “The theory underlying this practice of mülazemet was designed to
give the graduate from the madrasa a period of practical work under the supervision of a
senior scholar before allowing him to enter the duties of the teaching or judicial career.”181
Upon the completion of twelve years of mülazemet Mahmud Efendi did not behave
properly during the exam and for this reason he was appointed to Athens as a mufti, a small
town in the countryside at the time. Inalcık says that, “It should be also noted that in all
appointments, Ottoman bureaucratic rule stipulated that the candidate should qualify not only
by keeping the company of his supervisor, but should also prove his ability and competency
for the job.”182
It is unknown under whose supervision he completed his practice and if he received a
stipend or what he did to earn his living during this period. The only information that can be
acquired from Mahmud Efendi is that he had spent his mülazemet period in Istanbul and
married.
1.2.5 His Appointment to Athens as Mufti
Members of Ottoman religious institution also were included in the military class and
had duties in three different areas: teaching (tadris), fatwa (al-ifta) and judgment (kaza). The
181
182
Sheikh ul-Islam in Ilmiye bureaucracy and the Ottoman mülāzemet system, XVI – XVIII Centuries) Belleten
267 (2009 August), pp. 423-441 and Klein, Die Osmanischen Ulema des 17. Jahrhunderts, pp. 48-59.
Uğur, The Ottoman Ulema in the mid-17th Century, p. xli.
Halil Inalcık, “The Ruznamce Registers of the Kadıasker of Rumeli as Preserved in the Istanbul Müftülük
Archives,” Turcica 20 (1988), pp. 251-271, p. 265.
39
teaching of religious and rational science was carried out in the madrasa. Fatwa duty was
executed by muftis who reinterpreted social problems according to Islam. Judgment (kaza)
meant solving legal conflicts according to religion and the codes of law in court. This was
performed by judges who had successfully completed their training. Judges were directly
under the authority of two chief justiceships in the center. One of them was in charge of
judicial affairs in Anatolia and the other one was responsible for Rumelia. Appointment,
dismissal, relocation and all the other personal procedures of judges and other men of the
religious institution were all under the control of this office.183 There were two sorts of muftis,
on the one hand the Şeyhülislam, on the other hand the kenar muftis.184
Although Mahmud Efendi was not a kadi and was a provincial mufti, he had an
honored position. As Imber notes, “alongside the judge, stood the mufti, a qualified
juristconsult whose response, or fatwas, served as authoritative although non-binding
statements of law.”185 The muftis had an important role in the courts, however. In eighteenth
century Salonica, for example, “in all cases in which the litigants presented a fatwa issued by
a local müftü, they won their case.”186
In his own words, Mahmud Efendi was appointed to Athens as a mufti in the year
1699, when Feyzullah Efendi was the şeyhülislam187, as a result of his “rage during the
exam.”188 As noted above, given that Mahmud Efendi had waited 12 years for appointment, it
can be concluded that he had no powerful mentor or affluent scholar in his family. Or his
sponsor might have been influential at that time. Atçıl notes that “it seems that mülazemet
marked not only initiation to the ilmiye, but also a process of establishing strategic contacts
with its powerful members. In most cases, these contacts seem to have been very significant
183
184
185
186
187
188
Ergenç, Ankara ve Konya, 80.
R. Cooper Repp, The Müfti of Istanbul: a Study in the Development of the Ottoman Learned Hierarchy,
(London: Ithaca Press, 1986), p. 63.
Colin Imber, Ebu’s-Su’ud: the Islamic Legal Tradition (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1997), p.7.
Eyal Ginio, “The Administration of Criminal Justice in Ottoman Selanik (Salonica) during the Eighteenth
Century,” Turcica 30 (1998), pp. 185-209, 193. On the muftis role as intermediaries in dispute resolution,
see Boğaç A. Ergene, Local Court, Provincial Society and Justice in the Otoman Empire: Legal Practice
and Dispute Resolution in Ankara and Çankırı (1652- 1744) (Leiden: Brill, 2003).
Michael Nizri mentions how Feyzullah Efendi easily climbed the steps in ilmiye hierarchy with the help of
his patron and father-in-law, Vanizade Mehmed Efendi and the Sultan himself. For instance, between 1669
and 1673, within a very short time period he “completed the entire set of twelve teaching grades”: in “The
Memoirs of Seyhlislam Feyzullah Efendi," in Many Ways of Speaking about the Self: Middle Eastern EgoDocuments in Arabic, Persian and Turkish (14th-20th Century), (eds.) Ralf Elger and Yavuz Köse,
(Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2010), pp. 27-37, p. 30.
TMH: 266b.
40
for advancement in the hierarchy. A prominent member of the ilmiye could always help his
protégés to progress.”189 However, it is also possible that Mahmud Efendi’s wait was due to
the sixth Ottoman Venetian War, La guerra di Morea, between 1684-1699. It seems that
when the war ended, Mahmud Efendi was appointed. It is probable that he might have chosen
to stay in Istanbul while his homeland was in chaos due the war. And it is very likely that the
board of examination had appointed him to Athens because he was already familiar with the
region.
Indeed, as mentioned in the Introduction, Mahmud Efendi notes that upon serving as a
juristconsult in Athens between the years 1698/99 and 1715, he then became a preacher in
Nauplion by the command of Şehid Damad Ali Paşa. However, he continued his positions in
Athens. Nearby the juristconsultship, he mentions tedris in this sentence for the first time. So,
Repp’s statement, “it may be taken as fact that during the late fifteenth and the sixteenth
centuries a number of joint müderris/müftülük came into existence in the provinces”190 was
also valid for eighteenth century Athens. That is to say, Mahmud Efendi was teaching at the
madrasa of Athens or even in the nearby towns simultaneously with his job as a mufti.
This long-term service might not have been an uncommon practice in the provinces.
For instance, in Sofia, Gradeva states that according to Ata’i, Pir Mehmed, “the best of the
provincial muftis, served for many years and died there in 1611-2.”191
In other words, he was not promoted to a higher position in the Balkans following his
term in Athens.192 If he was appointed as a judge, normally, following their mülazemet the
judges of Rumelia under the administration of the kadıasker of Rumelia would follow nine
ranks, starting from çinad at the lowest rank, and finally ending at the top rank of Sitte-i
Rumelia. Then the respective judge would retire. Each town in the Balkans was organized in
this fashion according to nine ranks.193 Taking into consideration the petitions to address the
189
190
191
192
193
Abdurrahman Atçıl, “The Route to the Top in the Otoman Ilmiye Hierarchy of the Sixteenth Century”, in
Bulletin of SOAS 72, no. 3 (2009), pp. 489–512, p. 497.
Repp, The Mufti of Istanbul, p. 67.
Rotsissa Gradeva, “Judical Hierarchy in the Ottoman Empire: the case of Sofia from the Seventeenth to the
Beginning of Eighteenth Century,” in Dispensing Justice in Islam: Qadis and their Judgements, (ed.)
Muhammad Khalid Masud, Rudolph Peters, David Stephan Powers (Leiden: Brill, 2006), pp. 271- 298, 277.
Provincial judgeships were three kinds; judgeships of towns in Rumelia, judgeships of towns in Anatolia and
judgeships of towns in Egypt. The judges serving in Rumelia were not allowed to transfer to Anatolia as
they were registered in the book of Qadiasker of Rumelia. They would only get promoted within the towns
in Rumelia: Ismail Hakkı Uzunçarşılı, Osmanlı Devleti’nin İlmiye Teşkilatı, (Ankara: TTK, 1988), p. 91.
Uzunçarşılı, p.92.
41
shortcomings in the judiciary ranking şeyhülislam, Minkarizade Yahya Efendi ordered
Babazade Abdülkadir Sinani Efendi, the kazasker of the region, to revise and reorganize all
positions. Thereupon, Sinani Efendi assembled the senior judges in 1078 (1667-1668) and
revised all judiciary positions in Rumelia.194 In that report, regarding the town of Athens it
was noted that it was “part of Agriboz district, consisting of twenty houses, bordering to
Megara and Kifise towns. Memduh mansıbdur. 300”.195 According to the ranking system
Varna, Gördes, Tımışvar (Timişvora) and Vardar Yenicesi (Yannitsa) were in the same
category as Athens. However, Mahmud Efendi’s career followed a different direction because
of his position as a mufti. So Repp’s reservation about the muftis’ place in the Ottoman
Empire is true in the case of Mahmud Efendi. As Repp doubts whether the muftis were
appointed by “systematic attempt” or “whether…they came into existence in a more
haphazard way, more by individual than by systematic ‘governmental’ initiative”196, it seems
that Mahmud Efendi experienced both. First he was appointed by the centre, but then, he was
charged by an individual, namely Damad Ali Paşa, to the mosque he endowed.
What might have occupied Mahmud Efendi in Athens? Unfortunately the sicil
documents of the town are not available. However, he might have performed similar practices
to the the other muftis of the Empire. Uzunçarşılı states that the fatwas by provincial muftis
which were given as responses to the problems and questions of the local people in their daily
life is same as the style of şeyhülislams’. The appointment of these muftis was under the
responsibility of the şeyhülislam. These muftis sealed the fatwas they gave, so that they
declared in which town the fatwa was given. Then they wrote the Arabic text of the fatwa and
the fatwa-book from which they took the fatwa.197 Mahmud Efendi have had help from such
fatwa books which were preferred to the fiqh books, because of the fact that they contain
questions and answers from different law-schools and/or judges and one was preferred. Also
they related the actual affairs too, which made them more useful than books merely on
jurisprudence. For this reason there were many fatwa books. In Katip Çelebi’s Keşfüzzünun,
there are 150 books entitled “Fetava” containing fatwas. Mahmud Efendi probably had the
fatwa book of Ebussud (from 16th c.), Fetava-yı Ali Efendi (from 17th c.), Behçetü’l fetava,
194
195
196
197
M. Kemal Özergin, “Rumeli Kadılıklarında 1078 Düzenlemesi,” in Ord. Prof. Dr. Uzunçarşılı’ya Armağan
(Ankara: TTK, 1976), pp. 251-309, pp. 254-55.
According to Özergin, the respective book is registered at the Istanbul Metropolitan Library at no. K13.
Repp, The Müfti of Istanbul, p. 67.
Uzunçarşılı, Osmanlı Devleti’nin İlmiye Teşkilatı, p. 174.
42
Neticetü’l Fetava, and Fetava-yı Minkarizade (from 17th c.) among many others.198 He must
also have had Mülteka’l-ebhur of Halebi İbrahim Efendi from the sixteenth century, in which
the author had compiled fatwas from various fatwa books written before him. Because of its
practical characteristics, Mülteka became very popular and famous among Ottoman ulema.199
Although the form and the style of the fatwas resembles each other, as Tucker showed,
collections of fatwas from seventeenth and eighteenth century Syria and Palestine
differentiate in regard to muftis approaches as interpreters of law or not.200 The same is true
for the eighteenth century Bosnia, for fatwas given by al- Mostari. Zečević explains his fatwas
in two dimensional analyses. A diachronic one in which the mufti uses other fatwa texts, and
a synchronic one which reveals “an eighteenth Bosnian mufti would opt for the one which he
deemed most suitable to the context of his time.”201
In the end we must note that “as architecture was the material expression of Ottoman
Islam, the ulema, madrasa-trained scholar-jurists, were its living embodiment”202 and
Mahmud Efendi was one of them.
1.3. Athens under the Ottoman Domination
Throughout the medieval period, Athens was a small provincial town to which the
sources rarely refer. According to Kazanaki-Lappa, its history from the end of the sixth
century to the Turkish conquest of 1456 can be divided into three periods:
the Dark Ages (7th–9th centuries), when life in the city continued but was confined to a
small area around the Acropolis; the middle Byzantine period (10th–12th centuries),
when Athens grew and can truly be said to have flourished (as witnessed by the large
number of churches built during this time); and the period of Frankish rule (13th–15th
centuries), under the rule, successively, of French, Catalan, and Italian dukes, when the
198
Fahrettin Atar, “Fetva”, TDVIA, vol. pp. 486-496, p. 495. There is a growing literature in the Ottoman
historiography on the value of fatwas for the social and economic life of the Ottomans. For an example of
this, see: Tahsin Özcan, Fetvalar Işığında Osmanlı Esnafı (İstanbul: Kitabevi, 2003).
199
Uzunçarşılı, Osmanlı Devleti’nin İlmiye Teşkilatı, p. 173.
200
Tucker says that the mufti “might refer directly to the Quran and the writings of Abu Hanifa, the founder of
his school, as well as to collections of fatwas he considered authoritative. He also felt it appropriate,
however, to draw on his knowledge of local custom and human nature in order to fashion legal decisions that
were suited to the specific contexts of the cases at hand”: Judith E. Tucker, In the House of the Law: Gender
and Islamic Law in Ottoman Syria and Palestine, (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2000), pp. 1617.
201
Selma Zečević, “Missing Husbands Waiting Wives, Bosnian Muftis: Fatwa Texts and the Interpretation of
Gendered Presences and Absences in Late Ottoman Bosnia”, in Women in the Ottoman Balkans: Gender,
Culture and History, (ed.) Irvin C. Schick & Amila Buturovic (New York: I.B. Tauris, 2007), pp. 335-360,
p. 349.
202
Madeline C. Zilfi, The politics of piety, p. 24.
43
Acropolis was converted into a medieval castle and the city shrank to a settlement
203
huddled at the foot of the rock.
Kappa also states that after a prosperous period during the late Roman times, in the
fifth century when Christianity and Greco-Roman tradition coexisted, Athens started to
decline following a ban on philosophical schools and the predominance of Christianity during
Justinian’s rule. The late sixth and seventh centuries saw the conversion of the ancient
temples—the Parthenon,204 the Erechtheum, the temple of Hephaistos— into churches.205
Mahmud Efendi describes the church of Panagia stin Petra in these words:
As all of the temples within Athens were pertaining to the heavens, the king of the city
collected his parliament one day and answered the Athenian people: “All of your temples
were related to the heavens but the earth is closer than the heavens and you are using
many benefits of it, then why don’t you build at least one temple for the earth?” After a
short time, he had a church built. It was called called the Earth Temple and even now
maintains this name. The Roman Frenks, when they came to Athens, showed very big
206
favor and respect to that church.
So during the seventh and eighth centuries it is very likely that Athens shed the last of
the characteristics that marked it as a city of late antiquity and was transformed into a “small
and insignificant town” of the Middle Ages.207
The Ottoman army took Athens on June 4, 1456, thus bringing to a close two and a
half centuries of Latin domination. Almost four years after the Turkish occupation, Franco
Ajuoli wrote to Duke Francis Sforza of Milan,
…that while in years gone by I was ruling the city of Athens and other lands adjoining it,
the sultan of the Turks (Mehmed II), having heard of the extraordinary strength of my
castle and the city of Athens, decided to see it. And as soon as he had seen how
impregnable it was – and that he had its equal nowhere in his dominions- he conceived a
very great love for it: hence he required me to be straightaway removed from possession
of it and to abandon my house to him, and he gave me another city by the name of
208
Thebes.
203
204
205
206
207
208
Maria Kazanaki-Lappa, “Medieval Athens,” in Economic History of Byzantium From the Seventh through
the Fifteenth Century, vol. 1, (ed.) Angeliki E. Laiou (Boston: Dumbarton Oaks, 2002), pp. 639-646, p. 639.
Anthony Kaldellis, The Christian Parthenon: Classicism and Pilgrimage in Byzantine Athen (Cambridge:
Cambridge Univ. Press, 2009).
Kazanaki-Lappa, “Medieval Athens,” p. 641.
TMH: 216b. I guess “yer mabedi” as Panagia stin Petra from the information John Freely gives in his
Strolling through Athens: Fourtheen Unforgettable Walks through Europe’s Oldest City (London & New
York: I.B. Tauris 2004), p. 226.
Kazanaki-Lappa, “Medieval Athens,” p. 642.
Kenneth M. Setton, Athens in the Middle Ages (London: Variorum Reprints, 1975), p. 273. Setton gives
detailed information on the general condition of Athens before the Ottoman domination. See: pp. 225-277
and esp. f.n. 174-175.
44
Mahmud Efendi himself described the conquest of Athens as such:
They were afraid that there would be no olive trees left if the situation continued so they
sent the priest of the Koçbaşı monastery, who previously went to the countryside of
Yenişehir from Athens, loaded with a tremendous amount of gifts to the abode of the
sultan. And when this priest conveyed the message as exactly it was and with the
submission of a subject in the royal presence of the Sultan of world and the answers he
gave in all sorts of humble ways with all sorts of expressions of their goodwill in their
servitude upon being inquired by the Majesty of the world about their pitiful situation, rid
the heart of the Emperor of the world of fear and because they did not know and were not
aware of how the name and fame of this land would be elevated and how it would be
blessed with signs of bounty, luck and fertility, they retreated into the castle to protect
their properties, their children and their women from a possible siege of those soldiers
who were like lions. The mutasarrif of the sandjak of Thessaloniki, Durak Beg, whose
post was under that of the governor of Thessaloniki was ordered to enter the castle
together with the priest to get a good understanding of the situation and to bring the
people trapped in the castle back to Athens.
Durak Bey entered the castle. The people of Athens greeted him outside of the castle door
with great respect and had him sit in the highest place within the castle. After they had
served lots of foods and gifts to him, all of them approved and confessed things similar to
those of monk in front of the Sultan. Then, they asked Durak Bey for intercession and all
of them requested mercy and displayed their obedience to the Sultan. He forgave the past
crimes. He wanted to look at some of the wonderful buildings within the castle himself.
The mosques and masjids built in other villages and towns appended this ancient temple
and revived while appointing two imams, four callers to prayers, muderris and preacher,
and sufficient duties were appointed to each of those people. The costs of the mosque
were paid sufficiently and due to the existence of this mosque, all of the infidels were sent
out of the castle, and a protector of the castle (dizdar) with sufficient soldiers was
appointed. Similarly, a head of caravans, a head of foot soldiers and a head of
artilleryman were appointed with a sufficient number of soldiers under each.
Then, the Sultan gazed at the wonderful ancient buildings within the castle. He stayed
some days in the Athens so he could better know the wonders and weird things of Athens
that had been described and explained in detail within the history books before his direct
observation while he was residing in his matchless supreme residence in the villa built
from pure white marble and on four pillars all in the form of a girl. He visited the ancient
209
works and buildings both within the castle and/or around the city.
To give an idea about Ottoman Athens, an historical outline must be presented.
According to Karidis, the study of the conditions of the development of Athens is divided into
three historical periods: 1456 to 1640, 1640 to 1760, and 1760 to 1821.210 According to Kiel,
right after the death of Sultan Suleyman, the development of Ottoman Athens became more
obvious with their registers between 1569 and 1570. According to the register, there are 3,150
households, 302 unmarried men, the same number of widows, all Christians, and fifty seven
209
210
TMH: 239b- 241a.
Dimitris N. Karidis, “Town Development in the Balkans, 15th- 19th centuries: The Case of Athens,” Etudes
Balkaniques 18 (1982/2), pp. 48-57, p. 50.
45
civilian Muslim households and twenty five unmarried Muslim males. This is equivalent to a
total population (including the garrison that had the same strength as before) between 16,00018,000 souls, or over four times as many as late Frankish Athens. Although they lived within
the narrow circuit of the Byzantine-Frankish town walls, their growing number led them to
spread far beyond. As a result of such large population, one of the largest cities in the Balkans
became Suleymanic Athens.211
Kiel continues that the economic life of the city blossomed. Ottoman archive sources
reveal that the Athenian economy was based on the production of olive oil, wine, honey
(famous since Antiquity), some textiles and the industries connected with oil and honey, soap
and candle making. Nevertheless, wheat for daily bread was not sufficiently produced due to
the poor quality of the soil of Attica. Therefore it had to be imported in large quantities. The
expanding population and economy of Suleymanic Athens explains why scores of new
churches and monasteries were built all around Athens and within it, and why existing ones
were restored, renovated and refurbished. These are obviously not the signs of a declining
city.212
Kiel also suggests that “the combination of population growth and limited agricultural
possibilities suggests that Attica, towards the end of the sixteenth century, was slowly heading
for a subsistence crisis.” On top of this came the Ottoman financial-economic crisis of the
sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries, harming Attica more severely than other regions.
When Jacop Spon and George Wheler visited Attica, there were not fifty-five villages as in
1570, but only forty three, thirteen of which were entirely or almost entirely deserted.213 At
the same time, the population of Athens had dropped from approximately 14,000 in 1570 to
9,000 in 1675. Meanwhile, the capital of the sandjak of Eğriboz, had grown from nearly 4,300
inhabitants in 1570 to 15,000 in 1675.214
Other examples come from the adventurous traveler and author of the ten volume
Seyahatname, Evliya Çelebi (1611-1682).215 Evliya Çelebi recorded his visit to Athens in
211
212
213
214
215
Kiel, “Central Greece in the Suleymanic Age”, p. 403.
Ibid., p. 403.
Jacop Spon and George Wheler, Voyage d’Italie, de Dalmatie, de Grèce, et du Levant (Lyon: 1678), p. 259.
More detailed information on the immigration from Attica to the more fertile northern part of the sandjak is
found in recordbook M. M. 114 861 in the Presidential Archives, dated 1087 (1677/78).
Robert Dankoff, An Ottoman Mentality: The World of Evliya Çelebi, (ed.) Robert Dankoff, (Leiden: Brill,
2004).
46
1668.216 He mentions the names of Ancient philosophers such as Plato (Eflatun), Restetalis
(Aristotle), Bokrat (Hippocrates), Sokrat (Socrates), Fisagores (Pythagoras), and Feylekos
(Philikos?) in the beginning of his notes on the city because of its fame as “dar-ı medinetü’l
hukema ve’l-kudema”.217 He wrote that Athens was called either the city of İşrakiyyun
(Platonist) or of Meşşa’iyyun (Peripatetics or Aristotelians).218 Plato was described as a holy
person possessing some magical powers like, Belinas (Apollonius). The only story about
philosophers in the section on Athens was the story of Plato’s magical candle, hung from the
dome of the mosque in the Parthenon in Athens and lit by itself. This candle was a product of
Eflatun-ı İlahi, i.e., the holy Plato.219
Evliya Çelebi gives detailed information on Parthenon before Mahmud Efendi. At first
Evliya depicts the very beautiful carved and long, cypress leaves on the grand entrance, being
“as high as twenty leaves” as once gliding, and states that it still retained the insets, which
used to hold jewels. Evliya sees a marble throne having been supported under its own dome
by Plato. The colored marble of the furnishings of the cathedral was highly admired by
Evliya, however what is left from the interior now is only few pieces such as a pretty carving.
What Evliya notices are the cypresses gilded and painted. According to Evliya, on the night
Prophet Mohammed was born there was a catastrophic fire in the cella, at some time in the
unwritten history of Athens between about 250 and 550. This second fire, according to
Evliya, was set by an imaginary Egyptian Sultan who wanted to plunder all the treasure of the
church. Evliya, then, says that the “wound” could be seen from that fire. Evliya observes a
mosque with a minaret. The mosque was confined with forty six coloumns and mostly, the
sky could be seen between the spaces of coloumns and the walls since they were not covered
from above. The sculptured scenes on the metopes between the tops of the coloumns as well
as the top of the cella was seen by him. On the sculptures he saw fairies, angels, dragons,
rhinoceri, giraffes, elephants, crocodiles, scorpions, thousands of mice, ghouls, cats and so
forth. The different kinds of creatures depicted from the world could be seen. One of them
was saved in Paradise why the other were petrified in Hell. According to Evliya, these
216
217
218
219
Pinelopi Stathi, “A Greek Patriarchal Letter for Evliya Çelebi,” Archivum Ottomanicum 23 (2005/6), pp.
263-268, p. 264.
Evliya Çelebi, Evliya Çelebi Seyahatnamesi: Topkapı Sarayı Kütüphanesi Bağdat 308 numaralı yazmanın
transkripsiyonu-dizini (haz.) Yücel Dağlı, Seyit Ali Kahraman, Robert Dankoff (İstanbul : Yapı Kredi
Yayınları, 2003), vol. 8, p. 113.
Ibid., p. 119.
Tansu Açık, “Evliya Çelebi’de Yunan- Roma Dünyası,” Çağının Sıradışı Yazarı: Evliya Çelebi, haz. Nuran
Tezcan (İstanbul: YKY, 2010), pp. 23-33, p. 32.
47
sculptures were located in the courtyard. He explains the fact that the Parthenon-mosque was
indeed a mosque inside its courtyard especially after the fire and the fall down of the roof.
The coloumns of the mosque were completely separate from inside, however were joint by
lintels. In the narthex, he sees the holy water in a huge goblet, which was indeed so large that
a man could fit in- also the old men, since they drank so much, must have been mighty. He
was fascinated by a column supported by an arch, as well as noticing a pipe organ over the
door that lied from the narthex to the church. The kibla that he shows is covered with gold
mosaics and it was used as apse of the mosque. The multicolored mosaics, which was a
reminder of the Dome of th Rock in Jerusalem, was covered with arches and walls of the
sanctuary. Around the inner part of the church, there was a gallery and four coloumns that
were made up of porphryr and closest to the altar due to the gallery, there would be two
levels, which were all luted and grooved and sixty columns in total was counted by him.
Evliya saw the greats mosques in Damascus, Edirne,Cairo, Jerusalem, Constantinople,
however he stated that “there is no such sparkling and luminous mosque.”220
According to Evliya, the Acropolis had 300 tiled houses which had bay windows and
balconies, but no gardens. About the houses in Athens, Mahmud Efendi gave such details:
“Big buildings like grand palaces were built within the castle of Athens using only pure lime,
stone and sand, and within Athens there were not any houses or any gardens built with black
plaster or sun-dried brick, all of them were coated with pure lime. And even today, there was
not any house or wall with black plaster or sun-dried bricks in Athens.”221 The town below
had three Muslim quarters, three Friday mosques, seven smaller mosques, one madrasa, three
smaller schools, three hamams, two dervish monasteries, two hans and 500 stores. According
to Evliya, keeping in mind his exaggerations, the city had a total of 7,000 tiled houses; more
than 10,000 of the citizen inhabitants were infidels; it was clean; the Christians were wealthy
and the Muslims were insignificant. The city possessed 300 churches, 3,000 monks and 4,000
wells.222 There were thirty six neighborhoods (mahalles) and each neighborhood was jointly
responsible for its taxes. Therefore when a member died or left the neighborhood, the
remaining members had to share the tax burden of the departed. Mpenaldes, an Athenian
220
221
222
Evliya Çelebi, Seyahatname, vol. 8, pp. 113-116. Diana Wright tells Evliya’s views on Parthenon in her
article “Evliya Visits the Acropolis” : http://surprisedbytime.blogspot.com/2010/01/evliya-visitsacropolis.html
TMH: 146b.
Evliya Celebi, Seyahatname, vol. 8, p. 117.
48
archon of seventeenth century named four evils that contaminated Athens in the latter half of
that century: plague, hunger, captivity and fire.223
The koinon (the municipality, the commonwealth and it displayed both a considerable
social stratification and political division) had the authority to give contract loans for civic
purposes. It assessed contributions for civic services and for water supply for irrigation in
particular. Its citizens’ politeness and their attachment to, or love of, the city was called
patriotismos. Koinon was thus a legal entity which carried out both legal-administrative and
economic obligations to the state. The first class of the koinon consisted of around twelve
families of the aristocracy who could devote all their time to municipal government thanks to
their greater wealth. They were called proestotes. The second class consisted of twenty to
thirty well to do families who were called noikokyraioi.224 They managed the economic
affairs of the proestotes, and were active socially and politically. The third class included
craftsmen the bazaar people involved in such trades as fur, skins, olive oil, cheese, soap,
foodstuffs, shoes, leather, and guns. The fourth class was farmers who lived in the suburbs
and rural areas close to Athens where olive trees were like a forest and vineyards lie across
the Cephissus river.225
Around the time of vicious Haddji Ali Haseki, despotic voyvoda of Athens in the late
1700’s, Panagi Skouzes asserts that the city had a population of 1,500 Christian, 350
Ottoman, thirty African and twenty five Gypsy families. He adds that the Gypsies were all
ironsmiths and that the Africans made straw hats.226 Skouzes also assesses the property of his
grandfather in 1760: “over 1,200 olive trees, eighty flocks of sheep with thirty head per flock,
two large vegetable gardens, forty stremmata vineyards, a team of oxen, 500 stremmata arable
land, two olive presses, a soap factory, two shoe factories, a place for the storage of cut grass
(grasidotopos), three houses, and capital (kapitale) all those who owed him money for oil,
cheese, butter, wheat, honey, etc., (from his shop).”227
223
224
225
226
227
Speros Vryonis, “The Ghost of Athens”, p. 54
Ibid., pp. 58-9.
Mackenzie, Türk Atinası, p. 39.
Vryonis, “The Ghost of Athens”, p. 60.
Paul Sant Cassia and Constantina Bada, The Making of the Modern Greek Family: Marrriage and Exchange
in Nineteenth Century Athens, (Cambridge: Univ. of Cambridge Press, 1991) , p. 30, cited from Skouzes, p.
102. For Skouzes’ Chronicle of Athens Enslaved, see Johann Strauss, “Ottoman Rule Experienced and
Remembered: Remarks on Some Local Greek Chronicles of the Tourkokratia”, pp. 209-214.
49
Most of the inhabitants of the plain were Christians of Albanian origin who had settled
in the area after successive colonization’s from the end of the fourteenth century until 1778.228
They were bilingual, speaking both Albanian and Greek. They had to speak Greek because it
was used in trade, by the local government, the church and the native Greeks. The guards of
the town gates were Albanian Musulmans.229 The rural economy was based on olive oil. The
land was divided into small holdings of the peasantry and big holdings that belonged to a few
Turks, Greeks and the clergy. There was a significant number of villeins living and working
on the estates of these landowners. Moreover, the big monasteries benefited from cattleraising and bee-keeping.230 Kifse/Cephissia, the favorite summer country retreat of the
Ottomans because of the rich gardens and their “fertility is owing to the stream from which
Cephissia took its name” featured the only mosque in the countryside of Attica.231 There were
two types of settlements in Attica; those inhabited by free peasants and those inhabited by
villeins of the private estates. The villages of the free peasants were older than the Ottoman
conquest and they were located on arable lands with water supplies. The villeins’ settlements,
on the other hand, were founded after the conquest. Because they were working for the
Ottoman landowners, their houses were built on their properties. Both of these types of
villages were scattered around the vast cultivated lands. The Ottoman landowners would build
a tower with small houses around it. As for roads, they can be traced back to Antiquity.232
Contrary to mainstream historical belief about sixteenth century Athens and the Athenian
plain, the settlements and their monuments stand as evidence of the prosperity and
development at the time. First of all, the villages expanded greatly due to population growth
and economic activities. Monasteries thrived accordingly. However, economic prosperity did
not lead to excellence in architecture. The region’s church architecture at its height featured
imitations of well-known Byzantine patterns and a reluctant adoption of a few elements of
Ottoman architecture. The same applies to mural painting, where the influences from the great
contemporary schools of post-Byzantine fresco painting never managed to form a local
artistic idiom in Attica. After this prosperous period, the map of the Athenian plain did not
228
229
230
231
232
For the Albanians settling in Central Greece, see Ferdinand Gregorovius, Geschichte der stadt Athen im
Mittelalter (1889 reprint München 1980), pp. 444-5.
William Miller, “Greece under the Turks, 1571- 1684,” The English Historical Review 19 (1904/76) pp.
646-668, p. 657.
Georgios Pallis, “The Topography of the Athenian Plain under Ottoman Rule (1456- 1821),” The Historical
Review/ La Revue Historique IV (2007), pp. 33-55, p. 36.
Edward Dodwell, A Classical and Topographical Tour Through Greece: During the Years 1801, 1805 and
1806 (London: Rodwell and Martin, 1819), vol. 1, pp. 527-28.
Pallis,,“The Topography of the Athenian Plain”, p. 50.
50
change much, but the population and economy weakened with a steady decline. Building
activity, however, continued in a more simplified form and on a more limited scale.233
The region’s main moneymaking resources were agriculture and manufacture. The
exports were thoroughbred horses, leather equipment, parchment, and iron weapons while the
main commodities were oil and textiles. The south Peloponnese was so good for tending olive
trees that this alone sufficed for the local population’s income. Shawcross reports that a
twelfth century traveler commented, “et ibi erescit copia olivarum, adeo quod dicitur quod in
toto mundo non est locus ubi mit [tanta] copia olei olivarum (There is no place in the whole
world where they make such vast quantities of olive oil).”234 Meanwhile, in the central and
northern Peloponnese, also in Attica and Boeotia, people were occupied with producing linen,
wool, and especially, silk, which created related occupation branches such as purple-fishers
and dyers, weavers and clothiers, and tailors. Their craftsmanship was acclaimed highly. For
example, when the author of the Vita Basilii described the magnificent gifts presented to the
Emperor Basil I by a very rich widow from Patras, he describes the garments made of silk as
“lighter than spiders” webs.235 In 1672 the Jesuit Jacques Paul Babin came to Athens and
wrote a book on the description of the city. On the beauty of the gardens, he says:
As you climb higher along the bed of the river half a league before the city, many gardens
more beautiful than those close to the city and a little lower than the palace of Hadrian
and much more extensive, where Pausanias does mention a place near Athens called the
Garden. Everyone has a house to house those who care and many have high square
towers to house their masters during part of the year. It has neither firms nor gone: every
tree sounds in order and without confusion, but one has to address the water during the
236
summer, water from wells or streams shall never fail them.
For the streets of Athens, he comments:
Most of the streets resemble those of a village. Instead of those beautiful buildings, these
glorious trophies, and rich temples of the past which were the ornament of the city, we
233
234
235
236
Ibid., 55.
Teresa Shawcross, Historiography in Crusader’s Greece (Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 2009), p. 15.
Shawcross, op.cit.
“Comme l’on monte plus haut en suivant le lit de la riviere, l’on rencontre à demy lieüe de la ville, quantité
de jardins plus beaux que ceux qui sont proche de la ville un peu plus bas que le palais d’Hadrian, et qui
tiennent beaucoup plus d’étendue, d’où vient que Pausanias fait mention d’un lieu proche d’Athenes appellé
les Iardins. Chacun à une maison pour loger ceux qui en ont soin et plusieurs ont de hautes tours carrées
pour loger leurs maitres pendant une partie de l’année. L’on n’y voit ni cabinets, ni allées: tous les arbres
sons sans ordre et en confusion; mais on a de l’adresse pour les arroser durant l’été, l’eau des puits ou des
ruisseaux ne leur manquant jamais.” Jacques Paul Babin, Relation de l’etat present de la ville d’Athenes,
ancienne capitale de la Grece, batie depuis 3400. ans. Avec un abbregé de son histoire et de ses antiquités
[Herausgegeben von Jacob Spon]. A Lyon: Chez Loüis Pascal, ruë Merciere, vis à vis la petite porte S.
Antoine, au Livre blanc, 1674. Herausgegeben und kommentiert von Margaret Daly Davis, p. 20 in
http://archiv.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/artdok/volltexte/2009/791 urn:nbn:de:bsz:16-artdok-7918
51
see only narrow, unpaved streets, with houses without magnificence, made of ancient
ruins, have some other ornaments, pillars, pieces of marble put into the walls without
order, and the way of other stone, marble or a few degrees of the cross mark, which Servy
used on doors or windows of the ruined churches. The houses are mostly stone, whereas
at Constantinople most are of wood. We even see some beautiful for the country, where it
237
is not now allowed for buildings to be beautiful.
Louis Deshayes was the first Frenchman to visit Athens after the Renaissance. He was
also called the Baron de Courmenin, a special ambassador sent by the king to relieve
Franciscan monks in Palestine. He visited Turkey three times, and during his second voyage,
he stopped in Athens in 1626. His impressions are to be found in his 1632 travelogue:
the ‘Chateau’ [the Acropolis] still used by the Turks: among many ancient buildings
there is a Temple that is as whole and unscathed by the injuries of time as if it had just
been made. . . . The local Christians say that this Temple is the very same one that was
dedicated to the unknown God, in which Saint Paul preached. It is now used as a Mosque
by the Turks. . . . This town enjoys such a salubrious air that the most maleficent Stars,
238
were they to gaze upon it, would withdraw their harmful influences.
This is how it appeared to Babin:
I entered only one of the Mosques of Athens, which was first a Temple built by the
Gentiles in honor of the Goddess Pallas before the coming of the son of God, and then
dedicated by the Christians to the Eternal Wisdom. . . . This temple, which can be seen
from afar, . . . is the most elevated edifice of Athens, [and] a masterpiece of the most
excellent Architects of antiquity. . . . The Frontispiece . . . is such that it is difficult to find
239
in all of France anything resembling its magnificence and workmanship.
A kind of census took place in 1715 for the Peloponnese in order to determine and to
describe the real property and land possessions of the Muslim and non-Muslim inhabitants of
the towns and villages after the re-conquest of the region.240 The main motivation behind this
237
238
239
240
“La plus part des rües ressemblent à celles d’un village. Au lieu de ces superbes edifices, de ces trophées
glorieux, et de ces riches temples qui faisoient autrefois l’ornement de cette ville, l’on ne voit que des ruës
étroites sans pavé, que des maisons sans aucune magnificence, faites des ruines anciennes, a’yāns pour tout
ornement quelques pieces de colomnes de marbre mise dans les murailles sans ordre, et à la façon des autres
pierres; ou quelques degrez de marbre marquez de croix, qui ont servy autrefois sur les portes ou fenêtres
des eglises ruinées. Les maisons sont presque toutes de pierre, au lieu qu’à Constantinople la plus part de
bois. On en void même quelques unes assés belles pour le pays, où il n’est pas maintenant permis d’estre
magnifiques en batimens”, cited by Daly Davis, p. 12.
Olga Augustinos, “Hellenizing Geography: Travellers in Classical Lands: 1500-1800,” in The Classical
Heritage in France,” (ed.) Gerald Sandy (Leiden, Boston, Köln: Brill 2002), pp. 9-24, pp. 17-18.
Ibid., pp. 19-20.
The Peloponnesе was conquered by the Ottomans in 1460, however, Venice still occupied important points
on the coast, which they finally left in 1537. During the war between the Ottoman Empire and the Holy
League (1683-1699), Venice reconquered the Peloponnesе in 1687, and ruled it formally after the treaty of
Karlowitz (1699). In 1715 the Ottomans reconquered Peloponnese again and ruled it after the treaty of
Passarowitz (1718). For more details, see “Morea,” Encyclopaedia of Islam New Edition. Vol. 7 (Leiden–
New York: E. J. Brill, 1993), pp. 236-241; W. Miller, “The Venetian Revival in Greece 1684-1718,” in
52
survey was to facilitate the return of the expelled Peloponnesian Muslims to the region and
give them their former homes and lands. This was ordered directly by Sultan Ahmed III.241
A witness of events told a Greek merchant the following story providing interesting
details of that time:
I was an inhabitant of Gastouni at the time of Venetian rule. Now I am established with
my family in Ioannina, my homeland. Twenty-eight days ago I was in Patras on business
and there was a tahrirci or commissioner there, who was making the cadaster of all the
properties. He is in charge of that part [of Patras] where the majority of the inhabitants
are Jews of Larissa... In each district there is a tahrirci who registers the properties, but
they do not issue a property deed (cozzetto: Turkish hüccet) to anyone of those [the
Christians] who used to possess them [the deed]. The Turks who used to live in the
Kingdom are arriving from Roumeli, and they are claiming all their houses and fields;
thus does an Order of the Grand Signor prescribe, and these Turks are arriving from
242
there every day...
The Venetians had different expectations from the different population groups in the
newly conquered lands, which can be understood from their settlement policies for the
immigrants. They generously allotted lands to Athenians in return for an expectation of a
substantial contribution to the financial recovery of the area due to the fact that the Athenians
were mostly from the superior economic and social ranks. Also, most of them were
merchants. The most powerful group among them, the Athenians, settled in cities like Patras,
Gastouni, Nauplion, Mystras and Patras.243
In Nauplion and Patras, a cosmopolitan image of the cities emerged after the blend of
population groups. This made them important administrative and commercial centers of the
Peloponnese. Greeks from different parts of the wider Greek world mixed with those of
Italian, Venetian and Slavic origin, who had mostly been mercenaries in the Venetian army.
The picture consisted of natives and foreigners, Greeks and Italians, Orthodox and Catholics,
241
242
243
Essays on the Latin Orient (Cambridge: University Press, 1921), pp. 403-427; S. Sophocles, A History of
Greece (Thessaloniki: n.p., 1961), p. 22, 261-263.
Peter Topping, “Premodern Peloponnesus: the Land and the People under Venetian Rule (1685-1715),”
Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 268 (1976), pp. 100-102, f. n. 5. See also G. A. Finlay, History
of Greece from its Conquest by the Romans to the Present Time. B.C. 146 to A.D. 1864. Vol. 5: Greece
under Ottoman and Venetian Domination. A.D. 1453-1821 (Oxford: n.p., 1877), p. 226.
Topping, p. 101. Quoted by Stefka Parveva, “Agrarian Land and Harvest in South-west Peloponnese in the
Early 18th Century,” Études Balkaniques 1 (2003) , pp. 83-113, here p. 84.
Alexis Maliaris “Population Exchange and Integration of Immigrant Communities in the Venetian Morea,
1687-1715,” in Between Venice and Istanbul: Colonial Landscapes in Early Modern Greece, (eds.) Siriol
Davies and Jack L. Davis (Athens: American School of Classical Studies at Athens, 2007), pp. 95- 110, 99.
53
and Christianized Muslims. All of these elements coexisted during the entire Venetian
period.244
Two socially and economically powerful families from Athens, the Macolas and the
Bosichis, were both possessors of contea (including entire villages and their inhabitants). The
Macolas were granted this title before the Bosichis. Both of them were appointed to this post
in order to replace former Ottoman landowners locally, thus, they occupied lands through
land grants and rent of public lands which in the previous period had been possessed by
Ottomans.245 But after a while, the immigrants grew disillusioned with the Peloponnesian
environment, and the oppression under which the common people suffered, so they returned
to their native lands under Ottoman reign in central Greece.246
On the other hand, the Ottomans collaborated with immigrants to the Peloponnese
desiring to abandon the Morea, and assisted them with transportation. They disseminated
propaganda among them with the promise of amnesty and the return of all properties in the
Ottoman lands that the immigrants had abandoned.247 In the eighteenth century, the
population of Attica seems to have somewhat recovered. The cizye hane (household poll tax)
entries of nine different years between 1130 (1717-8) and 1236 (1821), show that the number
of those liable to pay tax had gone up from 2,263 cizye hane to 3,094. For the last decades of
Ottoman rule, Pouqueville gives detailed information. According to him, the total rural
population of Attica was 15,000, roughly the same as it had been in 1570. The Ottoman
administrative system in Athens changed through the middle of the seventeenth century;248
the town and its adjacent territory became part of the sultans hass (privileged) and came under
the jurisdiction of the Kızlar Aga (the chief of the black eunuchs in the palace), who leased
the revenues of the town to a voyvoda.249 This administrative change was of crucial
importance because, as happened elsewhere in the Balkans, it reduced to a great extent the
power of the central government to effectively control the means of feudal exploitation in
peripheral places. This change reflected the gradual transformation of the land tenure
244
245
246
247
248
249
Ibid., p. 100.
Ibid., p. 104.
Ibid., p. 105.
Ibid., p. 106.
On the administrative aspects of Greek lands under the Ottomans, see Dimitris Dimitropoulos, “Limites
Interieures dans l’espace Grece au Temps de la Domination Ottomane: l’Aspect geographique des
administrations politiques et ecclesiastiques,” The Historical Review / La Revue Historique 5 (2008), pp.
239-253.
Wheler, Journey into Greece, p. 348.
54
conditions in Attica, a transformation which had started from the end of the sixteenth century:
on the one hand, the peasants were losing their rights in land-tenure granted to them according
to the original timariotic system, whereas, on the other hand, three social groups from within
the leading feudal class, with absolutely different religious-national characteristics, were
favored by that administrative change and tried to extend, for their own profit of course, their
control over the means of production, both in town and countryside. These three social groups
were Ottoman officials and local Muslim a’yans (local notables), the Christian kocabaşı
(religious leaders) and the leaders of the monastic clergy. A group of Athenian kocabaşıs
availed themselves of the opportunity of buying in 1703, at very low prices, many areas of
arable land which had been abandoned since the Venetian invasion in 1687. During the
eighteenth century, the foreign trade from Athens was strongly linked with French
commercial policy, the principals of which had been laid down since the mid-seventeenth
century by Colbert. Since 1715, the French had easily been able to get what they wanted from
the neighboring “echelles” of the Morea, a fact which is reflected in the very loose
organization of the French consulate in Athens.250
In 1645 a group of Jesuit missionaries were sent there to rediscover a famous city which
they removed to Negroponte largely inhabited by Franks. Having been founded in 1540, the
society of Jesus within a few years recruited Jesuits in Ottoman territory. They were well
educated, sophisticated, well-mannered men, and their sympathetic interests were in
minorities, they came across many Greek families, as well as befriending with members of the
hierarchy. But Jesuits continued to influence. Pope Gregory XII at Rome in 1577 through the
College of Saint Athanasius helped further educate Greek boys. However, many students in
the Aegean Islands came from Catholic families, but the Jesuits at Constantinople were able
to convince some Orthodox parents to send their sons to the College. During their studies, not
all of them were converted to Catholicism, however almost all of them approached Rome
sympathetically, as well as being ready to work for the union. Within time, Jesuits founded
new schools under the reign of the Ottoman Empire. With the establishment of Pera, boys
received a high quality of education before the end of the century, moreover the school fees
were reasonable, and similar schools existed in Thessalonica and Smyrna. The schools proved
to be very successful in Constantinople. Hence, the Orthodox authorities began putting greater
250
Karidis, “Town Developments in the Balkans”, p. 52.
55
efforts into education.251 In 1641a French Jesuit, François Blaizeau arrived in Athens and met
with Ottoman rulers and local Greek clergy for establishing a school. His school was begun in
1645, but there were too few students so it moved to Chalkis in Euboea where lived seven or
eight Catholic merchant families lived.252 The Capuchins followed the Jesuits to Athens,
purchasing a house in the Plaka which held the To Phanari tou Diogenis, ‘Lantern of
Demosthenes’, in reality the choreographic monument of Lysikrates in 1658.253 A Frenchmen,
Monsieur de La Guillatiere gives details on them in his fictitious book, which based on
Cappuchin missionaries maps and notes.254 He notes Simon de Compiegne as taking the
permission to buy that place and says Athenians and particularly dizdar supported him, so that
he (Father Simon) gratified abundantly by his care of their children afterwards; teaching
them to read, write, cast accompt, and speak Italian; and which was much more, he
taught them their catechism according to the Council of Trent, being translated into the
vulgar Greek, and printed at Venice and though in it the errors of the Greek church were
formally condemned, their parents regarded it not, nor took notice of the dissuasion of
their archbishop who was highly agaist it.255
During the Venetian Interlude which will be mentioned below, a company of Countess
Koeningsmarck Swedish lady named Anna Akerhjelm wrote to her brother:
…the city is more beautiful than all others. There are many handsome houses, both of
Greeks and Turks. They have clothes of delicate weaving, wondrously embroidered. We
went to see a Capuchin who lives at the Lantern of Demosthenes, and he served us wine,
bread, apples, figs and pomegranates. It is impossible to describe all the antiquities to be
found here. My brother, I would like to know what you think of our being in this city,
Athens, the fountain of civility for all others, even for Rome!256
During the Ottoman-Venetian conflict, the Venetian commander took all the Athenian
mosques and handed them over to the Catholics. In 1715 the Ottomans advanced on Nauplion
and its Latin archbishop, Angelo Maria Carlini, died in the defense of the Palamidis fortress.
At the conclusion of this war the last Aegean Catholic bishopric was incorporated into the
251
252
253
254
255
256
Steven Runciman, The Great Church in Captivity: A Study of the Patriarchate of Constantinople from the
Eve of the Turkish Conquest to the Greek War of Independence (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1985),
pp. 230-31.
Charles A. Frazee, Catholics and Sultans: The Church and the Ottoman Empire 1453- 1923 (Cambridge:
Cambridge Univ. Press, 1983), p. 124.
Miller, “Greece under the Turks, 1571- 1684,” p. 654.
Robin Middleton, “Introduction”, p. 33.
Guillatiere, An account of a late voyage to Athens : containing the estate both ancient and modern of tat
famous city and of the present Empire of the Turks (London : J.M. for H. Herringman, 1676), p. 213.
Cornelia Hadjiaslan, Morosini, the Venetians and the Acropolis (Athens: American School of Classical
Studies Gennadius Library, 1987), p.14.
56
Ottoman Empire, when the Treaty of Passarowitz ceded Tinos to the Turks.257 Although
Catholics were firmly opposed to the Orthodox Church, the Ottoman Sultans were in fact
widely known to have supported this faction, even before the conquest of Istanbul, especially
after 1452. Since then, the attempt the papacy made to promote the “unit of the Christian
church” under Rome turned out to have repercussions within Ottoman lands. Numerous
missions followed, upon the decision of the Council of Trent (1546-1563) which Guillatiere
mentions, and the missions were conducted by Jesuits, Capuchins and Franciscans. The
empire’s Gregorian Armenians, Orthodox and Lebanese Moronite subjects, through teaching
and preaching of ecclesiastics were intended to convert to Catholicism or to make them
recognize the Pope as the head of the Christian Churches, as well as holding their traditional
ecclesiastical rituals.258 The priests and friars usually worked under the auspices of the French
ambassador, since the ambassador was able to promote their interests effectively before 1798,
when the Ottoman Empire and France were living in peace. Moreover, these priests and friars
were not attractive to Ottoman Christians because they established schools, but rather because
the French ambassador promoted them. The French ambassador wanted Franciscans to gain
or retain control of holy places in Jerusalem and Bethlehem, since these sites were unstable at
that time. Certain remote Ottoman provinces were highly risky for physical presence of
missionaries, foreign merchants and diplomats. Besides this, these people managed to get in
touch with Ottoman Christians unlike the rest of the Europeans, because they learnt the
relevant languages in Rome, where specific language schools in colleges were established for
this purpose.259 The seventeenth century was the time during which Catholic missions were in
effect both in Europe and in other parts of the world. The Catholic commands, mainly the
Jesuits, were related to the Catholic Propagation of Faith. Catholics at the Holy Sites was also
another factor affecting the attitudes of the Patriarchs in Constantinople. For centuries, the
reasons for conflict between Catholics and Orthodox Christians were over the rights to holy
churches and places of the region. Several imperial decrees show that Franciscans and
Orthodox Christians were struggling over control of these sites in the seventeenth century.260
The eighteenth century was a century of significant changes in operations of the Jesuits and
French in the Ottoman lands. The French ambassador, Jean Louis d’Usson, points out in his
report that Ottomans were uncomfortable with the Catholic missionaries because they simply
257
258
259
260
Charles A. Frazee, “Catholics” in Minorities in Greece Aspects of a Plural Society (ed.) Richard Clogg
(London: Hurst and Co., 2003), pp. 24- 47, p. 32.
Suraiya Faroqhi, The Ottoman Empire and World Around It (London: I. B. Tauris, 2004), p. 35.
Loc. Cit.
Bayraktar Tellan, The Patriarch and the Sultan, p. 120.
57
went beyond the limit of capitulations. Missionaries making the Ottoman authorities uneasy
and changed the attitudes and affected relations badly. The Porte made the missionaries
concentrate more on the indigenous Catholic Population, instead of Orthodox Ottoman
subjects. In 1722 the Greek patriarchate in Istanbul succeeded in obtaining a firman which
forbade all conversions to Catholicsm and “Catholic converts were ordered to return to their
traditional faith”.261 So Ottoman administration regarded the Catholic missionaries as a threat
and a problem, and in bureaucratic language it meant ihtilal (rebellion/riot).262
Regarding the collective identity of peasants, ethnic origin was not a major factor.
Their geography had religious orientation punctuated by holy relics, monasteries and the
routes of pilgrimage to the Holy land. In the eighteenth century, a Greek in Thessaloniki, for
example, felt much closer to Jerusalem than he felt to Athens. There were no national
frontiers and ethnic boundaries did not signify anything. They adopted a Christian peasant
calendar. Their calendar was determined by saints’ festivals and agricultural work. This
tradition of identification with religion was related to the residual strength of the Christian
identity promoted by the Byzantine Commonwealth.263
The most important among the churches was the metropolitan church, the Katalikhon.
In spite of the lesser influence of the clergy in Athens, the metropolitan was a politically
significant foundation.264 Beekeeping dating back to Classic Ages in Hymettos was still
practiced by the monks of Kaisariani as it will be seen. Trade was limited, therefore few
Franks resided in Athens. So it was entirely in Greek hands.265 In the eighteenth century there
were signs in the Ottoman world of a modest recovery of population and economy, together
with evidence of some new directions. The surviving traces of such prosperity are the
wonderful multistoried, finely decorated houses of Mt. Pelion. Chandler tells us his
impressions of the characteristics of the Turks, Greeks and Albanians and its surroundings.
According to him, “the Turks of Athens are in general more polite, social, and affable, than is
261
262
263
264
265
Frazee, Catholics and Sultans, p. 155.
Leal, The Ottoman state and the Greek Orthodox of Istanbul, p. 357.
Dimitris Livanios, “The Quest for Hellenism: Religion, Nationalism and collective Identities in Greece
(1453- 1913),” The Historical Review/La Revue Historique 3 (2006), pp. 33-70, p.46.
Miller, “Greece under the Turks, 1571- 1684”, pp. 661-2.
Ibid., p. 663.
58
common in that stately race, living on more equal terms with their fellow
citizens.”266Additionally he says that
Athens is not inconsiderable, either in extent or in the number of inhabitants. Corsairs
infested it, the avenues were secured, and in 1676 the gates were regularly shut after
sunset. It is now open again, but several of the gateways remain, and a guard of Turks
patrols at midnight. The houses are mean and straggling, many with large areas of court
in front of them. In the lanes, the high walls on each side, which are uncommonly whitewashed, reflect strongly the heat of the sun. The streets are very irregular, and anciently
were neither uniform nor handsome. They have water conveyed in channels from Mount
Hymettus, and in the bazaar or market place is a large fountain. The Turks have several
mosques and public baths. The Greeks have convents for men and women, with many
churches, in which service is regularly performed, and besides these, they have numerous
oratories or chapels, some in ruins or consisting of bare walls, frequented only on the
anniversaries of the saints to whom they are dedicated. A portrait of the owner on a
board is placed in them on that occasion and removed when the solemnity of the day is
over. Besides the more stable antiquities, many detached pieces are found in the town, by
the fountains, in the streets, the walls, the houses and churches. Many columns occur,
with some maimed statues, and pedestals, several with inscriptions and almost buried in
earth.267
1.3.1 Venetian Interlude:
On September 21, 1687 a Venetian fleet and army entered the harbor of Piraeus and
exploded a bomb four days later ruining the Parthenon268 and killing more than three hundred
people, men and women.269 On the bombardment of the Parthenon by the Venetians, Mahmud
Efendi comments:
During the Venetian invasion of 1099, even the above-mentioned big temple built within
the castle which had been transformed into a mosque similar to Hagia Sophia was totally
destroyed with a Venetian bomb due to the presence of an arsenal within its walls.
Around 700 hundred Muslims men, women and children who had sheltered within the
castle, died. After the Venetian infidels caused the destruction of this mosque, they
suffered from decline when they invaded Euboa at the year of ninety-nine, but turned
back without any success. Likewise, they invaded Chania on the Cretan island in the year
1691/92 but turned back again empty-handed. And in the year of 1694/5 they conquered
Sakız; however, after six months, the Islamic navy sank four big galleys and scattered the
270
rest of the navy totally and re-conquered the island.
266
267
268
269
270
Richard Chandler, Travels in Asia Minor and Greece or an Account of a Tour Made at the Expence of the
Society of Dilettanti (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1825), vol. 1, p. 118.
Ibid., p. 34.
About this bombardment there were anonymous poems/songs in Italian. See Georgios I. Pilidis, “La bomba
arrogante e la poesia servile: celebrazioni poetiche,” in Venezia e la Guerra di Morea: Guerra, politica e
cultura alla fine del ‘600 (Venice: FrancoAngeli, 2005), pp. 276- 277.
Theodor E. Mommsen, “The Venetians in Athens and the Destruction of the Parthenon in 1687,” American
Journal of Archeology 45 (1941), pp. 544-556, p. 548.
TMH: 133a- 133b.
59
On April 8, 1688, the observer Morosini sailed from Piraeus, which was deserted after
a conquest not of military value, but of historical value, for destroying the most perfect
monument of Athenian architecture.271 The plague entered Greece in the same year as the
Venetian conquest. It first appeared at various points in Morea and this alerted the army to
keep away from Athens. On December 7, Morosini wrote that the plague had reached Thebes
and there had been suspicious cases in Athens:272
A Council of War on March 15 decided to continue the segregation of all doubtful cases
in Athens, to hasten the departure of the Athenians, and if matters grew worse, to bring
the troops down to the coast behind the recently constructed trench, which would cut off
273
communications with the country.
When the Turks withdrew from Athens, the entry of Christian forces produced
widespread rejoicing. Morosini consecrated the first church, in the name of St. Dionysios the
Aeropagite, as a sign of thanks to God for the conquest of the city. The rejoicing came to a
halt when the aforementioned evils started to spread in Athens. First, the plague struck the
city and many soldiers as well as citizens died. Second, Morosini could not hold the city any
longer against continuous Turkish attacks and he prepared to abandon Athens. So the
Athenians asked Morosini to send them somewhere safe. He dispatched them on ships to
Aegina, Salamis, and the Cyclades islands as well as Corinth. However, the majority of the
affluent Athenians fled to Nauplion. They received a warm welcome and financial assistance
from the Venetian aristocracy there, and they remained in Nauplion until its capture by the
Turks in 1715.274 The Sublime Porte found a solution to the resettlement of the abandoned
city. Three-year tax free status was given to Athens and those who wanted to resettle in the
city received their properties back. Only the property of those who refused275 to return would
be confiscated. Since many chose not to return, Benizelos notes that a number of the Athenian
archons, including Benizelos, Palaeologus, and Latinos went to Istanbul and purchased from
the state all the abandoned properties of those Athenians who chose to remain in the ‘foreign’
lands, at a reasonable price.276 Forsen states that, unlike what is said, Venetian and Ottoman
271
272
273
274
275
276
James Morton Paton (ed.), The Venetians in Athens: 1687- 1688 (from the Istoria of Cristoforo Ivanovich)
(Cambridge and Massachussets: Harvard Univ. Press, 1940), p. 3.
Ibid., p. 40.
Ibid., p. 42.
Vryonis, “The Ghost of Athens”, p. 56.
Ibid., p. 57.
Ibid., pp. 137-8.
60
were indeed in constant interaction across the borders, instead of living in isolation. Many
people were able to cross borders. Around 20,000-30,000 people moved from Ottomanadministered lands to Venetian-controlled Peloponnese between 1689-1700. However, after
1700, refugees uncomfortable with Venetian rule, decided to return to their native lands.277
1.3.2. Mahmud Efendi’s Athens
Mahmud Efendi gives a detailed account of some of the buildings in Athens. The first
one is of the Parthenon. He gives valuable explanations about this famous sanctuary:
They desired to return to the building of the monastery. Even Pericles wanted to start
with the building of the mentioned monastery from his heart. Then he found a stone
quarry, which was purely white marble, in Mendil mountain, (Mt. Penteli) three hours
distant from Athens. Those milk-white marbles were specifically for the temple in certain
sizes. In order to cut the marble, he invited stonemasons and flushers from the
surroundings and collected the most talented engravers in order to rectify the cut marble
plates. And those were to be transported to Athens on sledge and carriage with daily
wage with fifty thousand workers serving in the building of this temple. When those
stones reached the castle of Athens – the small ones reached it in one day, some great
ones in three to five days, and the greatest ones in fifteen days or one month - and for the
sledges of the stones were to be appointed different numbers of men to carry them: for
small ones fifty, for the medium and great ones hundred and five hundred and thousand
men.278
Stonemasons treated the stones in such a way that they took on a different light and as
they would be transported to the place in the building, everybody thinks it is as if the
building was built from one marble plate. Then, great bases were excavated in the middle
of the Athenian castle. They started to excavate as they established solid places for the
bases and after that they put raw stones on the base. When the basement was built so it
became four zira (0,757 738 m) higher than the earth, the size of the temple was written
in our sources of Greek, Latin and Frank history not with the units of measurement as
zira or arşın (fathom) but with ayak (foot) or kadem, and between the sizes of foot or
arms in that age and in our age, differences existed necessarily, this poor guy also
counted the size of castle again with food and step.279
The length of the temple’s floor covering was one hundred and eighty steps and its width
was ninety-eight steps. Four angles were totally six hundred and thirty-two steps. The
covering surface consists of eleven thousand four hundred sixty-four steps totally. And
the marbles were so nice and flatly covered that observers think it was covered only from
a single marble plate. And its four walls were also built so dense and thick. And the
surrounding of the basement was built so solid that if a man tried to get only one stone
out even in ten days, he would fail. The walls of the temple were longer than three zira.
277
278
279
Björn Forsén, “Regionalism and Mobility in Early Modern Greece - a Commentary”, in S. Davies and J.
Davis (eds.), Between Venice and Istanbul: Colonial Landscapes in Early Modern Greece, (Princeton: The
American School of Classical Studies at Athens, 2007), pp. 237-244, p. 240.
TMH: 126b- 127a.
TMH: 127b.
61
And all of the stones used in the building were from the above-mentioned white marble.
The marble was very artistic and the building was a durable one, since no sand or lime
was used; instead it was built with raw lead and some different building materials, but
from the outside, lead and the other materials were never seen.
All of the walls seem to be built as if from a single marble plate. And observers were
admiring the columns in the four parts surrounding the temple due to their weird, strange
and inimitable artistic features. Those pillars were higher than thirty zira. The thickness
of its walls was less than three kulacs and the stands built under them had walls around
four kulacs thick. And for halls around four sides, forty-six columns were used in total.
And for each hall seventeen levels were widened. In the three directions within the abovementioned temple, a decorated mahfel (gallery) was built, and under this mahfel, forty six
decorated column-like şeş-hanes were placed. And from the top of the mahfel, again
forty-six marble pillars were placed up to the ceiling. And each of these pillars was three
kulacs thick. The roof of the temple was not a dome. There were beams at the ceiling from
the white marble with two zira thickness at the corner and thirty zira length. Upon them,
decorated and unique marble thrones were built and the floors were engraved with the
same marbles in a beautiful way. The wars, courage and achievements of formerly
mentioned Theseus were described in marble. However, the described people (women
and girls) did not conform to the general ethical rules of being a guest, they were
described on top as human but below the belly button as animals. The viciousness of
those and the courage and bravery of Theseus were described through the whole walls of
the temple. And apart from Theseus, the wars, victories and bravery of other rulers,
especially the talents of Solon [Suleyman Hakim], were described totally. And in the
eastern part of the temple, there is an altar from marble with unique and beautiful
engravings.280
And they ornamented around the altar with raw gold and interesting engravings. They
also embellished the floor of the temple in different colors with raw gold. Also the
“Athenians” were assumed to consider a “sculpture of girl” as an idol. They made that
sculpture sit within a throne of twelve thousand kiyye gold and ornamented her with
limitless types of pearl and jewels. And they colored her face with the color of a human
beings face. In place of her eyes, they put one sunstone. In the middle of this stone, a
black ruby was put. Whoever sees this sculpture, assumes it is alive. She was dressed with
clothes embroidered with raw silver thread. She sat on a throne embellished with jewels.
From the time of Adam until this time, such an embellished sculpture had never been seen
or heard of. Hence, they decided that the mentioned temple should be so unique from the
time Adam and during the forthcoming times and therefore built such a unique temple.
Then they hung in front of the sculpture forty zira long and twenty zira wide curtains in
interesting color.281
For the description of the Tower of Winds/Horologion of Andronicos, Mahmud Efendi
writes:
Having mercy on those who laments and sorrows, Socrates the Wise built and invented
an observatory comprised of the knowledge of the compass in order to comprehend the
affairs of ships better. And even now, the structure of the compass is generally the same.
Nevertheless, because there is nobody who is capable of using the compass knowing the
strength of it, it is left vacant. The shape of the compass was found in the following way:
Socrates chose a vacant plot of land in the city of Athens where all of the winds would
280
281
TMH: 128a- 129b.
TMH: 130b.
62
converge. Then Socrates ordered an octagonal building to be built from white marble in
the same type as a compass without lime and sand but with kined(iron stick) and lead.
Then, they pictured eight different winds on the eight different sides of this building from
white marble in the form of female dancers. And the amusement and joy required by each
woman dancer was depicted in marble and some musical instruments such as tambourine
etc. were described and given to the hands of the female forms.282
On the described winds, marble with minutes and grades, and boards required by the
winds were to be found. The dome of the compass was produced from marble in the form
of a hewer’s conical hat and built in this form. Also, a statue of a big stork was built and
placed on top of the dome of the compass in such a way that whatever direction the wind
blows, the statue of the stork turned in that direction and the nose of the stork stayed in
the middle of the board of each wind and marked the minutes and degrees of that wind.
And the movement of that nose signified the speed and force of wind. Eight talented
leaders who knew the Egyptian sea, Anatolian and Greek coasts and the distance between
the islands in full detail were selected and appointed to the service of the compass with
daily pay. Two of these were responsible for the conditions of ships toward Egypt. Two of
them were responsible for giving information about the ships directed towards the
Anatolian coast. Two were dealing with the affairs of those appointed to the Greek coast,
and two were responsible for the islands. The responsible leaders were to be informed
about the affairs of ships in the following manner so that a ship owner or capital owner
who stayed in Athens, but did not sail informed the two responsible leaders on the affairs
of Egyptian sea if, for instance, a ship from the harbor of Athens sailed towards Egypt
carrying Athenian corn to Egypt that such and such ship owned by this or that owner or
capital owner had moved out from the harbor at this time. Then, the leader recorded the
year, month, day and time of sailing in the register of Egyptian affairs. As this compass
building was in the form of the tent of the Janissary corps, this building exists even now
except for the stork’s shape and therefore is called by people a “tent”.283
From Roman Athens, Mahmud Efendi mentions the Arch of Hadrian. Interestingly
like Evliya Çelebi, he also mentions Belkis, the legendary queen of the pre-historical Saba
Kingdom in the context of the Arch of Hadrian with such words:
Again, a grand king from the Roman kings lived in Athens a long time due to the quality
of water and air of Athens, he even suffered from diseases in other cities, when he came
to Athens, during his residence in Athens, he recovered from these diseases without using
any medication and therefore provided Athens with bigger buildings. Specifically, he
built the unique palace of the so-called “Belkis throne,” which was a very big building. It
was so nicely embellished and artificially built that it was unprecedented at that time.
Whoever came and saw it, admired it and had to look.
He also built a hundred and twenty interesting and weird pillars the lengths of which
were twenty zira and width was nine zira. Upon these pillars, he built a world famous
building and even that was an unprecedented one. All of the rooms of the mentioned
palace were covered with pure white marble and even all of the walls were of white
marble and windows were of bell metal lattices and all of the doors and windows were
produced by bell metal and bronze. The floors of rooms were built with decorated and
favored marble and its ceilings were built of pure marble and ornamented with
282
283
TMH: 140b.
TMH: 140a- 141b. Evliya Çelebi also defines the Tower of the Wind as çadır (tent), see: Seyahatname, vol.
8, p. 118.
63
chrysolite. It had very big domed large central halls and all of the rooms and central
halls were built with terraces and over each central hall and surrounding area, in a
courtyard in order to elevate, fifteen-step stairs were built from pure decorated marble. If
four-five times a hundred thousand soldiers entered the courtyard, it would not be full.
Also, the arch of the entrance door of courtyard still remains. And if four or five loads
would try to enter together, they would fit. It has the same width and size like the dome
and arch of Istanbul mosques. And even, from the pillars, it has nineteen column
284
minarets.
1.3.3. Ottoman Sources about Athens
The official Ottoman archival documents offer valuable information on Athens in the
second half of the eighteenth century.285 Nevertheless, the Ottoman sources have not been
taken into consideration sufficiently in the history written about Athens until now.
Unfortunately, the Ottoman court records on Athens, called sicils, one of the most important
sources about Ottoman city life, no longer exist, unlike those in Salonica, Larissa Veroia, and
Crete.286 However, the ahkam defters (registers’ of imperial orders) of Morea are available for
study. These defters contain hükms (orders) subjected to the governors of Athens.
From 1742, decrees which were taken by the Imperial Divan in Istanbul after a request
to correct an unjust act were recorded in defters (registers) according to the provinces on the
basis of a new classification.287 Each defter was named according to its province, or region.
Its content was like a continuation of the complaint registers. All of the ahkam defters except
for the Morean ahkam defters began in 1242 and continue until the Second Constitutional
period.288
284
285
286
287
288
TMH: 220a- 220b.
For general Balkan history, see Mehmet Hacısalihoğlu, “Osmanische Quellen zur Balkangeschichte:
Versuch einer Übersicht über die Bestände des Zentralarchivs in Istanbul und weiterer osmanischer
Archive,” in Südosteuropa von vormoderner Vielfalt und nationalstaatlicher Vereinheitlichung: Festschrift
für Edgar Hösch, eds. Konrad Clewing, Oliver Jens Schmitt (München: R. Oldenbourg Verlag, 2005), pp.
35-86.
Eyal Ginio, Marginal People in the Ottoman City, the Case of Thessaloniki during the Eighteenth Century,
(Ph.D diss., Hebrew Univ., 1999); Antonio Anastasapoulos, Imperial Institutions and Local Communities:
Ottoman Karaferye, 1758-1774 (Ph.D diss., Univ. of Cambridge, 1999); Mustafa Oguz, Girit (Resmo)
Ser’iye Sicil Defterleri 1061-1067 (Ph.D diss., Marmara Üniversitesi Türkiyat Araştırmaları Enstitüsü,
2002), Elif Bayraktar, The Implementation of Ottoman Religious Practices (M. A. Thesis, Bilkent Univ.,
2002).
See Feridun M. Emecen, ‘Osmanlı Divanının Ana Defter Serileri: Ahkam-ı Miri, Ahkam-ı Kuyud-ı
Mühimme ve Ahkam-ı Şikayet’, TALID 3 (2005), pp. 107-139, p. 125; for the Ottoman legal practice of
‘şikayet,’ see Michael Ursinus, Grievance Administration (sikayet) in an Ottoman Province: The Kaymakam
of Rumelia's 'Record book of complaints' of 1781-1783 (London: Routledge Curzon, 2005), pp. 1-9.
See Said Öztürk, “Sosyo-Ekonomik Tarih Kaynağı Olarak Aḥḳām Defterleri,” in Pax-Ottomana Studies in
Memoriam Prof. Dr. Nejat Göyünç, (ed.) Kemal Çiçek (Ankara: Yeni Türkiye Yayınları, 2001), pp. 611639.
64
The major difference between court registers and ahkams is their selection criteria.
The court registers contain data of the local interpretation of Islamic law, whereas ahkams
contain decrees which were enacted upon complaints sent to the capital from the provinces.
Not all of the complaints were seen by the imperial center as worthy to act upon. Therefore,
ahkam defters recorded only those affairs or complaints which were considered by the center
as worth or fit to act upon.289
In the second half of the eighteenth century, the kaza (judicial district) of Athens
belonged to the sancak (provincial district) of Euboea (Eğriboz). In the ahkam defters of
Morea, the following references are made: Eğriboz muhafızı vezire ve Atina kazası naibine or
kadısına or voyvodasına hükm ki. The judge (kadı) of the Islamic court was the representative
of the Ottoman state in this region, but the affairs in this town were also under the jurisdiction
of the sancak authorities. Athens and a large section of the kaza were also a part of the
imperial estates (havass-ı hümayun) and its fiscal revenue has been farmed out on life-long
contracts (ber vech-i malikane). The tax farmer then sublet the district’s income to a third
party, who was called a voyvoda; in other words, the authority of the voyvoda was established
on a fiscal basis, in coherence with the definition in his contract with the contract holder
(malikane),290 but he definitely played a significant role in the political affairs of the kaza. For
example, in 1772 the famous voyvoda, Hacı Ali Ağa purchased the contract and three years
later became voyvoda of Athens. Ali Ağa was mostly known for his oppression and for a
project to build a defensive wall, Serpentzes, around the city. His story ended when he was
banished to Chios in 1795 and later beheaded.291
Athens had a mixed population of Muslims and Christians. The Christian community
leader, usually described as kocabasis, was another significant figure in the political life of the
town. The military authority basically was given to the commander (serdar) of the janissaries
and dizdar of the castle,292 the Acropolis.
289
Michael R. Hickok, “Homicide in Ottoman Bosnia,” in The Ottoman Balkans, 1750-1830, (ed.) by Frederick
P. Anscombe (Princeton, NJ: Markus Wiener Publishers, 2006), p. 43.
290
Αthens became a ‘malikane’ in 1760. see Dimitris N. Karidis, “Town Developments in the Balkans, 15th19th cent. The Case of Athens,” p. 53 and for general information on the issue, see Erol Özvar, Osmanlı
Maliyesinde Malikane Uygulamasi (Istanbul: Kitabevi, 2003).
291
Panayis Skouzes (1776-1847)’s memories about Haseki Ali Ağa, A Chronicle of Athens Enslaved is a wellknown source on the deeds of the voyvoda.
292
M.A. 4 / p.79, n. 4 (Evasıt-ı CA 1157).
65
What is to be seen in the ahkam defters of Morea, between volume four dated 17421747 to volume 17, dated 1801-1806? First of all, there were many complaints about the
governors of Athens, similar to the ahkams of other regions. Their unjust acts are one of the
main reasons for the complaints of the reaya (subjects) and janissaries; Muslim and nonMuslims together.293 Another main point of dispute in the defters is conflicts over land,294
mostly over olive and citrus trees, and vineyards.295 The most often occurring claims emerge
from the unjust acts of sipahis toward subjects and from their excessive tithe and poll-tax
demands.296 Furthermore, if subjects began any agricultural activity outside of their own
lands, then this also became the issue of a claim. There were also some affairs between the
tax-paying population297 and tax-farming governing class. Debt and commercial cases were
also to be seen.298
Claims for inheritance are one of the most frequently appearing items. The conflicts
among inheritors, affairs stemming from wills, unjust outside interference into inheritance
were reasons cited in the the applications of the Muslim299 and non-Muslim population
alike300 to the Imperial Divan in Istanbul. Affairs related to foundations are also frequent.301
Simple offenses such as murder, theft and injury are reflected in the ahkams also.302
Among those many decrees, which were formulated almost in the same way in
different parts of the whole Empire, there are some decrees that are specific to Athens. Those
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
M.A. 9 / p.109, n. 2 (Evahir-i L 1180), M. A. 9 / p.298, n. 4 (Evasıt-ı C 1182), M.A. 9 / p.231, n. 3 (Evasıt-ı
N 1181), M.A. 9 / p.229, n. 3 (Evasıt-ı N 1181), M.A. 9 / p.168, n. 3 (Evahir-i S 1181), M.A. 9 / p.165, n. 3
(Evahir-i M 1181).
M.A. 9 / p.314, n. 2 (Evahir-i B 1182), M.A. 9 / p.311, n. 2 (Evahir-i B 1182), M.A. 4 / p.120, n. 1 (Evasıt-ı
CA 1158), M.A. 4 / p.129, n. 1 (Evahir-i B 1158).
M.A. 9 / p.345, n. 4 (Evahir-i S 1184), M.A. 9 / p.346, n. 1 (Evahir-i S 1184).
M.A. 9 / p.115, n. 4 (Evahir-i S 1180), M.A. 9 / p.100, n. 3 (Evail-i C 1180), M.A. 9 / p.101, n. 1 (Evail-i C
1180).
M.A. 9 / p.103, n. 1 (Evasıt-ı C 1180), M.A. 4 / p.191, n. 6 (Evasıt-ı L 1159).
M.A. 9 / p.120, n. 3 (Evahir-i S 1180), M.A. 4 / p.133, n. 2 (Evahir-i Ş 1158), M.A. 4 / p.213, n. 2 (Evahir-i
RA 1160), M.A. 4 / p.291, n. 1,2,3 (Evasıt-ı C 1162), M.A. 4 / p.284, n. 5 (Evail-i CA 1262), M.A. 4 / p.223,
n. 3 (Evahir-i CA 1160), M.A. 4 / p.214, n. 2 (Evail-i R 1160).
M.A. 9 / p.7, n. 1 (Evahir-i C 1169), M.A. 9 / p.104, n. 2,3 (Evahir-i C 1180), M.A. 9 / p.94, n. 3 (Evahir-i
CA 1180).
M.A. 9 / p.118, n. 2 (Evahir-i M 1180), M.A. 9 / p.35, n. 3 (Evasıt-ı CA 1179), M.A. 9 / p.118, n. 2 (Evasıt-ı
S 1180), M.A. 9/ p.218, n. 1 (Evahir-i B 1181), M.A. 4 / p.56, n. 3 (Evasıt-ı Ş 1156), M.A. 4 / p.171, n. 4
(Evasıt-ı CA 1159).
M.A. 9 / p.320, n. 1 (Evasıt-ı L 1182), M.A. 9 / p.319, n. 3 (Evasıt-ı S 1182), M.A. 9 / p.260, n. 1 (Evahir-i Z
1181), M.A. 4 / p.196, n. 4 (Evasıt-ı Z 1159).
M.A. 4 / p.25, n. 2 (Evasıt-ı ZA 1155), M.A. 4 / p.151, n. 1 (Evasıt-ı Z 1158), M.A. 4 / p.243, n. 1 (Evasıt-ı
M 1161).
66
were related to the English303 and French304 consuls, to kocabaşıs,305 and to priests,306
churches, monasteries307 in the town and its surroundings. The ahkam registers contain highly
valuable information in the sense that the names of neighborhoods,308 buildings309 and places;
data on shops310 in the city – for instance, the existence of the oil-mills linked to the olivetrees311 - religious foundations, and some bits of information on religious life. All of this
information enables us to re-construct the history of Athens under Ottoman domination just
after Mahmud Efendi, in the second half of the eighteenth century, when this city was a small
country town before the Greek revolution.312
1.4 Neo-Hellenic Networks of Mahmud Efendi
In Athens, Mahmud Efendi met with Sotiris and Kavallaris and via their chanells, he
maintained indirect network of Greek scholars of that time. They supported him with Istoria
of Kontares, whom they might even met in Italy before or in Athens. It should be bear in mind
that the scholars of seventeenth and eighteenth centuries were not isolated from each other.
“There was a regular migration of scholars and an intense traffic of books between Western
Europe, the Balkans and Istanbul”.313 There are reasons for that: first of all, there was an
ongoing circulation between monasteries. As Fotić clearly demonstrates, “travelling
monks”314 of higly prestigious Mount Athos were everywhere inside and outside of the
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
M.A. 4 / p.22, n. 4 (Evasıt-ı L 1155).
M.A.9 / p.302, n. 3 (Evahir-i C 1182).
M.A. 9 / p.285, n. 4 (Evasıt-ı R 1182), M.A. 9 / p.220, n. 2 (Evahir-i B 1181), M.A. 4 / p.79, n. 1 (Evasıt-ı
CA, 1157), M.A. 4 / p.171, n. 3 (Evasıt-ı CA 1159), M.A. 4 / p.243, n. 3 (Evasıt-ı M 1161).
M.A. 9 / p.211, n. 3 (Evasıt-ı C 1181), M.A. 9 / p.288, n. 2 (Evahir- i R 1182), about ‘metropolit’s: M.A. 4 /
p.33, n. 3 (Evasıt-ı S 1153) .
M.A. 9 / p.63, n. 2, M.A. 9 / p.286, n. 3-4 (Evahir-i R 1182).
Kara Sofu Mahallesi: M.A. 9 / p.243, n. 2 (Evail-i Va? 1181).
Kara Emin Mosque in one of Athens villages: M.A. 4 / p. 40, n. 3 (Evail-i RA 1156), about a fountain: M.A.
4 / p.93, n. 4 (Evasıt-ı L 1157).
M.A. 4 / p.287, n. 1 (Evahir-i CA 1162).
M.A. 4 / p.102, n. 2 (Evahir-i ZA 1157), M.A. 4 / p.287, n. 1 (Evahir-i CA 1162).
For the ‘re-planning’ of the city of Athens in terms of modernization, see Eleni Bastéa, The Creation of
modern Athens: Planning the Myth (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2000). Even the ‘new’ Athens was
criticized because of its ‘superficial alteration of manners, the uncritical rush for foreign things, mimicry and
pernicious misunderstanding of European culture’ (Αìών- Newspaper, 16 July 1860): in Vilma HastaoglouMartinidis, “City Form and National Identity: Urban Designs in Nineteenth Century Greece,” Journal of
Modern Greek Studies 13 (1995/1), p. 110.
Damien Janos, “Panaiotis Nicousios and Alexsander Mavrocordatos”, p. 191.
They were called as taxidiotis in Greek, or as putnik in Serbian and were also known as pandohoi, or the
monks “receiving everything”: Aleksandar Fotić, “Athoniate Travelling Monks and Ottoman Authorities,
16- 18th centuries”, in Perspectives on Ottoman Studies Papers from the 18th Symposium of the
67
Ottoman empire. After the middle of the seventeenth century, he states that “…some 2,000
monks, who would make between one third and one half of all the Athonite monks, were
constantly on the road.”315 Second, they could construct networks via schools later,
“Academies”. We can follow the ties between them especially in the diaspora regions,
especially in Italy.
In 1500, for example, the Aldine Press founder Aldus established an academy called
Neakademia for the study of Greek and the publication of the Greek classics.316 In the same
year, on 12 April, Erasmus of Rotterdam wrote the following to his friend James Batt: “The
moment I get some money I will buy first Greek books, and then clothes.”317 The first Greek
editions, for example the Aldine editions of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries318 often have
an introduction in Greek.319 Alongside Aldine Press, Zachary Kallierges, Sabio, Melchiore
Sessa, Ravani, Giunta, Zanetti, Scotto, Damiano de Santa Maria, the Farreus Brothers,
Nicholas Sophianos and associates, Bartholomew Ianninos and others produced thousands of
books over a period of four centuries covering a wide range of subjects such as literature,
ecclesiastical, historical, geographical, and scientific studies and popular novels in Greek.320
Prior to the establishment of a high school in 1665, The Hellenike Schole tes
Adelphotetas, a Greek elementary school, had been established in Venice in 1593. The high
school institution, the Flaggineios Scole, was named after Thomas Flaggineis (1578-1648)
who never lived enough to see it with his own eyes. He played a crucial role in intellectual
International Committee of Pre-Ottoman and Ottoman Studies (CIEPO) at thre University of Zagreb 2008,
(eds.) Ekrem Causevic, Nenad Moacanin, Vjeran Kursar (Berlin: LIT Verlag, 2010), pp. 157- 173, p. 157.
315
Ibid., p. 158.
316
H. Forbes Brown, The Venetian Printing Press, 1469-1800: A Historical Study Based upon Documents for
the Most Part Hitherto Unpublished (London: John Nimmo, 1891), pp. 40-49, p. 44.
317
Arthur Tilley, “Greek Studies in England in the Early Sixteenth Century,” The English Historical Review 53,
no. 210. (Apr., 1938), pp. 221-239, p. 221.
318
For the Venetian printing house of Aldus Manutius (1449- 1515), see Martin Davies, Aldus Manutius: Printer
and Publisher of Renaissance Venice (Malibu, CA: J. Paul Getty Museum, 1995).
319
Cretan Marcus Musurus’ contribution to Aldine Press is very impressive. Additionally, when he was
professor of Greek, Padua University became a place of attraction with students from all over Europe. For
the influence of Musurus, see Deno John Geanakoplos, Greek Scholars in Venice: Studies in the
Dissemination of Greek Learning from Byzantium to Western Europe (Cambridge & Massachusetts:
Harvard University Press, 1962), pp. 111-166. Reynolds and Wilson write that “…if he was personally
responsible for all the good readings which appear for the first time in editions that he saw through the press,
there can be no doubt that he was the most talented classical scholar ever produced by his nation.” in L. D.
Reynolds and N. G. Wilson, Scribes and Scholars: A Guide to the Transmission of Greek and Latin
Literature, pp. 141-142.
320
Apostolos E. Vacalopoulos, The Greek Nation, 1453-1669: The Cultural and Economic Background of
Modern Greek Society, trans. Phania Moles (New Brunswick & New Jersey: Rutgers Univ. Press, 1976), p.
161.
68
history during early Neo-Hellenic enlightenment. The Flaggineios School worked on
preparing the Greek students of Venice and other Greeks from Greek lands for a higher study
at the University of Padua. Although the events increased the importance of Greek higher
education, Greek students’ enrollment in Pedua predates the Tourkokratia. As a result, the two
colleges, named the College of Saint John (1583) and Cottunian College (1653) were
established by Padua. Moreover, according to a Greek scholar, between 1634-1671 four
hundred and ninety five Greek medical students alone were registered for these schools.
Medicine was one of the fields Ottoman world advanced in since the high ranking Turks took
those educated and knowledgeable Greeks, Armenians and Jews as personal pyscians.321
Kostantaras shows that most of the 517 students registered in Flaggineio School
(1665-1798) were from Venetian ruled Greek islands. With 119 students, The Ioanian Island
Kefallonia was the highest contibuter, followed by Crete with seventy- six students and
Kerkyia with 61. Greeks, graduated from the Flaggineio school, were considered among the
most essential logioi of the pre-Englightenment period. Elias Meniates (1669-1714) of
Kefallonia, who first came to the school as a student, is considered among one of them. He
later became one of the most well-known Greek rhetorican of his generation. Patousas, who
was then the director of the school created texts for the school’s curriculum, and Philological
Encyclopedi, which was used at Padua as well, is the most famous example of his texts. The
work was formed of four volume and was first published in 1710 in Venice, and later was
reprinted many time, since it happened to be crucial for students and teachers. A collection of
the great figures of antiquity and the Christian era, including Plato’s Euthhyphro and Krito
with the theological writings of Gregorios were included in his work. Patousas aimed to
demonstrate the proper grammer and rhetoric forms and crucial parts of
Flaggenio
curriculum from such works. Another important part of the school’s curriculum was
demonstrating the rhetorical, grammatical and philosophical works Gerasimos Vlaxos (16051685), who was a Cretan refugee and later Metropolitan of Venice.322
In the same period, the first Greek printing press of Constantinople was established by
a Venetian subject, Greek originated monk Nicodemos Metaxas in 1627. Very little is known
about Nikodemos Metaxas before his arrival to Constantinople, since there is very scarce
information or almost no material available that provide any clue about his early life. Having
born in the village of Kerameies in Cephalonia in 1585, he studied in Athens for two years,
321
322
Kostantaras, Nationalism and the Culture of Self- Contempt, pp. 82- 83.
Ibid., p. 88.
69
between 1614-1620 his lecturer in Athens was Theophilos Korydaleus. He wrote a letter to
Korydaleus, offering him to teach in Cephalonia where he spent some of his time after his
graduation. On 17 August 1619 Korydaleus replied to him, and the letter can be seen in Peri
Epistolikon Tipon, published by Metaxas.323 Around July 1622 and July 1623, Metaxas joined
his merchant brother in London, who exported currant from Cephalonia. Since he became an
expert in the art of printing in London, he published different titles tied with three volumes
and two different printing houses produced them. The Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople
Cyril Lucaris (d.1638)324 wanted to establish a publishing house under the Patriarchate in
Constantinople, however since this required knowledge, as well as training and skills,
Metaxas bought a printing press with his own money and came to Constantinople with it.
Having arrived at Constantinople, in June 1626, with bringing a hand-press device, two
different sets of typefaces, paper and crates of printed, on a vessel called Royal Defense that
was under Levant Company’s possession, he delivered the cargo thanks to the the English
ambassador Sir Thomas Roe. Lucaris, who was long waiting for his wish to come true
welcomed him ashore.325 At the Orthodox Greek Patriarchate of Constantinople, Metaxas
wanted to employ the press for use that would assist education and improvement of Orthodox
community. Through the help of printing, as a reaction to intense Catholic propaganda,
Byzantine and post-Byzantine theological text would be spread out for the Orthodox
community. The forces of Lucaris, the head of the Orthodox people in the Ottoman Empire
were joined with the Protestant England and Netherlands, and they started growing tight
relations with their ambassadors, who were Sir Thomas Roe and Cornelius Haga,
respectively.326
The Greek clergy was indeed unhappy with the declining number of students at the
Patriarchal school. In his new settlement, Lucaris himself published Metaxas’ Σύντομος
πραγματεία κατὰ Ἰουδαίων ἐν ἁπλῇ διαλέκτῳ (Brief discourse against the Jews, in vernacular
dialect) firstly. Jesuits that felt provoked by the Metaxas’ prints were against Metaxas’
attempt to aid the Patriarch’s flock. The production of Margounios’ second work faced with a
323
Ε. Layton, “Nikodemos Metaxas, the First Greek Printer in the Eastern World”, Harvard Library Bulletin 15
(1967), pp. 140- 168, here 140-141.
324
On Lucaris, see: Günnar Hering, Ökumenisches Patriarchat und europäische Politik: 1620–1638 (Wiesbaden:
F. Steiner, 1968) and George A. Hadjiantoniou, Protestant Patriarch: The Life of Cyril Lucaris, 1572-1638,
Patriarch of Constantinople (Richmond: John Knox Press, 1961).
325
Layton, “Nikodemos Metaxas”, p. 145.
326
Paschalis M. Kitromilides, “Orthodoxy and the West: Reformation to Enlightenment”, in The Cambridge
History of Christianity vol. 5 Eastern Christianity, (ed.) Michael Angold, (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ.
Press, 2006), pp. 187- 209, here pp. 196-198.
70
shut down of his print workshop and the Ottoman officials, who were annoyed by the
continuous complaints of the French Jesuit priests, had to confiscate his press.327 Metaxas was
faced with various charges agaianst him, he was accused of stirring a rebellion among
Cossacks, and he was charged with publishing traces against Muhammad, also he was
accused of being an English agent. Metaxas was able to escape and took refuge in English
ambassador’s resident, which was located close to the print workshop, however he was found
innocent upon his trial. Following the events, the press was closed down since Bishop of
Cephalonia and Zakynthos ordained Metaxas, probable to compensate for his financial
difficuly, and he came to Cephalonia to take his episcopal throne.328
For the sake of the Greek-speaking citizens of the Ottoman Empire, among the
“religious humanists,”329 the most famous person was a native of Athens, above mentioned
Theophilos Korydaleus (1570-1646). In Padua Korydaleus had studied philosophy and
medicine. Before he became “an agent” bringing the new Aristotelianism to the Greek
homeland, he was able to discuss not only the direct texts of Aristotle, but also the ancient
commentators. His teaching activities included the reorganization of the Patriarchal Academy
of Constantinople according to the Padua model.330
Having left their hometown Verria, Johannes Cottunius(1574- 1658) and his brother travelled
to Rome overland in 1589. Before crossing the Ottoman border, they were held captives by
the bandits, however by giving random the Duke of Wüttenberg brought them to Tübingen.
After spending a few years with the famous Greek philologist Martin Crusius (1526- 1607),
he came to St. Athanasius in 1605. He studied medicine at Padua between 1613 and 1615.
Having been in the same Venetian intellectual environment, Cottunius and Korydaleus were
327
328
329
330
Thomas Smith (1638- 1710) desribes these events in detail as a witness in his An Account of the Greek
Church: As to Its Doctrine and Rites of Worship; with Several Historicall Marks Interspersed, Relating
Thereunto. To which is Added, an Account of the State of the Greek Church, Under Cyrillus Lucaris
Patriarch of Constantinople, with a Relation of His Sufferings and Death, (Oxford: Miles Flesher, 1675), pp.
266- 269.
E. Layton, “Nikodemos Metaxas, the First Greek Printer in the Eastern World,” pp.152-153.
For the details, see Gerhard Podskalsky, Griechische Theologie in der Zeit der Türkenherrschaft (14531821): die Orthodoxie im Spannungsfeld der nachreformatorischen Konfessionen des Westens (München:
Beck, 1988), pp. 118-180.
G. P. Henderson, The Revival of Greek Thought, pp. 13-14; E. Turczynski, “Gestaltwandel und
Trägerschichten der Aufklärung in Ost- und Südosteuropa,” in Die Aufklärung in Ost- und Südosteuropa,
Aufsätze, Vorträge, Dokumentationen (Köln, Wien: Böhlau Verlag, 1972), p. 26. Jacques Bouchard, “L’aube
des lumières dans les pays Roumains,” La Revue Historique Institut de Recherches Néohelléniques vol. II
(2005) pp. 31-51, p. 37. For the life and works of Korydaleus, see Cleboule Tsourkas, Les débuts de
l’enseignement philosophique et de la libre pensée dans les Balkans – La vie et l’œuvre de Théophile
Corydalée (1570-1646) (Thessalonique: Institute for Balkan Studies, 1967).
71
acquaintance with each other. He published his first two books: Aristoteles’ De anima and
Meteorologica at the University of Bologna, where he taught Rhetoric, Poetry and the works
of Aristotle since 1615. He continued teaching at the Chair of Philosophy at the University of
Padua as a succession of his former teacher, who was Cesare Cremonini, a well-known Italian
philosopher. He founded the Cottunian College (Κωττούνιον Ἑλληνομουσεῖον), which was a
boarding school for Greek boys in Padua in 1648. According to a Venetian diplomat who was
nearly comtemporary in Paris F. Marchesini, Cottunian College was also funded by the
French. Being a friend of Martin Crusius, Leo Allatius and other contemporaries, Cottunius
was a prominent scholar and used to make comments on Aristotle’s works. For instance Esad
Efendi from Ioannina made the Arabic translation of Cottunius’ Commentarii lucidissimi in
octo libros de physico auditu Aristotelis. He died in 1657 in Padua.331
After receiving his early education in Crete, Nektarios of Jerusalem (1602-1676) later
studied with Korydaleus in Athens. Spending many years in the monastery of Mount Sinai, he
was appointed the Patriarch of Jerusalem. Proficient in Latin, Arabic and Ottoman Turkish, in
addition to Greek, he began writing to protect his flock from the proselytizing efforts of the
Latin missionaries. In many respects, Nektarios reflects the values of the Byzantine era
transplanted under the rule of the Ottomans.332 Unlike Meletios of Athens and Notaras, who
“drew heavily upon the ‘fathers’ of Hellenic culture for inspiration.”333
After becoming a monk, Ioannina-born Michael Metros (1661- 1714) took the name
Meletius and was generally called Meletios of Athens. He studied Latin, philosophy,
mathematics, rhetoric and medicine at the University of Padua. He was sent by the
Patriarchate of Istanbul as Exarch to the Peloponnese under Venetian rule in the time of
Venetian war where he authored his Ancient and Modern Geography. He filled the position of
the metropolitanate of Athens between 1703-1714. In 1714, he was appointed the
Metropolitan of Ioannina and died in the same year. His work, the Ancient and Modern
Geography accepted as an early methodical study which portrays the world and posits the
conceptual and physical insight of Hellas in it. He situates Hellas within Europe both
geographically and conceptually in the framework of the book like Notaras334 and considered
331
332
333
334
Küçük, Early Enlightenment in Istanbul, p. 142, 129.
Leal, The Ottoman state and the Greek Orthodox of Istanbul, p. 491.
Dean Kostantaras, Nationalism and the Culture of Self- Contempt: A Study of Greek Enlightenment and
Independence Movement, (Unpublished PhD diss.: George Washington Univ., 2005), p.294.
Kostantaras, Nationalism and the Culture of Self- Contempt, p. 300.
72
the Turks as spreading darkness and “rendering into a state of barbarity” over Hellas and
showed lament over Greece: “Greece, the great and legendary name of ancient times, the
slight and deplorable one of the present.”335 This introduction was followed by a glorification
of ancient times:
Before any other place in Europe, or Asia there was established in Greece a people of
ancient greatness and incomparable glory and luminosity in all their acts and works;
here was secured the home, the residence of Wisdom, and from her came the sciences,
and to the other parts of Europe and other places from Greece were sent colonists to
336
many different lands… and so did Greece light up the world.
Nearly all the books written by the Greek scholar on new theories of the eighteenth
century, clearly demonstrates their “debt” to their ancient predecessors. During the
Enlightenment Greek scientific culture constituted of this conception, being uninterrupted
continuity and excellence of ancient knowledge that was adopted and promoted by the church.
With related to the new ideas of the scientific revolution merging with the Aristotelian
tradition and the Orthodox Christian ontology, description of the fundamental aspects of a
philosophical discourse was the main field Greek scholars pursued during that period.
Chrysanthos Notaras (1663-1731) published his work called An introduction into Spheres and
Geography in 1716, nearly a century after the beginning of Theophylos Korydaleus in the
Patriarchal Academy as a director. In his time, the engravings of Descartes’ vortex in the
1716 and 1718 editions were presented to the Greek world for the first time.337 During this
period, Chrysanthos, in succession to his uncle Dositheos, was the Patriarch of Jerusalem. In
terms of strengthening Orthodox Greeks position in the Holy Lands, both of them played an
active role and opposed to the claims of Catholic Church. Dositheos partiularly was looking
for a Russian support against the Catholics so as to take control of the holy sites. During this
very period, in Moscow a Greek community was in growth, due to increasing trade relations
between Russia and the Greek communities in the Ottoman Empire. There was a trade going
on in manuscripts and relics between Russia and Mount Athos, the right to found an annex
(metochion) in Moscow was acquired by the monastery of Athos. In terms of founding an
educational institution at an advantage level was favorable for him. With the financial help of
Prince Basil Vasilevich Galitsin and Meletios Domestikos, the first higher education
establishment, being The Slavo-Greco-Latin academy, was founded in Russia in 1685. The
335
336
337
Ibid., p. 304.
Ibid., pp. 304-305, cited from Meletios, Geographia Palaia kai Nea.
Efthymios Nicolaïdis, “Was the Greek Enlightenment a Vehicle for the Ideas of the Scientific Revolution?”,
Balkan Studies 40 (1/1999), pp. 7-19, p. 13.
73
new patriarch of Russia, Iokim (1620- 1690), sought the help of Dositheos so as to find
professors for the academy. Having studied at the Greek college of Venice under Gerisamos
Vlachos (c. 1607-85), the Leichoudis brothers were chosen. Before moving to College of
Kottounios in Padua, where his nephew Arsenios Kaloudis worked, Vlachos used to teach
Aristotelian philosophy both in Greek and Latin. Continuing to study at the university of
Padua, Sofronios followed mathematics and Aristotelian natural philosophy courses there.
The curriculum they used related to the view of Dositheos. As well as teaching languages like
Slavonic Greek, Latin, Italian and rhetoric, they also taught Aristotle-logic and physics,
moreover some parts were taught in Latin. In fact, the tradition of Jesuit colleges of the
seventeenth century was followed by the teaching of Leichoudis brothers that fouces on
natural philosophy and mathematics. The patriarch was unhappy with it. However, the
education in many Greek colleges in Ottoman Empire and Italy were not any different than
the education by Leichoudises. One of the aims of the mission of Chrysanthos was to remove
Leichoudises to Moscow.338
Having studied his studies at Patriarchal Academy, Chrysanthos was sent to Vienna in
1696 and then to Venice and Padua. In order to make astronomical observations, he went to
Paris, where he made observations at the Paris Observatory for several months. He did not
practice any teaching, however, he proposed a reform programme to the Academy of
Bucharest in 1707, and Academy of Iasi (1714) made use of this programme for its own
reforms. The main courses of the programme were philosophy and natural sciences and
Ancient Greek literature. But Chrysanthos proposal of philosophy teaching was in relation to
Korydaleas’ model of neo-aristotelian philosophy, however a century later he had already
studied at European universities. Aristotelian cosmology during this period was already
thought in all Greek schools. However, Chrysanthos by opposing to the current theories of
heliocentrism aimed to support the geocentric system. Although Chrysanthos showed
tolerance towards Copernicus and debated on his ideas, he was a loyal pursuer of religious
humanism.339 Methodios Anthrakites’ (1660 - 1749) first and sole edition of book were printed
among which Episkepsis pneumatikou and Christianikes Theories can be given as an
example. Having born in Ioannina, Anthrakites educator was Sougdoures and he studied
338
339
Idem., Science and Eastern Orthodoxy: From the Greek Fathers to the Age of Globalization, (trans.) Susan
Emanuel, (Baltimore, Maryland: John Hopkins Univ. Press, 2011), p. 137, 144.
Ibid., p. 145.
74
philosophy in Italy. He used to teach in his hometown and later at the school of Castoria. He
aimed to render philosophical works of Westerners, e.g Descartes during his escalating fame
among Greeks in terms of intellectual level. Having born in the village of of Kaminia or
Kamnia, in the Zagori region (Epirus), he was educated in Gioumeios (later Balaneios)
School in Ioannina under Georgios Sougdouris. He went to Venice in 1697 when he became a
priest, and he studied Philosophy and Mathematics (geometry, trigonometry, astronomy and
physics) there. He stayed in Venice until 1708, and he served as a priest until that period at
the San Giorgio dei Greci. When he returned to Greece in 1708 he became the first director of
the Ierospoudasterion, which was a new school founded with the help of Georgios Kastriotis,
in Kastoria in Macedonia. Kastriotis was a rich Greek man from Kostaria and used to lecture
between 1710-1721 and lived in Wallachia, where he centered on lecturing comtemporary
European philosophy and mathematics.340
1.4.1 G. Sotiris and T. Kavallaris:
Theophanis Kavallaris was a famous teacher of grammar, literature and other sciences
in the period 1722-1728, with Grigoris Sotiris. Both are mentioned as abbots in the Monastery
of Kaisariani. Theophanis Kavallaris came from a famous aristocratic family in Athens,341
which had founded a church in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries in Athens in honor of
Saint Demetrios.342 Kambouroglou also says that he was one of the most educated abbots in
the Monastery of Kaisariani.343 Kambouroglou mentions both, abbot Kavallaris and abbot
Sotiris, as famous scholars of Athens during this period.344 Theofanis Kavallaris was elected
at the Council meeting of 40, on September 18, 1712 as a school teacher in Athens under the
guardianship of the Abbot’s office.345He used to teach in Athens in 1709 and used to be an
abbot of Kaisariani in 1728. In a writ issued in 1710 by the learned metropolitan of Athens,
Meletios,Theophanes Kavallaris, who was the wisest and pious among monks as well as a
master, was appointed as teacher, and hence gained the right to receive the income as an
340
341
342
343
344
345
Podskalsky, Griechische Theologie in der Zeit der Türkenherrschaft (1453- 1821), pp. 312- 317.
Dimitrios Kambouroglou, Ιστορίες από την παλιά Αθήνα, Μνημεία της ιστορίας των Αθηναίων, vol. 1
(Athens: A. Papageorgiou, 1891), p. 81.
Anastasios K. Orlandos, Μεσαιωνικά μνημεία της πεδιάδος των Αθηνών και των κλιτυών Υμηττού –
Πεντελικού, Πάρνηθος και Αιγάλεω (Αθήνα 1923), p. 145.
Kambouroglou, Ιστορίες από την παλιά Αθήνα, vol. 2, p. 202.
Ibid., vol. 3, p. 197.
Πρακτικά συνεδρίασης του Συμβουλίου των 40 18 Σεπτεμβρίου 1712. AEIB, Α΄. Οργάνωση - λειτουργία, 3.
Πρακτικά Συνεδριάσεων, Κατάστιχο 8, φφ. 191v-196r. From the digitized archive of Greek Institute of
Venice.
75
inheritance from Abbot Epiphanius in Benice, between 1709-1710. He continued teaching
between 1712-1714. Kavallaris was one of the first teachers recruited when the priest Gregory
Sotiris established the first school in Athens, later in 1722 he became the teacher of what was
then called Seminar of Greek studies and he continued lecturing until late 1728. In 1728 he
was also appointed as the abbot of Kaisariani.346
Gregory Sotiris or Sotirianos, a monk of Athens, returned to his hometown Athens
after having studied ancient Greek and Latin in Italy347 because of the requests and
established the first school ever to be permanent in Athens and afterwards he was appointed
as a Metropolitan of Monemvasia and Calamata. He bought an old house in the centre of the
city around 1717, the old house was near the church of Great Panayia, within Hadrian’s
Library, Lord Elgin presented the tower erected for the clock. He demoslished it and
constructed a large and recpectable school, he started teaching at this school for free, and he
enriched the library of the school with six hundred volumes. When more students attended the
school named The Seminar of Greek Studies, he recruited other fellow teacher, including
Kavallaris in 1722. When Kavallaris was elected a the Abbot of Kaisariani, Paul Caravias of
Ithaca was appointed as a teacher; he started the job in 1729, he beared the name Païsios when
he became monk. However, there was a lack of funding so as to maintain the seminary. Since
the founder put so much money on its building and equipment, he was unable to enrich it with
the capital for the future. The main revenue was only a small amount of fify ducats, which
was the proceed of Epiphanios’ legacy in venice. Even this amount was insufficient to pay a
teacher’s salary, sinc they generally earnt 200 ducats. George Anthony Melos, Stephanos
Rhoutis and Samuel Kouvelanos. After Kouvelanos died, the school, which was confiscated,
joined with the Deka School, established in 1750 by John Dekas. The school lasted for 100
years and was ruled by seven headmasters in total. Three Patriarch among its students were
Parthenios and Ephraim of Jerusalem, and the martyred Oecumenical Patriarch Gregory V. 348
This monastery is thought to have been one of the most significant ones.
Just over two hundred years later, above mentioned Jacob Spon (1675) and his
companion George Wheler, suggested that Sultan Mehmed II had taken the key
of the city from the abbots and exempted it from the taxes because of the
346
347
348
Demetrios Sicillianos, Old and New Athens, (trans.) Robert Liddell, (London: Putnam Pub., 1960), p. 195.
Vyronis, “The Ghost of Athens”, p. 65.
Demetrios Sicillianos, Old and New Athens, p. 259.
76
Sultan’s joy.349 The Turks called the monastery koçbaşı probably because of the
spring flowing through marble goat’s head at the entrance.350 Both Evliya Çelebi
and Mahmud Efendi called the establishment Koçbaşı manastırı. For Hymettus,
both of them used deli dağ, literally meaning “crazy mountain” as it was
colloquially known as ho Trellos or Trellovouno among the local people.351
Evliya Çelebi mentions the natural beauty of Hymettus with its flora, wheather
and spring water.352 For “the marvelous and very old” monastery he gives
suchdetails that the testament of the philosophers in the past was to be burried in
this monastery because their corpses did not damage because of the beauty of
the weather around and the talismans they have made agaist reptiles. Evliya
praises the monks of the monastery because they host every body with the milk
of the birds and lions. They have many visitors from the Western countries
too..353 Evliya also praises the honey of Mount Hymettus which is widely known
as the wild thyme honey since the Antiquity and exported to Rome.354
Contemporary to Evliya, Hatice Turhan Sultan (d. 1683) orders in her trust deed,
vakfiyye for Yeni Mosque that during the nights of Ramadan, sherbets from
honey must be delivered to the people from the doors of the Mosque. She
adamantly warns that honey must be Atina balı, honey of Athens, not other than
it.355
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
J. Spon and George Wheler, Voyage d'Italie, de Dalmatie, de Grece et du Levant : fait aux années 1675 &
1676 (Amsterdam: Chez Henry & Thedore Boom, n.d.), p. 172. George Wheler, A Journey into Greece,
(London: 1682).
J. Arnold Hamilton, The Church of Kaisariani in Attica: Its History, Architecture and Mural Paintings. A
Study in Byzantine Art (Aberdeen : W. Jolly, 1916), p.5.
Gustav Adolph von Kloeden, Handbuch der physischen Geographie, (Berlin: Weidmannsche
Buchhandlung, 1861), vol. 2, p. 1200.
Evliya Çelebi, Seyahatname, p. 120.
Ibid.; vol. 8, p. 120.
Josiah Ober, “Rock-Cut Inscriptions from Mt. Hymettos”, Hesperia: The Journal of the American School of
Classical Studies at Athens 50 (1/1981), pp. 68-77, p. 77.
“Ve dahi şöyle şart ve ta’yin eylediler ki; leyali-i Ramazan-ı şerifde cami-i şerifin üç aded kapularında şerbet
olmağ içün her sene üç bin vakıyye Atina balı iştira olunup bade’l-teravih cema’at-i müslimine iskā oluna.
Bu tertib ile ki cami-i şerif kapularından her bir kapuya şerbet içün gecede otuz üçer vakıyye asel verilüp ve
her kapuya iki nefer kimesne şerbetçi ta’yin oluna ve Atina balından gayri bal alınmayup her ne mikdar baha
ile olursa yine Atina balı iştira oluna”, Hatice Turhan Sultan Vakfiyesi, Süleymaniye Kütüphanesi, nr. 150, s.
77
It is written in a bull of the patriarch of Constantinople in 1678 that “since it has been
free from earliest times, no bishop or other person can interfere with its affairs.”356 This
exemption from taxes (σταυροπηγιακή) was canceled once in 1687 by Patriarch Hieremias the
third357because the Metropolitian of Athens’ income had decreased due to the Venetian
interlude.358 While his was in his trip to Greece, after visiting Kaisariani, Heidegger notes:
…what the little church possesses that is Christian remains in harmony with ancient
Greece, a pervasive spirit that does not bow before the theocratic thought seeped in
canon law (dem kirchenstaatlich-juristischen Denken) of the Roman Church and its
theology. On the site where today there is the convent, there was formerly a ‘pagan’
359
sanctuary (ein “heidnisches” Heiligtum) dedicated to Artemis.
1.4.2 G. Kontares
Little published on the life of Kontares by academic circles. One of the sources on the
details of his life was written by Patrinelis and his article was widely used side by side section
in Lengrad’s.360 In the beginning of the article, Patrinelis says that although Kontares is
unknown in the Greek education of literature and history, he is widely known by history
lovers or the simple people of Kozani, because of the epitaph of Kozani and the metropolitan
church of Kozani, Agio Nikola. We owe the earliest and also the fullest biographical sign for
Georgios Kontares to Harisio Meydani (the famous scholar and teacher from Kozani), who in
1820, in his famous thesis about the schools of Kozani devotes and extensive paragraph to
Georgios Kontares, the first teacher of the school.361
Meydani says that;
Kontares was born and raised in Servia from parents who were inhabitants of this city
known as Serviotes. They descended from illustrious ancestors, who served in [various]
offices during the reign of the Greco-Roman and there are references[for them] in
Byzantine history. They scattered in many places with political tasks before and after the
conquest of Constantinople. Descendants of this family existed in Kastoria, Peloponnese,
in Servia even in Venice, where they dealt with ministries of [local/ Venetian]
aristocracy. In 1540 Alexandros Kontares was commander of Venetians in Naphlion
when they capitulated with the Turks and gave them the town. Georgios left for Venice to
356
357
358
359
360
361
58 a cited from Nurdan Şafak, Hayırsever Bir Osmanlı Sultanı Hatice Turhan Sultan ve Vakfiyesi (İstanbul:
Fatih Sultan Mehmet Vakıf Üniversitesi Yayınları, 2013), p. 50.
Hamilton, The Church of Kaisariani in Attica, p. 8.
C. D. Cobham, The Patriarchs of Constantinople (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1911), p. 18.
Theonos Hatzidakis, Το Μοναστήρι της Καισαριανής (Αθήνα: εκδόσεις, 1977), p. 7.
Jacques Derrida, Acts of Religion, (ed.) Gil Anidjar (London & New York: Routledge, 2002), p. 54, f.n.9,
cited from Séjours (Paris, editions du Rocher, 1989), p. 71).
Ε. Legrand, Bibliographie Hellénique... XVII siècle..., τ. 2, Παρίσι 1894, pp. 318-321
Christos G. Patrinelis, «Γεώργιος Κονταρής, λόγιος του ΙΖ' αιώνα άπο τά Σέρβια», Ή Κοζάνη και ή περιοχή
της.Ιστορία - Πολιτισμός, (Κοζάνη 1997), p. 459.
78
his relatives and knew the Latin and Italian dialects [languages]. We do not have
accurate information about his greek education and the teachers who taught him. What
we know is that he was an Aristotelian[αριστοτελικός=follower of the Aristotelian
philosophy] and he was persuasive in speech, humble in his ways, was venerable
character, and preferred the bachelor life. He was teacher in the school of Kozani for
three years and then he went to Sérvia, his homeland, to exercise his profession. After
the bishop of Servia Dionysios died , ordained priest according to demand of the people
of the province, and was renamed Grigórios. He remained as bishop [in Servia] for four
years and wrote the history of Athens in the vernacular language, which published then
in Venice. Athenians, because of the story that he wrote, when died the (their) High
Priest, acted and was transferred and became (bishop) of Athens. He was very skillful at
embroidery of sacred vestments with gold wire, and the Lamentation of Christ, who is
hung opposite the pontifical throne in the Catholic church of Kozani is a work of his
hands, and shows his great adroitness.362
Teacher, coder, embroiderer, writer, translator, member of a publishing (house) in
Venice, bibliophil, priest and finally bishop of Servia/Serfiçe and metropolitan of Smyrna363;
Gregory Kontares (born George) was born in Kozani (Servia) in 1638. His presence in
Venice, where he had relatives, was first witnessed in 1668 and then in the period between
1683 to 1684 as serving in Flagiano Gymnasium as Supervisor (Prefetto).364 According to
Patrinelis, appointment to this seat indicates certainly the official recognition of his
scholarship and and of the prestige he had in the Greek community. During the period 16751682 he should be taught in Kozani and Thessaloniki. Nevertheless, he was teaching in
Thessaloniki in 1682. In the work of Symeon of Thessaloniki which Kontares copied, the
following note was found: “This book written by me monk Gregorios Kontares, (humble)
teacher, in Thessaloniki, in the holy monastery of Kamariotissis, in 3 Feb 1682”. The
monastery of Kamariotissis, known since the fourteenth century, was in Acheiropoietou. For
the subject of the classes Kontares taught, Aristoteles held the priority 365 After returning from
Venice, Patrinelis states that he became bishop of Servia, and in 1690 bishop of Smyrna,
where he died in 1698. His personal library, which he donated to the Evangelical School of
Smyrna, formed the nucleus of the Library of the school.366
362
363
364
365
366
Χαρίσιος Μεγδάνης, Αγγελία: Περί του κατ' Έτος τελουμένου κοινού Μνημοσύνου υπέρ των Συνδρομητών
των εν Κοζάνη Σχολείων Ελληνικού τε και κοινού περί της Εξετάσεωςτων Μαθητών εν Έτει 1819 κατά
Μήνα Φευρουάριον, και περί της Αρχής, Προόδου, και της νυν Καταστάσεως της Ελληνικής Σχολής, και
των εξ αυτής επί Παιδεία αναφανέντων Εγχωρίων τε και Ξένων , (Βιέννη: Εκ του τυπογραφείου Σβεκίου,
1820), pp.45-46. Dr. Gregory Stournaras from National Technical University of Athens has kindly translated
the text for me.
Patrinelis, «Γεώργιος Κονταρής, λόγιος του ΙΖ' αιώνα άπο τά Σέρβια», p. 460.
Ibid., p. 462, p. 464.
Ibid., p. 464.
Hariton Karanasios and Konstantinos Petsios, Προβλήματα πατρότητας ενός Ανώνυμου φιλοσοφικού έργου:
Γρηγόριος (Γεώργιος) Κονταρής vel Γεώργιος Σουγδουρής, Πρακτικά συνεδρίου Βυζάντιο-ΒενετίαΝεώτερος Ελληνισμός. Μια περιπλάνηση στον κόσμο της ελληνικής επιστημονικής σκέψης, ΚΝΕ/ ΕΙΕ και
79
It is accepted that after his service in Servia, Kontares was elected as the metropolitan
of Athens and Patrinelis correlates this election to this seat, to the book about the history of
Athens. However, the catalog for the metropolitans of Athens for this period is known and
there is no Gregory among the metropolitans of Athens for these years, but because of a
chronological gap, which allows us the suspicion that Kontares was for a short time the
metropolitan of Athens. Moreover, in 1688, after the Venetian occupation of Athens and the
catastrophy of Parthenon in 1687, the Athenians went away to the Saronikou islands and to
Moria, and Athens was deserted.367
It is important to note that After 100 years later, the Swedish traveler J.J. Björnstahl
found Kontares’s book in the monastery of Dousikou. About his journey, he notes that: “In 24
May (1779) I read the history of Athens, written in koine Modern Greek by Georgios
Kontares from Servia and published in Venice in 1675. It is remarkable. However, it is
ridiculous to read about the wonders of ancient Athens in simple language, barbaric words in
the mouth of Dimosthenis, and about the great navy of Xerxes.”368 Apostolopotlos mentions
that there are copies of the book in Athens, Thessaloniki, Mt. Athos but also in libraries
abroad: Paris, Moscow and Sofia.369
It is also important to note that Kontares dedicates his book to Peter Gaspari and
Giannouli Poulimeno. Peter Gasparis was in Athenian origin other merchants who resided in
Venice and was especially prominent member of the Greek community of Venice as he was
elected governatore of the Brotherhood of Holy Nikolaou in 6 April 1674.370 When we look at
Gaspari, we see him on the side of the Venetians in Morean war. In the meantime of Venetian
Interlude, the Athenians had left the city on March 24 or earlier. While some of them went to
the Venetian Zante, others to Nauplio and Salamis. Most of them however, fled to Aegina
under the leadership of Gasparis.371 Sicilianos informs that under Dimitrios Gaspari to Aegina
and others under the leadership of Peter Gaspari to Salamis.
372
He also states that Peter
Gasparis had married with the daughter of the Astrakari family, one of the twelve archons of
367
368
369
370
371
372
Ινστιτούτο Βυζαντινών και Μεταβυζαντινών Σπουδών Βενετίας, Αθήνα 7-9.11.2003, (Αθήνα 2004), pp.
101- 117, pp. 103- 104 and Patrinelis, «Γεώργιος Κονταρής, λόγιος του ΙΖ' αιώνα άπο τά Σέρβια», p. 466.
Patrinelis, «Γεώργιος Κονταρής, λόγιος του ΙΖ' αιώνα άπο τά Σέρβια», p. 465.
Ibid., p. 469.
Dimitris G. Apostolopotlos, “«Νέοι Έλληνες» Ο νεολογισμός και τα συνδηλούμενά του στα 1675” in Ho
Eranistes/The Gleaner 25 (2005), pp. 87-99, p. 87.
Ibid., p. 94.
Miller, “The Venetian Revival in Greece 1684-1718,” p. 413.
Sicillianos, Old and New Athens, p. 113.
80
Athens.373 The leader of the Athenian volunteers, Gasparis had died like Koeningsmark, from
fever.374 It is very meaningful that Kontares draws a paralel between Theseus and Gasparis,
which fits into the Athenian “founder hero” character of Theseus that will be discussed in the
Chapter 2. In the Preface, Kontares writes as such:
The old Greeks and our ancestors were never so eager toward any other project as they
were in rewarding greatly those who wanted to excell for their country. As was their
custom, sometimes they dedicated to them great temples, for others they built bronze and
barble statues, artfully made. And for others they painted their images in public houses,
as a way of rewarding their bravery. As we can see clearly by their stories, they
dedicated many temples in the name of Theseus, they painted Themistocles, Aristeides,
Miltiades, and all the other generals in the public palace, they built statues in honour of
Demetrios Phalireus in the agora and in public places, where people spent their day. And
the also had this other habit, that they would honour those who did well for the country,
not only with monetary honours, but also by praising them. This they did all together,
even little children. This is what they did for the time of Theseus, who rebuilt Athens with
his own money, that is what they did at the time of Konon, who rebuilt his country’s walls
that have been destroyed by the Spartans and the same they did for many others.
Therefore, if they paid so many honours to those at these times, how many honours
should we give to your excellency, Kyr (Mr.) Petro Gaspari, you who showed similar love
for your country. You have spared no expenses but have spent lavishly in order to help
your country. Thus you have received honours from all, and I have wanted first to
dedicate to you this History that I have began. Your grace resembles Theseus and, like
him, you wanted to help your country and rebuild, like Theseus did, as it is evident in the
History, where his name and actions will be remembered forever. I have decided to give
to you the same honour and to write this history also for your dear friend Giannoulis
Poulemenos. Because Theseus went through all the labours alone, but he share the weath
and glory with his beloved friend Peirithos, for whom he endangered his life many times.
Similarly you gave your wealth alone but received the glory and eternal fame together
with him. This is why I dedicate this book and give to both your hands, and let me be
pardoned for that. I have not met the honourable Giannoulios with my own eyes, but
many truthful and honest people have told me that he is such a worthy man that even if I
sought another on with Diogenes’s lamp, I wouldn’t find someone better. Because the
love and concord that exists between you shows clearly that there is no difference
between you, but you are of own mind and soul in two bodies. So the family of
Giannoulis should also accept this gift of his best and most beloved friend.
It is a work sanctioned by God (with the help of Petrakes Gaspares) to labour for the
common good of our brothers in faith, especially at the present time that they don’t have
their freedom or what is necessary for education, to work in order to give them a helping
hand not only through advice, the lives of saints and the holy scripture but also through
old history. Because the wisdom of God wished to bring light through truth and
knowledge to people, who lacked not only His word and advice, but also knowledge of
the old and useful history from the beginning of the world. For this reason he gave to the
prophet Moses his written word in Mount Sinai, which can be read in the Old Testament
to this day. When this prophet took all the knowledge of history he gave it to all the
Jewish nation, which was – at the time – the chosen people and by reading God’s word
he learned everything, the lives of the ancestors and holy men and the history of cities
and lands, of different nations and when they appeared and how they were divided into
tribes. And later, taking these stories, our ancestors left them for their descendants. And
373
374
Ibid., p. 226
Ibid., p. 414.
81
they survive until today, with the help of God, and we learn what we can by reading them.
Therefore, the Holy Scripture teaches us that is God’s will to try and save what is worthy
of narration from the old stories, that is the lives of famous men and cities. So we will
begin writing the history of Athens, not by using rhetorical praise or excessive words
(because that should be avoided according to Lucian), because it is not the work of a
historian to mix narration with poetry and rhetoric. Therefore we will narrate the facts
simply, without exaggerations, how I found them in old Greek and Italian books, which I
translated into the common language. And we have not left anything out nor added on
our own words.375
So Apostolopoulos asks how this cooperation occurred between these Athenians and a
priest from Servia? For him, Peter Gasparis and Kontares met in Venice and they know each
other personally.376 After he says that staying in the same place is certainly convenient
condition to developed a collaboration , however, “if we want to find the deeper causes this
cooperation must to see the purpose for which he wanted to be a sponsor to the book.”377 First
reason might be lie behind the content of the book. The book presents the history of ancient
for Athens from the time of Cecrops as the time of Dionysius “Areiopagitou”. Secondly,
Kontares wants to highlight and stimulate historical memory of the “New Greeks”. Thirdly,
they might want to present the infidel and uncharitable tyrants as regards the obligations of
young Greeks must realize their origin, their history, and imitate their ancestors in learning, in
his wisdom and bravery.378 Apostolopoulos ends up his article by the assumption that the
strong anti- Turkish tone that dominates the book on the history of Ancient Athens allow us to
reasonably assume that the book 1675 reflects the ideology of the sponsor rather than the
author.379
375
376
377
378
379
G. Kontares, Ίστορίαι παλαιού και πάνυ ωφέλιμοι της περίφημου πόλεως Άθήνης, Trikoglou Collection
Books, Rare Collections of the Central Library of Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (A.U.Th.). Translated
kindly by Dr. Vera Andriopoulou (Univ. of Birmingham)
Apostolopotlos, “«Νέοι Έλληνες»” , p. 94.
Ibid., p. 95.
Ibid., p. 96.
Ibid., p. 98.
82
CHAPTER 2
READING THE HISTORY OF MAHMUD EFENDİ
2.1. Content of Tarih-i Medinetü’l-Hukema
The Tarih-i Medinetü’l-Hukema of Mahmud Efendi is a small size manuscript, 195 x
122 mm, with nesih calligraphy. Every page has 19 lines.380 It covers many long centuries
through 291 folios. It starts from the foundation of the city of Athens in ancient times and
finishes with the Morean expedition of the Ottomans at the beginning of the eighteenth
century. The manuscript does not possess any hatime (conclusion) and therefore it appears to
end suddenly. Because of the long time span, I needed to leave aside some parts and did not
transcribe the folios between 241a and 291b, i.e., the parts where he narrates the Morean
expedition of the Ottomans in which he participated in Thebes. I used information from this
part but did not transcribe the text since the detailed account on the Morean expedition given
by Mahmud Efendi is outside the scope of this thesis.
To give an idea about the content of the manuscript, I roughly summarize the events
below like a detailed table of contents for the text itself:
1b - 2a: Begins with Arabic invocations (basmala, hamdala, salwala) and gives the reason for
compiling and translating the manuscript
2a - 2b: Presents two Greek abbots as sources and gives the date for starting the task
2b - 3a: The role of Muhsinzade Mehmed Paşa and his character in composing the text
3a - 4a: Mentions the difficulty that was experienced and requests the pardon of the readers
for possible faults
4a - 4b: Gives the name of the historians as the written sources
4b - 6a: The topography of Athens
6a - 6b: The government of Athens
6b - 7a: The places under Athenian government
7a - 7b: The rulers of Athens
7b - 8a: Sultan Mehmed II, the Conqueror (Fatih Sultan Mehmed)
8a - 8b: Athens under Ottoman rule
8b - 9a: Athens from Adam to Cecrops
9a - 9b: Athens after Noah
9b - 10a: People of Athens wearing golden, silver, copper and rivet Cicadas in their hair
10a - 10b: Issue of Athens’ name
10b - 11a: Athena
11a - 11b: The stratum system in Athens and the reign of Cranaus and Amphictyon
11b - 12a: The reign of Erichthonius and Pandion
12a - 12b: The reigns of Thrace, Arihtav and Cecrops II
380
F. Edhem Karatay, Topkapı Sarayı Müzesi Türkçe Yazmalar Kataloğu, (İstanbul: Topkapı Sarayı Müzesi,
1961), vol. 1, p. 326.
83
12b - 13a: The King of Crete
13a - 13b: Minotaur and Ageis
13b - 14a: Ageis, his wife and Theseus
14a - 14b: Theseus and his mother
14b - 15a: Theseus slays Periphetes
15a - 15b: Theseus slays the robber Sinis at the Isthmus of Corinth
15b - 16a: Theseus kills the Pinebender/ destroys Cromyon sow/ hurls Sciron into the sea
16a - 16b: Theseus overthrows Cercyon in wrestling/ slays Procrustes/arrival at Athens
16b - 17a: His stepmother, Medea wants to poison him
17a - 17b: Recognition of Theseus by Aegeus at the meal
18a - 20a: Medea warns the rival cousin of Aegeus on the danger to the throne and they fight
with Theseus
20a - 20b: Theseus wins and he requests to go to Crete with the third tribute to the Minotaur
20b - 21b: Aegeus does not agree but Theseus persuades his father
21b - 23a: Theseus fights the wrestler Minotaur and overcomes him
23a - 23b: Theseus asks for the abolishment of the tribute of seven girls and seven boys
23b - 24a: The king wants his daughter to marry Theseus, they marry
24a - 25a: They depart from Crete together but the captains forget to hoist white sails instead
of black on his return from Crete
25a - 25b: Aegeus throws himself to the sea thinking that Theseus is dead and Theseus
laments his father for forty days
25b - 26a: Theseus succeeds to the sovereignty of Athens
26a - 29a: Theseus goes with Heracles against the women warriors (Amazons)
29a - 29b: Theseus wins the battles against Amazons and he takes Hippolyte
29b - 30a: His friendship with Pirithous
30a - 32a: Theseus fights with the soldiers of Candavro (actually Centaurs) at the wedding of
Pirithous, returns to Athens with Helen
32a - 33a: Theseus’ fame increases/ he builds a palace / begins to live in luxury and his
character changes, he demands the daughters of the rulers sometimes by force
33a - 34a: He demands the daughter of the king of Sparta/ the king refuses/ with the
assistance of Pirithous he carries off Helen to the place where his mother lives because she
was so young
34a - 34b: Theseus wants the daughter of the king of the Molossions
34b - 35a: Kept prisoner
35a - 35b: Pirithous is killed by the dog Cerberus in the prison
35b - 36a: Theseus is rescued by Heracles
36a - 36b: The soldiers of Helens’ father from Sparta loot the city of Athens
36b - 37b: The notables of Athens gather together to talk about the deeds of Theseus
37b - 38a: Menestheus is appointed by the notables of Athens
38a - 38b: Theseus goes to Euboea with his family and servants
39b - 40a: Killed by Lycomedes while hunting a bird, his bones are brought back from Scyros
to Athens by Cimon
40a - 41a: Sanctuary of Theseus
41a - 45a: Helen’s affair, Troy
45a - 48a: People come to Padova by ships from Troy
48a - 49a: Establishment of the city of Venice
49a - 49b: Menestheus
49b - 50a: Demophon, Oxynthes, Apheidas, Thymoites
50a - 51a: Kodros
51a - 51b: Time of life-long rulers begins
84
51b - 52a: Medon, Akastos, Arkhippos, Thersippos, Phorbas, Megacles, Diognetos,
Pherekles, Ariphron, Thespius, Agamestor, Aiskhylos, Alkmaion
52a - 52b: Decision to limit the ruling time to ten years
52b - 53a: Drakon
53a - 62b: Solon
62b - 65b: Solon’s visit to Cyprus; Croesus in the Golden Age
67b - 68a: Sons of Solon
68a - 68b: Hipparchus’ murder
68b - 69a: Hippias is overthrown
69a - 69b: Hippias’ flees to Sardis in Anatolia to the court of the Persian Artaphernes and
promises control of Athens to the Persians if they help restore him
69b - 70a: Militiades’ victories
70a - 71a: Persian victories in the Aegean Islands
71a - 71b: Persians arrive in Euboea in mid-summer/ Their march to the coast of Attica, en
route to complete the final objective of the Campaign – to punish Athens.
71b - 72a: Battle of Marathon/ Themistocles, Callimachus, Militiades, Aristides
72a - 72b: Persian soldiers can’t find food and water and flee to the sea. After three days the
battle ends when the Persian centre broke in panic towards their ships, pursued by the Greeks.
72b - 73a: The heroism of the Athenian Commanders/ the Murder of Callimachus during the
fight.
73a - 73b: Herodotus records that 6,400 Persian bodies were counted on the battlefield and the
Athenians lost 192 men.
73b - 74a: Persian naval army is too tired to invade again.
74a - 74b: Persians return
75b - 76a: Militiades leads an Athenian expedition of seventy ships against the Greekinhabited islands deemed to have supported the Persians. Miltiades leads an attack on the
Cyclades, the archipelago that the Persians had recently added to their empire.
76a - 76b: Charged with treason, he is sentenced to death, but the sentence is converted to a
fine of fifty talents.
76b - 77a: He is sent to prison where he dies.
77a - 77b: The debt is later paid by his son, Metiochus
77b - 78a: Darius’s death, his son Xerxes/Dariusb bin Behmen kills Darius bin Dariusb.
78a - 78b: Persian army crosses the Hellespont and marches through Thrace, Macedonia and
Thessaly and Mount Athos.
79a - 79b: The Persian king asks for earth and water in Thessaly/ Darius sends emissaries to
all the Greek city-states, asking for a gift of ‘earth and water’ in token of their submission to
him.
79b - 80a: Athenians think that there is no way out except death
80a - 80b: They kill the envoy, the Persian king is furious.
82a - 82b: Establishment of a massive fleet under the guidance of the politician Themistocles
to fight the Persians
83b - 84a: Fall-back plans for the defence of the Isthmus of Corinth by settlers of the
Peloponnesian cities
84b - 85a: A local Greek, Ephialtes, betrays the Greeks by showing a small path leading
behind Greek lines
85a - 85b: General Demophilus refuses to leave and commits himself to fight with 700
Thespians
85b - 86a: They fight with spears until every spear is shattered and then switch to xiphē (short
swords)/ The death of Leonidas
85
86a - 86b: Recovery of the body of Leonidas by the Persians, order by Xerxes to cut off his
head and to crucify his body.
86b - 91b: Greco-Persian wars
92a - 92b: The expression by the Persians that they lack food.
92b - 93a: The Persian king returns due to the political situation in India and a small number
of soldiers stay in Athens and Peloponnese.
93a - 93b: Famine in Athens
93b - 94a: Complaints about Athens by the Persian soldiers, after the retreat of soldiers,
Athens progress.
94a - 94b: The Spartans envy Athenians and Themistocles is sent as envoy to Peloponnese.
94b - 95a: The Spartans threaten Themistocles and Athens.
95a - 95b: Themistocles excites pity about the Athenian conditions and tells the Spartans that
they should send an envoy to Athens and see their condition.
96a - 96b: Spartan envoys observe that Themistocles is right and this rids the Spartans of their
envy and hostility.
96b - 97a: Spartans and Athenians collaborate and reconquer the islands that had been
conquered by the Persian king.
97a - 97b: Themistocles conquers the islands with sweet-talk, the Spartans by force.
97b - 98a: Aristides
98a - 98b: Athens prospers because of the lack of war and illness.
98b - 99a: The Spartan captain is not a good-mannered and sweet-talking man, the Athenians
wish to teach him a lesson.
99a - 99b: They ask the Spartans to build a tower on Mykene island and to put there tithe
incomes and to appoint clerks.
99b - 100a: The Spartans accept this offer and erect buildings.
100a - 100b: They appoint guardians and clerks to the island and property accumulates during
ten years.
100b - 101a: The arena in Athens
101a - 101b: Buildings of Athens
101b - 102a: Athens becomes a place of pilgrimage/ in the eastern part there are barracks for
soldiers.
102a - 102b: Artisan shops around the barracks
102b - 103a: Shops related to the navy around Pyrrhaeus port and the features of soldiers
103a - 103b: The madrasas in the southern part of Athens and relevant shops like binding
houses; also courts exist there.
106a - 106b: The Persian king fights around for fifteen years in India and Transoxiana but he
always keeps Athens and Sparta in his mind.
106b - 107b: He sends gifts and letters to the commanders of Athens and Sparta in order to
bring them to his side/ Spartan commander Pausanias’ letters to Xerxes.
107b - 108a: His death
108a - 108b: Themistocles leaves Athens for Argos.
108b - 109a: He cuts trees in the Black Sea region and builds ships/ A huge navy is created.
109a - 110a: His death, by poison/ Athenians grieve deeply while while reading his letter.
110a - 110b: Navy sails from the Black Sea to the Mediterranean and conquers Cyprus and
Rhodes.
110b - 111a: Athenians take the treasure from the island due to the fact that Persians will
come and take it, however, the Spartans claim if Pausanius had been alive, the Athenians
could not have dared to do this
111a - 111b: The Persian navy comes across Athenian ships at the coast of Rhodes, since the
Athenian ships were smaller, they easily escape to the Egyptian waters.
86
111b - 112a: Running continues and the Persian navy progresses slowly.
112a - 112b: The Persian ships are split off in a rocky area due to a storm and Athenian
soldiers enslave the Persian soldiers
116a - 116b: They return to Athens and organize celebrations. Birth of Socrates
116b - 117a: Socrates gives lectures on wisdom and philosophy. He owns four schools and
each one of them has seven thousand students.
117a - 117b: During this time, nine wise philosophers reign in Athens.
117b - 118a: There are five hundred philosophers divided into ten divisions. They choose
seven, seven choose three, and three choose the one.
118a - 118b: There are also forties and Arpanegaus also has a court place.
121a - 122a: Militiades is killed and Cimon comes to take his place
122a: Pericles
124a - 129b: The features of the Acropolis
129b - 132b: The sculpture and cult of Athena
132b - 134a: The mosque within the Parthenon and its bombardment
134a - 138b: The operations of the courts
138b - 143a:
143a - 144a: The description of the Tower of Wind
144a - 147a: The debts of Pericles due to his building of the Parthenon
147a - 148b: Socrates and the philosophers
148b - 150a: How Athenian people worshipped deities
150a - 151a: The philosophers’ faith in one God/Socrates tries to disguise their beliefs from
the Athenians
151a - 155a: Alcibiades
155b - 157b: Pericles and Nicias
157a - 157b: Oracle
157b - 158a: Ravens peck the head of the idol, meaning a bad omen for the mission,
nevertheless, Alcibiades insists on the Sicilian expedition and kisses Socrates’ hand before the
march/ Socrates gives him advice on not displaying belief in one God.
158a - 158b: Alcibiades conquers Sicily and displays his belief in one God.
158b - 159a: Due to his belief in one God, Alcibiades is discharged from his office by the
Athenians/ Spartans help Sicilians and Athenian navy is defeated by them.
159a - 159b: Accordingly they know of Socrates’ belief in one God and they plan to kill him.
159b - 160a: Athenians ask Socrates how he wishes to be killed, and he repeats with poison.
Plato tries to prevent this.
160a - 163a: Socrates’ death, his funeral, his tomb.
163a - 163b: Alcibiades’s life at the Spartan court, his relationship with Spartan Agis II’s
wife, Timaia.
163b - 164a: Other women complain to Agis II
164a - 164b: Agis II wants to punish his wife Timaia.
164b - 165a: The relatives of Timaia tell Agis II that he should protect his wife and other
women and he decides to remove Alcibiades from his territories.
165a - 165b: Alcibiades escapes from Sparta, and takes refuge with the Persian satrap
Tissaphernes.
165b - 166a: The Spartans learn that Alcibiades took refuge in the court of the Persian satrap
Tissaphernes, and become sad and send him letters to invite him back.
166a - 167a: Alcibiades is recalled by the Athenians
167a - 168a: Athenians catch the horses of the Persians around Istanbul and bring them to
Athens.
87
168a - 168b: Alcibiades returns to Athens with deep resentment because of their killing of
Socrates, he is welcomed by a big crowd.
168b - 169a: They try their best to make everything easy for Alcibiades.
169a - 169b: Spartans become jealous of this situation and especially the women force their
husbands and men to an expedition to Athens since “the fire of envy buried their livers too
much”.
169b - 170a: The battle of Abydos/ They ask Alcibiades to be commander.
170b - 171a: He appoints Thrasybulus to the Athenian fleet.
171a - 171b: Spartan victory, Alcibiades flees to the Persian king
171b - 172a: The soldiers complain that Alcibiades ordered them not to attack/ The
Athenians’ love for him turns into hatred.
172a - 172b: They ask the Persian king for Alcibiades’ submission to them.
172b - 174a: Athenian envoys explain Alcibiades’ actions in detail.
174a - 174b: They catch Alcibiades and fire on the castle he takes shelter.
175a - 175b: The cooperation of the Athenians with Thebes against the Spartans.
175b - 176a: Spartans make their tribute to the Athenians.
176a - 176b: Wall, Demosthenes
176b - 179b: Chapter on wall, Spartans ask Demosthenes the reason for building the wall and
arrest him, then envoys come and ultimately Demosthenes is freed.
179b - 180a: Spartans try to transgress the treaty between Thebes and Athens.
180a - 180b: They start preparations for their attack on Thebes.
180b - 183a: War between Thebes and Spartans: battle of Leuctra.
183a - 184a: Praise of the courage of the Theban people.
184a - 185a: The return of Spartans to their home wounded, their fear of Theban people/
Athenians find ease thanks to the people of Thebes.
188b - 189b: Iphicrates
189b - 190a: The Thebans and Athenians live in pride, hedonism and arrogance because of
their conquered lands, therefore, the Theban hegemony ends too early.
190a - 192b: Philip the Macedonian emerges and makes an expedition towards Thebes, a
bloody war takes place. The Third Sacred war takes place.
192b - 195b: Alexander gives advice to his father on the Thebans and tries to convince him to
make peace with them. Philip finds Thebans too brave and audacious.
195b - 196 a: They invite Aristotle to Athens
196b - 197a: Athenians host Alexander the Great and his tutors
197a - 197b: Alexander stays forty days in Athens and returns back to Philip
197b - 198b: Philip’s expeditions
198b - 199a: Darius wins the battle & rapes Philip’s wife/ peace agreement held on 300
golden eggs
199a - 199b: Alexander is born, Philip’s wife does not explain the truth about the identity of
his father
199b - 200a: Philip dies/ Darius asks 900 eggs from Alexander for the previous three years
200a - 200b: As an answer Alexander sends two symbolic army vessels
201a - 202a: The main difference between Alexander and Darius/ Alexander behaves well
toward his soldiers
202a - 202b: Darius is killed
202b - 203b: Darius’s last request from Alexander/ his advice
203b - 204a: Alexander’s Eastern campaigns
204a - 204b: Difference between Alexander the Greek and Dhu’l-Qarnain
204b - 207b: Dhu’l-Qarnain according to Islamic scholars/ confusion on his identity
207b: Alexander the Greek and Dhu’l-Qarnain are not the same person
88
207b - 208a: Alexander’s death
208b - 214b: Antipater/Demesthones/ Cassender/ Phocion/ Antigonos Gonatas/ Demetrios
214b - 217a: Battle of Pydna
217b - 218a: Roman emperor Augustus
218a - 220a: Apostle Paul comes to Athens and tries to teach Christianity
220a - 222a: Hadrian and his deeds in Athens
222b:- 225a: Constantine the Great
225a - 231a: The legends of Hagia Sophia
232a - 233b: Heracles in the time of the prophet Muhammad
233b - 234a: Julian II
234a: Venice and Mehmed the Second
234a - 240a: Mehmed the Second’s Morean expedition and his visit to Athens
2.2. Sources
One of the most interesting aspects of Mahmud Efendi’s manuscript is, in fact, its
sources. As mentioned above, Mahmud Efendi wrote History of the City of the Philosophers
with the help of two Greek scholars, G. Sotiris and T. Kavallaris and the book of G. Kontares.
Apart from them, he noted the names of some books, but unfortunately he did not give a full
bibliography in the modern sense:
ve Atina’nın kadimden mürur eden ahvaline ma’rifet ve ıttıla’ı olan mihri-yi ehl-i
tevarihden İzmir’e karib Alkarnas nam hakim ve Atina hukemasından Sucizizi nam hakim
ve Rum ilinde Livadiyeye karib Keruniye kal’asından, hala harabdır, Plutarhos nam
hakim ve Misina ceziresinden Davudres nam mezkur hukema-yı Roma ve Latin ve Efrenc
tevarihlerinden…381
Those scholars were respectively Herodotus from Halicarnassus near Smyrna,
Thucydides from Athens, Plutarch from the ruined Chaironeia castle near Livadeia and
Diodorus from the island of Sicily.
The main source of Mahmud Efendi was, as mentioned, Kontares’ Ίστορίαι παλαιού
και πάνυ ωφέλιμοι της περίφημου πόλεως Άθήνης (Ancient and Useful Stories of the Famous
City of Athens).382 It is clear that Mahmud Efendi had used the book of Kontares via two
Greek abbots.
381
382
TMH: 4a.
It would be a great project for line to line comparison of the two texts. Because it is out of scope of this
dissertation and it is beyond my competence, I content myself with the detailed “table of contents”(index) of
Kontares’ work which was translated for me by Dr. Vera Andriopoulou (Univ. of Birmingham). I would like
to do such kind of effort in my post-doc studies under a cluster of research project with the collaboration of
colleagues who have a good command of seventeenth century Greek texts.
89
2.2.1 Detailed Table of Kontares’ Ίστορίαι παλαιού και πάνυ ωφέλιμοι της περίφημου
πόλεως Άθήνης
The content pages of Ίστορίαι is as such383:
p. 3 How Athens obtained its power
p. 3 First king (ruler) of Athens
p. 4 Origin of the names Athina (Athens) and Atthis
p. 4 Cecrops, first king of Athens, death of Cecrops
p. 5 Grains that they began to sow for the first time
p. 6 Birth of Theseus
p. 8 His [Theseus’] death
p. 10 First money in Athens
p. 11 Who were the Pallantides
p.11 Theseus aims his arrow against the Pallantides
p. 12 He [Theseus] killed the Pallantides
p. 12 He [Theseus] tamed the bull of Marathon
p. 13 Gifts for the Minotaure
p. 14 Request of Minos to Athenians
p. 14 Mass kidnapping of children (paidomazoma) in Athens
p. 14 Youth of Athens in Crete, given to the Minotaur
p. 15 Goodwill of Theseus
p. 16 He [Theseus] defeated the Minotaur,
p. 16 Labyrinth that Theseus was put in in Crete
p. 17 Captain made a mistake
p. 17 Aegeas’ death
p. 18 Ship that they kept safe all these years
p. 19 It [Athens] was rebuild by Theseus
p. 19 Prytaneion founded by Theseus
p. 19 He [Theseus] installed democracy and the prytaneion and the celebrations and he
divided the people
p. 19 Democracy of Theseus; celebrations/Feasts in Athens
p. 20 The Amazons attack Greece
p. 20 He [Theseus] expanded the country’s borders. He defeated the Amazons
p. 21 Wisdom of Hippolytos
p. 21 Dishonesty of Phaidra
p. 22 Her [Phaidra] death
p. 22 Hippolytos is accused
p. 22 His [Hippolytos] death
p. 23 Friendship of Perithios and Theseus
p. 23 Wedding of Peirithios
p. 24 He [Theseus] tamed the Hippocentaurs
p. 24 He [Theseus] stole Hellen
p. 24 What are hippocentaurs and how they were tamed from Theseus
p. 25 Kerberus and what it was
p. 25 He [Theseus] was hated by Menestheas
383
Although there is not a content pages of the book, I have used the index of it after rearranging the
information according to the style of “content pages”.
90
p. 25 Cruelty of Idoneus toward Theseus and Perithios
p. 26 His [Menestheus] shrewdness
p. 26 Brothers of Elleni (Hellen) in Athens
p. 27 Heracles sets Theseus free
p. 27 Lykomedes’ deceit towards Theseus
p. 28 He [Theseus] was freed by Herakles
p. 29 Destruction of democracy
p. 31 His [Menestheus] death
p. 32 How an eagle pointed toward his [Theseus’] remains, and they were brought to Athens,
p. 32 Kodros, king of Athens
p. 34 Reign of Solon
p. 35 The Athenians fought the Megareis
p. 35 His [Solon’s] prudence and his laws
p. 35 He [Solon] urged toward the battle of Salamina
p. 35 They [Megareis] fought the Athenians and lost
p. 35 Athenian answer to Darius
p. 35 Solon’s laws in Athens
p. 36 He [Solon] pretended to be impudent
p. 37 Salamis taken by Athenians
p. 39 Cruel manner of the rich
p. 39 [Solon] Was elected ruler by the Athenians
p. 40 [Solon] Made laws
p. 40 Strict laws of Drakon
p. 41 He [Solon] divided the land
p. 42 Difference in Laws
p. 45 He left Athens
p. 45 His answer
p. 46 His discord with Aesop
p. 46 Dispute between Aesop and Solon
p. 46 Peisistratos’ will to become monarch
p. 47 Eloquence of Peisistratos
p. 47 His [Peisistratos’] eloquence and how he became monarch
p. 48 [Peisistratos’] Payment toward Solon
p. 48 Megareis captured by Athenians
p. 49 [Megareis] Defeated again
p. 49 Library first appearing in Athens
p. 50 On the spot of his [Peisistratos’] birth
p. 50 First occurrence of dekatia
p. 51 His [Peisistratos’] virtues
p. 52 Ippias, tyrant of Athens
p. 53 Democracy restored in Athens
p. 53 His [Ippias’] exile from Athens
p. 54 He [Ippias] defeated the Spartans
p. 55 He [Ippias] was defeated by the Spartans
p. 55 Fight between Kleisthenes and Isagoras
p. 55 Exile of Kleisthenes,
p. 55 Lakedaimonians defeated by Ippias
p. 56 Death of Isagoras and Filon
p. 56 Cleomenes disturbed Athens
p. 56 His [Kleisthenis’] return from exile
91
p. 57 They [Ippias] marched against Athens
p. 57 [Ippias] Defeated by Athenians
p. 58 Chalkis defeated by Athens
p. 58 They [Chalkis] asked for the olive tree’s wood from Athenians
p. 58 People of Boeotia and Chalkidiki defeated by Athenians
p. 59 They murdered the Athenian ambassadors,
p. 59 Chased by Athenians
p. 60 Government of Athenians during the war
p. 61 Criterion of Areopagite
p. 61 Darius’ answer to Ippias
p. 61 His [Darius’] mission to Athens
p. 62 His [Darius’] resentment towards the Athenians
p. 62 Union of Athenians and Ionians
p. 62 They [Athenians] burned down Sardis
p. 64 Darius’ campaign against Greece
p. 66 Opinion of Miltiades
p. 66 Address of Panas toward Athenians
p. 66 They [Athenians] left for the war in Marathon
p. 68 They [Athenians] defeated the Persians
p. 73 Their [Athenians’] jealousy
p. 76 Their [Athenians’] praise
p. 77 They [?][Athenians] took over all the lands of the Greeks
p. 79 Darius’ glorious death
p. 64 Destruction of Eretria by the Persians
p. 65 Differences between Persians and Athenians
p. 65 Captains and the Athenians
p. 65 Vote of the ten Captains
p. 65 Advice of the ten generals
p. 65 Persians against Athens
p. 67 Battle in Marathon
p. 67 War of Marathon
p. 67 War at sea between Greeks and Persians
p. 68 War against Athenians and Persians
p. 68 [Persians ] Defeated by Atheninan
p. 69 Magnanimity of Atheninas
p. 70 Fame of the ten Athenian generals
p. 70 Bravery of Callimachos
p. 71 War of Kinigyros
p. 72 Concord of Athenians
p. 72 Image of the ten generals
p. 72 Death of Ippias
p. 73 Their [Persians] flight
p. 73 He [Miltiades] captured the Cyclad islands
p. 73 Envy of Athenians
p. 74 Decision against him [Miltiades]
p. 74 Envy of Xanthippos toward Miltiades
p. 75 Plutarch criticizes the measure of ostrakismos by the Athenians
p. 75 Resentment of judges and Athenians towards Miltiades
p. 75 Ingratitude of Athenians toward him [Miltiades]
p. 75 Reproach of Plutarch and Tarkaniotes against the Athenians concerning the ostrakismos
92
p. 76 Praise for Athenians
p. 78 Study/Plan about Greece
p. 78 Sciences and art that first develop in Athens
p. 79 Fights of the Persian kings
p. 80 of the sons of Darius
p. 80 Advice of Artaphernes to Xerxes
p. 80 Xerxes’ plan for his campaign in Greece
p. 81 Anger of Xerxes toward Artaphernes
p. 81 Letter of Demaratos to Athens
p. 81 Death (murder?) of the ambassadors of Xerxes by the Athenians
p. 82 Trespasser at Xerxes
p. 82 His [Xerxes’] pride
p. 85 Letter of Xerxes to Athens
p. 85 How he [Xerxes] decorated the platanon?
p. 86 Oracle explained by Themistocles
p. 87 They [Athenians] took their ‘things’ [i.e. way of thinking? Of governing?] to other cities
p. 87 Eclipse of the sun
p. 87 Themistocles explains the oracle
p. 87 Monsters in the army of Xerxes
p. 88 How his [Xerxes’] army crossed the sea by a bridge
p. 88 Another monster in Xerxes’ army
p. 89 Xerxes’ fear and cowardice
p. 90 First victory of Themistocles
p. 90 Destruction of their [Persians] fleet
p. 90 Magnanimity of Leonidas
p. 91 Spies that Xerxes sent to Leonidas and their death
p. 92 Other spies and their death
p. 92 They [Persians] crossed the mountain
p. 93 Bravery of Leonidas and his words towards his soldiers
p. 93 His [Leonidas’] wars and death
p. 93 War that the fought with Leonides
p. 94 Question of Xerxes to Demaratos
p. 95 His [Leonides’] plan
p. 95 The Persian fleet is close to the fleet of the Greeks
p. 96 They [Athenians] defeated the Persians at sea
p. 96 Defeat/destruction of the Persian fleet
p. 96 Victory of Athenians at sea
p. 97 Battle in Artemision of Greeks and Persians
p. 98 His [Xerxes’] anger against Athenians
p. 99 How he [Xerxes] sent people to attack the temple of Apollo
p. 99 Phokis is abandoned because of Xerxes
p. 99 His [Leonides’] death
p. 100 He [Xerxes] took Athens
p. 100 Temple of Apollo attacked by Persians
p. 101 Fear of the Greeks
p. 101 Themistocles gives advice to the Greeks
p. 102 His [Themistocles’] pride towards Adeimanta
p. 102 Their [Greeks’] general councils
p. 105 Themistocles’ letter to Xerxes
p. 106 Xerxes’ fleet attacks the Greek fleet
93
p. 106 The kindness (or naiveté?) of Aristeides
p. 107 He [Aristeides] sends news to the Greeks
p. 107 Victory of Athenians over Persians
p. 108 Flight of Persians
p. 109 He [Aristeides] killed the Persians
p. 110 Flight of Xerxes
p. 110 Bravery and death of Masistas
p. 111 How his [Xerxes’] soldiers also fled
p. 113 It [Athens] was freed again
p. 114 Olynthos captured by Mardonius
p. 114 He [Themistocles] receives honours from the Greeks
p. 114 Mardonius captures Olynthos
p. 115 He [Mardonius] sent Alexander Amintas against the Athenians
p. 116 Against Boeotia
p. 117 They [?] were taken by Mardonius
p. 117 Cruelty of Athenians
p. 117 He [Mardonius] took Athens
p. 117 Letter that he [Mardonius] sent to Athens
p. 118 He [Mardonius] burned down Athens
p. 118 They [Athenians]were burned down by him
p. 119 Lakedaimonians march with Athenians against Mardonius
p. 119 Another one [war at sea between Greeks and Persians]
p. 121 Ranks/divisions of the army
p. 122 Battle at Plataia
p. 123 Letter of Pausanias to Athenians
p. 123 Death of Kallikrates
p. 123 Death of Callimachos
p. 123 Socrates the philosopher
p. 123 Flight of the other nations in the war
p. 124 Death of Mardonios
p. 124 Victory of Athenians over Persians in Plataian
p. 124 Alliance of Greeks and Persians
p. 124 [Leonides’] Defeated in Plataia
p. 125 Another distruction [Leonides’]
p. 125 Young man who went for the fire
p. 125 Alliance of Thebes, Boeotia and Athens
p. 125 Tripod dedicated to the temple of Apollo
p. 125 How many people were murdered at Plataian
p. 126 Great sacrifice of the Greeks
p. 127 He [Cimon] defeated the Persians at sea
p. 127 Two victories for the Greeks in one day
p. 127 Signals to Greece
p. 129 They [Athenians] took over the peninsula
p. 129 [Athenians] Against Thebes
p. 129 The Athenians take Cheronesos
p. 129 Death of Artaklos and Eubazos
p. 129 Happiness of Athenians
p. 130 Four wars that the Athenians fought with the Persians
p. 130 Fair judgment of Athenians
p. 130 Thebes brought into justice
94
p. 130 His [Aristeides’] right judgement
p. 133 They [Athenians] took over their land
p. 134 His [Lakedaimonians] envy toward Athenians
p. 135 His [Themistocles’] reply to the Spartans
p. 135 His [Themistocles’] cunningness
p. 136 His [Themistocles’] reply
p. 136 Building/ construction of Piraeus
p. 137 His [Themistocles’] exile
p. 137 Exile as a usual practice in Athens
p. 138 His [Aristeides’] exile
p. 138 Fair judgment of Aristeides
p. 139 He [Aristeides] returned once again to Athens
p. 139 Aeschylos, poet
p. 139 The Athenians give the ten Captains their reward
p. 139 The poet Aeschylus
p. 140 Exile of Damon
p. 140 Accusations toward him [Themistocles]
p. 141 He [Themistocles] is betrayed by Pausanias
p. 141 He [Themistocles] flees to Persia
p. 142 His [Themistocles’] excellent reply to the dragoumanos
p. 143 He [Themistocles] learned the Persian language in one year
p. 143 He [Themistocles] received pardon/favour from Xerxes
p. 144 His [Themistocles’] death
p. 145 Pride of Pausanias
p. 146 Convicted by his [Pausanias] compatriots
p. 146 Cimon is voted Captain by the Athenians
p. 148 He [Cimon] defeated the Phoenicians
p. 148 [Leonides’] Again defeated
p. 148 They [Athenians] defeated the Persians and took hold of their spoils
p. 149 What he [Cimon] built in Athens
p. 149 Building activity of Cimon
p. 150 Again he [Cimon] defeated the Persians
p. 150 [Cimon] Hated by many
p. 151 His [Cimon] exile
p. 151 Beginning of hostility between Spartans and Athenians
p. 152 Forgivingness of Cimon
p. 153 Dream of Cimon
p. 154 Beautiful drawings (?) of Pheidias
p. 154 His [Cimon] philanthropy and hospitality
p. 156 The poet Tertaeus
p. 156 His [Tertaeus] poem and address to the soldiers who won
p. 157 Victory of Lakedaimonians
p. 158 Another victory over the Lakedaimonians (or for them)
p. 158 Lakedaimonians defeated by Athenians
p. 158 Brave deeds of Pericles
p. 159 Again distress of Athenians
p. 161 Fervency of Athenians and Lakedaimonians
p. 161 Corinthians against Athenians
p. 162 Victory of Athenians
p. 163 The Athenians are defeated and killed by the Corinthians
95
p. 163 Distress of Spartans
p. 163 [Athenians] Defeated by the Corinthians
p. 163 Flight of the Corinthians
p. 163 People of Phokis are being governed by Spartans
p. 164 They [Athenians] defeated the Boeotians
p. 164 They [Athenians] burned down the Spartan shipyard
p. 164 Again defeated by Athenians
p. 165 Akarnaeis, defeated by Athenians
p. 165 Pericles against the Peloponnesians
p. 166 He [Pericles] was elected Captain by the Athenians for a second time
p. 166 They [Athenians] defeated the Samians
p. 166 Their [Megareis] revolt against Athens
p. 167 He [Pericles] took Samos
p. 169 He [Pericles] took Byzantium
p. 169 He [Pericles] took fifty children from Samos
p.169 Samos blockaded by Athens and destroyed by them
p. 170 Praise of Perikles for those who were killed at war
p. 170 Phormion, general of Athens
p. 171 His [Pericles] charity
p. 172 Konon the Athenian is voted captain
p. 172 His [Pericles] kind character
p. 173 [Pericles] Accused by Thucydides
p. 173 His [Pericles] answer
p. 173 How he [Konon the Athenian] sent the two ships in Athens
p. 173 Exile of Thucydides
p. 124 Diomedon the Athenian defeated by the Spartans
p. 174 Pheidias the sculptor and his drawings
p. 174 His [Pericles] prudence
p. 175 Sculptor Agorakritos
p. 175 Sculptor Alkimenes
p. 175 Other excellent sculptors
p. 176 Dispute between Alkistides and Euripides
p. 176 Gorgias the philosopher
p. 176 Euripides
p. 176 Excellent poets
p. 176 Sophocles the poet
p. 177 His [Sophocles] prudence
p. 177 His [Euripides] death
p. 177 Unbearable distress of Athenians
p. 178 Battle between Athenians and Lakedaimonians
p. 179 Archestratos, Captain in Athens
p. 179 Revolt of Pytideis against the Athenians
p. 180 [Potidea] Defeat by Athenians
p. 180 Their [Corinthians] councils against the Athenians
p. 180 Councils of Corinthians against Athenians
p. 182 Answer of Sthenelais against Archidamos
p. 182 Speech by Archidamos on help for the Athenians
p. 183 Gelon asks to become ruler of Athens
p. 183 Strange requests made by the Spartans toward the Athenians
p. 184 [Pericles] on issues regarding the Spartans
96
p. 186 Treachery of the citizens of Thebes towards the Plataieis from whom they were killed
p. 186 Answer of Plataieis to Thebes
p. 187 They [Lakedaimonians] prepare for war
p. 189 Letter that he [Konon the Athenian] sent to Athens
p. 189 He [Konon the Athenian] went to Artaxerxes
p. 190 Their [Plataieis] land was burned down by Thebes
p. 190 War between Athenians and Spartans
p. 190 He [Konon the Athenian] defeated the Spartan fleet. Honours that he [Konon the
Athenian] received in Athens
p. 190 They [Lakedaimonians] marched against the Athenians
p. 190 His [Pericles] precognition on the war
p. 192 They [Lakedaimonians] drew back
p. 192 They [Athenians] were defeated
p. 192 Damage caused by Athenians to the Peloponnese
p. 192 Peloponnese destroyed by Athenian fleet
p. 193 Klineias, captain of Athenians
p. 193 He [Konon the Athenian] burned down that lands of the Spartans
p. 194 Again they [Lakedaimonians] attacked Athens
p. 194 [Pericles] Praise for the brave men that were killed at war
p. 195 Death and hunger, and war in their own land [Athens]
p. 196 They [Athenians] stormed Peloponnese
p. 196 The Athenians complain about Perikles
p. 197 The Athenians destroy Epidauros
p. 199 Death of Perikles
p. 199 Hippocrates
p. 200 Alcamenes, his death
p. 200 Death of Melissadrons
p. 200 [Lakedaimonians] Envoys killed in Athens
p. 200 [Phormion] Elected Captain
p. 201 They [Potidea] surrendered to Athens
p. 202 Their [Lakedaimonians] cruelty towards the Plataieis
p. 202 Their [Plataieis] trust in Athens
p. 203 He [Phormion] went to Chanea with his fleet
p. 205 Defeat/destruction of the Peloponnesian fleet
p. 206 Victories of Azopios the Athenian
p. 206 Magnanimity of Thrasylos
p. 206 Mytilene blocked by Athenians
p. 208 Cruelty against Lesbos
p. 209 They [Athenians] sent an army to Sicily
p. 210 Demosthenes and Prokles travel with the fleet to the Peloponnese
p. 210 Nicias the Athenian in Melos
p. 210 Proskles the Athenian with his fleet in Peloponnese
p. 210 Tanagraios, defeated by Athenians
p. 211 His [Proskles the Athenian] death
p. 211 Aitolians, defeated by Athenians
p. 212 Eurimedon the Athenian in Sicily
p. 212 [Lakedaimonians] Defeated by Athenians
p. 212 A General (admiral) leads the fleet to Sicily
p. 213 Their [Lakedaimonians] fleet is blocked in Pelon
p. 214 Victory that they [Kleon] had over the Spartans
97
p. 214 War between Athens and Syracus
p. 215 Vrasidas from Lakedaimon
p. 215 He [Nicias the Athenian] destroyed many lands in the Peloponnese
p. 216 Hippocrates, Captain of the Athenians attacks Boiotia
p. 216 They [Lakedaimonians] marched against Athens
p. 216 Flight of the Athenians
p. 217 Revolt of Sicion against Athens
p. 218 He [Nicias the Athenian] destroyed Mendan
p. 219 Sicion captured by Athenians
p. 220 [Nicias the Athenian] Marched against Chalkis
p. 221 He [Kleon] captured Toroni
p. 221 He [Mardonius] decided about the war
p. 221 Torone captured by Athenian
p. 222 His [Kleon] death
p. 222 [Athenians] Defeat in Amphipolis
p. 222 His [Vrasidas] death
p. 222 Alliance between Athenians and Lakedaimonians
p. 223 Aristophanes the comedian
p. 223 Timon the misanthrope
p. 224 Alcibiades, his attack against Argos
p. 228 Guards were put in prison
p. 229 [Alcibiades] Was accused in Athens
p. 231 Message for his [Alcibiades] return from Sicily
p. 232 [Alcibiades] [fled?] from the ship
p. 233 Lais brought in Athens
p. 233 His [Nicias the Athenian] treachery against the Syracusians
p. 234 The defeated Syracuse
p. 236 Lammachos defeated the Syracusians. His death
p. 237 Gelippos from Lakedaimon in Syracuse
p. 237 Port Plymmerios taken by Atheninas
p. 238 Demosthenes in Sicily
p. 239 [Port Plymmerios] Taken back by Syracusians
p. 241 He [Demosthenes] fought with Syracuse
p. 241 Despair for them
p. 241 Distress of Athenians
p. 242 They [Syracuse] defeated Athens
p. 242 Heracleid being held captive
p. 242 [Athenians] Defeated by Syracuse
p. 243 His [Nicias the Athenian] magnanimity
p. 243 Another war between them [Athens and Syracuse]
p. 244 Another war at sea [Athens and Syracuse]
p. 244 Trap set by Syracuse for the Athenians
p. 244 Their [Syracuse] deceit toward Athens
p. 244 They [Syracuse] burned down the Athenian fleet
p. 245 [Leonides’] Defeated by Athenians
p. 245 Alliance of Athens and Sparta
p. 247 He [Xenokrates] pleaded with Gelippos to spare his life and was successful
p. 247 They [Athenians] surrendered themselves to Syracuse
p. 247 [Demosthenes] Surrendered to the people of Syracuse
p. 248 Honours that they [Syracuse] gave Gelipos
98
p. 248 He [Gelon] hopelessly addresses Demosthenes and Nicias
p. 249 His [Demosthenes’] death
p. 249 His [Xenokrates] death
p. 249 Death of Nicias and Demosthenes
p. 250 At the time, he [Alcibiades] became the reason for Athens’ destruction
p. 253 Law that they refused about the Treasury
p. 253 The Spartans named him [Alcibiades] Captain
p. 254 His [Alcibiades] love towards Timaia
p. 255 [Alcibiades] Fled from the Spartans
p. 256 The poet Tertaios
p. 257 Good things he [Alcibiades] did for his country
p. 257 They [Athenians] destroyed democracy
p. 257 Death of Phrynichos
p. 258 They [Athenians] restored it [democracy]
p. 258 [Lakedaimonians] Defeated by Athenians
p. 259 Honours that he [Alcibiades] had when he was at the court of Tisafernis
p. 260 Medaors the Lakedaimonian
p. 260 War at sea between Athens and Sparta
p. 261 The Athenians chase down Tisaphernes
p. 261 They [Athenians] defeated the Spartans
p. 262 He [Alcibiades] was imprisoned by him and again he fled
p. 263 [Alcibiades] Joined the Athenian army against the Persians
p. 263 His [Medaors the Lakedaimonian] death
p. 263 Pharnavazos defeated by Athenians
p. 264 Kyzikos enslaved
p. 264 Trophies constructed by Athenians
p. 265 He [Alcibiades] conquered Selymbria
p. 265 Akarnania
p. 265 The same [Pharnavazos defeated by Athenians]
p. 266 [Lakedaimonians] Defeated by Athenians
p. 266 Selymbria captured by Athens
p. 266 Chalkedon, enslaved by Athenians
p. 267 [Pharnavazos defeated by Athenians] Again defeated by them
p. 267 The Athenians conquer Byzantium
p. 267 [Syracuse] Captured by Thrasiboulos
p. 268 Celebrations in Athens for the return of Alcibiades
p. 269 King Cyrus, beloved friend of Lysander
p. 269 Lysander, captain of Lakedaimonians
p. 270 What he [Lysander] requested from Cyrus
p. 272 [Alcibiades] Fled to Thrace
p. 272 Methymnos destroyed by Kallikratides
p. 273 The Spartans blockade the Athenian fleet
p. 273 The Athenians send a new fleet
p. 275 Arrakos the Spartan
p. 275 He [Lysander] captured Lammachos
p. 275 Celebrations of the fleet of Athens
p. 275 Oracle given by Delphi to Athens
p. 276 The Athenians blockade the Spartan fleet
p. 276 The Spartans capture the Athenian fleet
p. 276 The Athenian fleet reaches Sicily
99
p. 276 New law in Athens, named amnesteian
p. 277 He [Lysander] took all the lands in Asia from the Athenians and the same in the islands
p. 277 [Lysander] Against Athens
p. 278 They [Corinthians] were defeated by the Athenians. Their cruelty toward the Athenians
p. 278 They [Lakedaimonians] blockade Athens
p. 278 Cruelty of Corinthians toward Athenians
p. 278 Distress of Athenians
p. 278 Goodwill of Spartans toward Athenians
p. 279 Second alliance between them [i.e. the Athenians and the Lakedaimonians]
p. 279 Kallias, Captain of the Athenians
p. 280 His death
p. 280 Thirty tyrants in Athens
p. 281 [Alcibiades] Fled to Persia once again, for fear of tyrants
p. 282 His [Alcibiades] death
p. 282 Cruelty of the Thirty Tyrants
p. 282 Plato in Sicily
p. 283 They were defeated by the Athenians. Their goodwill toward the Athenians
p. 283 Grave danger of Athenians
p. 284 His [Thrasyboulos’] propriety and gentle nature
p. 285 [Thrasyboulos] Defeated the tyrants
p. 285 They [Thirty tyrants] removed weapons from Athenians
p. 286 [Thirty tyrants] Exiled from Thrasyboulos
p. 286 Their [Thirty tyrants] death
p. 286 [Thrasyboulos] Sent the tyrants to exile and freed Athens
p. 287 He [Thrasyboulos] received a laurel from the Athenians
p. 287 Origins of philosophers
p. 289 Agesilaos, defeated by Konon
p. 290 Rebuilt of the city
p. 291 They [Athenians] defeated all the lands
p. 292 Yfikrates the Athenian defeats the Spartans
p. 295 He [Thrasyboulos] became Captain of his homeland, his death
p. 295 Tribon the Spartan defeated by Athenians
p. 296 Envoys of Artaxerxes in Athens
p. 296 Once again he [Yfikrates the Athenian] defeats them at sea
p. 297 Alliance with the Spartans
p. 297 Wars between Thebes and Sparta
p. 297 Dimotheos, Athenian captain. His victory over the Spartans
p. 298 He [Menassipos the Lakedaimonian] was defeated by the Athenian Stesikles
p. 299 Histoians Herodotos and Thucydides
p. 299 Gifts that he [Yfikrates the Athenian] received from Artaxerxes
p. 300 Alexander Feraios: conquered Larisa; his death
p. 300 Larissa taken by Alexandros from Ferais
p. 300 Pelopides defeats Alexander Pheraios
p. 300 Wars of Pheraios against the Greeks
p. 301 Civil wars toward Greeks
p. 302 Gabrias the Athenian, surrounded by Lakedaimonians
p. 302 Death of Epameinondas
p. 303 His [Gabrias the Athenian] courage and death
p. 304 Kings of Macedonia
p. 305 Enslaved by Philip
100
p. 305 [Larissa ] Taken by Philip
p. 305 Philip the great ruled in Macedonia
p. 305 He [Philip the great] took over Athens and Thessaly
p. 306 He [Philip the great] lost one eye
p. 306 The Greeks lose their freedom
p. 306 Lesbos revolts against Athens
p. 307 [Philip the great] Was elected Captain by the people of Thebes
p. 307 They [the Spartans? Or People of Phokis] stripped down the temple of Apollo
p. 308 His [Philip the great] schemes
p. 308 It [Lesbos] was taken by them
p. 308 [Mytilene] Captured by Athenians
p. 308 Democrates the Athenian’s rude answer to Philip
p. 309 His [Philip the great] cruelty
p. 309 they [People of Phokis] were all killed by Philip
p. 309 Phocion, general of Atehns
p. 310 He [Phocion] defeated Philip’s army
p. 311 Menestheus, captain of Athenians
p. 312 They went to Byzantium
p. 312 Alexander the Great
p. 312 His [Alexander the great] love for learning
p. 313 He [Phocion] took Megariken
p. 313 The other Demosthenes, i.e. the rhetor
p. 313 His [Demosthenes the rhetor] eloquence
p. 314 His [Demosthenes the rhetor] first speech
p. 316 His [Alexander the great] alliance with the Athenians
p. 316 His [Philip the great] envoys to Athens, his goodwill toward Athens and cruelty toward
Thebes
p. 317 [Alexander the great] Campaign against the Athenians
p. 317 [Alexander the great] Enslaved Thebes
p. 318 [Alexander the great] Defeated Darius, King of Persians
p. 318 Advice that he [Phocion] sent Alexander
p. 318 Gifts that Alexander the Great sent him [Phokion] and he did not accept them
p. 319 Arpalos in Athens
p. 320 How he [Demosthenes the rhetor] accepted money from Arpalos
p. 320 [Demosthenes the rhetor] Flee from Athens
p. 321 He [Demosthenes the rhetor] was pardoned and returned to his homeland
p. 321 Aeschines, rhetor
p. 321 Demades rhetor. How he [Demades] managed not to compose his speeches
p. 321 Isokrates, rhetor
p. 322 Yperides the rhetor
p. 323 Blockade of Antipaxos
p. 324 The Athenians defeat Antipaxos
p. 324 Leosthenes, Captain of Athenians and his death
p. 325 Melos captured by Athenians
p. 325 [Phocion] Elected captain once again
p. 325 Lammachos and Nicias and Alcibiades
p. 326 Leonatos the Macedonian defeated by Athenians
p. 327 He [Antipaxos] attacked Athens
p. 327 His [Yperides] unjust death
p. 328 His [Demosthenes the rhetor] death
101
p. 329 His [Antipaxos’] cruelty and amoral behavior
p. 329 War among the heirs of Alexander
p. 331 Nikanoras, general of Kassandros
p. 331 His [Phocion] death
p. 332 Demetrios son of Antigonos moves against the Athenians
p. 332 Demetrios the Phalireus in Athens
p. 332 Fight between Antigonos and Kassandros (Cassender)
p. 333 He [Demetrios the Phalireus] fled Athens
p. 334 Liberties that he [Demetrios son of Antigonos] gave Athens
p. 334 Stratocles, the Athenian ambassador
p. 335 Theophrastos the Philosopher
p. 335 A young man teased Xenokrates
p. 336 He [Demetrios son of Antigonos] defeated Kassandros
p. 336 Tutors in the Academy
p. 337 He [Demetrios son of Antigonos] besieged Athens
p. 337 Laskaris, ruler in Athens
p. 338 Revolt of Athenians against Demetrios
p. 339 He [Demetrios son of Antigonos] was captured
p. 339 [Demetrios son of Antigonos] Alliance with Athens
p. 339 Alliance with Demetrios
p. 340 He [Demetrios son of Antigonos] regained his freedom
p. 340 Antigonos the Second
p. 341 They plundered the lands of the Athenians
p. 342 Defeated once again by the Athenians
p. 342 He [Philip] marched against Athens
p. 342 Mithridates in Greece
p. 344 Alliance that he [Mithridates] made with Athenians
p. 344 Silas the Roman in Greece
p. 345 He [Silas the Roman] fought against Athens
p. 345 Aristonas and his cruelty
p. 345 Hunger in Athens
p. 346 He [Silas the Roman] entered Athens
p. 346 Children that they sent from Rome to Athens to study
p. 347 Markanthony in Athens and favours that he gave the Athenians
p. 348 Dionysios the Areopagites – how he became a Christian
p. 348 The Apostle Paul in Athens
102
2.3. Historiography of the History of Ancient Athens
A brief discussion of the historiography of the history of Ancient Athens is necessary
for a better understanding of Sotiris, Kavallaris, Kontares and Mahmud Efendi’s place in the
same line of historiography.
Scholars dealing with Greek historiography argue that the concept of the history of
Greece is a recent concept. The English were the first to write histories of Greece.384 George
Grote, the nineteenth-century British banker and political figure who wrote History of Ancient
Greece (1846-1856), is most frequently cited as having been the author of “the earliest history
of Greece still consulted by scholars.”385 For Vlassopoulos, this situation may be evaluated as
a consequence of the lack of a center or an institution for Greeks in their widely scattered
settlements throughout the Mediterranean around which they could organize their own
history. Due to this absence, they had never achieved economic or social unity.386
The question of how Greeks saw their own past could begin with the Byzantines.387
The knowledge of Homer, the tragedians, or Herodotus, Thucydides, Plato and Demosthenes,
Plutarch and Lucian as well, brought about the use of quotations and allusions very freely
together with adaptations of motifs and various associations. While doing this, they were
aware of the utilization of foreign property or of even committing plagiarism.388 The great
majority of the Byzantine historians were interested in a more detailed account of their
contemporary history. If they dealt with Ancient history, they imitated the chroniclers, who
384
385
386
387
388
Kōstas Vlassopoulos, Unthinking the Greek Polis: Ancient Greek History beyond Eurocentrism (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2007), p. 15, f.n. 8.
Giovanna Ceserani, “Modern Histories of Ancient Greece: Genealogies, Contexts and Eighteenth-Century
Narrative historiography,” in The Western Time of Ancient History: Historiographical Encounters with the
Greek and Roman Pasts, (ed.) Alexandra Lianeri (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2011), pp. 138-155,
p. 138. For Grote’s role in the historiography of Ancient Greek history, Momigliano’s inaugural lecture
given in 1952 is very useful: “George Grote and the Study of Greek History” (London: H. K. Lewis and Co.,
Ltd., 1952).
Vlassopoulos, Unthinking the Greek Polis, p. 15.
For a general view on the preservation of Greek Classics in Byzantine Age, see John Edwin Sandys, History
of Classical Scholarship (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2010) (digitally printed version), pp. 378-428.
For the Byzantine historians, see H. Lieberich, Studien zu den Proömien in der griechischen und
byzantinischen Geschichtschreibung, II: Die byzantinischen Geschichtsschreiber und Chronisten (Munich:
J. G. Weiss, 1900). And for the usage of classical sources by Byzantine authors, see G. Moravcsik,
“Klassizismus in byzantinischen Geschichtsschreibung,” in Polychronion: Festschrift F. Dölger zum 75.
Geburtstag (Heidelberg: Winter, 1966), pp. 366-377.
Herbert Hunger, “On the Imitation (Mimesis) of Antiquity in Byzantine Literature,” in Greek Literature:
Greek Literature in the Byzantine Period, (ed.) Gregory Nagy, (London: Routledge, 2001), pp. 80-102, p.
86. Originally Dumbarton Oaks Papers 23- 24 (1969-70), pp. 15- 38.
103
started their outlines with the creation of the world.389 In some cases, it is not a big surprise to
see that during this naive imitation of classical models, Christian or contemporary Byzantine
personalities may be replaced by mythological figures. This substitution ranged from
comparisons to references or allusions. Synesius presents Christ as a second Heracles in the
sixth hymn where he does not even mention the name of the Greek hero. Christ was burdened
with the same functions as Heracles, like “cleaning up” the earth, the sea, the air.390
So, although Muslim scholars accused Byzantine men of letters of not protecting
“antique wisdom,”391 it is accepted that “the classical tradition was never completely
disrupted in Byzantium and therefore should be considered more as survival than as
revival.”392 Nonetheless, the Byzantine classicists of earlier centuries knew the history, great
men, anecdotes, religion, social and political institutions, topography, monuments, language,
idioms, and literature of ancient Athens by heart.393 Antique statues adorned the streets of
Constantinople,394 Byzantine artists imitated mythological characters in their hagiographical
art,395 Homer was read in the schools396 and a great number of mythological and historical
motifs were widely used.397 The attitude was that the city of Athens was seen as an example
to imitate.
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
Ibid., p. 85
Ibid., p. 86
Ibn al-Nadīm relates this issue in a chapter on philosophers in his lengthy work Fihrist, noting that
“philosophy was extinguished with the emergence of Christianity among the Greeks and Rum because
Christianity banished philosophy. While some works were burned others were hidden away.” Dimitri Gutas
has dealt with this subject under the title “Foreign Policy and the Translation Movement: The Ideology of
Anti-Byzantinism as Philhellenism.” See Dimitri Gutas, Greek Thought, Arabic Culture, pp. 83-94.
Herbert Hunger, “The Classical Tradition in Byzantine Literature: the Importance of Rhetoric,” in
Byzantium and the Classical Tradition, eds. M. Mullett and R. Scott (Birmingham: Center for Byzantine
Studies, 1981), pp. 35-47, p.35. Cyril Mango discusses this “bridge” character of Byzantium in the same
edition: “Discontinuity with the Classical Past in Byzantium.”Ibid., pp. 48-58.
Recent scholarship focuses on what Byzantium did with ancient culture, instead of what survived. For brief
information on the Byzantine use of Classical Tradition, see Robert S. Nelson, “Byzantium,” in The
Classical Tradition, A. Grafton, Glenn W. Most, Salvatore Settis (eds.) (Cambridge, Massachussets,
London: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2010), pp. 152- 9.
Cyril Mango, “Antique Statuary and the Byzantine Beholder,” Dumbarton Oaks Papers 17 (1963), pp. 5375.
K. Weitzmann, Greek Mythology in Byzantine Art (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1951); D. V.
Ainalov, The Hellenistic Origins of Byzantine Art (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers, 1961).
Robert Browning, “Homer in Byzantium,” in Studies on Byzantine History, Literature and Education
(London: Variorum Reprints, 1977). For some other examples, see Herbert Hunger, “On the Imitation of
Antiquity in Byzantine Literature,” in Greek Literature in the Byzantine period, (ed.) Gregory Nagy (New
York: Routledge, 2001), pp. 80-102; and Gy. Moravcsik, “Klassizismus in der byzantinischen
Geschichtsschreibung,” in Polychronion: Festschrift F. Dölger zum 75. Geburstag, hrsg. von Peter Wirth
(Heidelberg: Winter, 1966), pp. 366-377.
Hunger, “On the Imitation of Antiquity in Byzantine Literature,” p. 92.
104
In the eleventh century, Kaldellis informs that Psellos (1017-1096) made a passing
reference to a friend who ‘‘loved not merely Athens but Athenian place-names,” as he
excerpted Strabon’s account of its topography into a separate treatise for his benefit. Another
reference made to Athens’ topography appeared in an unpublished letter addressed to the
governor of Greece by a professor of rhetoric, Nikolaos Kataphloron, from the twelfth
century. He asked whether Athens was the way he had imagined it in his youth, i.e., “Do the
Athenians still have an Areiopagos? Or has it crumbled away?” It was not customary for a
Byzantine professor to think to bring his paideia into relation with the city’s physical state.398
Letters of the archibishop of Athens, Michael Choniates (1155- 1215) provides
valuable information about the perception of the city. After the announcement of his
appointment that many congratulated him for gaining “most renown and golden Athens,”
even though he had some mixed feelings about leaving Constantinople.399 He gave his famous
inauguration in Athens in 1182 and reminded the glory and greatness of Athens, however, he
complained that his speech “called no response whatever from his Athenian audience.”400 Van
der Vin suggests that with the exception of a few well educated individuals in the thirteenth
and fourteenth century, there is no question of any clear interest in ancient objects as
documents of one’s own past. He claims that “written references to antiquities and traditions
are practically non existent among Greeks.”401
At the same time, while presenting historical events, classical reminiscences are often
seen by authors imitating Herodotus and Thucydides. In order to emphasize certain merits of
their heroes more boldly, historians introduce mythological and historical figures for
comparison. For instance, while Anna Comnena (1083-1153) was describing the battles of her
father Alexius, she introduced Typhon and the struggle between the giants and the gods, by
way of comparison.402
However, the Parthenon, which had become a church in honor of the Mother of God,
became one of the most important centers of pilgrimage in the Byzantine world, and was
praised far beyond the small circle of Hellenists. Thus, according to Kaldellis, Greek
398
399
400
401
402
Anthony Kaldellis, Hellenism in Byzantium: The Transformations of Greek Identity and the Reception of the
Classical Tradition (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2007), p. 324.
Ibid., p. 327; from Choniates, Inaugural Address at Athens 8: 11- 12.
J. P. A. van der Vin, Travelers to Greece and Constantinople: Ancient Monuments and Old Traditions in
Medieval Travellers’ Tales (Istanbul: Netherlands Historisch Archaeologisch Instituut, 1980), p. 201.
Ibid., p. 319.
Herbert Hunger, “On the Imitation (Mimesis) of Antiquity in Byzantine Literature,” p. 91.
105
paganism was one of the constituents of a form of Christian piety, with very important
consequences.403 He writes that, “It is significant that the word ‘Hellene’, which in the great
days of Byzantium had denoted a pagan, now began to be used by the Byzantines to describe
themselves.”404
Less than a century later, interest in the past increased. Known as the Palaeologan
Renaissance405, Runciman notes that it was “the most splendid” among other revivals of
Classical studies in the Byzantine Empire.406 Andronikos II (1282-1328) and his entourage of
well-educated high officials were the patrons of men active in reviving the glories of the
ancient Greek literary, philosophical and artistic culture.407 Thus, Runciman concludes, “when
the West was ready to receive the gifts of ancient Greek learning there were contemporary
Greeks well able to provide help.”408
In addition to Byzantine scholars, the late date of the start of the historiography of
ancient Greece is remarkable if we compare it to the rebirth of Greek studies in general. The
role of Byzantine émigrés, both from Crete and Constantinople, in the revival of Greek letters
in Western Europe is a well-known phenomenon.409 The fall of Constantinople into Ottoman
hands propelled a wave of migration to the West, especially to Italy, where Byzantine
Hellenists initiated and successfully carried out a comprehensive restoration project on Greek
texts that they accomplished by the middle of the fifteenth century.410 In the case of Crete, in
Geanakoplos’ words, “for over two centuries, from about 1400 to well past 1600, Crete
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
Kaldellis, Hellenism in Byzantium, p. 325.
S. Runciman, The Last Byzantine Renaissance (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970), p.8.
See: E. B. Fryde, The Early Palaeologan Renaissance (1261- 1360) (Leiden: Brill, 2000)
Runciman, ibid., p.7.
For the details and full references, see Fryde, pp. 91- 373; L. Vranoussis, “Post-Byzantine Hellenism and
Europe: Manuscripts,” Modern Greek Studies Yearbook 2 (1986), pp. 1-71. Runciman also attributes the
“revolutionary revival of the word Hellene” as a clue for this “last Byzantine Renaissance’: The Last
Byzantine Renaissance, p. 22.
Runciman, The Last Byzantine Renaissance, p. 8.
Although there are discussions about the role of Byzantine scholars, I leave aside these question marks.
Alongside Manuel Chrysoloras; George of Trebizond, Bessarion and John Argyropoulos were influential
figures on Greek studies in the West. See J. Monfasani, Byzantine Scholars in Renaissance Italy: Cardinal
Bessarion and Other Émigrés: Selected Essays (Aldershot: Variorum, 1995). On the debate of contributions
of Byzantine emigrees to Italy, see Deno John Geanakoplos, Constantinople and the West: Essays on the
Late Byzantine (Palaeologan) and Italian Reniassances and the Byzantine and Roman Churches (Madison,
Wiscentury: University of Wisconsin Press, 1989). Chapter 1 and 2 and their rich bibliography on the
subject are worth studying. Also Donald M. Nicol’s Byzantium and Venice (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ.
Pres, 1988) is helpful.
106
exported along with its choice wines and oils scores of intellectuals and artists, who wherever
they went in western Europe held high positions of influence.”411
The famous fourteenth century Italian humanists Petrarch and Boccaccio were two
pioneering scholars interested in the recovery of the Greek language and the Homeric
poems.412 Petrarch obtained Greek manuscripts of the poems from the Byzantines and ordered
their translation by Leo Pilatus.413 But the event which marks the first systematic teaching of
Greek language and literature in the West was the arrival of the aristocratic Byzantine Manuel
Chrysoloras to Florence in 1397 to teach at that city’s studium.414 Leonardo Bruni (13701444), one of his famous students, describes his attitude towards this opportunity as follows:
At this time I was studying Civil Law, though I was not an ignoramus in other studies,
and I had devoted no little effort to dialectic and rhetoric. Thus, I was actually of two
minds when Chrysoloras arrived, as I thought it shameful to abandon the study of the
415
law, and at the same time a sort of crime to miss such an opportunity to learn Greek.
In his celebrated letter of December 10, 1513, Machiavelli wrote an account of
reading classical texts to Francesco Vettori:
On the coming of evening, I return to my house and enter my study; and at the door I take
off the day’s clothing, covered with mud and dust, and put on garments regal and courtly;
and reclothed appropriately, I enter the ancient courts of ancient men, where, received by
them with affection, I feed on that food which only is mine and which I was born for,
where I am not ashamed to speak with them and to ask them the reason for their actions;
416
and they in their kindness answer me; . . . entirely I give myself over to them.
411
412
413
414
415
416
Deno J. Geanakoplos, Byzantine East and Latin West: Two Worlds of Christendom in Middle Ages and
Renaissance (Hamden, Connecticut: Archon Books, 1976), p. 139. For details, see the chapter from the same
book: “The Cretan Role in the Transmission of Greco-Byzantine Culture to Western Europe via Venice,” pp.
139-164.
An essential learning method for the Greek language in early modern Europe was also writing poetry in
Greek and imitation of the best Greek poetry and prose. See: Tua Korhonen, “Der frühe Philhellenismus in
Finnland des 17. und 18. Jahrhunderts,” in Ausdrucksformen des Europaeischen und Internationalen
Philhellenismus vom 17- 19 Jahrhundert, hrsg. von Evangelos Konstantinou, (Philhellenische Studien Band
13) (Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 2007), pp. 61-67, here 62.
Casey Du, “Homer’s Post-Classical Legacy,” in A Companion to Ancient Epic, (ed.) John Miles Foley
(Malden, Mass.: Blackwell, 2005), pp. 397-414, p. 402. For a general introduction to the transmission of
Greek literature from antiquity to the Renaissance, see L. D. Reynolds and N. G. Wilson, Scribes and
Scholars: A Guide to the Transmission of Greek and Latin Literature, 3rd ed. (Oxford: Clarendon, 2009);
and Frank Pierrepont Graves, A History of Education during the Middle Ages and the Transition to Modern
Time (Westport, Conn: Greenwood Press, 1970), p. 118.
Laurie Adams, Italian Renaissance Art (Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press, 2001), p. 58.
Gordon Griffiths, “Classical Greece and the Italian,” in Paths from Ancient Greece, (ed.) Carol G. Thomas
(Leiden: Brill, 1988), pp. 92-117, here 95-96 from Leonardo Bruni, Rerum suo tempore gestarum
Commentarius, Rerum Italicarum Scriptores, t. 19, (Bologna, 1926), part 3, pp. 431- 432.
Niccolo Machiavelli, The Letters of Machiavelli, (ed.) and trans. Allan Gilbert (Chicago: Chicago Univ.
Press, 1961), p. 142.
107
Merely studying ancient texts did not suffice for Machiavelli as he wanted to interact
with the characters of antiquity and to participate in their culture. It is clear that statesmen like
Machiavelli and Petrarch sought guidance from the past. So the figures of antiquity lived in
spirit among the Renaissance men through their writings. Apart from the established prose
which was subject to extensive renovation by the humanists, the extracurricular reading and
writing of the Renaissance men demonstrates the depth of the impact. Their enthusiasm led
them to emulate their favorite historic figures from Antiquity in an effort to absorb the ancient
culture not only textually but also physically. In brief, humanism constituted a distinct
cultural milieu that included the textual but reached far beyond that. This environment
allowed the humanists to reinterpret the texts as well as to interpret their own personal
experiences.417
Although in the early medieval period and after Biblical, liturgical, theological and
some scientific or Aristotelian texts were translated from the Greek, it is generally accepted
that classical Greek literary texts remained unknown until the Renaissance.418 For Hankins, in
order to introduce epic and lyric poetry, oratory, mathematics, geography, medicine,
rhetorical theory, history, biography, theology, patristic writings and natural science of
ancient Greece to the Latin language speakers, Renaissance culture aimed to ‘make the
Greeks speak Latin’ and ‘empty the treasuries of the Greeks’. Works of Demosthenes,
Isocrates, Homer and Plutarch; the most prominent Greek historians; the major geographers
had already been translated greatly by Italian humanists, by the end of the fifteenth century;
translation made up until the sixteenth century still exists in Latin as Greek antiquity.419
In France, before the establishment of the College Royal, where Latin, Greek and
Hebrew were systematically taught under the patronage of Francois I in 1530, only a few
scholars were able to read Greek mythology. People mostly referred to the Latin translation of
Homer by Lorenzo Valla (1502, Venice) and of The Odyssey by Raphael Volaterranus (1510,
Rome). Exceptional cases such as Jacques Lefevre d’Etaples (1450-1536) and Guillaume
Bude (1467-1540), whose contacts with exiled Greek scholars and Italian humanists allowed
them to develop a profound knowledge of Greek literature and culture, had the privilege of
417
418
419
Kenneth Gouwens, “Perceiving the Past: Renaissance Humanism after the ‘Cognitive Turn’,” The American
Historical Review 103 (1998), pp. 55-82, here p. 66.
James Hankins, Humanism and Platonism in the Italian Renaissance (Roma: Edizioni di Storia e
Letteratura, 2003), p. 276.
Ibid., p. 282.
108
reading them in original. Bude, for example, quotes Homer very often in his De transitu
Hellenismi ad Christianismum (Paris, 1535), which contains the first extended discussion of
Greek mythology by a French scholar.420
Studying library catalogues of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries reveals that Greek
literary texts began to appear slowly in European libraries. The Western European interest in
Greek during the earlier centuries was directed toward theological and scientific works. But in
the fourteenth century, Greek literary texts were rarely found in royal or private collections.
For instance, Petrarch took care of the texts of antiquity without any success. But his
colleague, Boccaccio, studied Greek and owned some Greek texts. He financed the first
complete translation of Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey, even if they were somewhat faulty. Apart
from them, the private as well as aristocratic collections of the early fifteenth century counted
only for Greek books.421 However after that time, a rapid increase in the amount of Greek
texts took place. This growing interest in Greek books is best illustrated in the collections of
the Vatican and the de Medici family.422
The personal collection of Pope Julius II, held not originals but translations of Greek
texts, namely those by Herodotus, Thucydides, and Homer, translated into Latin by Lorenzo
Valla; Strabo translated by Guarino of Verona and Gregorio da Citth di Castello; Polybius
translated by Niccolo Perotti; Maximus of Tyre translated by Cosimo de’Pazzi, bishop of
Arezzo and archbishop of Florence (1508-1513); Arrian’s history, translated by Pier Candido
Decembrio; and Diogenes Laertius, translated probably by Ambrogio Traversari. Even
Aristotle’s Politics and Ethics were translated by Leonardo Bruni and Johannes Argyropulos,
respectively. It is not surprising to find profane literature of this sort in the library of the
venerable Julius II, as it was a characteristic of ecclesiastics of the Renaissance era.423
All of these Greek, Hebrew and vernacular books, the great bulk of the contents of the
libraries of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, nonetheless followed the Latin tradition. In
other words, works composed originally in Greek, Hebrew, and Arabic, continued to circulate
chiefly in Latin translations as they had during the earlier Middle Ages. There were, however,
420
421
422
423
Philip Ford, “Classical Myth and Its Interpretation in 16th Century France,” in The Classical Heritage in
France, (ed.) by Gerald Sandy (Leiden: Brill, 2002), pp. 331- 350, 336.
Pearl Kibre, “The Intellectual Interests Reflected in Libraries of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries,”
Journal of the History of Ideas 7 (3/1946), pp. 257-297, p. 260.
Ibid., p. 262.
Ibid., p. 264.
109
an additional number of new humanistic Latin translations of the Greek literary, philosophical
and scientific works.424 As Naeurt formulates, “thus, full recovery of the Greek cultural
heritage depended on the making of Latin translations.” 425
Greek literary classics, seldom found in the original before the fifteenth century, were
represented both in the Greek and in translation by the works of Homer, Aristophanes,
Xenophon, Aristides, Sophocles, Plutarch, Lucian of Samosata, Oppian, Hesiod, Apollonius
and others. There were also Greek texts with the translations of the historians Herodotus,
Thucydides, Xenophon, Flavius Josephus, and Eusebius. The most remarkable of all was the
library of Cardinal Bessarion, which boasted copies of all the above mentioned authors. The
scope of the libraries covered scientific and philosophical writings in both original and
translation. They were either Latin translations from Greek works of the fifth and sixth
centuries or Latin translations from Arabic dating from the twelfth or thirteenth centuries.
Particularly, the medical works of Galen and Hippocrate, also of Euclid, Ptolemy, Aristotle
and so on, survived this way.426
Sanford states that it is a fact that the foremost attention should be drawn to the sources
about the ancient world medieval scholars used, because clearly one of the main mistakes
they made was their negligence of the greatest Greek and Roman historians that look in favor
upon the summaries and compilations. The determinant factor of such negligence was as a
result of tastes of the late classical period, instead of their own choices. Translators were
unable to render the works of Herodotus, Thucydides and Polybius to those who could speak
very little Greek, and so was the works of Plutarch, who could be appreciated if his works
were rendered. The best Greek writers could be admired but they were praised only by later
writers. Although the language was not a matter of any hindrance, the chief Roman historians
could be used, however they attracted less attention and were read less in the later years of
Roman Empire, but they deserved more. The Roman public preferred to use handy but dull
summaries than use Livy’s bulky history and simply neglected it, Livy’s works were praised
424
425
426
Ibid., p. 274.
Charles Garfield Nauert, Humanism and the Culture of Renaissance Europe, 2nd ed. (Cambridge:
Cambridge Univ. Press, 2006), p. 37.
Kibre, “The Intellectual Interests”, pp. 281-2.
110
more in the Middle Ages than he was read at that time. He used to be a role model for
historians but he was regarded as an expert by those who were unable to obtain his texts.427
Leonardo Bruni (1370-1444) wrote the first serious work of Greek history by a Latin
author since Antiquity. Corpus Plutarcheum illustrates the efforts of these early generations
to recover the historical experience of the Greek city-states in the classical age, the age that
seemed to offer so many parallels with Renaissance Italy. After Bruni’s pioneering work, the
major sources for the Greek classical age – Herodotus, Thucydides, Xenophon and Diodorus
Siculus – were translated into Latin.428 G. Gemistus Pletho’s (1355-1452/1454) own historical
compendium, E Diodoro et Plutarcho de rebus post pugnam ad Mantineam gestis, which is a
continuation of Bruni’s Commentaria rerum Graecarum (1439); ends with the battle of
Mantinea in 362 BC, where Pletho’s begins. Commentaria was a historical compendium
based on Xenophon’s Hellenica. Bruni and Pletho’s texts were published by Joachim
Camerarius in 1546 as a useful summary of that fourth-century BC Greek history.429 Pope
Nicholas V430 ordered Lorenzo Valla (1407-1457) to translate the Histories of Thucydides
and Herodotus and, as Fryde notes, “for several centuries most educated Europeans were
acquainted with these two greatest Greek historians only through Valla’s translations.”431
Niccolo Perotti, a young man was entrusted by Pope Nicholas V to translate Polybius. He
completed the first five books in 1454.432
The works of the ancient historians either were used directly or summarized and
nobody felt the need to write the history themselves. Their activities were limited to
translating the histories by Greeks into Latin or other European vernaculars. They thought that
only the events unrecorded by the Greeks were worth writing about. The need to rewrite grew
in the later period of the Renaissance. The first well-arranged account of the constitution,
history, and chronology of Athens, De Republic Atheniensium (On the Athenian Republic)
427
428
429
430
431
432
Eva Matthews Sanford, “The Study of Ancient History in the Middle Ages,” Journal of the History of Ideas
5 (1/1944), pp. 21-43, p. 22
James Hankins, Humanism and Platonism in the Italian Renaissance (Roma: Edizioni di Storia e
Letteratura, 2003), p. 262.
James Haskins, “The Dates of Leonardo Bruni’s Later Works (1437- 1443),” Studi medievali e umanistici
(Messina) VI (2007), pp. 1-51, p. 23.
For the contribution of Nicholas V as a ‘patron’ to the Humanistic knowledge, Georg Voigt, Die
Wiederbelebung des classischen Alterthums oder das erste Jahrhundert des Humanismus, 2 Bde. (Berlin:
Reimer, 1859), pp. 269-323.
E. B. Fryde, Humanism and Renaissance Historiography (London: The Hambledon Press, 1983), p. 92.
Ibid., p. 99.
111
was written by Carolus Sigonius (1524-1584). Sigonius had very strong bonds with Venice
and had taught in the Republic.433 Additionally, we must take into account Plutarch’s role in
the Renaissance and early modern Europe. Greece and Rome were discovered in those times
through Plutarch’s eyes.434
The publishing dates of the most circulated works in the later Renaissance were as
follows:
Herodotus:
Latin, translated by L. Valla in Venice by Rubeus in 1474
Greek edition in Venice by Aldus in 1502
Italian by M.Boiardo in Venice by Nicolilino di Sabio in 1533
German by Hieron, Boner in Augsburg by Steiner in 1535
French by P. Saliat in Paris by Groulleau in 1556
English by B.R in London by Marshe in 1584
Thucydides:
Latin by L. Valla in Treviso by Rubeus in 1483
Greek edition in Venice by Aldus 1502
French by Cl. De Seyssel (from Latin) in Paris by Badius in 1527
German by Hieron, Boner in Augsburg by Steiner in 1533
Italian by Francesco de Soldo Strozzi in Venice by Vaugris in 1545
English by Thos. Nicolls in London by Walland in 1550435
The Protestant reforms increased the study of Greek in Germany and in Holland. This
stream of scholarly activities in the Low Countries achieved a very high level in the United
Provinces. Among the eminent figures in this regard were first, Mersius (Jan de Meurs)
(1579-1639), who was the author of a number of monographs of institutions, chronologies
433
434
435
Carmine Ampolo, “Modern States and Ancient Greek History,” in Re-reading Antiquity, pp. 101- 118, p.
103: www.stm.unipi.it/Clioh/tabs/libri/3/08-Ampolo_101-118.pdf
On Plutarch’s role in Western classical tradition, Robert Lamberton, “Plutarch,” in The Classical Tradition,
(eds.) Anthony Grafton, Glenn W. Most, Salvatore Settis (Cambridge, Massachusetts, London: the Belknap
Press of Harvard Univ. Press, 2010), pp. 747-750.
A. M. Woodward, “Greek History at the Renaissance,” The Journal of Hellenic Studies 63 (1943), pp. 1-14,
p. 13.
112
and the well known figures of the Athenian Republic. His text implicitly favored
republicanism since it was dedicated to the Venetian state before the part about the Athenian
Areopagus. Another important figure was Ubbo Emmius (1547-1625), who is known to have
been the first rector of the University of Groningen. He wrote a monograph of three volumes
on Greek history, Vetus Graecia illustrata. The first work of its kind, it was published in 1626
by his son. It treats Greece systematically. The first volume dealt with the republics and
institutions. The second, which discussed Greek history in general, was based on the ancient
authors as sources and evaluates their quality, arranges them chronologically, in a sort of
historic cycle: Herodotus, Thucydides, Xenophon, Diodorus Siculus and Polybius. It can be
argued that the model of this work presents a new perspective on the ancients. Before him, the
reference to universal history had been necessary in order to have a general idea about Greek
history, but this represented the ideal source on the subject.436
According to Eric Nelson, the legacy of the knowledge of Ancient Greece had
considerable influence on republican thought in England from the early sixteenth century.437
In the eighteenth century, when questions gained a new dimension and turned from antiquity
to empire, writers turned to Roman history. Even at that time, Ancient Greece functioned as
an important supplement to British attempts to find an ideal model of empire.438 In Cesarani’s
words, “The development of modernity was accomplished thanks to ancient Greece playing
role in important features during the narrative historiography of late eigteenth century”. How
about the narrative histories of ancient Greece even before that century?439
Some forerunners of this process need to be mentioned here. Potter’s book
Archaeologia Graeca (1697) was received with considerable enthusiasm, when Greek history
was not a matter of great interest. In 1707, Hind published the first volume of his History of
Greece.440 Temple Stanyan (1676/7-1752) published his Grecian History in the same year.
The second edition of this work was published in 1739 and was accepted later as the
forerunner of many later Greek histories published in the second half of the eighteenth
century. This work dominated the field until the publication of the histories by Gillies and
436
437
438
439
440
Ampolo, “Modern States and Ancient Greek History,” p. 105.
E. Nelson, The Greek Tradition in Republican Thought (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), p.
17.
C. Akça Ataç, “Imperial Lessons from Athens and Sparta: Eighteenth Century British Histories of Ancient
Greece,” History of Political Thought 27 (4/2006): 642-660, p. 644.
Ceserani, “Modern Histories of Ancient Greece,” p. 144.
Ataç, “Imperial Lessons from Athens and Sparta,” p. 645.
113
Mitford, in spite of its methodological shortcomings. It was classified as “pro-Spartan” due to
the fact that its author had an unhidden antipathy towards democracy, and made some
arguments against Athens. But he kept himself away from Sparta in the same manner because
Sparta was “too limited” a monarchy.
The lessons on the management of an Empire, however, were derived mostly from
Athens in Stanyan’s work.441 Stanyan was a little-known figure even in Great Britain. He
published the first volume of his Grecian History in 1707, several decades after the English
revolution. This work was completed much later, in 1739. The reason for this seems to have
been the influence of several universal histories which were published in the meantime: a
collective work, including contributions from different authors, published in England and the
other in France, by Rollin. The other great universal history was Rollin’s Histoire Ancienne,
which remained for a long time a standard work in terms of its literary value and pedagogical
utility. It remained successful, and was reissued well into the nineteenth century and
translated into many languages, including Italian (1733-1740), English (1738-1740), Greek
(1750), Spanish (1755-1761), Portuguese (1773), German (1778) and even Bengali (1847).442
The work indeed gained audiences well beyond that of school children; Rollin counted among
his fans men like John Adams, who, like many others before and after, familiarized himself
with ancient history by reading Rollin.443 Ataç states that histories of Ancient Greece and
Rome increased greatly during the eighteenthcentury, due to the fact that the period of neoclassicism was greatly inspiring and this allowed a better understanding and analysis of
British history and the present time through ancient examples.444
The rise of the philosophers’ interpretation in the eighteenth century brought about a
significant shift in the interpretative schemas of the human being. They constructed their
fourfold historical scheme and associated their kingship with the classical world, which was a
radical interpretation of and a deeper offense against Christian sensibilities. The praise of
Greece contradicted passionately and deliberately the traditional historical view of Christians.
It shifted attention away from the Jews to the Greeks and also criticized the distinctive
signposts in the periodization of history. Transforming the Greeks into the fathers of true
civilization – fathers in terms of the first Enlightenment – was to invalidate the foundations of
441
442
443
444
Ibid., p. 646.
Cesarani, “Modern Histories of Ancient Greece,” p. 147.
Ibid., p. 148.
Ataç, “Imperial Lessons from Athens and Sparta,” p. 643.
114
Christian historiography by considering man’s past as a secular, not a sacred, record. The
supremacy of Greece indicated the supremacy of philosophy, and the supremacy of
philosophy invalidated the claim that religion was man’s basic concern.445
2.3.1 Greek Histories and selected works regarding the Greek world:
1541 G. Postel, Tractatus de republica, seu Magistratibus Atheniensium
1564 C. Sigonius, De republica Atheniensium
1583 J.J. Scaliger, De emendatione temporum (2nd edn. 1598)
1606 J.J. Scaliger, Thesaurus temporum complectens Eusebii Pamphilii Chronicon
1622 J. Meursius, De archontibus Atheniensium
1623 G.J. Vossius, De historicis Graeci libri tres
1626 U. Emmius, Vetus Graecia illustrata
1632 U. Emmius, Graecorum respublicae
1632 J. Meursius, Solon
1681 J.B. Bossuet, Discours sur l’histoire universelle
1697-1702 J. Gronovius, Thesaurus Graecarum antiquitatum, I-XII
1699 J. Potter, Archaelogia Greca
1707-1739 T. Stanyan, The Grecian History, I-II
1719-1724 B. Montfaucon, L’Antiquité expliquée et représentée en figure, I-V/2
1730-1738 Ch. Rollin, Histoire ancienne des Egyptiens, des Carthaginois, des Assyriens, des
Mèdes et de Perses, des Macédoniens, des Grecs: I-XIII.
445
Peter Gay, The Enlightenement: An Interpretation. The Rise of Modern Paganism (New York and London:
Norton and Company, 1966), p. 72.
115
1735-1771 A. Calmet, Histoire universelle sacrée et profane depuis le commencement du
monde jusq’à nos jours, I-XVII.
1736-1744 The Universal History, Ancient and Modern from the Earliest Account to the
Present Time, I-VII.
1749 Mably, Observations sur les Grecs
1752 D. Hume, Of the Populousness of the Ancient Nations
1766 Mably, Observations sur l’histoire de Gréce ou des causes de la prosperité et des
malheurs des Grecs
1774 O. Goldsmith, The Grecian History from the earliest state to the Death of Alexander the
Great, I-II
1780-1789 L. Cousin-Despreaux, Histoire générale et particuliére de la Grèce, I-XVI
1781-1782 C. Denina, Istoria politica e letteraria della Grecia
1784-1818 W. Mitford, The history of Greece, I-V
1786 J. Gilles, History of Ancient Greece, its Colonies and Conquests, I-II
1788 C. De Pauw, Recherches philosophiques sur les Grecs, I-II
1809 E. Clavier, Histoire des premiers temps de la Grèce, I-II446
1817 A. Boeckh, Die Staatshaushaltung der Athener, I-II (2nd edn.1850)
1820 K. O. Müller, Geschicte hellenischer Stämme und Städte, I, Orchomenos und die Minyer
1824 K.O. Müller, Geschicte hellenischer Stämme und Städte, II/1-2, Die Dorier
1827-1828 Corpus Inscriptionum Graecarum, I (Boeckh)
1827-1830 H. F. Clinton, Fasti Hellenici, I-III
446
Ampolo, “Modern States and Ancient Greek History,” p. 111.
116
1833 J. G. Droysen, Geschichte der Nachfolgers Alexanders
1843 J. G. Droysen, Geschichte der Bildung des hellenistichen Staatensystem
1843-1877 Corpus Inscriptionum Graecarum, II-IV (Boeckh, Franz, Curtius)
1846-1856 G. Grote, History of Greece, I-XII
1847-1851 B.G. Niebuhr, Vorträge über alte Geschichte, I-III
1852-1857 M. Duncker, Geschichte der Altertums, I-IV
1854 F. Kortüm, Geschichte Greichenlands von der Urzeit bis zum untergang des Achäischen
Bundes, I-III
1857-1867 E. Curtius, Greichische Geschichte, I-III
1861 V. Duruy, Histoire de la Grèce ancienne, I-II
1863 E. A. Freeman, History of Federal Government
1864 N. D. Fustel de Coulanges, La cité antique447
2. 4. Analysing the Text
2.4.1. Translation Turn
Peter Burke addresses that “if the past is a foreign country, it follows that even the
most monoglot of historians is a translator. Historians mediate between the past and the
present and face the same dilemmas as other translators, serving two masters and attempting
to reconcile fidelity to the original with intelligibility to their readers.”448 This statement is
true for Mahmud Efendi. In addition to this, he was a translator. Being a translator and a
historian, he mediated between the Ancient past and the Ottoman present. What he did when
he confronted the “foreign land” in question is very important to understanding the strategies
he followed. To be able to comprehend those, it is necessary to take a glance at translation
theories.
447
448
Ibid., p. 112.
Peter Burke, “Cultures of Translation in Early Modern Europe,” in Cultural Translation in Early Modern
Europe, (eds.) Peter Burke and R. Po-chia Hsia (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2007), pp. 7- 38, p.7.
117
It is obvious that a “translation turn” in the social sciences took place in the past
decades. With this turn, the purview of translation was extended from the strictly linguistic to
other fields of cultural production, including it as both an explanatory emblem and a dynamic
practice through which the circulation, mediation, reception and transformation of distinct
cultural forms and practices was effected.449 While explaining “translational turn” in the age
of globalization, Susan Bassnett comments that “for translation is not just the transfer of texts
from one language into another, it is now rightly seen as a process during which all kinds of
transactions take place mediated by the figure of the translator.”450According to Lefevere,
translators needed to consider two factors attentively during a text-transmission from a source
culture to a target one. In order to determine the image of a work of literature as targeted by
the translation, two factors play determining roles: the first one being the ideology of the
translator, that is to say, whether the translator willingly embraces it, or whether patronage
plays a dominant role by constraining the choices of the translator. The second factor is the
receiving literature’s dominance on poetics during which the translation is made. The
principle strategy the translator will use is dictated by the ideology, and accordingly solutions
to the issues related to both ‘universe of discourse’ stated in the original, being objects,
concepts, customs belonging to the world that the writer of the Source text was familiar with,
and the language of the source text itself.451
Lefevere problematizes above how a text might be transmitted into another cultural
setting. It also embraces how the ideology or poetics of any setting merged into each other
and affected the translation activity. Any translation act comprises the creation of values like
linguistic and literary, religious and political, commercial and educational. The unique feature
of translation seems to be that the value-creating process in translation occurs in the form of
an interpretation of a foreign-language text. The values inherent in this text withstand
diminution and revision in order to fit the appeal of domestic cultural constituencies. Any
translation means an inscription of the text from a foreign source culture with domestic
intelligibilities and interests. This occurs also if the translator seeks to maintain a semantic
equivalence with the source culture of the text.452
449
450
451
452
Finbarr Barry Flood, Objects of Translation: Material Culture and Medieval Hindu-Muslim (Princeton:
Princeton Univ. Press, 2009), p. 8.
Susan Bassnett, Translation Studies (Routledge: London & New York, 3rd ed. 2002), p. 6.
André Lefevere, Translation, Rewriting, and the Manipulation of Literary Fame (London & New York:
Routledge, 1992), p. 41.
Lawrence Venuti, “Retranslations: The Creation of Value,” in Translation and Culture, (ed.) Katherine M.
Faull (Lewisburg: Bucknell Univ. Press, 2004), p. 25.
118
On the other hand, transfer studies are much more based on insight from postcolonial
studies according to which “nations” or “cultural areas” cannot be modelled as “autonomous”
or “hermetic” entities, but rather interrelated systems. In his article “Post-Colonial and PostModern: The Question of Agency”, Homi Bhabha argues that, “culture …is transnational as
the translational”.453 During the translation process, text changed not only their language, but
also their cultural frame of meaning/reference. Thus, very notable transformations inevitably
occur in the course of their de- and re-contextualization, either through the material or
structural changes, or through semantic shifts due to a different interpretative framework in
the source culture. Due to this reason, it is an indispensable phenomenon to conceive the
textual transfer through translation as a subset of cultural transfer. This mode is suited to
provide insights into the histories of mentality and meaning that cannot be gained from the
traditional perspective of historical translation studies alone. As Medick asserts, how one
perceives the mental world of foreign cultures, understands or at least represents, can apply
for the literature considering its texts provide quite similarly.454
Translation in the emerging knowledge and world society is more than only pure
medium of cultural contact or purely process of intercultural confrontation according to
Medick. Translation can also be a model for a discipline linking, in making the individual
disciplines as much as possible to other sciences for exploring connection and “contact
zones”.455 Giving example from Clifford Geertz, she notes that “Textinterpretation bezieht
sich auf eine symbolisch vorstrukturierte Welt.”456 By using the sentence of Jürgen
Osterhammel as “relationship and contact history between cultures”, she asserts that this
illuminates the active role of translation for: to interact, exchange, reciprocity and also
untranslatability.457 Furthermore she asserts that Snell & Hornby & Turns put translation into
analytical concept which influences all sociological subsections-as with the examples of
social theory, cultural theory, action theory, microsociology, history, intercultural theory,
migration studies. What is more, a translational turn, which is linked to culture study, is
453
Homi K. Bhabha, The Location of Culture (London & New York: Routledge, 1994; rpt. 2004), pp. 245- 282.
Doris Bachmann Medick, “Kultur als Text”, in Gedächtnis – Identität – Interkulturalität : Ein
kulturwissenschaftliches Studienbuch, eds. Andrea Horváth & Eszter Pabis, (Budapest: Bölcsész
Konzorcium, 2006), p. 141- 152, p. 141.
455
Idem., Cultural Turns: Neuorientierungen in den Kulturwissenschaften (Reinbek bei Hamburg:Rowohlt
Taschenbuch Verlag, 2006) p. 257.
456
Idem., “Kultur als text”, p. 142.
457
Idem., Cultural Turns, p. 259.
454
119
evaluated
and
connected
to
the
shifts
in
cultural
fields’
own
intrinsic
dynamics/characteristics.458
Alongside this, the term “cultural translation” originally was coined by anthropologists
in the circle of Edward Evans-Pritchard for the description of the happenings in cultural
encounters if each side tries to make sense of the actions of the other. Evans-Pritchard
emphasized the inconsistency of Nuer vocabulary with Christian terms. Published in 1956, his
book Nuer Religion draws attention to the Westerner’s emposing of understanding something
foreign as the world of Nuer beliefs through the medium of English whose terms are afflicted
by the concepts, history and values of the Christian West.459 James Clifford questions the
authority of etnographer and brings discourse, representation, power, and textuality to the
center of the discipline. Clifford calls this as “rejection of monological authority”.460 By
translational turn in anthropology, key concepts like the other/ the stranger, participant
observation and cultural translation redefined. From a translational turn while they may only
speak when the orientation of ethnography is more prominent, which does not seek more
cultural translation, but even acts between cultures, which is characterized by a “going beyond
boundries”.461 In this context, Talal Asad states the translation as its firm link with the
translator’s own characteristics and interests and the literacy that translator lives in. In this
regard, “all good translation seeks to reproduce the structure of an alien discourse within the
translator’s own language.”462 A vivid example is Laura Bohannan’s account of how she told
the story of Hamlet to a group of Tiv in West Africa and heard the story “corrected” by the
elders until it ultimately fit the patterns of Tiv culture.463 Every word has a history of usage to
which it responds, and anticipates a future response in Bakthinian sense. As Bakhtin says,
“The life of the word is contained in its transfer from one mouth to another, from one context
to another context, from one social collective to another, from generation to another
458
459
460
461
462
463
Idem., “Translation: A Concept and a Model for the Study of Culture” in Traveling Concepts for the Study
of Culture, eds. Birgit Neuman and Ansgar Nünning, (Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter, 2012), pp. 23- 44, p. 27.
Theo Hermans, “Paradoxes and Aporias in Translation and Translation Studies”, in Translation Studies:
Perspectives on an Emerging Discipline, (ed.) Alessandra Riccardi, (Cambridege: Cambridge Univ. Press,
2012), p. 20.
(eds.) James Clifford & George Marcus, Writing Culture: The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography
(Berkeley: University of California Press, 1986). For a recent “review” of his own deficiencies in Writing
Culture, see: “Feeling Historical” in Cultural Anthropology 27 (August 2012), pp. 417- 426.
Bachmann Medick, Cultural Turns, p. 262.
Talal Asad, “The Concept of Cultural Translation in British Social Anthropology” in Writing Culture:
Poetics and Politics of Ethnography, (eds.) James Clifford & George Marcus, (Berkeley: Univ. of California
Press, 1986), pp. 141- 164, p. 156.
Burke, “Cultures of Translation in Early Modern Europe,” p. 8, mentions “Shakespeare in the Bush: An
American Anthropologist Set out to Study the Tiv of West Africa and was Taught the Rrue Meaning of
Hamlet” in Natural History 75 (1966), pp. 28- 33.
120
generation”.464 “The Dialogical Imagination” of Bakhtin argues the close and continuous link
of words to their language’s historical and ideological context. Words are very like the human
nature; living in a vivid space with ongoing history and intellectual heritage, so every word
“tastes of the context and contexts in which it has lived its socially charged life”465
Before Mahmud Efendi, what had the translation strategies of the Ottoman literati
been? Before the “Westernization” translation movement in the nineteenth century,466 there
was one in the fourteenth century in which almost every important text from Arabic and
Persian was translated.467 An important characteristic of the translators is the fact that they did
not translate the texts word for word. Rather, keeping in mind the function of the source text,
they try to “dress” the target text with the same function in the target language.468
Serpil Bağcı describes the same acculturation/appropriation process in the realm of
illustration, in the history of Ottoman miniatures. She discusses this issue in the context of
image-translation. She analyzed two copies of Şerif’s translation and the interpretation of two
Ottoman painters in order to compare scenes depicting the same subject to see how Ottoman
painters translated these canonical images into their own visual language. What she found is
very interesting, as most of the manifestations in the new language might be found in changes
in the styles of clothing, which were domesticated by Ottoman painters. An example of this
process in the miniatures is “disrobing the beloved of Persian attire, he dressed her/him at
once in Rumi style, removing from her/his shoulder the shabby cloth, he replaced it with the
satin cloak of Rum.”469
464
465
466
467
468
469
M. M. Bakhtin, Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics, (ed. and trans.) Caryl Emerson, (Minneapolis: University
of Minnesota Press. rpt. 1984), p. 202.
M. M. Bakhtin, The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays, (ed.) Michael Holquist, (trans.) Caryl Emerson and
Michael Holquist, (Austin and London: University of Texas Press, rpt. 1981), p. 293.
For the history of translation in the Ottoman Empire, Cemal Demircioğlu, From Discourse to Practice:
Rethinking “Translation” (Terceme) and Related Practices of Text Production in the Late Ottoman Literary
Tradition (Unpublished Ph.D. diss.: Boğaziçi Univ., Istanbul, 2005); and Haşim Koç, Cultural Repertoire as
a Network of Translated Texts: New Literature after Tanzimat (1830-1870) (MA thesis Boğaziçi Univ.
İstanbul, 2004).
Anja Pistor-Hatam, “The Art of Translation. Rewriting Persian Texts from the Seljuks to the Ottomans,” in
Essays on Ottoman Civilization: Proceedings of the XIIth Congress of the Comité International d’Etudes
Pré-Ottomanes et Ottomanes, Praha 1996 (Praha: Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic Oriental
Institute, 1998), pp. 305-316, here pp. 307-308.
Ibid., p. 316.
Serpil Bağcı, “From Translated Works to Translated Image: The Illustrated Şehname-i Türki Copies,”
Muqarnas 17 (Leiden: Brill, 2000), pp. 162-176, p. 162.
121
In addition to the clothing, she writes that landscape and architecture were depicted
according to Ottoman art.470 She concludes her work by saying that Ottoman artists loaded
their styles and iconographic interpretations with images, and did not produce mere copies of
Shahnama illustrations, to which they gave a distinct and original local color. The artists
deliberately Ottomanized the paintings, as in the case of texts. This means that the translation
process not only took place literally, but also syntactically and expressively. The elements
were reproduced to match Ottoman cultural norms, and the scenes were depicted for the
audience again, making them fit the geographical, architectural and cultural setting. The
painters, who were different from their Persian colleagues, visualized the world according to
the Ottoman style.471
Another example comes from the story of three sculptures taken by the Sultan
Suleyman the Magnificent when he seized the treasury of the King in the Budin campaign in
1526. Historian Peçevi (1574- 1650?) records that,
Among the objects of art, there were three bronze sculptures that were strange (garip)
and bizarre (acaip) erected outside the entrance to the fortress of Budin. I think the big
one was the statue of a king who governed over all the infidels and the others, smaller in
size but similar in form, were the sculptures of the sons of this king who reigned after
him. Since they were so strange and so bizarre they were transported to Istanbul by boat.
Each was erected on a Stone pedestal at the Hippodrome for the public to see and those
who saw them found them admirable. The verse written in Persian by Figani, a poet of
the time who was executed because of his verses, was composed because of these statues:
‘Two Abrahams came into this church called the world, one destroyed the icons whereas
the other erected them’.472
These statues originally had represented Hercules, Diana and Apollo and had been
commissioned by King Matthias Corvinus of Hungary (1458-1490) from an Italian sculptor
Giovanni Dalmata. However, neither Peçevi’s, nor the miniature artists of the Hunername
manuscript, description of the statues agrees with the mythological description of these
figures. Statues representing Apollo, Hercules and Diana were not depicted in Ottoman visual
sources whereas the statues of a king and two men were considered important enough to have
been represented three times in the same manuscript in relation to the Palace of Ibrahim
470
471
472
Ibid., pp. 167-169.
Ibid., p. 173.
Filiz Yenişehirlioğlu, “Ibrahim Pasha and Sculpture as Subversion in Art,” Sensibilities of the Islamic
Mediterranean: Self Expression in a Muslim Culture from Post-Classical Times to the Present Day, (ed.)
Robin Ostle, (London & New York: I.B.Tauris, 2008), pp. 59-78, p. 59. “The other” Abraham was the
grand-vizier Pargalı İbrahim Pasha who came from a Christian family.
122
Pasha.473 It seems the sculptures of Diana, Apollo and Hercules were not appropriated by the
public or considered as trophies. Rather, they were quickly forgotten, consigned to oblivion
and replaced by other iconographic representations, to wit, a group of sculptures representing
a king and two other figures chosen for public memorial. The appropriation of Hungarian
military figures could be the interpretation of an oral history that substituted the original story
with one constructed to suit the tastes of Ottoman culture and collective memory.474
The cases cited above reveal that models that were to the new cultural setting were
eliminated and new ones were interpolated. It might be attributed to interculturality, too. In
order to comprehend what Mahmud Efendi did when he described Ancient Athens, in
addition to “translation turn,” “inturcultural” theories could be helpful.475 The concept of
intercultural history has some connection with conceptual pairs as interculturalism,
intercultural communication and intercultural philosophy and its usage became very
widespread at the end of the twentieth century due to globalisation.476 Two prominent
scholars, Espagne and Werner, from CNRS in Paris, have developed the concept of “cultural
transfer” continuously since the 1980s in their project: Les transferts culturels francoallemands de la période prérévolutionnaire à la première guerre mondiale. Franco-German
cultural relations served as the basis in this project.477
I am aware that it could be problematic to apply such concepts that emerges in a
definite historical context to an Ottoman history book written in the eighteenth century.
However, I believe that they can be used to clearly expressing my understanding of
intercultural interaction. So, if we will speak on interculturality, we must take into account
both the process of writing and the text itself. If intercultural contacts is the above all the
mobility of cultures, it is clear that one of the main factors in the existence of this text was the
473
Ibid., pp. 61-2.
Ibid, p. 75.
475
Instead of using “interculturality”, one can also use different terms. For the problematics of different
terminology such as “hybridization” , “borrowing”, “melting pot”, “creolization”, “glocalization”, see:
Phillip Wolfgang Stockhammer, “Conceptualizing Cultural Hybridization in Archaeology” in
Conceptualizing Cultural Hybridization: A Transdisciplinary Approach, (ed.) Phillip Wolfgang
Stockhammer (Berlin & Heidelberg: Springer Verlag, 2012), p. 46.
476
Paul Kennedy & Victor Roudometof, “Communities Across Borders under Globalising Conditions: New
Immigrants
and
Transnational
Cultures,”
Available
at:
http://www.transcomm.ox.ac.uk/working%20papers/WPTC-01-17%20Kennedy.pdf, 1-45.
477
For some examples of Werner’s and Espagne’s works, see Michael Werner, “Maßstab und
Untersuchungsebene: Zu einem Grundproblem der vergleichenden Kulturtransfer-Forschung,” in Nationale
Grenzen und internationaler Austausch: Studien zum Kultur- und Wissenschaftstransfer in Europa, (ed.)
Lothar Jordan, Bernd Kortländer (Tübingen: Niemeyer Verlag, 1995), pp. 20-33; Transferts: les relations
interculturelles dans l’espace franco-allemand (XVIIIe et XIXe siècle), (ed.) Michel Espagne and Michael
Werner (Paris: Editions Recherches sur les Civilisations, 1988).
474
123
“mobility” of Mahmud Efendi, that is to say, his intellectual interaction with two Greek
abbots as analysed above. Mahmud Efendi’s narration shows a mental structure transforming
what it perceives. At this point, Lau Chec Wai’s argument as following is useful: Cultural
interaction at higher and creative level brings about interculturalism, by realising the rise of
product, which is greatly different from the input. Looking at an intercultural movie,
especially the movie of Akira Kurosawa named Kumonosu-ju or Throne of Blood, we can
illustrate the image of interculturalism. Different traditions that are hundreds of miles away
and yet them getting together clearly shows the mobility of cultures. Kurosawa’s movies have
such little in common with plays of Shakespeare that the first question that comes to minds is
whether faithfulness is a good criterion or not. Other adaptations such as Polanski’s version of
Macbeth I cast its setting and period, Kurosawa brought Macbeth to a foreign country
andtales in symbols were associated with indigenous culture. The more we are come across
new situations and representations, the more imagination the work captures.478
From the dimension of fiction, it can be seen that a dialogue exists both in the
structure and rhetoric of Mahmud Efendi’s text. The manner in which Mahmud Efendi reads
the city as a “signifier” and writes a storia about it for the eighteenth century Ottoman
audience allows me to claim that his cultural context serves as a meaning-generating
framework. The perception and the understanding of the relatively unknown always have
been formed by the projection of the well known, and thereby, the unknown becomes familiar
to us. Every understanding of the unknown occurs through its integration into the already
known: that means through its domestication into the known culture. For example, I am well
aware that when he provides information about the ancient rulers, he employs Ottoman
terminology such as padişah, sultan, and bey anachronistically. An attempt like this was not
made by the Ottoman philhellenistic authors in the nineteenth century, who transmitted
directly what they saw. Nevertheless, Mahmud Efendi tries to dress up in an Ottoman and
Islamic robe what he had learnt on this issue.
It must be specified that Mahmud Efendi’s “Ottomanization” attempt on foreign
cultural units works as first, the Ottoman institutions, customs, traditions and titles were
projected onto the elements from Ancient Greece; and second, all of the phrases are set up
with a particular Ottomanization process, i.e. the local elements from the point of view of
language, such as proverbs and idioms, and language features.
478
Lau Chek Wai (Eric), available at: http://www.inter-disciplinary.net/ci/interculturalism/IC1/lau%20paper.pdf.
124
To give some example, in explaining some events, he enriches the story with Quranic
verses, hadiths and Ottoman idioms.479 In addition, he makes a projection of the concepts
such as cizye (poll tax), öşür (traditional agricultural tax) and rusumat (excise and special
taxes) as if they had existed in Ancient Athens even though they belonged to the Ottoman
administrative system.480 Another example is the term “Allah misafiri,” or “guest of Allah”.481
This phrase denotes the significance of the guest. Any guest deserves particular hosting and
service. And as mentioned in the text, it is not proper behavior to kill God’s guests. Another
concept is sulh (amicable agreement), which had an important place in Ottoman society.482 It
was the method of finding a solution or a point of agreement between two conflicting parties
without applying to the court. Another phrase appears, “rencide-i hatr” in this sample text
which means to be offended. Another phrase is “nush u pend” meaning to give some advice
referring to the counsel culture.483 In this form, which is commonly seen in Divan literature,
troubled people are sighing. Following this term, another concept about the order of country
(nizam- ı memleket) was an important and very traditional term in the Ottoman polity.
Additionally, he calls Solon as Süleyman Hakim. What is at stake here is to advance a name
directly above another name, or an icon towards another one, such as mentioning that “Solon”
is an equivalent for “Suleyman.” The word Suleyman is used here like an attribute “lawmaker” because of the fact that the Ottomans called Suleyman I, the Magnificent (15201566), the Lawgiver. In Darling’s words, “Suleyman acquired the epithet ‘lawgiver’ because
he presided over the harmonization of dynastic law and Islamic law, and because his courts
exercised a justice like that of the Biblical Solomon.”484 What is also interesting is that in the
depiction of this King Suleyman entering the city, the components of the welcoming
ceremony are dominantly Ottoman ones.485 A misbehavior is explained with terms from the
mystical culture as “desire of lust of nefs/ego.”486 Athenian people sacrifice animals and
479
TMH: 62a, 17b.
For the usage of öşr, TMH: 67a, 67b, 78a, 98a, 99a, 99b, 122a, 123a, 123b, 153a, 155a, 174b, 185a
For rusum: TMH: 51a, 118b, 122a, 123a, 123b, 125a, 125b, 153b, 154b, 155a, 156b, 172b, 174b, 185a
Cizye: 99a, 122a, 123b, 125a, 125b, 166a, 172b.
481
TMH: 35b.
482
For the implementation of sulh in the Ottoman courts, see Işık Tamdoğan, “Sulh and the 18th Century
Ottoman Courts of Adana and Üsküdar,” Islamic Law and Society 15 (2008): pp. 55-83. For sulh, see TMH:
35b, 36a, 61a, 61b.
483
TMH: 38a, 51a, 62a, 69b, 83b, 96a, 154a.
484
Linda Darling, “Political Change and Political Discourse in the Early Modern Mediterranean World,”
Journal of Interdisciplinary History 38 (4/2008), pp. 505-531, p. 515.
485
TMH: 54a.
486
For the stages of nafs, Robert Frager, Heart, Self and Soul: The Sufi Psychology of Growth, Balance, and
Harmony (Wheaton: Theosophical Publishing House, 1999); and Annemarie Schimmel, Mystical
480
125
distribute the meat to the poor. He uses some phrases for the philosophers of Athens such as
“Elhamdulillahi Teala.” For the Spartans in the Battle of Thermopylae (480 BC), he uses the
term serdengeçti,487 a term meaning a soldier who puts himself in the front and so becomes a
martyr, in the Ottoman context. He also compares the Boeotians led by the Thebans in the
Battle of Leuctra against the Spartans to Rustam, who was a famous Persian hero from the
Shahnamah of Firdawsi.488 Mahmud Efendi mentions Pericles in the section on the building
of the Parthenon with terminology belonging specifically to Ottoman culture. If some
charitable building such as a fountain or mosque was built, a verse specifying the date of the
building and the name of the person who funded the charity were written at the entry gate.489
As a last example, when he describes Aristotle and Plato, he mentions their views on the
unity of God.490 He identifies Socrates as “enlightened with the light of the Unity of God”
[nur-ı tevhid ile mücella].491 Furthermore in explaining some events, he enriched the story
with some short Quranic verses, hadiths and Ottoman idioms.492 And while writing about
philosophers, he mentions the three, the seven or the forty (üçler, yediler, kırklar) as appears
in various forms in Turkish mythology.493
2.5. Theseus
In order to grasp what Mahmud Efendi did to the text better, I would like to give
detailed information from the sections on Theseus, Alexander the Great and Constantine the
Great. Theseus can be considered as a good example to metamorphose Theseus’ story into an
Ottoman-Islamic, even mystic-sufi, genre. He draws an image of a young figure at the
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
Dimensions of Islam (Chapel Hill: University of South Carolina Press, 1975). TMH: 32a, 33a, 36b, 67b, 68b,
136a.
TMH: 85b.
TMH: 183b.
TMH: 144a.
TMH: 149a-150b. We may see similar trends in the early translation from the Greek. For instance, in an
early Arabic translation of Aristotle’s Rhetoric, Zeus is crossed out in the Arabic text and Apollo was
replaced with God (Allah). Similarly, Hunayn ibn Ishaq replaced Greek deities with the one God. G.
Strohmaier, “Hunayn b. Ishaq,” Encyclopedia of Islam New Edition, Electronic Version (Leiden: E. J. Brill,
1958-2004). In the translation of Themistius’ commentary on Aristotle’s Metaphysics, Ishaq bin Hunayn
translated the First Intellect as God (Allah): “It has become clear from all of this that God (Allah) is the first
cause (Mabda’ al-awwal) and he knows Himself and all the things for which He is the initiator.” For
additional examples and a more detailed discussion of the translation of names of Greek deities into Arabic
see John Walbridge, “Explaining Away the Greek Gods in Islam,” Journal of the History of Ideas 59
(3/1998), p. 389.
TMH: 116b
TMH: 61b, 17b.
TMH: 132a, 133b. For the Turkish mythology on numbers, see Bahaeddin Ögel, Türk Mitolojisi (Kaynakları
ve Açıklamaları ile Destanlar), 2 vols. (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu yay., 1995).
126
beginning, who is brave, benevolent and charitable, considerate of his father and the people of
Athens. He linked other cities around Athens and built many buildings in the city and strived
for the development of the city. After these affairs, in Mahmud Efendi’s words, he followed
his “bad soul / and animal lust” and became a man of a character so low that he assaulted the
daughters of other rulers in the surrounding cities. In the end, he perished because of a bird,
even though he was a King.
The Theseus story told by Mahmud Efendi is imbued with the mystic and nasihatname
tradition and gains the character of a Mirror for Princes, in order to obtain lessons from this
story. In this sample, if the speeches of the people after building the tomb of Theseus are
examined, Ottoman subjects are encountered again. These subjects consider Theseus to be
their protector (veliyyü’n-niam) and themselves as his slaves, ready to be released (azadlık
kul). Veliyyü’n-niam means in the Ottoman context “protector” or “supporter,” which also
signifies being accepted under the protection of a patron. In this story no place is given to the
mythology, although there are in the original story.
2.5.1. The Story of Theseus
Theseus is a very important character for Mahmud Efendi, with whom he begins his
History, because Kontares does so. It is very normal to start the history of Athens with the
story of Theseus because it is well known, “Athens had a founder”494 and “truly, the
Athenians were, as Sophocles calls them, Theseidai, the ‘sons of Theseus’”.495 This situation
may be a sign for us that the Athenians were fully aware of the “founder-hero” character of
Theseus496 during the second half of the seventeenth century. As Mahmud Efendi depends on
the choices’ of the Greek monks and what they had chosed is Istoria of Kontares; it reminds
me of Theseus’ agency in the formation of Athens’ identity as a city-state. My argument lies
in the fact that Mahmud Efendi’s text has shown us very early clues about the “re-invention of
Athens” as explained in the Introduction. Mahmud Efendi’s narration could be counted as an
early attempt, before Philhellenistic curiosity.
494
495
496
W. Den Boer, “Theseus: The Growth of a Myth in History”, Greece & Rome 16 (1969), pp. 1-13, p.1.
Plutarch calls Theseus the “founder” (oikistês, the same word used for the founder, real or legendary, of a
colony) of Athens and compares him to Romulus, the “father” (patêr) of Rome. See Barry S. Strauss,
Fathers and Sons in Athens. Ideology and Society in the Era of the Peloponnesian War (Princeton: Princeton
Univ. Press 1993), p. 105.
Ibid., p. 128.
See Carla M. Antonaccio, “Contesting the Past. Hero Cult, Tomb Cult, and Epic in Early Greece”, American
Journal of Archaeology 98 (3/1994), pp. 389- 410.
127
Let me survey how Theseus became such an important figure for Athens. For the
survey, we firstly must emphasize that from the early times onwards Athens had a tendency to
appropriate and define “typically Greek” features or institutions as “typically Athenian” and
so Theseus became a culturally and morally significant hero attributed to the previous
“panhellenic culture hero Heracles”.497 Many reasons for this heroification process could be
voiced. One of the first reasons in the increasing interest in Theseus seems to lay in the
cultural and political situation in Athens. The late archaic and early classical periods are
historically evaluated as the time of freedom and creativity in politics and art. The Athenian
people liberated themselves from tyranny, set up a democracy, and subdued the Persian threat,
and gradually established a rich empire. Poetry, drama and art expanded, and the artists
sought new themes to honor their growing city. And at this point, they found the glorified
figure of Theseus to reflect the general prosperity of Athens upon the hero.498
It is also known that the legend of Theseus had become a part of the daily life of
every Athenian during the time of the Parthenon, of Aeschylus, Sophocles and Euripides, of
Cimon and Pericles. His exploits were commemorated by the most admired sculpture and
painting; the common utensils of the dining room and kitchen carried images of his great
accomplishments. The politicians overemphasized his virtues and took his life as an example.
Even Theseus was honored, along with Hermes and Heracles, as patron of the gymnasium and
palaestra.499 His festivals provided holidays and recreation. The tragedians noticed in his
legends one of the most fertile sources for Greek drama. Thus, Theseus, more than any other
man or any other demi-god, had been transformed into the hero of Classical Athens. And yet
this pre-eminence had not always been his. At the beginning of the sixth century BC, a
century before the start of the extraordinary age of genius which we call Classical Athens,
Theseus was a hero with little honor, even in his own country.500 The best indication of
Theseus’ relatively minor role in early Greek legend is provided by the Homeric poems. We
see the figure of Theseus in the Iliad and Odyssey very few times: Theseus is a quite
unpopular Attic hero in the older epic tradition and in the Iliad (apart from some interpolated
lines of the Iliad), while the Odyssey has references about Ariadne story (11.321-325). Then,
the tale of Theseus’ sons Acamas and Demophon, whose grandmother Aethra had been
bridled by Dioscuri for the enslavement of Helen and who headed to Troy for freeing Aethra,
497
498
499
500
Sophie Mills, Theseus, Tragedy and the Athenian Empire (Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1997), p. 232.
Jenifer Neils, The Youthful Deeds of Theseus (Rome: Bretschneider, 1987), p. 2.
Strauss, Fathers and Sons, p. 119.
W. R. Connor, “Theseus in Classical Athens”, in The Quest for Theseus (ed.) Anne G. Ward et al. (New
York: Praeger, 1970), pp. 143- 175, p. 143.
128
is converged in the Cyclic poems.501 Yet, we notice that it is precisely during the rule of
Pisistratus and his sons that the Theseus myth begins to grow in popularity and prominence in
Athens. This is the first “re-invention of a founder myth” which the successors have given
wide distribution. Theseus was held reponsible from the unification of numerous Attic
townships into one capital city, according to the tradition; as citing from Diamant.502 He
becomes more frequently represented in Athenian art. Festivals become associated with his
deeds and he takes on an added splendor in Attic cults. Before the century ends, a whole epic,
the Theseis, had been composed about him and he had become the most famous of Attic
heroes; on the vases of this period we find Theseus appearing nearly half as often as Heracles,
the traditional athlete of all Greek peoples. Instead of being only the hero of Crete, we see his
presentation at every opportunity: against the Amazons and Centaurs and various enemies that
he overcame on his journey from Troezen to Athens. Just when the cycle of his adventures
was established we cannot definitely say, but it is certain that toward the end of the sixth
century in Athens he successfully threatened Heracles’ supremacy, although later Theseus
was called “‘Heracles the Second’ as Plutarch tells us (Thes. 29.3)” 503 There is a clear reason
for this: he was an Athenian, whereas Heracles was disagreeably Dorian.504
A recurring pattern in classical Athenian art is its response to political and historical
events in the world around it. It turns to the old legends to remodel them so that they may gain
new importance. The tale of Theseus’ battle with the Amazons underwent the same process
after the Persian invasion. We see then that his exploits had been sung – many exciting
adventures were told like a romance – especially the scene in which Theseus carried off one
of the Amazons.505 After the Persian attacks, the Amazon myth was considered from a new
perspective. It appeared as a prototype of the more recent barbarian attack which the
Athenians had just warded off. The legend metamorphoses. Theseus’ invasion of the
Amazons’ country was not stressed any longer. Instead, their incursion into Attica is
501
502
503
504
505
Greek Epic Fragments from the Seventh to the Fifth Centuries BC., edited and translated by Martin L. West,
2003, 24-5.
Steven Diamant, “Theseus and the Unification of Attica. Studies in Attic Epigraphy, History and
Topography: Presented to Eugene Vanderpool”, Hesperia Supplements 19 (1982), pp. 38-47, p. 38.
John N. Davis, “Theseus the King in Fifth c. Athens”, Greece & Rome 29 (1982), pp. 25-34, p. 26.
Walter R. Agard, “Theseus: A National Hero”, The Classical Journal 24 (2/1928), pp. 84-91, p. 86.
Connor, “Theseus in Classical Athens”, p. 156.
129
emphasized. In this new situation, Theseus functions as the defender of his city, not an
adventurer.506
In summary, Theseus, who passed away so long ago as to be everyone’s ancestor,
provides a direct connection from the greatest heroes of old, who survived even before the
Trojan War, down to their modern ancestors. Theseus was the only hero with Athenian
connections who was well-known outside the borders of Attica. His siege over the Minotaur
transcends his failures with Ariadne, Helen and Persephone, and it is as the Minotauromachist
that he gets a position of importance among the Athenians.507 We see from this peculiarity of
Theseus that he had not been seen as only a figure but his connection with some rituals such
as initiation, change of status and death, indicate that he is a symbol of process: a boy grew
into a man, a child into a citizen, and a dependent became kyrios. Thus, he was a significant
symbolic figure of alteration and change.508
2.5.2. Theseus in the Narration of Mahmud Efendi
It can be summarized here the main lines of the story of Theseus as narrated by
Mahmud Efendi in the following manner:
Theseus was raised at Mezistre in Morea509, and when he became mature he took, by
his mother’s directions, the sword and sandals510, the tokens which had been left by
Aegeus511, and went on to Athens. He went by land, showing his command by destroying the
robbers and monsters that infested the country. Periphetes, Sinis, Phaea the Crommyonian
sow, Sciron, Cercyon, and Procrustes fell before him: “The slaying of Sinis, the son of
Poseidon, who is described as having overwhelming strength and was once the most powerful
of men; the felling of the man-slaying sow of the Crommyon woods; the killing of reckless
506
507
508
509
510
511
Ibid., p. 157.
Mills, Theseus, tragedy and the Athenian Empire, p. 265.
Strauss, Fathers and Sons, p. 121.
Mahmud Efendi, folio 13a: “Mora ceziresinde vaki‘ Mezistre diyarına...” See Machiel Kiel, “Mezistra”,
Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı İslam Ansiklopedisi, vol. 29, Ankara 2004, 545-546. The hometown of Theseus,
although generally accepted as Troezen, is an issue for discussion. For all these discussions see: Henry J.
Walker, Theseus and Athens ( New York 1995), pp. 9- 15.
“The ancients generally derived Theseus’s name from the verb tithêmi, “to place,” “put,” “set,” “establish,”
“adopt,” or “acknowledge” a child. Various etymologies were proposed, of which Plutarch cites two.
According to Plutarch, some of his sources derived the name “Theseus” from the placing of tokens of
recognition (dia ten ton gnôrismatôn thesin, Thes. 4.1)”, see: Strauss, Fathers and Sons, p. 123.
Called “Gnorismata”: Frank Brommer, Theseus. Die Taten des griechischen helden in der antiken Kunst und
Literatur (Darmstadt 1982), p. VII.
130
Sciron; the closing of the palaestra of Kerkyon; and the stilling of the hammer of Polyphemos
wielded by Procrustes.”512 At Athens he was immediately known by Medea513, who laid a plot
to poison him at a banquet to which he was invited. With the help of the sword which he
carried, Theseus was recognized by Aegeus, acknowledged as his son, and called his
successor. The sons of Pallas, thus disappointed in their hopes of succeeding to the throne,
aimed to secure the succession by violence and declared war, but were destroyed. After this
Theseus went of his own accord as one of the seven youths whom the Athenians were forced
to send annually, with seven maidens, to Crete, to be devoured by the Minotaur. According to
Mahmud Efendi, the Minotaur was adam ejderhası baş pehlivan, the man-like dragon, head
wrestler. By calling him this all the mythological attributions of Minotaur were cleared away
and the monster was grounded in an Ottoman context. After he threw the Minotaur over a big
stone in the dungeon – not in the labyrinth- King Minos presented Ariadné, his daughter in
Mahmud Efendi’s text, to Theseus as a wife. They married and returned to Athens together.
Ariadné is never mentioned by Mahmud Efendi from then on. As the vessel approached
Attica, Theseus neglects to hoist the white sail which was to have been the signal of the
success of the expedition; whereupon Aegeus, thinking that his son had been killed, threw
himself into the sea. Thus, Theseus became the king of Athens. Other adventures followed.
Theseus is said to have assaulted the Amazons514 before they had recovered from the attack of
Heracles, and to have carried off their queen Antiopé. At the beginning of the adventure,
when Mahmud Efendi talks about Heracles, he underlines the heroic character of Heracles,
the son of Theseus’ paternal aunt, and he notes that “…and before the appearance of Theseus,
the bey of Thebes, so called Heraclius, who is well known with his courage and efficacy,
hence, above mentioned bey of Thebes, Heraclius enchanted all of the settlers with his
courage and usefulness and became so very famous. Even Heraclius was one of the relatives
of Theseus, the son of his paternal aunt. But, since the appearance of Theseus, the courage of
Heraclius became outmoded, and the courage of Theseus was spoken widely…”515 The
Amazons in their turn invaded Attica, and entered into Athens itself; and the final battle in
which Theseus overcame them was fought in the very center of the city.
512
513
514
515
Theseus’ deeds according to Bacchylides: Neils, The Youthful Deeds of Theseus, p. 9.
For the whole story of Medea, see: James J. Clauss (ed.), Medea. Essays on Medea in Myth, Literature,
Philosophy and Art (Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press, 1997)
On the Amazons, Mahmud Efendi gives very interesting information which needs more attention in a
separate article.
TMH, 26a.
131
Theseus figures in almost all the great heroic expeditions. He established a close
friendship with Pirithous, and assisted him against Çandovaro şahının askerleri literally the
soldiers of shah Çandovaro, Centaurs. The reason for this fight was the immoral behavior of
the soldiers, such as raping women of the marriage ceremony when they got heavily drunk.
Mahmud Efendi gives an explanation for their representation on the Acropolis in very
Ottoman language. He says that
…under the roof of that weird and strange temple built in the Athenian castle, from white
marble, in that wedding ceremony, the faces of the group kidnapping women … were
described as animals, for as much as, that group of people did not obey the customs of
the visit, and also did not obey the quality of humanity as merdumiyyet, they described
their halves as behimane, meaning animal with four legs, as they have subordinated
themselves to lust. Since this group seems to be in appearance human, but in their selves
and their lust they are animals, they do not possess the peculiarities of purity and innerpersuasion. Therefore, they depict them down to their bellies as human, and down below
516
their bellies as animals…
With the assistance of Pirithous he carried off Helen from Sparta while she was still a
girl, and placed her at a place called Drogoman, Aphidnae, under the care of Aethra. In return
he accompanied Pirithous in his journey to Epirus, in order to steal away the daughter of the
king of Molossians. That king had a great dog (Cerberus) and threw Pirithous to be torn in
pieces by his dog and put Theseus into prison, and kept him. Theseus was kept in hard
conditions until he was released by Heracles. Meantime the shah of Mezistre, (in original
sources Castor and Pollux) invaded Attica, and carried off Helen and Aethra, and burned
Athens. Menestheus also tried to provoke the people against Theseus, who on his return found
himself unable to re-construct his authority, and retired to Scyros, where he met with a
hazardous death at the hands of Lycomedes. Mahmud Efendi mentions that “to send woe
away and to get rid of sadness, he tends to always go hunting and gradually he became
addicted to bird hunting…”517 and therefore, he perished because of a bird even though he
was such a brave shah: “ah vah yazık oldu böyle bir bahadır şaha ki bir kuş yoluna feda
oldu”518
The shield, sword and then the bones of Theseus were discovered with the help of a
black bird, and brought to Athens, where they were stored in a temple (the Theseum) erected
in honor of the hero by the sale of Theseus’ properties. The temple is called mabed and türbe
in parallel with the Ottoman context.
516
517
518
TMH, 32a.
TMH, 38b.
TMH, 39b.
132
In the Istoria of Kontares, the arrangement of the events in the story is overlapped
with the narration of Mahmud Efendi. Kontares puts the line of the story as such:
p. 6 Birth of Theseus
p. 8 His [Theseus’] death
p. 10 First money in Athens
p. 11 Who were the Pallantides
p.11 Theseus aims his arrow against the Pallantides
p. 12 He [Theseus] killed the Pallantides
p. 12 He [Theseus] tamed the bull of Marathon
p. 13 Gifts for the Minotaur
p. 14 Request of Minos to Athenians
p. 14 Mass kidnapping of children (paidomazoma) in Athens
p. 14 Youth of Athens in Crete, given to the Minotaur
p. 15 Goodwill of Theseus
p. 16 He [Theseus] defeated the Minotaur
p. 16 Labyrinth that Theseus was put in in Crete
p. 17 Captain made a mistake
p. 17 Aegeas’ death
p. 18 Ship that they kept safe all these years
p. 19 It [Athens] was rebuild by Theseus
p. 19 Prytaneion founded by Theseus
p. 19 He [Theseus] installed democracy and the prytaneion and the celebrations and he
divided the people
p. 19 Democracy of Theseus; celebrations/Feasts in Athens
p. 20 The Amazons attack Greece
p. 20 He [Theseus] expanded the country’s borders. He defeated the Amazons
p. 21 Wisdom of Hippolytus
p. 21 Dishonesty of Phaidra
p. 22 Her [Phaidra] death
p. 22 Hippolytus is accused
p. 22 [Hippolytus] death
p. 23 Friendship of Perithios and Theseus
p. 23 Wedding of Peirithios
p. 24 He [Theseus] tamed the Hippocentaurs
p. 24 He [Theseus] stole Hellen
p. 24 What are hippocentaurs and how they were tamed from Theseus
p. 25 Cerberus and what it was
p. 25 He [Theseus] was hated by Menestheas
p. 25 Cruelty of Idoneus toward Theseus and Perithios
p. 26 His [Menestheus] shrewdness
p. 26 Brothers of Elleni (Hellen) in Athens
p. 27 Heracles sets Theseus free
p. 27 Lykomedes’ deceit towards Theseus
p. 28 He [Theseus] was freed by Herakles
p. 29 Destruction of democracy
p. 31 His [Menestheus] death
p. 32 How an eagle pointed toward his [Theseus’] remains, and they were brought to Athens,
133
After narrating the main plot of Theseus’ story and a reminder of who Theseus was, it
is necessary to compare the classical texts with Mahmud Efendi’s narration via Kontares. The
order of events in his life span according to first hand sources in Perseus Digital Library
seems to be in the following manner:519
In classical texts
Son of Aegeus and Aethra: Apollod. 3.15.8
In Mahmud Efendi’s text
Exists
Son of Poseidon and Aethra, daughter of
Pittheus: Paus. 1.17.3, Paus. 2.30.9, Paus.
10.25.7
mother of Theseus carried away captive by
Dioscuri: Paus. 1.41.4
great-grandson of Pelops: Paus. 1.41.5,
Paus. 5.10.8
called an Erechthid: Paus. 7.17.7
born at Genethlium near Troezen: Paus.
2.32.9
story of young Theseus and the lion's skin
of Heracles: Paus. 1.27.7
procures the tokens left by Aegeus: Paus.
Exists
1.27.8, Paus. 2.32.7, Apollod. 3.15.8
clears the road from Troezen to Athens of
Exists
rogues: Paus. 2.1.4, Apollod. 3.15.8,
Apollod. E.6.3
his abduction of Helen into Attica: Hdt.
Exists
9.73, Apollod. 2.3.2
carries off Helen to Aphidnae: Apollod.
Exists
3.10.7
in the Argo: Apollod. 1.9.17
goes to Thesprotis with Pirithous to carry
Exists
off king's wife: Paus. 1.17.4, Paus. 1.18.4,
519
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.04.0004:entry%3Dtheseus, p.151.
134
Paus. 2.22.6
kept prisoner in Thesprotis: Paus. 1.17.4, 5,
Exists
Paus. 3.18.5
descends with Pirithous to hell: Paus.
9.31.5
attempts to win Persephone for Pirithous,
but is detained with him in Hades: Apollod.
2.3.2
Rescued by Heracles and sent back to
Exists
Athens: Apollod. 2.3.2
bound fast in hell but rescued by Heracles:
Paus. 1.17.4, Paus. 10.29.9, Apollod.
2.5.12
in Hades: Apollod. 3.10.7
allies himself with Pirithous in the war with
Exists
the centaurs: Apollod. 2.2.2, Apollod. 2.3.1
Theseus fights Centaurs at wedding of
Exists
Pirithous: Paus. 1.17.2, Paus. 5.10.8
comes to Athens: Apollod. 2.1.3
Exists
sent against the Marathonian bull: Apollod.
2.1.3
drives bull of Marathon to Acropolis and
sacrifices it: Paus. 1.27.9 ff
recognized by Aegeus: Apollod. 2.1.3,
Exists
Apollod. 2.1.3
his adventures with the Minotaur, Phaedra,
Exists
and Ariadne: Apollod. 3.1.4
sent with the third tribute to the Minotaur:
Exists
Apollod. E.1.6
sails for Crete to beard the Minotaur: Paus.
Exists
1.1.2, Paus. 1.22.5, Paus. 1.42.2
Fetches ring of Minos from sea: Paus.
1.17.3
135
fights bull of Minos (Minotaur): Paus.
Exists
1.24.1, Paus. 3.18.16
vanquishes Asterion, son of Minos: Paus.
2.31.1
by means of a clue furnished by Ariadne he
enters the labyrinth and kills the Minotaur:
Apollod. E.1.6, Apollod. E.1.9
goes with Ariadne to Naxos: Apollod. E.1.9
robbed of Ariadne by Dionysus: Paus.
9.40.4, Paus. 10.29.4
dedicates image of Aphrodite to Delian
Apollo: Paus. 9.40.4
holds games in Delos in honor of Apollo:
Paus. 8.48.3
forgets to hoist white sails instead of black
Exists
on his return from Crete: Paus. 1.22.5
succeeds to the sovereignty of Athens:
Exists
Apollod. E.1.11
founds temple of Savior Artemis on his
return from Crete: Paus. 2.31.1
collects Athenians into one city: Paus.
1.22.3
institutes worship of Vulgar Aphrodite:
Paus. 1.22.3
Panathenian games get their name in his
time: Paus. 8.2.1
false tradition that Theseus instituted
democracy at Athens: Paus. 1.3.3
goes with Heracles against the Amazons:
Exists
Apollod. 2.1.5, Paus. 1.2.1, Paus. 5.11.4
carries off Antiope or Hippolyte: Apollod.
Exists
E.1.15
136
In some accounts Hippolyte is said to have
been married to Theseus instead of Antiope.
Euripides, in his Hippolytus, makes her the
mother of Hippolytus.
carries off Amazon Antiope: Paus. 1.2.1
vanquishes the Amazons at Athens:
Exists
Apollod. E.1.16
Defeats Amazons in Attica or Troezenia:
Exists
Paus. 1.15.2, Paus. 1.41.7, Paus. 2.32.9,
Paus. 5.11.7
Said to have slain Timalcus, son of
Megareus: Paus. 1.41.3 ff.
hunts Calydonian boar: Paus. 8.45.6
Refuses to surrender children of Heracles to
Eurystheus: Paus. 1.32.6
receives the banished Oedipus: Apollod.
3.5.9
with the Athenians, captures Thebes and
gives the Argive dead to be buried:
Apollod. 3.7.1, Paus. 1.39.2 ff.
has a son Hippolytus by the Amazon:
Exists in Kontares’ version
Apollod. 2.1.5
Marries Phaedra: Apollod. E.1.16, Paus.
1.22.2
sends Hippolytus to Troezen: Paus. 1.22.2
curses his son Hippolytus: Apollod. E.1.16
by his curses causes death of Hippolytus:
Paus. 2.27.4
father of Acamas and Demophon: Apollod.
E.1.16, Apollod. E.5.21
banished by Menestheus: Apollod. E.1.22,
Apollod. E.1.24
father of Demophon: Paus. 10.25.7
137
father of Melanippus by daughter of Sinis:
Paus. 10.25.7
kills the fifty sons of Pallas: Apollod.
Exists
E.1.11
slays Pallas and his sons: Paus. 1.22.2
Exists
tried for slaughter of Pallas and his sons:
Exists
Paus. 1.28.10
goes to Troezen to be purified: Paus. 1.22.2
killed by Lycomedes: Apollod. 2.4.1
Exists
goes to Scyros: Paus. 1.17.6
Exists
treacherously murdered there by
Exists
Lycomedes: Paus. 1.17.6
his bones brought back from Scyros to
Exists
Athens by Cimon, Paus. 1.17.6, Paus. 3.3.7
sanctuaries of Theseus: Paus. 1.17.2, 6,
Exists
Paus. 1.30.4
Characters in Mahmud Efendi’s narration of Theseus:
Girit şahının oğlu [son of King
Andoraiyona
Minos]
Ayais
Aegeus
Korunt haramisi (topuzlu) Gördes
Korynetes/ Periphetes
[The Corinthian bandit (with mace)]
Şebki
Sinis-Pityokamtes who uses pine
trees
Şebki’nin mahbube kızı [beloved
Perigune520, mother of Melanippus
daughter of Şebki]
İskarona
520
521
Sciron521 at Megara
Ovid, VII, 440
According to Talfourd Ely, “the prosaic character of the legend of Skiron no doubt is in great measure the
cause of its neglect by earlier writers, and the infrequency of its occurrence on works of art.”see: “Theseus
and Skiron”, in The Journal of Hellenic Studies 9 (1888), pp. 272- 281, p. 281.
138
Arkadyalı harami Çarçona [the
Cercyon
Archadian bandit Çarçona]
Arkadyalı haraminin ayakdaşı [the
Procrustes
companion of Archadian bandit]
Meziyyi
Medea
Amca oğulları [sons of uncle of
Pallas’ brothers
Aegeus]
Girit şahı [the shah of Crete]
King Minos of Crete
Sefine kaptanı [the captain of ship]
Captain with whom Theseus returns
from Crete
Baş pehlivan [head of the wrestlers]
Minoatur
Girit şahının yetişmiş kızı [mature
Ariadne
daughter of Crete]
İstefe kralı Iraklı, hala oğlu [king of
Heracles
Thebes, son of paternal aunt of
Theseus]
İpolti
Hippolyte
Matalti
Heracles’ wife
Ereğli şahı Pirinso [the shah of
Prithous
Ereğli]
Çandavro şahının askeri [soldiers of
Centaurs
shah Çandavro]
Mezistre şahının kızı [daughter of
Helen
the shah of Mezistre/Mystras]
Milusu şahı [shah of the place
Molossians
called Milusu]
Minsitiya
Menestheus
Eğriboz şahı [shah of Eğriboz]
King of Eubeoa
Eşkire beyi [ruler of Eşkire]
King of Skyros, Lycomedes
Saluna’da olan kahinler [the oracles
He might mean Delphi, but I am not
in Saluna]
sure
139
2.5.3. Images of Theseus
If we turn our attention to Mahmud Efendi, we find him writing Theseus in the form
of Seseya and makes others use the expression “wild bandit” when talking about Seseya.522
When we look at the above chart, we can simply notice that Mahmud Efendi did not tell all
the affairs and events in his narrative, but he chose some of them. For instance he did not
mention the capture of the Marathonian bull, which was considered one of the great
achievements of Theseus.
Mills’ explanation about the remodeling of Theseus’ story by the Athenians could
help us to understand Mahmud Efendi’s, in reality Kontares’ choices better. Mills challenges
the view that Athenians were attracted to Theseus’ darker side and argues that although
Theseus has an blurred position between good and bad, he was the only hero connected to
Athens and famous outside of Attica.523 We know that his triumph over the Minotaur
transcends his failures with Ariadné, Helen and Persephone, and it is as the Minotauromachist
that he gets a significant position among the Athenians. In killing the foreign and malevolent
creature, he is essentially a civilizing hero.524
Additionally when we look at the usage of Theseus in the next centuries, we see the
same attitude: changing the story according to contemporary needs. Thus, the medieval mind
turned naturally to allegory, and it required no undue ingenuity to fit the accomplishments of
Hercules, Jason and Theseus into a scheme of moral exempla in the same way as history,
zoology, astronomy and every other science had been fitted. Theseus’ emergence in the
literature of the early Middle Ages is sporadic and seems to reflect no consistent or
particularly important attitude.525 Although because no distinction was drawn between myth
and history before the Renaissance, the Theseus stories were retold in many encyclopedic
works that began with the Creation or Adam and continued to the writer’s own day.
The generation after Dante saw the first humanist investigations into Classical
civilization, and a new interest in mythology. The effect upon literature and art was twofold:
522
523
524
525
J. Hall made a parallel comment to the usage of Mahmud Efendi: J. Hall, Ethnic Identity in Greek Antiquity
(Cambridge 19979, p. 15: “Theseus the Athenian was something of a wild bandit, if we can judge by his
appearance in the works of early archaic artists and writers.” Mahmud Efendi also mentions the well-known
fact that Theseus came from abroad when the opposition to Theseus arises: “…çünkü sen böyle mechulü’nnesebi temenni idüb ecnebiyi bize şah etmek dilersin seni daḫi şah istemeyiz…/…as if you wish a foreigner,
who had an unknown-ancestry, to be our shah, we even do not like you to be our shah…”
Mills, Theseus, Tragedy and the Athenian Empire, p. 264.
Connor, Theseus in Classical Athens, p. 265.
Tidworth, “The Roman and Medieval Theseus”, in The Quest for Theseus, pp.175- 195, p.188.
140
the ancient heroes become more human and more intellectualized simultaneously. They are
seen as real men and women having real emotions, and also as symbols of complex
intellectual ideas. For instance Petrarch’s greatest follower in Classical studies, Giovanni
Boccaccio, immersed himself deep into the problems of mythology trying, in true
Renaissance style, to combine the wisdom of the ancient world with the credence of medieval
Christianity.526 But Seneca, Ovid and Virgil were known and read all through the Middle
Ages, and some of the most beautiful late medieval manuscripts are of their works. Theseus
and Hippolytus are displayed as knights of chivalry, and Phaedra might be a lady from the
court of France.527
The men of the mid-sixteenth century looked again at the myth of Theseus and
searched for something new. What they found was eroticism.528 In the seventh century, a
certain kind of tendency to medievalize literature seems to have recurred, and thus, allegory
came back into intellectual fashion. George Sandys first published his translation of Ovid in
1626; it was re-issued in 1632 with an elegant commentary giving ‘the philosophical sense of
the fables of Ovid’. The labyrinth is ‘the condition of man’, only passable by ‘the conduct of
wisdom and exercise of unfainting fortitude’. The most extreme example of allegorization
comes in 1647 in Mystogogus Poeticus by a Scottish schoolmaster called Alexander Ross.
Ross’s cast of mind is fully medieval, but he overemphasizes this more than any medieval
commentator. For him Theseus is nothing less than a type of Christ.529 Thus, before the
eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, Theseus was a medieval romantic hero, a knight of
chivalry or one of the main characters of eroticism. The admission of pagan stories into
Christian scholarship affected Theseus’ story deeply.
It is not difficult to notice here the re-birth of Theseus the hero decisively during the
age of Napoleon and of the beginnings of nationalism. Hegel called for a ‘new Theseus’ for
the unification of Germany and the recollection that he was the founder of Athens begins for
the first time to influence Theseus’ image in art and literature. He transforms into the athletic
champion of civilization against barbarism, an interpretation implicit in the statue by
Antoine–Louis Barye (1846) where the Minotaur, a smaller figure than Theseus, clings to his
enemy with both legs while Theseus holds his shoulder with one hand and is about to swing a
sword into his skull with the other. Copied from Archaic Greek models, calm intelligence
526
527
528
529
Tidworth, The Roman and Medieval Theseus, p. 190.
Ibid., p. 193.
Tidworth, “From the Renaissance to Romanticism”, in The Quest for Theseus, pp. 195- 231, p.202.
Ibid., p. 216.
141
versus brute stupidity is personified in Theseus’ image. The idea of Theseus the patriot
enjoyed wide popularity all through the nineteenth century and is still current. The Romantic
Movement remodeled the old stories in its own view, characterized by two opposing and
rarely coexisting features – violence and sentiment.530
Mahmud Efendi’s Theseus can be considered an attempt to metamorphose Theseus’
story into Ottoman-Islamic, even mystic-sufi, genre. The image of Theseus drawn by
Mahmud Efendi is in fact at the beginning a young figure, who is a brave, benevolent and
charitable guy, considering his father and people of Athens. He allied other cities to Athens,
built many buildings in the city and strived for the development of the city. After these affairs,
in Mahmud Efendi’s words, he kept following his “bad soul / and animal lust” and became a
man with very low character assaulting the daughters of other rulers in surrounding cities.
Therefore, he perished because of a bird even he was a great King. The Theseus story told by
Mahmud Efendi is woven with the mystic and “ilm-i siyaset” tradition and gets the character
of Mirror for Princes in order to take lessons from this story. Throughout this story, no place
is given to the mythology, apart from two small scenes in which the oracles at Delphi were
mentioned.
To conclude, I would like to list some of the basic phrases and sections narrated by
Mahmud Efendi in his Theseus story which contain clues of wisdom and Ottomanization via
the usage of words that are used particularly for Ottoman contexts531:
“even the shah replied that murdering without informing the guest was not an act
appropriate for the fame of shahs…”532
“…my dear Sultan, in this issue, please permit your son because he is not worth the
leadership of the state in this land, during the reign of my sultan, this kind of novel things
would have emerged and after my sultan, to the sons of armed peoples such kind of fear
and cruelty would have left, this was not the case of my Sultan who is worth the state and
he had the fame of shahs. If the sultan has left the good treatment and best application,
nevertheless during nine years fourteen armed children will not be taken from the hands
of their parents, or relatives in cruel ways. They have been then captured. Consider this
fact into which degree it was a treatment of a famous shah. This situation was worse than
dying. To resolve this inappropriate situation away is a most convenient act. In this way,
530
531
532
Tidworth, From the Renaissance to Romanticism, p. 226.
These are sentences that can not be translated easily. Such as the term “gazanız mübarek olsun”. It has a
deep meaning in gaza ideology of the Ottoman state and Mahmud Efendi used it when Theseus returned
from the Amazon expedition. For the discussion of gaza thesis of Wittek for the early Ottomans see: Cemal
Kafadar, Between Two Worlds: The Construction of the Ottoman State (Berkeley 1995); Heath Lowry, The
Nature of the Early Ottoman State (Albany, New York 2006). For a comparative approach see: Ali
Anooshahr, The Ghazi Sultans and the Frontiers of Islam. A Comparative Study of the Late Medieval and
Early Modern Periods (New York 2009).
TMH: 12a
142
with the good invocation of my Sultan, your humble and vile son will try to resolve this
inappropriateness, please my Sultan, do not forget to mention us in your good
invocations.”533
“…please bestow this humble son of yours, so that I may arrive and get the good
invocation of my old father and then I will pray to come to these areas safely…”534
“… even Theseus could not succeed in keeping and protecting his good works and
famous name which he received, then he became subordinated to bad deeds and sensual
lust which were the opposite of those good works…”535
“… they asked the oracles and oracles replied that Athenian people were a group of
ungrateful people, and the curse of your king Theseus made you to come to this state of
affairs … that shah made you in the Peloponnese from the evil of six bandit monster, and
he saved you from the protection tax to Cretan shah to whom you paid for nine years
seven boys and seven girls, and also he protected you from the evil of women with one
breast. You cannot endure his loss after you had become sure of the threats from the
surrounding shahs due to their fear of Theseus, and your land become prosperous and
you won so many states. You dethroned him and he perished due to his deep sorrow. But
if you would like to get rid of that fear, concerns, sorrow and grief, you should respect,
serve and treat his relatives, children, and family with great respect. Then you should
arrive to the place where he perished and find his bones. After revering him, you should
put them into a sarcophagus and bury him in Athens and build upon his bones a tomb.
Unless you do this, you cannot be rid of apprehensions and suspicions. This was the
response of oracles.”536
2.6. Alexander the Great
In the Alexander the Great legend, as opposed to most Muslim scholars, Mahmud
Efendi makes a differentiation between Alexander the Great and a Quranic figure Dhu’lQarnain. So to speak, Alexander the Great does not transform into the Quranic prophet Dhu’lQarnain. However, in the narration, Mahmud Efendi prefers to tell Alexander’s story,
especially the episode about Darius’ death, as if it is a moral text. The depiction of the last
words of Darius and the funeral scene recall the style of Eastern advice literature rather than
Greek, Latin or French history texts.
Alexander the Great (356 BC-323 BC) ; known as the ruler of the all ages, born as the
son of king Philip of Macedon, and died in Babylon. In a reign of thirteen years, he spent
eleven years away from his country, “campaigning in hitherto unexplored regions.”537 After
combining the fragmented city-states of classical Greece, he carried Hellen culture to the
533
534
535
536
537
TMH: 30b.
TMH: 23b.
TMH: 33b.
TMH: 40a- 40b.
Richard Stoneman, Alexander the Great (London & New York: Routledge, 1997, second edition 2004), p. 1.
143
regions from Asia Minor to Himalaya Mountains and constructed new cities which
“represented a radical cultural change in the Near East”.538 . Probably because of this fact we
confront with the image of Alexander as Dhu’l-Qarnain in Islamic world whose sovereignty
was expressed as “ruling from Qaf to Qaf” (Kaf’dan Kaf’a hükmederdi)539 like the prophet
Solomon. Additionally, Dankoff acknowledge that as it is evident in monumental TurkishArabic lexicon, Diwan Lughat at-Turk of Mahmud Kashgari, there was a Central Asian
conception of Alexander the Great.540 Dankoff has noted that the American traveller Schuyler
remarked nineteenth century of Samarqand as such: “the exploits of Alexander, or Dhu’l
Qarnain in this region have been preserved by legend, and are known to every inhabitant.”541
Indeed, beyond space and time, encompassing Europe, Near East, Central &
Southeastern Asia and from Alexander’s own reign through the Middle Ages up to the
Modern times, his ventures “continued to yield rich veins that generations of writers exploited
in a strikingly diverse array of literary and didactic texts.”
542
He is the figure, for whom the
old world has produced the highest number of legends about. Alexander the Great, as a
symbol, can easily find a place to itself in Kafka’s stories with his horse Bucephalus543 or in
the line of a Divan poetry.544 His image can be reflected on a mosaic, on the wall at the House
of the Faun of Pompeii545 or in a miniature546; and the name Alexander can be given to
children almost everywhere in the world.
Mahmud Efendi was also aware of Alexander the Great. As we will see below, it is
very possible that Mahmud Efendi had gathered his first knowledge about him from the
538
Ibid., p. 1.
Qaf is referred as a mystical emerald mountain in Islamic cosmology. See: Feray Coşkun, A Medieval
Cosmography in an Ottoman Context: Mahmud el-Hatib’s Translation of Kharidat al-‘aja’ib, (unpublished
MA thesis, Boğaziçi Univ. 2007), p. 123.
540
Robert Dankoff, “The Alexander Romance in the Diwan Lughat at-Turk”, in Humaniora Islamica 1 (1973)pp.
233-44
541
Ibid., p. 233 cited from Eugne Schuyler, Turkistan ( New York 1877), p. 237.
542
Donald Maddox and Sara Sturm-Maddox, “Introduction: Alexander the Great in the French Middle Ages” in
The Medieval French Alexander, (ed.) Donald Maddox and Sara Sturm-Maddox , (Albany: SUNY Press,
2004), p. 1.
543
Francis Kafka, “Der Neue Advocat”, in Parables and Paradoxes (Parabeln und Paradoxe) (New York:
Schocken Books, 1961). Buchephalus appears in this story as a Dr. Lawyer.
544
Dursun Ali Tokel, Divan Şiirinde Mitolojik Unsurlar (Ankara: Akçağ Yay., 2000), pp.204- 208.
545
About the Alexander image at Pompei, see: Ada Cohen, The Alexander Mosaic: Stories of Victory and Defeat
(Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1997) and Michael Pfrommer, Untersuchungen zur Chronologie und
Komposition des Alexandermosaiks auf antiquarischer Grundlage, (Mainz: von Zabern, 1998).
546
Alexander the Great appears abundantly as Iskandar in Shahnameh miniatures: Robert Hillenbrand, “The
Iskandar Cycle in the Great Mongol Shahnama,” in (eds.) Margaret Bridges and Christoph Bürgel, The
Problematics of Power: Eastern and Western Representations of Alexander the Great (Bern: Lang Verlag,
1996), pp. 203-29.
539
144
Islamic resources in which the Alexander the Great had been mentioned many times and
usually identified with Dhu’l-Qarnain. However on the other hand, the information that
Mahmud Efendi mentioned about in Tarih-i Medinetü’l Hukema is a different Alexander the
Great, mainly based on Greek monks and their resources. Although he criticised some of the
commentators of the Quran and claim that Alexander the great and Dhu’l-Qarnain are not the
same person, he transforms Alexander the Great into the Alexander in Shahnamah as I will
try to express in the Darius’s death scene. Thus, what I claimed at the beginning that everyone
creates his/her own Alexander is still valid.
According to Ian Worthington, it is not easy to learn the life of Alexander the Great.
This is due to the limited resources. The sources, from the years between 336- 323 were
written by the contemporaries of Alexander and considered as primary sources, however most
of these sources did not survive. The sources that survived until today were mainly written by
the authors who lived later than Alexander and were called secondary works.547 For example,
Nearchus’s account that is about Alexander’s Indian expeditions was mentioned in Arrian and
Strabo’s books. Ptolemy’s account, which is about Alexander’s military aspects, forms the
backbone of Arrian’s narrations. Cleitarchus is also mentioned many times by Diodorus,
Curtius and Plutarch. Other than these, the Alexander Romance must be taken into account. It
is a mostly fictitious account of Alexander’s reign which began its life in the third or second
century BC and was reworked and expanded for many centuries to come.548 Speros Vryonis
claims that Pseudo- Callisthenes style of Alexander the Great figure was “a Byzantine legacy”
among Greeks, Serbs, Bulgarians, and Rumanians and with Oriental version Turks. With
reference to Veloudes, he says that “from the oldest Pseudo-Callisthenes text to the last
edition of the Modern Greek popular book in 1926 that there is no decisive break.”549 One of
the reasons for this was widely diffused Greek oral tradition including lore, tales, folk songs,
magical imprecations and even Karagöz, the shadow theatre.550 The popular Alexander story
was so strong that it “seems to have played a part, in the shaping of Digenes Akrites, and
547
548
549
550
Waldemar Heckel and J. C. Yardley lists the texts of all the ancient authors inwhich we can find the
information on the life of Alexander the Great: Alexander the Great: Historical Sources in Translation
(Oxford: Blackwell, 2003), pp. xxiii- xxix.
A.B. Bosworth, “The Sources” in Alexander the Great: A Reader, (ed.) by Ian Worthington, (London &
New York: Routledge, 2012), pp. 1- 17, 1-2.
Giorgos Veloudis, Der neugriechische Alexander Tradition in Bewahrung und Wandel (Munich:
Universitat, Institut fur Byzantinistik und Neugriechische Philologie, 1968), p.5 cited by Speros Vryonis,
“The Byzantine Legacy in Folk Life and Tradition in the Balkans”, in The Byzantine Legacy in Eastern
Europe, (ed.) Lowell Clucas, (New York: Columbia Univ. Press, 1988), pp. 107- 148, p. 145.
Speros Vryonis, op.cit. For the Karagöz see: Linda Suny Myrsiades, “Legend in the Theatre: Alexander the
Great and the Karaghiozis Text”, Educational Theatre Journal 27, (3/1975), pp. 387-394.
145
through that text its influence has been carried over into the later Tale of Achilles.”551 When
we consider how Alexander the Great was mentioned in Byzantium, we see that Alexander
was a popular figure for late Byzantium’s emperors as well. According to Nicolette Sophia
Trahoulia, such potential was also attributed to Mehmed II after the conquest of
Constantinople (1451- 1481).552 For Trahoulia, Alexander’s positive imperialistic image has
started in tenth century and in twelth century as he gained popularity with Komnenoi. In fact,
after 1204, emperors’ ideas of being the successor of Alexander became an important aspect
of Byzantium’s imperialistic ideology. The author attributes this to the enhanced Turkish
threat and to their idea of identifying Turks with the Persians who were defeated by
Alexander. Beyond all of these, Alexander as a Greek hero was such kind of field of Greek
historians during the Tourkokratia, that they often “wove the vision of myth into a compound
fabric of culture and ideology with special focus on nationalism.”553
Additionally, Alexander’s story was widely known in the West. According to
Stoneman, there were “four main channels of transmission of stories about Alexander from
antiquity to the authors of the medieval texts.”554 The first is the historical one written by
Quintus Curtius Rufus. Next is the Alexander Romance which was translated twice into Latin
by Julius Valerius and Leo the Archpriest of Naples later. Beside these narratives of
Alexander’s life, “there are numerous shorter texts referring to particular episodes in his
career.”555 These texts include the Letter to Aristotle on India and Brahmins.556 The fourth
consists of two texts of Arabic origin, the Sayings of the Philosophers by ’Abū Zayd Ḥunayn
ibn ’Isḥāq al-‘Ibādī (809- 873) and the Secret of the Secrets, a correspondence between
Aristotle and Alexander on the subject of kingship.557 Among all of these, Alexander
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
Roderick Beaton, The Medieval Greek Romance, (New York: Routledge, 1996), p. 31. For its influence on
Diogenes Akrites, see p. 46.
Nicolette Sophia Trahoulia, The Venice Alexander Romance, Hellenic Institute Codex Gr. 5: A Study of
Alexander the Great as an Imperial Paradigm in Byzantine Art and Literature, (Unpublished PhD diss.:
Harvard Univ., 1997), pp. 49-50.
Kyriakos N. Demetriou, “Historians on Macedonian Imperialism and Alexander the Great”, Journal of
Modern Greek Studies 19, (2001), pp. 23-60, p. 25. Demetriou has searched the reception of Alexander the
Great in History of Greece (12 vols., 1846–1856) by GeorgeGrote (1796–1871) and the History of the Greek
Nation, (5 vols., 1860–1874) by Konstantinos Paparrigopoulos (1815–1891).
Richard Stoneman, The Legends of Alexander the Great (London & New York: I. B. Tauris, 2012), p. ix.
Ibid., p. x.
Idem., “Naked Philosophers: The Brahmans in the Alexander Historians and the Alexander Romance” , the
Journal of Hellenic Studies 115 (1995), pp. 99- 114; Aleksandra Szalc: “Alexander's Dialogue with Indian
Philosophers: Riddle in Greek and Indian Tradition”, in Eos 98 (2011), pp.7-25 and Marc Steinmann,
Alexander der Große und die "nackten Weisen" Indiens. Der fiktive Briefwechsel zwischen Alexander und
dem Brahmanenkönig Dindimus (Berlin: Frank & Timme, 2012).
Stoneman, The Legends of Alexander the Great, pp. xi- xiii.
146
Romance was the most influential. For Dowden, with its eighty versions in twenty four
languages and its top point just after the diffusion of Bible, the Alexander Romance is the
most accomplished novel of antiquity, while its literary details and quality is vague.558 The
main source of the Alexander Romance was an epic written in Greek by an Hellenized
Egyptian in Alexandria during the second century AD attributed wrongly to Callisthenes.
Magic, marvels of the world, wonders and legends predominates the historic character of
Alexander the Great in Pseudo- Callisthenes variations such as in Armenian559, Syriac,560,
Ethiophian561, Mongolian562, Hebrew563, Malay564 and many vernacular versions including
German Annolied and Alexanderlied, French Roman d’Alexandre , English King Alisaunder,
Swedish, Danish, Scots, and in the Slavic languages.565 The Latin Alexandreis of Gautier de
Chatillon (ca. 1170) which extents in some two hundred manuscripts was also very influential
even it is believed that its depictions of Alexander “helped to shape medieval attitudes toward
history.”566
It is generally presumed that by the end of the Middle Ages Alexander romance
literature declined and historical versions substituted the Alexander Romances. A striking
558
Ken Dowden, “Pseudo-Callisthenes, The Alexander Romance, translated with introduction and notes”, in
B.P. Reardon (ed.), Collected Ancient Greek Novels (Berkeley & Los Angelos: University of California
Press, 1989), pp. 650-735.
559
Translated from the Armenian Version with an Introduction by Albert Mugrdich Wolohojian, The Alexander
Romance (New York & London: Columbia Univ. Press, 1969).
560
For the classical source, see: Theodor Nöldeke, Beiträge zur Geshichte des Alexanderromans
(Vienna:Denksschriften der kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1890) and a “recent” study on the
issue, G. J. Reinink,“Die Entstehung der syrischen Alexanderlegende als politisch-religiöse
Propagandaschrift für Herakleios' Kirchenpolitik” in After Chalcedon: Studies in Theology and Church
History, (ed.) C. Laga, J.A. Munitiz and L. Van Rompay (Leuven: Peeters, 1985), pp. 263-281.
561
E. A. Wallis Budge, The Alexander Book in Ethiopia: The Ethiopic Versions of Pseudo-Callisthenes, the
Chronicle of Al-Makin, the Narrative of Joseph Ben Gorion, and a Christian Romance of Alexander
(Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press 1933).
562
See: Francis Cleaves, “An Early Mongolian Version of the Alexander Romance”, in Harvard Journal of
Asiatic Studies 22 (1959), pp. 1-99.
563
Wout Jac Bettum, “Medieval Hebrew Versions of Alexander Romance”, (eds.) Andries Welkenhuysen et
all, in Medieval Antiquity, (Leuven: Leuven Univ. Prress, 1995), pp. 293- 302. Shamma Boyarin, Diasporic
Culture and Makings of Alexander Romances (Unpublished PhD diss.: Univ. of California, 2008).
564
P. J. Van Leeuwen, De Maleise Alexander Roman (Utrecht: Rijksuniversiteit te Utrecht, 1937).
565
For the summary of the romance in Medieval times see: L.J.Engels, “Alexander the Great”, A Dictionary of
Medieval Heroes, (ed.) by Willem P. Geritsen & Anthony G. van Melle, (trans.) Tanis Guest, (Woodbridge:
the Boydell Press, 1998), pp. 15- 24. The substantial corpus of Medieval texts concerned with Alexander
was examined by George Cary in his dissertation. It was published after his unexpected death: The Medieval
Alexander, (ed.) D.J.A. Ross, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1956, rpt. 1967). D. J. A. Ross
surveyed the illustrated Alexander manuscripts: D. J. A. Ross, Alexander Historiatus: a Guide to Medieval
Illustrated Alexander Literature (London: The Warburg Institute, 1963). Friedrich Pfister, Kleine Schriften
zum Alexanderroman (Meisenheim am Glan: Hain, 1976).
566
Donald Maddox and Sara Sturm-Maddox, “Introduction”, p. 2.
147
example is the prominence of Alexander texts in fifteenth century Burgundy, where he “plays
a key role in the rich political reflections of the theoreticians of power”.567 Thus, coming to
the early eighteenth century, there was a bulk of Western sources on Alexander the Great and
Sotiris and Kavallaris’ knowledge (via Kontares) on him based on these sources.568 However,
Mahmud Efendi’s perception of Alexander the Great was based on not only the two Greek
monks but also the Islamic resources, as mentioned above.
2.6.1. Islamic Heritage
What about the Islamic world’s perception of Alexander the Great? Famous by his
military expeditions, Alexander the Great has a prominent place in the cultural atmosphere of
the Islamic world. The reception of Alexander into the Islamic lore is grateful to his
identification with Dhu’l-Qarnain (“the two-horned”) who is mentioned in the Qur’an (18:8397) as the builder of the wall to imprison the warrior tribes of Gog and Magog (Yajuj waMajuj): [And he marched westwards] till, when he came to the setting of the sun, it appeared to him
that it was setting in a dark, turbid sea; and nearby he found a people [given to every kind of
wrongdoing]. We said: "O thou Two-Horned One! Thou mayest either cause [them] to suffer or treat
them with kindness! He answered: “As for him who does wrong [unto others] - him shall we, in time,
cause to suffer; and thereupon he shall be referred to his Sustainer, and He will cause him to suffer
with unnameable suffering. But as for him who believes and does righteous deeds - he willhave the
ultimate good [of the life to come] as his reward; and [as for us,] we shall make binding on him [only]
that which is easy to fulfill.” And once again he chose the right means [to achieve a right end]. [And
then he marched eastwards] till, when he came to the rising of the sun he found that it was rising on a
people for whom We had provided no coverings against it: thus [We had made them, and thus he left
them]; and We did encompass with Our knowledge all that he had in mind. And once again he chose
the right means (to achieve a right end]. [And he marched on] till, when he reached [a place] between
the two mountain-barriers, he found beneath them a people who could scarcely understand a word [of
his language]. They said: “O thou Two-Horned One! Behold, Gog and Magog are spoiling this land.
May we, then, pay unto thee a tribute on the understanding that thou wilt erect a barrier between us
and them?” He answered: “That wherein my Sustainer has so securely established me is better [than
anything that you could give me]; hence, do but help me with [your labour's] strength, [and] I shall
erect a rampart between you and them! Bring me ingots of iron!” Then, after he had [piled up the iron
and] filled the gap between the two mountain-sides, he said: “[Light a fire and] ply your bellows!” At
567
568
Loc.Cit.
It is interesting that Kontares did not narrate Alexander in detail as seen in its index.
148
length, when he had made it [glow like] fire, he commanded: “Bring me molten copper which I may
pour upon it.”And thus [the rampart was built, and] their enemies were unable to scale it, and neither
were they able to pierce it. Said [the King]: “This is a mercy from my Sustainer! Yet when the time
appointed by my Sustainer shall come, He will make this [rampart] level with the ground: and my
Sustainer's promise always comes true!”569
As Zuwiyya points out, the story of Alexander had been covered in many different
genres in the Middle Age Arab literature. These genres were history, geography, wisdom
stories, interpretation of Qur’an and stories of prophets. Some of these genres considered
Alexander as a prophet while the others acknowledged him as a saint. 570 In some cases Dhu’lQarnain and Alexander were identified as same person, while in other cases these two figures
were considered separately. For example, above mentioned al-Ṭabarī’ talks about Dhu’lQarnain in his Qur’an interpretation while he mentioned Alexander in his history book.
Alexander’s expeditions to India and China are referred very briefly in order to criticize his
arrogance and vandalizing the places that he passed by.571
Apart from al-Ṭabarī, there are many Qur’an interpretations and Mahmud Efendi
refers to some of them in his Alexander the Great section. First he mentions Ibn Kathīr’s
name, then he gives a quotation from Ibn ‘Asākir, and an Arabic sentence from Ibn Kathīr. He
went on with Ibn ‘Asākir’s explanations and after that he notes that “all of the texts up to this
place were translated (transmitted) from Ebussuud”. From this it is understood that he recited
all of them from the tafsir of the famous Ottoman scholar. Following him, he also added AlBayḍāwī’s name shortly.572 At the end of this comparison of Alexander the Great with the
Prophet Dhu’l-Qarnain and a controversy between the Islamic scholars about his identity, he
said that “huz ma safa da’ma keder,” literally meaning “take the good one and leave aside the
bad.” I will give short biographies of them for the sake of understanding Mahmud Efendi’s
horizons concerning Alexander the Great.
569
570
571
572
The Message of The Quran,translated and explained by Muhammad Asad, (Gibraltar: Dar Al-Andalus,
1980), pp. 644- 646. (source http://www.geocities.com/masad02/073.html) For Gog and Magog: see: Gog
and Magog in Early Eastern Christian and Islamic Sources, (eds.) Emeri Van Donzel and A.B. Schmidt,
(Leiden: Brill, 2010) .
Z. David Zuwiyya, “Alexander Legend in the Arabic Tradition” in A Companion to Alexander Literature in
the Middle Ages (ed.) Z. David Zuwiyya, (Leiden: Brill, 2011), pp. 73- 112, p. 73.
Among the Medieval scholars, al-Ṭabarī gives the fullest summary of the tale of Alexander. For his detailed
account see: Michel M. Mazzaoui, “Alexander the Great and the Arab Historians” in Graeco-Arabica 4
(1991), pp. 33- 44; Paul Weinfield, The Islamic Alexander: A Religious and Political Theme in Arabic and
Persian Literature (Unpublished Ph.D. diss., Columbia University, 2008), pp. 59-63 and pp. 89- 93. For the
list of sirat al Iskandar manuscripts, see Doufikar- Aerts, Alexander Magnus Arabicus, p. 339.
TMH: 205b- 207a.
149
Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī, or Imam Rāzī (1149-1209), was a famous Persian
polymath. al-Tafsīr al-kabīr (The Large Commentary), also known as Mafāṭīh al-ghayb,
(Keys to the Unknown) is a classical Islamic tafsir book in ten volumes in which Rāzī
presents all his knowledge on both philosophy and religion.573
Ibn Kathīr, (c.1300–1373) was a muhaddith, faqih, historian, and commentator. Ibn
Kathīr wrote a famous commentary on the Quran called Ṭafsīr Ibn Kathīr, which linked
certain hadiths, or sayings of Prophet Muhammad, and sayings of the sahaba to verses of the
Quran, in explanation. Ibn Kathīr was renowned for his great memory regarding the hadiths
and the entire Quran. 574
In Damascus, Ibn ‘Asākir (1105-1176) was the most notable figure of the ‘Asākir
family, the members of which held prestigious positions. Under Nur al-Din’s patronage, Ibn
‘Asākir composed several books, among them the largest work of history ever produced by a
medieval Muslim scholar, Tarīkh madīnat Dimashḳ (The History of Damascus and Its
Environs), which he started in 529/1134. The History of Damascus is primarily a biographical
dictionary. The first two chapters focus on the sanctity of the city and its environs and list the
sites and events that make it holy. Ibn ‘Asākir did not limit himself to only Muslim figures in
his work. He included biblical prophets and figures as well: Abraham, Sarah, Hagar, David,
Jesus, Mary, and John the Baptist, to name a few. This is one of the most important Muslim
biographical dictionaries, consisting of substantial biographical notices for pre-Islamic
figures.575 It served like a preserver of the ḳiṣaṣ al- anbiyā (the Stories of the Prophets)
tradition. For this reason, Ibn ‘Asākir mentions Alexander the Great.576
Al-Bayḍāwī (d. 1286) or Kadı Beyzavi as the Ottoman scholars called him because of
his position as ḳāḍī in Shīrāz. His main reputation comes from his Quran exegesis. The full
title of his exegesis is Anwār al-tanzīl wa-asrār al-ta’wīl which serves a source book for the
later Quran commentators and been published in many editions.577
Ebussuud Efendi (1490-1574), known as Hoca Çelebi, was a famous commentator on
the Quran, Hanafi scholar and şeyhülislam. He composed a commentary on the Quran drawn
573
574
575
576
577
G. C. Anawati, “Fakhral-Dīnal-Rāzī”, EI2 new edition, vol. II, pp. 751- 755.
H. Laoust, “Ibn Kathīr “, EI2, vol. III, pp. 817-18.
N. Elisséeff, “Ibn ‘Asākir” EI2, vol. III, pp. 713-15.
James E. Lindsay, “`Ali Ibn `Asakir as a Preserver of Qisas al-Anbiya': The Case of David b. Jesse” Studia
Islamica 82 (2/1995), pp. 45-82; pp. 53-58.
Yusuf Şevki Yavuz, “Beyzavi,” TDVIA, v.6, pp. 100-102.
150
mainly from al-Bayḍāwī and al-Zamakhsharī. He was known for bringing the kanun, the
administrative law of the Ottoman Empire, into agreement with the sharia.578
As an example of another genre rather than tafsir, al-Mas ‘ūdī could be a good
example. Like other Muslim authors before him, al-Mas ‘ūdī started his account of Greek
political history with the house of Philip of Macedon and did not seem to know of earlier
Greek political institutions. He did, however, point out that despite the lack of information in
chronicles and tables of rulers on the earlier period of their history, “the Greeks had earlier
rulers (literally: kings) before (Philip) but their numbers and names are debatable.” The
picture of Alexander the Great that emerged from the Murūdj al-dhahab wa-ma ‘ādin
djawhar (The Meadows of Gold and Mines of Gems) and al-Tanbīh wa ‘l-ishrāf (The Book
of Warning and Revision) not only showed al-Mas’ūdī’s appreciation of the legendary aspect,
but also reflected his understanding of the proper historical, geographical and cultural setting
of the Macedonian king. More important, however, is that his account, especially in the
Tanbīh, represented Alexander as a recognizable historical figure whose period, life-span,
length of reign, military exploits, cultural achievements and his relations with Aristotle were
all viewed in a historical context and within the chronological framework of ancient Greek
history.579
Related with the same issue, some of the Islamic leaders invented ceremonies to
legitimize their relationship with Alexander. For example, thirteenth century historian
Muhammad al-Nasawī mentions about a ritual called “nawbay-i Dhu’l-Qarnain” which is
performed in the court of Alā ad-Dīn Muhammad II of Khwarezm (d. ca. 1221).580 In
Medieval times, authors takes the level of Alexander’s self control as “archetypal”. In other
words, these authors considered and used Alexander “as a representative of universal
psychological situation of the kings.”581 As we learn from Latham, Ibn al-Nadīm claims that
Emevi caliph Hisham assigned his secretary Abu al Sālim for the duty of translation of the
correspondences between Alexander and Aristo.582 Alexander was the ideal example of
perfect monarch, and he could be traced in codes of conduct of medieval times for kings,
578
579
580
581
582
J. Schacht, “Abu’l –Suud,” EI2, vol.I, p. 152. For an overview of him, see Colin Imber, Ebu’s-Su’ud: the
Islamic Legal Tradition (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1997).
Shboul, Al- Mas’udi and His World, p. 118.
Weinfield, The Islamic Alexander, p. viii
Ibid., p. 12.
J.D. Latham, “The beginnings of Arabic Prose Literatur: The Epistolary Genre”, The Cambridge History of
Arabic Literature: Arabic Literature to the End of Umayyad Period, (ed.) A.F.L. Beeston, et. al.
(Cambridge: Cambridge Univeristy Press, 1983), p.20.
151
besides appearing in oral and written literature. In medieval mental map, Greek philosophers,
especially Aristotle and Plato often pointed lessons on virtue and justice of kings, and the
emerging of Alexander was the perfect reflection of their wisdom and lives of aforementioned
Greek philosophers. Muslim theologian Abū Ḥāmid Muḥammad ibn Muḥammad al-Ghazālī
(1058-1111) attributes Alexander the Great to various actions and sayings in his work The
Councel for Kings, by quoting “Alexander asked Aristotle whether courage or justice is
higher. He answered: “if the king has ruled justly, he will not need courage”.583
Latham gives Grignaschi’s study on Rasail for its significance since it demonstrates
how the Islamic authors use Alexander to deal with the political issues of their time. Even at
such early periods, these authors had never considered Alexander as a foreign ruler.584 Also
for Latham, we can examine the evolution of general attitude of Arab literature towards
Alexander in the first four hundred years into three periods; the first one is the bureaucratic
period in which the purpose of the stories about Alexander is to explain how a state should be
ruled. They intend to explain how a state should communicate with the governors and with
other foreign states and also how a ruler maintains harmony with all of his political apparatus.
The second one is a pro-imperial period in which the purpose of stories about Alexander is to
explain how the Islamic Empire protects and saves instead of assimilating the cultural
heritance of the conquered places based on a uniform Islamic outlook perspective. According
to Latham, such perspective has started in 750 with the arrival of Abbasi and found its perfect
place in ninth century with the increased number of Arabic texts about Alexander. The third
period is an anti-imperial period and the purpose of stories about Alexander is to indicate the
drawbacks of the empire and meaninglessness of combining the religion and the power of the
centralist state. The common aspect of these three periods is that the idea of Alexander’s
period reflecting the Islamic caliphate finds its place in the Islamic political allegory.585
If we consider the Islamic narrations, we can say that Arabs’ perception of Alexander
is affected mainly by the legendary stories of Romances of Alexander instead of Quintus
Curtius, Arrian or Plutarch. As the Islamic Empire expanded, Arab authors gathered the
information about Alexander from Iran in east and from Spain in West. It seems like they
combined all these information with the information from pseudo-Callisthenes. As a part of
the adaptation process, the western Arab authors assumed that Alexander was either from
583
584
585
Edward A. Allworth, The Modern Uzbeks: From the Fourteenth Century to the Present: A Cultural History,
(Stanford, CA: Hoover Institution Press, 1990), p. 18.
Latham, “The Beginnings of Arabic Prose Literatur”, p.21.
Ibid., pp. 21-23.
152
Spain or North Africa while the others who were originated from Iran, like al-Ṭabarī, have
pictured him as the son of Darius. Since Dhu’l-Qarnain is mentioned in Qur’an, Islamic
scholars point not only to Alexander’s ethical responsibilities but also how he fits to the chain
of prophets. At the end of these discussions, Dhu’l-Qarnain is accepted as a saint.
2.6.2 What is the Persian influence?
The expansion of the legend made Nizami Ganjavi (1141- 1209) to create a new form
of the stories in the twelfth century.586 Iskandarnamah is based on Syriac translation of the
life and deeds of Alexander the Great in Greek, which was mentioned above and as called
Pseudo-Callisthenes.587 Although its Pahlavi source claimed by Nöldeke is controversial588, it
is clear that story of Alexander in Persian disseminated via two ways of perception: one
which comes from Greek tale and the other Zoroastrian priestly tradition. In the Persian
literature, Alexander’s image of the brave warrior, fair king, and sage prophet was limited
with the Islamic period and Muslim Persians. Their portrait of Alexander was recovered from
Pseudo-Callisthenes, Ethiopic, Syriac and Arabic texts about Alexander, Islamic folklore and
legends and Qur’an narratives. Muslim authors imitated these resources and praised
Alexander. On the other hand, Zoroastrian Persians used the local resources, thus they
criticised Alexander. Because, according to their traditions, Alexander has burned their sacred
books and temples and has killed their clergies.589 However, both of these views were
mentioned in the same book. Influence of Ferdowsi can be observed in the late period books
about Alexander. The most well-known adaptation of Alexander in Iran is Nizami’s
Iskandarnamah. In Sharafnamah which is the first part of this epic, Alexander’s life and
adventures are narrated. The second part, which is called Ikbalnamah and holds the features
of a mirror for princess, contains the dialogs of Alexander with Greek and Iranian
philosophers on administration and some other subjects. In Iskandarnamah, Alexander is
presented as model person. There are other studies that take Iskandarnamah as model such as
Ayine-yi Iskandar and Khiradnama-yi Iskandar.590 As it can be seen from the high number of
editions of Iskandarnamah and Shahnamah in the Ottoman world, Ottomans also had
586
Britannica Online: http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/14218/Alexander-romance
William L. Hanaway, Encylopedia Iranica, vol. VIII, pp. 609-12, p. 609
588
Nöldeke, Beiträge zur Geschichte des Alexanderromans, p. xxxiii. For a recent discussion on the issue, see:
Claudia Ciancaglini, “The Syriac Version of the Alexander Romance,” Le Muséon 114 (2001), pp. 121–140.
589
Minoo Southgate, “Portrait of Alexander in Persian Alexander-Romances of the Islamic Era,” Journal of the
American Oriental Society 97 (July - September, 1977), pp. 277- 284, p. 278.
590
Josef Wiesehofer, “The ‘Accursed’ and the ‘Adventurer’: Alexander the Great in Iranian Tradition”, A
Companion to Alexander Literature in the Middle Ages, (ed.) Z.D. Zuwiyya, (Leiden: Brill, 2011), pp.113-132,
p. 113
587
153
followed Alexander very closely and Persian influence is very significant. This effect can be
observed also in Mahmud Efendi’s work. The language of Darius’s death scene, the sequence
of events, Darius’s last will from Alexander the Great and his wish of marriage of her
daughter and Alexander are affected completely by the Persian literature instead of the Greek
sources. Especially, the following scene of Shahnamah is almost the same as in Mahmud
Efendi’s book.
2.6.3 Alexander the Great in the Ottoman context
Inspired heavily from Persian literary genre, the Alexander Romance was widely well
known in Ottoman belles lettres. Evliya Çelebi states that he had learned the life of Alexander
from Simyon:
The heretic Simyon, working in our shop as goldsmith, heard me as I was reading the
History of Yanvan. Hence, our acknowledgement with them from the early times on leads
me to understand the Greek and Latin language. And I was teaching to Simyon the
Dictionary of Şahidi. And he taught me Aleksandıra, i.e., the History of Alexander the
Great (İskender-i Zülkarneyn Tarihi).” Even in this history book, the ancestry of Greek
591
kings went back to Amlak and Sam and Noah.
When we look at the written material concerning Alexander, we confront with the poet
Ahmedi’s Iskandarnamah in fourteenth century and several translation of Firdawsi’s
Shahnamah.592 Among these works, Ahmedi was famous because of its miniatures. After
getting education in Egypt and returning to his country, Ahmedi (1333- 1412/13) became a
frequenter to the palaces of various Anatolian principalities in the complicated environment of
Anatolia. The most important ones were the palaces of Aydınoğlu, Germiyanoğlu
principalities and Ottoman Sultan Yıldırım Beyazid’s brother Suleyman Çelebi’s palace in
Edirne. Even after the death of Emir Suleyman, Ahmedi was protected by Mehmed I due to
his good relations with Ottomans. It is known that he died in Amasya while he was on a duty
ordered by I. Mehmed.593 Ahmedi’s book has the features of an encyclopedia. He delivers his
591
592
593
Evliya Çelebi, Seyahatname, vol.1, p. 37: “Bu hakir-i pür taksirin dükkanlarında zergerlik eder kefere
Simyon, Yanvan Tarihi’n okudukca istima‘ edüp hatır-nişanımız idi. Zira anlar ile alem-i sabavetden beri
ülfetimiz sebebiyle ve reşid ü necib olmamız cihetiyle fesahat [ü] belağat üzre lisan-ı Yunanı ve lisan-ı
Latini anlardım. Ve hakir Simyon’a Şahidi Lügatı’n okudurdum. O bize Aleksandıra ya‘ni İskender-i
Zülkarneyn Tarihi’n okudurdu. İskender Tarihi’nde dahi Rum kayasıralarının ecdadı Amlak’a ve Sam’a ve
Hazret-i Nuh’a müntehidir ve’s-selam.”
Orhan Şaik Gökyay, “Şehname ve Türkçe Tercümeleri” in Destursuz Bağa Girenler (İstanbul: Dergah yay.,
1982), pp. 46-47.
Ahmedi, İskendername :İnceleme, Tıpkı Basım, (haz.) İsmail Ünver (Ankara : Türk Dil Kurumu, 1983), p. 4.
154
knowledge on astrology, theology, history, metallurgy, medicine, philosophy and geography
which he gathered from the most famous madrasahs of his time, to the readers with his book
about Alexander’s life without disturbing the continuity of the events. This work is not just a
pure translation of Firdawsi’s Shahnamah, it also attaches “innovations” to the stories of
Firdawsi version594 and most parts of the Ahmedi’s Iskandarnamah were copied in the
fifteenth century and many copies are still present in the libraries in Turkey and around the
world.595
Especially in the traditions of Mediterranean and the East of this area, Alexander is a
legendary icon for many rulers that would induce their desire to be ‘the Alexander of their
time’.596 Serpil Bağcı focuses on Ottoman Iskandar miniatures and claims that the examples
of visual representations of Alexander, in other words some scenes from his life in the art of
miniature, became one of the most common subjects of Islamic visual arts. In the Islamic
visual Alexander was reflected as an ideal ruler. Another the most highlighted feature of
Alexander was his relationships with scholars and his unsatisfied curiosity. All the
Iskandarnamahs have inspired and guided the rulers over the centuries since they contain
Alexander’s communications with Aristoteles and Hızır (Khidr) and their advices on
administrative and moral issues. Thus, the scene of Alexander having a conversation with
scholars is observed very often in the art of miniature.597 In the Ottoman palaces the various
versions of Iskandarnamah not only written in Eastern languages but also in Greek and Latin
were circulating around and read. It is known that Ottoman Sultans, especially Fatih Sultan
Mehmet, and some of the viziers owned and read Greek books about Alexander. The most
famous one of these books is Arrianus’s Anabasis which was copied most probably for the
sultan in the palace’s art workshop Nakkaşhane and dated as 1460 due to water traces on its
pages and currently placed in the Topkapi Museum.598 In addition, Mehmed II knew the
classical edition of the life of Alexander by Quintus Rufus which was read aloud to him by
Ciriaco d’Ancona besides Laertius, Herodotus and Livy.599 Mehmed II’s library had the copy
594
Such “innovations” are Gulshah episode, “Universal History” and the “Mevlid”: Caroline C. Sawyer,
“Revising Alexander: Structure and Evolution Ahmedi's Ottoman Iskendername (c. 1400)”, Edebiyat:
Journal of Middle Eastern Literatures 13, 2, (2002), pp. 225-244, here pp. 228-230.
595
Serpil Bağcı, “Osmanlı dünyasında Efsanevi yönetici imgesi olarak Büyük İskender ve Osmanlı
İskendernamesi”, in Humana: Bozkurt Güvenç’e Armağan, (eds.) N. Serpil Altuntek et. al. (Ankara: Kültür
Bakanlığı yay., 1994), pp. 117-118.
596
Ibid., p. 111
597
Ibid., pp. 114-115.
598
Ibid., p. 116.
599
Giacomo Langusto, “Cyriacus von Ancona und Mehemmed II”, in Byzantinische Zeitshrift 30 (1929-30), p.
199.
155
Arrians’ Anabasis and this fact points the influence of Anabasis on Sultan’s ideal of being the
world’s conqueror.600 Additionally, the historian Doukas compares Mehmed II to Alexander
the Great and calls the Sultan as “a modern Macedonian”.601 The Sultan’s desires and efforts
on being identified with and exceeding Alexander’s personality and effectiveness was
mentioned very clearly by Kritovoulos from Imbros. In the introduction part of Kritovoulos’
history book, dedicated to Mehmed II, he praises Mehmed II as such:
Seeing that you are the author of many great deeds ... and in the belief that the many
great achievements of generals and kings of old, nor merely Persians and Greeks, are not
worthy to be compared in glory and bravery and martial valour with yours, I do not think
it just that they and their deeds and accomplishments... should be celebrated and admired
by all... while you should have no witness for the future... or that the deeds of others...
should be better known and more famed... while your accomplishments...(which are) in
no way inferior to those of Alexander the Macedonian... should not be set forth ...nor
602
passed on to posterity.
According to Bağcı, starting from sixteenth century, with the effects of the power
owned by the Sultans, the artists started focusing on producing written and visual arts praising
their own sultans. Now their big, pictured, hand written projects are Suleymannamehs and
Selimnamehs instead of Iskandarnamahs. Obviously, Ottoman Sultans do not need to be
compared with the previous rulers anymore in order to prove their greatness.603
Additionally there was an “ajib and gharib” 604 (mirabilia) genre in which Alexander
has a dominant place. Literary they mean “astonishing and strange” and they are used for
buildings of Antiquity, topography, different races, exotic plants, animals and minerals for
their astonishing and strange characteristics.605 In Medieval Islamic literature, we confront
with the existence of various travel accounts, geographical and cosmographical works which
describe wonders and anomalies within the world.606 According to Coşkun in the Turkish
translation of Arabic cosmography book Kharidat al-‘Aja’ib wa Faridat al-Ghara’ib and
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
Julian Raby, “Mehmed the Conqurer’s Greek Scriptorium” in Dumbarton Oaks Papers 37 (1983), pp. 1534, p. 18, 21.
Marios Philippides and Walter K. Hanak, The Siege and the Fall of Constantinople in 1453: Historiography,
Topography and Military Studies (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2011), p. 163, f.n.102.
Caroline Finkel, Osman’s Dream: The History of the Ottoman Empire (New York: Basic Books, 2006), p.
80 cited from Charles T. Riggs (trans.), History of Mehmed the Conqueror (Princeton: Princeton University
Press, 1954), p. 3.
Bağcı, “Osmanlı Dünyasında Efsanevi Yönetici İmgesi Olarak Büyük İskender”, pp. 122-23.
For this genre, see: Syrinx von Hees, “The Astonishing: a Critique and Re-reading of ‘Aga’ib Literature”,
Middle Eastern Literatures, 8, no. 2 (July 2005), pp. 101-120.
Feray Coşkun, A Medieval Islamic Cosmography in an Ottoman Context: A Study of Mahmud el-Hatib's
Translation of the Kharidat al-‘aja’ib (Unpublished MA thesis, Boğaziçi Univ., 2007), p. 36.
Ibid., p. 38.
156
Dürr-i Meknun we see the same kind of image for Alexander. Generally, “Alexander appears
as a constant traveller who reaches the fringes of the world and even goes beyond them. He is
reported to have visited various islands, even the ones in the Sea of China.”607 Alexander in
Divan poetry which was influenced by above mentioned Iskandarnamah literature, has
features within “ajib and gharib” genre. His name and adventures were emphasized many
times and the story of his trips with Khidr to the lands of darkness to find ab-ı hayat, how he
could not drink it but Khidr drank it was narrated.608 During their voyages, they confronted
with many bizarre things, one of them is the talking tree, Waq Waq with branches from
animals or human heads.609 In these stories Alexander is an imaginary person, mixture of
Alexander the Great and Dhu’l-Qarnain. In the Divan poetry, besides his search for ab-ı
hayat, Alexander was mentioned also as one of the greatest ruler of the world who established
a worldwide empire. The influence of all the legendary stories told about him over the
centuries plays an important role on why such an image was attributed to him in Divan
poetry. Poets used Alexander as a figure in order to praise the person that they would like to
praise.610 Usually, Alexander is a pitiful character when compared with the actual praised
person. Baki, uses a different approach and refers Alexander as Kanuni’s weapon:
Ne yana buyursa revadur getürmek
Devatun Aristo silahın Skender (Baki/13)
Poets also pointed to stories about Alexander in order to tell various periods of their love
adventures. They used specifically the mirror of Alexandria as a metaphor. For instance,
Rüşti, in one of his verses, says that he does not need ayine-yi İskender and a beautiful face
was like the mirror of Alexander the Great for him:
Ayine-i İskenderi biz neyleriz ey dil
Ayine-i dil aşıka bir vech-i hasendir (Rüşdi/ 145)611
607
608
609
610
611
Ibid., p. 123.
For the miniatures on the character of Khidir, see: Metin And, Minyatürlerle Osmanlı- İslam Mitologyası
(Istanbul: Akbank Kültür ve Sanat Yayınları, 1998), pp. 192- 197. For the general information on Khidir,
see: Patrick Franke, Begegnung mit Khidr: Quellenstudien zum Imaginaren im traditionellen Islam
(Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag, 2000).
And, Minyatürlerle Osmanlı- İslam Mitologyası, pp. 291- 295.
Dursun Ali Tokel, Divan Şiirinde Mitolojik Unsurlar, pp. 191- 201. İskender Pala, “İskender mi, Zülkarneyn
mi?”, Journal of Turkish Studies-Türklük Bilgisi Arastırmaları 15 (1991), pp.387-403.
Tokel, Divan Şiirinde Mitolojik Unsurlar , p. 204.
157
Apart from books narrating directly the life and deeds of Alexander and ajib and gharib
genre, Alexander was used widely in Nasihatname literature.612 One of the best examples is
Veysi’s, the sufi and judge from Edirne, died in 1628, Habname (Dreambook) dedicated to
Ahmed I. (r. 1603–1617). Starting with the stories of Adam and Eve and intending to give
advice to the Sultan himself, Veysi narrates a conversation between sultan Ahmed I and
Alexander the Great. Sultan Ahmed was complaint about the problems of “ruling justly in
such a turmoil time when the world is in ruins after forty years of warfare”.613 Then
Alexander the Great tells thirty-four stories to prove that the world was not that kind of place.
It is not a coincidence that in Veysi’s dream setting, Alexander is depicted as the “Sultan of
the Sultans” whom Ahmed I made a conversation on political wisdom, since Alexander was
quite a popular character in Ottoman literary genre and was deemed with great respect.614
Katib Çelebi also referred to the Greek philosophers and Alexander the Great in various
places in his works. One instance which illustrates his view of Alexander the Great comes
from his Dustur’ul-Amel li Islah’il-Halel (The Principles of Actions to Improve
Shortcomings): “It is narrated from the Greek king Alexander, God bless him (rahimehullahu
aleyh); these things ruin any governance and authority: blame and obloquy of people and the
consent of the tyrants (zaliman).”615
2.6.4 Mahmud Efendi’s Alexander the Great
Mahmud Efendi narrates on Alexander and Dhu’l-Qarnain between the folios 199a
and 208a. He first tells that the mother of Alexander became a slave to the Persian king
Darius and then became pregnant from him. She denied this situation and hid it from Filikos,
King Philip II of Macedon. Then, Alexander was recognized as the son of King Philip, which
made him King after Philip’s death. Then he describes the war against Darius as due to a tax
issue. This is followed by the death of Darius, which is narrated as a mystical text in an epic
612
613
614
615
As it will be mentioned in Nasihatname section, in Nergisi’s el-Vasfu l-kāmil fī-aḥvāli l-vezīri l-ādil,
Alexander the Great appears as a role model. See: Nedim Zahirović, Murteza Pascha von Ofen zwischen
Panegyrik und Historie : eine literarisch-historische Analyse eines osmanischen Wesirspiegels von Nergisi
(el-Vasfu l-kāmil fī-aḥvāli l-vezīri l-ādil) (Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 2010), p.36 in 45v, 65r and 101v
from the manuscript.
Gotfried Hagen, “Ottoman Understandings of the World in the Seventeenth Century” in Robert Dankoff, An
Ottoman Mentality: The World of Evliya Çelebi ( Leiden: Brill, 2004), p. 240.
A. Tunç Şen, “The Dream of a 17th century Ottoman Intellectual: Veysi and his Habname,” (Unpublished
M.A. Thesis, Sabanci University, 2007), p. 54.
Fatih Ermiş, Ottoman Economic Thinking before the 19th Century (Ph.D. diss., Univ. Erfurt 2010), p. 92,
cited from Katib Çelebi, Dustur’ul-Amel li Islah’il-Halel, Süleymaniye Archive, Hamidiye 1469, fols. 161b.
158
form. Alexander fell into grief over the death of Darius, and built a tomb as a testament to
him.
After explaining how the Islamic world in general perceives Alexander the Great, now
I would like summarize the information about Mahmud Efendi in order to understand the
differences and similarities of him. According to his writing, before Philip dies, Darius
captures Philip’s wife and rapes her. After saving his wife in return of some ransom, his wife
keeps the rape as her secret from Philip. Alexander is born due to Darius’s rape. However, no
one knows that the Alexander is Darius’s son. Philip sends Darius 300 golden eggs every year
as extortion. After Philip’s death, Alexander becomes the king when he is fifteen, and refuses
to send any exortion to Darius for three years. When Darius sends his messengers to get 900
golden eggs in total, however Alexander sends a mace and boxwood. Darius considers such
answer as a challenge and declares war. In this part, Mahmud Efendi comments on the
differences between Alexander and Darius’s leadership and commandership. He prepares the
readers to the reason of Darius’s failure by stating that his soldiers had hated from him and
prayed for the victory of Alexander because of his arrogance and haughtiness, and also they
were uncertain about his anger and punishment.616 It is crucial to look at the terms Mahmud
Efendi has used. He uses siyaset meaning not “politics” but as an oppressive act like early
Ottoman historian Tursun Beg.617 Bernard Lewis addresses that “Siyasa is a punishment
administered under the discretionary power of the ruler, for an offense against the authority of
the ruler. In this sense it invariably means severe physical punishment and frequently
death”.618 When two treacherous guards killed Darius and gave the good news to
Alexander,619 Mahmud Efendi says that Alexander awarded them by some jewellery and
616
617
618
619
TMH: 201a: “Gerci ‘asker Darius’ya göre az idi ancak her biri maóall-i meãÀfede her biri bünyÀn-ı
merãÿã-ÀsÀ durup ve düşmÀn keåretinden aãlÀ yüz cevirmezlerdi. VelÀkin dÀ’imÀ kibr u ‘aôamet ile
durup ve dil-Àvizlik itmeyüp dÀ’imÀ dil-ÀrÀz olındığından ‘askeriniñ ve erkÀn-ı devlet ve vüzerÀsınıñ
kendüye muóabbetleri aãlÀ olmayup ve cümlesi gaêab u siyÀsetinden rÿz u şeb emín olmayup dÀ’imÀ
Darius’nıñ zevÀl ve inhizÀmıñ istid‘À iderlerdi”
Leslie Pierce states that “as Tursun Beg argued in the introduction to his late fifteenth century history, the
sultan’s principal means of ensuring order was the judicious application of summary punishment (siyaset);
this right of the sultan itself over the lives of his subjects was itself a source of tyranny, however, if it was
not exercised within the confines of the holy law, and not tempered with forbearance (hilm)”: Imperial
Harem: Women and Sovereignty in the Ottoman Empire (Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1993), p. 177. For a
general outlook to the “anger” in Islamic literature see: Zouhair Ghazzal, “From Anger on Behalf of God to
‘Forbearance’ in Medieval Islamic Literature,” in Anger’s Past: The Social Uses of Anger in the Middle
Ages, (ed.) Barbara Rosenwein (Ithaca & London: Cornell University Press, 1998), pp. 203-30.
Bernard Lewis, “Siyasa” in In Quest of an Islamic Humanism: Arabic and Islamic Studies in Memory of
Mohamed al-Nowaihi (Cairo: American Univ. of Cairo Press, 1986), pp. 3-14, p. 9.
TMH: 202b- 203b.
159
laughed at their face, however indeed he was very upset. He wanted to see Darius and found
him just before dying. In Shahnamah the scene of dying Darius is such: “Then [the dying]
Darius (The last Kayanid king.) spoke quickly, going over his wishes and omitting nothing.
He began by saying, “You have achieved fame, but see that you fear the world’s Creator, who
has made the heavens and the earth and time, and the strong and the weak. Look after my
children and my family, and my veiled wise women. Ask for my daughter’s hand in marriage,
and keep her gently and in comfort in the court. (. . .) It may be that you shall have a son with
her and that the name of Esfandyar (A Kayanid prince, the son of king Goshtasp. Lohrasp,
mentioned below, was also a Kayanid king.) will be renewed in him, that he will preserve the
fires of Zoroastrianism and live by the Zend-Avesta, keeping the Feasts of Sadeh and No-Ruz
and preserving our fire temples. Such a son will honour Hormozd and the sun and moon, and
wash his soul and face in the waters of wisdom; he will renew the ways of Lohrasp and
Goshtasp, treating men according to their station whether it be high or low; he will make our
faith flourish and his days will be fortunate.” Sekandar [Alexander] answered him, “Your
heart is pure and your words are wise, O king. I accept all that you have said, and I shall not
stray from your words while I am within the borders of your kingdom. I shall accomplish the
good deeds you recommend, and your wisdom will be my guide.” He [the first Sasanian king
Ardeshir] addressed his followers: “Illustrious and righteous as you are, there is no one here
who has not heard what the malevolent Sekandar, out of the baseness of his heart, did on this
earth. One by one he killed my ancestors and unjustly grasped the world in his fist. I am
descended from Esfandyar, it is right that I cannot recognize Ardavan [the last
Parthian/Ashkanian king] as king here.”620
And thus Darius’s tirade of death that we shall show in detail occurs. Then, Alexander
marries Darius’s daughter and turns his attention to India through Boukhara and Khorasan.
Mahmud Efendi records that the Greek histories do not mention Alexander as a book-owning
prophet who also encountered Gog and Magog. He refers to them as part of Dhu’l-Qarnain
from the books by Muslim scholars mentioned at the beginning of this chapter and
emphasized that these two historical characters were completely different persons. In the end,
for strengthening his argument, he concludes his discussion about the identity of Alexander
the Great by mentioning that Dhu’l-Qarnain lived more than thousand years and a man has to
620
D. Davis (tr.), Shahnameh: The Persian Book of Kings, (New York, 2006), pp. 468–469, 538–539
160
live very long to do as many things as Dhu’l-Qarnain did. However, he says, according to the
Greek sources, Alexander only lived thirty six years.621
As I mentioned above, Mahmud Efendi claims very self-confidently that Alexander
the Great was not the same person as Dhu’l-Qarnain and explains the life of Alexander, the
famous commander, based on the non-Islamic references. However, in the chapter that I will
summarize here, Mahmud Efendi clearly could not disregard his Eastern origins. This section
is the scene of Darius’s death. Although Mahmud Efendi seems like he was not affected by
the Mufassir’s narratives about Dhu’l-Qarnain, I believe he was influenced greatly by
Shahnamahh, the famous epic of Firdavsi.
2.7. Constantine the Great
‘As an imperial prototype, a point of reference, and a symbol of imperial legitimacy and
identity’622, Constantine has been the subject of discussions between historians over the
centuries.623 Even until now, there has not been any decrease either in the interest towards
Constantine or in the controversy about him. The main reason for that is his acceptance of
Christianity, because “his personal conversion to Christianity and public patronage of
Catholicism transformed the Christian Church from a persecuted minority cult into an
established majority religion, and the pagan empire into a Christian commonwealth.”624 His
victory at the Battle of the Mulvian Bridge on 28 October 312625 legenderised with vision and
dream symbols, convinced him to choose the God of the Christians and later on in Western
hagiography genre, he was depicted as a “model Christian emperor”.626 He even became a
621
TMH: 199a-208a.
P. Magdalino, “Introduction,” in New Constantines: The Rhythms of Imperial Renewal in Byzantium,4th-13th
centuries, ed. P. Magdalino (Aldershot: Variorum, 1994), pp.1-9, p.3.
623
There are two main sources on him, one is from an ecclesiastical perspective, the other is from secular one
which are used for religious and cultural material & political and military matters: Eusebius of Caesarea’s
Vita Constantini composed ca. 336-39 and Origo Constantini Imperatoris by an anonymous author about
340- 390. For the primary sources on Constantine see: Bruno Bleckmann, “Sources for the History of
Constantine”, in Cambridge Companion to the Age of Constantine, ed. by Noel Lenski, (Cambridge:
Cabridge University Press, revised edition 2012), pp. 14- 34. For Eusebius see: Timothy D. Barnes,
Constantine and Eusebius, (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1981). Charles Matson Odahl gives
details on main attitutes toward Constantine in the section “The Legacy and Modern Interpretations”, pp.
251-254 in his book Constantine and the Christian Empire, (New York: Routledge, 2004).
624
Odahl, Constantine and the Christian Empire, p. 250
625
For the historiography of the battle at Milvian Bridge, see: Raymond van Dam, Remembering Constantine at
the Milvian Bridge, (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2011).
626
Samuel N. C. Lieu, “From history to legend and legend to history: The medieval and Byzantine transformation
of Constantine’s Vita” in Constantine: History, Historiography and Legend, (eds.) Samuel N. C. Lieu and
622
161
great example for the Roman Church to convince the other barbaric and pagan rulers to accept
Christianity.627 His life has an important place in the history of the church since he is a
milestone in the history of Christianity not only because of his conversion but also his ability
to organize the First Ecumenical Council at Nicaea.628
The Roman emperor, Flavius Valerius Aurelius Constantinus, or Constantine I, was
born at Naissus, Niš, in Modern Serbia. He was the senior son of Constantinus Chlorus and
Helena, and first identified himself as a soldier in Diocletian’s Egyptian expedition (296), and
then under Galerius in the Persian war. After the last great victory at the Milvian Bridge
against Maximillan and defeated Licinius in 323, Constantine became sole ruler of the Roman
world. He chose Byzantion for his capital, and in 330 inaugurated it under the name
Constantinople. Christianity became a state religion in 324, although paganism was not
persecuted. The great Church Council of Nicaea was held in 325 and it was only shortly
before his death in 337 that he received baptism.629 According to Eusebius of Caesarea (c. AD
263 – 339) the author of Ecclesiastical History as well as Constantine’s life and deeds (Vitae
Constantini), Constantine dedicated the New Rome to ‘the God of the martyrs.’630 Thus,
“Constantinople was erected as a new Christian capital on the Bosporus Strait.”631
Additionally he desired the new Christian capital to match up to Rome so he ordered
the construction of many new buildings including a second senate whose members were
considered as equal in rank to senators of Rome, which shows his desire to give the
inhabitants of the new capital some priviliges including the free distribution of grain from the
harvests of Egypt.632 At the same time, to adorn new capital, Constantine ordered “all kinds of
antique statues” to be collected from the Eastern cities.633 Historian of the Christian Church,
Sozomen from fifth century says that
He erected all the needed edifices for a great capital …a hippodrome, fountains, orticoes
and other beautiful adornments. He named it Constantinople and New Rome… and
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
Dominic Montserrat, (New York: Routledge, 1998), pp. p. 156. For the details of Constantine’s life, see. pp.
158- 168.
Samuel Lieu, “From history to legend and legend to history”, p.136.
For this issue, see: H. A. Drake, “The Impact of Constantine on Christianity”, Cambridge Companion to the
Age of Constantine, ed. by Noel Lenski, (Cambridge: Cabridge University Press, revised edition 2012), pp.
111- 136.
“Constantine the Great”, Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium, (ed.) Alexander Kazhdan, (Oxford: Oxford Univ.
Press), vol. 1, pp. 498-499.
Timothy D. Barnes, Constantine and Eusebius, p. 222.
Odahl, Constantine and the Christian Empire, p. 10.
Barnes, Constantine and Eusebius, p. 223
Jas Elsner, “From the Culture of Spolia to the Cult of Relics: the Arch of Constantine and the Genesis of
Late Antique Forms”, Papers of the British School at Rome 68 (2000), pp.149-84. p. 154.
162
established it as the Roman capital for all the inhabitants of the North, the South, the
East, and the shores of the Mediterranean, from the cities on the Danube and from
Epidamnus and the Ionian Gulf to Cyrene and Libya.634
According to el-Cheikh, Arabs were aware of Constantine’s importance both for
Byzantine and ecclesiastical history. She gives several examples from the writings of Arab
authors in which Constantine’s conversion to Christianity was given a prominent place. One
of those examples comes from the judge ‘Abd al-Jabbār (d.1025). Al-Jabbār claims that
Emperor Constantine the Great (324- 337) scrutinized the works of philosophers and
once he found their theses false, burned their books, destroyed their temples and killed
them. Hence philosophers were annihilated in Athens, then known as the city of
philosophers. Only peasants, tanners and dyers survived. Temples were converted into
churches and filled with monks, and all of the books of philosophy and medicine were
burned.635
Like al-Jabbar, they all underline that the decline in philosophical and scientific studies
in the Byzantine empire started with the conversion of Constantine the Great.636
2.7.1. Constantine in the Ottoman context
After the conquest in 1453, Mehmed II ordered to a group of Greek and European
scolars and religious men to write down the histories of the emperors who constructed
wonderful buildings in Constantinople. The earliest Turkish and Persian version of this text
from 1479/80 was based on Diegesis perites Hagia Sofias from ninth century. It was
translated into Persian by Şemsüddin Karamani.637 According to Necipoğlu, Mehmed II’s
desire was to reconsecrate Hagia Sophia and Constantinople in the new Islamic context. In
order to highlight the sultan’s own political ambitions, the triumphal aspects of Justinian’s
634
Ecclesiastical History, II.3 From: William Stearns Davis, ed., Readings in Ancient History: Illustrative
Extracts from the Sources (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1912-13), vol. II, pp. 295-296
635
‘Abd-al-Jabbar, Tathbit, 1: 161-2) cited and translated by Nadia Maria El Cheikh, Byzantium Viewed by the
Arabs (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univ. Press, 2004), p. 108.
636
Idem., The Conversion of Constantine the Great: A Reading of Arabic- Muslim Sources, Journal of Turkish
Studies in Memoriam Angeliki E. Laiou 36 (December 2011), pp. 69- 84, p. 70.
637
Felix Tauer, “Les versions persanes de la legende sur la construction d’Aya sofya”, Byzantinoslavica 15
(1954), 1-20, p.1.
163
imperial, holy and inspired church, which was commamorated to emperor’s victory over
pagan rebels, was particularly emphasized. This verfied the transition of the Ottoman State
from modest principality to a world emrpire, by closely showing the Hagia Sophia’s
conversion into the Sultan’s mosque, embodying his imperial policy. The text’s different
versions especially in the late 1480’s and 1490’s after Mehmet II’s death, diverted the
emphasis from the royal to the sacred links connecting the building to the original Greek
texts. The texts relate that the construction of Hagia Sophia displays the will of Constantine’s
religious wife Asafiya. The monument is believed to have received its name from Asafiya,
which is an attempt to underplay its connection with the powerful emperor Justinian. It took
longer time to Islamize the mosque, however it was Ottomanized by Mehmet II. 638
When we come to Constantine in Ottoman texts, wee see that Constantine is a figure
between reality and fiction. Ottoman chroniclers provide information about Constantine
among the other legendary founders. That is why, many Ottoman historians are confused
about Constantine. For example, in Fetihname-yi Sultan Mehmed, Kivami from the reign of
Mehmed II and Bayezid II implies that he was converted to Islam by way of the followers of
Jesus Christ when he escaped to Egypt.639 Lütfi Paşa (d. 1564) notes in his history book,
Tevarih-i al-i Osman that Constantine was a Christian and he was the third founder of the city
after Buzantin and Yanko bin Madiyan. He died after naming the city as Konstantinopel and
Mihran, Arakil and Yorgi ruled the city respectively.640 Thus, within these texts myth and
history are combined one within another; the aim is to blend Constantinople and Hagia
Sophia into both a pre-Christian mythical past and Islamic present, so as to show the
dominant Christian-Byzantine memory. Described as a historical city, Constantinople is
believed to have been founded by the mythical ruler Yanko bin Madyan, who was the
descedent of the Persian emperor Shaddad. Yanko bin Madyan was guided to a marvelous
city where two seas meet, with the help of his divine dream.641
The myth of Yanko bin Madyan becomes a necessary part of the so-called tradition
about the foundation of Istanbul. Thus, in sixteenth century, Hoca Saadeddin, Mustafa Ali,
638
Gülru Necipoğlu, “The Life of an Imperial Monument: Hagia Sophia after Byzantium”, in Hagia Sophia:
From the Age of Justinian to the Present, eds. Robert Mark and Ahmet Cakmak, (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1992), pp. 195–225, p. 202.
639
Kıvami, Fetihname, prepared by Ceyhun Vedat Uygur, (İstanbul: YKY, 2007), p.114/115, vr. 47 in the
original text.
640
Lütfi Paşa ve Tevarih-i Al-i Osman, prepared by Kayhan Atik, (Ankara: Kültür Bakanlığı Yayınları, 2001),
p.185, vr. 176- 179 in the original text.
641
Necipoğlu, “The Life of an Imperial Monument: Hagia Sophia after Byzantium”, p. 199.
164
Katip Çelebi and Evliya Çelebi narrate this myth as a historical fact.642 For instance, in
Mustafa Ali’s(1541- 1600)643, narration, Yanko is one of the founders of the city as
Constantine: ‘Vakta ki şehr binası tamam oldu, ismi Yanko konulıp, banisi şöhretiyle be-nam
oldı’644. According to Oruç Bey from fifteenth century645 and Mustafa Ali, when Mehmed the
Second took over the city, he gave instructions to the Greek scholars to inform him about the
history of Istanbul. Oruç Bey records that:
After Sultan Mehmed II. conquered the city of Constantinople, he came to Hagia Sophia
and gazed upon it. He saw many bizarre buildings which by which he was amazed and he
admired them. He wished then to learn from the Greek and Frankish people, from their
clerks and monks and patriarchs and those who knew history, who built the palace of
Constantine and who had been the kings of the Empire. Historians brought patriarchs,
monks and clerks together and asked them: Who built Constantinople and who ruled
there? They responded according to their knowledge from their books and historical
646
accounts to Sultan Mehmed II.
Mustafa Ali narrates the Sultan’s ceremony of Hagia Sophia’s conversion into a
mosque as follows:
Sultan Mehmed, in the first Friday, with all of his entourage, entered into this big temple
and then prayed and thanked to God. Then he let the reciter to recite from the Holy
Qur’an some verses. In his sermon, after he repeated his thanks to God, looted books
have been brought in front of the Sultan. They translated them with the help of the
competent clerks into the Turkish language. From the time that both the Hagia Sophia
and the city of Constantinople were built, how many times it was destroyed and re-built,
all of the knowledge he sought was found in those books in great detail. They deduced
this knowledge from those different books after consulting them for many days. Then they
647
got an answer, and they wrote it in detail.
642
643
644
645
646
647
For the case of Katip Çelebi, see: Orhan Şaik Gökyay, Katip Çelebi: Yaşamı, Kişiliği ve Eserlerinden
Seçmeler (Ankara: Türkiye İş Bankası, 1982), p. 305 from Fezleke.
On Gelibolulu Mustafa Ali, see Cornell H. Fleischer, Bureaucrat and Intellectual in the Ottoman Empire:
the Historian Mustafa Ali (1541-1600) (Princeton: Princeton University, 1986).
Gelibolulu Mustafa Ali, Künhül Ahbar C. II.: Fatih Sultan Mehmed Devri(1451-1481), prepared by Hüdai
Şentürk, (Ankara:Türk Tarih Kurumu, 2003), p. 28.
For Oruç Bey and his work, see Franz Babinger’s Die frühosmanischen Jahrbücher des Urudsch (Hannover:
Orient Buchhandlung Heinz, 1925), pp. VIII-XXIV.
“Ve girü Sultan Mehemmed Han şehr-i Konstantin’i feth itdükten sonra gelüp Ayasofya’yı görüp temaşa
idüp, garib binalar görüp mütehayyir ve hayran olup kaldı. Diledi kim, ehl-i Rum’dan ve Firengistan’dan
ruhbanlarından ve kasis ve keşiş ve batrıklarından ve tevarih bilenlerden Konstantin’ün binasını kimler
itmişlerdir ve kimler padişah oldılar, anı bilmek istedi. Tevarih bilenler, Rum ve Fireng tayifesinden
batrıklar, keşişler, kasisler ve ruhbanlar cümlesini cem’ idüp sual kıldı kim: Konstantin’i kimler bina itdiler
ve kimler hükm kıldılar? Anlar dahı bildüklerince kitablarında ve tevarihlerinde tevatüri ile isnad olunan
haberlerden Sultan Mehemmed Han’a haberler virdiler.” Oruç b. Adil, Oruç Beğ tarihi: (Giriş, Metin,
Kronoloji, Dizin, Tıpkıbasım), haz. Necdet Öztürk (Istanbul: Çamlıca Basım Yayın, 2007), pp. 81- 112 (vr.
55b- 80a in original text), p. 81. Babinger, Mehmed der Eroberer und seine Zeit, p. 67.
“…binaya müte’allik olan kitabları bir yere getürdüp ehl olan ruhbanlarun tercümanlığı ile Türki lisana
döndürdiler. Gerek Ayasofya binası ve gerek Konstantıniyye ne kadar zamandan berü ‘imaretdür; kaç kerre
165
In seventeenth century, Constantine was acknowlegded in a more historical context.
As it was mentioned before, Hezarfen Hüseyin has narrated in his history book, Tenkih-i
Tevarih-i Mülük. After linking Truva to Rome, Hazerfen starts telling Constantine’s story. In
his version of the story, Constantine is the son of the kings of Pagan Spain, Portugal, England
and France and he ascends the throne in Portugal when he is twenty- three. Then, Romans
request his help against the so-called fifty-first king of Rome, Maxentius, claiming that their
belongings were seized and they were tortured. After a tough battle in the Tiber River area,
Constantine defeats Maxentius and arrives at Rome where he would be the ‘Padişah of
Rum’648. In fact, after Rolumus, Constantine is the second ruler who was named as ‘padişah’
by Hazerfen.649 According to Hezarfen, in his dream, Constantine is told to establish a big
city. Thereupon, Constantine leaves Rome and arrives at Thessalonica. He establishes in
there a city that has churches, baths and cisterns. However, the location of the city is not right
and two years later many of the soldiers die due to an epidemic of plague. During his voyage
to Iran, after passing the Bosphorus he sees Chalcedon, which was plundered by Iranians, and
he orders establishment of a city. During those days, an oracle named Eupharates comes into
the scene and says that the city should be established in a location called ‘Vizanton’. After
that, Constantine returns and passes back across the Bosphorus. He orders the city to be
established there in 324. During the following four years, many palaces and castles were built
in the city and the city was known as ‘Constantinople’. After the city receives its name, larger
scale construction activities take place, and many people and merchants from Rome are
brought to the city.650
648
649
650
harap olup ve kaç kerre ihyası mestur u müsebbetdür, tafsil ü tasrihini murad idindiler.” Gelibolulu Mustafa
Ali, Künhül Ahbar, p. 19.
“In most of the narratives, Rum stands geographically for Anatolia and politically fort he Byzantine empire.
Frengistan, the country of the Frenks (Frenk ili) is adjacent to the domain of Rum (Rum mülkü) and is
governed by Filyon Frenk or the Pope (Pap). …In Saltukname, Anatolia and western parts of Anatolia are
referred as Yunan, whereas the territories in Rumeli, in Thrace and in the Balkansa re referred as Rum. The
perplexity about the terms Rum and Yunan may be attributed to a certain level of confusion that also existed
in medieval Arab accounts pertaining to the legacy of the Byzantine past where al-Rum was used to refer to
the ancient Greeks, although the dominating term in that context was al-Yunaniyyum/Yunan, deriving from
the Greeks’ biblical name: Yonan (Genesis 2:10).” Zeynep Aydoğan, “Creating an Ideal Self:
Representations of Infidels in the Late Medieval Anatolian Frontier Narratives”, in Journal of Ottoman
studies, no: 40 ( 2012), pp. 101- 120, p. 109. In Medieval Arab accounts, the word Frenk designated all
Western and Northwestern Europeans: Aziz el Azmeh, “Barbarians in Arab Eyes”, Past and Present,
no:134, (February 1992), p. 6.
Cited by Bekar, A New Reception of Rome, Byzantium and Constantinople, p. 59: Tenkih, 192a
Ibid., pp. 62-63. Bekar claims that Hezarfen actually used Cedrenus’ work, Compendium Historiarum.
166
2.7.2 The Construction of Hagia Sophia
Located near “the acropolis of ancient Greek city of Byzantium and at the political and
ceremonial center of Byzantine Constantinople and Ottoman Istanbul”651, Hagia Sophia (Holy
Wisdom) museum, former Orthodox patriarchal basilica, the place of imperial ceremony and
ecclesiastical ritual, later a mosque Ayasofya is one of the best known monuments of the
world. The current building was constructed between 532 and 537 immediately after the Nika
Revolt, on the orders by Justinian on the former site of two churches. It was designed by
Isidore of Miletus and Anthemius of Tralles. Hagia Sophia is famous for its holy relics,
beautiful mosaics, its enormous dome and the colums that have been taken from ancient cities
such as Aspendus, Ephessus, Baalbeek, and eight colums which support the dome brought
from Egypt. Hagia Sophia have been the subject of great admiration and legends. Ottomans
are among them.
Hezarfen defines Ayasofya as ‘Allah’ın hikmeti’ (the wisdom of God) 652. According
to Hazerfen, Justinian built Ayasofya. For the construction of Hagia Sophia, Hezarfen
mentions a dream which seems as though he quoted it from Şemseddin Karamani. After the
construction of the building started, the treasury was emptied and then construction stopped.
Under these troublesome conditions, Justinian had a dream. In his dream, there was someone
named ‘Pir-i nurani’ and this person tells Justinian “You have served God much. Do not
worry, go to the west of your empire, you will find a treasure there.”653 In the morning
Justinian went to Silivri and Pir appeared to him again. Pir showed him the location of the
treasure and disappeared of a suddenly. There Justinian found eighty weighbridge, kantar
(56.449 kg.) of gold and finished the construction of Ayasofya.
654
In Şemsüddin’s version
from 1480, Pir introduces himself as Khidir, God’s immortal Messenger. In both narrations,
the location of this incident is stated as Silivri.655
Mahmud Efendi mentions Constantine as among the rulers of Rome who conquer the
greater part of the world aggresively, yet when he came to the site of Istanbul, he liked it and
decided to found a city upon.656 According to Mahmud Efendi, Constantine ordered the
651
652
653
654
655
656
Robert S. Nelson, Hagia Sophia 1850- 1950: Holy Wisdom Modern Monument, (Chicago: The University of
Chicago Press, 2004), p. xv.
Tenkih, 199b cited by Bekar: A New Reception of Rome, Byzantium and Constantinople, p. 66.
Ibid, 199b, “Allah’a bu kadar riyazet ettin, meraklanma bu kadar mal ve hazine boşuna gitmez.Saltanatının
batı tarafına git ve orada bir hazine göreceksin”.
Tenkih 199b.
Tauer, “Les versions persanes de la legende sur la construction d’Aya sofya”, p.9.
TMH, 222a.
167
collection of parts from the ancient ruins for the construction of the buildings of Istanbul and
also employed fifty-thousand labourers and craftsmen these activities. For another story, he
writes, when he camped around Istanbul with his soldiers, he went hunting and saw a gazelle
which transformed into a dignified person. When Constantine asked him his identity, he
answered that “I am appointed to show you the place for founding a great city. This site is so
holy that there is not such a place on earth because here the Mediterranean and Black Sea
unite with each other, and starvation and drought never appear.” In his heart Constantine felt
that he should order the foundation of the city immediately, and this man showed him the
place of the fortresses by drawing a circle on earth. After that the man disappeared.
Constantine has asked to his viziers and ministers about the identity of that man but nobody
could find him. As a result, they decided that he was an angel or Khidir.657
On the construction of Hagia Sophia, Mahmud Efendi also tells that astrologers,
müneccimin prepared a horoscope to find the proper time to lay the foundation. For this
purpose they order great bells. When the exact time comes, they will ring the bells. In the
meantime, however, a stork was flying with a snake in its beak. When it drops the snake to
the ground because the snake bites it, the snake falls on one of the bells. When this bell rings,
workers/artisans lay the ground although the astrologers try to prevent this because it is the
wrong alarm.658 This narrative appears in Mustafa Ali659, Celalzade Mustafa Çelebi660 and
Solakzade661. Additionally Mahmud Efendi writes that in French, Latin and Greek histories it
is mentioned, from the Christ to Hagia Sophia the amount of time that passes is 318 years.
According to Turkis Hagia Sophia histories, a white angel appeared in order to give fifty
kantars of gold to build the Hagia Sophia.662 After completing the construction of Hagia
Sophia, a thousand animals were sacrified and various goods were distributed among the
poor, many feasts were given for the rich people, especially to the workers many extra
657
658
659
660
661
662
TMH, 223a.
TMH,
Mustafa Ali, Künhül Ahbar, p. 27.
Ferhat Aslan, Ayasofya Efsaneleri (İstanbul: İstanbul 2010 Avrupa Kültür Başkenti Ajansı, 2010), p. 196,
cited from Koca Nişancı Reisülküttab Celalzade Mustafa Çelebi, Tarih-i Kala-ı İstanbul ve Mabed-i Camii-i
Ayasofya, vr. 81b: “Ol zamanun müneccimleri da’ire-i irtifa’ı mukabele-i şeref-i şemsde tutup evkat-ı
müşerrefeden bir sa’at-i mübarek bulurlar ve ol dem Üstünyanu padişaha evvela ol sa’at-i şerefde tir-i murad
iken hedefde mezkur mimar Agnadiyos cami’-i Ayasofya’nun bünyadınun binasın urdurur. Ve ol zamanda
455 yaşında Martikos nam dirler bir keşiş vardı. Cümle-i ruhbanlar ol vakit anda hazır olurlar ve mezbur salhurde keşiş sayir kıssiler ve batrikler ile bina mübarekliği-çün el kaldurub du’a eylediler ve istihkam içün
yani dünyada devamı-çün mezbur sal-hurde keşiş bina üstüvarligine bir tılsım bünyad idüb binayı anunla
yapdurdu.”
Mehmed Hemdemi Çelebi, Solakzade Tarihi, haz. Vahid Çubuk, (Ankara: Kültür Bakanlığı yay., 1989), pp.
278-79, p. 277.
TMH, 230b.
168
payments were given in addition to their salaries. Morevoer there were abundant wines in the
Hagia Sophia because it is a great blessing sevap. At the end of his narration of the
construction of Hagia Sophia, Mahmud Efendi states that when Constantine was busy with
Hagia Sophia, the soldiers of Tatars conquered and raided Rome. After the finishing the
building of Hagia Sophia, Constantine sent his vizier, Milsari with a large army to Rome
agaisnt Tatar soldiers. This vizier asked the help of other Christian nations against the Tatar
threat and won the difficult battles. Constantine’s reign lasted thirty six years and after him,
his son Furbilasi got throwned.663
2.7.3. Talismans of Istanbul
In his seminal work Geographie humaine du monde musulman, André Miquel indicates
that Constantinople had a special status in Arabic geographical texts.664 Constantinople was
well known by its statues in the streets and public and market places665 and “popular beliefs
and legends had grown up around these antique monuments.”666 The Byzantines accept
Apollonius to be the sculptor of the statues, and they attribute magical powers to them. All
sorts of monuments in Constantinople are enumerated in Byzantine collection of texts, also
known as Patria, and it is through these collection that myths and stories are transmitted. The
collection also affirms Apollonius as the creator of the city’s talismans. Thanks to the
prominent connection between Apollonius the ‘Byzantine’ and talismans, authors of the Arab
World were persuaded that there were many talismans living in Byzantine Capital.667 One of
the main concerns of Arabic authors was the description of the talismans of the city. If we say
Constantinople was famous for its talismans among Arabs, it would not be wrong. El-Cheikh
notes that “the talismanic protection of antique cities is a theme of medieval Arabic literature
and …the majority of the monuments and statues mentioned in our sources are endowed with
663
664
665
666
667
TMH, 231a.
Miquel, La Géographie humaine du monde musulman jusqu'au milieu du 11è siècle (Paris, Hague: EHESS,
1967- 1980), vol. 2, pp. 381- 481.
As we learn from Mango, “to adorn his new capital on the Bosphorus, Constantine the Great removed a
multitude of antique statues from the principal cities of the Greek east. These statues – those that were set up
by Constantine as well as by others- continued to grace the streets and squares of Constantinople for the
greater part of the Middle Ages. Their number gradually diminished as a result of fires, earthquakes and
vandalism; but an impressive collection of them was still in existence when the Crusaders captured
Constantinople in 1204” Mango, “Antique Statuary and Byzantine Beholder”, p. 55.
Krijnie N. Ciggaar, Western Travellers to Constantinople: The West and Byzantium, 962-1204: Cultural and
Political Relations (Leiden: Brill, 1996), p. 63.
Al-Cheikh, pp. 148-9.
169
talismanic or magical power.”668 In his famous Fihrist, Ibn al-Nadīm in tenth century
mentions “one group of philosophers and servants of the stars” who “assert that they have
talismans based on [astronomical] observations” in the section on books of magic. He
continues giving biographical information about Apollonius the Wise669, “one of the people
of Tyana, in the Byzantine territory” and “the first to begin discussing about talismans.”670
Ursula Weisser states that he was mentioned in numerous Arabic sources as “Meister der
Talismane (sāhib al-tilasmāt)”671 and a sage, ḥakīm.672 He was also known as Balīnās.673
The Antiochene chronicle from the sixth century, Ioannis Malalas mentions Apollonios of
Tyana in his book Chronographia, History in 574 as the most learned man who travelled the
world and made talismans everywhere. On the request of the Byzantines, he prepared many
talismans for Constantinople, formerly Byzantion. One was for storks, one for the river
Lykos, one for the tortoise, one for horses and other miraculous things.674 Above mentioned
Greek scholar Leo Allatios (1585- 1669), gives similar information about Apollonios, who
makes talismanic objects that could control natural events:
When Claudius was emperor, there was a Pythagorean philosopher, Apollonios, a
Tyanean by birth, who performed wonders through magical figures. When he arrived in
Byzantium he was asked by the inhabitants to bring about through magic arts that neither
serpents nor scorpions would strike, that midges would not appear, nor horses go wild,
and that they would not savage each other, nor any other creature. He also controlled the
675
River Lykos, lest it harmed Byzantium by its floods.
In his book on the legends on Hagia Sophia, Yerasimos mentions that the same subject
was also emphasized in various texts that were gathered in Patrias. According to the sixthcentury pagan Hesychius, Constantinople had the stork talisman :
668
Al-Cheikh, “Byzantium through the Islamic Prism from the Twelfth to the Thirteenth Century”, p. 65.
Apollonius of Tyana (Ἀπολλώνιος ὁ Τυανεύς) was a Greek Neopythagorean philosopher from the town of
Tyana in the Roman province of Cappadocia in Asia Minor. His primary biographer, Philostratus the Elder
(c.170–247 CE) places him c. 3 BCE to 97 CE. See: Ursula Weisser: Das „Buch über das Geheimnis der
Schöpfung“ von Pseudo-Apollonios von Tyana, Berlin 1980, p. 10.
670
Ibn al-Nadīm, al-Fihrist (Cairo, n.d.), 443–44, 448; trans. in B. Dodge, The Fihrist of al-Nadīm (New York,
1970), 2:726 from Nadia Maria El-Cheikh, “Byzantium through the Islamic Prism from the Twelfth to the
Thirteenth Century”, in The Crusades from the Perspective of Byzantium and the Muslim World, edited by
Angeliki E. Laiou and Roy Parviz Mottahedeh, Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection
Washington, D.C., 2001, pp. 53-69, p. 66.
671
Ursula Weisser, Das „Buch über das Geheimnis der Schöpfung“ von Pseudo-Apollonios von Tyana (Berlin:
Degruyter, 1980), p. 23.
672
Maria Dzielska, Apollonius of Tyana in Legend and History (Rome: L'erma Di Bretschneider 1986), p. 112.
673
Martin Plessner, “Balinus” in The Encyclopaedia of Islam (Leiden: Brill, 1960), vol.1, pp. 994-995.
674
Elizabeth Jeffreys, Michael Jeffreys, Roger Scott et al., The Chronicle of John Malalas: A Translation
(Melbourne: Australian Association for Byzantine Studies, 1986), p. 139.
675
Allatios, De opin. XXI, p. 163, cited by Hartnup, ‘On the Beliefs of the Greeks’, p. 285.
669
170
…at the same time, different kinds of dragons had invaded the city and were harming the
people of the city; thus, people requested help from storks. And it is said that Poseidon
helped them. After a while, storks also had started to be harmful. They scared the people
walking on the streets by randomly throwing snakes at them which they collected from the
cisterns. Some people even died because of them. Hence, a man from Tyana and named
Apollonios made a talisman by using polished stone, consisting of three storks that were
676
facing each other. This talisman still exists and protects the city from the storks.
When we look at Mahmud Efendi’s account, we confront two clergymen who were
talented in the occult sciences. First one made an olive talisman and the other prepared a fish
talisman. The former one was from the Maghreb and was also an expert in astrology and
talisman-making, which were passed down to him through the Qur’anic (19:56-57, 21:85)
prophet Idris677 and the Arabic sciences (ulum-ı Arabiyye). This clergyman was searching for
a shah who could value his abilities. When he was informed about Constantine and the monks
he invited to his court, took the road to Constantinople and (after arriving), he liked the city
and Hagia Sophia. This man wanted to show his talents so that he could solve the food
problem of monks whom Constantine gathered together in Constantinople. As in the times of
fasting, the monks could only eat olives, olive oil and bread, so he ordered a golden starling
statue from the jewelers and decorated it with a olive type diamond in its beak. Then he hung
up it on the dome of Hagia Sophia. After ordering a five hundred bottles of water from a place
in Iran which has starling birds traveling from, five hundred groups of starlings also followed
the waters and arrived in Constantinople together. In the time of olive harvesting, a great pool
and in the middle of it, a big pillar was built in front of Hagia Sophia. People hung the golden
starling at the top of this pillar and the clergyman hung a magical sign around its neck. With
the permission of God, these five hundred starlings brought the olives in their beaks and claws
from the olive trees from countryside around Istanbul and they throw the olives to this pool.
In forty days, this talisman was effective and everytime the pool was full, the people collected
the olive for the clergymen for their need over the course of a year. After forty days, they
removed the statue of starling from the pillar and put it in the dome of Hagia Sophia. Many
years passed like this.678
676
677
678
Theodor Preger, Scriptores Originum Constantinopolitanarum (Leibzig: BSB B.G.Teubner Verlag, 19011907), vol.1, pp.10-11 cited in Yerasimos, Kostantiniye ve Ayasofya Efsaneleri , p. 92.
It was controversial among Arabs before famous astrologer Abū Ma’shar was the first author who wrote the
biography of Hermes. Later authors mentioning Hermes in Arabic regularly add to his name the remark, “he
being Idris”, wa-huwa Idris. See: Kevin Thomas van Bladel, The Arabic Hermes: from Pagan Sage to
Prophet of Science (Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 2009), p. 168.
TMH: 225b-227b.
171
Yerasimos states that the history of the olive talisman can go back to the mechanical
birds of Roman gardens. The pictures of these birds can be found in Alexandrian Heron
(Hero)’s (ca. 10- 85 AD) book Pneumatica. In the Arab literature, Yerasimos continues, the
olive talisman appears in Ibn Khurradādhbih (or Ibn Khurdādhbih) book named Kitāb al
Masālik w’al Mamālik (The Book of Roads and Kingdoms) written in 846. The author
mentions four wonders of the world and one of these wonders is a bronze starling sitting on a
bronze tree in Rome. : “This metal starling starts tweeting during the harvesting of olives. All
the other starlings carry three olives, one in their beak and two in their claws and then they
drop all these olives on the bronze starling. The people, who live close by, take all these
olives and make olive oil that is enough to treat the leathers to make shoes.”
679
Another
example comes from Kitāb mu'jam al-buldān (Dictionary of Countries) of Yāqūt (d.1229). At
that time, the starling also gaines talismanic powers. He records that: “There is a pool in front
of the church. It is five old miles long and has the same width as its length. There is a fifty
fathom, kulaç (1.8288 m.) long, one piece pillar in the middle of the pool. On top of the pillar,
there is a statue of a bird (starling) Sudani.680 There are magic signs on the bird’s chest and
the bird holds three fake olives, one in its beak and two in its claws. During the harvesting of
olives, all the birds, wherever they are, bring olives in their beaks and claws and drops the
olives on top of the magic bird. Both of Rome’s olives and olive oil come from there. This
talisman was made for Romans by Balinus.” 681
Another account of a starling statue comes from Evliya Çelebi in his narration of the
second talismanic pillar. He says that it was damaged during the earthquake on the night of
Prophet Mohammad’s birth and it was fixed later. Evliya Çelebi provides ‘historical’
information about this pillar. First of all, Evliya mentions that this pillar was built one
hundred thirty years earlier than Alexander the Great and states how old the city was in 1562.
The pillar, which was mentioned by Evliya Celebi, is the Pillar of Konstantin or Çemberlitas
Pillar. According to Evliya, a talisman in the shape of a starling was placed on top of the
pillar. When this bird flaps her wings and shouts once a year, all the birds bring olives in their
beaks and paws. Evliya gives information about the talisman but he does not mention
anything about the purpose of the talisman or how it protects the city. “Second talisman. In
679
680
681
Stephanos Yerasimos, Konstantiniyye ve Ayasofya Efsaneleri, (trans.) Şirin Tekeli (İstanbul: İleitişim,
1993), p. 95, from Ibn Khurradādhbih, Kitāb al-masālik, (ed.), J. de Goeje, Bibliotheca geographorum
arabicourm, VI (Leiden, 1889), pp.
Sudani bird could be referred to one of the oldest Nubian or Sudani war God Tetun in the form of a God.
Yerasimos, Konstantiniyye ve Ayasofya Efsaneleri, p. 95, cited from Yāqūt, Kitāb mu'jam al-buldān, (ed.) F.
Wüstenfeld, (Göttingen: Brockhaus, 1866- 1870), vol. 2, p. 866.
172
the Tavuk bazaar (poultry- market) there is another needle-like column (the pillar of
Thedosius), formed of many pieces of red emery, simpare stone, and a hundred royal cubits,
zira meliki high. This was also damaged by the earthquake which occurred in the two nights
during which the Pride of the World was called into existence; but the builders girt it round
with iron hoops, as thick as man’s thigh, in forty places, so that it is still firm and standing. It
was erected a hundred and forty years before the era of Iskender; and Konstantine placed a
talisman on the top of it in the form of a starling, which one a year clapped his wings, and
brought all the birds in the air to the place, each with three olives in his beak and talons, for
the same purpose as was related above.”682
Mehmed Hemdemi Çelebi, who lived in the seventeenth century and narrated the
foundation of Istanbul and told stories about Madyan’s son Yanko in his book, also relates a
starling myth. Although the context of these two myths is different, their similarities are
remarkable. According to the myth, a scholar, named Rukya/Rukiya who was an expert on
esoteric sciences, learned that Yanko bin Madyan was building a metropolis and a large
church and therefore came to Istanbul to show Yanko bin Maden his talents. He used pure
gold to make a starling bird and an olive seed. He decorated the seed with diamond and silver
and placed it in the starling’s mouth. He carved a talisman that consisted of names from the
Torah and Psalms on a golden plate. Then he places the golden plate on top of that large
church. One year later, during the olive harvesting, they hung the golden plate on the starling
statue. Then, a countless number of birds arrivde with one olive in their beaks and two in their
talons. They spread the olives on top of the starling statue for forty days. The purpose of this
talisman is explained as such, “In this way countless amount of olives were gathered. Some of
these olives were food for the clergy and the rest were sold to supply their needs.”683
The second talisman Mahmud Efendi mentions concerned fish. The second priest from
the Maghreb came to Constantinople, met with Constantine and said to him that he would
invent a fish talisman as his friend invented an olive talisman.684 Constantine was happy with
this news and brought the necessary items that the priest would need. This second priest made
a silver cube and put a golden fish model in it and fixed them on the top of a column in the
sea near the Yedikule district of Istanbul. Fish gathered around the column and seamen caught
them easily. When the fishes were sold, the money was paid firstly to the fishermen, and then
682
683
684
Evilya Çelebi, Narrative of Travels in Europe, Asia and Africa in the Seventeenth Century, (trans.) Josep
von Hammer, (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, digitally printed version 2012), pp. 16-17.
Mehmed Hemdeni Çelebi, Solakzade Tarihi, pp. 278-79.
TMH: 227b.
173
priest’s charge was given to them. This fish talisman also went ahead many years but after the
death of Constantine and his priests neighbouring rulers were jealous about the talismans and
made many plans to stop their influence.685 A group of olive trees owners who suffered from
the olive talisman found a reptilian with making a promise on capital. This man changed his
identity and became a priest. He succeeded in entering the Hagia Sophia and after gaining the
priests’ confidence, one night, he stole the starling statue from the dome of Hagia Sophia. He
burried it in the ground away from Hagia Sophia. When the olive harvest time came and the
statue was not found, the priests became deeply sorrowful and unjustly punished other
people.686 Nevertheless because the waters were in Hagia Sophia, the birds again brought the
olives. And the reptile person understood that the talisman functions. At this time he had
stolen the starling water from the bottles and filled it with another water as well as he
breakups the statue after he took out it from the place he buried it. As a result all the starlings
fled from the city. The priests awaited the birds at the time of olive harvest but even a single
bird did not appear. Everybody understood that this had talisman lost its influence. Fort the
fish talisman, nobody could do anything because its guardians were numerous. 229b In a
mean time an Egytpian shah organized a military expedition to Constantinople by sea and
when he became victorious, he canceled the fish talisman because his soldiers desired the
silver cube and golden fish very much. Mahmud Efendi comments this by saying: “Cenab-ı
Rabbü’l-Alemin birine yabdurır ve birine yakdurır.”
As a last point, while narrating the Hagia Sophia, Mahmud Efendi uses Turkish
histories on the construction of it, as he mentions in the text, although he does not mention
Yanko bin Madyan. Gülru Neciboğlu claims that when the Ottomans both inherit the great
church, Hagia Sophia and the texts, they “transformed the two together into an integral part of
their own collective memory.” Using the terminology of Pierre Nora, “lieu de mémoire”687,
she continues that Hagia Sophia represents this term in phenomena in which “a wide variety
of memories (Christian- Byzantine and ıslamic-Ottoman) crystallized, passing down from one
generation to the other and continually being reinterpreted according to changing contexts”.688
This fits perfectly to the narration of Mahmud Efendi.
685
686
687
688
TMH: 228b.
TMH: 229a.
Pieree Nora, “Between Memory and history: Les Lieux”, Representations 26 (1989), pp. 7- 25.
Gülru Necipoğlu, “The Life of an Imperial Monument: Hagia Sophia after Byzantium”, in Hagia Sophia:
From the Age of Justinian to the Present, eds. Robert Mark and Ahmet Cakmak, Cambridge University
Press, London, 1992, 195–225, p. 225.
174
2.8. History as “Mirrors for Princes”
This section argues that Mahmud Efendi’s Tarih can be read as a “political counsel text.”
While describing the distant past, he indirectly and cleverly pointed out the problems which
could be found in the current Ottoman socio-economic and political structure, which will be
discussed below. First, however, a discussion of the background of the era is necessary.
As mentioned above, Mahmud Efendi’s text emerged in the late seventeenth and early
eighteenth centuries which Ergene says “witnesse[d] a radical transformation in the political
structure of the Ottoman Empire” due to the gradual rise of the “substructures.”689 It is no
coincidence that during the seventeenth century socio-political critiques found a strong place
among the Ottoman literati, as in the case of the fifteenth century when there appeared across
the Middle East “an unusually large concentration of works on justice” written in Arabic,
Persian, and Turkish, that Darling notes “discussed political issues under the rubrics of
philosophy, history, religious exegesis, cultural study, imaginative literature, and advice to
kings.”690
Among those written in the seventeenth century, some of them were optimists, others
not. However, they commonly accepted that the empire was in a course of decline, which
mainly stresses not the degeneration of state officials but rather the timar system and
janissaries.691
The genre of ıslahatnames and nasihatnames (advice letters), which corresponds to
“mirrors for princes” or Fürstenspiegel, has a profound tradition in Islamic political culture,
indeed.692 Na½¢¼at al-Mulūk (Advice for Rulers), which is considered as the genre of pre689
690
691
692
Boğaç A. Ergene, “On Ottoman Justice: Interpretations in Conflict (1600- 1800),” Islamic Law and Society
8, (1/2001), pp. 52- 87, p. 79.
Linda Darling, “Political Change and Political Discourse in the Early Modern Mediterranean World,” p.
508.
M. Sariyannis, “Ottoman Critics of Society and State, Fifteenth to Early Eighteenth Centuries: Toward a
Corpus for the Study of Ottoman Political Thought,” Archivum Ottomanicum 25 (2008), pp. 127-50, p. 143.
On the general historiographical survey of the literature, see Hüseyin Yılmaz, “Osmanlı Tarihçiliğinde
Tanzimat Öncesi siyaset düşüncesine yaklaşımlar,” Türkiye Araştırmaları Literatür Dergisi 1/2 (2003), pp.
231- 298. P. Fodor, “State and Society, Crisis and Reform in 15th- 17th century Ottoman Mirror for
Princess,” Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungariae 40 (2-3/1986), pp. 217-240; A. C.
Schaendlinger, “Reformtraktate und -vorschlage im Osmanischen Reich im 17. und 18. Jahrhundert,” in
Osmanistik, Turkologie, Diplomatik: Festgabe an Josef Matuz, (eds). Christa Fragner, Klaus Scwarz (Berlin:
K. Schwarz, 1992), pp. 239- 253; Bernard Lewis, “Ottoman Observers of Ottoman Decline,” Islamic Studies
1 (1962), pp. 72- 87. E. I. J. Rosenthal, Political Thought in Medieval Islam, an Introductory Outline
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1968); Patricia Crone, God’s Rule, Government and Islam: Six
175
modern Islamic literature, may possibly be categorized under this phrase as it is comprises
advise to rulers and state officials on state politics as well as relations with the subjects and
God.693 In the introduction to Na½¢¼at al-Mulūk (Book of Counsel for Kings) of al- Ghazālī’,
H.D. Isaacs describes this literature as incorporating elements from Persian and Arab literary
and political traditions claiming a continuity between the two and demonstrating a combined
identity for the medieval Muslim civilization.694
This could be summarized in Ibn Ḵhaldūn’s formula, which he quoted from Aristotle’s
advice letters to Alexander the Great, indicating “circle of justice”:
The world is a garden hedged in by sovereignty/the dynasty
Sovereignty/the dynasty is authority, by which the law lives
Law is administration, governed by kingship
Kingship is order, supported by the army
The army are helpers, supported by wealth
Wealth is livelihood, gathered by the people
The people are servants, enfolded by justice
Justice is familiar, it is the support of the world695
As far as their influence on Ottoman scholars is concerned, the most important “mirrors
for princes” were accepted as three written during the Seljuk period, the Ḳābūs-nāma, written
in 1082 by Keykavus bin İskender; the Siyāsat-nāma by Nizamülmülk (1018-1092); and
Naṣīḥat al-mulūk (Book of Counsel for Kings) by al- Ghazālī (1058-1111).696 Kabusname, is
one of the mystical Works focusing on ethical education. It is full of advice and comprises
sections and lectures about the features of a good statesman, eating and bathing styles,
forecasting from the stars, using swords, medicine and the characteristics of a good horse. The
Siyāsat-nāma was the work of the vizier Nizamülmülk, composed on the order of Melikşah,
693
694
695
696
Centuries of Medieval Islamic Political Thought (New York: Columbia University Press, 2004); Cornell
Fleischer, “Royal Authority, Dynastic Cyclism, and ‘Ibn Khaldunism’ in Sixteenth-Century Ottoman
Letters,” Journal of Asian and African Studies 18 (1983), pp. 198–220.
C. Edmund Bosworth, “Naṣīḥat al-Mulūk”, EI², vol. VII, pp. 984- 988.
Al-Ghazālī’, Counsel for Kings, (trans.) F. R. C. Bagley from the Persian text ed. by Jalal Huma'i and the
Bodleian Arabic text, (ed.) by H. D. Isaacs, with introduction, notes, and biographical index (London:
Oxford University Press, 1964), p. ix
Darling, “Political Change and Political Discourse in the Early Modern Mediterranean World,” p. 509.
H.D. Isaacs, Counsel for Kings, p. xiii.
176
the Seljuk Emperor. The author explains in his introduction that Melikşah wanted to learn
about earlier governments, kings and institutions so that the book was based on his more than
twenty years experience in government.697 The Ottoman Sultan Murad II ordered a certain
Mercimek Ahmed to make a plain Turkish translation of the Ḳābūs-name.698 Different in
character and purpose was the Book of Counsel for Kings by al- Ghazālī’, which consists of
two parts: The first is devoted to theology and explains what the faith is to uphold a pious
Muslim teaching and what the religious principles are accordingly. This religious tone makes
al-Ghazālī’s work different from the other works in the same genre. The other part resembles
the other mirrors for princes with additional chapters on viziers, secretaries, the generosity of
Kings, the aphorisms of the Sage, intelligence and women.699
Early examples of this kind in the Ottoman intellectual world appeared in a form of
history text. The fifteenth-century Ottoman historian Tursun Bey, author of Tarih-i Ebu’lFeth (History of the Father of Conquest), followed the Persian ornamented prose style when
composing a book on Ottoman history and this made him a pioneer.700 In the Introduction, he
follows the usual conventions of “Advice to Kings” literature. His usage of quotations from
the Akhlāḳ-i Nāṣirī (Nasırian Ethics) of Naṣīral-Dīn al-Ṭūsī and possible consultation of the
Čahār maḳāla (Four Discourses) of Niẓāmī ‘Arūḍī Samarḳandī701 prove his familiarity with
this literary genre. A further reference for the mirrors for princes composer was Alexander the
Great, whom Tursun Bey uses as an example of the virtue of the forgiveness. He appeared as
normally a pious and heroic Persian king, who traveled the world for wisdom with his teacher
Aristotle. Kınalızade Ali (1510-1572), an important scholar and moralist of the sixteenth
century, details his views on ethics in his book Ahlak-i Ala’i. The book was very impressive
and one of the most read books from the time it was written until the collapse of the Ottoman
Empire. Uysal expresses the impressiveness and reputation of the book by saying that it was
widely used in madrasahs for moral knowledge and courses until the collapse of the Empire.
697
698
699
700
701
Nizamülmülk, Siyasetname (Siyeru’l-muluk), (trans.) N. Bayburtlugil (Istanbul: Dergah Yayınları, 1981), p.
25.
Kabusname, Unsur Keykavus b. İskender b. Kabus Keykavus b. İskender, çev. Mercimek Ahmed İlyasoğlu,
yay. Orhan Şaik Gökyay, (Ankara: Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı, 1966), p. 3. Unsur Keykavus b. İskender b.
Kabus Keykavus b. İskender, A Mirror for Princes, trans. from the Persian by Reuben Levy (London: The
Cresset Press, 1951).
Isaacs, Al- Ghazālī’’s Book of Counsel, p. xv.
For detailed information about Tursun Bey’s life and his book Tarih-i Ebü’l-Feth, see H. İnalcık, “Tursun
Beg, Historian of Mehmed the Conqueror’s Time”, Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde des Morgenlandes 69
(1977), pp. 55-71.
See E. G. Browne, Revised Translation of the Chahar Maqala (Four Discourses) of Nizami-i Arudi of
Samarqand (London: Cambridge University Press, 1921), pp. 10-12.
177
Handwritten copies of the book, 70 of which are held in libraries in Istanbul, can be found all
over the world. The book has three parts, the first of which is about the individual and general
ethics and related problems. The second part is mainly about family ethics and the third part
involves state ethics and political philosophy.702
In the introduction to the book, Ali explains the principles of normal administration
and the reasons for the collapse of a country. He concentrates on questions of justice,
suppression and the nature of the sultan’s administration. He presents some examples to
support his criticism of those points and directs attention in this way to the fact that decline
had begun within the Ottoman realm, before he had begun writing his book.703 In his Ahlak,
(Ethics) Kınalızade Ali defines justice - parallel to Greek ethics - which Ergene lists as “1.
Maintaining the order of erkan-ı erba’a (four pillars) intact and in harmony 2. determining the
ranks of the inhabitants of the society according to their merits and capabilities and 3.
distributing the benefactions accordingly.”704
A decade later, in 1608, Veysi (1561- 1627) composed Habname (The Book of
Dreams) and presented it to Sultan Ahmed I. The author was a poet and a kadi (judge) who
believed that there was a great deal of corruption in the Ottoman Empire. According to him,
Habname appeared as a result of deep thinking on how to tell the Sultan about the current
situation of the Empire. One day, while Veysi was contemplating these questions, he had a
vision in which he was in an assembly at which Alexander the Great governed the earlier
Ottoman Sultans.705 In the meantime the current Sultan Ahmed first, likewise at the meeting
began to speak with Alexander. The topic of the discussion was why a country breaks down.
During the discussion, Sultan Ahmed complained that disturbances during his reign had
increased. Alexander replied with the observation that disorder and corruption had existed
since the day humans had been created. With Alexander as the speaker of his ideas, as it were,
Veysi outlined his opinions about the reasons for the collapse of a good government.
According to Veysi, the Sultan stays at the center of the universe. The loss of the heart affects
the remainder of the body, the corruption on the part of the Sultan led to disturbance in the
702
703
704
705
Enver Uysal, “Kınalızade’s views on the moral education of children,” Journal of Moral Education 36/3
(2007), pp. 333-341, p. 334.
Mehmet Öz, Osmanlı’da “Çözülme” ve Gelenekçi Yorumcuları (Istanbul: Dergah Yayınları, 1997), pp. 5455.
Ergene,“On Ottoman Justice: Interpretations in Conflict (1600- 1800)”, p. 86.
Üveys b. Muhammed el-Alaşehri Veysi, Habname, (İstanbul: Şeyh Yahya Efendi Matbaası, 1293/1876), p.
4; quoted by A. Tunç Şen, “The Dream of a 17th century Ottoman Intellectual: Veysi and his Habname,”
unpublished M.A. Thesis, Sabanci University, 2007, p. 53.
178
country generally speaking. Preventing these disturbances required the rulers to govern with
mercy: anything other would only aggravate the situation of humans.706
Parallel to the Mirror for Princes literature, there are risales (pamphlets) which
try to present ways for reforming while focusing on the corruption in traditional Ottoman
institutions. One of the most famous examples of this is the Risale of Koçi Bey.707 However,
the more important treatise comes from Katip Çelebi in the same century. Düsturü’l-Amel liIslahi’l-Halel (The Method of Practice to Overcome Disorders), Katip Çelebi repeats the idea
of daire-i adliye (circle of justice) and endorses the traditional social hierarchy of erkan-ı
erbaa, or four orders. Like the other authors, he mentions the high burden of taxation on the
reaya. He suggests that the government income should be distributed evenly and points out
that unnecessary expenditure in government circles could be prevented. Its conclusion evokes
different solutions for the problem of corruption in the government, including the practice of
strong guidance from above, piety on the side of the Sultans, by the army under the command
of patriotic generals and general agreement over measures, including unnecessary
expenditures.708
Another scholar who addressed the problems the Ottomans faced in the seventeenth
century was Hezarfen Hüseyin’s Telhisü’l-Beyan fi Kavanin-i Al-i Osman (The Summary of
the Explanation in the Laws of the Exalted Ottomans). The work consists of thirteen parts in
which the author explains his observations and ideas on decline and corruption in the Ottoman
realm. At the same time he cites from earlier mirror and consultation letters. He argues that it
is not necessary for each society collapse after a period of decline. However, he warned that
those who did not maintain justice would cease to exist.709
Parallel to these above-mentioned works, there is a strong presence of advice letter
literature in verse style. The most important pioneer of this genre was the famous Pendname
of Feridüddin Attar. A bulk of translations and exegesis arose around it in the Ottoman
literary world. Apart from Pendname, Sadi’s Gülistan and Bostan also had a deep effect on
the nasihatname literature of Divan poetry.710 The best-known example of this is Yusuf Nabi
706
707
708
709
710
A. Tunç Şen, “The Dream of a 17th century Ottoman Intellectual”, p. 55.
Yılmaz Kurt, Koçi Bey Risalesi (Ankara: Akçağ Yayınları, 1994).
Orhan Şaik Gökyay, “Düsturü’l- amel”, TDVIA, vol. 10, pp. 50-51.
Kenan İnan, “Remembering the Good Old Days: the Ottoman Nasihatname [Advice Letters] Literature of
the 17th Century”, http://www.cliohworld.net/onlread/6/20.pdf , pp. 111- 127, 122.
Mahmut Kaplan, “Türk Edebiyatında Manzum Nasihatnameler,” Türkler , cilt 11 (Ankara: Yeni Türkiye
Yay., 2002) , p. 791-792.
179
(1641-1712)’s Hayriye, which was written for his son. In Hayriyye, Nabi presents solutions to
the collapse of the state while giving advice to his son, representing youth in general.711
After a brief introduction to the advice literature among Ottoman literati, it is easily
grasped that when Mahmud wrote his History, there were a bulk of books, pamphlets and
poems concerning the future of the state detailing solutions and advice. As a preacher and
müfti, Mahmud Efendi presented his “advice” while discussing the distant past. It is important
to note that a preacher, vaiz (derived from wa-‘a-za root, meaning ‘to warn’) was responsible
for “commanding right and forbidding wrong” and giving advices. In addition to the other
examples I qoute below, there is one term, cumhur müşaveresi, which find itself a prominent
place when Mahmud Efendi narrates the peculiarities of Athenian socio-economic system. In
the eighteenth century, Şemanizade Süleyman Efendi defines “republic” (cumhur) as a system
where a group of leaders elected by the people rules the state. “In such as a state” he says,
“there is no single ruler, but all affairs are dealt with by the agreement of its leading men; and
these leading men are elected by the choice of the populace.”712
Literally means as consultation, müşavere or meşveret, the practice of which could be
traded back to the early days of Islam, is the fundamental cornerstone of the juridical
literature on political authority. Meşveret has been underlined since at least sixteenth century,
both in Ottoman historical and political literature. For Bosnian scholar Hasan Kafi Akhisari
(Hasan Kafija Pruščak) (d. 1616), giving up the tradition of consultation is among the three
reasons of corruption.713 Other authors of History and Mirror for Princes genre describe the
destructive effects of not consulting and warn against deciding great decisions alone. Derviş
Hasan from the reign of Murad IV (1623-1640) approaches squarely to the classical juridical
tradition, and he emphasizes that it is sunna to take on consulting especially for certain cases
and gives an example of the Prophet Muhammad. On the other hand, he underlines the fact
that sultan should consult no one, but those whose ancestors served to the state.714 In addition
to them, scholars, bureaucrats, sufis and notables stress the advantages of meşveret, as they
711
712
713
714
Mine Mengi, Divan Şiirinde Hikemi Tarzın Büyük Temsilcisi Nabi (Ankara: Atatürk Kültür, Dil ve Tarih
Yüksek Kurumu Atatürk Kültür Merkezi, 1987).
Bernard Lewis, The Muslim Discovery of Europe (New York &London: W.W. Norton & Company, 1982),
p. 213, from Şemanizade, İcmal-i Ahval-i Avrupa, 3: 21-22.
Hüseyin Yılmaz, “Osmanlı Devleti’nde Batılılaşma Öncesi Meşrutiyetçi Gelişmeler”, Divan 13 (2008), pp.
1-30, p. 26.
Derin Terzioğlu, “Sunna-minded sufi preachers in service of the Ottoman state: the naṣīḥatnāme of Hasan
addressed to Murad IV”, Archivum Ottomanicum 27 (2010), pp. 241-312, p. 269.
180
want to get involved in the process of decision making.715 According to the general view in
the Nasihatnames, poor or rich, Muslim or non- Muslim, every person is suitable for
consulting as long as having the qualification for the subject matter of consultation.716
Mahmud Efendi mentions müşavere in fourteen places.717 But the most important one is the
sentence of “the Athenian people did not fight or conflict with each other. Their actions take
place by the people’s decision. According to the decision of the majority of the people, they
execute one rule every day.”718 Here Mahmud Efendi describes Athens as having no
opposition, conflict and battle because the Athenians ruled by the consultation. With the vote
of the majority, a decree was carried out everyday. Not suprisingly, after that, he jumps to the
hidden notion of justice: putting things in their right place by saying that groups (taife) did not
imitate the food and the dress of the superior ones. For example, if the poor imitate the food
and dress of the rich, they will killed.719 Apart from them, he also uses the terms relating to
the social order: nizam-ı memleket (preserve public order) and tedbir-i siyaset, adalet (justice)
and zulm (tyranny) in various places of his Tarih.
It is also important to note that in the same period of Mahmud Efendi, an increasing
interest on Byzantine “mirror for princes” texts among Greek literati was seen. The first
director of the above mentioned the Academy of Bucharest, Sevastos Kyminites of Trebizond
(1632- 1702) wrote paraphrases in vernacular Greek from Byzantine advice literature,
especially Agapetus’ Ekthesis in 1700 and Synesius’ De Regno (On Kingship) on the order of
Constantine
Brancoveanu Bassarab (d. 1714), Prince of Wallachia between 1688 and
1714.720 In Mahmud Efendi’s case, the role of Brancoveanu was acted by Muhsinzade. In the
introduction of Tarih, Mahmud Efendi says that the book is meant as counsel for the vizier
Muhsinzade Mehmed Paşa.721 Presentation of such kind of genre to the statesmen was not
unique to Mahmud Efendi, indeed. Nedim Zahirović introduced the fact that the work of
Nergisi born in 1585 in Sarajevo, El-Vasfu’l-Kamil fi-Ahvali Veziri’l-Adil, was presented to
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
Hüseyin Yılmaz, “Osmanlı Devleti’nde Batılılaşma Öncesi Meşrutiyetçi Gelişmeler”, p. 27.
For Hüseyin Yılmaz, the increasing importance of consultation in early modern Ottoman political discourse
and practice make the “Ottoman constitutionalists” in nineteenth century to appropriate the term for their
political purposes.
TMH: 51b, 68b, 69b, 79b, 101a, 103b, 108a, 123b, 123b, 124a, 145b, 165b, 179a, 185a.
TMH: 103b: “Rÿy-i „arøda ol vaúitde Atina‟ya iódÀå olunan umÿr-ı „acíbe bir diyÀrda olmuş değil. Çünkü
ceng u nizÀ„ kimse ile yok idi ve umÿrları cumhÿr müşÀveresiyle olurdı. Cümle re‟yle her gün birer emr
iódÀå iderlerdi.”
TMH: 104a.
Glycofrydi-Leontsini, “Teaching Princes”, pp. 71- 90, here pp. 78-81.
TMH: 2b.
181
Bosnia-born Murteza Paşa(d. 1636) and that the work had a feature of fürstenspigel and
Reformwerke and was a “Wesirspiegel” actually.722
Mahmud Efendi’s thoughts interwoven in the text show his intent:
Because property is sedition, it imprisons three of us, and one of us poisoned another one
and murdered him. And again, the poisoner, too, took the poison and died. After that, the
one who wrote these lines got the plague, and wrote this leaf as he was ill from the
pestilence. If someone will see our dead bodies, then he should consider this page, take
some lessons, should concur with the Will of God and not favor highly worldly property.
Hence, the reader will be devoid both of this world and goods.723
During his government, the people of Athens had good fortune and did not fight with
anybody. For this reason they had minimum expenditure. Therefore they could save from
their state treasury and possess many goods. After that Elkumus bequeathed that they
should appoint one judge every ten years. And his testament was accepted that they
appoint a new judge every ten years. Seven judges were in duty in seventy years so that
Athens became a prosperous and happy city, and it experienced much progress, because
they did not claim any kingship, and there were many people of knowledge (scholarship)
who dealt closely with science and philosophy. Science and philosophy were favored
most and in order to learn and teach them they built many school rooms.724
This law was hated by everybody and all of them requested its abolition. Then, a perfect
philosopher from the royal lineage emerged, as a scholar, philosopher, predictable and
regulating person, possessing knowledge, so-called philosopher Solon as a scholar and
an undoubted philosopher emerged and was appointed head philosopher over the nine
philosophers. He abolished that strict law and instead introduced a merciful law, which
was accepted by the rest. This ruler’s treatment and policies were acceptable and
specifically admired by all of the people and thus the city of Athens became a very
prosperous city, which made him favorite of all the people.725
Since peace may take place between us, in the place called Lisna once per year, the new
year for the period of hundred years declined. Since the art of government (philosophy) is
based on peace and they did not give consent to outrage.726
King Suleyman was famous to his followers for his knowledge of philosophy and wisdom,
and of the science of politics and government and the order of the country. The kings and
governors from other entities joined and enjoyed his conversation in Athens. And the
kings invited him in order to join his advisory conversation sessions that contained
wisdom and very useful counsel. And they let him to return to Athens with big
ascendancy.727
One day later, they brought all of the king’s best horses and mares and camels and other
animals in front of the wise man, but the mentioned wise man did not esteem this and the
722
723
724
725
726
727
Nedim Zahirović, Murteza Pascha von Ofen zwischen Panegyrik und Historie, p. 28- 33, 33.
TMH: 46b.
TMH: 52a.
TMH: 53a.
TMH: 61a.
TMH: 62a.
182
next day, they showed him the cavalrymen. After that the king came there together with
his special entourage who were decorated with ornaments and golden embroidery, his
servants were altogether equipped with things decorated with pearls, jewels, and
emeralds. When the king appeared, Suleyman the Wise stood up and took his greetings in
a seemly manner. But he limited his gaze so that he never did look at the gold, jewels and
pearls with high esteem. And the men appointed by the king in order to describe and
transport those embroideries praised those ornaments highly. But the wise man never
favored those or answered them.728
When the king asked those who accompanied the wise men: “How did the wise man
answer my wealth and how did he praise and esteem it?” The men who had accompanied
[the wealth] said that he had not said anything but had prayed. Then the king said:
“Maybe the wise man assumed that my treasure came from my father” and gave orders
to the keepers of the treasury: “Show all of my treasures to the wise man!” And they
showed all of the treasures to the wise man, and he did not say anything but prayers. And
after that, when the king asked the keepers, they replied, “he did not say anything but his
prayers.” The king ordered them to bring Suleyman the Wise to his presence. And
Suleyman the Wise fulfilled the best manners of behavior toward a shah in the best way.
After that, the king asked this wise man: “Whom have you seen and heard in the places
you have gone and observed, from the kings and governors who were praised and had
good features and efficient governing?”729
The King responded: “Suleyman the Wise replied: I saw in Athens a man called Telun
and noticed that he had a very good relationship with the neighbors and therefore all of
the people who knew him are happy with him. And after he had fought for the sake of his
country and died, he ascended to the highest place. And after that, all of the sons like
himself left the country” and so finished his words. Then King asked again: “Who else
did you see other than Telun?” The Wise man replied: “Again, in the city of Athens I saw
two brothers, and their mother was alive. And they were very respectful and obedient to
their mother. They were living to such a degree for the approval of their mother that a
temple was built in our country in a holy place. One authentic day a year, the Athenians
and people from the surrounding areas were gathered and sacrificed in the temple. Then
they expressed their wishes and made their requests to their holy being, and with the
order of God (AllahuTe’ala), that wish would be accomplished. And to this same temple,
one year the people gathered and the above-mentioned brothers prepared to visit that
temple together with their mother. And they rode together upon an ox cart. But the oxen
were so slow that the sons realized that at that speed their mother could not reach the
temple that day. Therefore, they left the oxen behind and instead they started to pull the
cart and got their mother to the temple that day. And all of the people gathered around
that temple praised and commended the children’s care for their mother’s approval. And
when the time of sacrifice came and the mother observed the people’s esteem of her sons,
she said to them: “It is probable that the joy I get from your respect is at the peak and
this level of approval may not be repeated again! Since the time to voyage from this
world is due, be it that I submit my spirit at this time.” And so she asked for death and
gave her spirit away. When the children saw their mother in this manner, they said: “In
spite of being sad and sorrowful for our mother, it is better to wish at this moment our
own deaths along with hers!” and they also gave away their spirits. The people around
them favored and respected the love among mother and children and buried them in the
same grave, upon which a tomb and a dome were built, which was even now a place to
visit. And still, in people’s mouths, they have good reputations and nice attributes.” He
finished the wise man’s speech. The king wished that the wise man had eulogized him.
728
729
TMH: 62b.
TMH: 63a.
183
But the wise man never did that, which made the king very angry. He asked again: “Who
has a good reputation among people other than these?” and the wise man replied: “I do
not know other good reputable persons.” The king: “Since you are a poor man, you
learned only the names of poor ones because you only observed them. However, you have
not met with the mostly reputable great kings and therefore could not have the
opportunity to see their greatness, mercy, favor and benefaction; and therefore did not
eulogize them, only tell me those who are dervish-mannered people. Only those kings are
deemed to be of good favor and reputation, if some poor people would wish anything
from them, their wish would be fulfilled and the goodness and perfection of the poor
would be accomplished in his personality without any injustice on them and would not
disseminate towards other people” and “still, even my reputation is known all over the
world. You are hiding that and not expressing it.” The wise man replied, “My dear
Sultan! May your reputation continue from the beginning to the end since reputation over
a long span of time is more acceptable. And we look among people not to their reputation
and the respect they gained from others due to their reputation, since it does not
distinguish the reputable ones from the poor ones. Because the origin of the rich and
poor came from Adam (peace be upon him). He is the cause of the birth and descendants
of mankind on earth. The reason for the voyage from this world is the departure of the
animated spirit from the human body. And in this voyage, all people will participate. For
us, the subject for good reputation seems to be the continuation of the reason for
reputation from the beginning to death, but not whether he is rich, noble or poor.
Because many lords may become poor and their kingdom can be extinguished, and many
poor people may gain the reputation of a lord or shah.” As he finished his words in this
way, the King grew very angry and declared a death sentence for the wise man. However,
his viziers did find another interpretation for those words and managed to just save the
wise man from the death.730
And Suleyman the Wise got old and left governing and dealt with teaching in a silent
edge. He never expressed any words on government. Anyhow, the above-mentioned wise
man authored codes on government, the economy and order of the country; his followers
acted according to the codes, and therefore did not incommode him. And they appointed
the cousin of Suleyman the Wise, Mezistratus, who would govern according to the art of
Suleyman, as king. And this shah reigned according to the manner of his predecessor,
thus it became very good for the Athenian people. The philosophers who were ready for
government did at the beginning not give consent and were stubborn against him.
Nevertheless, after some time they too gave their consent. The subjects and nobles were
happy with him. As for the king, all of the Athenian people stood at his door. He built
within the city of Athens in the necessary quarters around forty fountains, bringing water
through channels, wells and chimneys from the Mendil Mountains, Cholandiri Valley
which had a higher altitude than Athens and had very tasty and high-quality water. And
for twelve years this water flowed and did a great deal. And during his time, philosophy
and other sciences taught in Athens were taught everywhere. This king ordered: “All of
the sciences will be collected and written again! For, many rules would be abandoned
because of forgetting the rules of science. Actually, there were less honest philosophers
and most neglected results in the corruption of science. So, each scholar studied the rules
in their sciences and wrote and compiled new books. New study halls and teaching
schools were built, new teachers and scholars were appointed to these new institutions.
This king invented the foundation of everything in the Greek areas; even the prices for the
art of artists were decided by this king, also the wages of farmers. When the king asked
an old farmer one day, “What did you earn today?”; the farmer replied: “I did not earn
anything but the tithe.” Then the king showed mercy to this old man and abolished the
tithe for farmers and artisans. His reign lasted twenty four years and then he died. After
730
TMH: 63b- 65b.
184
him, he had two sons: Deyuklis and İpas, both of whom were appointed together as kings,
since they were very delighted from their fathers and also they did not wish that one of
them be sad.731
They said: “You made an oath to massacre us and to leave our country in ruins. We then
found an opportunity to come here in order to murder you, however, you escaped from
our hands with your good fortune and we were caught and jailed. You know that we will
not turn again to your side. Therefore, we ask from you our quick deaths so that we will
not see the ruins of our country and the massacre of our people” and they cried. The
Persian shah said: “Why did you deem to lay waste to your country and to be put to
death. My father was a great king and sent a letter to your shah, but you did not accept
his request. And after that he sent a soldier to you, but you even desolated him in a tricky
way. I sent you an envoy and you threw him into a deep hole and covered him with earth.
Even though there is a rule that no harm will be given to envoys, you murdered him. And
after that again in a tricky way, they sent you, the mad people, to murder me. After all of
these affairs, tell me who will be murdered and whose country will be left in ruins other
than you! But what will I get from murdering you?” he said. [To forgive is offering of
victory].
If a case cannot be solved in the local courts, then it will come to the great court for the
decision, and a decision will be made since, according to an oral tradition, for each
issue, another court was established.
No other place in the world experienced such strange affairs as in Athens since there was
no war or fight with anyone else, and their affairs were handled by mutual consultations.
Every day they appointed a leader. And the duties and appointments they gave to the
army did not exceed the expiration date and were submitted in the regular time
limitation. And no social group was able to imitate the clothes and meals of any higher
groups. No one could invade everything. If a person or a soldier insisted on the imitation
of the higher clerks eating, drinking or clothing styles, then the imitator would be killed
directly without paying any attention to his words, descent or honor. Likewise, if poor
people imitated the clothing and food of the wealthy, they would be killed instantly. If the
lazy ones imitated the food, clothing or housing of the nobles, they would be killed
732
without giving any permission or mercy.
731
732
TMH: 66b- 67b.
TMH: 103b- 104a.
185
CONCLUSION
In the second half of the seventeenth century, Mahmud Efendi, the mufti of Athens,
resided in the city between the years 1699 and 1715. Moreover, he wrote a history of Athens
entitled Tarih-i Medinetü’l Hukema, which exists as a single copy today in Topkapı Palace.
Throughout 291 folios, the author describes the history of ancient Athens (1a-240b) with the
help of two Greek abbots, Georgios Sotiris and Theophannis Kavallaris from Gregory
Kontares’ book on Ancient Athens. This book has a unique and important characteristic in
Ottoman historiography: it devotes itself completely to the history of Athens. Most probably,
it was the first work explaining about Theseus and other ancient Greek rulers. In addition,
Tarih-i Medinetü’l Hukema contains information about the ancient buildings, customs,
traditions and social structure of Athens.
Nevertheless, it is an unfamiliar characteristic for the “Barbar” Turk. As Wunder
addresses, in Giovanni Paolo Marana’s Letters Written by a Turkish Spy (1684), “the author
depicted his fictitious Turkish character as a sensitive antiquarian so that the protagonist could
win credibility as a civilized commentator on European society.”733 A century later, after the
Greek Enlightenment, parallel with the above mentioned, a nineteenth century historian
Kambouroglou states that;
“…the voice of mouesin, coming from the Acropolis and heard around it, in the place
where the most sacred memories of ancient and Christian Athens are to be found, marked
for the Athenians the beginning of a new phase in their life. But in the areas around the
Acropolis, where the voice of Pericles, of Demosthenes, of Plato and Saint Paul were
once heard, there is no place for the voice of imam which represents the negation of
political, patriotic and moral principles, advocated by them. Shadows of the creators of
the great feats of humanity, do not be sad; Koran’s principles cannot grow roots in the
soil of Attica. The kind of dust of the people who are buried in it would resist them, since,
even if barbarism absorbs every strength, one day the breath of freedom will uproot
it…”734
The same attitude continues when the French historian Charles Diehl claims that
Turkey’s effort to look like European reveals a desire to collect antiquities of the ancient
Greek while ruling in those territories.735 Diehl talks about the eagerness that the Ottomans
733
734
735
Wunder, “Western Travelers, Eastern Antiquities, and the Image of the Turk in Early Modern Europe,” p.
91, f.n. 7.
Hamilakis, The Nation and its Ruins, p. 61.
In Zeynep Çelik, “Defining Empire’s Patrimony: Ottoman Perception of Antiquities”:
http://www.ottomanlands.com/sites/default/files/pdf/CelikEssay_0.pdf
186
tried to show about antiquities that began with the Tanzimat period.736 Although it had a
special agenda, that is to say, to show the empire’s cultural diversity and a civilized face,
interest in Ancient history has an intellectual and popular background. Turks seemed to accept
that to be European and civilized, one had to know the ancient history and literature, and open
museums to show the ancient glory in their lands and preserve the ruins.
Mahmud Efendi’s peculiarity appears in this point. He described ancient Athens with
every detail at the beginning of the eighteenth century, even before the Philhellenistic attitude
of the Europeans that was to emerge in the second half of the same century. I claim that
although this attempt had some unique characteristics, I have to mention here that the
Ottomans translated or made written commentaries either as full works or as chapters within
great works on Ancient history: for instance, Katip Çelebi translated Tarih-i Frengi. Hezarfen
Hüseyin Efendi wrote Tenkihü’t- Tevarih before Mahmud Efendi. For this reason, it is clear
that we cannot consider Mahmud Efendi’s authentic work to have been isolated or
independent from the context of the Iskandarnamahs, from the propheticized philosophers
and wise scholars such as Socrates, Plato and Aristotle in Divan poetry,737 from the Athens
narrative of Evliya Çelebi, from Katip Çelebi’s work of İrşadü’l-Hayara, and from the
legends about Hagia Sophia. So, as Emden notes, “the understanding of antiquity changes
over time, the conception of classicality is necessarily shifted.”738
In Mahmud Efendi’s case, we come across another long-lasting heritage among the
Ottomans: he received help from two Greek abbots. We see similar assistants to Ottoman
scholars in the previous times. Esad Efendi from Ioannina received assistance from two
Greeks in his translation of Physics, the Byzantine scholars residing in Sultan Mehmed II’s
palace after the conquest of Constantinople, the dragoman Panayotis Nicussios
and
Alexandros Mavrokordatos who helped Hüseyin Hezarfen and Ebubekir Behram ed-Dımeşki
in the translations of Greek and Latin works while they were preparing their works.
Mahmud Efendi’s work raises some other questions: What were the contributions of
some scholars, such as Korydaleus, Cottunius, Nektarios of Jerusalem, Meletios of Athens,
736
737
738
Melin Has-Er, Tanzimat Devrinde Latin ve Grek Antikitesi ile İlgili Neşriyat (1254-1300), graduation thesis,
(Istanbul Univ. Türkiyat Enstitüsü: Istanbul 1962).
Tokel, Divan Şiirinde Mitolojik Unsurlar, pp. 415-426.
Christian J. Emden, “History, Memory, and the Invention of Antiquity: Notes on the ‘Classical Tradition,”
in Fragile Traditions: Cultural Memory and Historical Consciousness in the German-Speaking World since
1500, (ed.) David Midgley and Christian J. Emden (Oxford: Peter Lang, 2004), pp. 39- 69, p. 45.
187
Chrysanthos Notaras, and the students studying in the new academies of the Ottoman
intellectual world? At which level did they interact with the Muslim scholars?739 Although we
are not able to talk about the existence of a uniform homo Ottomanicus,740 we question
whether there was a common scholarly and cultural code within the vast geography under the
Ottoman domination. Were there any other persons from the zımmis contributing to the
Ottoman intellectual world? I argue that we learn a lot from the connections of mystics,
scholars, students and dervishes within the Muslim geography.741 We learn also from the
movements of non-Muslim scholars raised within the Ottoman territories in their own cultural
spheres and in Europe: “indeed it was in Italy that the remarkable transformation from
‘Byzantines’ to ‘Hellenes’ began to ripen.”742
Additionally, Greek intellectuals who returned from studying in European cities like
Venice, Padua and Leipzig were appointed as managers or directors in Greek schools which
were financed by rich Greek merchants from cities like Vienna.743 The curricula in these
schools were influenced deeply by European intellectual movements. This reformed the
mental world of the literate people in those regions.744 All of these developments can be seen
as some of the most important factors in the Greek Independence movement in the first half of
739
740
741
742
743
744
For the zımmi scholars in the Southeastern Europe through the seventeenth century, see Virgil Candea, “Les
intellectuals du Sud-Est européen au XVIIe siécle,” Revue des études sud-est européennes VIII (1970/2), pp.
181-230 and (1970/4), pp. 623-668. For the contributions of Ottoman Greeks to the general Ottoman book
culture, see Johann Strauss, “The Millets and the Ottoman Language: The Contribution of Ottoman Greeks
to Ottoman Letters (19th-20th centuries),” Die Welt des Islams, nr. 35 (1995/2), pp. 189-249.
Meropi Anastassiadou and Bernard Heyberger (ed.), Figures Anonymes, Figures d’élite: pour une Anatomie
de l’Homo Ottomanicus (Istanbul: Isis Yay. 1999).
For the networks of an Ottoman scholars in the eighteenth century, see Yaşar Sarıkaya, Abu Sa'id
Muhammad al-Hadimi (1701-1762) Netzwerke, Karriere und Einfluss eines osmanischen Provinzgelehrten
(Hamburg: Verlag Dr. Kovac, 2005); for the applications of network analysis in the Islamic world, see
Roman Loimeier (ed.), Die islamische Welt als Netzwerk: Möglichkeiten und Grenzen des Netzwerkansatzes
im islamischen Kontext (Würzburg: Ergon Verlag, 2000).
Nancy Bisaha, Creating East and West: Renaissance Humanists and Ottoman Turks (Philadelphia:
University of Pennsylvania Press, 2004), p. 133.
According to A. Korais (1748- 1833), “the Greek merchants in European centers were the motivators of
their land’s renaissence since they brought in new ideas together with the goods they brought home. The
transfer of knowledge becomes easy because they accompany the products and commodities merchants were
exporting from other countries. All of Europe, particularly France, became the main center from which
books were exported alongside with textiles.” see Augustinos, “Philhellenic Promises and Hellenic Visions,”
p. 190.
On the revival in Greek thought, see Henderson, The Revival of Greek Thought; to grasp the travels of the
Greek scholars during the eighteenth century, see Manolis Pationitis, “Scientific Travels of Greek Scholars
in the Eighteenth Century,” in Travel of Learning: A Geography of Science in Europe, eds. Ana Simônes et
al., (Dordrecht et al.: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2003), pp. 47-76; on the influence of Greek merchants in
Europe, see Deno J. Geanakoplos, “The Diaspora Greeks: The Genesis of Modern Greek National
Consciousness,” Hellenism and the First Greek War of Liberation (1821-1830): Continuity and Change,
eds. Nikiforos P. Diamandouros et al. (Thessaloniki: Institute for Balkan Studies, 1976), pp. 59-78.
188
the nineteenth century. For example, the increase in the influence of the Phanariots and the
above-mentioned merchants upon the Greek community diminished the authority of the
Patriarchate especially on education and thus, an intellectual prototype independent of that of
the Patriarchate emerged.
Another important subject may be on the contribution of persons raised in the Ottoman
territories other than Anatolia to the transmission of the accumulated knowledge from these
different parts of the Empire to Istanbul. Noticing the general mobility of the whole Islamic
world within this century,745 it is a very small probability that Mahmud Efendi did not have
any contact with the general intellectual circles and circulation of Istanbul where he spent
fourteen years.
One may ask the reasons for the exceptional position of Mahmud Efendi’s attempt. It
can be explained by the term “cultural memory,” as Aleida Assmann describes it.
Accordingly, to function as a “cultural memory,” a memory needs “mediators,” which are the
“institutions of memory maintenance and meditation of knowledge.”746 At this point, Emden
discusses how “the classical tradition” was created while re-inventing Antiquity. As he
suggests, the interplay between history and memory observed in the formation of traditions is
exemplified in the invention of Greek and Roman antiquity as a fundamental reference point
for the European identity.747 In this context, we cannot speak of Mahmud Efendi’s Athens
narrative as a generator of cultural memory since this work had neither “mediators” nor
“followers.” But in the case of Hellenism during the Tanzimat period, a cultural memory was
created because it had public and state mediators such as journals, books and a museum for
support. Additionally, as he did not attempt to create a new civilization from the ancient ruins,
he differentiated himself from the Philhellenes and the later Ottomans.
Philhellenism among Tanzimat Intellectuals The Ottoman intellectuals during the Tanzimat period had close relationships with
Europe. Thus, they were influenced by the developments in the Empire which they lived
745
746
747
For a general summary of the discussions on the general scholarly mobility within the Islamic world outside
Istanbul and Anatolia and the concepts of “Islamische Aufklärung/Islamic Enlightenment,” see Stefan
Reichmuth, “Arabic Literature and Islamic Scholarship in the 17/18th century: Topics and Biographies”.
Aleida Assmann, Erinnerungsräume: Formen und Wandlungen des Kulturellen Gedächtnisses, 4. Auflage
(München: Beck, 2009), p. 189. Aleida Assmann brings further Jan Assmann’s work Das Kulturelle
Gedächtniss: Schrift, Erinnerung und politische Identität in frühen Hochkulturen (München: Beck, 1999).
Emden, “History, Memory, and the Invention of Antiquity,” p. 41.
189
through and in those cultures with which they had intense exchanges. The following section
examines the emergence of Philhellenic approaches among Ottoman intellectuals.
One of the most distinctive features of the Tanzimat period was its intellectuals, or
Tanzimat aydını.748 They were different from the traditional ulema and held positions in the
State bureaucracy. Tanpınar, in his seminal work, called them yenilik muhitleri (circle of
innovations), who met mostly in the konak (mansions) of generals, especially in Mustafa
Reşid Pasha’s konak.749 The translation activities of the members of these circles seems to
have been an important feature among many of their other characteristics, such as having
experience in Western countries, knowing foreign languages, writing in daily newspapers,
having Western-style of furniture, and dressing like Westerners.750 Considering themselves to
be the guardians of civilization, to civilize “the folk”, they wrote novels and made translations
from the Western languages. For them, the novel was not only a vessel for entertainment, but
also carried some “heuristic” messages for the common people.751
In her study on the Turkish novel during the Tanzimat period, Jale Parla argues that
the main motive behind the composition of novels was to be able to transmit to society their
concepts of “human nature,” “human morality,” and the “features of the society.” In other
words, it was a social endeavor.752 Translations or adaptations of novels made up a high
percentage of the total number of publications in this period for the same reason. At the
beginning of the nineteenth century, the Translation Bureau (Tercüme Odası) was established
by the order of Mahmud the Second. Findley emphasizes the role of this bureau in his study
of the transformation of Ottoman officials during the nineteenth century.753 It became the
most important office of the Sublime Porte and became the only gate of education for a
748
749
750
751
752
753
Şerif Mardin, “Tanzimat ve Aydınlar,” in Tanzimat’tan Cumhuriyet’e Türkiye Ansiklopedisi (İstanbul:
İletişim, 1985), vol. 1, pp. 46-54.
Ahmet Hamdi Tanpınar, 19.yy Türk Edebiyatı Tarihi, 6. Baskı (Istanbul: Çağlayan Kitabevi, 1985), p.94.
There are many works concerning the issue. For the changing feature of every day life of the late Ottomans,
see Ekrem Işın, İstanbul'da Gündelik Hayat: İnsan Kültür ve Mekan İlişkileri Üzerine Toplumsal Tarih
Denemeleri (İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 1995); Nevin Meriç, Osmanlı’da Gündelik Hayatın Değişimi:
Adab-ı Muaşeret 1894-1927 (İstanbul: Kaknüs Yay., 2000).
This feature was shared by a former Turkish novel composed in the Armenian script Akabi Hikayesi. See
Laurent Mignon, “Tanzimat Dönemi Romanına Bir Önsöz: Vartan Paşa’nın Akabi Hikayesi,” Hece: Türk
Romanı Özel Sayısı 65-67 (2002), pp. 538-543.
Jale Parla, Babalar ve Oğullar: Tanzimat Romanının Epistemolojik Temelleri, 3. Baskı. (Istanbul: İletişim
Yay., 2002), p. 52.
See also Carter V. Findley, Bureaucratic Reform in the Ottoman Empire: the Sublime Porte 1789-1922
(Princeton: Princeton University, 1980).
190
position in the bureaucracy.754 Almost all of the viziers and ministers went through the offices
of this Bureau and gained upward mobilization via their posts. This contributed to the growth
of the importance of the Translation Bureau during the Tanzimat period755 and the bureaucrats
mostly applied to reason and the idea of liberty.756
Parallel to the growth of the Translation Bureau, journalism was an integral part of the
the Ottoman modernization effort.757 In the columns of newspapers and journals, new ideas
and excerpts about Western science appeared. Even journals such as Diogenes, a name that
had become popular thanks to Teodor Kasap’s satirical journal Diyojen (Diogenes), were
published in French, Greek and Turkish. One of the common characteristics of these
intellectuals was, in Strauss’ words, “their Greek connections.” As he points out, Greek
influence can be detected in the most diverse spheres of intellectual activity during the
Tanzimat era. It is most visible in the domain of literature and learning. The Greek
contribution to the development of Turkish culture in the nineteenth century was not limited
to Turkish translations or adaptations made by learned Greeks; in fact, it may be argued that
in this respect their contribution “though considerable, seems to have fallen short of that of
the Armenians.”758
Translations from the Greek World
There were many “Hellenistic” translations in the Ottoman Empire during the
Tanzimat period.759 One of them, Télémaque, was very influential. A survey of its translation
history will present an overview of the publishing world. First of all, we notice that
Télémaque was translated several times. One of its translators was Münif Paşa (1830-1910), a
prominent statesman from Southeastern Anatolia who was a major contributor to the
Cemiyyet-i İlmiyye-i Osmaniye (Ottoman Scientific Society) and its periodical Mecmua-i
754
755
756
757
758
759
İlber Ortaylı, İmparatorluğun En Uzun Yüzyılı, 18. Baskı (Istanbul: İletişim yay., 2004), pp. 239-240.
Ibid., p. 240.
Mehmet Kaplan, “Mustafa Reşid Paşa ve Yeni Aydın Tipi,” in Mustafa Reşid Paşa ve Dönemi Semineri
Bildiriler: Ankara, 13-14 Mart 1985 (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 1987), pp. 113-120.
On the role of the newspapers, see Ali Budak, Batılılaşma ve Türk Edebiyatı: Lale Devri’nden Tanzimat’a
Yenileşme (İstanbul: Bilge Kültür Sanat, 2006), pp. 382-409.
Johann Strauss, “The Greek Connection in 19th century Ottoman Intellectual History,” in Greece and the
Balkans: Identities, Perceptions and Cultural Encounters, (ed.) Dēmētrēs Tziovas, (Aldershot: Ashgate
Pub., 2003), pp. 47-67, p. 48.
The Armenian contribution to the Ottoman literary world is not within the scope of this dissertation. For this
issue, see Kevork Pamukciyan, Ermeni Harfli Türkçe Metinler (Istanbul: Aras Yayıncılık, 2002).
191
Fünun (Journal of Sciences) through translations.760 This journal has an “encyclopedic”
characteristic and beyond that, the journal had several Greek subscribers and it even contained
articles written by Greeks. Two Greek scholars, Alexander Constantinidis and Alexander
Themistoklis Phardys, wrote articles on the history of Hagia Sophia, the Princes Islands and
the Ancient Kings of Persia, while Münif Paşa himself wrote a series of articles on Tarih-i
Hükema-i Yunan (History of the Greek Philosophers) in sixteen continuous issues of
Mecmua-i Fünun in a serial form covering Thales to Anacharsis.761 Münif Paşa’s translation
of Muhaverat-ı Hikemiyye (Philosophical Dialogues)762 was the first piece which brought the
philosophical mentality of the Enlightenment to the Ottoman world.763 Mardin considers
Münif Paşa’s Dialogues “a leitmotiv of Turkish progressive thought in the early nineteenth
century.”764
Turning to Télémaque, we see that this novel was translated first from French to
Arabic by the famous Egyptian scholar Rifat Badawi al-Tahtawi (1801-1873),765 which was
the first novel translated from a Western language into Arabic in the Ottoman world.766 He
translated Télémaque in 1851-52/1267-68 and the novel was published in 1867/1283 in
Beirut. Tahtawi’s work was a full translation of the original text, in contrast to the Ottoman
versions. It had a twenty nine page introduction with information on Greek history in general
and on the war in Troy in particular.767 Later on, the adventure of Télémaque in Ottoman
760
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
See Bernard Lewis, “Djem’iyyet-i ‘Ilmiyye-i ‘Othmaniyye,” EI2 vol. II, p. 532. Ekmeleddin İhsanoğlu,
“Cem’iyyet-i İlmiyye-i Osmaniyye,” TDVİA, vol. VII, pp. 333-334. On the life of Münif Paşa, TBEA, vol. II
(Istanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları, 2001), pp. 576-577.
Strauss, “The Greek Connection in 19th century Ottoman Intellectual History,” p. 52.
Ali Budak gives eleven dialogues in his Batılılaşma ve Türk Edebiyatı, pp. 446-466. The author gives all of
the content with brief information on the authors. We can see many members of the Translation Chamber
were authors or translators of Mecmua-i Fünun.
İsmail Habib Sevük, Avrupa Edebiyatı ve Biz: Garpten Tercümeler (Istanbul: Remzi Kitabevi, 1940), p. 57.
See also Saliha Paker’s “Turkish Tradition,” in Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, (ed.) by
Mona Baker, as. by Kirsten Malmkjaer. (London, New York: Routledge, 1998), pp. 571-583, p. 577. Paker
also states general trends of translation activities in her article “Turkey,” in Modern Literature in the Near
and Middle East, 1850-1970, (ed.) by Robin Ostle (London and New York: Routledge, 1991), pp. 17-32.
See for the first literary translations during Tanzimat, pp. 18-25.
Şerif Mardin, The Genesis of Young Ottoman Thought: A Study in the Modernization of Turkish Political
Ideas (Princeton NJ: Princeton Univ. Press, 1962), p. 236.
For the life and influence of Tahtawi in the Arab world, see Ibrahim Abu-Lughod, Arab Rediscovery of
Europe: A Study in Cultural Encounters (Princeton NJ.: Princeton Univ. Press, 1963).
For the general translation and printing activities in Egypt in the nineteenth century, see J. Heyworth-Dunne,
“Printing and Translation under Muhammed ‘Ali of Egypt: the Foundation of Modern Arabic,” Journal of
the Royal Asiatic Society (1940), pp. 325-349.
Based on Murice Herbette, Haşim Koç informs that the first resident Ottoman ambassador, Moralı es-Seyyit
Ali Efendi (1757-1809), translated Télémaque there in order to improve his skills in the French language.
192
Turkish began. The very first novel translated into Turkish was Télémaque768 in 1859, and the
translator of the novel was Yusuf Kamil Paşa, who was one of the most remarkable statesmen
of the Empire. It was published twice, after having been circulated from hand to hand for 3
years. When Yusuf Kamil Paşa was serving as the Grand Vezir, the book was published for
the second time by Şinasi Efendi’s Tasvir-i Efkar Press in 1863. The translation into Turkish
was made in bombastic style (Augsburger Allgemeine Zeitung, 6 July 1876 Beilage).
Télémaque appears to be a well-known translation. Münif Paşa referred to its success and
praised it in his magazine Mecmua-Funun in its early years. Ahmed Vefik Paşa, on the other
hand, was greatly uncomfortable with Yusuf Kamil’s style, hence simplified the style of
Télémaque and made it more understandable. Ziya Paşa translated Télémaque as well.769
M. Kayahan Özgül completed a detailed study on the reception of Télémaque among
Ottoman intellectuals after the first translation by Yusuf Kamil Paşa.770 Some concepts such
as democracy, the capability of the Sultan, and the skillfulness of the governors emerged in
the discussion of the Tanzimat intellectuals. The widespread familiarity of Télémaque made
the ideas of the Western philosophers also accessible to non-educated people. Additionally an
interest in Ancient Greek civilization appeared and this trend projected its heritage onto the
emerging Neo-Hellenism (Nev-Yunanilik) for many years.771
Apart from Télémaque, there were other translations with Hellenistic features. Some
of the translators came from the Greek speaking areas of the Empire. Muslims from Crete and
Epirus played an important role in this. Ali Refik from Candia, in collaboration with a Turk
768
769
770
771
See: Cultural Repertoire as a Network of Translated Texts: the New Literature after the Tanzimat Period
(1830-1870) (Unpublished M.A. Thesis, Boğaziçi Univ., 2004), pp. 140-141.
There is also a Greek translation of Fénelon's Les Aventures de Télémaque. The published Greek translation,
which was prepared by Athanasia Skiada is entitled, Τύχαι Τηλεμάχου υιού του Οδυσσέως ή συνέχεια της
τετάρτης Βίβλου της Οδύσσειας του Ομήρου εις Βιβλία Δέκα εις Γαλλικήν Γλώσσαν συνθεμένα παρά του
Ιερωτάτου (Venice: Antonio Bortoli, 1742). Another translation was made by Panagiotis Govdelas and was
published in Bouda in 1801.Nicholas Mavrocordatos had comissioned the early translation to Dimitrios
Prokopiou in 1715 but it was not published. The manuscript is entitled Αι Τύχαι του Τηλεμάχου, υιού του
Οδυσσέως, παρά Φρατζέσκου Σσλινιάκ Φενελόν, διδασκάλου των υιών του Βασιλέως τ?ις Φράντζας
μετάφρασις δε Δημητρίου Προκοπίου ιατρού, κατ' επιταγήν του υψηλοτάτου και σοφότατου Αυθέντου και
Ηγεμόνος and was kept at the library of the Monastery of Limonos in Lesbos: Glycofrydi-Leontsini
“Teaching Princess”, p. 82, f.n. 33.
Roderic H. Davison, Reform in the Ottoman Empire, 1856-1876 (Princeton: Princeton University Press,
1963), pp. 181-182.
Metin Kayahan Özgül, “Yusuf Kamil Paşa’nın Tercüme-i Telemak’ı,” Erdem 14 (January 2002) no. 40, pp.
193-241, p. 195, f.n. 4.
Ibid., p. 220.
193
from Istanbul, translated the Erotokritos into Ottoman Turkish (1873).772 Other Muslim
Cretans are known to have translated Greek dramas into Turkish.773
Şemseddin Sami’s brother, Naim Frasheri (1846-1900), an Albanian Muslim poet
educated in Ioannina, translated the first book of Homer’s Iliad into Turkish in 1887.774
Towards the end of the 13-page introduction, he mentions that during the civilization of the
Muslim Arabs, they had taken some books of the Greeks on the sciences but they had never
admired Greek literature, hence the Muslim poets constituted a distinct group. According to
the belief of realists, any one of the poets in this modern world could reach the level of
Homer.775
Another Greek-speaking Muslim from Ioannina, Hafız Refii (d. 1902) who was a
teacher of Arabic at the Lycée de Galatasaray776 between 1869-1902, assisted his Greek
colleague Abraham Maliakas in the compilation of his voluminous Turkish Greek Dictionary
(1876). Hafız Refii was also the author of a collection of fables, in Arabic and Turkish
versions, mainly based on Aesop (1874). The poet Avni from Larissa (Turkish Yenişehir-i
fenar), who is accepted as the last Divan poet, also knew Greek, even if he wrote his poems in
Turkish and Persian. Strauss notes that “among his unpublished writings is a translation from
an unknown Greek source. The hero of this work, whose name appears as Antak, seems to be
the Seleucid ruler Antiochus I Soter (323-261 BC), the son of Seleucus I (Selefkos), one of
Alexander the Great’s generals.”777
Parallel to these works, Lucian’s Parasite was translated by a former secretary at the
Patriarchate, Vasilaki Voukas (d. 1854) Vasilaki Efendi, as Dalkavukname (Flattery
772
773
774
775
776
777
J. Strauss, “Eratos yani Sevda. The 19th Century Ottoman Translation of the Erotokritos,” Byzantine and
Modern Greek Studies 16 (1992), pp. 189-201.
J. Strauss, “The Greek Connection in 19th Century Ottoman Intellectual History,” pp., 55-56. Strauss gives
those examples: f.n. 47: “Mehmed Raşid from Candia translated G.P. Kontis’ work. The Turkish version
bears the title: İraklis ve Olympiakos Agonas yahud sıdk u hulus ve muhabbet-i hakiki (İstanbul 1289[1872];
the Cretan (Giridi) Rifat, aide-de-camp of Sultan Abdülaziz, translated the drama ‘Chios enslaved’ by
Doctor Alexander Stamatiadis (1838- 1891), a native of Samos. The Turkish translation, which does not
name the author, bears the title Hata-i Nisvan yahud Sakız Esirleri (Women’s Error or the Prisoners of
Chios, Istanbul 1291 [1874]). Its original was one of the most successful plays in Istanbul in the nineteenth
century.”
M. Naim Fraşeri, Karabet ve Kasbar Matbaası 1303 (1887).
Sevük, Avrupa Edebiyatı ve Biz, p. 64.
On the role of Galatasaray, see Niyazi Berkes, Türkiye’de Çağdaşlaşma, yay. hazırlayan Ahmet Kuyaş. 2.
Baskı (Istanbul: Yapı Kredi Yay., 2002) pp. 188-192.
Strauss, “The Greek Connection in 19th Century Ottoman Intellectual History,” p. 58.
194
Letters).778 The publication of Dalkavukname, was due to the intervention of Ahmed Vefik
Pasha (1823-91), an outstanding statesman, diplomat, writer and scholar of the Tanzimat era.
Has-Er, argues that the names and the language and style were transformed into the
Ottoman.779
Aesop’s fables were first translated into Turkish with Armenian letters in 1866. Also,
an Ottoman of Armenian origin from Diyarbakir, Çelebizade Agop, translated Aesop under
the title of Tercüme-i Yezepos (Translation of Aesop).780 In 1877 he was translated again by
Osman Rasih Efendi. Osman Rasih even put poems from Divan poets such as Fuzuli, Ziya
Paşa and Cevri into the fables.781 The eighth book of the series “library of famous persons,”
published by Ebuzziya Tevfik in his own publishing house in Galata, belongs to Aesop. In
this work, which was published in 1884, some of Aesop’s short stories were published after
giving some information on Aesop’s life.
Translations of Greek History
The popularity of Télémaque, with its innumerable references to ancient Greek
mythology, geography and history, led to the publication of works on Greek mythology (ilm-i
esatir).782 In newspapers and journals, information about the antique world began to appear
more frequently. For example, the columns of Ruzname-i Ceride-i Havadis (Daily
Newspaper) contain numerous excerpts from classical works, particularly of a historical
nature, by both Ottoman and Western (including Ancient Greek and Byzantine) authors, such
as the extracts from Kritovoulos’ History of Mehmed II, translated by Alexander
Constantinidis.783
Constantinidis Efendi (later Pasha) left numerous works in Turkish and Greek.
Constantinidis’ Tarih-i Yunan-ı kadim (History of Ancient Greece), printed by the State Press
in 1869, was most popular. In its preface, he wrote,
778
779
780
781
782
783
It was not published until 16 years after the death of its translator, in 1870, and was printed by the State
Press (Matbaa-i Amire). Terceme-i Lataif-i Asar der Ta'rif-i San'at-ı Lukiyanos, Dalkavukan (İstanbul:
Matbaa-i Amire, 1287).
Melin Has-Er, Tanzimat Devrinde Latin ve Grek Antikitesi ile İlgili Neşriyat (1254-1300) (Graduation
Thesis, İstanbul Univ.Türkiyat Enstitüsü: İstanbul, 1962), p. 16.
Sevük, Avrupa Edebiyatı ve Biz, pp. 68-9.
Ibid., p. 68.
Those publications were Nabizade Nazım’s Esatir (İstanbul: Kaspar Press, 1893); Şemseddin Sami’s Esatir
(İstanbul: Mihran Press, 1895); Mustafa Nuri’s translation from M. Edom (İstanbul: Araksi Press, 1913).
Sevük, p. 82.
Strauss, “The Greek Connection in 19th century Ottoman Intellectual History,” p. 51, f.n. 16.
195
…old Greeks who were from the old and famous nations, have served for the emergence
of civilization in their old days and many philosophers and wise men came out from these
people. Their government survived many changes according to the change in the whole
world. But even though this was a fact, there was no history book written in the Turkish
language about the above-mentioned Greek nation. In order to overcome this lack of a
large section of general history, I have been ordered the task of composing a short Greek
history. Thus, I have tried to compile the information I have obtained from history books
in foreign languages so that I can now offer this History to the High Dignity of the Sultan
and to check of the content of book. After the book received permission from the relevant
784
authorities, it has been published. All of the errors and mistakes are mine.
In the same time period, Yorgaki Petropoulo, a Greek interpreter at the Ministry of
War and the Police Department (Divan-ı Zabtiye), created an abridged Turkish version of the
Constantiniad by Patriarch Konstantinos (1770-1859) in Turkish letters from Greek. Strauss
writes that “for the Turkish reading public, this slim booklet was to remain for many years the
only available work on the Byzantine past of the Ottoman capital.”785
Ahmed Mithad Efendi (1844-1912), a prolific author of the nineteenth century, had a
great interest in Greek matters. In 1888, he translated Xenophon’s Cyropaedeia into Turkish,
presumably from Joseph Dacier’s French version (1777). In his first journals, Dağarcık
(Vocabulary) and Kırkambar, Ottoman readers could find many articles on Greek mythology
and philosophers. Ahmed Midhat’s History of Greece was published in his collection
“Universe” (Kainat) in 1882, together with a volume on Ottoman history.786 In contrast to
Constantinidis’ history of Ancient Greece, which ends with the conquest of Corinth by the
Romans, Ahmed Mithad’s booklet covers the complete Greek history, including the
Byzantine and post-independence period, although he leaves aside the Turkish domination.
The introductory chapter is devoted to the geography of modern Greece (Yunanistan-ı cedid).
As Strauss argues, although the content of it repeats “the standard line found in contemporary
784
785
786
“milel-i kadimeyi meşhureden eski Yunaniler’in ma tekaddümünde ibda-yı mebadı medeniyete bir hayli
emek ve hidmetleri sebkat etmiş ve içlerinde pek çok hukemayı benam zuhur eylediği misillü zaman ı
hükumetleri ahval i alemin teğayyür ve teceddüdünü mucib olan nice nice vukuat ı cismiyeye masdar olmuş
olduğu halde millet i mezkurenin ahval ve asarına dair lisan ı Türki üzere yazılmış bir tarih mevcud
olmadığına ve bu ise tarih i umumi mukaddematının büyük bir parçası olarak ıstıla’ ı malumat ı tarihiye içün
medar ı külli idüğüne mebni suret i muhtasırada bir Yunan tarihinin cem ve tertibi … i acizaneme tavsiye ve
sipariş buyurulmuş olmakdan naşi elsine yi ecnebiye üzere destires olduğum tevarih …dan isinbat ve iltikat
olunarak işbu tarihin saye i … hazret i şahanede cem ve tertibiyle maarifi umumiye nezaret celilesinin
mürebbi-yi usul i maarif ve ulum olan nazar ı feyz eser i alilerine takdimine ictisar ve mahz muktezay seciye
i aciz nevazi? Üzere lutfen ve tenezzülen mazhar ı kabul ve Tahsin olarak şayan buyurulan müsaade’i aliye
üzere yine tab’ ve temsiline ibtidar olunmuş olmağla her halde makar ve muterif olduğum hatiyyat ve
sehviyyatın ma sadak miel? (el tegafülü min şeym ül kiram) buyurulması mutalaasına nikah endaz iltifat ve
tenezzül olacak zevat taraflarından istirham ederim. ez hulefa yı oda yı tercüme yi bab ı ali kostantinidi.,”
Kostantinidi, Tarih-i Yunanistan-ı Kadim (Konstantiniyye: Matbaa-yı Amire, 1286), p. 2.
Strauss, “The Greek Connection in 19th century Ottoman Intellectual History,” p.50.
Ibid., p. 59.
196
European historical writings,” his own observations at the end had interesting information on
how a modernized Ottoman intellectual viewed modern Greek culture. For Strauss, Ahmed
Mithad Efendi is always happy to magnify the Ancient Greek culture, he praises the cultural
by saying that every nation or civilization has to accept the fact that their first teachers are
from Greek culture. Romans that descend from Latin nationality, as well as Arabs and
Europeans are always proud to regard themselves as the disciples of Greek culture and aim to
improve their scientific knowledge that has its origins traced back to Ancient Greece. Mithad
Efendi agrees with the views of Fallmetayer in terms of modern Greece, which are that
modern Greeks are mixed and that they have no relation to the Ancient Greeks. It can also be
understood from the language difference. Ancient and Modern Greek languages are so
different from each other that even the scholars and writers of Modern Greek cannot succeed
in understanding Ancient Greek, which is called ellinika. The aforementioned comments
contrast with the views of contemporary Greek scholars as these scholars do not accept the
differences as relevant. Explaining this to Turkish readers, Alexander Constantinidis notes
that the Modern Greek used today is no less perfect than the Greek used by Plato, Aristotle ad
other Greek philosophers. He names this flawless language as mükemmel lisan-ı Yunani. The
language over centuries might have gone through certain changes or deformations, however
the basic structure of the language remains intact. With the continuous help of educated
people, the language has been made more regular and richer. With regard to its good style and
its rhetoric, it has been able to reach the level of Ancient Greece (Yunan-ı kadim), gained new
strength, and was able to express the ideas of new civilization (medeniyet-i cedide)
appropriately.787
Naturally, the Greek revolution and its consequences led to a strong interest in the
history of this area, and native Muslims from Greece obviously were qualified to extend the
relevant knowledge on the history of Greece. For instance, a well-informed Greek from
Euboa, Melek Ahmed Bey (d. 1871 in Thessaloniki), also knew French. He wrote a
memorandum over the Philiki Hetaira, and also the first comprehensive History of the Ancient
Greeks and Macedonians (Tarih-i Kudema-yı Yunan ve Makedonya). This work treated not
only the historical geography of ancient Greece and its history, but dealt also with
philosophers such as Socrates and Plato. These works, however, never appeared in the
press.788
787
788
Strauss, “The Greek Connection in 19th century Ottoman Intellectual History,” p. 60.
Johann Strauss, “Graeco-turcica: die Muslime in Griechenland und ihr Beitrag zur osmanischen Kultur,” in
Die Kultur Griechenlands in Mittelalter und Neuzeit: Bericht über das Kolloquium der Südosteuropa-
197
The other work on Ancient Greece was written by Mehmed Tevfik Paşa (Fatihli) (d.
1915).789 He wrote in the introductory part:
The mythology of the Ancient Greek is signaling. It is true that there exist already ancient
Persian, Assyrian, Palestine, and ancient Egypt’s mythologies and and superstitions, but
the kindness and courtesy of Greek mythology cannot be compared with the
aforementioned ones. After the human was saved from the animal phase and started to
use his mind, he had the will to learn the mystery of his creation. The human being could
not lift the cover off this mystery currently – despite the level of knowledge he has
reached today, then old people became powerless against this complex mystery.
From this perspective, one should know the symbols and refinements contained by both
the Greek, and originating from that Roman, mythology and superstitions because of the
need to shape social culture and of the service to civilization’s progress. The Creator
praised the water, soil, and sun of a total area starting from the Byzantine Bosphorus,
Marmara Sea, Dardanelles, ancient Ionian Sea at the eastern part of the Mediterranean,
which is a poetical part and a silver basin of civilization, from there the Greek sea
covering the western part of Greece and the Island of Crete in the south, with the Island
of Sicily and eastern coasts of Italy. The area bordered by all of those places was created
in a very nice manner special to these places with a benevolent moderate climate. This
nature cannot escape notice even from the most indifferent and shallow of travelers.
An implacable earthquake separated those islands from the Peloponnese and scattered
them on the Aegean Sea. This old occurrence contributed to the beauty of the region. In
addition to this, it eased the sea voyage for Pelagas and his friends who made their trips
in order to inhabit those islands. Consequently, sea trade emerged, from which a
complication of different tribes took place. Due to this fact, the complication of the mind
worked and an opening occurred for Homer. It occurred in some reddish color from the
heat during dense weather on the coasts of this region. Therefore, the legends in the
minds became poetic, but it doesn’t require them to be decent in the same conditions.
The myths of ancient Greece, which combine morality with poetic utterances, started the
arts of sculpture and architecture. A widespread interest in music, dance, theatre plays,
and their texts stemming from this poetry and literature occurred.
There is a special chapter on the social morality of the later progressive nations for
Greek mythology because they do not want to stay away from the spiritual pleasure of the
consideration of this clever work from the perspectives of Western and Eastern
civilizations. The virtuous people from the time of Abbasid rule, who were part of the
Arabic civilization, consulted and studied the ancient knowledge and science, rather than
humiliating them. Therefore, they were able to conquer in a very short time period large
territories due to this first spark. The Turks, who had been mostly adequate to the
attribution of İmadüddin at different times, and their followers the Ottomans, succeeded
in leaving the trace of Islam on this mindful sun, then it is highly probable that the city of
philosophers (Athens) [Medinetü’l-Hukema] would be under their domination and its
most powerful wise precedent, the Acropolis, would not be in its current ruined form, but
in its past gorgeous and built style, the mythological temple of the Greeks.
789
Kommission 28.- 31. Oktober 1992, hrsg. von Reinhard Lauer und Peter Schreiner (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck
& Ruprecht, 1996), pp. 325- 351, p. 330.
On Mehmed Tevfik Paşa: Franz Babinger, Die Geschichtsschreiber der Osmanen und ihre Werke, pp. 399400.
198
If a rare plate from Saxony would be given as a toy to a child, then it is very normal that
its fate that it will either be to fall or be thrown down and broken into pieces. The nations
which cannot prove their development with science and knowledge are no different than a
child without reason who throws or breaks his toy rather than appreciates the value of it.
Even if the products they have in their hand are not from a general one, they destroy them
with an incompetent negligence. Actually, to be able to appreciate the value of an object
requires the recognition of the same object. The Greek mythologies are not only to
entertain us with legends more than many thousands of years old. The consecutive
superstitions described very cleverly awake in us the value and appreciation of the fine
arts, and makes the literary works in our mind or in our hearing available so that we do
not stay ignorant of them. They flatter our self-esteem. These very old mythologies are
undoubtedly more useful than our tales told at tandoori which are going to be lost in our
tradition, the current western literature, from the novels and from the ethically seditious
stories and articles. Greek mythologies are exemplary. This was the motivation behind
790
the composition and publication of the mythological journal.”
His main source was Paul Decharme’s (1839- 1905) Mythélogie de la Grece antique.
Ahmet Tevfik Paşa praises the style of Muallim Düşarim (Decharme), notes that he wanted to
put a photograph of Düşarim on the book but unfortunately he was informed on Düşarim’s
death four or five years ago. He thanks his friend Mehmed Şakir Paşa for giving him the book
as a gift. He then lists his Turkish sources:
Mustafa Nuri Bey, Tarih-i esatir [History of Mythology]; Müşir Merhum Suleyman
Paşa, Tarih-i alem (Yunan ı kadim bahsi) [History of the World, Part of the Ancient Greece];
Kostantinidi Paşa, Yunan- ı kadim Tarihi [History of Ancient Greece]; Ahmed Refik Bey,
Muhtasar Tarih- i Umumi (Yunan bahsi) [Abridged General History (Part of Ancient Greece)]
Merhum Naim Bey, Dastan- ı Homer [Legend of Homer]; and Merhum Şemseddin Sami
Bey, Kamus ı A’lam [Universal Dictionary].
Ebuzziya published an article entitled Ayine-i Iskender (Mirror of Alexander) in the
second issue of the journal Muharrir (The Author), dated 1282/1865-6, pp. 50-52. In this
article, the author first gave information about the mirror in Alexandria built by Alexander the
Great based on Persian sources, then he presented a critique of the whole story. Melin Has-Er
says about this critique;
…even though this text was not related directly to Antiquity, it had a very important
function in that it showed us which level the Ottoman intellectuals had reached in
criticizing the sources which they had relied on for so many centuries in their knowledge
about the old Greek and Latin world after their contact with the Western world. They had
mostly possessed their knowledge of the Ancient world through Arabic and Persian
works. The fact that the author could have shown the mistakes in Persian works based on
790
Mehmed Tevfik, Esatir-i Yunaniyan (Kostantiniye: Harbiye Mektebi Matbaası, 1329/1913), the introductory
part. Its Ottoman original can be seen in Appendix 1.
199
the Greek history should have been a consequence of a closer relation with Antiquity.
Even though the author and his contemporary colleagues could not have read the Latin
and Greek works in the original language, they had the opportunity to read and to study
them from their French translations. Prior to the Tanzimat period, all contact with
Antiquity would have been undertaken through Arabic and Persian works, except in one
or two instances.791
Apart from these works, Les anciens turcs by Constantin Borgenski, who was a Polish
nobleman but converted to Islam and changed his name to Mustafa Celaleddin, must be
considered. He participated in the revolution of 1848.792 In this book, he argued that the Turks
had been referred to many times in the historical sources of the Old Age based on the old
Greek and Roman historical sources. He based his argument on philological sources and
mentioned that most of the tribes with ambiguous origins were of Turkic origin. He referred
to the books of classical historians such as Herodotus, Strabon and Thucydides for this
claim.793
Establishment of the Museums
Parallel to these “Hellenistic” subjects in the literary world, the idea to establish a
museum for the collections available, as in the Western countries, was current.794 Prior to that,
as Hagen says, “the Islamic world furnished mirabilia as well, such as talismans, bewitched
fountains, strange buildings, ruins of buildings erected by demons and giants: especially
remnants of pre-Islamic cultures, in conjunction with etiological legends, coming in handy to
supply the cosmographical interest. However, Ottoman authors were slow to add to the
literary lore from their own experience.”795
The talismanic power of the cities, monuments and statues in the Byzantine world
found a great place in Muslim literature. Medieval Arabic literature paid a great deal of
attention to the talismanic protection of the ancient cities as we have seen in the Alexander the
Great section of chapter 2. But in an approach to ancient times distinct from that of Western
civilization, the Eastern mentality never idealized antiquity and its era. This may stem from
the fact that the Near Eastern people lived their daily lives together “with the impressive
791
792
793
794
795
Melin Has-Er, p. 101.
M. Djelaleddin, Les Anciens Turcs (Konstantiniyye: Courrier d’Orient Press, 1869).
H. Ziya Ülken, Türkiye’de Çağdaş Düşünce Tarihi (İstanbul: Ülken Yay. 1979), p. 74.
For the chronological survey of Ottoman museums until Osman Hamdi Bey, see Selçuk Mülayim,
“Kronolojik Notlarıyla 19.yy Osmanlı Müzeciliği,” Journal of Ottoman Studies 34 (2009), pp. 175-202.
Gottfried Hagen, “Ottoman Understandings of the World in the 17th century,” in Ottoman Mentality: the
World of Evliya Çelebi, (ed.) Robert Dankoff (Leiden: Brill, 2004), pp. 215-256, p. 224.
200
monuments of antiquity.”796 They did not feel it necessary to restructure or to interrogate
these ruins that already were internalized as natural parts of their daily lives. In the modern
world, some things have changed and new fundamental elements have become standard: First,
the separation of antiquities from the flow of daily life, as something distinct requiring
protection. In order to protect, house and exhibit them, new institutions appertaining to these
functions are built. In these new institutions, a new category of people consume those
antiquities visually and appreciate their value.797 The accumulation of archaeological findings
thus takes classical philology one step further so as to fill national museums with statues and
vases from Ancient times so that governments may prove their commitment to Hellenism and
their civilized status. Also museums may be interpreted as symbolizing the power of each
government over ancient Greece.798
Considering the symbolic role of antiquities in Europe and in Greece, Kural- Shaw
questions the Ottoman Empire’s interest and profits from the Hellenistic collections and
antiquities within the Empire’s territory. As a result, she notes that the Ottoman Empire would
appropriate such collections and regard them as part of their national patrimony, leading them
to be represented as integral to the cultural heritage, which is on show in European
museums.799
Osman Hamdi Bey was appointed to Çinili Köşk for establishing an institution in
order to fulfill this command. The Archaeological Museum he founded was opened to the
public in 1881 as an imperial museum.800 Feedback on the establishment of this new museum
featured comparisons with those in Europe: for example, an article in Servet-i Fünun stated,
Thanks to our Sultan... Europeans can see how the Ottoman state has entered a period of
progress. They write about the service of archaeology to the spirit of arts and progress in
their press. They admit that for the examination of history and fine arts, just as London,
Paris, and Rome have each been a center of the treasures of antiquities, Istanbul has also
801
become the same.
796
797
798
799
800
801
Bruce G. Trigger, A History of Archaelogical Thought (Cambridge: University of Cambridge Press, 1992),
p. 44.
Yannis Hamilakis, The Nation and its Ruins: Antiquity, Archaeology, and National Imagination in Greece
(Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 2009), p. 80.
Ian Morris, “Archaeologies of Greece,” in Classical Greece: Ancient Histories and Modern Archaeologies,
Ian Morris (ed.) (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, reprinted 1995), pp. 8- 48, p. 25.
Wendy Kural Shaw, Possessors and Possessed: Museums, Archaeology, and the Visualization of History in
the Late Ottoman Empire (California: University of California Press, 2003), p.65
Alpay Pasinli, Istanbul Archaeological Museum (Istanbul: A Turizm yay., 1999), p. 3.
Servet-i Fünun (the Scientific Wealth) 2: 49 (6/2/ 1307), 266 cited by Shaw, p. 158.
201
Parallel to that statement, Ahmed Midhad Efendi even praised “the sculptures placed
outside the building for making the environs of the museum resemble the public gardens of
Europe.”802 As one newspaper explained, “The archaeological works put [in the museum] are
very valuable to our archaeology and art history, and worthy of examination.”803 The
importance of archaeology was defined in terms of its relation to civilization and the progress
it represented: “Today in finding the spirit of civilization in the fine arts, archaeology has the
highest position with respect to its importance and service, even when compared with
painting. Now how can it be excused that this important science that Europeans call the soul
of civilization was absent from our country until a few years ago?”804
In short, I contend that Mahmud Efendi’s curiosity about “Antiquity” differed from its
later form, which was woven within the Westernization process, in all spheres of life that
included mythological elements from Ancient world. Hence the main argument of this thesis
is to make it clear that the “Hellenism” Mahmud Efendi had and the later Tanizmat
intellectuals differentiate from each other because of the fact that he narrated all of the
Ancient history, as I claim, for the sake of “good advice”. Hence Mahmud Efendi’s text also
contributed to the nasihatname literature. We can find many characteristics concerning how
Mahmud Efendi presents “ideal state organization” while describing Athens. The most
important emphasis is given to oppression. The others, such as the temporality of sensual
desires, the importance of being wise for a ruler and the harmony of the four classes, and the
necessity of maintaining peace are scattered among the text. While explaining the social
structure of Athens, Mahmud Efendi seems to make propaganda, especially in the section of
the court system. More importantly Mahmud Efendi dresses up Ancient Athens in Ottoman
clothes when he presents dialogue. Almost every dialogue contains lessons of wisdom.
Understanding the strategies of Mahmud Efendi while narrating the Ancient history
seems to also be one of the important aspects of this thesis. He seems to have internalized the
story of Athens, so examples from translation theories and interculturality were given. A
quick look at the Greek and Turkish history text-books makes clear that these books do not
assume any interaction and communication between the two “cultures”, as if they had
survived without touching each other in the past.805 Exactly at this point, the concept of
802
“Yeni Müze,” Tercüman-ı Hakikat (the Interpreter of the Truth) 3898 (7 Zilhicce 1308- 13th of July 1891, 2)
cited by Shaw, p. 159.
803
Tercüman-ı Hakikat 3858 / 18 Şevval 1308- May 27 1891, 3872/ 6 Zilkade 1308 – June 12 1891
804
Servet-i Fünun 2:49 (6th of February 1307) cited in Shaw, Possessors and Possessed, p. 160.
805
Yasemin Nuhoglu Soysal and Vasilia Lilian Antoniou, “Nation and the Other in Greek and Turkish History
Text Books,” in The Nation, Europe, and the World: Textbooks and Curricula in Transition, eds.
202
interculturality opposes that view. Additionally, this approach opposes a stable, homogeneous
understanding of culture. Especially the anthropologists Hannerz, Pieterse, Shweder and
Sullivan refuse to think of culture as homogeneous and stable. Instead they have recently
stressed the reciprocal influences of cultures leading to the hybridization of cultures.806
Hence, on the one hand, Mahmud Efendi’s text shows the existence of cultural interaction
between Turks and Greeks. That he wrote the text within the network of two Greek abbots,
Sotiris and Kavallaris, is the final proof of this interaction. They helped him in the translation
of books on the history of Athens, especially the Istoria of Kontares. In other words, each act
of cultural translation consisted of a double process of decontextualization and
recontextualization, first reaching out to appropriate what “alien” was and then trying to
domesticate it.807 As mentioned above, the category of cultural transfer or better, “cultural
transfers”, is most often associated with the work of Espagne and Werner at the Sorbonne. In
their work, they effectively address the missing points of older comparative approaches to
literary and cultural history as multivalent and permeable. Some historians who focus on the
role of culture in international relations or the history of multiculturalism within one country
label transnationalist encounters808 “border crossings.” This notion of “border crossings”
permits the study of confrontations both attracting and repelling, between any kind of two
sides, as people, institutions and artefacts, represented and studied through a bundle of
different types of evidence. It suggests a horizontal movement through frontiers, either
between nations or differently defined social cultures or structures. It also implies that through
these crossings, borders break down.
Then, I should also mention that every book is a product of its time. The manner in
which Mahmud Efendi reads the city as a “signifier” and writes a storia about it for the
eighteenth century Ottomans allows me to argue that his cultural context serves as a meaninggenerating framework. The perception and the understanding of the relatively unknown have
always been formed by the projection of the well-known, and thereby, the unknown becomes
familiar to us. Every understanding of the unknown occurs through its integration into the
806
807
808
HannaSchissler and Yasemin Nuhoglu-Soysal (New York: Berghahn Books, 2004), pp. 105-121; Yasemin
Nuhoglu Soysal and Vasilia Lilian Antoniou, “A Common Regional Past? Portrayals of the Byzantine and
Ottoman Heritages from Within and Without,” in Clio in the Balkans (Thessaloniki: Center for Democracy
and Reconciliation in Southeast Europe 2002), pp. 53-72.
W. Welsch, “Transculturality: the Puzzling Form of Cultures Today,” Spaces of Culture, (eds.) M.
Featherstone and S. Lash, (London: Sage, 1999), pp. 194-213, p. 198.
Peter Burke, “Cultures of Translation in Early Modern Europe”, p. 10.
Recently studies on “cultural encounters” rather than tensions between “East” and “West” has arisen. For
one of the best examples of the literature, see Nabil Matar, Turks, Moors and Englishmen in the Age of
Discovery, (Columbia: Columbia Univ. Press, 1999).
203
already known, i.e. through its domestication into the known culture. So appropriation,
“Aneignung” occurs.
In the light of all the above-mentioned features, it can be argued that Mahmud
Efendi’s narrative about Athens allows us to raise many questions both about its existence and
content and to deepen our knowledge of Ottoman intellectual life. The importance of this
dissertation lies in the fact that as it developed a highly comparative framework to analyze
Mahmud Efendi’s text, it illuminated the difference between philhellenic attitudes and
Mahmud Efendi’s narration and moreover the changing parameters of the perception of
Athens by the Ottoman literati. Besides, this study brought an explanation of the continuity of
knowledge of Greece and Greek people in Islamic history from early sources up to the
beginning of the twentieth century.
Furthermore, it considers Greece’s eastern past. As a recent study indicates, “many
scholars consider the Ottoman past to be of little interest when set next to the glories of
ancient Greece, Rome and Byzantium”809 and an important potential in the Turkish Archives
for Ottoman domination (between fifteenth through nineteenth/twentieth centuries) has been
largely unrecognized.810 The glory of Athens dominates the academic world, nevertheless,
this dissertation opens a door on this neglected Tourkokratia period of the city by presenting
the ahkam registers of Athens. And more importantly, it contributes to a “shared world” as
Greene showed: “from the time of the Fourth Crusade in 1204 onward, the eastern
Mediterranean was the point of intersection for not two but three, enduring civilizations –
namely, Latin Christianity, Eastern Orthodoxy, and Islam.” 811
In Mahmud Efendi’s narrative, it is not strange to meet with Herodotus from
Halicarnassus near İzmir, Thucydides from Athens, Plutarch from the ruined Chaironeia
castle near Livadeia and Diodorus from the island of Sicily with Ibn Kathīr, Al-Bayḍāwī,
Ebussuud and Ibn ‘Asākir side by side. The narration of Mahmud Efendi illustrates the
function of the Horologion/the Tower of Winds in Ottoman times. On the outer side of this
octagonal building in the Roman Agora of Athens, the personified wind deities of each side,
Boreas (north wind), Skiron (north west), Zephyros (west), Lips (south west), Notos (south),
809
810
811
Fariba Zarinebaf, Jack L. Davis, John Bennet, A Historical and Economic Geography of Ottoman Greece:
the southwestern Morea in the Eighteenth Century, with contributions by Evi Gorogianni, Deborah K.
Harlan, Machiel Kiel (Princeton: The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, 2004), p. 2.
Ibid., p. 9.
Molly Greene, A Shared World: Christians and Muslims in the Early Modern Mediterranean (Princeton,
New Jersey: Princeton Univ. Press: 2000), p. 4.
204
Euros (south east), Apeliotes (east), and Kaikias (north east) are depicted as friezes. However,
as Edward Dodwell shows in his two coloured engravings dated from April 5, 1805, inside
the Horologion, the dervishes can be seen while they are whirling. Hence, as a function of
Mahmud Efendi’s text, for instance Zephyros and dervishes lived side by side like the local
Greeks, who attributed to those ruins “variety of meanings and associations, expressing at
times admiration and awe.”812
As a last remark, it seems that Mahmud Efendi stands between two research clusters:
Islamische Aufklärung and neo-Hellenic Enlightenment. Perhaps it includes characteristics of
both, therefore it seems worth reading and studying Mahmud Efendi’s unique manuscript.
Discussing Mahmud Efendi’s place between these two periods, in fact, indicates the evolution
of Ottoman intellectual horizons. In my view, Mahmud Efendi was neither in a position like
Evliya Çelebi, who was part of what can be called the “wonders and curiosities” (acayib ü
garaib) genre, nor like the Tanzimat intellectuals, who considered Antiquity to be an issue
related to specifically Western “civilization.” If Mahmud Efendi’s style of “reading” the
ancient world could have created repercussions among the Ottoman literati, it would have
been possible for a different kind of “super Westernization” to have taken place during the
Tanzimat period. Parallel to that interest, the “other” histories could be interpreted as a break
away from the “mythical stories” tradition that occupied in the Ottoman mental map. Maybe
if all the socio-economic and cultural circumstances had been present, as Dimitri Gutas
displays so well with the Greco-Arab translation movement, it would be possible to discuss
some kind of Greco-Ottoman translation movement at that time. However, the Tulip Era did
not produce such a movement, so Mahmud Efendi stood alone, like Katip Çelebi and Esad
Efendi from Ioannina.
812
Hamilakis, The Nation and Its Ruins, p. 67.
205
Appendix 1:
“Yunan-ı kadim esatiri dikkate şayandır. Vakı’a Hindin, İran ı kadimin, Asur’un,
Filistin’in, Mısr-ı kadimin de esatiri, hurefatı var ama Yunan esatirindeki nekahet, incelik
onlarda yoktur. İnsan – hayvanlık derkesinden kurtulup- dimağını işletmeye başlayınca sırr-ı
hilkatini öğrenmek arzusuna düşmüş. Güneşten gelen aydınlığa geçid vermeyen madeni
levhalar gibi bir metanet-i mütecellidane ile bu esrarı örten perde-yi i’cazkaraneyi yırtabilmek
– bu günkü vukufuna rağmen- henüz insanlara nasib olamadığı nazar-ı ibtisar ve iftikar
önünde tecelli edince eski insanların bu sırr-ı mütegallib ve mütehekkim karşısında zebun
kaldıklarını teslimde tereddüt edilmez. Hal böyle iken Yunan, ondan iktibas-ı feyz-i irfan
etmiş olan Roma esatir ve hurefatının ihtiva ettiği rumuz ve dakaik-i tenvir dimağı beşer iden
‘amillerden ad olunmak yalnız kadirşinaslık değil, kemalat-ı medeniyyeye hidmeti i’tibariyle
de bilinmesi terbiye-i ictima’iyye levazımından görülmek heman zaruridir. Mevhibe-i
musadıf-i hilkat Bizans Bosforu medhalinden başlayarak Marmara denizi, Helsipon
(Çanakkale boğazı) oradan ‘gülzar-ı medeniyyenin bir havz-ı simini’ vasf-ı beliğ-i şairanesine
masdak olan Akdeniz aksam-ı şarkıyesinden kadim ‘Ege’ denizi (İyon-Pelagos)
Yunanistan’ın garbını kaplayan Yunan denizi ile cunuba düşen Kandiye adası da birlikte
Sicilya adasıyla İtalya şark sahillerinin tersim ve tahdid ettikleri – havza-yı behşetinin suyunu,
toprağını güneşin, ancak bu yerlere mahsus lütufkar bir hararet-i mu’tedilesine mazhariyetle
taltif etmiştir. Bu .. tabi’at en sath-ı nazar, en lakayd bir seyyahın bile dikkat ve hayretinden
kaçamaz.
Bir zelzele-yi biamanın Peloponez (Mora) toprağından koparıp Ege denizine
serptiği adalar bu hadise-i kadime-yi .. zuhura gelen havzanın lütf-i manzarasını arttırmakla
kalmamış o yerlerde mesken tutmak nimetiyle nasibdar olan Pelagalar? Ahfadına seyahat-ı
bahriyeyi teshil etmiş, bu seyahat-ı bahriye ticaretini vücuda getirmiş, bu ticaret .. akvam ile
ihtilata yol açmış, ihtilat-ı dimağı işletmiş, Homeri katantlara inbisat bahş olmuştur. Bu
havza-yı behşeti sahillerine kesafetli havalarda kars-ı kamere intiba’ iden kızımtıraklığa
benzer altın renkler salan har, har olduğu kadar in’am-ı nesar bir güneşin tenmih ettiği kaynak
cereyan demlerin nazmı olan dimağlarda perver-i şiyab olan efsanelerin şairane olduğu
mertebede nezih olmaları da canib-i istiğrab etmez. Yunan ı kadimin ahlakiyatı şa’iriyetle
mezc etmiş olan usturaları heykeltıraşlık, mimarlık sanayi’ nefisesini ibda’ etti. Musikiye,
raksa, hayat-ı ictima’ı safahatını temsil eden oyunlara (tiyatro), bunları tertib ve tanzim
edecek eş’ar ve edebiyata intima ve inbisat bahş oldu. Şark ve Garb medeniyetinin her türlü
ta’arruzdan mesun … rakibi bulunan bu zekayı cevali eseriyle tetbi’ etmek hazz ı
ruhanisinden mahrum kalmak istemeyen akvam ı müterekkıye-ı müteehhirenin fihrist-i
terbiye-i ictima’iyesinde esatir-i Yunaniyan için de bir hane ayrılmaktadır. Medeniyet i Arab
206
ve İslamın şarkında .. Yemen ..tealisi olan mutekaddimin hulefayı Abbasiye devr i
hemmatının efazılı Yunan ı kadim ilm ve marifetini istihfaf ve ihmal değil, tetbi’ ve ta’mik
ettiler. Bu sayededir ki şimşir i futuhatın mevzu’ olacağı gılaf ı ihtişamı bir sanat çıra desti ile
i’male zafaryab olabilmişler idi. İslam aleminde ‘İmaduddin’ tavsifine, edvar-ı muhtelifedeki
hemmatı bahadıranelerine isbat ı istihkak iden Türklerle onlara terdifen gelen Osmanlılar bu
haydari? Güşeş i sadaneye verzeş dimağıyeyi terkık/tertik/ hususunda İslamın izini
bırakmamakta ibraz ı selabet edebileydiler - bugün ellerinde kalacağı hiç şübhe götürmeyen –
Medinetül Hukema (Atina) onun vaktiyle en bülend bir nümune i mütehaccir irfanı olan
Akropol mabed esatir asar mimarisinin bugünkü harabeliğiliyle değil belki dünkü imar ve
ihtişamıyla arz ı endam etmesi ağleb i ihtimal idi.
Kıymeti ağırlığında elmas düğün …
nadide bir Saksonya tabağı bir çocuğun eline oyuncak verilirse ya elinden düşürerek ya bir
yere fırlatarak onun bin parça olup gitmesi onun mukadderatı zevalindendir. Hüccet i ilm ve
marifetle isbat ı rüşd ve .. edemeyen kavimlerin de asar ı nefisenin takdir mahiyetinde
oyuncağını kıran, atan bir tıfl ı bi idrakden farkı yoktur. Ellerine düşen enfes asarı amden bile
olmasa bir ihmal i na ehlane ile tahrib ederler. Haddızatinda kıymeti olan bir maddeyi takdir
edebilmek onu tanımakla meşruttur. Esatır ı Yunaniyan nice bin senelik te’amili efsaneler ile
bizi eğlendirmekle kalmaz. Pek fetanetle tasvir edilmiş o hurefat ı müteselsile sanayi’i
nefisenin takdir i kıymeti duygularını bizde uyandıracağı gibi garb asar ı edebinde piş
tefekkürümüze yahud bir muhazıra-yı üns ü ülfette sem’imize eriş bir olup birisine karşı bizi
hecalet i bigane giden de kurtarmış olur. İzzet- i nefsimizi okşar. Esatir i Evvelin artık
Osmanlı ananatımızdan ıraklaşub gaib olmakta olan tandır başı masallarından da, edebiyat- ı
hazıra-yı garbiyede bile – pek mebzul olmayan mümtazları müstehak oldukları mevkı’ …de
alıkonularak istisna edilmek şartıyla- artık cıvıklaşan bize Yeni kapının sandık burnu
kahvehanelerindeki o ma’hud meddahları hatırlatan yavegu romanlardan da; bunları
nefislerine muktedaye? Ad edecek tenezzüllerinden nasılsa çekinmeyenlerin müfsid i ahlak
makalat ve hikayatından da hiç şüphe yok ki daha faidelidir. İbret bahştır. Esatir mecmuanın
tahrir ve neşrine bu mutalaat saik oldu. Makırköy Rebiülahir 1329, 1911 Nisan- Mehmed
Tevfik. Bittiği Tarih: Büyük Ada 26 Muharrem 1332/ 13 Kanun ı evvel 1913.”
207
APPENDIX 2
[1b]
BismillÀhi’r-raómÀni’r-raóím
ElóamdulillÀhi Rabbi’l-‘Àlemin ve’ã-ãalÀtü ve’s-selÀmu ‘alÀ resÿlinÀ Muóammedin ve
Àlihí ve aãóÀbihí ecma‘ín.
Ve ba‘d bu faúírü’l-óaúír ve ‘abd-i kesírü’t-taúãír úalílü’l-bidÀ‘atü’l-mübtelÀ bi-fetvÀyı Atina dÀ’imÀ ol diyÀr ‘iber-i Àyine-i ‘acíbesine nÀôır ve bÀúí olan ÀåÀr-ı úudemÀya
mütefekkir olup ve bÀ-òuãÿã Atina diyÀrına tesmiye olunan Medínetü’l-ÓükemÀ nÀmı iútiøÀ
eder ki diyÀr-ı mezbÿr maúarr-ı óükemÀ-yı úudemÀ ola. Ve óÀlÀ mevcÿd olan ÀåÀr-ı binÀların
bÀnílerine aãl-ı dín-i úudret-i uômÀ ola. Ve bu diyÀr-ı celílü’l-i‘tibÀrda ta‘allüm ve ta‘allüm-i
‘ilm-i óikmet eden meşÀhir-i óükemÀdan kimler ola deyü dÀ’ima øamír-i faúírde bu aóvÀl caypir olup eslÀfdan Atina diyÀrında mürÿr eden ãÀóib-i fetvÀ olan ‘ulemÀdan ve erbÀb-ı ‘urefÀ-yı
ehl-i İslÀm’dan kimesne saù[r]-ı taórír-[e] taãaddí edüp tevÀriò-i Efrenc ü YunÀn ve Latin ü
Roma lisÀnlarından tercüme ile silk-i taúarrüre getürüp tedvín itmediler.
Fikr-i mezbÿr giderek àayret ve himmeti cÀlib olup derÿnda muømer olan hÀlí, úÀle
[2a] getürüp biñ yüz yigirmi yedi sÀl-i feròunde-fÀl Atina diyÀrında óÀlen mevcÿd olan dört
yüz keníse ve on manastır pÀpÀz ve rÀhibler re’ísleri olan PÀpÀ Kolari ve PÀpÀ Sotori
isimleriyle tesmiye olunan ruhbÀnlar elsine-i Efrenc ve Yunan ve Latin ve Roma tÀríòlerinde
vÀúi‘ Atina tevÀriòlerine tevaààul ve ‘ilm ve ma‘rifetleri tÀm olmaàın faúír daòı Atina
tevÀriòini Türkí lisÀnına tercüme etmek içün mezbÿr rÀhibleri tercíó eyledik.
Ve mesfÿrların elsine-i erba‘ada vÀúi‘ Atina tevÀriòlerinden òaber verdikleri aòbÀrı
faúír daòı tercüme edüp tesvíd-i Àòar oldukda Mora seferi daòı küşÀde olup sefer-i mezbÿr
àÀilesinden ve icmÀl vÀsıùasıyla kûşe-i nisyÀnda terk olunup gāh óacc-ı şeríf ve gÀh İslambol
seferi tebyíøine mÀni‘ olup biñ yüz elli sene tÀríòi evÀòirinde Anadolu úal‘ası muóabbetsına
ta‘yín buyurulan vezírini naôír ki, dÀ’imÀ müdebbir birr-i verÀ-yı Àsaf-ı sırrun fi’l-kerem
‘aliyyü’l-himem bir mekkí ve òÀtem-i nişím-i vezír ibn vezír Muóammed Paşa ãadÀret-i
‘uômÀ şerífiyle şeref-yÀfte olan MuósinõÀde Abdullah Paşa yesserallÀh Te‘ÀlÀ le-hümÀ [2b]
mÀ yürîdu ve mÀ yeşÀ óaøretleri, “el-veledü sırru ebí” esrÀrı ve evãÀf-ı óüsni müstaósenesi,
õÀt-ı celílelerinde bi’l-cümle cÀmi‘ olup óilye-i ‘ilm ü ‘amel ile mücellÀ vÀreste ve zíver-i
ÀdÀb vezír-i ÀdÀb ve ma‘Àrif birle müzekkÀ ve pírÀste ve ‘aúl-ı kiyÀsetde EflÀtÿn ve Aristo-ÀsÀ
ve niôÀm-ı ‘Àlem memleketde ve tedbír-i siyÀsetde müşírini hemtÀ olmaàın ‫ﻦ ﻟﹶﺎ‬
َ ‫ﻯ ﺍﱠﻟﺬِﻳ‬
ِ ‫ﺴﺘَﻮ‬
ْ ‫َﻫ ﹾﻞ َﻳ‬
‫ َﻳ ْﻌﹶﻠﻤُﻮ ﹶﻥ‬mefhÿm-ı münífine ‘Àlim olmaàla her şeyin cehlinden ‘ilmini tercíó edüp tab‘-ı
208
müşírÀnelerine ulÿ’l-elbÀb şembesi mÀ-ãadaú olmaàla úıãÀã-ı ümem-i sÀlife ve muÀrıø-ı enÀm
muòÀlifi vÀúı‘Àtı nice ‘acÀib ve àarÀ’ibÀtı şamil ve envÀ‘-i ‘iber, naãíhat ve menfa‘Àtı
müştemil olup ‫ ﻟﻘﺪ ﻛﺎﻥ ﰲ ﻗﺼﺼﻬﻢ ﻋﱪﺓ ﻻﻭﱃ ﺍﻟﺒﺎﺏ‬ma‘nÀ-yı laùífine Àrif olmaàın bu óaúír-i pürtaúãíri meclis-i ÀãefÀnlarına maórem idüp ve nuãó-ı pendi şamil ümem-i sÀlife óikÀyÀtına
mÀ’il ve bu ‘abd-i dÀ‘ílerine fırúa-i mÀøiye óikÀyÀtları taúrír ve tafãíline iõinle müsÀ‘ade
buyurulmaàın senÀ-kÀr-ı devlethÀhları [3a] daòı perverde-i derÿn-ı òulÿã-ı maòãÿãum olan
ed‘iye-i bí-àÀye edÀsı siyÀúında ‘ale’l-biêÀ‘a ‘aãírü’l-isti‘mÀl olan ıãùılÀóÀt-ı ‘acíbeden ‘Àrí ve
mu‘aúúad olan elfÀô-ı àaríbeden biri tesvíd kılan Atina tevÀriòinden maófÿôum olan ba‘ø-ı
óikÀyÀt-ı pür -‘iberi taúrírimden óaôô-ı mevfÿrları olup tesvíd-i mezbÿru tebyíø ile fermÀn
buyurdular.
Bu nÀçiz úaãíru’l-edÀ ve úalílü’l-bidÀ‘ate daòı enfÀs-ı müşírÀnelerinden ve fermÀn-ı
vÀcibü’l-imtiåÀllerinden úudret ve iútidÀr óÀãıl olup kÿşe-i nisyÀnda mütví olan Atina tevÀriòi
tesvídi tebyíøine mübÀşeret olındı. LÀkin eltÀf-ı ‘aliyye-i vezírÀneden ve a‘ùÀf-ı celíle
müşírÀneden recÀ ve niyÀz ve mes’ÿlüm oldur ki her ‘ayb ki sulùÀn be-pesend hünerest mÀãadaúnahu ircÀ‘ buyurula! Ve bi’l-cümle êelÀlet ü úuãÿr ve küsÿrÿm ãahfa-i ‘aybdan mahv
buyurula; ve ‘ayn-ı ‘inÀyet naôar-ı celílerinde óüsn-i úabÿl ile maúbÿle úarín buyurula!
Bu faúír-i pür-taúãírin fetvÀ ü va‘aôım meslekim olup ‘ilm-i óÀlim [3b] olan fıkıó ve
óadís ve tefsír iştiàÀli evúÀtım istí‘Àb eylediğinden kitÀb inşÀ mesleğine kemÀl-i iştiàÀl
müyesser olmadı. Ancak hüner-verÀn-ı ‘irfÀndan daòı mes’ÿlüm oldur ki tercümede te’líf
eylediğim elfÀôda ve naôm olunan edÀlarda vÀúi‘ olan úuãÿr ve küsÿru taãóíó buyurup àÀflet ü
nisyÀnımız ‘afv buyuralar. ZírÀ mihr-i erbÀb-ı maÀrif ‘indlerinde òafí olmayup nümÀyÀndur ki
lisÀn-ı Türkíden yine Türkí lisÀn üzere tevÀriò cem‘ tedvín olunsa te’líf-i elfÀô ve imlÀ
òuãÿãlarında aãlÀ ‘usret çekilmez; zírÀ tercíó olunan münÀsib maóaller elfÀô ü imlÀõÀde tab‘a
muótÀcdur. KitÀbet ve inşÀda kemÀl-i mahÀret taóãíl etmeyen müterecciólerin ‘usret ve
zaómetleri emr-i bedíhídir. Bu ‘abd-i pür-taúãíre yigirmi iki senesinde Tuófetü’t-TüccÀr
nÀmıyla fıkó-ı şerífden lisÀn-ı ‘Arabí üzere bir kitÀb tercümesi müyesser olmuşdur. Ve
keõÀlik yine lisÀn-ı ‘Arabíden feøÀil-i cihÀd ve niyet-i cihÀdı Şamil Tuófetü’l-áuzÀt nÀmında
bir tercüme daòı müyesser olmuşdur. VelÀkin bu tercüme çekilen zaómet ve ‘usret İberí
tercümesinde [4a] çekilmedi. ZírÀ nekre lisÀnlarından aòõ olunup tercümÀnlar daòı Türkí
lisÀnı bilmeyip söyledikleri Rÿmí lisÀnı Àòar mütercime daòı muótÀc olduğumuzdan ‘asm-ı
ãu‘ÿbet ile ‘usretleri çekildi. ‘Afv-ı úuãÿr u küsÿr içün istircÀm ümidiyle bu ‘ilel ve i‘zÀr taórír
ü temhíd olunmuşdur. Heme-i ‘Àlemi inşÀ ve ícÀd eden àaffÀrü’õ-õünÿb vessettÀrü’l-‘uyÿb
CenÀb-ı Eróame’r-RÀóimín’den ‘afv u ma‘rifet istid‘À olunmuşdur.
209
Ve Atina Medínetü’l-ÓükemÀ nÀmıyla şöhret-yÀb olmaàın tercüme ve cem‘-i tedvíni
taãmím olunan kitÀbın daòı nÀmı, TÀríò-i Medíneti’l-ÓükemÀ tesmiye olunmuşdur. Ve
Atina’nıñ úadímden mürÿr eden aóvÀline ma‘rifet u ıùùılÀ‘ı olan mehre-i ehl-i tevÀriòden
İzmir’e úaríb Alúarnas nÀm óakím813 ve Atina óükemÀsından æÿcízízí814 nÀm óakím ve
Rÿmilinde Livadiye’ye úaríb Görüniye úal‘asından815, óÀlÀ òarÀbdur, Pÿlitaròÿs816 nÀm óakím
ve Misina cezíresinde DÀvudres817 nÀm meõkÿr óükemÀ-yı Roma ve Latin ve Efrenc
tevÀriòlerinden [4b] dest-i İslÀm’a gelince Atina’da vÀúi‘ úudemÀ aóvÀlini tafãílen ve Mora
aóvÀlini icmÀlen müştemil Efrenc ü Latin ve Yunan u Rÿmí tÀríòlerinden müntehab u mesbÿk
bi’l-miål olmayan bir tÀríòin tercüme ve cem‘ u tedvínine ‘aôímet olunup Óaúú celle ve ‘alÀ
òayr ile itmÀmın naãíb ü müyesser eyleye!
Ve mezbÿr óükemÀnın ittifÀúı böyledür ki; Atina úal‘ası, Rÿmili’nin vasaùındadur ve
mezbÿr úal‘anın maşrıú ùarafından Eàriboz818 cezíresi vÀúi‘ olup ve cenÿb ùarafından Akdeñiz
cezíreleri vÀúi‘ olup ve şimÀl ùarafında Rÿmili vÀúi‘ olup ve àurÿb ùarafında Mora vÀúi‘
olmuşdur. Ve mezbÿr úal‘a, bir ãaàír taş tepe üzerinde ve mezbÿr úal‘anın cevÀnib-i
erba‘asında cirmi dört yüz yetmiş kulaçdur. Ve metín ü müstaókem ve ‘acíb ü àaríb
binÀlarının ÀåÀrı bÀúídir. Ve kapusı ùaríki beş kat úal‘ a olup beş kapudan mürÿr etmeyince
derÿn-ı úal‘aya duòÿl úÀbil değildür ve àÀyet metín ve sarb úal‘adur. Kaç def‘a fetó oldu ise
emÀn ile fetó olup ve kılıç ve yür[ü]yüş ile fetói müyesser olmadı. Ve àÀyet ile metín [5a]
olmaàın úadímde Rÿm melikleri nuúÿd ve cevÀhir ve õí-úıymet eşyÀlarını mezbÿr úal‘aya
emÀnet vaż‘ ederlerdi. Ve muúaddemÀ mezbÿr úal‘anın ismi Aúrūpūlí tesmiye olunup
varoşun ismi “Atina” tesmiye olunmuş idi. Ve lisÀn-ı Rÿmíde “Aúrūpūlí” ma‘nÀsı “tepe
üzerinde binÀ olunmuş úal‘a” demekdür. Mürÿr-ı eyyÀm ile varoş àÀyet kebír olmaàın varoş
ismi àalebe edüp úal‘aya ve varoşa bi’l-cümle “Atina” tesmiye olındı.
Ve Atina’nuñ Àb u havÀsı leùÀfetinden nÀşí emrÀø u eskÀmdan ahÀlísi maãÿn ‘ömr-i
ùavíl ile mu‘ammer oldukları cihetde keåret-i tenÀsül ile úal‘anın cevÀnib-i erba‘ası bir
mertebe varoş tevessü‘ olındı ki, cevÀnib-i erba‘ası sekiz sÀ‘at devr eder idi. Ve õí-úudret
olduklarından mezbÿr varoşu kÀr-gir ve metín binÀlar ile maóãÿn etmişler idi. Ve mezbÿr
varoşun nihÀyet bulduğı eùrÀf bu vechile ta‘dÀd olunup ta‘yín olmuşdur. DeryÀ cÀnibinden
813
814
815
816
817
818
Herodotus
Thucydides
Chaironeia castle
Plutarch
Diodorus
Euboea
210
nihÀyet bulduğı mevÀøı‘ Ejder Limanı819 beryÀ ve leb-i deryÀ bi’l-cümle ve Aya Kozma820
nÀm mevøi‘a varınca ve berren Deli Dağ821 etekleri bi’l-cümle [5b] ve Koçbaşı Manastırı822 ve
İncili Çavuş ve Òıøır İlyas Tepesi823 ve Batisa824 ve Sepula825 tesmiye olunan bÀàçeler ve
zeytÿnlar ‘arãaları bi’l-cümle yine Ejder Limanına varınca mezbÿr varoş nihÀyet bulmuş imiş.
Ve ol mevÀøı‘ bi’l-cümle ma‘mÿr idi ve óÀlÀ mevÀøı‘-ı mezbÿrede eåer-i binÀlar bÀúídür.
Ve cevÀnib-i erba‘ası baà ü bÀàçe vefret üzere olup ve enhÀr-ı cÀriye keåretiyle
müzeyyen olup ve ahÀlísi Àb u havÀ leùÀfetinden nÀşí eõkiyÀ ve mudrik olup ve ‘ilm u ma‘rifet
taóãílinde olanlar fÀ’iúu’l-aúrÀn olup ve erbÀb-ı ãanÀyi‘ mahÀret-i keåíre ile meşhÿr olup ve
ehl-i tüccÀr kesb ü ticÀretlerinde mecd ü sÀ‘í olmaàın dÀ’imÀ ribóden òÀlí olmayup ve ‘askerí
tÀifesi óarb u êarb Àletlerin isti‘mÀlinde mahÀret üzere olup ve ceng vaúitlerinde àÀyet
cesaretleri iôhÀrıyla ekåeriyÀ düşmÀnlarına àalebe üzere olup bi’l-cümle evãÀf-ı pesendíde ile
ahÀlísi meşhÿrlar idi.
Ve úadímü’l-eyyÀmda ümera ve óÀkimleri Àòardan olmayup [6a] Atina ahÀlísinden
müstaóaú-ı óükm ü velÀyet olanlar naãb olunurdı. Nice duhÿr-ı sinín-i vÀfire aãlÀ Àòar
pÀdişÀha tÀbi‘ olmadılar. Ve vÀlíleri ve óÀkimleri fevt olmayınca yÀhÿd kendülerden ‘azli
mÿcib bir fi‘l-i úabíó ãudÿr itmeyince Àòar vÀlí ve óÀkim naãb olunmazdı. Nice sinín ü duhÿr
böyle olup ba‘dehÿ on senede bir vÀlí tebdíl eder oldılar. Ba‘dehÿ nice sinín u duhÿr
mürÿrunda senede bir vÀlí naãb eder oldılar. Ba‘dehÿ ôuhÿr edüp umÿr-ı ‘Àmmeye ıùùılÀ‘ı ve
niôÀm-ı memlekete iútidÀrı olan feylesof-ı óükemÀdan senede on óÀkim naãb eder oldılar.
Ba‘dehÿ beher sene ellişer óÀkim naãb ider oldılar. Ba‘dehÿ şehr-i mezbÿr kemÀl bulup,
cevÀnib-i erba‘ası sekiz sa‘Àt devr ider oldukda, SokrÀt u EflÀtun vaúitlerinde beher-sene
óükemÀdan beşer yüz adam telòíã olunup umÿr-ı ‘Àmme içün müdebbir ü óÀkim naãb
olunurdu.
İskender-i Zü’l-Úarneyn devrine gelince bu maúÿle taãarruf u óükÿmetleri mütemÀdí
olmuşdur. Ve İskender yanında olan [6b] AristotÀlís vesÀ’ir óükemÀnın ekåeri Atina’da
ta‘allüm ü taóãíl-i ‘ilm u kesb-i ma‘rifet etdikleri ecilden Atina’yı dÀ’imÀ óıfô u ãıyÀnet üzere
olup, İskender`e Atina’yı dest-rÀzlık etmeğe mÀni‘ olup tecÀvüz etdürmezlerdi. Ve İskender
819
820
821
822
823
824
825
Piraeus
Hagios Kosmas
Mount Hymettus
Kaisariani Monastery
Hill of Profitis Ilias at Piraeus
Tourkovounia- Lofos Patatsou
Sepolia
211
‘aãrında daòı kendülerinde istiúlÀl var idi. Ve müddet-i mezbÿrede berren kırk biñ ceng eri
müretteb óÀøır u müheyyÀ ‘askerleri mevcÿd olup ve baóren yigirmi biñ gemiciden àayrı
óÀøır olup iki yüz mükemmel ve müretteb ceng sefÀyini müheyyÀ idi.
Ve óükÿmetleri berren bi’l-cümle Rÿmili’ne ve İslambol yerinde ol vaúitde VíjÀndiyū
nÀmında bir küçük úaãaba olup bu ãÿret ile óısn-ı İslambol binÀ olunmuş değil idi. Ve daòı
Karadeñiz derÿnunda Minúaliya nÀm maóalle dek Atina óÀkimi óükm ider idi. Ve baóren bi’lcümle Akdeñiz cezíreleri Misina ve Girit ve Kıbrız deryÀları muóíù oldukları cezírelere bi’lcümle Atina óÀkimi óükm iderdi. Ve úudret-i keåíre ile miknet sÀóibi olan ‘aôímü’ş-şÀn
pÀdişÀhlar ile ceng etmişlerdur; óattÀ ‘Acem şÀhlarından Behmen bin İsfendiyÀr ile ve ser‘askerleriyle ‘aôím cengler [7a] eylemişlerdür. Ser-‘askerlerine bir kere berren ve bir kere
baóren Atina ‘askeri àalebe eylemişlerdür; velÀkin Behmen şÀh iki def‘a bi-nefsihí Atina
üzerine aòõ-ı intiúÀm içün gelüp Atina şehrini ve úal‘asını hedm ü òarÀb eylemişdür. Ve
Atina óÀkimi mÀlik olduğu kılÀ‘ u úaãabÀtı ve cezíreleri fetó edüp kendüye tab‘iyyet
etdirmişdir, inşÀ’allahu te‘ÀlÀ maóallinde icmÀliyle tafãíl olunur.
Ve İskender devrinden soñra Roma pÀdişÀhı Atina’ya àalebe edüp żabù u taãarruf
etmişdür. Ve ba‘dehÿ İspanya kralı àalebe edüp żabù u taãarruf eylemişdür. Ve ba‘dehÿ
İspanya yedinden pÀdişÀh-ı heft kişver ü şehinşÀh-ı baór-i berr óaøret-i fÀtió-i ekber İslambol
fÀtiói SulùÀn bin SulùÀn Muhammed ibn-i MurÀd ÒÀn (tayyebehullÀhÿ serÀ-humÀ ve ce‘ale’lcennete mesvÀ-huma) ‘asker-i nuãret-şi‘Àr ile vezíri Mahmud Paşa, Atina üzerine gelüp
‘inÀyet-i SubhÀníyle mu‘cize’-i Muhammedí ve şevket-i mücÀhidín-i ‘OåmÀní, Atina
keferesinin úulÿblarını ru‘b-ı aôím ilúÀ edüp [7b] ve lÀ-‘ilÀc olup ãadÀ-yı emÀn-ı peyveste-yi
ÀsumÀn idüp bilÀ-óarb u úıtÀl Atina úal‘asının miftÀólarını, vezír-i Àsaf-ı naôíre teslím
eylediler, inşÀ’allahu’r-raómÀn icmÀliyle tafãíli beyÀn olunur.
Ve ba‘dehÿ biñ doksan altı senesinde meróÿm ve maàfÿr SulùÀn Muhammed bin
İbrÀhim ÒÀn aãrında iòtilÀfÀt-ı keåíre ve niôÀm-ı memlekete iótilÀl ve beyne`r-rü’esa
maóabbet ü meveddet in‘idÀmından nÀşí milel-i kefere her ùarafdan baş kaldurup, her bir
millete başka ‘asker ve ser-‘asker ve sefer iútiøÀ eylediğinden Venedik keferesiyle barışık
iken mel‘ÿn, Mora cÀnibi òÀlí bulmaàın naúø-ı ‘ahd idüp Mora üzerine sefer idüp ùaraf-ı
sulùÀníden Mora cezíresini eyüce tedÀrik ve muóabbetsını ve şerr-i a‘dÀdan kemÀ yenbaàí
iãtiòlÀs mümkin olmadığı ecilden Venedik cumóÿru iki senede bi’l-cümle Mora cezíresini
Benefşe`den826 mÀ‘adÀ alup, ba‘dehÿ biñ doksan sekizde gelüp àÀflet ile Atina’yı daòı alup,
826
Monemvasia
212
altı ay derÿnunda mekå etmeden Eàriboz ve İstefe [8a] muóabbetsında olan àuzÀt-ı
muvaóóidín iki cÀnibden hücÿm idüp Atina úal‘ası varoşundan Venedik melÀ‘ínini kaçırdılar.
Ba‘dehÿ yüz bir senesinde müstaófaô ve müretteb ‘asker ta‘yín olunup KöprülüõÀde meróÿm
Muãùafa Paşa ãadÀreti vaútinde Atina żabù olunup ve evúÀt-ı òamse ve iúÀmet-i cum‘a
meróÿm (tÀbe serÀhÿ) SulùÀn Süleyman bin SulùÀn İbrÀhim üzerine òuùbe okunmuşdur.
Buraya gelince taórírÀtımızdan úahr-ı dest-asÀ Atina tÀríòiyçün ‘ilm-i icmÀlí óÀãıl olur.
Ba‘dehÿ tafãíl-i icmÀliyye şurÿ‘ olındı. Óaúú Celle ve ‘alÀ -òayr ile itmÀmın naãíb ü müyesser
eyleye!
Õikri sebúat eden beylerin ve óükemÀların her biri Atina’da kaçar sene vilÀyet ve
óükÿmet etdikleri ve zamÀn-ı óükÿmetlerinde vÀúi‘ olan vaúÀyÀ ve ‘acÀyib ü àarÀ’ibÀtı
mehmÀ emken beyÀna şurÿ‘ olındı. Ve tevÀriò-i Efrenc ü Yunan ve Latin ü Roma kitÀblarında
taúrír ü beyÀn-ı tercümÀnımız olan Papa ÚūlÀrí ve Papa Sūtirí nÀm rÀhibler mezbÿr
tevÀríòlerden şöyle beyÀn ederler ki; ùÿfÀn-ı Nuh (‘aleyhisselÀm)’dan evvel Atina diyÀrına
[8b] bení Àdemden kimesne sÀkin olduğun erbÀb-ı tevÀríòden kimesnenin ma‘lÿmu değildür.
Ve ba‘de ùÿfÀn-ı Nuh (‘aleyhisselÀm) şöyle taúrír ü beyÀn ederler ki evlÀd-ı Behiullah`dan
SÀm ve HÀm ve YÀfes kalup külliyen ‘Arab ve ‘Acem ve úavm-i ‘Ad ve úavm-i Semÿd ve
ehl-i FÀris bi’l-cümle SÀm’dan tenÀsül etmişdür. Ve ùÀ’ife-i Zengí ve siyÀhlar ve Fir‘avn,
HÀm neslinden tenÀsül etmişdür. Ve ùÀ’ife-i Rÿm ve Harzec ve Türk ve Ye’cÿc ve Me’cÿc ve
Yunan bi’l-cümle YÀfes evlÀdından tenÀsül etmişdür. Ve ba‘de’ù-ùÿfÀn YÀfes evlÀdından
Rÿmíler Atina diyÀrına gelüp tavaùùun etmişdür.
Ve bu meõkÿr tÀríòlerden tercüme olındığundan anlara tab‘iyyet ile seneler bí-óesÀb-ı
şemsiyye ta‘dÀd olunmuşdur. Ve meõkÿr tÀríòler beyÀnı üzere mehbit-i Ádem
(‘aleyhisselÀm)’dan Nuh (‘aleyhisselÀm)’a gelince iki biñ iki yüz kırk üç senesine mürÿr
etmişdür. Ve Atina diyÀrına tavaùùun iden Rÿmlar birer ve ikişer gelüp perÀkende úaryelere
cem‘, ba‘dehÿ HÀm evlÀdlarından Mıãır ùarafından nice adamlar daòı gelüp cem‘ oldılar. Ve
böyle perÀkende [9a] úaryeler ba‘de’ù-ùÿfÀn vÀlísiz biñ üç yüz sene sÀkin olmuşlardur.
Ve ba‘dehÿ Mıãır ùarafından HÀm evlÀdlarından hicret eden ùÀ’ifeden Çaúrūpū827
nÀmında cümle ma‘rifetiyle bir kimseyi vÀlí ittiòÀõ eylediler. Ve icrÀsı iútiøÀ iden óudÿd u
aókÀmı icrÀya istiúlÀl verdiler. Ve ebu’l-beşer äafiyyullah`dan mezbÿr Çaúrūpū`ya gelince üç
biñ beş yüz kırk üç sene mürÿr etmişdür. Ve óükemÀ-yı Rÿm’dan Cezrinyū ve Roma
óükemÀsından CicerūnÀ828 daòı ittifÀúıyla şöyle rivÀyet ederler ki; ùÿfÀndan soñra cümle ‘Àlem
827
828
Cecrops
Cicero
213
tevÀ’if olup her bir diyÀrda müstaúil birer vÀlí óükm ederdi. Ve ùÿfÀndan muúaddem olan baà
u bahçe ve zirÀ‘at ve elbise ve sÀ’ir levÀzım-ı insÀn fÀni olmaàla Atina’ya cem‘ olan úavm-i
meõkÿrÀtı ol diyÀra ícÀd ve ibtidÀ cem‘ etmişdür. Ve diyÀr-ı meõkÿrun Àb u havÀsı
leùÀfetinden dÀ’imÀ ahÀlísi ten-dürüst ve emrÀø-ı muòtelifeden maãÿn olup, tenÀsül ve evlÀd-ı
ensÀblardan ziyÀde olup maóaùù ve alÀ-òavfından Àòar diyÀra hicret ederlerdi; [9b] óattÀ
Anadolu cÀnibinden ol úavmden on iki şehr cem‘ olmuşdur. ÓÀliyen İzmir şehri mezbÿr
şehirlerdendür.
Ve àayrı diyÀrlara düşmÀn ôuhÿr eylese Atina’dan istimdÀd olunurdu; velÀkin
Atina’ya ôuhÿr ettikte kendü ‘askeri kifÀyet edüp, Àòar diyÀrdan istimdÀda muótÀc olmazlardı.
Ve Atina diyÀrına Àòar diyÀrdan gelüp içinde sÀkin olmuş muhÀcir bulunmazdı; ol ecilden
Atina ahÀlísi ancak “yerlü ta‘bíri bize mÀ-ãadaúdur” deyu iddi‘À ederlerdi. Ve bu da‘vÀlarına
‘alÀmet olmak içün, altÿndan ve gümüşden ve bakırdan ve perçinden her biri birer ağustoz
böceği taãvírin dürüp saçlarına ricÀl u nisvÀnın sarkıtırlardı. Ağustoz böceği tevellüd eyledigi
yerde fevt olup diri iken mekÀnın kimseye vermediği gibi keõÀlik úavm-i meõkÿr daòı
mekÀnların Àòara vermezlerdi.
Ve bir gün Atina ahÀlísi bir yere cem‘ olup dediler ki: “Rÿy-ı ‘arżda olan cemí‘
diyÀrların ismi olup bizim diyÀrımızıñ ismi olmamak münÀsib [10a] değildür, hemÀn biz daòı
diyÀrımıza bir isim tesmiye idelim” deyüp ve her biri birer isim söylediler. Ve beynlerinde
vÀfir iòtilÀf vÀúi‘ oldı. İttifÀú böyle münÀsib gördiler ki, içlerinde iki adamı tercíó eylediler.
Ve ol iki adamı meclislerinden ùaşra[ya] irsÀl eylediler ve dediler ki: “Ùaşrada her ne
görürseniz bir eyüce żabù edüp bize òaber veresiz. Ol òaber verdiğiniz kelimÀtın birini biz
daòı tercíó edüp diyÀrımıza isim tesmiye edelim”. Mezbÿrlar ùaşrada gezub ve ba‘dehÿ gelüp
şöyle òaber verdiler ki, evvel gelen: “Ben bir çeşme ve bir at gördüm” ve soñra gelen dedi ki:
“Ben bir zeytÿn ağacı gördüm”. Úavm-i meõkÿr, görülen şeylerin işÀret ve delÀletleri ne
olduğun fehm edemeyüb velÀkin Rÿmili’nde Livadiye`ye829 úaríb Salona830 nÀm úaãabada bir
deyr olup ve cemí‘ Rÿm ahÀlísi ‘avÀúıb u evÀòir olacak müşkülÀtlarını mesfÿr kÀhinlerden
istiòbÀr ederlerdi. KeõÀlik Atina’ya isim aóvÀlini biz daòı mezbÿr kÀhinlere ‘arż edelim,
vÀúı‘an öyle eylediler.
[10b]KÀhinler daòı cevÀb eylediler ki: “Zeytÿn ağacını -óÀşÀ- òalú eyleyen putun adı
Aåina’dur. Ve çeşme ile Àtí vükelÀ: “DeryÀ putu òalú eylemiştir” deyu kÀhinlere cevÀb
verdiler. Atina úavmi daòı zeytÿn ağacını òalú eyleyen putun ismiyle diyÀrlarını tesmiye
829
830
Livadia
Saluna
214
eylediler. Ve ol aãrın òalúı àÀyet aómaú ve bí-idrÀk olduklarından “Her diyÀrı ve herbir
cezíreyi ve deryÀyı birer put taòlíú etti” deyu ba‘żı fettÀnlar óílesiyle i‘tiúÀd ederlerdi. Mezbÿr
şeyùÀní fettÀnlar herbir tenhÀ yerde birer put taãvír idüp vaż‘ ederlerdi. Ve òalúdan òaber ve
òalúın dil-òÀhı üzere puttan òaber verirlerdi. Ve ol ‘aãrın bí-idrÀklerine i‘tiúÀd ettirirlerdi.
Ve bir rivÀyetde ol ‘aãrın vaútinde bir õí-úudret adam ve “Atina” nÀmında zevcesi
olup Atina ahÀlísine ve mÀlen ve bedenen ‘aôím òayrı iãÀbet etmekle mezbÿrun nÀmı ilÀyevmi’l-úıyÀme yÀd olsun deyu mezbÿr adamıñ zevcesi adını koyub “Atina” deyu tesmiye
eylediler.
Ve vÀlíleri olan mezbÿr Çaúrūpū otuz sene [11a] óükÿmet idüp fevt oldukda, oàlu
olmadığından dÀmÀdı olan ÚaranÀğyū831 vÀlí olup zirÀ‘at ve òırÀset ‘amellerin muóabbet idüp
ve bağ ve bÀàçe àarsına òalúı taóríå idüp mezbÿr gününde zirÀ‘at ‘ameli ve bağ ve bÀàçe
àÀyet keåret üzere olup ve diyÀr-ı mezbÿr ahÀlí[si]ni dört ãınıfa taúsím eyledi: Bir ãınıfına
“úırÀūnÀíler” ya‘ní, vÀlí tevÀbi‘i ve ‘askeri ve sÀ’ir rü’esÀ tevÀbi‘i demektir. Ve bir ãınıfına
“etídis” ya‘ní, erbÀb-ı ‘ilm ve erbÀb-ı ma‘rifet demektir. Ve bir ãınıfına “maãÿyedes” ya‘ní
erbÀb-ı zirÀ‘at ve òırÀset ve rencber demektir. Ve bir ãınıfına daòı “õí-iúrades” ya‘ní, erbÀb-ı
ãanÀyi‘ ve tüccÀr demektir.
Ve mezbÿr Úaranaū(ÚaranÀğyū) dokuz sene vilÀyet idüp oàlu olmamak ile dÀmÀdı
İftihona ba‘żı óüsn-ü sülÿklarıyla òalúı kendüye tÀbi‘ kılub òalú bir gün vÀlíleri olan
Úaranaūyı vÀlílikten ‘azl idüp ve dÀmÀdı Iftaòÿna’yı vÀlí naãb eylediler. Ve mezbÿr
Iftaòÿna832 òalú[l]a eyü geçinub, on sene vÀlí olup, [11b] ol daòı bilÀ-veled fevt oldu. Atina
ahÀlísi cem‘ olup a‘yÀn-ı vilÀyetden cümle ma‘rifetiyle Aríòåÿnÿz nÀm kimesneyi vÀlí naãb
eylediler. Mezbÿr úuyumculara kuştan envÀ‘í şeyler yapdurmağı ol ícÀd eyledi. Ve ol ‘aãırda
daòı rukÿb için devÀb müte‘Àrif olmadığıyçün cümle vaø‘ ve refí‘-i õihÀb, iyÀbları meşyen
olup merúÿm vÀlínin ayaklarına ba‘żı ‘ilel ve emrÀø ôuhÿr etmeğin ‘araba daòı ícÀd idüp
dÀ’im ‘araba ile gezerdi. VelÀkin ‘arabaya óayvÀn koşmak Atina’ya müte‘Àrif olmadığından
óayvÀn yerine ‘arabaya insÀn koşarlar idi. Ve senede üç gün nevrÿz etdirdüb cümle ahÀlí ol
nevrÿza cem‘ olup ‘aôím donanmalar ve ‘acíb ve àaríb şen[li]kler iderler idi. Mora içinde
Mizistre833 úal‘asını mezbÿr binÀ eylemiştir. Ve mezbÿr vÀlí elli sene óükÿmet idüp fevt
oldukda, oğul PanzíyūnÀ834 vÀlí olup ve óüsn-i sülÿka ve celb-i úulÿba sÀlik olmaàın ve kızını
831
832
833
834
Cranaus
Amphictyon
Mystra
Pandion
215
İårÀca835 pÀdişÀhına vermekle aúrÀnına birkaç meróale nüfÿú etmiştir. Ve ‘aôím [12a] úuvvet
bulup eùrÀf beyleri ve vÀlíleri mezbÿrdan òavf idüp emrine muòÀlefet etmezlerdi. Ve İårÀca,
memleketi Edirne ve eùrÀf-ı Edirne Boğaz Óiãarlarına varınca[ya dek] olan mevÀøı‘ ta‘bír
ederler idi. Mezbÿr dil-òÀh üzere óükÿmet idüp, merúÿmun vaútinde Atina ‘aôím i‘tibÀr
bulmuş idi.
Ve kırk sene tamÀm-ı velÀyet sürdükten soñra fevt olup oàlu Aríòtav836 vÀlí naãb
olunup, mezbÿr daòı taúsím-i tecdíd idüp ahÀlí[y]i yine dört kısma taúsím eyledi. Ancak
cümle òalúı cem‘ idüp ve içlerinden úaviyyü’l-bünye ve çabuk ve cerí ve cesÿr olanları ‘asker
ve cengci ifrÀz ve ta‘yín eyledi. Ve ‘aúl-ı fetÀnet aãóÀbını erbÀb-ı ãanÀyi‘ ta‘yín eyledi. Ve
‘akıl ve kiyÀsetde vasaùu’l-óÀl olanları ve cefÀya taóammül edenleri zírÀ‘Àte ta‘yín eyledi. Ve
cünÿn meşreb olanları çobÀn ve rencberliğe ta‘yín; ve mezbÿr Aríòtav kaç sene óükÿmet
ettiğini erbÀb-ı tÀríò, taórír eylemediler.
Ve mezbÿr fevt oldukda aúrabÀsından Çaúrūpū-i åÀni837 vÀlí [12b] naãb olındı. Mezbÿr
óüsn-i óÀl ile kırk sene vÀlí naãb olup fevt oldukda, aúrabÀsından Panziyona-i åÀni vÀlí olup,
mezbÿr daòı óüsn-i óÀl ile yigirmi beş sene óükÿmet eyledikden soñra fevt olup, müteveffÀ
neslinden Ayais vÀlí oldu. Merúÿmun gününde Girít cezíresi melíki oàlu Andoraiyona
nÀmında Atina’ya gelüp Atina’nıñ óüsn ve leùÀfeti[ni] müşÀhid olmağa seyr içün gelmiş idi.
VelÀkin Atina’nıñ muóibb ve maóbÿbeleri àÀyet keåír olmaàla pÀyepes olan maóbÿba úanÀ‘at
etmeyüb kibÀr ve a‘yÀn kızlarına daòı daòl ve tecÀvüz ve “äayd sevdÀsında iken yetmez mi
temÀşa-yı cemÀl elde sunarsın ey ‘Àşık-ı mihnet-zede buldukça bunarsın” fehvÀsınca
aúrabÀdan ba‘żılar muùùali‘ olunca taóammül edemeyüb mezbÿru úatl eylediler.
Ve maútÿlun pederi
òabír oldukda ‘aôím ‘asker ile Atina’ya gelüp muóÀsara
sevdÀsında olup, lÀkin [13a] ol ‘aãırda Atina’ya bir vebÀ-yı ‘aôíme iãÀbet idüp, ceng değil
óarekete daòı mecÀlleri olmadığı ecilden muãlihÿn tavassuùuyla her dokuz sene başında yedi
maóbÿb oğlan ve yedi maóbÿbe kız, Girít memleketine vermek üzere muãÀlaóa olunup ve
melik-i mezbÿr, oğlan ve kızları her dokuz sene tamÀmında bir zír-i zemínde meõkÿrları óabs
idüp beher-sene oàlu úatlolduğu günde nevrÿz-ÀsÀ ‘askerin cem‘ idüp ve güleş tutturdub her
kim óamlede àÀlib olup meydÀn Ànda kalur ise zír-i zemínde olan kızları birer birer verir idi.
Ve ManūtÀu nÀmında bir .. ziyÀde úuvvete mÀlik bir pehlüvanı vÀr idi. Mezbÿr pehlüvÀn
cümleye àÀlib olmaàın mezbÿr oğlan ve kızları bi’l-cümle ol alır idi.
835
836
837
Thrace
Erechteus
Cecrops II
216
Ve Atina vÀlísi olan Ayais838 vÀlíliği evÀilinde Mora cezíresinde vÀúi‘ Mizistre
diyÀrına tebdílen gidüp Eåerina839 nÀmında bir kızı tezevvüc idüp, óaml ôÀhir oldukda kendüyi
Atina meliki olduğun bildürup ve bir ‘aôím taştan tekne içine kılıcını [13b] ve bir çift çizme
koyub ve bir óacer-i ‘aôími kapak idüp ve zevcesine şöyle vaãiyyet eyledi ki: “Eğer bu senede
olan óaml erkek olur ise ve muóaúúaú benim evlÀdım ise büyüdükde benim evlÀdım olduğun
bildüresin ve adını SíseyÀ840 koyasın! Ve eğer bu kapağı kaldurır ise içinde olan seyfi alup
kuşansın ve çizme giysün. Ve bir Àn durmayub gelüp beni Atina’da bulsun” deyüp ve gerü
‘avdet eyledükten soñra, zevcesi bir erkek evlÀd tevellüd idüp, on beş yigirmi yaşına girdikde,
oğlan àÀyet ile cerí ve cesÿr ve úuvvetli olup Mizistre diyÀrında SíseyÀya kimesne àalebe
edemeyüb her gün nizÀ‘ı ôuhÿr idüp şikÀyetçisi eksik olmazdı. Àòar vÀlidesi bi’ø-øarÿre ‘Àciz
olup, “Bu oàlunu pederine irsÀl etmeden àayrı çÀre yokdur” deyüp, SíseyÀ’yı tenhÀlayub
“Benim yavrum sen àÀyet şaúí oldun! Òavfım budur ki, seni bir gün úatlederler ve babanıñ
óasreti úıyÀmete kalur!” VÀlidesi böyle deyince, “YÀ benim babam kimdir?” dedi. VÀlidesi
cevÀb verdi ki: “Seniñ babañ
[14a] óÀlÀ Atina pÀdişÀhıdur” dedikde, SíseyÀ: “YÀ ben óÀlÀ
yigirmi yaşına girdim babamı baña niçün demedin?”, “Ay oğul seniñ firÀúına taóammül
edemediğimden soñra nedÀmet çekim deyü söylemedim. Ve bir daòı budur ki; pederin bir
kılıç ile bir çizme şu taş tekne içine koyub, baña şöyle tenbíh eyledi ki: ‘Eğer óamlin erkek
olursa büyüdükde yalñız başına bu taş tekne kapağı kaldurır ise taóúíú ol benim evlÀdımdur.
Kılıcı alup kuşansın ve çizmeyi ayağına giyüb ve gelüp beni Atina’da bulsun!’ deyü vaãiyyet
eyledi. Ben daòı òavf ederdim ki sığarın óÀlinde ol kapak olan taşı yalñız belki ref‘ edemezsin
ve baña Àr lÀóıú olur, òavfımdan te’òír ederim ki oàlum yekíd olsun ve eyüce úuvvet ve
úudret sÀóibi olsun, mezbÿr kapağı yalñız kaldursın deyu söylemedim bu kelimÀtı.”
SíseyÀ bu vechile istimÀ‘ eyledikde bí-pervÀ hemÀn el urup mezbÿr kapağı zÿr-i
evvelde ref‘ idüp, taş tekne içinde olan kılıcı alup ve kuşanub [14b] ve çizmeyi ayağına giyüb
hemÀn ol sÀ‘at vÀlidesinin elini bÿs idüp vedÀ‘ eyledi. VÀlidesi lüùfuyla, “Oğul sen pÀdişÀhõÀdesin saña tevÀbi‘ ve adamlar tÀ‘yín edeyim, kemÀ-yenbaài pederiñe vÀãıl olasın” diye
gö[nd]erdi. SíseyÀ aãlÀ iãàÀ etmeyub ferd-i vÀóid Atina’ya be-rÀh oldu. Gördesi tecÀvüz
eyledikde, .. tesmiye olunan Boğaz`da topuz isti‘mÀl eder Úorūnti nÀmında bir úuùùÀ‘-ı
ùaríkden ol maóalli żabù idüp, ebnÀ-yı sebílden mürÿr edenlerden karşı koyanları úatl idüp ve
teslím olanları soyub, ol vÀdide bir aóad yalñız mürÿr etmeğe iútidÀrı olmaz idi. SíseyÀ ol
maóal vardıkda, mezbÿr óarÀmí, SíseyÀ`yı görüb ra‘d-vÀrí bir na‘rÀ-yı mühíb urup, “Bre
838
839
840
Aegeus
Aethra
Theseus
217
yaban oğlanı! Bu vÀdiden benden iõinsiz kimse mürÿr etmediğin işidüp bilmez misin, ne yere
gidersin? Dur yerinde, óareket eyleme; yoòsa bu topuz ile başını pÀre pÀre ederim!” deyüp,
SíseyÀ üzerine óamle eyledi.
ÁsÀn vechile SíseyÀ óamle[y]i def‘ idüp, mezbÿr [15a] óarÀmiyle bir iki sÀ‘at ceng
idüp, Àòirü’l-emr SíseyÀ, fırãat-yÀb olup, mezbÿr òarÀmí[y]i úatl eyleyüb ve topuzun alup,
EúsÀmílÀ`ya geçdikde Boğaz içine girüb Boğaz içinde daòı Şebkí nÀmında bir òarÀmí-i
úuùùÀ‘-ı ùarík, tavaùùun idüp, ol vÀdide dÀ’imÀ çÀm ağaçlarını kesub ve yol üzerine doldurup
geçen yolcular yolu taùhír ile meşàÿl iken, mezbÿr òarÀmí gelüp yolcuları soyub ve úatl
ederdi. SíseyÀ daòı çÀm ağaçlarını yoldan kaldurırken, mezbÿr Şebkí-i òarÀmí, SíseyÀ üzerine
óamle eyledi. Ve SíseyÀ-yı merdÀne óamlesin def‘ idüp iki üç sÀ‘at ‘aôím ceng eylediler. Ve
yine àÀlib olup, mezbÿr Şebkí-i òarÀmí[y]i úatleyledi.
Ve mezbÿr òarÀmínin bir maóbÿbe kızı olup SíseyÀ kızı esír idüp ba‘dehÿ kız ile
me‘an Kasrÿmiye derbend içinde nÀm mevøi‘a geldikde, ol mevøi‘de bir yaban canavarı, ol
maóalli úabø idüp sÀ’ir óayvÀn ve insÀn, ol canavarıñ şerrinden mürÿr edemez idi. SíseyÀ
gördükde, üzerine óamle idüp dişleriyle çalmak murÀd eyledi. [15b] SíseyÀ, merd ü merdÀn
oldığı óasebiyle bir dÀf urup canavarıñ kellesini şöyle topuz ile urdığı başı ve beyni bi’l-cümle
dağıldı. Ve ba‘dehÿ yine kız ile me‘Àn Kacı İskilÀ nÀm mevøi‘a vardıkda, lisÀn-ı Rÿmíde
“Kacı İskilÀ” deyu “sarb nerd-bÀn”a tesmiye olunur; ol mevøi‘ daòı àÀyet sarb ve dar ve
kayalar birbiri üzerine, kayalar nerd-bÀn-ÀsÀ olmaàın , ol isimle tesmiye olındı. Ol maóalli
daòı İsúarona nÀmında úuùùÀ‘-ı ùaríúden bir òarÀmí żabù idüp, SíseyÀ`yı gördükde, üzerine
óamle eyledi. SíseyÀ daòı óamlesin ÀsÀn vechile def‘ idüp mezbÿr òarÀmí belinden kapub
deryÀya itiverdi. ZírÀ mezbÿr maóallin bir ùarafı deryÀ-yı ‘amíú ve bir ùarafı sarb kaya idi.
Mezbÿr, ùaraf-ı deryÀya düşüb àarú oldu. Ve ba‘dehÿ SíseyÀ, mezbÿre kız ile Çaratopirgöz
nÀm bir sarp maóalle daòı geldikde, Ànda daòı Arúadiyyala nÀm bir úuùùÀ‘-ı ùarík daòı olup,
Çarçona dimek ile meşhÿr müãÀdefe idüp anı daòı göz açturmayub [16a] úatl eyledi. Ba‘dehÿ
İstiya nÀm maóalle geldikde, Arúadiyyalı òarÀmíniñ bir ayakdaşına daòı müãÀdefe idüp, anıñ
ile daòı bir miúdÀr ceng, ana daòı amÀn vermeyub úatleyledi.
Ba‘dehÿ kız ile me‘an Atina`ya úaríb Dragoman nÀm maóalle gelüp yabandan
Atina`ya gelen adamları ùaríkde olan bekçiler alup, Dragoma mevøi‘ine getürüp ya‘ní
tercümÀn maóalline getürüp, tercümÀnlar yabancınıñ ismini ve diyÀrını ve maãlaóatını tekrar
ettürdüb, ve telòíã idüp, cevÀb gelmeyince, gelen adamlar Atina`ya vuãÿl mümkün olmaz idi.
SíseyÀ daòı ùarík bekçileri Dragoman maóalline getürüp taúrírin alurken, babasının Atina`da
olan zevcesinin aúrabÀsından ba‘żı Ànda mevcÿd bulunmağın ba‘de’t-taúrír SíseyÀ`ya bir
218
miúdÀr keyf gördürüb ve Atina PÀdişÀhınıñ oàlu olduğun iúrÀr ve .. varup, kız karındÀşına
òaber verdiği, “ÓÀlen eniştemin Mizistre`de óÀãıl olmuş yigirmi yaşında bir oàlu geldi.
ŞÀhımız iòtiyÀrdur, fevt olursa [16b] gelen oğlan şÀh olur” didi. “Bak seniñ evlÀdıñ yok ki
şÀh ola!” didikde, şÀh zevcesi olan Meziyyi841 bu òaberi istimÀ‘ eyledikde, nÀr-ı óased ciğerin
òÿn idüp fi’l-óÀl bir keyd óÀãıl idüp, güyÀ uyòudan bí-zÀr olmuş gibi gözlerin ovarak şÀha
gelüp, mekkÀresini-yeyi muãferratü’l-vech ve maòõÿne gördükde, sebeb-i óızÀne olduğun
su’Àl idüp mekkÀre bir sahte uyòuyu dÿğ ber-dÀhte ile bir düş òaber verdi ki: “Şimdi uyòuda
iken òaber verdiler ki, bu günde yarında size bir genç misÀfir gelir. Eğer söyletmeden
úatlederseñiz şerrinden òalÀã olursuñuz; ve illÀ söyletirseniz şÀhı úatlidüp bu diyÀra şÀh olsa
gerekdur.” MekkÀrede vÀúı‘ayı tamÀm. SíseyÀ daòı gelüp selÀmını verup, tapukladı. MekkÀre
SíseyÀ`yı gördükde, “Bak, vÀúı‘a ne ôuhÿr eyledi! HemÀn amÀn vermeden vÀúı‘anıñ
tenbíhine göre söyletmeden úatleyle!” dedi. ŞÀh daòı cevÀb verdi ki: “MisÀfire söyletmeden
úatl[17a] şÀhların şÀnına lÀyıú değildür” deyüp, mekkÀreye emr eyledi ki: “Bir zehirli şerbet
yapub, kebÀb ekl olunurken, zehirli şerbeti verelim, úatlolsun” deyüp, ta‘Àm vaúti olmaàla,
ta‘Àm ióøÀr olunup kebÀb geldikde, SíseyÀ belinden babasınıñ kılıcını çıkarup kebÀbı kesmeye
başladı. Babası kılıcı gördükde, bilüb, verdiğim şol kılıcı göreyim dedikde, kılıcı bir hoşca
bilüb, SíseyÀya su’Àl eyledi: “Bu kılıcı ne yerde buldun?” ,”Ol daòı vÀlideme tenbíh
buyurduğuñuz vaãiyyet üzere taş tekne üzerinde sengí taş kapağı yalñız başıma ref‘ idüp, bu
kılıcı alup ve kuşandım. Ve çizme[y]i alup giydim, òÀk-i pÀye mÀşiyen gelüp, rÿy-ı mÀlide
kıldım” dedikde, mekkÀrenin cÀn başına sıçrayub: “Hay, oğul babasın buldu!” deyüp hemÀn
yedinde olan mesmÿm şerbeti SíseyÀya sundu, babasının cÀn başına sıçrayub, mekkÀrenin
yedinden kÀse ile şerbeti kapub yabana attı. Oàlunu kucaklayub bağrına bastı.
‘Avrat, óasedinden bir Àòar keyd daòı mülÀóaôa idüp, “inne keydekünne ‘aôímun”
[17b] fehvÀsınca şÀhıñ karındÀşı oğulları, taóta cülÿs için müheyyÀ olmuşlardı. Ve ol mekkÀre
dÀ’imÀ def‘ ederdi; çünkü Àyine-yi ‘Àlem başka ãÿret gösterdi. MekkÀre şÀhıñ karındÀşı
oğullarına òafiyyeten òaber irsÀl idüp, “Ma‘lÿmları olsun Mizistre`den bir yaban oğlanı geldi.
‘Ben şÀhın oàluyum’ deyüb bir koca ma‘tuhde evlÀd delisi olmaàla oğlanı taãdíú idüp, evlÀd
ittiòÀõ etmek murÀd eder. HemÀn bundan aúdem sizi şÀh etmeğe ãa‘y eden umerÀdan ve
vükelÀdan ve a‘yÀnlardan kimler óÀøır ise cem‘ eyleyin. Ve gelüp dívÀn-óÀneye ol yaban
oğlanıñ vücÿdunu ref‘ eyleyin. Ve ol koca ma‘tuhu, evlÀd sevdÀsından òalÀã edesiz. Sizlere
óayftır. Taót, yaban heriflerine intiúÀl eylemesün!” deyüp, nÀr-ı fitneyi íúÀd eyledi. Anlar daòı
841
Medea
219
kendülere tÀbi‘ umerÀ ve vükelÀ ve a‘yÀn ve sÀ’ir eşòÀs-ı keåíre[y]i cem‘ idüp SíseyÀ`yı úatl
ve şÀhı taótından indürmek içün şÀhıñ sarÀyına ÀlÀt-ı óarble yürüdüler.
MekkÀreniñ murÀdı, SíseyÀ`yı heriflere úatletturup ve şÀh yine [18a] şÀhlıkda fevt
olunca, şÀhlık üzerine olsun mülÀóaôasıyla fitne[y]i íúÀd eyledi. Gördüğü encÀm-ı kÀr-ı Àhir
yüz bulacak hemÀn ‘acele ile gelüp, şÀha dedi ki: “Ne durursun karındÀşıñ oğulları umerÀyı ve
vükelÀyı ve a‘yÀn-ı vilÀyeti cem‘ idüp oàlunu ve seni úatliçün yürüdüler!” dedikde, şÀhın cÀn
başına sıçrayub cümle sarÀyda olup óarb ve êarba úÀdir olanları silÀólandurdı. Ve sarÀy
kapularına cümle çevirdü. Cenge müheyyÀ oldukda, anlar daòı ùaşradan gelüp kapıları kapalı
bulduklarında ve şÀh ùarafından, “Niçün cem‘ olındınuz ve niye geldiniz?” deyü su’Àl
olındıklarında, cevÀb verdiler ki: “Bir aãlı fer‘í yok. Yaban oğlanı gelmiş ve ‘ben şÀh
oàluyum’ deyü iddi‘À eylemiş, biz oğlanı şÀhdan ùaleb idüp cezÀsın görmek içün geldik”
dediklerinde, ne edeceğin bilmedi ve óayretde kaldı. HemÀn SíseyÀ gelüp, şÀhın yedin bÿs
idüp ve pederine niyÀz ile söyledi ki: “Bu gelenlere cevÀb ver ki, bunlar varup bir meydÀna
dursunlar. Ben daòı yalñız ol meydÀna [18b] varayım. Ve ol vaúitde baña àÀlib olurlar ise
benim cezÀmı versinler.” ŞÀh rÀøı olmayup cevÀb verdi ki: “Ben bu sinn-i viãÀle vÀãıl oldum
ve evlÀd nÀmında seni gördüm; Madem ki ben olmayınca seni ele vermem” dedi. Yine SíseyÀ
dedi ki: “Ey ata böyle şÀhlık olur mu ki, kendi ‘askerinden òavf idüp böyle kaçub durasın?” ,
“YÀ ne edelim, ey cÀnım oğul?! Çokluğa darı saçılmaz, suhÿlet ile belki def ‘ ederidin.”
SíseyÀ, babasına dedi ki: “Bunlara cevÀb ol yaban oğlanı dediğiñiz benim öz ve ãulb
oàlumdur. Yerlerinize ‘avdet idüp oturuñ ve illÀ cümleñiziñ cezÀsın şimdi veririm!” dedikde,
şÀh daòı muòÀlefet etmeyüb sarÀy kapusuna duranlara böyle cevÀb verdi. Ve önde cem‘
olanlar bu cevÀbı şÀhdan işittiklerinde bir ağızdan çağırup dediler ki: “Çünkü sen böyle
mechÿlu’n-nesebi temennÀ idüp ecnebiyi bize şÀh etmek dilersen, seni daòı şÀh istemeyiz”
deyüb, sarÀy kapusuna topuz urmağa başladılar. HemÀn SíseyÀ kılıcın kuşanub ve topuzu
eline alup ve şÀhıñ kalkanlarından bir kalkanı yüzüne çeküb [19a] ve kapuya bir tepme urup,
kapıya topuz uranlarıñ başlarına kapuyu yıkub ol demirden sengín kapunuñ altında kalup
helÀk oldılar. Ve SíseyÀ kapudan ùaşra olup ÀlÀt-ı óarble duranlarıñ yüzüne karşu mühíb-i ãadÀ
birle bir na‘ra urdu ki, mezbÿrlarıñ avazı gidüp serÀsime olup yedlerinden ÀlÀt-ı óarbleri
düşdü. Ve SíseyÀ önünden koyun kurttan kaçar gibi firÀr etmeğe başladılar. Ve şÀhıñ karındÀş
oğulları salùanat sevdÀsıyla bir miúdÀr karşu duralım sandılar. SíseyÀ bilmezlik ile aãlÀ göz
açturmayub bir topuz ile ikisini daòı helÀk eyledi. Tecemmu‘ edenler mezbÿrlarıñ helÀkını
göricek, cümlesi firÀr idüp karşu durur kimesne kalmadı.
Ba‘dehÿ bir miúdÀr SíseyÀ kimesne gelur deyu ceng ederken, şÀh yetüşüb oàlunu
bağrına basdı ve “Óamd olsun bÀrí-i te‘ÀlÀ’ya ki ve óamd olsun seniñ gibi bahÀdur evlÀd baña
220
iósÀn eyledi; ve arslanım saña karşu gelür àayrı yokdur.” Ve SíseyÀ`yı içerü sarÀya getürüp ve
eåvÀb değişdürüb, kan olan eåvÀbın çıkardı [19b] ve herkesin aúrabÀsına emr olındı ki;
maútÿllerini ref‘ ve defn eylesinler. Ve şÀhın karındÀşı oğullarını daòı kaldurup defn ve
salùanat kavgasından emín oldılar. Ve bu müfsídeye bÀ‘iå olan mekkÀrenin daòı aóvÀline şÀh,
ıùùılÀ‘ óÀãıl ettükde vücÿde-i mekr-i Àlÿdini ãafóa-yı ‘Àlemden ref‘ eyledi. Ve şÀh dívÀn idüp
cümle umerÀ ve vükelÀ ve a‘yÀn ve cümle vaø‘ ve ref‘ cem‘ olup, şÀhdan yine tecdíd-i bey‘at
eylediler. Ve SíseyÀ şÀhlığı úabÿl etmeyüb şehõÀdelik merkezinde úarÀr eyledi.
Ve umerÀdan adamlar ta‘yín olunup şehõÀdeniñ Atina`ya gelirken derbentlerde
úatleylediği òarÀmíleriñ mÀllarını meàaralardan cem‘ idüp Atina`ya getürdüler. Ve ‘arabalar
ve çadurlar müsinn ve iòtiyÀr beyler vÀfir ‘asker birle ta‘yín olunup, şehõÀdeniñ vÀlidesini
‘aôímu’l-emr ve şenklerle alup getirdiler, günden güne şehõÀdenin bahÀdurlıkları ôuhÿr eder
idi. Ve eùrÀf beylerine ve şÀhlarına şehõÀdeniñ Mora derinlerinde olan òarÀmíler şerlerinden
yalñız başına taùhír ettiğini [20a] zírÀ mezbÿr òarÀmíleriñ üzerlerine eùrÀf beylerinden ve
şÀhlarından ‘asker ta‘yín olunur idi. Ancak mezbÿrlar àÀyet sarb maóallerde taóaããun
ettikleriyçün ta‘yín olunan ‘asker ôafer bulmaz idi. BÀ-òuãÿã ol òınzır bir aóad gözetmeğe
úÀdur değil idi; şehõÀde ise yalñız cümle ol òarÀmíleri ve òınzırı helÀk idüp öldürdüğün taùhír
eylediğinden eùrÀf beyleri ve şÀhları ‘aôím muóabbet eylediler ve muòÀlif olan şÀhların
úulÿblerine òavf ve ru‘b düşdü. Ve fikr-i fÀsidelerin ref‘ idüp ‘adÀveti muóabbete tebdíl
eylediler. Ve şehõÀdeyi úaríb olan da‘vet idüp ve gelüp tapu kılub her biri ‘aôím øiyÀ[fet]
eylediler.
Ve sürÿr u òubÿr ile evúÀt-güzÀr iken Girít şÀhına oğlanlar ve kızlar verilecek vaúit
gelmekle Girít şÀhı ùarafından sefíne gelüp içinde Girít umerÀsından biri gelüp yedi oğlanı ve
yedi kızı ùaleb eyledi. Ve SíseyÀ bu aóvÀle vÀúıf oldukda, pederine niyÀz eyledi: “Beni daòı ol
vereceğin yedi oğlandan ‘add idüp veresün. Me’mÿldür ki, ÀsÀnlık ile bu beliyye[y]i
diyÀrımızdan def‘ ve ref‘ edeyim” dedikde, şÀhın [20b] ‘aúlı başından gidüp, “Ey benim
cÀnım! Bu nasıl òaberdir ki söylersin, seniñ uğruna nice biñ oğlan ve kız fedÀ olsun! Ben seni
gökde ararken yerde óÀøır buldum. Bir daòı elimden uçurmak mümkün müdür? Girít
cezíredür, firÀr mümkün değildür. BÀ òusÿs şÀhıñ oğul óarÀreti óÀlÀ derÿnunda bÀkídir. Sen
benim oàlum olduğun kendüye ma‘lÿm oldukda aãlÀ emÀn vermeyüb seni úatleder. Ve ben
seni .. ile óÀlÀ görür oldum. Ben seniñ firÀúına ùÀúat getüremem. HemÀn beni sever dilerseñ
gel bu sevdÀdan fÀrià ol; zírÀ beni helÀk edersiñ!” böyle óüzün ve meróameti mÿris kelÀmlar
söyleyegördü, aãlÀ müfíd olmadı. HemÀn şehõÀde kalkub pederiniñ yedini taúbíl eyledi ve bu
seferden mÀni‘ olmasın deyu ‘aôím niyÀzlar idüp òÀk-i pÀyine yüz sürdü. “Benim SulùÀnım,
bu òusÿsda oàluñuza iõin veresiz; zírÀ lÀyıú-ı devlet değildür ki, sulùÀnımın zamÀn-ı
221
devletlerinde bu diyÀrda böyle biê‘at olup ve sulùÀnımdan soñra evlÀd-ı fuúarÀya böyle óayf
ve ôulm bÀúí kala! LÀyıú-ı devlet olan şÀhlarınıñ nÀmıdur. Ve síret-i óasene [21a] ve íåÀr-ı
müstaósene terk eyleye; yoòsa el-‘iyÀzu billÀhi te‘ÀlÀ dokuz senede bir nÀ-óaú yere on dö(r)t
evlÀd-ı fuúarÀyı ôulm ve úahr birle anası ve babası ve òısm ve aúrabÀsı yedlerinden cebren ve
úahren evlÀdlarını alup ve esír ettirmek, mülÀóaôa buyuruñ ne kadar beher-nÀmlıkdur! Böyle
beher-nÀmlık ile sağ olmakdan ölmek daòı yeğdür! Ol bed‘iyyeti def‘ ve ref‘ etmek ehven ve
münÀsibdir. Öyle oldukda inşÀ’allahu te‘ÀlÀ sulùÀnımıñ òayr du‘Àsı berekÀtiyle bu óaúír nÀçiz
mÿr-ÀsÀ oàluñuz me’mÿl ederim ki, bu bed‘iyyeti def‘ ve ref‘ eder. HemÀn SulùÀnım bizi òayr
du‘Àdan ferÀmuş buyurmayasız!” deyüb ve yine şÀhıñ òÀk-i pÀyine rÿy-ı mÀlíde kılub iõin
ùaleb eyledi. Bi’ø-øarÿre pederi rÀøı olup iõin verdi.
Ve tebdíl olup ol gidecek yedi oğlÀnın birisi daòı ol oldu. Ve mezbÿr yedi oğlan, yedi
kızı götürmeğe Atina umerÀsından bir bey ta‘yín olındı. Ve mu‘ayyen sefíneye Atina
ùarafından vaø‘ olındı. Ve şÀh sefíne kapudÀnını çağırdub sipÀriş eyledi ki: “ ‘Avdet idüp
Atina úal‘ası [21b] göründükde, oàlum sıhhatte olup yine me‘an ‘avdet ederse beyÀø yelken
kullanasın; ve eğer sağ olmayup helÀk olursa siyÀh yelken kullanasın!” Ve bir rivÀyette bir
beyÀø ve bir siyÀh yelken kapudana verdi. Ve mír-i mezbÿr ile kapudÀn oğlanları ve kızları
alup ‘aôm-i cezíre-yi Girít eylediler. Ve bir gün Girít`e vÀãıl olup mezbÿr oğlanları ve kızları
alay ile şÀh-ı Girít`e götürüb teslím eylediler.
De’b-i úadímí üzere mezbÿr oğlan ve kızları zír-i zemíne óaps idüp ve oàlunun
Atina`da helÀk olduğu gün geldikde cümle ‘askerin cem‘ idüp ve ol gün nevrÿz idüp ve
güleşciler meydÀna òalúı sürüb ve münÀdíler nidÀ idüp cümle pehlüvÀnlar óÀøır olup ve şÀh
daòı Atina`dan gelen oğlanları ve kızları ióøÀr idüp ve iki ùarafdan güleşciler birer birer
meydÀna çıkub güleşdiler. Ancak cümleye baş pehlivÀn olan Mantuyu842 cümlesine àÀlib olup
ve àÀlib oldukça oğlanlardan ve kızlardan birer dÀne baş pehlivÀna şÀh verir idi. Nevbet Atina
[22a] şÀhı oàlu SíseyÀ`ya geldikde zindÀn müvekkilleri SíseyÀ`ya dediler ki: “Kalk baş
pehlivÀnıñ òÀk-i pÀyine yüz sür!” SíseyÀ cevÀb verdi ki: “Bana daòı àalebe ederse ol vaút
kulluğun úabÿl ederim” dedi. ŞÀha ‘arż olındıkda SíseyÀ`ya dedi ki: “Bre oğlan kanıña mı
susadın! Baş pehlivÀn adam ejdarhasıdur, görmez misin? Sus, seni işitmesin, seni helÀk eder!”
SíseyÀ cevÀb verdi ki: “ŞÀhım emreyle güleşeyim, eğer baña àÀlib olur ise kanım úatlim óelal
olsun” dedi. ŞÀh men‘ ettikçe SíseyÀ güleşe muãarrir oldu. Áòir baş pehlivÀn àaøaba gelüp ve
şÀh önünde yer öpüp SíseyÀ ile güleşe iõin ùaleb eyledi. “Ve eğer ol yaban oğlanına àÀlib olur
isem helÀk ederim!” deyu da‘vÀ eyledi. Ve şÀh ùarafından SíseyÀ`ya daòı emr olındı ve
842
Minotaur
222
“GünÀhıñ boynuna olsun, pehlivÀn saña àÀlib olur ise, seni helÀk eder” dediler. SíseyÀ ‘aôím
sürÿr birle bí-pervÀ meydÀna çıkıp PehlivÀn ile güleşe müdÀvemet idüp bir miúdÀr elleşdikten
soñra SíseyÀ kemerini pehlivÀna teslím eyledi.
[22b]
“Hey bak yaban oğlanına baña
pehlüvÀnlık ve merdlik ‘arø eder, òoş günÀhıñ boynuna!” deyüp ve var úuvveti bÀzÿya
götürüb, SíseyÀ`yı kaldurup yere urmak için şöyle zor eyledi ki eğerçi bir yerlü kayÀya eylese
yerinden ref‘ idüp yabana atmış idi. VelÀkin SíseyÀ`yı aãlÀ yerinden bir karış kaldurmağa
úÀdir olmadı. Ba‘dehÿ àaøaba gelüp bir iki üç def‘a şöyle zor eyledi ki ağzından ve
burnundan kanlar revÀn oldu. BilÀòare ref‘a úÀdir olmayup SíseyÀ`nıñ kemerini boş bırakdı.
Ve òÀr òÀr solumaya başladı. Ve ba‘dehÿ SíseyÀ`ya daòı nevbet gelüp, meõkÿr pehlivÀnıñ
kemerine dest urup zÿr-i evvelde ol ‘aôím kadd u úāmet ve çene ãÀóibi olan pehlivÀnı
kaldurup başı üzerine devr idüp, ba‘dehÿ ber-hevÀ bi’l-cümle meydÀnı devr idüp yerlü kaya
üzerine şöyle çarpdı ki, bedeni bi’l-cümle òurd òÀş oldu.
Ve óÀøır olan bení Àdem SíseyÀ`nıñ bu mertebe úuvvet ve úudretine cümlesi taósín ve
Àferin eylediler. Ve şÀh daòı SíseyÀ`nıñ bu mertebe bahÀdurlığın müşÀhede eyledikde, ‘aôím
ta‘accüb idüp, SíseyÀ daòı gelüp şÀh önünde zemín bÿs idüp ma‘õÿrÀne [23a] “ŞÀhım fırãatyÀb olsa bu kulunu pehlivÀn úatleder idi. Ancak òuda-yı müte‘Àl óaøretleri bu kuluna fırãat
iósÀn idüp üzerimizden ol òun-ríz-i bí-raómi def‘ ve ref‘ eyledi”.
Ve şÀh SíseyÀ`ya kaftÀn giydürdi. Ve ‘aôím sürÿr ile iósÀnlar eyledi. Ve “Seniñ
bahÀdurlığın evlÀd-ı fuúarÀda bulunmaz ve sende bir sır vardur, elbette bize beyÀn eyle!”
deyü ibrÀm eyledi. Ve ol bir esír oğlanlardan ve kızlardan SíseyÀ`yı su’Àl eyledikde mezbÿrlar
daòı bi’ø-øarÿre Atina şÀhınıñ oàlu olduğun iúrÀr eylediler. Ve şÀhın ma‘lÿmu oldukda kalkub
SíseyÀ`nıñ dídelerini bÿs idüp ve SíseyÀ`ya ‘aôím du‘Àlar idüp ve “Ol òÿn-ríz-i bí-raómi
úatleylediğinden daòı ‘aôím óaôô eyledim. ZírÀ ben daòı ol mel‘ÿndan bí-óuøÿr idim; zírÀ ol
òÿní baña bile fırãat bulsa, úatleder idi. ElóamdulillÀh ki seniñ gibi şÀhbaz-ı şehõÀdeye àazÀsı
müyesser oldu. Şerr-i şurÿrundan bizi ve sÀ’ir maòlÿku òalÀã eylediñ. HemÀn dile benden ne
dilersen, ‘indimde cümle mes’ÿlín úabÿldür!” dedikde, SíseyÀ dest bÿs idüp “Bizim
diyÀrımızda her dokuz senede aòõ olunan yedi oğlan ve yedi kız vergisini beldemiz üzerinden
def‘ ve ref‘ eyleyesiz!” dedikde, [23b] şÀh dileğini úabÿl idüp, temessük verdi ki, min-ba‘d
Girít ùarafından ol oğlanları ve kızları ùaleb eylemesünler, deyu ve ne kadar Atina`dan alınmış
oğlanlar ve kızlar esír bulundu ise cümlesin şÀh, ÀzÀd idüp SíseyÀ`ya híbe eyledi. Ve
SíseyÀ`ya başka konak ta‘yín ve her dÀ’im meclisine da‘vet ve ikrÀm eder idi. Bínişlerine
me‘an istisóÀb idüp SíseyÀ`nıñ úuvvetine ve merdÀne óareketlerine ‘aôím taósín ve Àferinler
eder idi.
223
Ve şÀhın bir yetişmiş kızı olup SíseyÀ`ya tezvíc idüp damad edindi. Ve erkek evlÀdı
olmadığından Girít şÀhlığını daòı teklíf eyledi. SíseyÀ úabÿl eylemedi; ve ‘öõr eyledi ki: “ÓÀlÀ
Atina şÀhı olan pederim àÀyet pírdir ve daòı pederim beni bir òoşca görüb ve sevinib
kovanmadı. Şimdilik lüùf u mürüvvet idüp bu oàluñuza iõin iósÀn eğleyiñiz varup ol iòtiyÀr
pederimin òayr du‘Àsın alayım ve yine bu ùarafa gelirim.” deyu ‘aôím niyÀz idüp ol daòı bi’øøarÿre iõin verdi. Ve SíseyÀ ‘aôím tuófe ve hedÀyÀ görüb ve sefíneler ióøÀr olunup gitmek
muãammem olındıkda, Girít şÀhınıñ zevce-i menkÿóası şehõÀdeden ayrılmayub, SíseyÀ ile
me‘an
[24a]
Atina[ya] gitmek murÀd eyledikde Girít şÀhı, bi’ø-øarÿre kızı içün daòı
tedÀrikler görüb zevciyle me‘an irsÀl eyledi.
Ve muvÀfıú eyyÀmla iki günde Atina kıyılarına vuãÿl buldular. Sefíne re’íslerine
muúaddemÀ Atina şÀhı sipÀriş eylemiş idi ki; beyÀø yelken ile Atina limanına girsinler, eğer
şehõÀde selÀmet bulup sıhhat ile Atinaya ‘avdet eder ise. Re’ísler ol sipÀrişi unudub kirli gök
yelkenler ile limana teveccüh eylediler. VelÀkin müjde için muúaddem sefíne göndermediler.
Ve Atina şÀhı, Atina úal‘ası derÿnunda olan sarÀyı úurbunda yigirmi otuz ‘arş kad çeker bir
mu‘aôôam kule-yi cihÀnnümÀsı olup, oàlu Girít`e gideli dürbín yedinde Girít engíninden
gözün ayurmayub dÿrbín ile bakardı. Gördü ki, Girít ùarafından birkaç pÀre yelken ôuhÿr
eyledi. Ol sÀ‘at, “DeryÀ ‘ilminde mahÀreti olan re’ísleri ióøÀr dürbínler ile gelen sefíneler
kimlerdür” deyu “Bana òaber verin!” deyu emr eyledi. Re’ísler daòı dürbín ile gördüler ki,
Atina`dan Girít`e giden sefíneler ile [24b] me‘an daòı birkaç sefíne vardur, deyu ãaóíó òaber
verdiler. ŞÀh emr eyledi ki: “Atina sefíneleri kimlerdir? baña gösterin!” dedikde, re’ísler daòı
Atina sefínelerini şÀha bir bir gösterdiler. ŞÀh daòı bir miúdÀr müteraúúıb olduğı Atina
sefíneleri sipÀriş üzere gök yelkenleri indürüb, beyÀø yelken korlar, müteraúúıb olup, gördü
ki; sefíneler beyÀø yelken göstermeyüb bi’l-cümle gök ve siyÀh yelkenler ile limana dÀòil
olunca, hemÀn Àh idüp, “Benim oàlum Girít`de helÀk olmuşdur!” deyu kimseye nuùú etmeden
şÀh, ol balÀ-bülend olan kuleden kendüyi aşağıya atub helÀk oldu.
VüzerÀ ve vükelÀsı cem‘ olup meyyitin defn eyledikden soñra müjdeciler gelüp,
şehõÀdenin sıhhat ve selÀmetin ve limana duòÿlunu ve Atina ahÀlísi üzerinden dokuz senede
bir yedi oğlan ve yedi kız Girít şÀhına verdikleri beliyyenin ref‘ olunup ve muúaddemÀ
verdikleri oğlan ve kızların gerü verdiklerini ve muúaddemÀ vermek içün verilen ‘ahidnÀmeler şaúú olup ba‘de’l-yevm vermemek üzere tecdíd-i ‘ahid-nÀme ve temessük [25a]
alındığın ve şehõÀde Girít şÀhınıñ dÀmÀdı olduğun bu meserret òaberleriñ cümlesini müjdeci
òaber verdikde, helÀk olan şÀhıñ óaúúında olan óüzn ve yasları sürÿra tebdíl oldu. Ve Àníde
alaylar tertíb olunup vüzerÀ ve vükelÀ bi’l-cümle limana gidüp şehõÀdeniñ òÀk-i pÀyine yüz
sürdükde, pederini su’Àl eyledi. EdebÀne ve óakímÀne ve ‘ÀrifÀne cevÀb ile helÀk olduğunu
224
òaber verdiklerinde, şehõÀde daòı ‘aôímu’l-medÀr olup óüzn ve elem birle Atina`ya duòÿl
idüp, şenkler ve alaylar ile girmedi.
Ve kırk gün babası yasın ve mÀtemin tuttukdan soñra vüzerÀ ve vükelÀsı cem‘ olup
şehõÀdeye gelüp dediler ki: “Meróÿm pederin ka‘rín-i zemínde yattıkca sen şehõÀdemiz, bize
devlet ve sa‘Àdet ile şÀh ol!” dediler. Ve erbÀb-ı dívÀn ve ‘askerí ùÀ’ifesi cem‘ olup bi’l-cümle
SíseyÀ’dan bey‘at idüp ve taòta çıkarup şÀhlığa úabÿl eylediler. Ve ba‘dehÿ Atina şÀhı taót-ı
yedinde olan diyÀrlara fermÀnlar irsÀl idüp herbir diyÀrıñ ‘uôemÀsı òaber olındıkda, ‘aôím
tuófe [25b] ve hedÀyÀlar ile gelüp mübÀrek-bÀd idüp herkes yine mansÿbunda kalup cümleye
muúarrer òil‘atleri giydirilüb iósÀn olındı. Ve her dokuz senede Girít`e verilen dokuz oğlan
ve kız beliyyesi ref‘ olduğu şükrÀnesine cemí‘-i Atina memÀlikine kırk gün ve kırk gece
donanma fermÀn idüp eylediler. Ve şÀd u şenkler ile Girít`den şehõÀdeyi getüren sefíne[y]i
kaldurup tersòÀneye çeküb ve üzerine õí-úıymet bürde çekdiler. Ve min-ba‘d kimse süvÀr
olmasun deyu ta‘ôímler eylediler.
Ve SíseyÀ şÀhlığına gelince Atina úal‘ası ve varoşu ãaàír olup SíseyÀ emr eyledi:
“Ekåer-i úaãabÀt a‘yÀn ve ‘uôemÀsı Atina varoşuna gelüp her biri birer sarÀy binÀ eylesünler!”
Ve kendü daòı ‘aôímu’ş-şÀn şÀhlara taúlíd idüp bir ‘aôím mükellef sarÀy binÀ eyledi ki dívÀnóÀne ve erbÀb-ı dívÀn-óÀneler mücedded iódÀå idüp bí-miål oldu. Ve mu‘ayyen êarb-óÀne
ícÀd idüp kendü nÀmına sikkeler kesdürüb ve mülÿk-ı ‘uômÀya iútiøÀ eden cemí‘u’l-ÀlÀti’lóarbi ve ÀlÀt-ı dívÀní-i vÀlÀ-yı zínetlerini ve sÀ’ir levÀzımı bi’l-cümle tekmíl eyledi. [26a] Ve
nice úaãabÀt bir yere cem‘ olmadığından Atina`nıñ müfred olan ismini cem‘ eylediler de
“Atinası” tesmiye eylediler. ZírÀ elfÀ-ı Rÿmí`de “sín” edÀt-ı cem‘dir.
Ve SíseyÀ`nıñ ôuhÿrundan muúaddem İstefe beyi olan Iraúlı843 nÀm bey, ‘aôím yararlık
ve bahÀdurlık ile meşhÿr; zírÀ meõkÿr İstefe beyi Iraúlı ekåer rup‘-ı meskÿnu yararlık ve
bahÀdurlık ile geşt idüp meşhÿr-ı ÀfÀú idi. Hatta mezbÿr Iraúlı, SíseyÀ`nıñ aúrabÀsından òÀlesi
oàlu idi. VelÀkin SíseyÀ ôuhÿr edeli mezbÿr Iraúlı`nıñ bahÀdurlıkları güm oldu, SíseyÀ`nıñ
bahÀdurlığı dillerde destÀn oldu. EùrÀf ve eknÀf şÀhları SíseyÀ`dan òavf idüp ‘ubÿddiyyet ‘arø
ederlerdi. Ve mezbÿr SíseyÀ daòı durmayub her gün birer bahÀdurlık iôhÀr eder idi.
Ve ùÿfÀn-ı Nuh (‘aleyhisselam)`dan soñra Tatar ve Gürcü sınırları nihÀyet bulduğı
Ejderòan Deñizi semtinde Dağıstan`da bir ùÀ’ife iskÀn olunup ol Dağıstan`da zirÀ‘at ‘ameli
mümkün olmadığı ecilden üç dört konak ba‘íd olan sehl yerlerde ol úavmiñ ricÀli bi’l-cümle
inüb zirÀ‘at ‘amelín iş‘Àrlar idi. Ve eùrÀfda olan Tatar ve Gürcü eşkiyÀsı, meõkÿr ùÀ’ifenin
843
Heracles
225
[26b] nisvÀnı ricÀllerinden òÀlídür, deyu gelüp, mezbÿr ùÀ’ifeniñ nisvÀnına dest-rÀzlık etmek
murÀd ederler idi. Ve ol nisvÀn ùÀ’ifesi ‘Àcize olup ve bir yere cem‘ olup her dÀ’im müdÀfa‘a
ile meşàÿl olurlar idi.
Ve müdÀfa‘a giderek muúÀteleye tebdíl olup nisvÀn ùÀ’ifesi giderek ÀlÀt-ı muúÀtele
taóãíl idüp ve giderek nisvÀn-ı meõkÿrelere ‘aôím cesÀretler óÀãıl eylediler ve Tatar ve Gürcü
ùÀ’ifesiyle muúÀtele idüp, àalebe eylediklerine úanÀ‘at etmeyüb Tatar ve Gürcü sınırları
dÀòiline girüb àÀret etmeye başladılar. Ve úaríblerinde olan Tatar ve Gürcü ùÀ’ifesi bi’ø-øarÿre
ol yurtları terk idüp ba‘íd yerlere sÀkin olmağa başladılar. Ve giderek ol nisvÀn ùÀ’ifesi yürük
atlar peydÀ idüp fenn-i fÀrislik ve silaóşörlük, her birini kemÀl ile taóãíl eyledi ve ne aãıl
semte zer u zíver òaber alsalar, ol semte varup àÀrÀt iderler idi. Ve mezbÿre nisvÀnıñ
memeleri àÀyet ile kebír olup óín-i muúÀtele ve muóÀrebede sÀğ memeleri kılıç salmağa ve
mızrak oynatmağa vaóşete mÀni‘ olurdu ve zaómet verir idi. Bi’ø-øarÿre küçük kızlarıñ [27a]
memelerini ãıàÀr óÀlinde dağlayub büyütmezlerdi.
Ve giderek nisvÀn ùÀ’ifesi erlerine àalebe idüp óükm nisvÀna intiúÀl idüp, erleri
maókÿm olmuş idi. Ve nisvÀn ùÀ’ifesi beynlerinde birini bey naãb idüp ãulb u siyÀ’et ve iútiøÀ
eden óudÿd ve óükm ve óükÿmÀt ve sÀ’ir taãarrufÀtı bi’l-cümle naãb olunan bey icrÀ idüp ve
Atina şÀhı SíseyÀ`nıñ óüsn ve cemÀli ve cür’et ve cesÀreti ve Atina`nıñ ricÀl ve nisvÀnı elbisei fÀòire ile mülebbes ve gümüş ve altÿn ve inci ve cevÀhir ile müzeyyen ve sÀ’ir ricÀl daòı
óüsn-i bahÀdurlık ve nisvÀn daòı bi’l-cümle óüsnü ve leùÀfet ile meşhÿre olduklarından
mezbÿre ùÀ’ife-i nisvÀn Atina ziyÀretine ‘aôím raàbet eylediler.
Ve böyle taãavvur eylediler ki: “Eğer Atina ricÀlini gözümüze kestirir isek ricÀlini esír
ederiz ve nisvÀnınıñ zer u zíverini aòõ ederiz. Ve eğer ‘aôímet ve cesÀretleri bize ru‘b ve òavf
eder ise istímÀn ve mülÀyemet ile ol diyÀra sükÿn içün ‘arãa ùaleb edelim. Ve giderek iòtilÀù
óÀãıl ederiz hiç olmaz ise istisóÀb eylediğimiz maóbÿbe kızları anlarıñ maóbÿb ve cerí ve
cesÿrlarına cimÀ‘ [27b] ettürdüb óamlleri ôÀhir oldukda yine diyÀrımıza ‘avdet ederiz. YÀ
budur ki zer u zíver ile ol cerí ve cesÿr esírlere mÀlik oluruz; yÀòÿd mülÀyemet ve iòtilÀùtan
nÀşí ôuhÿr ider ise iden óamllerden cerí ve cesÿr evlÀdlara mÀlik oluruz, ‘alÀ-keyl-i taúdírin
fÀ’ideden òÀlí olmayız.
İçlerinde cür’et ve cesÀret ve óüsn ü leùÀfet ile mümtÀz olanları intiòÀb idüp ve àÀyet
óüsn-i bahÀ ile mümtÀz ve ser-firÀz olan iki kızı Atina`ya gidecek ‘askerlerine serdÀr ta‘yín
eylediler. Ve böyle naúl ederler ki: “Bu iki serdÀr olan kızlardan birini Atina şÀhı olan
SíseyÀya cimÀ‘ ettürürüz.” deyüp ve “Birini daòı İstefe şÀhı olan Iraúlı`ya cimÀ‘ ettirirüz”.
226
Ve kemÀl birle Atina seferiyçün tedÀrikler görüb kulaguzlar peydÀ idüp böyle sefer-i
ba‘íd olan Atina`ya ‘aôímet eylediler. ZírÀ ol nisvÀn ùÀ’ifesiniñ ‘ÀdÀt-ı úÀnunları bu idi ki; her
kangi diyÀrda cerí ve cesÿr ve óüsn-i leùÀfet ile mevãÿf olan ricÀli istimÀ‘ eylediklerinde yÀ
fahren veyÀhÿd lüùfen ol diyÀrıñ ricÀline [28a] mÀlik olup ãayd etmek içün pÀy-ı veche-gÀn ol
diyÀra sefer iderler idi. Ve ol diyÀrıñ ricÀline mÀlik olurlar idi ve içlerinde óüsnen velvele-i
ÀrÀ olan ‘avratları pÀy-ı veche-gÀn ol ricÀle cimÀ‘ ettirirlerdi. Ve ol ricÀliñ nesline mÀlik
olsunlar deyu her dÀ’im bu kÀrdan òÀlí olmazlar idi. Ve Atina seferi bu taãavvur ile óÀãıl
olmuşdur ve sefer ba‘íddir demeyub bu arzÿ ile rÿz u şeb şod raól idüp Moskov diyÀr-ı
derÿnundan ve Leh ve Kazak ve Rÿmili derÿnundan mürÿr idüp bir gün Atina`ya vÀãıl
oldılar. Ve Atina`nıñ cevÀnib-i erba‘ası derbend olup gereği gibi maófÿô olmaàla ve mezbÿre
‘avratlar Livadiye ve İstefe úaríblerine vuãÿl buldukda ol maóal Atina`ya tÀbi‘ olmaàla
Atina`ya menzil ile iòbÀr eylediler Atina şÀhı SíseyÀ daòı derbend muóabbetsıyçün
derbendlere ‘asker irsÀl eyledi. Ve nisvÀn-ı ùÀ’ife daòı derbende vuãÿl bulduklarında hemÀn
mürÿr etmek murÀd eylediler. Ve derbende muhÀfıô olan ‘asker mÀni‘ olup karşu durdular.
NisvÀn ùÀ’ifesi daòı rıfúla mürÿr murÀd eylediler, müyesser olmadı. BilÀòare derbendde olan
‘askeri, nisvÀn ùÀ’ifesi gözlerine kestirüb ve piyÀde olup [28b] birkaç biñ ‘avrat derbend
eùrÀfına dağılub ve karşu gelenlere ‘avratlar emÀn vermeyub úatleylediler. Ve beş biñ miúdÀrı
‘avrat, derbendi fetó idüp żabù eylediler. Ve eùrÀf karaları fi’l-óÀl ‘avratlar àÀret idüp, derbend
úal‘asına ‘aôím õaòíre yığdılar. Ve SíseyÀ`ya feryÀdcılar varup ‘avratlardan ‘aôím şikÀyetler
eylediler. Ol daòı müretteb ‘asker ile ‘avratlar üzerine sefer eyledi.
Ve meõkÿre ‘avratlar ile SíseyÀ bir sene kÀmil óarb u úıtÀl eyledi. Ve ol ‘avratlar
kemÀn ‘ilminde àÀyet mÀhirler idi ve eyü at kullanırlardı. Rÿm òalúı ise at ve kemÀn
isti‘mÀline daòı me’lÿf değiller idi. Ve aãlÀ Rÿm ‘askerinde ata binmek ve kemÀn kullanmak
daòı kimesne bilmez idi; ol ecilden Atina bahÀdurlarını ve SíseyÀ`yı tír u kemÀn ile mecrÿó
ederlerdi. Ve ekåeriyÀ meydÀn ‘avratlara intiúÀl ederdi. Ve Atina şÀhı àÀlib olup úal‘a altına
geldikçe ‘avratlar úal‘a derÿrundan tír-i bÀrÀn ile şÀhı mecrÿó idüp ‘avdet ederlerdi. Giderek
‘avratlarıñ tírleri azaldı ve õaòíreleri òusÿsunda ‘aôím åıúlet çekerler idi. Ve anları kemÀl ile
yem yemedikleri [29a] ecilden zebÿn oldu. Bir müddet eùrÀf kÀrÀları àÀrÀt edüp ta‘ayyüş
eylediler. KarÀlar ahÀlísi maøarratlarından eùrÀfda olan kılÀ‘a ve úaãabÀta hicret eylediler.
KarÀlar òarÀb olıcak àÀretde aòõ ve esír eyledikleri adamları cevr ve eõiyyet ile úaãabÀtta olan
õí-úudret adamları òaber alırlar idi. Ve kulaguz ile şeb-òÿn edüp ol õí-úudretleri esír ederler
idi. Ve ba‘de iótiyÀcları miúdÀrı zehÀir ile istibdÀl ederler idi. Bir müddet daòı bu vechile
ta‘ayyüş eylediler.
227
Ancak okları azalup ve kemÀnları şikeste olup onlar daòı zebÿn ve atlarının ekåer
açlıkdan helÀk olmaàla ve ‘avratlardan daòı muóarebelerde maútÿl ve esír olmaàla ‘avratlara
aôím øa‘f óÀãıl olup bi’ø-øarÿre istímÀn ile SeseyÀ`nıñ kulluğun úabÿl eylediler. Ve SíseyÀ
mezbÿreleri cümle esír edüp ümerÀ ve vükelÀlarına taúsím eyledi. Ve ‘avratlar serdÀr olan iki
kızın birinin ismi Ípūltí844 ve birinin ismi MitÀlatí derlerdi. Ípūltí`yi Atina şÀhı kendüye
alıkoyub [29b] ve MitÀlatí`yi ‘ammisi oàlu İstefe şÀhı olan Iraúlí`ye845 ihdÀ eyledi. Ve bir
miúdÀr müsin olan ‘avratları isti‘mÀle imkÀnı olmadığı ecilden ve ÀdÀb erkÀn ta‘lími daòı
mezbÿrelere müte‘assir olmamağla bi’ø-øarÿre ol ‘avratları ÀzÀd edüp diyÀrlarına ‘avdet
etdirdiler. Ve mezbÿr ‘avratlarıñ aãlı beş biñ olup; ancak nıãfı, diyÀrlarına ‘avdet etmiştir. Ve
mezbÿre ‘avratlar diyÀrlarından Atina’ya aôímetlerinde ettikleri tefe’ül-i rÿó bulup, ol iki
kızlar ki cümleye serdÀrlar idi. Birinci Atina şÀhına ve birinci İstefe şÀhına cimÀ‘ ettirmek
müyesser oldu. VelÀkin dil-òÀhları olan gebelik ile ‘avdet muúadder olmadı. Ve Atina ve
İstefe şÀhlarından ol kızlar óÀmile kalup cerí ve cesÿr ve óüsn-i melÀhat ãÀóibi evlÀdlar óÀãıl
eylediler. Ve Atina’da .. kalup kendüler ile cimÀ‘ olındığunda aôím cerí ve cesÿr evlÀdlar óÀãıl
olup ol ‘Irak’ın evlÀdı Atina muóarebelerinden aôím medÀr olmuşdur.
Ve mezbÿre ‘avratlar istílÀsından Atina òalÀã olduktan soñra Edirne ve İslambol [30a]
eùrÀflarında olan ve Tekfur Dağı ve Boğazlar ve Kavala eùrÀfına gelince şÀhları olan Pirinsu846
tezevvüc murÀd idüp taót-gÀhı eski Ereğli’de olan eùrÀf ve eknÀf şÀhlarını da‘vet eyledi. ZírÀ
ol vaúitde Edirne ve İslambol daòı binÀ olmuş değil idi. Ve bu õíkr olunan eùrÀfıñ şÀhı
Ereğli`yi taót-gÀh etmiş idi. Ve ol zamÀn Ereğli, şehr-i ‘aôíme idi. ÓattÀ Atina şÀhı olan
SíseyÀ`yı ve sevÀóilde olan cümle şÀhları da‘vet etmiş idi. SíseyÀ ve sÀ’ir sevÀóil şÀhları ve
beyleri bi’l-cümle baóren ol da‘vete icÀbet eylediler. Ve Rÿmili içinde olan beyler berren
icÀbet eylediler. Ve Rÿmilinde ve Yeñişehir eùrÀfında şÀh olan Cendūrū nÀmında ol şÀh daòı
bi’l-cümle ümerÀsıyla binmiş geldi. ZírÀ anlarıñ diyÀrlarıñda şe‘ír ve sÀ’ir óubÿbÀt keåret
üzere olduğundan mezbÿre ‘avratlarıñ ekåeriyÀ atlarına Yeñişehir eùrÀfı mÀlik oldu. Ve ol
diyÀrıñ şÀhı dört beş yüz miúdÀrı atlar ile ol düğüne gelmiş idi. Ve Ereğli şÀhı maòãÿã ol
düğün içün ùÿl ve ‘arøı birer mil miúdÀrı meãÀfeyi cevÀnib-i erba‘asına óavlí [30b] ‘aôím
duvar çeküb, derÿnunda òavÀs kendüleri ve ‘avratları olmağiçün kol kol ãuffeler ve kürsíler
ve serirler, her şÀh óaremiyle ve òavÀssıyla başka başka sükÿn içün içün mevÀøı‘ ‘add
olunmuş idi. MevÀøi‘-i ma‘hÿduñ vasaùında ol vaútin erbÀb ı lehv ve tarÀbı ve çeng ve
çegÀnesi ve erbÀb-ı la‘b ve hüner aãóÀbı cem‘ olup mahÀretlerin ‘arø ve iôhÀr ederler idi. Ve
844
845
846
Hippolyta
Heraclius
Pirithous
228
eùrÀf şÀhlarınıñ óaremleri keyf oldukça anlar daòı òalúa olup òora ederler idi ve biriniñ óaremi
horaya çıksa ta‘yíb ederler idi. Bu vechile bunlar HazírÀn ve Temmus ve Àb aylarında üç ay
tamÀm ol düğün mütemÀdí oldu. Ve ol anlar ile gelen Yeñişehir eùrÀfı şÀhı bir genç nÀ-puhte
sefíh olup her bir ser-òÿş oldukda cümle ‘askerine emr eyledi ki; atlarına süvÀr olsunlar ve
gelüp hora içinde her biri birer ‘avrat at sağrısına alup diyÀrlarına gitsinler. ‘Askeri daòı bir
güne müteraúúıb oldılar ki düğünde olan ãaàír ve kebír bi’l-cümle ser-òÿş olup ve ‘avratların
cümle óüsnÀları horaya çıkdılar; zírÀ Rÿm ùÀ’ifesinin Àyín-i bÀùıllarında ol imiş ki, [31a] bir
düğüne vardıklarında ãaàír ve kebír ve ricÀl u nisvÀn bi’l-cümle hora tepmeğe çıkmasalar ol
düğün ãÀóibine ta‘ôím etmiş olmazlar; ol ecilden bÀy ve gedÀ bi’l-cümle ol düğünde hora
tepmeğe çıkmış iken ve cümlesi sarhoş olmaàla Çandavrū şÀhınıñ ‘askeri atlarına binüb ve ol
dÀ’ire içinde hora tepen óüsnÀ ‘avratlar üzerine at koşdurup ve na‘rÀlar, ol atların óiddet ile
koşduklarından Ànda olan ricÀl u nisvÀn ol heybeti bilüb ve görmediklerinden cümlesi mebhÿt
oldılar.
Ve òavf u òaşyet ùÀrí olup kimesnenin óarekete iútidÀrı olmayup ol yaramazlar
diledikleri óüsnÀ ‘avratlar at sağrısına alup ve firÀr murÀd eylediklerinde Atina şÀhı SíseyÀ,
çünki merd ve merdÀn idi, òamr-ı keåret ile isti‘mÀl etmeyüb ser-òÿş olmaz idi. Ve ol düğün
surunuñ kapusu yanında mekÀn tutmuş idi. Bu igÀreleri istimÀ‘ eyledikde ve mezbÿr atlı
‘askeri birer ‘avratı almış sur kapusundan çıkmak içün kapu ùarafına yürüdüklerinde Atina
şÀhı, SíseyÀ kapu ùarafına sedd idüp ve ol bí-edeblere: [31b] “Tiz ‘avratları bırakın!” deyüb,
pÀy-ender-pÀy na‘rÀlar urup “Her kim mütenebbih olup aldığı ‘avratı terk-i òalÀã oldu; ve her
kim ‘inÀd ve muòÀlefet eyler ise aãlÀ amÀn vermez, kendüyü atıyla me‘an dört pÀre ederim!”
dedi. MinvÀl-i meşrÿó üzere ol ùÀ’ifeden yüz miúdÀrı adam atıyla me‘an helÀk eyledi ve
cümle ‘avratları òalÀã eyledi. Ve ol ùÀ’ifeden òalÀã olanlar ol sÿr içinde köşe ve bucÀklara
iòtifÀ eylediler. Ve ortalık pÀk oldukdan soñra ol ùÀ’ifeniñ şÀhı daòı SíseyÀ úatletmek murÀd
eyledi; ancak sÀ’ir şÀhlar recÀ idüp òalÀã eylediler. Ve ol fettÀn ve òazÀnı düğünden diyÀrına
sürdüler. Ve cümle ol düğüne cem‘ olan şÀhlar ve beyler ve ãaàír ve kebír SíseyÀ`nıñ bu
ciğer-dÀr ve bahÀdurlığına ‘aôím taósín ve Àferin eylediler. Ve gelüp cümlesi niçe niçe tuófe
ve yÀdigÀr ile gelüp “áazÀñız mübÀrek olsun” dediler; BÀ-òuãÿã düğün ãÀóibi gelüp
SíseyÀ`nıñ pÀyına düşüp, “Beni kulluğa úabÿl eyle!” dedi ve SíseyÀ nÀmında bir mengÿş
kulağını kendü delüb geçürdü. SíseyÀ def‘ ede gördü, düğün ãÀóibi olan mündefi‘ olmayup,
SíseyÀ kulluğuna [32a] bel bağladı.
Ve yine düğün şenliğini SíseyÀ icrÀ idüp ve úuãÿr bırakmayub itmÀm eyledi. Ve
SíseyÀ düğün sÀóibi olup Pirinsū şÀhına dedi: “Sen bir ‘aôímü’ş-şÀn şÀhsın, benim kulluğum
‘úabÿl ettim’ dersen óÀşÀ! Ol olmaz, ancak birbirimizi karındÀşlığa úabÿl ederiz.” deyüp
229
karındÀşlık oldılar. Ve Atina şÀhı SíseyÀ`nıñ bu bahÀdurlığını SíseyÀ`dan soñra Atina`ya
óükm óükemÀnın iken, Atina úal‘ası derÿnunda binÀ eyledikleri ol ‘acíb ve àaríb ma‘bedin
saçağı altında beyÀø mermerden ol düğünde ‘avrat kapan ùÀ’ifeniñ ãÿretleriniñ nıãfı óayvÀnıñ
olmak üzere taãvír eylediler. ZírÀ ol ùÀ’ife müsÀferet ÀdÀbına ri‘Àyet etmeyub insÀnet ãıfatı
olan merdümiyyete aãlÀ raàbet eylemedikleri ecilden ve şehvet ve nefs-i emmÀreye teb‘iyyet
etmekle nıãflarını behímÀne taãvír eylediler. ZírÀ ol ùÀ’ife ãÿretÀ insÀn ve síret ve şehvetleri
behímÀne óayvÀn olduğundan insÀn-ı kÀmilde olan ãafvet ve ãafÀları yoğ idi. Ol ecilden
göbeklerine değin insÀn taãvír eylediler ve göbekden aşağı óayvÀn taãvír eylediler. İnşÀ’allahu
te‘ÀlÀ [32b] ol ma‘bed binÀsı taórírí maóallinde meõkÿr ùÀ’ifeniñ taãvíri tafãílen õíkr olunur.
Ve SíseyÀ ol düğünü kemÀ hüve óaúúuhÿ icrÀ eyledikten soñra ve cümle düğüne gelen
şÀhları mu‘azzez ve mükerrem ‘avdet ettürdükden soñra SíseyÀ daòı sefínelerine binüb
Atina`ya ‘avdet eyledi. Ve Atina ahÀlísi ve Atina`ya tÀbi‘ olan diyÀrlar ahÀlíleri SíseyÀ`nıñ ol
eylediği bahÀdurlıklardan óaôô-ı mevfÿr eylediler ve mermer sütÿnlara ol vÀúı‘ayı taórír
eylediler. Ve ba‘dehÿ Ereğli şÀhı Pirinsū ‘ahdine vefÀ idüp taót ve óükÿmetine vekíl koyub
kendü sefíne ile Atina şÀhı òidmetine gelüp maúÀm-ı òidmetinde oldu. VelÀkin SíseyÀ daòı
mezbÿra sarÀy döşeyüb ta‘yinÀt ve òidmetine adamlar ta‘yín idüp ri‘Àyetler etmiştir. Ve bu
vech ile SíseyÀ`nıñ günden güne nÀm u nümÀsı münteşir ve meşhÿr olup ùaraf-ı şÀhları SíseyÀ
òavfından her dÀ’im temlikler ve tuófe ve hediyyeler irsÀl idüp ve eùrÀf şÀhlarından her kim
SíseyÀ`ya muòÀlefet eder ise varup êarb-ı destiyle teb‘iyyet ettirirdi. Ve ol ‘aãırda Rÿm
şÀhlarından bir şÀh SíseyÀ`ya [33a] muúÀbeleye iútidÀrı olmayup Rÿm diyÀrlar, şöhret-i keåíre
ile meşhÿr oldu.
VelÀkin “eş-şöhretü Àfetun” taúdírince vardıkça SíseyÀ ile eùrÀf şÀhlarınıñ iltifÀt ve
i‘tibÀr ve temellükleri kendüye àurÿr gedürüb ve erkÀn-ı devletinden kimesne daòı kendüye
naãíhat etmeğe úudret ve iútidÀrları olmadığı ecilden vardıkça zevú u ‘işret ve ãoóbetine mÀ’il
olup nefs-i emmÀre bi’s-sÿ’i şöhret ile àalebe idüp kendü óareminde olan óüsnÀ nisvÀna ve
maóbÿbe cevÀrísine úanÀ‘at etmeyub eùrÀf ve eknÀfda istimÀ‘ eyledi ki maóbÿbe şÀhlar ve
beyler kızlarını rıfú ile ùaleb idüp vermedikleri óalde cebr ile alup ve bikrlerin izÀle ederdi. Ve
böyle giderek eùrÀf òalúınıñ daòı muóabbetleri ‘adÀvete tebdíl olup; zírÀ muóabbet ve ‘adÀvet
tÿ-emÀndur; ve şehvet ve iffet daòı tÿ-emÀndur ve birbirine eødaddur. Biri ref‘ olur ise ol biri
maúÀmına úÀ’im olur. Ve evãÀf-ı óasene ve síret-i müstaósene úıymetin bilmeyüb ve dÀ’imÀ
şükr ile úÀ’im olmayup Rÿmilini mÿris olan ef‘Àlden dÀ’im ictinÀb olmayup rÿz-şeb nefs-i
behímeye [33b] .. üzere olanın encÀmı olmayup muúaddemÀ taóãíl eylediği ÀåÀr-ı celíle-i
pesendídesi ref‘ olunup evãÀf-ı rezíle ve ÀåÀr-ı òabíseye mütebeddil olur.
230
KeõÀlik SíseyÀ daòı taóãíl eylediği ník-nÀm ve ÀåÀr-ı celílesini ãıyÀnet ve óıfôına
muvaffaú olmadığından øıddı ef‘Àl-i nefsÀniyye ve şehvet-i óayvÀniyyeye teb‘iyyet ile
Mizistre şÀhınıñ kızı ol ‘aãrda óüsn u leùÀfet ile meşhÿre ve elsine-i nÀsda velvele-ÀrÀ olduğu
SíseyÀ sem‘ine vÀãıl olıcak Mizistre şÀhından847 rıfúla ùaleb eyledi. Mizistre şÀhı daòı “Benim
kızım henüz on iki yaşını tekmíl etmeyüb şağíredür, inşÀ’allahu te‘ÀlÀ tezevvüce ãÀlióa
oldukda deríğ olunmaz” deyu vermede ‘illet eyledi; ancak çünki Mizistre, SíseyÀ`nıñ aãl-ı
mevlÿdu olmaàın úahr ve cebir birle kızı almağın lÀyıú görmeyub Ereğli şÀhıyla me‘an tebdíl
olup ve Mizistre`ye varup bir taúríb ile şÀhıñ kızını seriúa idüp Atina`ya götürdüler. VelÀkin
fi’l-óaúíúa mezbÿre kız daòı ãaàíre olup onunla fi‘l-i firÀş mümkün olmadığı ecilden ve kız da
maòõÿne olmasın deyu ravøa ve rıyÀøları [34a] bihişt-ÀsÀ olan Dragoman nÀm maóalle Atina
şÀhınıñ vÀlidesi olurdu, mezbÿre kızı daòı ol mekÀn-ı bihişte vÀlide yanında terbiyye olsun
deyu bırakub ve yine şeyùÀniyyete tÀbi‘ olup “ ‘AcebÀ maóbÿbe kız ne yerde vardur?” deyu
cüstu cÿya başladı.
Ve òaber aldı ki Mílūsū şÀhınıñ bir maóbÿbe velvele-ÀrÀ kızı olduğun ve óÀlÀ ol diyÀra
şimdi Yeñişehir tesmiye olunur, ve şÀhınıñ ismi Cendūrū, Ereğli şÀhınıñ düğününde ‘askeri,
‘avratları at üzerine alup kaçmak murÀd eyleyen şÀhıdur. AmmÀ çünkü SíseyÀ`ya ol kızı
‘aôím medó eylediler; ve görmeden kulakdan ‘Àşık eylediler. äabra taóammül edemeyüb,
mezbÿr şÀhdan kızı ùaleb eyledi. VelÀkin mezbÿr şÀhın Ereğli vaú‘Àsında fÀlıklığı olmaàın
kızı tezevvüce ãÀlióa iken ãaàíredür, deyu ‘illet eyledi; velÀkin vaããÀflar kemÀl ile kızı
SíseyÀ`ya tavãíf itmişlerdi. Ve SíseyÀ`nıñ aãlÀ firÀra iútidÀrı olmayup bi’ø-øarÿre mezbÿr
Ereğli şÀhıyla yine tebdíl olup Mílūsū diyÀrına ‘aôm eylediler. VelÀkin Mílūsū şÀhı848, çünkü
kızı SíseyÀ`ya vermedi. Ve SíseyÀ ne mertebe mutehÀlik olduğun bilür idi; ve gelüb [34b]
SíseyÀ bir taúríble kızı almağa geleceğin cürm etmiş idi. Ve dÀ’ima àÀfil olmayup SíseyÀ`yı
bilen adamları cem‘ edüp ve ol diyÀra girecek mevÀøı‘ı óıfô ve òırÀset ederdi. Ve bu
mertebeye daòı úanÀ‘at etmeyüb cümle diyÀrı ahÀlísine tenbíh eyledi ki: “Ecnebíden herkangi
müsÀfir gelür ise kimesne hÀnesine kondurmayub almasun. HemÀn müsÀfir nasıl adam olursa
olsun, benim sarÀyıma getürsünler!” deyu te’kíd-i tenbíhler eyledi.
KazÀrÀ bu tenbíhlerden soñra SíseyÀ daòı Ereğli şÀhıyla Mílūsū diyÀrına vÀãıl oldu ve
bunlarıñ önüne ùarík bekçileri düşüb doğru şÀh sarÀyına misafir-òÀne budur, deyu
kondurdular. Mílūsū şÀhı SíseyÀ`yı ve Ereğli şÀhını gördükde bilüb ve ‘aôím ri‘Àyetler idüp
øiyÀfet eyledi. Ve ‘ilaclı òamr içirib ikisi daòı mebhÿt olup lÀ-yu‘akkil eyledi. Ve ba‘dehÿ
847
848
The king of Sparta
The king of Molossions
231
emr eyledi, àÀyet úaví ve ağır zincir bendler urdular ki óarekete mecÀl bırakmadılar. Ve ãabÀó
oldukda mezbÿr şÀh bir adamı helÀk etmek murÀd eyledikde bir kelb-i ‘akÿru vÀr idi; ve ol
kelb àÀyet kebír olup insÀnı gördükde aãlÀ amÀn vermeyub pÀre pÀre ederdi ve mu‘ayyen ol
kelb içün binÀ olunmuşdur. [35a] Der-i divÀr metín bir zindÀn misli, üstü örtülü bir mekÀnda
ol kelbi beslerdi.
Ortalık ağardıkda Mílūsū şÀhı emr eyledi: “SíseyÀ ile Ereğli şÀhını úatl için ol kelbe
atsunlar!” İbtidÀ .. kelbe eli bağlu attılar. Kelb amÀn vermeyüb Ereğli şÀhını pÀre pÀre eyledi.
Ba‘dehÿ SíseyÀ`yı kelbe attılar ancak SíseyÀ merd u merdÀn olduğu óayåiyetle kelb-i ‘akÿrun
ibtidÀ óamlesi SíseyÀ`nıñ yedlerinde olan bende uğradı. Kelbiñ dendÀnı bendi bir miúdÀr
kırmağla bend gevşeyüb SíseyÀ daòı zor idüp bendleri bi’l-cümle kırup ve kelb yine óamle
edicek SíseyÀ bir òoşça eyleyüb kelbiñ başına bir muşt şöyle urdu ki kelbiñ başını òurda idüp
dağıttı. AmmÀ kelbiñ evvelki óamlede dendÀnı SíseyÀ`nıñ yedinde birkaç yere girdiğinden ol
yerlerden kan fevvÀre mÀnendi ceryÀn idüp SíseyÀ`ya ‘aôím øa‘f ùÀrí olup bir miúdÀr
bayılmak óÀãıl oldukda, Mílūsū şÀhı emr eyledi: “CellÀd gelüp SíseyÀ`yı úatleylesun!” Ancak
ol şÀhıñ erkÀn-ı devleti münÀsib görmeyub cellÀdı men‘ eylediler ve şÀhların naãíhat idüp,
SíseyÀ`nıñ úatline rıøÀ vermediler.” ZírÀ [35b] SíseyÀ úatlolunmağa a‘vÀn ve enãÀrı ve
vüzerÀ ve vükelÀsı bÀ-òuãÿã İstefe şÀhı ola[n] ‘ammi-õÀdesi SíseyÀ intiúÀmıyçün bu diyÀrıñ
altını üstüne getirdü ve bir aóade amÀn vermeyub bi’l-cümle úatlederler ve óÀlÀ SíseyÀ`nıñ bu
diyÀrlarda kimesne úatl ve ôulm ve rencíde eylediği ferd yokdur. Ancak Allah misÀfiridur
öyle iken úatlinden iútiøÀ eder” dediler. Mílūsū şÀhı cevÀb verdi ki: “SíseyÀ daòı òalÀã olur
ise, cümle dedikleriñizi icrÀ eder”, vükelÀ cevÀb verdiler ki: “ÓÀlÀ SíseyÀ àÀyet øa‘íf
olmuşdur, óarekete mecÀli yokdur, münÀsib olan SíseyÀ`nıñ yaralarına tımÀr uruverelim ve
İstefe şÀhı olan Iraúlı`ya münzel ile adam irsÀl edelim. Ve diyelim ki; óÀlÀ ‘ammiõÀden
SíseyÀ`nıñ yedimize fırãatı görmüş iken, seniñ òaùrın içün úatletmedük; ancak lüùf-i mürüvvet
buyurup bir gün evvel bu ùarafa teşríf buyurasız ve beynimize girüb, bizi SíseyÀ ile ãuló
edesiz ve SíseyÀ`yı alup ol ùarafa gidesiz” deyüp mektÿbu taórír edüp Iraúlı`ya irsÀl eylediler
ve SíseyÀ`yı tımÀr etmeğe başladılar.
Ve on gün mürÿrunda Iraúlı daòı muòtasırı bir iki yüz adam ile [36a] gelüp ve bir iki
biñ adam daòı ardındantelbíye eyledi ki, ta‘aúúub eylesünler. Ve Atina`ya daòı òaber edüp
SíseyÀ`nıñ òavÀsından ve .. ‘askerinden beş on biñ kadar Àdemü’l-gÀr ile Mílūsū şÀhı üzerine
yürüdüler. Mílūsū şÀhı bu hücÿmları òaber aldıkda úarÀr edemeyüb firÀr eyledi. Ancak
vükelÀsı Iraúlı ya ‘aôím ta‘ôímler idüp ve SíseyÀ`yı bir müreffeó sarÀya oturttular ve ri‘Àyetler
ve ikrÀmlar idüp cerÀóatlarına bir eyüce tımÀr eylediler. Ve ta‘aúúub eyleyen İstefe ve Atina
232
‘askerlerine daòı müferreó konaklar ve øiyÀfetler ve SíseyÀ`ya sözü geçenlere ‘aôím hediyeler
verdiler ki, Mílūsū şÀhı ile beynlerini ãuló ideler.
Ve bunlar bu ùarafda SíseyÀ`nıñ cerÀóatlarına tımÀr üzere iken ve ãuló itmeğe sa‘y
ederler iken, Mizistre şÀhı òaber alup ve “Fırãat àanímettir” deyüb beş on biñ adam ile àÀfilíni Atina`yı basub ve ol dem cÀsÿsladub kızı olduğu mekÀnı òaber almağla varup kızını aldı ve
yanında olan Mora ve Mizistre erÀzillerine Atina`nıñ bÀğ ve bÀàçe ve eşcÀrlarına [36b]
ateşler verüb òarÀb eylediler. Ve Atina`nıñ kibÀr ve a‘yÀn ve erkÀn-ı devlet óaremlerinden ve
evlÀd-ı etbÀ‘larından ol bÀàçelerde her kim bulundu ise karşu duranları úatleylediler. Ve
‘uôemÀ óaremleriyle ve cÀriye ve kızlarıyla zínÀ idüp ve zer ve zíverlerin soyub ve alup Atina
ahÀlísine bir rüsvÀylık ve bir òasÀret eylediler ki kimseye gerek ‘arø ve gerek mÀl ùaşrada
olanlar bırakmadılar. Ve şÀh, kızını alup Mizistre`ye ‘avdet eyledi.
Ve Atina`da muteøarrır olanlar bi’l-cümle bir yere cem‘ olup ve Atina`da mevcÿd
bulunan erkÀn-ı devlet ve a‘yÀn-ı memleket, cümle bir mekÀna óaşr olup:
“Bu muøarratları, şÀhımız, şehvet ve şeyùÀniyyete teb‘iyyet ettiğinden uğradık; gerçi
SíseyÀ bize ve diyÀrımıza ‘aôím iyilikler idüp beliyyeler ref‘ idüp şÀhlığı sebebiyle diyÀrımız
mu‘aôôam olup ma‘a-ziyÀdetin şÀn ve şöhret ãÀóibi biz ve diyÀrımız olmuşdur. VelÀkin bir
kaç senedür ki nefsi şeyùÀna teb‘iyyet ile kendü ‘ırøını ve bizim ‘ırøımızı bi’l-cümle … edüp
bÀ-òuãÿã bu beliye de cümlemizi ‘Àleme rüsvay idüp kendü ve ‘ırøı ve diyÀrımız ‘ırøını ve
bizim ‘ırøımızı bi’l-cümle pÀymÀl eyledi. Ve bundan soñra [37a] ol tek durmayub Mizistre
şÀhından ve Mílūsū şÀhından aòõ-ı intiúÀm úaãd eder ve Mizistre şÀhına bi’l-cümle Mora
teb‘iyyet ider ve Mílūsū şÀhına bi’l-cümle Rÿmili şÀhları teb‘iyyet ider. Ve anlar ile her dÀ’im
muóarebe ve muúÀtele mütemÀdí olması emr-i muúarrerdir. Rÿmili ve Mora bi’l-cümle
şÀhları ittifÀú ederler ise diyÀrımızı bi’l-cümle òarÀb etmeleri emr-i muúarrerdir. ØarÀr-ı
‘Àmmdan øarÀr-ı òÀãã tercíó oluna gelmiştir. Re’y-i óüsn budur ki; SíseyÀ`yı cümle ittifÀúıyla
şÀhlıkdan ‘azl ve şÀhlar neslinden tedbír-i salùanat ve memlekete úÀdir adamı şÀh naãb idelim.
Ba‘dehÿ SíseyÀ bu tedbíre rÀøı olmaz ise cümle re’yiyle oldukda kimesne ana bu diyÀrdan
teb‘iyyet etmez ve eùrÀf şÀhları daòı óaú yedimizdeyken SíseyÀ`ya kimse nuãret ve yardım
etmez. Ve ba‘dehÿ SíseyÀ`yı daòı diyÀrımızda kendü ve etbÀ‘ıyla bir beğendiği yerde sÀkin
olsun ve cümle ta‘yín ve ta‘yín-i emírimizden görülüb kendüye ve etbÀ‘ına kifÀyet edecek
maãraf ile zevú ve ãafÀsında olsun. VelÀkin diyÀrımızdan òÀric bir kimse daòl ve ta‘arruø
itmeğe úÀbil değiliz; zírÀ ta‘arruøun [37b] encÀmı gavga ve óarb ve úıtÀldur.”
Ve Atina`nıñ ãaàír ve kebíri cümle ittifÀú idüp ve şÀhlar neslinden MinsitiyÀ nÀmında
bir müdebbir adamı şÀh naãb eylediler. Ve bu re’y-i tedbíri münÀsib edÀ ile SíseyÀ`ya ve
233
Iraúlı `ya taórír idüp münzel ile irsÀl eylediler ve müretteb ‘asker olup “SíseyÀ`ya ittibÀ‘ı
olmayanlar Atina`ya ‘avdet etsünler” deyu şÀh-ı cedídden fermÀnlar taórír olunup irsÀl
eylediler. Ve SíseyÀ ve Iraúlı tavassuùuyla Mílūsū şÀhı ile muãÀlaóa olup ve Iraúlı cümle
‘askeriyle kalkub Mílūsū diyÀrından bir iki konak ayrıldıkdan soñra Atina menzilleri vuãÿl
bulup ve Atina ‘askeriyle me‘an giden ‘uôemÀnın ekåeriyÀ óaremlerine kesr u ‘arż ve sÀ’ir
ahÀlí ve nÀsın daòı bÀàçelerde ve bÀğlarda ‘avratları bulunan adamların ‘avratlarına kesr u
‘arż vÀúi‘ olup ve bÀğ ve bÀàçe ve bÀr-hÀnelerine bu kadar òasÀret ve kesr u ‘arż vÀúi‘ olup
bu gÿne işler olduğun òaber aldıklarında, SíseyÀ`ya olan muóabbetleri ‘adÀvete tebdíl olup ve
şÀh-ı cedídin fermÀnları gördükleri gibi aãlÀ durmayub ve SíseyÀ`dan istízÀn etmeden dokuz
biñ [38a] miúdÀrı Àdemü’l-gÀr ile Atina`ya muúaddem yürüdüler ve SíseyÀ ittibÀ‘ından biñ
miúdÀrı yanında kaldılar.
Ve Iraúlı bu aóvÀle vÀúıf oldukda, ‘aôím óicÀbda kalup anıñ daòı SíseyÀ`ya bu
òusÿsda bir miúdÀr rencíde-i òaùr oldu. Ve SíseyÀ`ya ba‘øı nash u pend etmeğe başlayıcak
[başlayınca] SíseyÀ, bir Àh-ı serd çeküb dedi ki: “ ? Atina ÀbÀ ve ecdÀdım taótı ve mevlÿdu
olduğundan yoòsa ol niôÀm-ı memleket olanlara ve şÀhlarına niôÀm ve şÀhlık ne olduğun
gösterirdim. Ancak benim yüzümden kendülere bu kadar kesr u ‘arż ve rehinedÀr olduklarına
benim tabí‘atım Atina şÀhlığına ve diyÀrına aãlÀ iúbÀl eylemez” deyüp, Eàriboz şÀhından
cezíre derÿnunda bir yer ùaleb eyledi. Eàriboz ŞÀhı daòı deríğ eylemeyüb Eàriboz adası
derÿrunda Aúsirūòūr ta‘bír olunan semti SíseyÀ`ya ifrÀz ve teslím eyledi. Ve SíseyÀ`ya bir ay
kadar Eàriboz şÀhı øiyÀfetler idüp sükÿn içün eyüce süknÀlar ta‘mír ve binÀ olunup ve
SíseyÀ`nıñ Atina`da olan óaremlerini, òazínesini ve eşyÀlarını me‘a-ziyÀdetin SíseyÀ`ya
mu‘azzez ve mükerrem Atina`da olan etbÀ‘ıyla irsÀl eylediler.
Ve SíseyÀ`ya [38b] birkaç sene dört beş yüz miúdÀrı òüddÀm ve óarem ve óavÀrí ile
mekå eyledi. Ve ref‘-i elem ve def‘-i óüzün içün dÀ’im ãayd u şikÀra mÀ’il olup ve giderek
kuş avlarına mÀ’il oldu. Eàriboz adası SíseyÀ olduğu ùarafınıñ karşusunda Eşkere adası849 olup
mezbÿr adada àÀyet eyü olur şÀhinler ve doğanlar çıktığından Eşkere adası şÀhin yavruları
vaúti oldukda SíseyÀ ùarafından dÀ’im adamlar ta‘yín olunup aòõ ederlerdi. Ada úaríb olmaàla
kÀhice SíseyÀ daòı adaya geçüb birer ay miúdÀrı kuş avı ve tazı avı ederdi. Ve Eşkere
Adasının Àb u havÀsı Eàriboz Adasından daòı eyücedür, deyu her dÀ’im söylerdi. Ve Eşkere
Adası beyi, “Bir gün SíseyÀ beni úatleder ve adayı alur” deyü òavf eder idi. Bir sene gene
şÀhin yavrusuna indirecek vaúit oldukda olacak olsa gerek SíseyÀ yavru indürmeğe bi’õ-õÀt
adaya kendü geçti ve kolayca olan yavruları indürdi. VelÀkin Eàriboz şÀhı SíseyÀ`dan her
849
Sycros
234
dÀ’im òavf üzere olduğundan SíseyÀ daòı fehm idüp Eşkere Adasınıñ bir semtine sükÿn
murÀd eyledi. Ve bi’l-cümle adayı devr idüp ‘imÀrete lÀyıú bir eyü mekÀn [39a] ittiòÀõ edüp
Àb u havÀsı àÀyet laùíf bulundu. Ve SíseyÀ ol mekÀnı ta‘míre başlayub kendü içün mu‘aôôam
sarÀy ve tevÀbi‘yçün herkesin óaddine göre odalar ùaró olındı.
Eşkire Beyi úalbine ‘aôím òavf ùÀrí olup bi’ø-øarÿre SíseyÀ`nıñ helÀkıyçün ba‘øı óile
ve òud‘aya ol daòı başlayub ve SíseyÀ çünkü şÀhın iòrÀcına àÀyet mÀ’il idi. Eşkire Beyi bir
sarb kaya derÿnunda bir şÀhin yuvası vÀr idi, anı SíseyÀ`ya gösterdi ve ol şÀhin yavrularını
àÀyet medó eyledi ve SíseyÀ tevÀbi‘inden kimesne ol yuvaya inmeğe cesÀret etmedi. Ve
Eşkire Beyi olan mekkÀr bir kenÀrı çürük halÀt peydÀ idüp ve yanında dÀ’ima istisóÀb eder
idi. Ve SíseyÀ`ya “İki gün daòı yavrular bu [yu]vadan aòõ olunmaz ise uçarlar” deyüb, SíseyÀ
daòı çünki àÀyet mÀyil olup “Áh bir eyü úaví ip olsa, kendim inerdim” demeğe başladı.
Eşkire Beyi: “İp bendeñizde mevcÿd, ancak sulùÀnıma inmek münÀsib değildür” deyü ba‘øı
ãıyÀnet semti ve ba‘øı teràíbden daòı òÀlí olmazdı. [39b] BilÀòare SíseyÀ kendü inmek murÀd
eyleyüb “İpi göreyim” deyüb, ol mekkÀr daòı ipin sağ ùarafını gösterdi. Çünkü peymÀne
dolmuş anı bağlanub aşağı inmeğe sarkındı. Ve SíseyÀ tevÀbi‘inden yigirmi otuz adam ol ipe
pek yapıştılar ve ol kayanıñ aşağısı beş on minÀre boyu derin ve altı daòı cümle serd kayalar
olup ipin sağı tamÀm oldukda çürük yeri daòı belli ve temyíz olunmadığından derdmend-i
tevÀbi‘ bilmeyüb çürük yerini daòı koyuverdiklerinde hemen ol sÀ‘at halat kopub SíseyÀ daòı
bir yere yapışamayub her bir kayaya uğradıkça bir ùarafını paralayub ka‘rına varınca pÀre pÀre
oldı. Beri ùarafdan feryÀda başladılar ve ol mekkÀr daòı pek münÀfıúÀne bukÀlar iôhÀr idüp
ca‘lí kendüye levm ve urmağa başlayub derdi ki: “Àh vÀh! Yazık oldu böyle bir bahÀdur şÀha
ki bir kuş yoluna fedÀ oldu!” buna benzer münÀfıúÀne yaşlar ve meróameti müş‘ir sözler ile
‘aôím yÀs ve mÀtem ve óüzn iş‘Àr ider kelimÀt ile feryÀd iderdi. Ancak ol sÀ‘at tevÀbi‘ dolaşub
ve maóall-i mehlekeye varup, derdmendi SíseyÀ`yı bi’l-cümle a‘zÀsı [40a] òurd u òÀş ve bi’lcümle paralanub rÿó teslím eylemiş buldular. ‘aôím feryÀdlar idüp bi’ø-øarÿre ol maóalle
mızrağı ve kalkanıyla defn eylediler.
Ve sÀ’ir tevÀbi‘i cem‘ olup Eàriboz adasına geçdiler ve Atina`ya òaber eylediler. Ve
aúrabÀsından ba‘øıları gelüp SíseyÀ`nıñ eşyÀlarını ve ezvÀc ve evlÀdını bi’l-cümle Atinaya
naúl eylediler. Ve Atina`nıñ ãaàír ve kebíri SíseyÀ`nıñ helÀkını ‘aôím te’essüf eylediler ve
vararak ol vesvese ba‘øı korkunç vÀúı‘alar ve òavflar ve elemler ve óüzün ve tasa üzere
oldılar. Ve cümle Atina ahÀlísine bu óÀletler óÀãıl oldukda bi’ø-øarÿre cümlesi cem‘ olup bu
görünen mekrÿó aóvÀlin mebde’etten gelür. Ve bu óüzn-i dÀ’im ve bi’l-cümle òaşyetler neden
óÀãıl oldu deyü keşfini murÀd eylediler. Ve içlerinde kimesne úÀdir olmayup bi’ø-øarÿre
Salunu`da olan kÀhinlere ‘arø eylediler. Ve kÀhinler cevÀb verdiler ki:
235
“Atina ahÀlísi bir iyilik bilmez adamlardur. ŞÀhıñız SíseyÀ`nıñ Àhı sizi bu óÀletleri írÀs
eyledi. ZírÀ ol şÀh size Mora derbendinde altı òarÀmíden, bir canavar şerrinden taùhír eyledi
ve dokuz senede Girít şÀhına verdiğiñiz yedi oğlan ve yedi kız òÀracdan sizi òalÀã eyledi ve
bir memeli ‘avratlar şerrinden òalÀã eyledi. [40b] Ve SíseyÀ òavfından cümle eùrÀf şÀhları size
dest-rÀzlık idemeyüb, diyÀrıñız ma‘mÿr olup SíseyÀ`nıñ sebebiyle bu kadar devletlere na’il
oldukdan soñra bir øarÀrına taóammül idemediniz. Ve taótından indürüb gurbetlere düşüb
úahrından helÀk oldı. VelÀkin ol òavf-nÀk düşlerden ve óüzn ve elemden òalÀã olmak murÀd
ider iseñiz; SíseyÀ`nıñ ehl ü ‘iyÀl u evlÀdlarını ve aúrabÀ ve ta‘allükātını ri‘Àyetler ve
òidmetler ve ikrÀmlar idüp ve varup helÀk oldığı yerden kemiklerini olsun bulup ta‘ôím ile
sandukaya koyub ve Atina`ya defn ve üzerine türbe bünyÀd idesiz. Ve illÀ ol evhÀm u
hayÀletden òalÀã olmazsınız” deyü kÀhinler cevÀb virdiler.
Ve ahÀlí-i Atina bir miúdÀr tereddüd idüp muòÀlifler serkÀrde olmaàla óasedleri bÀúí
olup kÀhinleriñ tavãiyelerine çokluk i‘tibÀr eylediler. VelÀkin SíseyÀ muóibleri, muòÀliflere
ta‘arruøu tebdíl olup muòÀliflerin önlerine korkunc ãÿret gösterüb ve gice dÀmlarına taşlar
[41a] atub taòvífler gösterüb, bi’ø-øarÿre muòÀlifler daòı ‘inÀdı terk edüp mezbÿr SíseyÀ`nıñ
ehl-i ‘iyÀl ve evlÀdlarını bi’l-cümle ri‘Àyetleri ve ‘izzetleri ve ta‘yín ve ta‘yínÀtlar verülüb ve
kebír evlÀdlarına arpalık ve tımÀrlar ve ta‘ayyuş ve sarÀylarını ta‘mír edüp òilÀf-ı fussÀka
tebdíl eylediler. Ve ba‘dehÿ baóren eyüce tedÀrikler ile sefínelere ‘asker doldurup ve varup
Eşkere adasını fetó edüp ve ricÀlini beyleriyle me‘an úatledüp ve nisvÀnını àÀrÀt idüp ve
mezbÿr adada insÀndan õí-rÿó aãlÀ bırakmayub ve SíseyÀ helÀk olduğu vaúitte tevÀbi‘den
yanında olup ve helÀkını müşÀhede idenlerin bir kaçını me‘an istisóÀb itmişler idi.
Ve maóall-i helÀkını ve merúadını su’Àl eylediler ve müşÀhede idenler bir miúdÀr
zamÀn mürÿruyla zühÿl olunup merúadını bulmada ‘aôím raómet çeküb yağmurlar ve seller
akdığından merakdan ôuhÿru müte‘assir oldu. Bunlar merúad tecessüsünde iken bir kara kuş
gelüb mütekārıyla yeri kazmağa başladı ve mızrağın ve kalkanın ÀåÀrı ôuhÿr eyledi. Ve
merúad ùalebinde olan adamlar ol ùarafa varup ve mızrağı ve kalkanı gördüklerinde daòı eyü
kazub insÀn kemiklerini [41b] gördüklerinde SíseyÀ`nıñ merúadi oldığın bilür ve mızrak ve
kalkan SíseyÀ`nıñ oldığı ma‘lÿm oldukda bi’l-cümle kemiklerini bir sanduka doldurup ve
mızrak ve kalkanı daòı alup ve gerü Atina`ya gelüp bir meràūb ve münÀsib yere defn
eylediler. Ve üzerine ma‘bed ve türbe binÀ eylediler. Ve bi’l-cümle eşkere adasında aòõ
olunan esír ü emvÀl u eşyÀlarını fürÿót ve úıymetlerini SíseyÀ içün binÀ olunan ma‘bed ve
türbeye maãraf eylediler. Ve ba‘dehÿ Atina ahÀlísi ol evhÀm-ı hayÀl ve elÀm-ı şedÀyidi
görmediler.
236
Ve SíseyÀ Mizistre`den sirúa idüp ve Atina`da Dragoman nÀm úaãra bihişt- ÀsÀdan
Mizistre şÀhı gelüp SíseyÀ Mílūsū`da iken Mizistre`ye kızı Eleni`yi alu[b] Mizistre`ye
götürdükde aãlÀ te‘òír etmeyüb tezvíc velÀkin mezbÿra vardıkça óüsn ve leùÀfeti ziyÀde olup
büyüdükçe velvele-ÀrÀ ve meşhÿre ÀfÀú olmuş idi. ÓattÀ bi’l-cümle Rÿmili ve Anadolu`ya
óüsnü münteşir olup Boğcaada karşusunda Anadolu`da “Eski İstambul” ta‘bír olunan maóall
ol vaúitte bir mu‘aôôam şehr idi. Ve bi’l-cümle maóãÿr olup yigirmi dört kapulu bir úal‘a-yı
metín [42a] ve müstaókem idi ki, bi’l-cümle Kaz Dağı850 eùrÀfı ve Aydın ve Saruhan cümlesi
ol úal‘a şÀhına tÀbi‘ idiler. Ol vaúitde mezbÿr úal‘a, taót-gÀh-ı mu‘aôôam idi. Ve şÀhı ol eùrÀf
şÀhlarınıñ ulÿsu idi. Ve bir maóbÿbÀn idi on sekiz yaşına girmiş bir şehõÀde-yi mümtÀz idi ki,
‘aãrda åÀnisi bulunmaz idi. Mizistre şÀhınıñ kızını kulakdan ‘Àşık olup vardıkça vaããÀfların ol
kızın óaúúında olan vaãıfları şehõÀdeniñ derÿnuna te’åír idüp ekl u şürbden kesülüb bir
mertebe-yi üftÀdesi oldukça rÿz u şeb òayÀl u fikrinden gitmez idi. BilÀòare taóammül
edemeyüb ve tebdíl olup birkaç ‘ayyar ve fettÀn mekkÀrlar alup ve Mora cezíresine geçüb
Mizistre`ye varup ba‘øı óíle ve òüd‘a-yektÀ olan acÀyiz ùÀ’ifesine mÀl-ı ‘aôím bedel edüp
Mizistre şÀhı kızı olan Eleni`yi òafyeten ãayd edüp eski İstambul`a getürdü. Ve mezbÿr kızın
zevci yine şÀh evlÀdlarından olmaàla ve kızın pederi Mora beyleriniñ cümlesiniñ şÀhı olmaàla
cümle Mora ahÀlísine Àr lÀhık olup ve cümlesi àayret idüp ve cümle Rÿmili şÀhlarına ve
beylerine daòı àayret alıverüb ve cümle sevÀóilde olan sefíneler cümle ittifÀúıyla biñ iki yüz
[42b] ãaàír ve kebír sefínelerle Eàriboz Limanına cem‘ olup yüz biñ miúdÀrı óarb ve êarba
úÀdur cengÀver ‘asker tedÀrik olunup óattÀ Atina`dan daòı kırk pÀre sefíne ile yedi sekiz biñ
cengÀveri imdÀda gitmiş idi. Ve Mizistre şÀhı ve kızıñ zevci işbilir adamlar olup ve ceng içün
cem‘ olan şÀhlar dil-nüvÀzlıklar idüp ve àayret ve óamiyyeti mÿris ãadÀdlar ile cümle Rÿmili
ve Mora şÀhlarına ‘aôím àayretler óÀãıl olup cem‘ oldılar. Anadolu şÀhları tebdíl olup Mora
cezíresinden mütevezzice olan ‘avratları alup ve ùaleb olunmayub yanına kalur ise yarın
Anadolu erÀzili daòı gelüp bunuñ emåÀli ve daòı eşnÀ‘ úabÀóatler olması emr-i muúarrerdir.
“HemÀn bu seferi şöyle úaví ve şedíd itmeliyiz ki ol şÀhıñ oàlu ve kız ile görüb úatlolmayınca
‘avdet olunmaya; ve úal‘ası ve taótı fetó olunup òarÀb olunmayınca ‘avdet olunmaya!”
dediklerinde cümle Mora ve Rÿmili ve Atina ve Atina`ya tÀbi‘ olan Úolori851 ve İnebaòtı
cezíresi beyleri daòı Atina şÀhı Mensitya ile seksen pÀre sefíne ve on biñ miúdÀrı ‘asker ile
Eàriboz Limanında [43a] cem‘ oldılar. Ve cümlesi böyle ‘ahd u şarù eyledikleri ol úal‘a fetó
itmeyince ve ol şehõÀdeyi ve kızı úatlitmeyince şÀhlardan kimse vaùÀnına ‘avdet eylemesun,
ve eski İstambul şÀhını daòı bu tedÀrikler ve ‘ahd-i mísÀkları istimÀ‘ eylediğinde ol daòı eùrÀf850
Mount Ida of Phrygia
851
Salamina
237
ı Anadolu`da ‘aôím ‘asker cem‘ idüp ve dağlar-mÀnend úal‘a derÿnunda õaòíreler yığdı. Ve
cümle lüzÿmu olan el-ehbÀzı ve suyu cem‘ eyledi. Ve Rÿmili ve Mora adaları sefíneleri
tamÀm-ı tedÀriklerini gördükden soñra Eàriboz`dan lengerlerin úal‘ edüp Eàriboz`un İslambol
boğazından çıkub ve muvÀfıú eyyÀm ile biñ iki yüz pÀre sefíne ve yüz yigirmi biñ cengÀver
‘asker, eski İstambul úurbunda Ak Liman nÀm maóalle yanaşub ve ‘asker döküb ve úal‘a-yı
mezbÿra şÀhı daòı yüz biñ miúdÀrı yarar ve cengÀver ‘asker ile karşu gelüp ‘aôím meãÀf
cengler olup, altı ay pey-ender-pey àÀyet şiddet ile ùarafeyn ceng eylediler.
Ba‘dehÿ şiddet-i şitÀdan maãÀff u cengleri mümkün olmayup Mora ve Rÿmili
‘askerleri oldukları mekÀnıñ cevÀnib åelÀåesinde ‘aôím hendek çevirib hendeğiñ ùarÀfını
deryÀya oyub hendeği ihÀùa [43b] eylediği mekÀnda kışla içün binÀlar ve silaólara? maàÀralar
ve kulübeler yapub kışlalarını her şÀh kol kol metín ve müstaókem eylediler. Ve Mora ve
Rÿmili ve Atina ve Adalar sefíneleri aãlÀ durmayub her dÀ’im her diyÀrıñ gemileri ‘asker ve
õaòíre naúlinden òÀlí olmazlardı. Ve bahÀr oldukda ùarafeynden ãÀflar düzülüb yine cengler
ederlerdi. Beş sene mütevÀliyeten ùarafeyn karşu gelüp maãÀff u cengler iderlerdi. Ve aãlÀ
àÀlib ve maàlÿb ma‘lÿm olmazdı.
BilÀòare altıncı kışlada úal‘a ‘askeri kışlalarına gittükde Rÿmili ‘askeri bir ay
mürÿrundan soñra àÀfileyn bir gece kalkub úal‘ayı, dÀ’iren-mÀ-dÀr muóÀsara eylediler. Ve
Gölcük úal‘a ‘askerine ve õaòíresine mÀni‘ oldılar. Ve ba‘dehÿ úal‘ayı, ‘aôím taøyíú eylediler.
Ve her dÀ’im taşrÀ ùarafından gelen ‘askeri ceng etmeden ‘avdet ettirirlerdi. Ve úal‘a-yı
Gölcük õaòíreye vÀãıl olmadığından úal‘aya maóãÿr olanlar ‘aôím rehnedÀr oldılar idi. Ve bu
minvÀl üzere daòı yedi sene muóÀsara eylediler. Ve derÿn-ı úal‘ada maóãÿr olanlara ‘aôím
øa‘af óÀãıl olmuş idi ve niceler açlıkdan fevt oldılar idi. Ve mecmÿ‘-ı muóÀsara on iki seneye
úaríb olmuşdur.
Ve muóÀsara [44a] eånÀsında Úolori cezíresi beyi852 bir ‘aôímü’l-cüsse ve úad-úÀmet
ãÀóibi adam idi. Ve ol cengde ceng iderek mest olurdu ve úatletmeğe adam bulmadıkda kendü
kendüyü ururdu, óiddetinden kendüyü men‘ edemezdi. Ol ‘aãrda Àndan uzun adam bulunmaz
idi hatta mızrağı yigirmi dört arşın idi. Ve kalkanının cirmi, yedi su sığırı derisinden idi. ùÿl ve
‘arøı kalkanının on arşın miúdÀrı tedvír olunurdu ve hergün ve her gece úal‘aya yaruş iderdi.
İsmi “Ayanda” tesmiye olunurdu. Ve mezbÿr Ayanda yine yaruş oldukda adam úatletmeğe
bulamayub kendü kendüye urup úatleyledi. Ve ol yaruşta úal‘a nıãf-ı miúdÀrını fetó eylediler.
Ve úal‘a şÀhı gördü ki òalÀã mümkün değil, “Bunlarıñ yedlerinde esír olup envÀ‘-i eõiyyet ile
852
Ajax the Great
238
úatlolunmadan ise anlara yüzümü göstermeyub leşimi göstermek yeğdür” deyüp bir kÀse
zehirli şerbet hÀøır etmiş hemÀn nÿş edüp rÿó teslím eyledi. Ve şehõÀde ve kız daòı birer
zehirli şerbet nÿş idüp aãlÀ nefes almadan anlar daòı rÿó teslím eylediler. Ve sÀ’ir gediklerde
olan úal‘a ‘askeri bi’ø-øarÿre emÀn deyüp úal‘ayı [44b] teslím idüp ÀlÀt-ı óarbi cümle
yedlerinden yere attılar.
Ve şÀhın ve şehõÀdeniñ huddÀm ve òavÀssı gördüler ki; şÀhları fevt oldu ve úal‘a
verildi. SarÀy kapuları àÀyet metín olup düşmÀn sarÀya girmeden bunlar òazínedenõí-úıymet
cevÀhir ve altÿn götürecek miúdÀrı yükleyüb, sarÀy-ı úal‘aya muttaãıl olan Uàrÿm
kapusundan iki yüz miúdÀrı òademe ile òavÀs çıkub eyne’l-mefer derken henüz gelüp, ol
meclise yanaşmış, õaòíre gemisiniñ ekåer ùÀ’ifesi úal‘a yağmasına gitmiş idi. Bunlar daòı
fırãat bulup ve ol gemiye bi’l-cümle girüb ve gemide olanlar bunları def‘ itmeğe úÀdir
olmayup ve lengerleri úal‘ ve úaù‘ edüp kabak meltemi vaúti olmaàın hemÀn ãuàrÀ üzerinden
EnderÀ enginine gemisinin bÀd-bÀnları küşÀd edüp engine saldılar ve bu ùarafda ‘asker úal‘ayı
fetó edüp ve mÀlını yağma ve karşu koymayanlara vermeyüb ve gördüler ki; maùlÿbları olan
kız ve şehõÀde mesmÿmen maútÿl olmuşlar. Óiddetlerin teskín idemeyub úal‘ayı ol şeb kol
kol yakub òarÀb eylediler. Ve emÀn verdikleri nisvÀn ve ricÀli maóallerinden ùard u ib‘Àd
eylediler. [45a] Ve “Min-ba‘d bu yerde sÀkin olmayasız!” deyu te’kíd ve tenbíhler ile ve
ba‘dehÿ her şÀh diyÀrlarına ‘aôím şennikler ile ‘avdet ve eski İstambul úal‘asında on iki
senede vÀúi‘ olan cengleriñ tÀríòlerini mermer sütÿnlara óaúúÀklar óaú edüp taórír ettürdüler
ve herkes diyÀrlarında kırk gün donanmalar ve şennikler eylediler.
Ve eski İstambul şÀhınıñ òademe ve òÀããı bindikleri gemi birkaç gün gidib Mora ve
Girít cezíresini gecdikten soñra bunlarıñ murÀdları Maàrib ùarafı iken bÀd muòÀlif olup,
bunları çevirib óÀlÀ Venedik olduğu şehriñ sığları üzerine şiddet-i furtuna ile düştüler ve
sığlarda taş olmamağla kendülere ve gemilerine aãlÀ øarÀr iãÀbet etmedi. Ve gemiyi sığdan
iòrÀca úÀdir olamadılar. Ol sığların .. .. olup şiddet-i furtuna ile sığlara ziyÀde girdiğinden
iòrÀc mümkün olmadı. BilÀòare ‘Àciz oldılar ve ol eùrÀfda ol vaúit Padova şehri taót-gāhı olup
Padova şÀhı daòı bunları söyledüp aóvÀllerine muttali‘ oldukda şehrine alup ve sükÿn içün
rıøÀ vermedi. Ve “Siz ki eski İstambul şÀhı adam dilersiz. [45b] On iki sene bi’l-cümle Mora
ve Rÿm ve Adalar şÀhları sizin şÀhınız ile on iki sene ceng eylediler. ŞÀhınıza olan ‘adÀvetleri
size daòı olduğu nümÀyÀndür. Ve sefer ile bu ùarafa geldiler. İótimÀldür, şÀhınızın òazínesini
gÀr ettiñiz deyu sizi benden ùaleb ederler. Ve àÀrÀt olunan mÀlı daòı ‘illet edüp ùaleb ederler.
Sizi daòı vermek münÀsib değil ve ùaleb eyledikleri mÀlı daòı vermek mümkün değil beni
àÀileye uğratmak, münÀsib görmek hemÀn şehrime ve ülkeme sÀkin olmak ve nereye murÀd
edersiniz varın, sÀkin olun!” deyu cevÀb verdi. Bunlar daòı bi’ø-øarÿre lÀ-‘ilÀc kalup sığlar
239
üzerine bir dalyan resminde sükkÀnlar yapub ve bir eğlence olmadığından balık avlamağa
başladılar ve giderek ağlar ve aàrebler peydÀ edüp ve avladıkları balığı Padova şehrine iledüp
ve bey‘ idüp ta‘yíş iderlerdi. Yüz sene miúdÀrı balıkçılar olup sebeb-i ma‘íşetleri balık bey‘
etmeğle oldu. Ve ba‘øı civÀrı ve fuúarÀ kızlarını Padova eùrÀfından tezevvüc edüp ol sığlarda
mehmÀ-emkine úÀbil-i süknÀ peydÀ eylediler.
Ve ba‘dehÿ bir gün gördüler ki furtuna [46a] şiddetinden àÀyet mu‘aôôam kalyon-asÀ
bir gemi ôuhÿr idüp ve furtuna anı daòı sığlara ilúÀ eyledi. Ve bunlar ol gemiden àÀyet òavf
eylediler ve içinde biñ miúdÀrı adam taãavvur iderlerdi. Ve cümlesi bir yere cem‘ oldılar. Ve
ol gemiden adam çıkar deyu üç gün müteraúúıb oldılar. Gördüler ki, gemiden adam çıkub
gelmez ve gemide aãlÀ adam görünmez, ancak ihyÀna bir bir gelüp ãadÀsı işidürlerdi. Ve
bilÀòare kayıklarına binüb ol gemiye yanaşdılar ve gördüler ki, kelbden àayrı õí-rÿó
bulmadılar. Ve gördüler ki, gemi içinde üç adam leşi yatar ve ol leşlerin birinin meyyitinde
divid úalem bulundı ve bir kÀğıda yazmış ki: “Bizden soñra bizim aóvÀlimize ıùùılÀ‘ óÀãıl
itmek murÀd idenler, ma‘lÿmuñuz olsun ki! Bu gemide olan eşyÀ bi’l-cümle Maàrib şÀhınıñ
bir ‘Àsabi oàlu ôuhÿr idüp ve salùanat sevdÀsına düşüb ve pederiniñ ve vükelÀsınıñ mÀl ve
menÀãıb iósÀnıyla tamÀ‘ idüp babasını úatl murÀd eyledi. Ve babasınıñ daòı ba‘żı muóibleri
bu tedbíri òaber virüb ol daòı lÀ-‘ilÀc def‘i mümkün olmadığı ecilden bu gemi[y]i peydÀ idüp
ve bir taúríble emvÀl ve õí-úıymet cevÀhir ve eşyÀsını gemiye doldurup ve getdü. [46b]
ÒavÀãã u òademiyle gemiye girüb taótından firÀr eyledi. Ve úatlolunmadan òalÀã olur deyu
gemi içine tÀ‘ÿn iãÀbet idüp cümle òavÀãã u òademe fevt ve şÀh daòı fevt oldılar. Ve ba‘dehÿ
fellÀhlar ve sÀ’irlerine bi’l-cümle tÀ‘ÿn iãÀbet idüp, ancak üç adam kaldık. Çünki mÀl fitnedür,
üçimizi daòı meftÿn idüp, birimiz, ol birini zehirleyüb úatliyledi. Ve yine zehr viren àÀflet ile
ol daòı zehír yiyüb fevt oldı. Ve ba‘dehÿ bu sergüzeşti muóarrir olana daòı tÀ‘ÿn iãÀbet idüp
ve mat‘ÿn iken bu varak taórír olındı. Bir cesedlerimizi kimesneye görmek vÀúi‘ olur ise
taórír itdiğim varağı naôar idüp ‘ibret olsun ve taúdír-i ilÀhiye rÀøı olsun ve dünyÀ mÀlına
raàbet iylemesün; zírÀ ol daòı bizim gibi hem dünyÀdan ve hem mÀldan maóRÿm olur ve
cesedimizden ne bÀúí bulur ise defn eylesün!” deyüp ve taóríri òatm eyledi.
Ve bir rivÀyetde mezbÿr vaãiyyetnÀme[y]i Maàrib şÀhı taórír eyledi; ve bu sefíne
mÀlına ôafer bulana kendüyi defn ve üzerine türbe binÀsıyçün tavãiye ve niyÀz eylemiş. Ve
bunlar bu aóvÀle muttali‘ oldukda ‘aôím mesrÿr oldılar ve “Bizden ba‘de’l-yevm iótiyÀc def‘
oldu” deyu şükr eylediler ve cümlesi bir yere geldiler. [47a] ‘Ale’s-seviyye ol emvÀli taúsím
eylediler. Ve rup‘ miúdÀrını Padova şÀhına, kendülerini şehre alsun deyu ‘arø eylediler.
Padova şÀhı bir müvesvis şÀhıs olmaàın iótimÀldür, “Bu mÀl buraya geldiğin Maàrib şÀhınıñ
oàlu òaber alur ise, gelüp bizden ùaleb ider. Ve ekåeri telef olmuş mÀlın cümlesini bizden
240
ùaleb edüp ve cemí‘ ve nerden vereyim, hemÀn siz bulduñuz, yine sizde dursun. Ve benim
şehrime siziñ hicretiñize rıøÀm yokdur. Varın, yine olduğuñuz yerde olun!” deyu cevÀb verdi.
Anlar daòı lÀ-‘ilÀc olup, üç sene miúdÀrı ol mÀlı cümle óıfô eylediler. Ba‘dehÿ gördüler ki,
kimse ol mÀlı ùaleb eylemedi. Anlar daòı bi’l-cümle mÀlı ‘ale’s-seviyye beynlerinde taúsím
eylediler. Ve mÀl-ı meõkÿru ferÀvÀn olmaàın ol ùÀ’ifenin cümlesi zengín ve kÀmurÀn oldılar.
Ve herbiri ol sığlarda sarÀylar binÀsına şurÿ‘ eylediler. Ve mÀl úuvvetiyle sığları doldurup
kÀr-gír ve metín binÀlar iódÀå ve çarşu ve ma‘bedler daòı binÀ eylediler. Ve sokakları tevsí‘
idüp iki ùarafı kÀr-gír ve yüksek kaldurımlar ve ol iki kaldurım deryÀ olup [47b] metín
köprüler ile birbirlerine mürÿr iderler idi.
Ve giderek mÀl úuvvetiyle Padova fuúarÀsını ãayd eylediler ve òidmetlerine istiòdÀm
iderlerdi. Ve ol sevÀóil òalúını daòı ãayd eylediler. Ve içlerinde birine vÀúi‘ olan óudÿd ve
sÀ’ir aókÀmlarını icrÀ içün óÀkim naãb eylediler. Ve ‘asker ve ÀlÀt cem‘ idüp ‘ale-l àafle varup
Padova şÀhını úatledüp Padovayı øabt eylediler. Ve eùraf-ı úal‘a ve úaãabÀt daòı fetó idüp øabt
eylediler. Çünkü óadlerine göre yedlerine vÀfir ola ki, Girít`i niôÀm-ı memleketlerine hevesler
idüp niôÀm içün memleket umÿrunu tedbíre kırk adam dÀnÀ ve erbÀb-ı ma‘rifet olmak üzere
ittifÀú eylediler. Ve bu kırk adamın tefekkür ve tedbír eyledikleri emre naôar içün yedi adam
daòı ol kırk adamdan ziyÀde ‘ilm ve ma‘fireti olmak üzere intiòÀb idüp vaø‘ eylediler. Ve ol
yedi adamın ma‘úūl ve taósín eyledikleri emre naôar içün anlardan a‘lÀ üç adam daòı intiòÀb
idüp vaø‘ eylediler. Ve ol üç adamın daòı rıøÀ verdikleri emrin temeşşíne ve icrÀsına óükm
etmek içün bir adam daòı cümleden [48a] ‘ilm u iósÀn olmak üzere óÀkim naãb eylediler.
EfrÀd-ı nÀsdan vÀúi‘ olan aókÀm-ı cüz’iyyi ol kırk adam görüb ióúÀú-ı óaú ederlerdi.
Ve eğer niôÀm-ı memlekete dÀ’ir bir emr-i ‘aôím ôuhÿr eylese yÀòÿd ‘ibret ve niôÀm içün bir
adamıñ úatli ícÀb eylese ve sefer ve vÀridÀt-ı maúÿlesini ve kıãÀã ve mír-i kılÀ‘ ôÀbitlerini ve
kapudÀn ve re’íslerini naãb ve ‘azl iútiøÀ ittikçe kırklar yedilere ve yediler üçlere ve üçler bire
‘arø etmeyince ol niôÀm ve úatl ve sefer ve kıãÀã ve naãb ve ‘azl olunmazdı. İbtidÀ naãb
eyledikleri óÀkimin ismi VenecÀn vÀúi‘ olmaàın
ol iódÀå eyledikleri şehrin ismin daòı
VenecÀn tesmiye eylediler ve óÀlÀ cümle milel-i küfrde ol şehrin ismi VenecÀn tesmiye
olunur. VelÀkin ehl-i İslÀm ism-i VenecÀn`ın cimini “dal”a ve Àòirinde olan “nÿn”u “kÀf”a
tebdíl ile “Venedik” tesmiye eylediler.
Ve ol gemi içinde buldukları kelbe ‘aôím ri‘Àyetler idüp ve şeyùÀn vesvesesiyle ol
kelbe muóabbet idüp ve óaúúında te’víl idüp bu kelb ãÿretinde görünen óaú ùarafından bize ol
mÀlı ísÀl [48b] içün bir mürseldür. Ve illÀ sÀ’ir kelbler gibi kelb olsa ol daòı ol gemi içinde
fevt olurdu. Ve ol kelbi ‘aôím ri‘Àyetler ile beslediler. Ve ol kelb fevt oldukda defn idüp
241
üzerine türbeler ve ma‘bedler binÀ eylediler. Ve ol ma‘bed ve türbeler kapusunda ol kelbin
ãÿretin taãvír idüp ta‘ôím eylediler. Ve bu mertebeye úanÀ‘at etmeyub gümüşden ve altÿndan
herkes iútidÀr-ı mertebe ol kelbin ãÿretin yaptırıp evlerine teberrük için vaø‘ itmişler idi. Ve
bÀy u gedÀ ve ãaàír ve kebír altÿndan ve gümüşden ve bakırdan ve pirinçden herkes iútidÀrı
miúdÀrı ol kelbin ãaàír ãÿretin yaptırıp üzerlerine daòı taşırlardı. Ve kelbin ismine .. tesmiye
idüp sancÀk ve bayrÀklarına taãvír idüp àalebeye ‘avn u nuãret olur, deyu ol sancÀkları
istiãóÀb iderlerdi. Ve óÀlÀ Venedik keferesinin kelbe olan muóabbetleri sÀ’ir óayvÀnata
yokdur. Ve illÀ ne menzillerinde ve ma‘bedlerinde ve gemilerinde ve üzerlerinde ol kelbiñ
taãvíri mevcÿddür. Ve Venedik evÀyil-i minvÀl-i meşrÿó üzeredür. İbtidÀları Eski
İstambul`dan firÀr ve Maàrib mÀlıyla neşv ü nemÀ bulmuşdur.
MünÀsebet ile [49a] Venedik`in aãl-ı ôuhÿrı bu mertebe taórír ile iktifÀ olındı. Ve
Venedik ôuhÿrından tÀríò-i İslÀmın sene biñ yüz kırk dokuz tÀríòine gelince Rÿm ve Latin
tÀríòleriniñ taórírleri iki biñ iki yüz seneden mütecÀviz deyu taórír eylediler. Ve CenÀb-ı
müyessirü’l-murÀd iden rÿz-ı şebb evkÀt-ı òamsede istid‘Àmız oldur ki; ol Venedik
cumhÿrınıñ vücÿd-ı habÀsetü’l-Àlÿdlerin ãafóa-’i ‘Àlemden ref‘ idüp şer şürÿrlarından ehl-i
İslÀm üzerlerinden def‘ eyleye. Ve bilÀd-ı şehr ve úal‘alarının küfr ü dalÀletlerinin ÀåÀrı ref‘
olunup nÿr-ı ímÀn ile münevver eyleye sitisini ‘an úaríb naãíb-i müyesser eyleye, Àmín yÀ
Mucíbe’s-sÀ’ilín!
Ve bundan aúdem taórír olunmuş idi ki; eski İstambul fetó olunup ve hedm olunup ve
cümle şÀhlar ‘avdet idüp herkes diyÀrını arzÿ eyledikde Atina şÀhı MinestiyÀ853 daòı Atina`ya
vuãÿl içün ‘avdet eyledikde hasta olup ve Değirmenlik nÀm adaya tasyíh-ı mizÀc içün
yanaşdıkda iki gün daòı sıhhatde ba‘dehÿ fevt oldı. Ve Değirmenlik854`e defn olunmayub
cesedini Atina`ya getürüp defn eylediler. [49b] Ve mezbÿr MinsitiyÀ yigirmi dört sene şÀhlık
eyledi. Ve bundan soñra SíseyÀ oàlu Dímūúūnda855 şÀh olup bu daòı pederi gibi cerí ve cesÿr
ve eùrÀf şÀhları bundan òavf idüp ve bunuñ gününde Atina yine àÀyet ma‘mÿr oldı. Ve bu
Dímūúūnda vaúūr olup ‘aãrında olanlar ile àÀyet dil-òÀh üzere geçindiler ve rıfú u ‘adl ile
otuz iki sene şÀhlık idüp, ba‘dehÿ fevt oldı.
Ve beyler evlÀdından reşíd ve müdebbir bulunmadığı ecilden a‘yÀn-ı ahÀlíden tedbír-i
umÿr-ı memlekete úÀdir Uúūşti856 nÀmında bir kimesneyi şÀh naãb eylediler. Ve ol daòı Atina
853
854
855
856
Menestheus
Milos
Demephon, son of Theseus
Oxyntes
242
ta‘mírine sa‘y idüp ba‘dehÿ fevt oldı. Aftepersene857 nÀmında biri daòı şÀh olup bir müddet
şÀhlık itdikden soñra fevt olup mezbÿr şÀhlar erkek evlÀd terk itmediğinden yine Atina
a‘yÀnından Dímÿyití858 nÀm kimesne şÀh naãb eylediler. Ve mezbÿr şÀh, zevú u ãafÀya mÀ’il
olup bi’l-cümle Atina ahÀlísi zevú u sürÿra teràíb iderdi. ÓattÀ senede üç gün şehri bütün
donadub bi’l-cümle dükkÀnları ve sarÀyları ve kapu önlerini ve cümle òalú aósen libÀslar
giyüb erbÀb-ı lehv ve tarÀb mahÀretlerin [50a] iôhÀr idüp envÀ‘-i zevú u sürÿr ile üç gün zevúyÀb olurlardı. Ve mürÿr iden üç şÀhıñ salùanatlarına ma‘lÿm olup, velÀkin mezbÿr Dímÿyití
otuz sekiz sene şÀhlık itmiş, deyu rivÀyet iderler. Ol daòı fevt olup Kuduruz859 nÀmında olan
oàlu şÀh oldı.
Ve mezbÿr şÀh Atina ahÀlísiyle àÀyet óüsn .. olup cümleye meróamet ve şefúat üzere
olup dÀ’ima aàniyÀya øiyÀfetler ve fuúarÀya iósÀnlar ve òayrÀtlar idüp cümleniñ úulÿbunu
celb itmiş idi. Ve ol mertebe Atina`ya ve ahÀlísine muóabbet itmiş idi ki, anlarıñ uğruna
vücÿdun fedÀ eyledi. Ve sebebi budur ki; İzdibin860 úurbunda olan derbend-i Kirek? beyi
Atina ahÀlísinden birkaç def‘a rehne görüb rencíde-òatır olmuş idi. Bi’l-Àòire taóammül
idemeyub eùrÀfda olan şÀhlara teôallum-i óÀl idüp ‘ale-l àafle Atina üzerine gelüp ve cümlesi
şÀhlar, buna meróamet idüp imdÀd eylediler. Ve ‘aôím ‘asker cem‘ idüp ve Atina eùrÀfını
cümle taòríb, Atina üzerine gelüp ve Atina ‘askeri daòı óÀøır bulunan şÀhlar ile me‘an karşu
çıkub birkaç [50b] def‘a muãÀfa cengler eylediler. Ve ol zamÀnıñ kÀhinleri ol ceng içün şöyle
istiòrac eylediler ki; ùarafeynden her kangısının şÀhı maútÿl olur ise, ol ùaraf àÀlib olur. Atina
şÀhı olan Kuduruz istimÀ‘ eyledikde; “Bundan eyü nÀm olmaz benim içün bir ölüm
muúarrerdir. Bu diyÀrı ve ahÀlísini düşmÀndan òalÀã düşmÀn üzerine àÀlib olmaz yine benim
úuvvetim sebeb olur ise ilÀ yevmi’l-úıyÀmet bundan eyü ník-nÀm taóãíline sebeb olmaz.”
deyüp ve tebdíl-i ãÿret idüp meãÀff ceng olurken şÀh kendüyu düşmÀnı úalbine ilúÀ idüp
keåret üzere düşmÀndan nice kimseleri úatlettükden soñra ol daòı maútÿl oldu. Ve ‘asker,
şÀhlarından bu óÀleti müşÀhede eylediklerinde, àayrete gelüp düşmÀna ‘aôím kılıç çekub ve
düşmÀn bunları bu mertebe óamle eylediklerini gördüklerinde ùÀúat getüremeyüb firÀr
eylediler. Ve bunlar ta‘úíb idüp yetiştiklerine emÀn vermeyub úatleylediler. Ve
düşmÀnlarından katí az adam òalÀã ve Atina ahÀlísi maútÿl olan şÀhlarınıñ cesedini ‘aôím
ta‘ôím ile defn itmek içün ref‘ idüp ve Atina`da bir meràūb mekÀna defn idüp üzerine türbe ve
ma‘bed binÀ [51a] idüp, envÀ‘-i zer u zíver ile merúadi tezyín eylediler. Ve “Cümlemiziñ
857
858
859
860
Apheidas
Thymoetes
Codrus
Lamia
243
veliyyü’n-ni‘amı ve ÀzÀdlık kullarıyuz” deyu ãaàír ve kebír ve àaní ve faúír her gün ziyÀret
idüp ve du‘Àlar idüp evãÀf-ı cemíle ile teõkír iderler idi.
Ve ibtidÀ şÀh olan Çaúrūpūdan bu maútÿl olan Muduruza861 gelince on dört şÀh mürÿr
idüp ve óükm ü salùanatları dört yüz doksan seneye bÀlià olmuşdur. Ve ba‘dehÿ Atina ahÀlísi
bir yere cem‘ olup dediler ki:
“Bu şÀhlarıñ meãÀrifi kesír cem‘ olan a‘şÀr ve rüsÿmÀtın ekåerini etbÀ‘larına ve
òademelerine ve zer u zíver ile òavÀsslarını ve óaremlerini ve kendülerini tezyín idüp murÀd
itdükleri isrÀfı ve ôulm ibrÀ iderler. Ve kimesne pend u nuãó ve men‘a úÀdur olmazlar, ma‘úūl
ve münÀsib olan cümleniñ re’yiyle; bir óÀkim, ibrÀ-yı aókÀm içün naãb olunup ve kendüye
kadar ma‘rÿf ta‘yín olunup ve ümerÀ-yı óükÿmet içün kendüye kifÀyet miúdÀrı adam ta‘yín
olunup, kendü ittibÀ‘ ve tevÀbi‘ ãÀóibi olmayup ancak óareminde zevce ve cevÀrí ve òademesi
elliden faøla ziyÀde olmaya. Ve keõÀlik biründe daòı kendi maòãÿã òademesi köle ve yanaşma
[51b] elliden mütecÀviz olmasun. Ve niôÀm-ı memleket ve umÿr u ‘Àmme ve naãb ve ‘azl ve
úatl cümle a‘yÀn ve eşrÀf re’yi munêam olmayınca icrÀ olunmaya!” deyu cümle, bu tedbíri
münÀsib görüb ve içlerinden erbÀb-ı ma‘Àrifden ‘Àkil ve reşíd ve müdebbir adam intiòÀb idüp,
minvÀl-i meşrÿó üzere óÀkim naãb eylediler. Ve şöyle şarù eylediler ki: “Mezbÿr óÀkim ôulm
ve te‘addí ve rüşte mÀyil olmaz ise ve dÀ’imÀ ‘adl u ‘adÀlet ve aãóÀb-ı müşÀvere re’yinden
òÀric iş itmez ise fevt olmayınca Àòar óÀkim naãb olunmaya. Ve eğer ôulm ve te‘addí ve ve
irtişÀya mÀ’il olur ise yine cümle re’yiyle ‘azl olunup yerine Àòar óÀkim naãb oluna!” Bu
tedbíri cümle óüsn görüb, óÀkim naãb olındı ve Àyín-i salùanat ref‘ olındı.
Ve bu taúrír olunan vech üzere üç yüz on üç senede on üç óÀkim mürÿr itmişti.
İbtidÀsı Úadurez oàlu MídÀ olup ba‘dehÿ Aàtūz862 ve Ariboz863 ve æürşíboz864 ve Aúarvendas
ve Avúūnas ve Míúados865 ve Deyunbitoz866 ve Mezdos ve Şibesbiyos867 ve AàÀmenesyos868
ve İslikos869 ve Elúamyos870 mezbÿr øÀbitler ve óÀkimler [52a] óareketi, bi’l-cümle re’y ve
tedbíri ve ma‘rifetiyle olup yalñız kendü re’yleriyle iş görmüş değiller idi. Ve zamÀn-ı
861
862
863
864
865
866
867
868
869
870
Medon
Acastos
Arkhippos
Thersippos
Megacles
Diognetos
Thespieus
Agamestos
Aiskhylos
Alcmaeon
244
óükÿmetlerinde Atina ahÀlísi müreffeóü’l-bÀl evkāt-güzÀr olup kimesne ile ceng u cidÀl
olmayup maãrafları àÀyet úalíl olduğundan mírí òazíneleri artub emvÀl-i keåíreye mÀlik
oldılar.
Ve Àòir gelen Elkumus vaãiyyet eyledi ki, ba‘de’l-yevm on senede bir óÀkim naãb
ideler. Ve bu vaãiyyeti maúbÿl olup on senede bir óÀkim naãb ide oldılar. Ve yetmiş senede
yedi óÀkim mürÿr edüp, Atina şöyle şen ve ÀbÀdÀn oldu ki ve vardıkça terakkíler bulup, çünki
salùanat iddi‘Àsı yok ve erbÀb-ı ma‘Àrif çok olup ‘ulÿm u óikmete tevaààul olunup ‘ilm u
óikmet ta‘lím içün dersòÀneler binÀ olunup ‘ilm u óikmete ‘aôím raàbet eylediler. Ve bu yedi
óÀkim fevt olup mürÿr ettikten soñra Atina`nıñ feylosof ve óükemÀsı kesír olup ve tedbír-i
memlekete anlarıñ re’yi àalebe idüp niôÀm-ı memlekete dÀ’ir ve tedbír-i óükemÀya intiúÀl
idüp ve soñra mürÿr iden yedi óÀkimiñ
[52b] isimleri nÀ-ma‘lÿm olduğundan taórír
olunmadı. Ve on dört şÀh ve yigirmi óÀkim mürÿrundan soñra óükemÀ cem‘ olup sülk u
bÀùılları ve i‘tiúād-ı fÀsidleri üzere; “bed-gūn u fesÀdın tedbír u taãarrufu, “eflÀk-ı tis‘a”dür.
Bizim daòı diyÀrımızıñ tedbíri ve taãarrufu, ve niôÀm-ı memleketi dokuz feyloãofa münóasır
olsun” deyüp ‘ulÿm-i óikemiyyede ma‘lÿm u keåíresi ve ‘ilm-i me‘Àşda mahÀreti olan
feylosof-i óükemÀdan dokuz adam intiòÀb idüp ióúāú-ı óaú ve evÀmir u nevÀhi icrÀ içün naãb
eylediler. Ve mezbÿr dokuz óÀkimi her senede tebdíl iderlerdi. Bir müddet daòı minvÀl-i
meşrÿó üzere Atina diyÀrınıñ óÀkimleri böyle naãb olunurlardı.
Ve mezbÿr óükemÀ ve tis‘a vaútinde Dako871 nÀmında bir óÀkim tekÀlíf-i şıkka[y]ı
müştemil ve evÀmir-i şedíde Şamil bir úÀnÿn-ı cedíd ícÀd eylemişdür. Ve ol vaúitde olan òalú
ol úÀnÿn aókÀmına ùÀúat getüremeyüb Atina òalúı etraf u eknÀfa hicret ve firÀr itmeğe
başladılar. Ol úÀnÿnda taórír olunan budur ki; úatli ícÀb etmeyen úabÀóat [53a] içün adam
úatlolunurdu ve terki evlÀ úabílinden olan şeyler içün ve òilÀf-ı edeb olanlar içün yüzer ve
ikişer yüz ve üçer yüz óad taórír olunurdu; ol ecilden çok adam muteøarrır olup Atina`dan
firÀr eylediler.
Ve bu úÀnÿn herkesin menfÿru, cümlesi ol úÀnÿnun nesò olmasın temmeni iderlerken
şÀhlar neslinden bir feylosof-i kÀmil ôuhÿr idüp ‘aãrında yegÀne ‘Àlim bir óakím ve müdebbir
ve nÀôım ve ‘ilm u me‘Àş ãÀóibi Solon nÀmında bir óakím-i õí-funÿn ve bir feylosof-i
‘adímü’z-zunÿn ôuhÿr idüp ve óükemÀ-yı tis‘aya re’ísü’l-óakím naãb olındı. Ve ol úÀnÿn-ı
şedídi, nesò idüp rıfúı müştemil bir úÀnÿn ícÀd idüp cümle telakkí bi’l-úabÿl eylediler. Ve
871
Draco
245
mezbÿr óÀkimiñ óarekÀt u sekenÀtı maúbÿl beyne’l-enÀm ve pesendíde-i òÀs oldu ve medíne-i
Atina`nıñ àÀyet ile ma‘mÿr olmasına cedd-i belíà ile cümleniñ maóbÿbu’l-úulÿbu oldu.
Ve óükemÀ-yı tis‘a zamÀnında Atina`ya yedi sekiz sÀ‘at meãÀfede olan Megara
úal‘ası, ol vaúitde bir metín ve müstaókem úal‘a olup ve müstaúil yeri olup çünkü [53b]
óükemÀda şevket ve ‘aôímet yoğidi. Atina óÀkimi Megara beyine teklíf olunagelen teklífi yine
eyledikde úabÿl eylemeyüb Atina`nıñ ‘aôímet ve úahr ãÀóibi şÀhı olmayup ve kendü úal‘ası
metÀnetinde i‘timÀdı olup maàrÿr Atine óükemÀsına imtiåÀlinden münòarif olup karşu koyub
birkac def‘a muóarebe ve muúÀtele eyledi. Ve ekåeriyÀ Atina óÀkimi àÀlib olurdu. Ve maàlÿb
oldukda úal‘ası maóãÿr olurdu. Çünkü úal‘a metín, çokluk òavfı yoğidi. Ve Atina`ya tÀbi‘
olan Úolori cezíresi beyi bundan bundan õikri sebúat itmiş idi ki; mezbÿr eski İstambul
cenginde kendüyi úatleyledi ve Úoloride olan zevcesi evlÀdlarını alup ve Atina`ya hicret
eyledi. Ve mez[bÿr] Úolori Adasınıñ maósÿlü kalíl olmaàla ekåeriyÀ ahÀlísi Atina`ya hicret
eylediler. Ve ol taúríb ile Úolori Adasınıñ adamı az kaldığından ve Megara Kayasına buğday
daòı bir mil miúdÀrı olmadığından ‘ale’l-àafle Megara beyi varup Úolori`yi daòı fetó eyledi.
Ve Atina`ya òaber olunup ‘asker Úolori`ye Mora [54a] ‘aôím tedÀrike muótÀc olmaàın
Atina`dan çokluk muúayyed olmadılar. Ve bu taúríb ile Atina ve Megara meãÀfeleri vasaùında
olan Lebine nÀm maóalde cümle Atina ve Úolori ve Megara ricÀl ve nisvÀnı cem‘ olunup on
gün nevrÿz idüp kol kol ãoóbetler ve yemeler ve içmeler ve la‘b ve hüner aãóÀbı mahÀretlerin
iôhÀr idüp ve aàniyÀ simÀtları düşünüb fuúarÀ arzÿların def‘ idüp bu gūne iderlerdi.
Bu kez Megara düşmÀn olduklarından ve bÀ-òuãÿã Úolori daòı Megara ùarafından øabt
olındığundan nevruz-ı mezbÿre ref‘ olındı. ZírÀ her dÀ’im Megara ve Úolori ile Atina`nıñ
ceng u cidÀli eksik değil; çünkü Solon re’ísü’l-óükemÀ idi. Kefere lisÀnında “Solon”,
“Süleyman” dimekdür. Mezbÿr Süleyman Megara ve Úolori cenglerini yasak eyledi. Ve üç
sene miúdÀrı Atina ahÀlísi lisÀnında Süleyma[n] Óakím òavfından kimesne õíkr etmeğe úÀdir
değil idi. Ve üç seneden soñra mezbÿr Esbinanūrūrí nevruz içün vaúti geldikde münÀdíler
nidÀ ettürdü. Ve Atina ahÀlísinden henüz [54b] ? olmadan on dokuz ve yigirmi yaşında üç biñ
miúdÀrı delikanlı intiòÀb idüp zenne eåvÀbı giydürüb ve üç biñ miúdÀrı puòte olmuş yiğidler
daòı yarar ve tuvÀna ve bahÀdur cerí ve cesÿr, cümlesi intiòÀb olunup ve õíkr olunan altı biñ
yiğid pür silÀó olup ve ol üç biñ nisvÀn ãÿretine giren yiğidlere iş görmüş zevci ãÿretinde
adamlar me‘an koşub ve ol bir üç biñ yiğid pür silÀó gecelik ile nevruz yerine varup pusuya
girdiler. Ve Süleyman Óakím daòı silÀó görünmez birkaç biñ adam ile maóall-i nevrÿza gidüp
mecmÿ‘u on iki biñ miúdÀrı óarb u êarba úÀdir ricÀl ile maóall-i nevrÿza cem‘ oldılar. Ve
görenler bilmeyüb, ricÀl u nisvÀn muótaliù cem‘ olmuşdur, deyu zann iderdi. Çünkü oturdular
ve yediler ve içtiler ve nisvÀn libÀslarıyla müzeyyen olup kalkub òora tepmeye başladılar.
246
AmmÀ çünki ‘Àlem-i aàyÀr òÀlí değildür. Ve Úolori ve Megara erÀzili cÀsuslayub òaber
aldılar. “Atina`nıñ óüsna kızları ne miúdÀr var ise [55a] cümlesi nevrÿzda gelmiş” dediler. Ve
ba‘øıları gelüp uzakdan gördüler. HemÀn ãabr idemeyub üç biñ miúdÀrı pür silÀó Megara ve
Úolori erÀzilinden intiòÀb olunup bir kendülerde ve İnebaòtı ve Mora kıyılarında olan firúate
ve büyük kayıklara yüz miúdÀrı òÀzırlayub ve kürekçi ve mellÀó beş biñ miúdÀrı olup ve
“Nevruzda olan Atina ahÀlísi beş altı gecedür bizim ùarafımızdan ‘adem-i ta‘arruø ile emniyet
óÀãıl eylediler ve cümlesi birden àÀfildür” deyüp yedinci gece aòşamdan evvel hÀøır olan
‘asker firúate ve kayıklara girüb ve maóall-i nevrÿz olan Libsina`ya doğru yürüdüler. Ve bu
ùarafdan Süleyman Óakím daòı àÀfil olmayup cÀsusları anlarıñ yedinci gece geleceklerinden
òaber verdi. Ol daòı üç biñ puòte alup bahÀdur yiğidleri pusuya koyub ve üç biñ zenne
kıyÀfetinde olanları “Òora tepin!” deyu emr eyledi. Anlar daòı ellişer tÀnesi birer òalúa ve
başka başka ùaró olunup altmış yerde òalúa olup hora tepmeye başladılar ve üzerlerine zenne
libÀsı ve derÿnlarına merdÀne libÀsların [55b] giyüb ve ÀlÀt-ı óarbi cümle merdÀne libÀsı
üzerine kuşanub ãÿretleri mÀnend-i nisvÀn ve derÿnları ÀlÀt-ı óarble Àreste-i merd ve merdÀne
olup ve hem sıçrayup oynarlardı ve hem düşmÀn cÀnibinden àÀfil değillerdi. Ve nıãf-ı leyl
úaríb oldukda karagolları òaber verdiği düşmÀn gemileri yanaşdı. Bunlar daòı ÀlÀtların
müheyyÀ idüp hÀøır oldılar. Ve mÀnend-i nisvÀn bir miúdÀr yorulmuş gibi türki çağurup hora
depmeğe başladılar. Gemiler ile düşmÀn cÀsuslayub gördüler ki, ‘avratlardan àayrı meydÀnda
çokluk adam yok. HemÀn yab yab ‘avratlar dağılsun deyu ol güzel maóbÿbe kızlardur, ‘aôím
şevú ile kızlarıñ üzerine yürüdüler. Ve kızlar daòı düşmÀn görüb nisvÀnca na‘rÀlar urup Busi*
ùarafından firÀra başladılar. DüşmÀn bunlar yatmadığından “Bu nasıl kızlardur ki erkekden
ziyÀde kaçarlar?” deyüp “Erişelim!” deyu kızlara şöyle seyirdürlerdi ki? ziyÀde ve kaçarak
kızlar bunları tamÀm pusu ortasına götürdüler. Ve pusu daòı ardlarında kaldukda ve cümle
düşmÀn pusuya [56a] kızlar mÀbeyninde vÀúi‘ oldukda hemÀn kızlar üzerlerinde olan nisvÀn
libÀsını çıkarup ve yalın kılıc olup düşmÀn yüzüne düşdüler. Ve “DüşmÀn úuvvetimiz
úaríbdir, kılıç çıkarmağa ne hÀcet!” deyüp kılıc ellerinde yoğiken kızları kovarlardı. Ancak
kızlar Àr olup ve dönüb böyle kılıc urdular ki düşmÀn yüz çevirib kaçmak murÀd
eylediklerinde pusuda olan kokonoz yiğidler daòı dal kılıc olup ve yemín ve yesÀrda
Süleyman Óakím ile iş bilüb kÀr u zÀr görmüş ‘asker daòı şöyle kılıc urdular ki, bir aóade
firÀr ve ‘avdete maóal bırakmadılar. Çünkü yaz gecesi olup havÀ ılımanlık idi, kürk ile
gelmişler idi ve cümle ‘askeri ve mellÀóÀn, kızlar ümidiyle çıkub bi’l-cümle gemileri başdan
kara itmişlerdi. Ve gemilerde aãlÀ bir aóad kalmayub kızlar kapmağa gitmişler idi. Ve Atina
ahÀlísi bi’l-cümle düşmÀnı ortaya almışlardı. Şöyle kılıc urdular ki düşmÀndan bir aóad òalÀã
bulmayub cümlesini tu‘me-i şimşir eylediler. Ve çabucak maútÿllerin eåvÀblarını soyub
Atina`nıñ kÀr u zÀr görmüş yiğidlerine giydürdiler. Kız ãÿretinde olan genc yiğidlere zenne
247
eåvÀbını yine Süleyman [56b] óakím ta‘límiyle giydiler. Ve kız ãÿretinde eylediğinden
murÀdı, güyÀ Megara ve Úolori ùarafından gelen düşmÀn Atinalı üzerine àÀlib olup ve ol üç
biñ kızı esír eylediler ve Megara ve Úolori gemilerine girüb Megara`ya doğru yürüdüler. Ve
deryÀ kenÀrlarında “Niçün bize úaydınız deyu na‘rÀlar urup biz sizinle min ba‘d ceng
etmeyelum ve etmemek üzere ‘aôímet itmiş idik. Siz ise àÀfilín gelüp bizi bu hÀle koyub,
ôulm ve te‘addí ve bu kadar adamımızı úatl etdikten soñra ‘avratlarımızı ve kızlarımızı esír
eylediñiz. LÀkin bu ôulmü eylediñiz, òayr görmezsiniz.” Bu misillu maãnÿ‘ saòte kelÀmlar ile
Megara`ya yürüdüler.
Ve Megara ahÀlísi gördüler ki baóren gemileri ‘aôím şennikler ile gelur ve gemileriñ
içi bi’l-cümle tÀze kız ile dolmuş gelirler. Ve Atina ahÀlísi karıdan ziyÀde ağlayub feryÀd
iderler. HemÀn kara kapuların kapayub iótimÀldir, Atina ahÀlísi óarÀret ile ölümü gözüne alup
derÿn-ı úal‘aya yürüyüş eylesünler. Úal‘alarınıñ kara semtini kapayub ve deryÀ ùarafından
olan kapuları acdılar. Ve gemiler gelüp hemÀn başdan kara alup mezbÿr [57a] kızlara,
Megaralı dest-rÀzlık eylediklerinde taóammül edemeyüb, hemÀn bi’l-cümle eåvÀbların iòrÀc
idüp ve yalın kılıc olup yalıya cem‘ olan Megara ve Úolori adamlarını kāt-ı öne idüp şöyle
kılıc urdular ki, Àn-ı vÀóidde yalıya esír içün cem‘ olanlardan bir aóad òalÀã olmayup
cümlesini tu‘me-i şimşírden geçirdiler. Ve ol vaúitde Megara`nıñ iç úal‘a dizdÀrı İúlidis
óakím olup ve iç úal‘adan dÿrbín ile bakub gördü ki, gelenleriñ eåvÀbıdur; lÀkin óarekÀt ve
sekenÀtları Atina óareketidir. Ol sÀ‘at iç úal‘a kapularını kapadıb ve ùaşra úal‘a dizdÀrına ve
adamlarına çağırup òaber verdi ki: “Bunlar dost değil düşmÀndür. HemÀn bi’l-cümle
adamlarınızı kal ‘a derÿnuna cem‘ eyleñ ve úal‘a kapuların park edin deyüp ve Efrosolidi
ancak ùaşra úal‘a dizdÀrı dÿrbín ile gördü ki; gemiler ile gelenler eåvÀbı, Megara ve Úolori
eåvÀbıdur ve kızlar Atina kızlarıdur. İúlidis óakím iòtiyÀrlık óasebiyle vesvese eyledi; ve
kendüye òavf ùÀrí oldu “Gemiler ile gelenler ãÀfí bizim adamlarımızdur” deyüp ve kızlar ãÀfí
doyumlukdur/toyumluktur? [57b] ve àanímet ile dilber kızlardur” deyüp úal‘adan ùaşra yalıya
çıkmışlar idi. Ol ecilden cümlesi kılıcdan geçüb maútÿl oldılar. Ve baóren ve berren gelen
Atina ‘askeri yürüyüş idüp ùaşra úal‘ayı fetó idüp aldılar. Ancak iç úal‘a àÀyet sarb olmaàla
beş on gün muóÀsara eylediler; velÀkin fetói müyesser olmadı.
Bi’ø-øarÿre ùarafeyn muãÀlaóa olup senede bir miúdÀr şeyi Megara ve Úolori Atina`ya
vermek üzere Atina`ya tÀbi‘ oldılar. Ancak maútÿllerin cümle emvÀl ve eåvÀbların ve evlÀd u
‘avratların alup ve karadan ve diyÀrdan Atina`ya ‘aôím şennikler ile ‘avdet eylediler. Ve
Atina`ya maãnÿ‘ olan Megara ve Úolori adamları Atinalıya àÀlib olup, ol kızları esír
eyledikleri òaberler vuãÿl buldukda, ‘aôím bukÀlar ve feryÀd u fiàānlar ile Atina`nıñ derÿnu
dolmuş idi. Ba‘dehÿ meserret òaberi geldikde cümleye sürÿr óÀãıl olup çünki Süleyman
248
Óakím böyle óüsn-i tedbír ile böyle yüz seneden beru ser-ferÿ etmeyen düşmÀnı úatl ve helÀk
ve sebeb-i àÀret ve àÀlib olup òarÀca kesdi. Atina`nıñ ãaàír u kebír cümleye pesendíde idüp
Atina`nıñ [58a] vaøí‘ ve refí‘i istiúbÀl idüp ve Süleyman Óakím`iñ basdığı yere kumaşlar
döşeyub ve du‘Àlar idüp ‘aôím ikrÀm ile şehre getürdüler. Ve Atina`da on gün ve on gece
şükrÀnlık içün donanmalar idüp fuúarÀ ve mesÀkíne, aàniyÀ iósÀnlar eylediler. Ve Süleyman
Óakím`e ta‘ôím ve tekrím ile cümlesi fermÀnına muùí‘ ve münúād oldılar.
Ancak Süleyman Óakím`iñ murÀdı, Úolori úal‘asını fetó eylemeden; zírÀ bundan
aúdem Atina ùarafından yüz sene miúdÀrı nice def‘a sefer olup Úolori úal‘ası fetói müyesser
olmadı. Bu def‘a Süleyman Atina`ya ‘aôímet ile vuãÿl buldukda aãlÀ te’òír itmeyüp otuz kırk
pÀre sefíne hÀøırlayub ve içlerine on biñ miúdÀrı cengÀver ‘asker doldurdular. Ve Ejder limanı
ùaşrasından koltuklarda úal‘alara berÀber gizlendiler. Ve “Bir zamÀn genÀyim taúsímiyle
meşàÿlüz” deyu Úolori ùarafından dil almağçÿn gemi gelur, hemÀn Úolori gemisi gelur ise
tutub ve ùÀ’ifesinden birini kaçırmayasız ve esír eylediñiz adamların eåvÀbları ne miúdÀr var
ise bizim ùÀ’ifeden ol kadar adam ol eåvÀbı giysünler ve dil almış gibi [58b] Úolori úal‘ası
ùarafına yürüsün. Ve bizim gemiler güya ol gemi[y]i almak içün ol geminiñ ardına düşsünler.
Ve ol gemi úal‘aya doğru yürüsün ve Úolori adamları gemileri dil ile gelur, deyu àÀfil seyre
çıkarlar. Ve bizim gemiler güyÀ ol gemi[y]i tutmak içün ardından kovarlar. Ve geri úal‘a
altına vardıkda güyÀ dil gemisini “Atina gemileri yetişdi” deyu Úolori cezíresini taòríb içün
Atina gemilerinin ‘askeri ùaşra dökülsün ve Úolori úal‘asının ‘askeri Atina ‘askerini ref‘ içün
úal‘adan bi’l-külliye çıkub Atina ‘askerine yürüdükleri vaúitde úal‘a boş kalur. Ol vaúitde dil
gemisi úal‘aya yanaşub ‘asker te’òír etmeyub úal‘a derÿnuna duòÿl idüp úal‘a øabt etmesunler
ve “Úal‘a ve fetó ettuk” deyu size işÀret eylesünler. Ve beş altı pÀre mükemmel ‘askerli gemi
úal‘aya yanaşsunlar ve úal‘aya duòÿl idüp eyüce úal‘anıñ her ùarafını fetó idüp øabt
eylesünler!”
Ve bu vaãiyyeti Süleyman Óakím eyleyüb on biñ miúdÀrı ‘askeri ve kırk gemiye yüz
ellişer adam doldurup ve bir müdebbir ser-‘asker naãb idüp minvÀl-i meşrÿó üzere [59a] irsÀl
eylediler ve ser-‘asker sipÀriş olunan vechi idüp varup gece ile yalı kenÀrına iòtifÀ eylediler.
Ve dil gemisi geldikde emÀn vermeyub aòõ eylediler ve me’òÿz olunan adamları söylediler.
Ve ol miúdÀr adama libÀsları giydür ve esírleri Atina`ya irsÀl eylediler. Ve uğradıkda dil
gemisi güyÀ dil almış ve Atina`dan ‘avdet etmiş gibi Úoloriye sür‘at ile gelur ve Atina
gemileri ardından anlar daòı sür‘at ile dil gemisini tutmak içün gelur. Úolori ahÀlísi bu óÀleti
müşÀhede eyledikde ãaàír ve kebír seyre ve karşuya çıkdılar. Ve dil gemisi doğru úal‘a altına
sığınmak içün yürüdü ve Atina gemileri güyÀ dil gemisine yetişmediklerinden Úolori bÀğ ve
bÀàçe ve varoşunu taòríb içün kara döküldüler. Ve Úolori úal‘asında ve varoşunda óarb u
249
êarba úÀdir ne miúdÀr adam bulundu ise Atina ‘askerini taòríbden men‘ içün ùaşra döküldüler.
Ve dil gemisi úal‘ayı boş bulup úal‘a derÿnuna suhÿlet ile dÀòil oldılar. Ve úal‘a[y]ı fetó
eyledikleri işÀretin daòı eylediler. Ve altı pÀre gemi daòı biñ beş yüz adam ile úal‘aya [59b]
adam ile anlar daòı ceng etmeden suhÿlet ile girdiler. Ve úal‘ayı eyüce øabt idüp fetó eylediler
ve úal‘a derÿnunda buldukları ricÀl u nisvÀnı ve subyÀnı esír aldılar. Ve ùaşrada olan
‘askerine, Atina ‘askeri şöyle kılıc uşurduler ekåerini úatl ve úuãÿrunu esír eylediler.
Ve cümle Úolori cezíresine minvÀl-i meşrÿó üzere fetó eylediklerin, Atina`da
Süleyman Óakím`e müjde içün adam irsÀl eylediler. Ve Úolori muhÀfıôasıyçün kifÀyet
miúdÀrı Süleyman Óakím, ada[m] ta‘yín idüp ve “Úuãÿruna ‘afv itmeyüp esír eyledikleri
adamlar ile Atina`ya gelsunler!” deyu òaber irsÀl eyledi. Muóabbetya ta‘yín olunan kalup
úuãÿru esírler ile me‘an Atina gelüp cümle Atina ahÀlísi istiúbÀl idüp ve şennikler ile Atina`ya
vuãÿl buldular. Ve üç gün üç gece fetóiyçün ‘aôím donanma ve şennikler ile ve Süleyman
Óakím`iñ burayı tedbírine cümle taósín eylediler. Ve eùrÀf şÀhlar Atina`da bu óarb
òademelerine mahÀreti re’ís bulundukda “Gemiler karşu kor” deyüp cümle a‘dÀ òavf idüp
dostlar sürÿr üzere oldılar.
Ve Megara`da baúıyyetu’s-suyÿf kalanlar [60a] bu taúríb ile Süleyman Óakím,
Úolori`yi daòı fetó etdüği müşÀhede eylediklerinde Megara ahÀlísine ‘aôím derd ve elem óÀãıl
oldu. Ve “ne demekdür ki yüz seneden mütecÀvizdir ki, Atina ahÀlísi Úolori`yi fetó etmek
murÀd iderler ve kendülere ol fetó müyesser olmadı. Ve bu Süleyman Óakím óíleler ile bize
ve Úolori`ye bu óakāretleri eyledi ve bunuñ bu etdüği işler yanına kalur ise bir gün gelüp
bizim úal‘ayı daòı fetó ider. HemÀn iyüsü budur ki; içimizden mütekellim olanlardan bir yüz
adam intiòÀb idüp ve Mora ve Rÿmili şÀhlarına ve ümerÀsına tezallum-i óÀl idelim. Belki
Süleyman Óakím`e bir eyü gūş-mÀl olunur ise biz daòı óílelerinden belki òalÀã oluruz” deyüp
ve beynlerinden yüz miúdÀr mütekellim adam intiòÀb idüp eùrÀf şÀhlarına ve umerÀsına irsÀl
eylediler. Ve her biri vardıkları şÀhlara ‘aôím óüzn u bükÀlar ile bÀsit-ı merÀm eyledi ki,
“Atina`da bu yakında ôuhÿr iden Süleyman Óakím`iñ mekr u keyd u óílesinden zÀr u feryÀd
eylediler ve bu Süleyman Óakím oldukdan mekr u keyd u óíle bilür ki, murÀd eylese cümle
‘Àlemi òarÀb ider ve şÀhlarını bend u zincire giriftÀr ider. Bizim ve Úolori`nin köklerimizi
kazudub dibimize [60b] kibrit suyu akıtmıştır ve cümle emvÀl ve erzÀkımızı almıştır. Ve
óíleler ile ricÀlimiz úatl ve nisvÀn ve subyÀnımızı seby ve esír etmişlerdür. MerdÀne dubÿr ve
ceng ile olsa kayırmazdık; ancak óíle ile aóvÀlimizi díger-gÿn eylemişdür. Ve bu óíleler ve
úabÀóat ve fesÀdları Süleyman Óakím`iñ yanına kalur ise nice şÀhlar diyÀrlarını òarÀb idüp
emvÀl ve erzÀkların aldıkdan soñra nisvÀn u sıbyÀnın daòı esír ider. Ve şÀhların bend u zincir
ile zindÀnlara vaø‘ ider” dediklerinde ve Rÿmilinde birbirine kurbiyyeti olan şÀhlar bir yere
250
cem‘ olup Süleyman Óakím`i ùaleb idüp yanlarına da‘vet eylediler. Ol daòı icÀbet idüp
meclislerine hÀøır oldu.
Ve şÀhlar ‘alÀ vechi’t-ta‘õír Süleyman Óakím`e dediler ki: “Devr-i Àdemden beru
kimesne irtikÀb eylemediği óíleleri sen niçün irtikÀb eylediñ? Senden evvel Atina şehrine şÀh
ve óÀkim olanlardan aãlÀ ve úaù‘a bir aóad irtikÀb etmediği óíleyi sen niçün irtikÀb edersin?”
dediler. Ol daòı cevÀb verdi ki:
“Atina ahÀlísi ve biz óíleyi Megaralı`dan ta‘allüm eyledik. ZírÀ ibtidÀ mekr u keyd u
óíleyi anlar [61a] ícÀd eyledi. Bundan aúdem Úolori cezíresi Atina`ya tÀbi‘ iken Atina`ya bir
kebír düğün ôuhÿr iyledi. Ve düğün ãÀóibi Úolori ahÀlísiyle ‘aôím iòtilÀùı olmaàın ekåer
Úolori ahÀlísi düğüne geldiğini MoğÀralı òaber aldıkda, fırãat àanímetdir, diyüb Úolori óÀlí
iken òaber itmedin gelüp Úolori`yi fetó idüp, ricÀlini úatl ve nisvÀn u sıbyÀnın esír idüp ve
emvÀl u erzÀklar mÀl àanímet deyüp aldılar. Ve ba‘dehÿ Atinalı[y]a àayret óÀãıl olup yüz sene
ceng ü cidÀl idüp, bize Megaralı böyle óíle ile úal‘amızı aldı ve bu şÀhlara aãlÀ şikÀyet
eylemediler. HemÀn merdÀne ceng eylediler. Ve ba‘dehÿ bu faúír-i pür-taúãír óakím naãb
olındıkda Úolori cengini yasÀğ eyledim. Üç sene Úolori cengini Atinalı`dan kimse lisÀnına
almadı. Ve belki beynimiz muãÀlaóa olur deyu LísnÀ nÀm maóalde senede bir kez nevrÿz
olurdu. Kadímden ve bunların şerrinden ol nevrÿz yüz sene miúdÀrı def‘ olmuş idi. Çünkü
óükemÀ mesleği ãuló u ãalÀó üzere olup kimesneye ôulm u ta‘díye rıøÀları yoğidi. Bu líke
Megaralı`ya [61b] ãulóa sebeb olur ümidiyle LebisnÀ maóalline yine Nevrÿz içün münÀdíler
nidÀ itdürdim. Ve vaúti geldikde Nevrÿz içün LebisnÀ`ya Atina`nıñ ricÀl ü nisvÀnı gitdiler. Ve
bunlar nevrÿz şenliğine meşàÿl iken Megaralı dört beş biñ kadar erÀzil cem‘ idüp ve gice
gelüp nıãfu’l-leylde baóren sefíneler ile bizi basub ve leb-i deryÀda bulunan cem‘iyyetimizi
períşÀn idüp kaçırdılar. Ve úanÀ‘at itmeyüb fırãatdur deyu üzerimize yüridiler. Ve bu kadar
niyÀz idüp emÀnlar çıkardık aãlÀ isgā eylemediler. Ve yalın kılıç olup bizi úatle başladılar. Ve
yedlerinden firÀr daòı mümkün olmayup bi’ø-øarÿre Atina ahÀlísi ölüm-ÀrÀ olup MoğÀra
erÀziliyle cenge mübÀşeret eylediler. Ve mazlÿmiyetimiz óasebiyle nesím-i nuãret bizim
üzerimize óubÿb idüp manãÿr olduk. Bi’ø-øarÿre óarÀretden “men dakka dukka” ve “kemÀ dín
tedÀne” fehvÀsınca biz daòı lÀ-‘ilÀc şerlerinden òalÀã içün biz daòı bir miúdÀr ta‘allüm
eylediğimiz óílelerden anlara icrÀ iyledik, mÀcerÀnın aãlı ve fer‘i budur.” Ve Süleyman
Óakím`iñ temhíd eylediği muúaddemÀtı bi’l-cümle óÀøır olan Megara mütekellimleri daòı
taãdíú [62a] eylediklerinde cümle şÀhlar úabÀóati Megara ahÀlísine bulup Süleyman Óakím`e
eyledikleri sÿ’-i zann ve ta‘õíri müş‘ir kelimÀtlarına nÀdim oldılar. Ve Süleyman Óakím`den
‘öõr ùaleb eylediler ve “Saña zaómet virdik” deyu ‘aôím iósÀn ve hediyeler virdiler. Ve
mu‘azzez ve mükerrem Atina`ya ‘avdet itdirdiler.
251
Ve Süleyman Óakím eùrÀf ve eknÀfa ‘ilm-i óikmet ve tedbír-i ma‘Àş u niôÀm-ı
memleket ve óükÿmet ve siyÀset ‘ilmleriyle meşhÿr olup, eùrÀf şÀhları ve umerÀları óakímin
ãoóbetine müştÀú olup, umerÀ gelüp Atina`da müşerref olurlardı. Ve şÀhlar da‘vet idüp ‘ilm-i
óikmete ve nuãó u pendi müştemil nice nasíhat-Àmíz meclislerinde taúrír ile hasta-ment
olurlardı. Ve ‘aôím ‘atÀya ile Atina`ya ‘avdet itdirirler idi. Ve mezbÿr óakím böyle ‘ilm ü
edeb ve úÀnÿn u siyÀset ve riyÀset ve óüsn-i ma‘Àş ‘ilminde mahÀret-i tÀmmesi olmaàın ,
Kıbrız adası şÀhı, ol ‘aãrda Haleb ve Şam ve Ahne ve sÀ’ir ol havÀlílerin cümle şÀhı ol idi,
óakím -i mezbÿrun böyle õí-fünÿn olduğın òaber aldıkda òavÀããından müstaúil adam
gönderüb, Süleyman Óakím`i [62b] da‘vet eyledi. Ve vüzerÀsına şÀh-ı mezbÿr dedi ki:
“Süleyman Óakím nice şÀhlar ve umerÀ meclisinde hÀøır olup hezÀr ÀşinÀdur ve bir daòı
anlara úıyÀs eyle belki meclisimize òıffet idüp şevketimize göre tekellüm eylemez. HemÀn
devletimize lÀyıú olan oldur ki, Àna ibtidÀ ‘aôímet ve şevketimiz gösterüb ve ba‘dehÿ
meclisimize duòÿle iõin verelim” deyüp ve ol şehrin dívÀn ve alay yolu olan bir maóalle
óakími iclÀs eylediler.
Ve bir gün evvel şÀhın cemí‘ini òÀs atların ve kısrakların ve deve ve üsterÿ ve sÀ’ir
óayvÀnÀtların óakím önünden geçirdiler. Óakím-i mezbÿr aãlÀ iltifÀt eylemedi ve ertesi gün
süvÀrí-i ‘askeríni gösterdiler. Ve ba‘dehÿ şÀh kendü cümle òavÀããıyla cevÀhir ve altÿna
tevÀbi‘ àarú olmuş ve yedikleri ve enderÿn òademesi bi’l-cümle na‘l ve incü ve elmÀs ve
zümrüd ile muraããa‘ ve müzeyyen ÀlÀt u eåvÀb ile kendü ve enderÿn òademe müzeyyen mürÿr
iylediler. ŞÀh göründükde, Süleyman Óakím ayağa kalkub edeb ile selÀmın aldı. Ancak
ta‘míú-i naôar idüp, ol zer u zívere ve cevÀhir ve incüye aãlÀ iltifÀt naôarıyla bakmadı. Ve şÀh
ùarafından ol [63a] zíynetleri ta‘ríf ve götürmek içün ta‘yín olunan adamlar teràíb-i ‘aôím ile
ol cevÀhiri medó iderlerdi. Óakím ise úaù‘an isgā itmeyüp, cevÀb vermezdi.
Ve ba‘dehÿ şÀh, mu‘arriflere su’Àl eyledikde, “Óakím, benim zeynime ne cevÀb verup
ve ne şekl medó ve taósín eyledi?” deyu su’Àl eyledikde, mu‘arrifler cevÀb verdi ki “Du‘Àdan
àayrı bir şey demezdi”, bu cevÀbı verdiler ve şÀh dedi ki: “Belki óakím zan ider ki, bu cevÀhir
peder-mÀndedur. ÒazínedÀrlara emr eyledi ki: “Cemí‘-i òazínelerimi óakíme gösteresiz!”
Anlar daòı bi’l-cümle òazÀyini óakíme gösterdiler. Óakím yine du‘Àdan àayrı bir kelÀm
söylemedi. Ve ba‘dehÿ òazínedÀrlara şÀh su’Àl eyledikde, “Du‘Àdan àayrı bir kelÀm
söylemedi” deyu cevÀb verdiler. ŞÀh emr eyledi, Süleyman Óakím`i óuøÿruna getürdiler.
Süleyman Óakím ‘alÀ vechi’l-aósen ÀdÀb-ı şÀhı yerine getürdi. Ba‘dehÿ óakím-i mezbÿra şÀh
su’Àl eyledi ki: “ ‘Álemde gezub ve seyr ettüğün beyler ve şÀhlardan memdÿhu’l-enÀm ve’ssünnet-i nÀsda ník-nÀm ve evãÀf-ı óasene ve síret-i müstaósene ile meõkÿr ve meşhÿr kimleri
görüb ve istimÀ‘ [63b] eylediñ?” ŞÀh dedi ki: “Süleyman Óakím dedi ki; Atina`da Telun
252
nÀmında bir adam gördüm ve mesmÿ‘um oldu ki, kendü ittibÀ‘ı ol diyÀrıñ òalúı komşularıyla
‘işret-i laùíf ve aòlÀk-ı óamíde ve evãÀf-ı pesendídesinden cümle òalú ve sÀ’ir iòtilÀù ettiği
kimesneler cümlesi Àndan òoşnud ve rÀøı olmuşdur. Ve mezbÿr Telun diyÀrı àayretine a‘dÀ ile
ceng idüp maútÿl olunca def‘-i a‘dÀya sa‘y itmiştir. ‘Akíbinde kendüsu gibi ? òamíde[y]i
cÀmi‘ evlÀdlar terk eylemişdür” deyüp Süleyman Óakím òatm eyledi.
ŞÀh yine su’Àl eyledi ki: “Telun`dan àayrı daòı kimi gördün?” Óakím cevÀb verdi ki:
“Yine Atina şehrinde iki karındÀş olup, vÀlideleri sıhhatte idi. Ve àÀyetu’l-gÀye
vÀlidelerine muti‘ler idi. Ve ol mertebe vÀlideleriniñ rıøÀlarında idi ki, diyÀrımızda emkine’-i
müteberrekde bir ma‘bed binÀ olunmuş idi. Senede bir mu‘teber günde Atina òalúı ve etraf-ı
nÀs, ol ma‘bede cem‘ olup kurbÀn ederlerdi. Ve müdÀm maúãÿdların nidÀ idüp
ma‘bÿdlarından òulÿs ile ùaleb iderlerdi, bi-emri’l-l’Allahu Te‘ÀlÀ ol maúãad óÀãıl olurdu. Ve
mezbÿr-ı mev‘ÿde bir sene [64a] yine òalú cem‘ olurken mezbÿr iki karındÀş vÀlideleri daòı
ol ma‘bede kurbÀn itmek içün óaøırlandı. Ve oğulları ile me‘an bir öküz ‘arabasına binüb
gittiler. Ve ‘arabalar öküzleri àÀyet ? yürüdüğünden oğulları cezm eylediler ki, bu yürüyüş ile
vÀlideleri yevm-i ma‘hÿdda ol ma‘bede vuãÿl müyesser olmaz, hemÀn lÀ-‘ilÀc kalup ve
‘arabadan inüb ve sığırları iòrÀc idüp kendüleri sığır yerine girüb ve vÀlidelerini ma‘hÿd
günde ol ma‘bede erişdirdiler. Ve ol ma‘bede cem‘ olan cemí‘ òalú evlÀdların vÀlideleri
rıøÀlarıda olmaklık içün çekdikleri zaómete taósín ve Àferin eylediler. Ve vaút-i kurbÀn
oldukda, vÀlideleri evlÀdlarına ol muóabbet ve rÀøıye ve kemÀl-i inkıyÀdlarına oldukların ve
òalúın teveccühleri müşÀhede eyledikde vÀlideleri oğullarına dedikde: “Bu Àna değin
hakgerde olan leõõet-i muóabbetim iótimÀldür ve bu mertebe kemÀl-i rıøÀm bir daòı müyesser
olmaya! Çünkü dünyÀdan rıólet emr-i muúarrerdir. Oldur ki bunda rÿó teslím ideyim” deyüp
ölüm münÀcÀtında ùaleb idüp ve ol Ànda teslím-i rÿó eyledi. [64b] Ve evlÀdlar vÀlidelerinde
bu óÀleti görünce anlar daòı böyle dediler ki: “Bundan soñra sıhhat olup ve her Ànda
vÀlidemizin óüzn ve elemin çekmekden ise bunda biz daòı mevti temenni itmek evlÀdur!”
deyu anlar daòı ol Ànda rÿó teslím eylediler. Ve òalú bu mertebe vÀlide ve evlÀdların
birbirlerine vefret üzere olan muóabbetlerine taósín ve Àferin idüp üçünü daòı bir mezara defn
eylediler. Ve anlarıñ üzerine türbe ve kubbe binÀ olunup óÀlÀ kabirleri ziyÀretgāhdür. Ve óÀlÀ
elsine-i nÀsda ník-nÀmları ve evãÀf-ı celíleri meõkÿrdür” deyüp yine óakím òatm-i kelÀm
eyledi.
ŞÀh me’mÿl iderdi ki, kendüyu medó ider. AãlÀ şÀhı medó eylemediğinden şÀh ‘aôím
elem çekub àaøaba gelur. Ve yine Óakím`e su’Àl eyledikde, “Bunlardan àayrı elsine’-i nÀsda
ník-nÀm ile kim meõkÿrdür?” deyüp Óakím:
253
“Bunlardan àayrı elsine-i nÀsda ník-nÀm bilmem” dedi. ŞÀh dedi ki: “Çünkü faúír
adamsın, fuúarÀya naôar idüp fuúarÀ nÀmlarını ezber eylediñ. Ancak sen şehinşÀh olan
‘aôímü’ş-şÀn pÀdişÀhlar ile görüşmediñ ve anlarda olan ‘aôameti ve fırãatı ve lüùf u ióãÀnı
görmedin ve anlarda olanı medó etmezsin, [65a] derviş maúÿlelerinde olan ník-nÀmı
söylersin. Ník-nÀma, sezÀ ve müsteóaú ancak ol şÀhlardur ki birinde gedÀyı murÀd eyledikde,
kÀmran ve nice mazlÿmlar ôulmet-i şerrinden òalÀã-ı fuúarÀnın iyiliği kendünde tamÀm olur,
Àòara sirÀyet etmez” dedi ve “ÓÀlÀ ník nÀmım ‘Àleme nümÀyÀn ve münteşir iken sen ketm
idüp söylemezsiñ” didi. Óakím cevÀb virdi ki:
“Benim SulùÀnım keşíde ník-nÀm evÀ’il-i óÀlinden òÀtime değin mümtedd ola. ZírÀ
“İnnemel i‘tibÀru bi’l-hevÀtimi”dir. Ve bizim naôírimiz insÀnda ník-nÀm ve òıãÀl-ı
óamídiyyedur; yohsa bey u gedÀyı birbirinden temyíz itmez. Çünkü bÀy u gedÀnıñ aãlı ebnÀyı Óaøret-i Ádem (‘aleyhi’s-selÀm)dür. Nev‘-i insÀnın dünyÀya gelmesine bÀdí-yi tevellüdüni
Àdem`dür. DünyÀdan rıólete sebeb rÿó-ı óayvÀní, beden-i insÀndan òurÿc itmesidir. Ve rıólete
cümle nev‘-i insÀn müşterekdir. ‘İndimizde bÀ‘iå-i ník-nÀm, òıãÀl-ı óamídeniñ mine’l-mebde’
ile’l-meÀdıdür; yohsa bÀy u gedÀ değildür. ZírÀ nice beyler gedÀ olur ve salùanat nÀmı ref‘
olur; ve nice gedÀlar bey u şÀh ve keõÀlik nÀmı ref‘ olur” didikde şÀh ‘aôím, àaøaba gelüp
[65b] Óakím`i úatl murÀd iyledi. VelÀkin vüzerÀsı envÀ‘-i te’víl idüp gücile úatlden òalÀã
iylediler.
VelÀkin “Bu òodbín-i bí-edebi rıúúıyyet ve kölelik òizmetlerinde ‘aôím meşaúúatlü
olan òidmetlere ta‘yín eylen!” dedikde, dÀ’imÀ şÀh meclisinde tabí‘at-gírlik ile şÀhı medó bir
bÀzirgÀn Süleyman Óakím`iñ kadrin bilirdi. HemÀn bÀzirgÀn, şÀhıñ hÀk-i pÀyine yüz sürüb
yuğidi. Óakím`i “Bana iósÀn eyle!” deyu ùaleb ile niyÀz eyledi. ŞÀh daòı bÀzirgÀna verdi. Ve
mezbÿr bÀzirgÀn Süleyman Óakím`e ‘aôím iósÀnlar idüp, mu‘azzez ve mükerrem Atina`ya
irsÀl eyledi.
Ve bir miúdÀr zamÀn mürÿrundan soñra ‘Acem şÀhlarından Darbini evvel Süleyman
Óakím`i “kul” deyu bağışlayan pÀdişÀha àÀlib olup ve cemí‘-i òazÀ’in ve memÀlikiñ yedinden
olup ve kendüyu kul ettüğüne úanÀ‘at etmeyub ve kullar òidmetine istihdam etmeyüb civanlar
òidmeti olan ‘araba çekmek òidmetine emr eyledi. Ve DÀrÀb şÀh, kendü ‘arabasına bindikçe
mezbÿr Rÿm pÀdişÀhını bir óayvÀn yerine koşub ol bir óayvÀnlar ile me‘an şÀh ‘arabasın
çekerdi. Ve ‘arabaya koşuldukça yÀş yerine kanlar dökerdi ve “Áh Süleyman Óakím, ne tez
benden
[66a]
intiúÀm aldın!” derdi. “Her bir sözün ve her bir kelimeñ óikmet-Àmíz
cevÀhirden imiş” deyu ağlardı. Ve “Sözün gerçekdür keşíde olan nÀm u òaslet u devlet
mebdÀdan mÀ‘adÀ mümted olan” derdi. Ve Rÿm PÀdişÀhı ‘arabayı çekdikçe bu kelimÀtı
254
söylerken DÀrÀ ŞÀhı işidüp “Nedir söylediğin?” deyüp ve ‘arabayı dürtüb Rÿm şÀhına
Süleyman Óakím`iñ aóvÀlini, min evvelihí ilÀ Àòirihí söyledüp “ ‘Acem şÀhı diye işte bu
çekdiğin ol Óakím õí-fünÿn óikmet-Àmíz kelimÀtına ‘amel itmeyüp kibr u kin ile ittiğün
irbetdür” deyüp òoş-Àmedi “Cürmüne mu‘terif olduñ” deyüp “Ol óakím hÀtıriyçün seni ÀzÀd
ettim” deyüp ‘araba çekmek òidmetinden ÀzÀd idüp ve bir miúdÀr ma‘íşet ile bir köşeye ta‘yín
eyledi.
Ve Süleyman Óakím iòtiyÀr olmaàla riyÀseti terk idüp óüsn u iòtiyÀrıyla
bir köşeye ders ve tedríse meşàÿl olup aãlÀ umÿra müte‘alliú bir kelíme ve .. ve işe
mübÀşeret itmeyüp maúam-ı ‘uzlet fevt olunca terk itmedi. Ancak mezbÿr Óakím, ‘ilm-i
riyÀsetde ve tedbír ve niôÀm-ı memlekete dÀ’ir úÀnÿn-nÀmeler [66b] te’líf itmeğin òalefleri
‘amel idüp sıhhatde oldukça Óakím`e zaómet vermediler.
Ve Süleyman Óakím teyzesi oàlu Mezistratos872 nÀmında ‘Àkil ve müdebbir yine
Süleyman Óakím`iñ tedbíriyle müstaúil nÀm ãÀóibi şÀh naãb eyledi[l]er. Ve mezbÿr şÀhı
óükmün terbiyesiyle olmaàın ol mertebe óüsn sükÿn ve sülÿk ve ‘ilm-i riyÀset ile Atina
ahÀlísine àÀyet eyü olup ancak riyÀsete müteheyyí olan óükemÀ evÀyilde bir miúdÀr ‘adem-i
rıøÀ ve òuşÿnet gösterdiler. VelÀkin soñra anlar daòı ãaóíóan ? idüp rÀøı oldılar. Ve bi’lcümle re‘ÀyÀ ve berÀya mezbÿr şÀhdan òoşnÿd oldılar. Ve meõkÿr şÀha gelince cümle Atina
ahÀlísi kapusunda òaşviyyet iderlerdi. Mezbÿr şÀh, óÀlÀ Atina`da Mendil Dağı ismiyle
müsemmÀ olan dağ eteklerinden ve òolandiriovası nÀm ovada mevøi‘lerde suyu àÀyet eyü ve
leõíõ bulup ve ol mevÀøı‘ Atina`dan yüksek olmaàla ol mevÀøi‘den kuyular kazub ve
kuyulardan birbirine lağım açub, Atina`ya úaríb yere değin yer altından lağım ve bacalar suyu
icrÀ edüp Atina derÿnunda lüzÿmu olan maóallÀta kırk miúdÀrı çeşme icrÀ eyledi. Ve on iki
[67a] sene bu su icrÀsına muúayyed olup a‘mÀl-i ‘aôím ãarf eylemişdir. Ve mezbÿr şÀh
zamÀnına gelince Atina`da ta‘lím ve ta‘allüm olunan óikmet ve sÀ’ir ‘ulÿm bi’l-cümle efvÀhı
ta‘lím ve ta‘allüm olunurdu.
Mezbÿr şÀh emr eyledi ki: “Cümle fünÿn u ‘ilm tedvín olunup silk-i taóríre gelsun!
ZírÀ nisyÀn ile úavÀ‘id-i ‘ilmden nice kÀ‘ideler terk olunur ve óükemÀdan óaúíúatde muãlió
bulunmayub nisyÀn, ifsÀd-ı ‘ilme bÀ‘iå olur. Ve her bir úavÀ‘id ‘ilmi ifrÀz idüp ve cem‘ u
te’líf idüp kitÀblar taórír eylediler. Ve dersòÀneler ve mu‘allim-òÀneler ve yevmiye-i vaôífe ile
872
Pisistratus
255
müderrisler ve òÀceler ta‘yín olunup mezbÿr müderris ve mu‘allimleriñ cihet-i ma‘ÿnetlerin
bi’l-cümle míríleri ùarafından görülüb verilirdi.
İbtidÀ ve Rÿm diyÀrlarında her şey’in ta‘şírini mezbÿr şÀh ícÀd eyledi; óattÀ ehl-i
ãanÀyi‘den daòı ãan‘atlarınıñ ücretlerini mezbÿr şÀh ta‘şír iderdi ve rencberleriñ ücretini daòı
ta‘şír iderdi. Ve bir gün mezbÿr şÀh, bir rencber iòtiyÀra su’Àl eyledikde, “Bugün ne kesb
eylediñ?” dedi. Ve rencber cevÀb verdi ki: “Öşr ve çekdiğim zaómet ve gözüme beş karış
óÀãıl [67b] eyledim.” dedi. Ya‘ní “öşrden àayrı bir şey taóãíl etmedim” demiş oldu. ŞÀh
meróamet idüp, ehl-i ãanÀyi‘ ve rencber ùÀ’ifesi olandan ‘öşrü def‘ u ref‘ eyledi.
Ve mezbÿr şÀh óüsn-i óÀl ile yigirmi dört sene şÀhlık idüp fevt oldu. Ve ba‘dehÿ iki
oğulları kalup biriniñ ismi Deyūúlis873 ve biriniñ ismi İpas874; ikisini daòı müşterek şÀh naãb
eylediler. Pederlerinden àÀyet òoşnÿd olduklarından birisi maòõÿn olmasun deyu velÀkin
Deyūúlis`in nefs-i şehveti hevÀsına tÀbi‘ olup, kendü ezvÀc u cevÀrísine úanÀ‘at itmeyüp her
kangı adamıñ óüsnÀ ‘avrat ve kızların istimÀ‘ eyleye nefsine uyub varup anlar ile zínÀ etmelü
idi. Ve bir gün yine güzel kızlar òaber alup ve ãabr etmeyub kızın evine ‘alenen varup cebr ile
zínÀ iderken, kızın bir deli kanlu karındÀşı olup òaber aldıkda evine gelüp mezbÿr şÀhı, derkÀr buldukda deryÀ-yı àayret cÿş eyledikden, aãlÀ emÀn vermeyub şÀhı úatleyledi. Ve ikinci
şÀh olan şÀhıñ karındÀşı òaber aldıkda ol daòı úÀtili aòõ idüp úatliçün óaps eyledi. [68a]
VelÀkin úÀtil àÀyet bir fettÀn adam olmaàın şÀha meydÀn-ı siyÀsetde iken “ŞÀhım bu fi‘li bu
kuluñuz kendü re’yim ile eylemedim. A‘yÀn ve eşrÀftan bir kaç adam gamz eyledi!” ŞÀh daòı
karındÀş óarÀretiyle kÀtilin gamz eylediği eşrÀfa aãlÀ emÀn vermeyub aòõ ve söyletmeden
cümlesini úatleyledi.
KÀtil me’mÿl iderdi ki mezbÿr a‘yÀnlar ÀsÀnlık ile úatlolmazlar mezbÿrlarıñ úatli belki
bir fitne íkÀø ider iftirÀ eyledi, gördü ki; ÀsÀn vechile mezbÿrları şÀh aòõ idüp ve bunu daòı
eõiyyet ile úatl murÀd eyledikde úÀtil bir fitne daòı mülÀóaôa eyledi. Ve şÀha dedi ki:
“Óayfdur ben úatlolunayım ve benim úatlime sebeb olanlar òalÀã olsun” daòı “Benim
karındaşım úatline sebeb olmuş kimdur?” dedikde úÀtil dedi ki: “ŞÀhım dívÀn ile ve erbÀb-ı
dívÀn cümle cem‘ olsun ve anlarıñ muvÀcehesinde sebeb olanları söyleyim. ÓattÀ şÀhı ôulm
eyledi demesunler.” ŞÀh, “ÚÀtil zımnen bize òaberòÀh olmuş” deyüp dívÀn eyledi. Ve cemí‘i,
vaøí‘ ve refí‘ cem‘ oldukda úÀtile şÀh emr eyledi: “Söyle daòı benim karındÀşımı úatle sebeb
kim oldu?” dedikde, úÀtil dedi ki: “Ey şÀh bu nasıl su’Àldir ki meydÀn-ı [68b] siyÀsetde úatle
müstehak adamın ettiği ifk u iftirÀya kulak tutub bí-günÀh adamları úatledersin! Seniñ
873
874
Diocles
Hyppias
256
karındÀşın nefs şehvetine tÀbi‘ bir adam olup şÀhlığa lÀyıú olmayan mevÀøı‘-ı töhmet olan
ef‘Àl-i reddiyeni irtikÀb eylediğinden ma‘bÿdumuz ana òışm eyledi. Ve anı benim
bedenimden úatle müstehak olmaàla úatletturdu.” ÚÀtil bu vechile òatm-i kelÀm etdikde
cümle erbÀb-ı dívÀn şÀh üzerine yürüyüb taótından indürdiler ve getürüp şÀhı, mahbeslerinde
óabs eylediler. Ve o aralıkda úÀtil fırãat-yÀb olup ve bendlerini eãdiúā ve aúrabÀsına óall
itdürdüb ve òalÀã oldı.
Ve cümle óükemÀ bir yere gelüp ve müşÀvere eylediler ki ba‘żı şÀhlar: “Óiddet ve
şiddetleri taóammül olunmaz hemÀn enseb olan oldur ki yine tedbír-i memleket içün óükemÀyı tis‘aya vaø‘ idelim” deyüp ve rü’esÀ-yı óükemÀdan yine dokuz adam intiòÀb idüp, niôÀm-ı
memleket içün naãb eylediler. Ve mezbÿr İbasen şÀhı óabsden bir taúríb ile òalÀã buldurup
firÀr eyledi. Ve ‘iyÀl u ezvÀcını vermediler. Ve ol daòı tek durmayub çünkü dedesi Süleyman
Óakím`iñ eãdiúāsından ba‘øı şÀhlar ve umerÀ, [69a] mezbÿrı gözedirlerdi. Ve ba‘żı kerre
eùrÀfdan istimdÀd idüp ve Atina nevÀhísine gelüp zevclerini ùaleb iderlerdi. Vermedikleri
óalde Atina`nıñ nevÀhísini ba‘żı maóallerini àÀrÀt idüp yine firÀr iderdi. Bu taúríb ile bir kaç
kerre Atina`nıñ nevÀhísini taòríb eyledi. Bi’ø-øarÿre Atina óükemÀsı tavassuù idüp adamlara
şard ittirdi ki, mezbÿr şÀha ‘iyÀl ve ehlin virdikden soñra Rÿmilinde sÀkin olmayup
Anatolu`ya hicret eylesun. Mezbÿr daòı şarùı úabÿl idüp ehl ü ‘iyÀlin alup Anadolu`ya hicret
eyledi.
Ve Atina`nıñ yevmen fe-yevmen ma’bÿriyyeti mütezÀyid olup ve mÀl u ‘asker berren
ve baóren ser-‘askerler ta‘yín olup vÀfir donanma ióøÀr olunup Akdeñiz cezírelerinden cümle
fetó olunmak içün MiliåyÀri875 nÀmında baóren KapudÀn Paşa naãb olunup ve mezbÿr
kapudÀn, àÀyet müdebbir ve cerí ve cesÿr olunup her sefer itdikce manãÿren Atina`ya ‘avdet
iderdi. Ve berren daòı Atina eùrÀfından ba‘żı ‘iãyÀn iden úılÀ‘a ve úaãabÀta daòı ‘asker ta‘yín
olunup teshír olunurdı. Ve eùrÀfa ‘aôamet ile Atina meõkÿr olmaàla başladı.
[69b] Ve
Anaùolı`ya hicret iden mezbÿr Atina şÀhı Atina`nıñ böyle şöhretin istimÀ‘ iyledikde nÀr-ı
óased derÿnuna kÀr idüp Atina arzÿsu derÿnundan gitmezdi. Bi’ø-øarÿre ãabr idemeyub
Anadolu beylerine tezallum-i óÀl idüp Atina`ya varup êarb-ı destiyle almak içün istimdÀd
eyledi. Ancak Anadolu Beyleri yevmen fe-yevmen Atina`nıñ úuvvet ve ‘aôametin istimÀ‘
eyledikce Atina üzerine sefere cesÀret idemezlerdi.
Mezbÿr Atina şÀhı IyÀyas bunlardan me’yÿs olıcak ol vaúitde ‘Acem şÀhı İran ve
Turan`a óükm iden DÀrÀb bin Behmen bin İsfendiyar876`a varup taôallum-ı óÀl idüp Atina
875
876
Miltiades
Darius
257
şÀhlığına ôafer içün istimdÀd eyledi. DÀrÀ-yı evvel şöyle re’y eyledi ki; “İbtidÀ rıfúla nÀme
irsÀl iderim ve cebr ile seni Atina`ya şÀh iclÀs ideriz.” deyüp ba‘øı nuãó ve pendi müştemil bir
nÀme Atina óükemÀsına taórír idüp irsÀl-nÀme Atina óükemÀsına vuãÿl buldukda birkaç def‘a
müşÀvereler eylediler. Mümkün olup mezbÿr şÀhı şÀhlığa kimesne úabÿle rıøÀ vermedi. Ve
‘aôím’un-niyÀm ve ricÀyı müştemil cevÀb-nÀme taórír eylediler. Ve bu kelÀm ile nÀme[y]i
òatm eylediler ki; “Eğer şÀhımız
[70a]
cümlemizi tu‘me-yi şemşirden geçirir ise daòı
kimesne ol zÀ[li]mi Atina`da şÀhlığa úabÿl ider bulunmaz” dediler. ‘Acem şÀhına bu netíce
àÀyet girÀn gelüp àaøab-nÀk oldu. Baóren ‘aôím donanma ve berren bi’õ-õÀt kendü gemin
üzere tedÀrikler görülsün deyu ‘aôím yeminler eyledi. Biñden ziyÀde Şam, Trablus ve äayda
ve Beyrut eùrÀflarında ve sevÀóilinde bi’l-cümlesinde ne kadar iskele var ise sefer içün
sefíneler kuruldu. Ve ba‘dehÿ Anaùolı sevÀóilinde olan on iki şehrí ‘Acem şÀhı ùarafından
‘asker ta‘yín olunup fetó eylediler. Ve Atina óükmünden ‘Acem şÀhı ùarafından vÀlíler naãb
olındı. Atina óükemÀsına ‘Acem şÀhı àaøaba gelüp Atina ahÀlísine òışm eyledi.
Ve Anaùolı`da vÀúi‘ olan iki pÀre úal‘ayı fetó idüp óÀkim kendi tarafından óÀkim øabt
ettiğin òaber aldıkda, anlar daòı donanmalarını ta‘yín idüp Kıbrız adası úurbunda Anaùolı
yakası sevÀóilinde bir şehre varup àÀrÀt eylediler. Ve bu Atina donanması àÀrÀt eyledikleri
şehrin òaberi ‘Acem şÀhına vÀãıl oldukda àaøab ve tehevvürü [70b] sÀkin olmayup ve
donanması hÀøır ve ‘askeri müctemi‘ olmadığından sÀkísine emr eyledi: “Gene baña cÀmı
doldurdukda Atina donanması àÀrÀt ettüğü úal‘ayı teõkír eyle!” derdi. Ve vüzerÀ ve
vükelÀsına tenbíh ve åıúlet eyledi ki: “Elbette on kere yüz biñ ‘asker berren ve beş kere yüz
biñ ‘asker baóren ihêÀr iylen! Anlar daòı nÀ-çÀr olup üç kere yüz biñ ‘asker baóren tamÀm biñ
sefíne ki her birisinde üç yüz adam olmak üzere hÀøır idüp ve şÀha niyÀz eylediler ki: “Emr
olunan ‘asker ‘aôím tedÀriki iki üç seneye değin ancak ihêÀr olunur. EvlÀsı budur ki, el-Àn
hÀøır olÀn biñ pÀre sefíne ile cümle adalar ve Atina içün irsÀl idelim. Matlÿb olan Atina`yı
taòríbdur.” deyüp BilÀòare şÀhı irêÀ eylediler. Ve mezbÿr üç kerre yüz biñ ‘asker ile ve yüz
biñ ‘asker biñ pÀre sefíne topladub Akdeñiz`e irsÀl eylediler. Ve meõkÿr donanma her kangi
adaya yanaşdılar ise aãlÀ emÀn vermeyub ‘Acem şÀhına teb‘iyyet iderlerdi.
Ve cümle Akdeñiz adaları ve Rÿmili sevÀóilini àÀrÀt [71a] ile yedlerine mÀl-i ‘aôím
ve userÀ-yı bí-úıyÀs esír eylediler. Ve ol taúríb ile àanÀyim-i vÀfireye mÀlik olanlar fırãat
buldukça firÀr eylediler idi. Beşer onar gemici her gece firÀr iderlerdi. Ve bu esnÀda esír
ãÀóibi olanlarıñ daòı ekåeri firÀr eyledi. Ve sÀ’ir adalar ve sevÀlik taòríb u tesòíri óasebiyle
Atina`nıñ seferi geç kaldı. Ve ‘askeriñ nıãfı mertebesi sefíneler ile firÀr eylediler, biñ
sefíneden beş yüz ancak kaldı. Ve ba‘dehÿ Eàriboz`a gelüp ve ol vaúitde Eàriboz şimdiki
olan maóalde değil idi, óÀlÀ eski Eàriboz dedikleri maóal idi, ‘Acem ‘askeri daòı Eski
258
Eàriboz`u muóÀsara idüp ‘aôím ceng eylediler. Ve Eàriboz`da ‘aôím ‘asker telef oldu; zírÀ
Eàriboz, sÀ’ir adalar gibi olmayup ‘askeri vÀfir ve àÀyet ma‘mÿr olmaàla ‘aôím zaómet ile anı
daòı fetó eylediler. Ve ba‘dehÿ Atina`ya ‘aôímet murÀd eylediler; velÀkin àÀrÀt eyledikleri
mÀl ve esírleri àÀyet kesír olmaàın cümle mÀl ve eåvÀb ve esírleri bir suyu çok adaya bir
yigirmi biñ kadar ‘asker, ol mÀlı ve esírleri òirÀset içün vaø‘ idüp [71b] ve baúıyye kalan kırk
elli biñ ‘asker ile Atina üzerine yürüdüler. VelÀkin Eàriboz Boğazın`da bÀd muòÀlif olmaàın
‘Acem donanması çıkamadılar. Bi’ø-øarÿre kalup Eàriboz Boğazı derÿnunda Atina sınırı olan
Murasata877 nÀm maóalle yanaşub ‘askeri dökdüler; ve ol ùarafı bi’l-cümle taòríb eylediler.
Ve Atina óükemÀsı òaber alup on biñ miúdÀrı müretteb ‘asker ile ‘Acem ‘askerini
istiúbÀl eylediler ve aãlÀ göz açdurmayub cenge mübÀşeret eylediler. Ve ‘Acem ‘askeri biñ
ekåeri àÀrÀt ve yağmada bulunmağla Atina ‘askerine muúÀbele iden yigirmi biñ adam yoğidi.
Ne óÀl ise karşu gelüp bir kac def‘a ceng-i ‘aôím eylediler. Ve Atina ‘askeri vardıkca úuvvet
bulup Atina`dan imdÀd gelmede idi. MiletizÀ nÀm re’ís on biñ adam ile geldi. Ba‘dehÿ İrsitidÀ
daòı vÀfir ‘asker ile ve ba‘dehÿ æemestoúli daòı vÀfir ‘asker ile geldiler. Ve ba‘dehÿ bu õíkr-i
sebúat iden üç başbÿğ üzerlerine daòı cümleye başbÿğ ve ser-‘asker olmak üzere KılımÀòus
nÀmında ceng tedbírinde mÀhir ve cerí ve cesÿr ve òud‘a-yı óarbi òÿb bilür adam olmaàın
[72a] anı daòı vÀfir ‘asker ile imdÀda irsÀl eylediler. Ve ‘Acem ‘askeri àÀret içün etrafda
olanlar geldikçe ‘Acem ‘askeri daòı úuvvet bulup Atina ‘askerine àalebe gösterdikçe
Atina`dan daòı merúÿm başbÿğlar imdÀda erişüb anlar daòı minvÀl-i meşrÿó üzere nÀr-ı óarb
alevlenub üç gün üç gece êarb u úıtÀl úaù‘ olunmayub ùarafeyn zebÿn oldukça imdÀdları gelüp
úuvvet bulurlardı.
Kırk biñ miúdÀrı ‘Acem ‘askeri maóall-i ma‘rekede hÀøır olup ve otuz biñ miúdÀrı
Atina ‘askeri cem‘ olup çünkü Atinalı kendü topraklarında àayretleri ziyÀde olup ‘Acem
‘askeri ise misÀfir olmaàın vardıkça øa‘f ùÀrí olurdu. ZírÀ Atina ‘askerine su ve õaòíre ve ÀlÀt
dÀ’im erişüb zaómet çekmezlerdi. ‘Acem ‘askerine susuzluk ve açlık ziyÀde øa‘f verdi; zírÀ
‘Acem ‘asker sulu yer ve õaòíre bulmadı. Atinalı gelüp bir çorak ve yaban yerde göz
açdurmayub cenge mübÀşeret eylediler. Bu taúríb ile ‘Acem ‘askeri àÀyet zebÿn olup bi’øøarÿre üç günden soñra maàlÿb cengin iderek sefínelerine ? ardın ardın ‘avdet eylediler. [72b]
Ve iskele ve sandal yalı kenÀrına erişüb ‘Acem ‘askeri sefínelerine girmeğe başladılar. Ve
Atina ‘askeri yalı kenÀrında sandala ve iskeleye binen adamlara óamle idüp Sefíne derÿnunda
olan ‘Acem ‘askeri tír i bÀran ile def‘ iderlerdi. Ve Atina ‘askeri Süleyman Óakím`den
ta‘allum eyledikleri óarb u òud‘alarını bi’l-cümle bu cengde icrÀ eylediler. Gece oldukda bir
877
Marathon
259
miúdÀr ‘asker yan verup sabÀó oldukda imdÀda gelur gibi ‘aôím şennikler ile cenge gelüp
mübÀşeret iderlerdi. Ve günde beş on kerre böylece ca‘lí imdÀdlar ederlerdi. Ve Atina
‘askerine ser-‘asker olan KalimÀòos878 kendüye ‘Acem ‘asker úabíline urup bir ceng-i ‘aôím
eylemişdur ki ol diyÀrlarda anıñ ettiği ceng sübÿk-ı bi’l-miål değil idi. Ancak ‘Acem ‘askeri
daòı öyle tír u òışt ve mızraklar bir ùarafından ol bir ùarafına geçüb mezbÿr Maòos ayak
üzerinde kalup mezbÿrun cesedine vurulan òışt u mızraklar Maòos`un cesedini yere düşmeğe
dört eùrÀfdan sanculub kalan mızraklar mÀni‘ olup ayağ üzerinde cÀn verdi.
Ve yine Atina ‘askeriniñ biñ bÀşlarından Çandalos nÀmında biri, ‘Acem ‘askeri [73a]
sandala girer iken ceng iderek gelüp bir eliyle sandal alıkoymak murÀd eyledikde, sandalda
olanlar elini úaù‘ eylediler; ol bir eliyle tutub alıkoydu, anı daòı úaù‘ eylediler. Ba‘dehÿ
òırsından dişleriyle sandalı tutub başını daòı úaù‘ eylediler. Ve yine Pujuli nÀmında bir binbaşı
daòı ceng mebninden àÀyet mest olub ve kan gözlerini bürüyüb dost ve düşmÀnını fark etmez
oldu ve kılıç saldıkça vÀfir Atinalı daòı úatleyledi. ÓattÀ Atina ‘askeri ‘Acem ‘askeri
müşterek úatleylediler.
Ve bu minvÀl üzere şedíd cengler olup bi’ø-øarÿre ‘Acem ‘askeri bi’-l cümle
sefínelerine girüb alarga oldılar. Ve meydÀn-ı ma‘rekede kalan maútÿlleri Atina ‘askeri óesÀb
edüp ‘Acem ‘askerinden altı biñ dört yüz maútÿl ta‘dÀd eylediler. Ve Atina ‘askerinden yüz
doksan iki ta‘dÀd eylediler. Ve Atina ahÀlísi bu vechile òalÀã olduklarına ‘aôím kurbÀnlar
fuúarÀya iósÀnlar eylediler. Ve ‘Acem ‘askeri ve ‘Acem sefíneleri esírleri olan adaya ‘avdet
idüp mecrÿóları tımÀr eylediler. Ve nÀr-ı maàlÿbluk ciğerlerin kebÀb eyledi. Ve bi’ø-øarÿre
yine bakıyye kalan ‘askerlerin cem‘ idüp [73b] ve içlerinden óarb u êarba úÀdir olanlarıñ
güzídelerin intiòÀb ve elli biñ miúdÀrı cerí ve cesÿr ‘asker ile; çünkü maúãÿd-ı aãl Atina idi.
Ve muúaddem Atina`ya varılmayub ‘askerlerin olmaz yere ãarf eylediler. Ve Atina`yı òasm-ı
úaví ‘add itmediler; zírÀ Atina`dan muúaddem sevÀóilden eùrÀfların her kangısına uğradılar
ise cümle manãÿr olmuşlar idi. Ve kendü ve ‘aôím àurÿr ùÀrí olduğundan Atina cengde
maàlÿb oldılar.
Bu kerre ol óarÀret ile ol elli biñ miúdÀrı adam ile yine Atina`ya ‘avdet eylediler. Ve
doğru Atina limanına üç yüz pÀre gemi ile girmek murÀd eylediklerinde Atina óükemÀsı àÀfil
bulunmayub ve ‘Acem ‘askerinin tekrÀr geleceğinden òaberleri olmaàla Atina`nıñ cemí‘-i
nisvÀnına ricÀl buluna koyub ve silÀó kuşadub ‘Acem donanması yanaşıcak limanda ve
etrafda Atina ahÀlísi yüz binden mütecÀviz alay gösterdiler. Ve bi’l-cümle sevÀóil, Atina
878
Callimachus
260
‘askeriyle dolu görülüb bunlar yanaşmağa imkÀn ve úudret bulamayıcak bir miúdÀr kıyılardan
alarga lenger burakdılar. Ve bölükle gece oldukda yanaşmağa fırãat-yÀb oluruz ümidiyle
liman ùaşrasında ? üzerine [74a] yattılar. Ve ùaşra dökülmeye mümkün olup fırãat bulup
buraya meddiler. Ve bu minvÀl üzere on gün miúdÀrı ol semtlerde ùaşra dökülmeye muãlió
bulamadılar. Ve ba‘dehÿ ba‘øı fırtınalar daòı ôuhÿr eylediğinden ol eùrÀfa mekå mümkün
olmayup şitÀ eyyÀmı daòı úaríb olmaàın bi’ø-øarÿre geri ‘avdet eylediler. Ve Atina cengini
sene-i atiyyeye terk eylediler. Ve adalarda olan esírleri ve emvÀl-i eåvÀbı aòõ idüp ve
meftÿhları olan kılÀ‘a mustaófıô ve muhÀfıôlar naãb ve ta‘yín olunup meftÿh olanlarıñ bir
òoşca tedÀriki görüldükden soñra Şam, Trablus semtlerine ‘avdet idüp ve ‘aôím àanimet olan
üsÀre ve emvÀl ile ‘Acem şÀhına vezíri ve Atina şÀhı varup ve òÀk-i pÀyine yüzlerin sürdüler.
Ve “Atina`yı niçün fetó etmediniz?” deyu cümlesin úatliçün óabs eyledi. Ancak vüzerÀsı,
şÀhıñ òÀk-i pÀyine yüzlerin sürüb ‘aôím ricÀlar eylediler:
“Gerçi kullarıñız Atina`yı fetó etmediler; ancak elli kadar Atina menend mevÀøı‘ ve
kılÀ‘ fetó idüp àanÀyim-i keåíre ve üserÀ-yı vÀfire ile ‘avdet eylediler. [74b] ‘aôím iş görüb
vÀúi‘ olan seferi ve donanma maãrafını kÀt-ender-kÀt çıkardılar; ve bu sene fetó eylemediler
ise sene-i atiyyede varup fetó ideriz deyu cümleniñ ittifÀúları vardur” dediler. Ve bu taúríb ile
şÀhı teskín idüp güç ile úatlden mezbÿrları òalÀã; ancak hapisden òalÀãa iõin vermediler.
VelÀkin cümle vezír vüzerÀ cem‘ olup dediler ki: “Kullarınızıñ óapse daòı cürmleri yokdur;
zírÀ doğru Atina`ya gitseler Atina`ya tÀbi‘ olan sevÀóil ve adalar mÀverÀlarında kalur idi. Ve
ardlarından gelüp gece ve gündüz bunlar şeb-òÿn ve àÀret ve fırãat-yÀb oldukları gemileri
ihrÀk iderlerdi. Ve bunlardan bir aóad ‘avdet itmek müyesser olmazdı; ancak bunlar iãÀbet
eylediler ki, muúaddem Atina`ya tÀbi‘ olan sevÀóili ve adaları fetó idüp, Atina ùaríkinin
dikenlerini kırup ve taùhír eylediler. Ve bu kadar emvÀl-i keåíre ve userÀ-yı vÀfire ile ‘avdet
eylediler. İnşa’allahÿ te‘ÀlÀ sene-i atiyyede ednÀ tedÀrik ile anıñ daòı úaydı görülür. İòrÀk
bi’n-nÀr olup vücÿdu ãafóa-yı elemden ref‘ olunur ve muhabbit äun‘ullah`dan [75a]
(‘aleyhi’s-selÀm)`dan mezbÿr Atina cengine gelince beş biñ yetmiş üç sene mürÿrundan soñra
vÀúi‘ olmuşdur. Ve Atina`ya vardıklarında Atina ahÀlísi bir alay ehl-i òud‘a ve óílekÀr
adamlar olduğundan ôafer müyesser olmadı. ZírÀ Atina`ya varınca ‘askerimizden vÀfiri
maútÿl ve mecrÿó ve hasta olup ve nicesi daòı firÀr eylemeğin güzíde ‘asker ile ol óílekÀrlara
varılmadığından böyle oldu, deyüp ol ricÀlleri daòı hayyiz-i úabÿle mevãÿl olunup óapsden
daòı òalÀã oldılar.
Ve berren ve baóren Atina ihrÀkiyçün ‘aôím tedÀrikler görülmeğe emr u fermÀn olındı.
Ve bu ùaraftan Atina ahÀlísi ‘Acem şÀhı ‘askerine àÀlib oldılar, deyu ‘Àleme neşr olup İran ve
Turan şÀhı ‘askerine àÀlib olduk deyu ‘aôím tefÀòür edüp ve donanma óaøırlayub bize
261
ba‘de’l-yevm kimse àÀlib olmaz ümidiyle, ‘Acem şÀhı ùarafından fetó olunan sevÀóil ve
cezírelerin fetóiyçün tedÀrikler görmeğe başladılar. Ve seksen pÀre sefíne óaøırlayub ve on
biñ ‘asker ile MiltiyÀri nÀm kapdan-ı serdÀrı [75b] ta‘yin eylediler. Ve meõkÿr kapudÀn hÀøır
olan sefíneleri ve ‘askeriyle Akdeñiz`e çıkub ibtidÀ Mürted879 adasın ve Termiye880`yi ve
Enderya881`yı ve İstenidli882 fetó idüp şitÀ eyyÀmı gelmekle yine ‘avdet eylediler. Ve ikinci
senede yine mezbÿr serdÀr-ı donanma ile çıkub İşkiroz883 ve İşkepoloz ve İşkinoz884 adalarını
fetó idüp ve üçüncü sene çıkub Sakız885 ve Midilli886 ve İstanköy887 ve Sira ve Nakşe888
adalarını fetó eyledi.
Ancak mesmÿ‘ları oldu ki; ‘Acem şÀhı Atina içün berren ve baóren ‘aôím tedÀrikler
gördü ve Atina seferine óareket ve ‘aôímet üzeredür. Ve Atina ahÀlísi daòı miúdÀrlarınca
tedÀrik görmeğe başladılar. Ve tedÀrik görmek içün donanmayı Akdeñiz`e çıkarmadılar;
velÀkin donanma serdÀrı olan MiltiyÀri, Bare adası fetóiyçün donanma çık[ar]mak murÀd
eyledi. Anlar men‘ ettükçe ol memnÿ‘ olmayup ilhÀh ve ibrÀm idüp bilÀòare iõin verdiler. Ve
muòtaãar donanma ile varup mezbÿr adayı muóÀsara eyledi.
EyyÀm-ı muóÀsara yigirmi yedinci güne vÀãıl oldukta mezbÿr serdÀr MiltiyÀri`niñ
yüzünde bir çıban çıkub ve ‘aôím elem verüb
[76a]
àayret cengi ederdi. Ve yevm-i
mezbÿrede Pare889 adasına imdÀd içün birkaç sefíne ôuhÿr eyledi. Bi’ø-øarÿre Atina ‘askeri
úal‘a muóÀsarasın terk idüp kendü sefíneleri boş olmaàla imdÀda gelen sefíneler ihrÀk
olunmasun deyu sefínelerine doldurdular. Ve imdÀda gelen sefíneler ‘aôím cengler eylediler.
Ve ceng eånÀsında imdÀd sefíneleri Pare úal‘asına vÀfir imdÀd dÀòil eylediler. Ve ba‘dehÿ
alarga olup durdular. Atina sefíneleri ‘askeri boş bırakub çıkmak úÀbil olmadı ve serdÀrın
maraøı daòı müştedd oldu, bi’ø-øarÿre sefer eyledi. Atina`ya ‘avdeti müstaósen görülüb
kable’l-vuãÿl ol maùlÿb gerü vuãÿl buldular.
879
880
881
882
883
884
885
886
887
888
889
Kea
Kythnos
Andros
Tinos
Skros
Skynos
Chios
Lesbos
Kos
Naxos
Paros
262
Feylosof-i tis‘a: “RıøÀmız yok iken, sen niçün ibrÀm eylediñ? Bizi bu kadar
meãÀrifden çıkardın ve yine maùlÿb elimize girmedi!” deyüp mezbÿr serdÀrdan Bare seferiniñ
maãrafını istirdÀd ile óükm eylediler. Ol daòı bir haşín adam olmaàın , “Belí” cevÀb
vermeyub “Ben ãırf-ı makdÿrÿmda sırr-ı tekÀsül etmeyub vücÿduma HudÀ, ‘illet ‘Àrıø
eylemek ile fetó müyesser olmadı. ‘Àlemin ceng serdÀrları [76b] cümle manãÿrÿmu ulurlar.
Bu nasıl cevÀbdur? Ben daòı sizden ücret ùaleb ederim yoòsa êamÀn bilmem’” dedi. Ve “Akçe
verenlerden değilim eliñizden ne gelir ise icrÀ eyleñ!” àÀyet şedíd cevÀblar verdi, anlar daòı
maraøına bakmayub medyÿnlar maóbesine óabs eylediler. Ol daòı şiddet-i maraødan ve
úahrından zindÀnda fevt oldu. Oàlu Metbik890
iòrÀc u defn içün ùaleb eyledikde, rıøÀ
verilmeyub, “SÀ’ir müflis medyÿn gibi ol daòı ol zindÀn içinde çürüsün” deyu iòrÀca iõin
vermediler. Oàlu daòı lÀ-‘ilÀc meõkÿr maãrafın cümlesini tedríc ile edÀya rÀøı olup ve òısm u
aúrabÀsı tekeffül edüp Miltiyar[ı] zindÀndan çıkarup sÀ’ir serdÀrlar merúadine anı daòı defn
eylediler.
Ve ‘Acem şÀhı olan DÀrÀb bin Behmen berren ve baóren Atina üzerine tedÀrikde iken
DÀrÀb fevt olup oàlu DÀrÀ bin DÀrÀb taóta cülÿs eyledi. Ve DÀrÀb maraø-ı mevtinde Atina
taòríbini oàlu DÀrÀ`ya vaãiyyet eyledi. Ol daòı babasınıñ tedÀrikini nice terakkí ile tedÀrik
[77a] görüb berren serdÀr ve ser ‘asker sekiz kerre yüz biñ ‘asker ve baóren yüz yigirmi ‘asker
ve biñ iki yüz kebír sefíne ve üç biñ ãaàír sefíne ve biñ altı yüz õaòíre gemisi ve biñ beş yüz at
gemileri ihêÀr olunup dört kerre yüz biñ ‘asker daòı baóren yürüyüb mezbÿr sefíneler
göründüğü sevÀóil ve adalardan karşu durur olmayub hemÀn tÀbi‘ olurlardı. Ve keõÀlik berren
daòı şÀh DÀrÀ buyurup: “Her kangı kılÀ‘ ve eyÀletlere uğrayub ve úurbunda geçdiler ise aãlÀ
muòÀlefet etmeyub teslím olmuşlardur. Ve Boğaz òisÀrlarına gelüp àÀyet tenk olan yerden
büyük ve yassı kayıklar ile kırk elli köprü uzadub ‘askerini Rÿmiline cümle geçürdü. Ve
Rÿmilinde aãlÀ bir köşe kalmayub cümle gelüp şÀha tÀbi‘ oldılar. Ve Selanik`e gelince berren
olan ‘asker on kere yüz biñ oldu. Ve Selanik úurbunda olan óÀlÀ Aynoroz ol vaúitde bir sarb
úal‘a idi ve Rÿmilinde ba‘øı beyler maófÿô olmak içün mÀl ve erzÀkların [77b] ol úal‘aya
taóaããun eylediler. ŞÀh DÀrÀ ‘asker gönderup fetó eyledi ve Rÿmiline muttaãıl olmaàla ‘Acem
úudretin ol eùrÀfa iôhÀr içün yanında müctemi‘a olan on kere yüz biñ ‘askere emr idüp
Aynoroz`a muttaãıl eùrÀfı ol ‘asker-i ‘aôím beş gün içinde óafr eylediler ve munfaãıl ada
eylediler. Ve şÀh DÀrÀ der idi: “Benden soñra gelen şÀhlar ve beyler benim bu mertebe úuvvet
ve úudretim olduğu ma‘lÿmları olsun ki boğaz óiãarları deryÀ iken kara gibi köprüler idüp bu
kadar ‘asker bí-şümÀr ile mürÿr eyledim. Ve óÀlÀ Aynoroz891, Rÿmiline muttaãıl kara iken
890
891
Metiochus
Athos
263
‘asker bí-şümÀrım beş günde kazub Aynaroz ve õí-müfrez ada ettirdim. Ve ardından Anadolu
cÀnibinden dÀ’imÀ õaòíre gelur idi. Ve Rÿmili etrafından ve Kara Deñiz sevÀóilinden ve
Dobruca ve Babadağı ve Akkirman Uzdulinc ve Boğdan ve Timeşvar ve Belirgad(Belgrad) ve
Bosna ve Arnabudluk eùrÀflarına şÀh DÀrÀ`nıñ mübÀya‘cıları gedüp günde biñ ‘araba gelmek
üzere ta‘yín olunmuş idi. Ve her on adama bir sÀúa ta‘yín olunmuş idi [78a] on biñ sÀúa
günde su taşırlardı. Ve eùrÀf u eknÀfda õaòíre vermeyub ve ‘Acem şÀhına teb‘iyyet etmeyen
şÀhları ve beyleri ol sÀ‘at ‘asker gönderup ol diyÀrı òarab ve şÀhı ve beylerini amÀn vermeyub
úatliderdi.
Ve ol vaúitte rÿy-ı ‘arøda bu kadar úuvvet u úudret ãÀóibi şÀh olmadığından rÿy-ı
õemínde olan cemí‘-i şÀhlar ve beyler òavf üzere olup cümlesi şÀh DÀrÀ`ya tÀbi‘ olmuşlar idi.
Ve mübÀya‘cılara ve elçilere tenbíh eylemiş idi ki: “İşkÀra õaòíre ùaleb eylemeden hemÀn
ùoprağa vuãÿl ùaleb eylen!” ya‘ní şÀh DÀrÀ sizden ùoprak ve su ùaleb iderdiñiz”, anlar daòı
“Ùoprak ve su şÀhın olsun” dedikden soñra “Siz daòı ùoprakdan ve ãudan óÀãıl olan ‘öşrü tíz
olun şÀha götürün!” diyüb, ol sene ol diyÀrda kaç biñ ‘araba ‘öşr olur deyu istiòbÀr idüp
ãıóóatine vÀãıl oldukda óÀãılı ‘öşrü kaç ‘araba óesÀb olunurdu ise ol ‘öşrü [78b] orduya naúl
ettirirler idi. Ve ol ‘asker-i ‘aôím kondukları çaylarıñ üst ùarafında úonanlar suya muøÀyaúa
çekmezdi; velÀkin çayın alt ùarafından nihÀyete varınca su bulamazlardı. Ve cümle ‘asker bir
yerde cem‘ olmazlardı ve illÀ bir úaç çay ceryÀn iden mekÀna úonarlardı. Ve minvÀl-i meşrÿó
üzere suya ve ôaòíreye muøÀyaúa çekilmesun deyu ‘askeriñ evveli Àòirine dek on úonÀú
meãÀfe istí‘Àb iderdi. VelÀkin Selanik ve Yeñişehir ãulu yerler ve vÀsi‘ feøÀlar ve ãaórÀlar
olmaàla anlar da oùraú[orùaú] olup cümle ‘asker cem‘ olmuşdur.
Ve bir rivÀyetde Atina üzerine gelen ‘Acem şÀhı “ŞÀh Behmen bin İsfendiyÀr”dur
deyu taórír olunmuş; zírÀ DÀrÀ İskender yedinde cenkte úatl olmuşdur. Zira bu vak‘adan soñra
İskender Rÿmí vaú’asına varınca üç yüz seneden mütecÀviz zamÀn mürÿr eylemişdur.
Behmen[in] şÀh olması eãaó aúvÀl olmak gerek ‘alÀ-kilÀ taúdureyn. ‘Acem şÀhı ‘aôím ‘aôamet
ile Yeñişehir ãaórÀsına vuãÿl ve cemí‘-i ‘askeri ol ãaórÀda müctemi‘ oldukda,
Atina
ùarafından gören çÀsuslarıñ [79a] ‘akılları çÀk olup ve gelüp Atina óükemÀsına òaber
verdiklerinde anlar óayrÀn ve dem-beste kalup ‘Acem ‘askerine ettikleri fezÀóate bi’l-cümle
pişmÀn oldılar ve dediler ki: “Biz daòı niçe yerler àÀrÀt ve òarÀb eyledik. Bu da bize
iútiãaãdur” [de]diler ve cümle emvÀl u evlÀd u ‘avratların Mora`nın ãarb yerlerine naúl
eylediler. Ve úal‘a ve vÀroşda bir óabbe bir şey burakmadılar. Cümle naúli mümkün olan
yerlere naúl eylediler ve naúli mümkün olmayan yerleri óafr idüp gömdüler. Ve Mora`dan
àayrı mekÀna taóaããun ve istimdÀda úÀdir olamadılar. Ancak İstefe[be]yi úaríb óÀlÀ ciftlikdür,
ol vaúitde bir metín úal‘a idi, anıñ daòı ahÀlísi Atina`ya bir miúdÀr imdÀd eylediler. Ve
264
‘Acem şÀhı çünkü Yeñişehir óavÀlísi vÀsi‘ ve ãulu yerler olmaàla bir kac gün istirÀóat içün
mekå eyledi. FermÀn olunup ve Atina ahÀlísine elçi irsÀl eyledi. Ve fermÀnında kendü
‘aôametini beyÀn ettükden soñra Atinalı`ya taórír eylemiş ki:
“Sizler birkac dídre cem‘ olmuş [79b] bir kac ruhbÀn meåÀbesinde iken meàÀrib ve
meşÀrıúda olan cemí‘ ümem-i muòtelifeye mÀlik olan ‘aôímü’ş-şÀn şÀhlara óarf-endÀzlıú idüp
anlarıñ úoru ve óımÀlarına taúarrüb sizlere neden geldi. Bundan aúdem vÀúi‘ olan
òıyÀnetlerinizi teõkír idiñiz ve su ile ùoprağınızı óÀøır eylen!” deyüp òatm-i kelÀm eylemiş ve
elçi Atina`ya vuãÿl buldukda, cümle bir yere cem‘ oldılar ve ‘aôím müşÀvereler eylediler. Ve
didiler ki: “Bundan soñra bizim şÀh ‘indinde rucÿ‘ ve tevbemiz maúbÿl değildür. MedÀr u
kelÀmatından bir şey óÀãıl olmaz ve şÀhı metín eylemez. Ve biz ba‘de’l-yevm ölüm-Àrí olduk
hemÀn eyusu oldur ki àayreti elden komayub merdÀne cevÀb vermekdür” deyüp ve bir kapu
yanına vÀfir ùaş ve ùoprak yığdılar. Ve elçi[y]i ol kapu başına getürdüler ve didiler ki:
“ŞÀhıñızdan ùoprak ve su ùaleb eyledi. İşte su!” deyüp kapu içinde olan suyu ve ùoprağı
gösterdiler ve “İşte toprak deyüb tamÀm suyu ve toprağı gösterdikden soñra “İşte señi ve
şÀhını [80a] böyle su içinde boğub ve ùopraú ile örteriz” deyüp elçi[y]i su içine itüb ve ùoprağı
üzerine örttüler ve adamlarına küşÀd verup “Var, şÀhınıza gördüğünüzden òaber veriñ!”
didiler.
Anlar daòı gelüp şÀha ol òaberi verdikde şÀh, ol mertebe gaêaba gelüp ve ol sÀ‘at güç
neferlerin çalup ve öyle yemín eyledi ki; Atina`nıñ úal‘a varoşunu cümle òarÀb ettükden soñra
“Yurdlarına zirÀ‘at ile ekin ekdüreyim ve óükemÀ ve a‘yÀnından her kim yedime girer ise aãlÀ
emÀn vermeyub envÀ‘ cezÀlar ile úatl eyleyeyim!” deyüp Yeñişehir ãahrÀsından göç eyledi ve
Atina óükemÀsının sem‘ine ŞÀh kendü õí-vuãÿl buldukda, “Bundan òalÀã yokdur ve buña
úarşu ùuracak iútidÀrımız yok, hemÀn buña óayli irtikÀb etmek gerek!” deyüp ve iki dívÀne
meşreb cesÿr adamlar ióøÀr idüp ve onlara ‘aôím mÀl ve manãıb va‘d olunup, va‘d olunan mÀl
yed-i emÀnete verilub ve manãıb emirleri yedlerine teslím olunup ve tebdíl-i cÀme ettirdiler.
“Gece veyÀòÿd [80b] veyÀòÿd gündüz ‘Acem şÀhına teúarrüb ve fırãat-yÀb olursañuz,
hemÀn úatl etmeğe say’u iúdÀm idesiz; ve eğer úatleyleyüb òalÀã bulursañız nÀmınız ‘Àleme
nümÀyÀn olur, dünyeví ve uòreví ‘aôím devlete vÀãıl olursuñuz ve diyÀrıñızı ve ahÀlísini ióyÀ
idersiñiz. Ve eğer aòõ olunup úatl olunursañız cümle ‘Àlem icre böyle iş gördüñüz cesÀret níknÀm ile meşhÿr olursuñuz dilerüm.”
Buraları envÀ‘-ı efsÀne ile tağyír idüp irsÀl eylediler ve mezbÿrları gelüp Ezden nÀm
maóalde ‘Acem şÀhı gelurken bir mekÀna úaríb oldukda fırãatdur, deyu şÀh üzerine yürüdüler
ve şÀhın yemín ve yesÀrında olan òuddÀm mezbÿrlarıñ úaãd-ı şÀh ettiklerin görcek dört
265
eùrÀfların alup mezbÿrları duri aòõ idüp ve amÀn vermeyub, bende çekdiler. Ve şÀh eùrÀflarıñ
alup mezbÿrları şÀhın önüne getürdüler. ŞÀh, bunlara su’Àl eyledi: “Sizler kimlersiz ve ne
diyÀrdansız ve bu emre ne şey sizi cesÀret ettirdi?” Anlar daòı mÀ-ceríyi aãlÀ ketm etmeyub
[81a] toğru òaber verdi. Ve òaber verdiler ki: “Yemín eylemişsiz bizi ve memleketimizi bi’lcümle òarÀb u yabÀb ve úatl-i ‘Àmm etsek gerek. Biz daòı lÀ-‘ilÀc kalup fırãat bulup seni úatl
niyetiyle geldik; ancak baòtın àÀyet úuvvetde olmaàla yedimizden òalÀã olduñ ve biz aòõ
olındık. Ve ma‘lÿmumuzdur ki bundan soñra òalÀã olmayız. HemÀn ricÀ ederiz ki bizi ehven
úatl ile úatl eyleyesiz ve biz diyÀ[rı]mız òarÀbını ve ahÀlísiniñ úatl ve istirúÀúların görmeyiz”
diyub óÀmÿş oldılar. ‘Acem şÀhı didi ki: “DiyÀrıñız òarÀb ve siz úatle niçün müsteóaú
olduñuz, ki benim pederim bir ‘aôímü’ş-şÀn şÀh iken size şÀhıñızı ricÀ idüp nÀme gönderdi ve
siz ricÀsını úabÿl eylemediñiz. Ve ba‘deóÿ ‘asker gönderdi anı daòı envÀ‘ óíle ile períşÀn
eylediñiz. Ve ben size elçi irsÀl eyledim, kuyuya atub ùopraú ile örttüñüz, elciye zevÀl yoğiken
siz elci úatl eylediñiz. Ve yine bunda óíle irtikÀbıyla sizcileyin dívÀneleri daòı beni úatle
gönderdiler. Bundan soñra siziñ diyÀrıñız òarÀb olmaz ve siz úatl olmayup daòı kim úatl
olunur! Ancak [81b] sizcileyin iki dívÀneyi úatlden ne óÀãıl olur úuvveti ve berk ve arslanlar
getürsüñler” didi. ‫[ ﺍﻟﻌﻔﻮ ﺯﻛﻮﺓ ﺍﻟﻈﹼﻔﺮ‬Affetmek ôaferin zekatıdur]
Ol iki dívÀne gelüp mÀ-cerÀtı Atina`da taúrír eylediklerinde Atina feylosofları bu
keremi, şÀhdan gördüklerinde, didiklerinde, “Çünki bu kerem-i mürüvvet şÀhdan ãudÿr etdi;
elbette ol bize àÀlib olur. HemÀn ne ise tedÀriklerimiz görüb” deyüp ve Salona nÀm úaãabada
olan kÀhinlere istiòbÀr eylediler ki: “Üzerimize gelen şÀh ile aóvÀlimiz yine müncer olur”
didiler. Anlar daòı cevÀb verdi ki: “Bu şÀh úahrından diyÀrıñız òalÀã olmaz; ve eğer siz
ağacdan úal‘alar görürseñiz ve taóaããun iderseñiz, òalÀã olursuñuz” deyu cevÀb verdiler.
ÓükemÀ daòı ağacdan úal‘adan murÀd, “Sefíneler” deyüp sefíne tedÀrikine ‘aôím tekayyüd
eylediler. Ve Mora`dan bi’l-cümle imdÀd olmak üzere yüz kırk kebír ceng gemisi ‘askeriyle
gönderdiler ve keõÀlik Atina`nıñ daòı yüz kırk kebír ceng gemisi müheyyÀ olup yigirmi beş
biñ adam Mora`dan ve yigirmi beş biñ Atina`dan ióøÀr olunup elli biñ deryÀ ahvÀli bilüb ve
deryÀ cenginde mÀhir [82a] adamlar gemilere ùoldurdular. Ve bunlar bu eånÀda òaber aldılar
ki; ‘Acem donanmasından üç yüz miúdÀr sefíne Kızıl HiãÀr892 nÀm maóalle geldiler ve Atina
donanması üzerine óükemÀdan bir cerí ve cesÿr ve óizb u òud‘asında mÀhir æemostoúli893 nÀm
kimesne[y]i cümle donanma üzerine ser-‘asker naãb eylediler. Mezbÿr ser-‘asker re’y-i
müstaósen gördüğü bi’l-cümle ‘Acem ùonanması cem‘ olmuş belki ùarafımızdan àalebe vÀúi‘
olur ise ‘Acem ùonanmasınıñ úulÿbuna bizim için bir miúdÀr òavf ‘Àrıø olur ve üzerime bi’l892
893
Kastellorizo
Themistocles
266
bedÀhe gelüp òavf ile gelurler” deyüp ve lengerlerin úal‘ eyleyüb ‘Acem ùonanmasına varup
Kızıl ÓiãÀr ile Endera894 açığında buluşub ve ‘aôím cengler eylediler. KÀh Atina donanması
àalebe iderdi ve ‘Acem ‘askeri tír-endÀzlıú ile def‘ iderlerdi ve vÀrif[fir]ce ‘Acem ùonanması
gelüp Atina ùonanması def‘ iderlerdi. BÀ-òuãÿã ‘Acem ‘askeriniñ tír-endÀzlığı olmaàla Atina
‘askerinden çok adamlar helÀk ve ÚÀsım eyyÀmı olmaàla [82b] şiddetli furùınalar ôuhÿr
etmeğin bi’ø-øarÿre ùarafeyn tefríú ve furùına bahÀnesiyle Atina donanması Atina`ya kışlaya
bağladılar. Ve ‘Acem ùonanması daòı bi’l-cümle Rÿmili sevÀóilinde limanlar ve adalar
arasında olan eyü limanlara bÀ-òuãÿã Eàriboz boğazlarında ve limanında biñ miúdÀrı ‘Acem
gemileri kışlaya bağlanub ve ùonanma serdÀrları berren varup şÀha buluşdılar. Ve şiddet-i
furùınadan óareket úudretleri olmadığından gerü geldiklerin ve Rÿmili şÀhları ve beyleri bi’lcümle şÀh yanına cem‘ olup ve şÀhı Atina üzerine gitmekden men‘ eylediler. ZírÀ bu úadar
ağır ‘asker Atina`da ve İstefe`de ve Livadiyye`de sÀkin olup ve kışlaları mümkün değildür
zíra ‘asker àÀyet çokdur ve ol yerlere ol ‘asker ãığması mümkün değildür. Kışla içün elbette
‘asker perÀkende olurlar iótimÀldür perÀkende ‘askere Atina óílekÀrları óíle ve òud‘a ile ôafer
bulup raóne-dÀr ideler hemÀn oldur yerlere girmeden cümle ‘asker Yeñişehir [83a] ve Selanik
ve ol óavÀlílere kışlamak içün emr u fermÀn buyuruñ deyüp şÀh daòı kışlaya iõin verdi. Ve
şÀh gerü ‘avdet itmeyüp iki yüz biñ miúdÀrı pÀk adam ile İõdin`de ve óavÀlísinde kışladı ve
kışla tedÀriklerin kemÀ-hüve-óaúúuhÿ gördü. Ve bu ùarafda Atina óükemÀsına Mora`dan àayrı
mu’ín olmadıúlarından anlar daòı òavf idüp imdÀda gelmezler ve ferÀgat etmesünler deyu
Atina óükemÀsı anlara her dÀ’im àayretler verup derlerdi ki: “ElóamdulillÀhi te‘ÀlÀ ‘Acem
‘askeri bu ùarafda kışladı, maàlÿb olmÀlarına delÀlet ider; zírÀ ‘Acem ‘askeri bu ùarafın
havÀsına me’lÿf değillerdür; ekåeri meríø olup, fevt olurlar. Ve ba‘øıları tebdíl-i havÀ içün
yine Anaùolı yaúasına giderken Rÿmili óarÀmíleri mÀllarını almak içün úatl iderler. Bu taúríb
ile az kalurlar biz daòı ba‘øı şeb-òÿn ve ba‘øı óíle ve òud‘a ile anları úahr idüp şerlerinden
emín oluruz” deyüp envÀ‘ efsÀne sözler ile Mora ahÀlísini [83b] daòı imdÀden nukÿl itmesün
deyu tesellí-yi hÀtır iderlerdi.
Ve bi’l-cümle nisvÀn ve ãıbyÀn ve iòtiyÀr-ı pír-i fÀníleri Mora`nıñ me’men olduğu
mekÀnlara sürdüler. Ve Atina derÿnunda õí-rÿódan kimesne kalmayub úal‘a varoşuna
oùurmayub óÀliyetü’l-óÀliye bırakdılar. Ve cümlesi Úolori ve yine kÀr u zÀra úÀdir olanlar
kaldılar. “Derbendlerimiz àÀyet ãarbdur, eyüce cengÀver ‘asker derbendler óıfôıyçün koysak,
me’mÿldür ki ‘Acem ‘askerini geçirmeyelim ve geçerlerse ekåerini ve esír olunur” diyüb
Atina derbendlerine beş on biñ miúdÀrı adam ta‘yín olındı ve .. derbendi olan Fundana895
894
895
Andros
Thermopylae
267
derbendine Mizistre`niñ derÿn bírÿnundan üç biñ adam ve beylerinden Liàondi nÀm Bey üç
biñ adama serdÀr olup ve ÀlÀt-ı óarb ve õaòíre tedÀrikleri görüb Fundana derbendi
muóÀfaôasına gitdiler. Ve İstefe`den mürÿr eylediklerinde İstefe beyi Mizistre beyine ‘aôím
nuãó u pend eyledi: [84a] “Ve on kere yüz biñ ‘asker men‘ine üç biñ adam münÀsib değil gel,
‘avdet eyle!” deyu ‘aôím ibrÀm eyledi, ancak muúayyed olmadı. Ve serdÀr olan Liàondi
cevÀb verdi ki: “Ben de bilirim ki ol ‘aôímü’ş-şÀn ‘asker-i úaví ve mÀni‘ olamam; velÀkin bu
úadar var ki, on kere yüz biñ adam üzerine üç biñ adam Mizistre beyinden filÀn bey vardı”
deyu “beyne’l-enÀm ilÀ-yevmi’l-úıyÀme ilÀ-nihÀye dillerde şÀdÀndur” deyüb me’mÿr olduğu
derbendin muóÀfaôasına varup òidmet-i muóÀfaôada úÀ’im oldu.
Ve şiddet-i şitÀ mürÿr idüp Mart eyyÀmı geldikde, ‘Acem ‘askeri, Atina seferine
óaøırlandılar. Ve “Atina ùarafından derbend muóÀfaôasına gelen üç biñ adam gelmişdir” deyu
‘Acem şÀhı istimÀ‘ eyledikde beş biñ miúdÀrı ‘asker derbend øabùıyçün irsÀl olındı. VelÀkin
‘Acem ‘askeri derbend bilmediklerinden açıkdan gidilüb derbendde olan ‘asker bunları bozdı
ve yine beş biñ daòı [84b] ‘Acem ‘askeri ta‘yín olındı; yine maàlÿb oldılar. Ba‘dehÿ on biñ
daòı ta‘yín eyledi yine maàlÿb oldukda, ‘Acem şÀhı gaêaba gelüp bir vezírin yigirmi biñ diò
tüvÀnÀ ‘askeriyle tayín eyledi. Ve “Eğer maàlÿb olursañız cümleñizi úatl iderim!” deyüp
yemínler eyledi. VelÀkin ta‘yín olunan vezír àÀyet ‘Àúil ve müdebbir adam olmaàla derbend
eùrÀfında olan kara ahÀlísinden yarar úulÀguz[vuz] alup derbende yigirmi biñ adam dört úol
beş biñ adam dört úoldan derbend içine yürüş eylediler. VelÀkin derbend muóÀfaôasında
olanlar daòı intibÀh üzere olduklarından yine derbendin ãarb yerlerinde ve maóalle
mürÿrlarında anlar daòı beş yüz perÀkende oldılar. Ve yine ’Acem ‘askeri derbendden duòÿla
müsÀàa bulamadılar. Vezír baña derbend duòÿlüne delÀlet ider eyüce delíl var ise, getürüñ
dilediği úadar iósÀn ideyim” didikde, derbend úrallarından Ùıraòíno896 nÀmında bir ãayyÀd
gelüp delÀlet eyledi. Ve mezbÿr [85a] ãayyÀd dÀ’imÀ derbend içinde ãayd eylediğinden
derbendiñ çok memerrilerin bulurdu. Ve mezbÿru bir òafí yerden on biñ miúdÀrı ‘asker ile
muóÀfaôada olanlar görmeden derbendin ‘aynu’l-fi’line götürdü ve derbend içinde úal‘a
şeklinde olan planúayı øabù eylediler. Ve derbend muóÀfaôasında olan Ùıraòíno ‘Acem
‘askerini derbend içinde gördükde yanında olanlara didi ki:
“Ba‘de’l-yevm de[r]bend muóÀfaôası fevt oldu şimdi[de]n soñra ecel cengi ôuhÿr
eyledi ve her kim ãıóóatini ve diyÀrını ve evlÀd u ezvÀcını ve aúrabÀsını ister ise durmayub
diyÀrına ‘avdet eylesun. Ve her kim diyÀr àayretine cÀn u baş verir ise benim ile me’an bunda
kalup ve ceng idüp ölünce intiúÀm alup dÀr u diyÀrıñ òarÀbını görmesün. Ve evlÀd u ezvÀcın
896
(Ephialtes) of Trachis
268
ve aúrabÀ ve eãdıúÀsın ve istirúÀúın görmesun!” deyüp ‘askerini taòayyur eyledi. Ve
cenglerde beş yüz miúdÀrı helÀk oldılar ve iki biñ miúdÀrı diyÀrlarına ‘avdet [85b] eylediler.
Ve mezbÿr Ùıraòíno beş yüz adam ile derbend cengin etmeğe istemeyub şÀhın olduğu yere
inub ve ol deryÀ miåÀli çalka[la]nan ‘askere beş yüz adam kendülerin urup şöyle bir ceng
eylediler ki her birisi katí ve efrÀdım úatl ettükden soñra maútÿl oldılar ve şÀh-ı ‘Acem
bunlarıñ böyle ciğerdÀr oldukların ve serdengeçdi olup ölüm mevúi’ine girdiklerine ‘aôím
ta‘accüb eyledi. Ve cümle úatl olunup bir aóadi firÀr eylemedi. Ve şÀh atına binüb bunlarıñ
lÀşelerini seyrÀn eyledi ki, her biriniñ cesedinde yüzer cerÀóatlu bulunurdu. Ve “ÁyÀ ki
bunlarıñ daòı ãıóóat bulup cÀnı çıkmadık var mıdur?” deyu “Baúıñız!” didi. Maútulleri
yokladıúda, Mizistre beyi Liàondiyo897 daòı şod ramaú buldular ve şÀha gösterdiler. ŞÀh
gördü ki; fi’l-óaúíúa daòa rÿòu çıkmadı ancak cesedinde bir zaòm yemedik yer yokdur. ŞÀh
bu mertebe bunlarıñ cesÀretlerine ‘aôím taósín eyledi. Ve mezbÿr Mizistre Beyini [86a] óÀleti nizÀ‘da gördüğünden şÀha meróamet gelüp kendü gerÀ-kesíni ta‘ôímen avuttu. Mezbÿr ol
óalde iken yine düşmÀn gerÀ-kesídür deyu iltiyÀm itmemek içün gerÀ-keåí üzerinden itdi. Ve
şÀh mezbÿruñ òuşÿnetine ‘aôím ta‘accüb idüp, “Buña ikrÀm, bunu tezce úatl itmekdür” deyüp
ve úatl içün emr idüp ol sÀ‘atde başını úaù‘ idüp bırakdılar. Ve şÀh-ı ‘Acem ol ma‘reke
yerinden göçüb ve ‘askerini on bölük idüp yüzer biñ adam ile on vezírini ta‘yín idüp ve günde
birini óareket itdürdüb ve şÀh daòı iki yüz biñ pÀk ‘asker ile giruden yürüdi ve cümle ‘asker
gelüp İstefe ãaórÀsına cem‘ oldılar.
Ve şÀh gelüp Atina üzerine yine ‘askeri on bölük idüp ve Atina`ya gider on ùaríúa
taúsím idüp on kere yüz biñ ‘asker on ùaríúden bi’l-cümle dÀòil oldılar. Ve vÀroş úal‘aya
ùoldılar ve üç günden soñra şÀh daòı bí-nefsihí dÀòil oldı ve Atina úal‘asını [86b] ve şehrini
àÀyet beyendi, “ÓayfÀ àalíô yemin eyledik, yoòsa bu nÀzenín şehri iórÀú lÀyıú değil idi”
deyüp bi’ø-øarÿre iórÀú u hedme fermÀn eyledi bi’l-cümle úal‘a ve varoşu iórÀú ve òarÀb
eyledi. Ve nevÀhísini daòı bi’l-cümle òarÀb idüp ve bÀğ u bÀàçe[y]i cümleten òarÀb u yabÀb
olup úaù‘a bir şey ãaóíh bırakmadılar. Ve Atina ahÀlísi cümle emvÀl u ‘iyÀl u evlÀdların
Mora`nıñ àÀyet metín ve ãarb yerlerine naúl eylemişler idi. Ancak Úolori ve İnebaòtı`dan
óarb u êarba úÀdir adamlar kalmış idi. Ve kendüleriñ yüz kırk pÀre sefíne ve Mora`nıñ daòı
yüz kırk pÀre sefíne içlerinde iki úÀt çengÀver ‘asker ile ùolmuş idi.
Ve ol vaúitde Misina aùasınıñ úralı ‘avrat ve ‘Acem şÀhı Atina üzerine àalebe ‘asker
ile geldiğini cemí‘-i ‘Àlemiñ mesmÿ’u olmuş idi. Mezbÿre ‘avrat daòı ol cengi temÀşÀ içün on
pÀre sefíne ile Úolori aùasına gelmiş idi ve ‘Acem şÀhını görmek içün şÀhdan [87a] istímÀn ile
897
Leonidas
269
gelüp ve ‘Acem şÀhı heybetlu àÀyet maóbÿb şÀh olmaàın ‘avrat, şÀha ‘Àşıúa olup dÀ’im şÀhıñ
ãoóbetine duòÿl ider idi. Ve şÀhdan muúaddem kalursa da Atina ahÀlísiyle vÀfir
görüştüğünden Atina`nıñ óíleleriniñ esrÀr-ı keåíresine ıùùılÀ‘ óÀãıl itmiş idi. Ve cümle esrÀrı
şÀha duyururdu ve mekr u óíle itmeğe úÀdire bir ‘avrat ve óílelerinden ‘Acem şÀhına ta‘allüm
eyledi ki:
“Atina ahÀlísine yÀlñız Mora imdÀd vermişdür. Ve Mora ve Atina ahÀlísi àÀyet óílekÀr
adamlardur. HemÀn eyusu oldur ki üç yüz biñ adamı beş on úısma taúsím buyuruñ ve
Mora`ya on yerden hücÿm eylesünler. Ve bir hücÿm olunan mevÀøı‘ kendi úaydlarında olup
birbirne imdÀda úādir olmazlar. Ve ‘askerleriñin güzídeleriniñ ekåeri bu ùarafda olmaàla ol
ùarÀfıñ àÀretini bunlar işitdikde bu arayı burağub diyÀrlarına ‘avdet iderler. [87b] Ve ol ùarÀfıñ
fetói daòı ÀsÀn vechile müyesser olur” didikde, ŞÀh burayı müstaósen görüb emr eyledi, otuz
biñ ‘asker on bölüğe taúsím eyledi. Ve Mora cÀnibine óareket üzere iken, Atina óükemÀsı bu
aóvÀli òaber alduúda, fi’l-óÀl ebnÀ óíleye dest urup Atina ùonanması serdÀrı olan æemestoúli
fevrí bir mektÿb yazub cümle Atina ahÀlísiniñ úulÿblarına ru‘b ve óasÀis müstevlí olup cüz’í
bahÀne ùaleb iderler: “SulùÀnıma úul olmaàla ancak şimdilik bir miúdÀr ùonanmalarına
ùayanırlar; velÀkin sulùÀnımıñ ùonanması “lÀ ye ‘uddu ve lÀ yuhsÀ” úabílindendir. Atina`nıñ
ve Mora`nıñ her bir sefínesine sulùÀnımıñ yigirmi beşersi müstevlí oldukda anlardan eåer
kalmaz; zírÀ bizim daòı cÀnımıza kÀr eyledi. DÀr, òarÀb; diyÀr òarÀb, aúÀrdan eåer kalmadı.
Bundan soñra sebeb-i ta‘ayyüş ancak sulùÀnım gibi bir ‘aôím [88a] ü’ş-şÀn şÀha úūl olmakdan
àayrı çÀre yokdur!” Bunuñ miåÀli .. virup şÀhı taørír eyledi ve aùalarda ve Rÿm ve Rÿmili
sevÀóilinde olan ùonanmasına te’kíd fermÀnlar irsÀl idüp ilóÀú ùonanmanıñ ekåeríniñ … ve
bÀğları itmÀm bulmayub nÀ-tamÀm iken şÀh ùarafından åıúlet birle úapucu başı ta‘yín olup
ekåeri nÀ-tamÀm kalup ve óÀøır olanlar óareket idüp üç dört yüz miúdÀrı ceng gemisi güçile
gelüp Atina limanına dÀòil oldılar. Ve şÀha niyÀz eylediler, úuãÿr-ı ùonanma tekmíline değin
ùonanma cengi te’òír olındı veyÀòÿd ancak ol şÀh-ı müzevvire mektÿba úapıldığından ceng
içün iúdÀm iderdi. Ve ‘Acem ùonanması serdÀrları şÀha niyÀz iderler ki: “Birúaç te’òír
buyuruñ üç dört yüz miúdÀrı sefíne daòı gelur. Eúall mertebe yedi sekiz yüz miúdÀrı [88b]
cengÀver gibi cem‘ olsun ki bu óílekÀrlara àalebe mümkün olsun; zírÀ bizim ùonanma
‘askerimizin ekåeri kara ‘askeridür anlar ise cümle deryÀ ‘askeridür. Baña yek anlar ile
muóÀrebe mümkün değildür; ancak keåreti ile belki àalebe mümkün ola.” ŞÀh gaêaba gelüp ol
serdÀrları ‘azl ve àayrıların naãb idüp ve cenge fermÀn eyledi, anlar daòı ceng tedÀrikine
müdÀvemet eylediler. Ancak anlar daòı şÀha ‘arøuóÀl idüp didiler ki: “Bizim ùonanmanıñ biñ
úalafÀtı ider úalafÀtcımız vardur. Ve mezbÿr úalafÀtlar beher gemiye otuz gemiye taúsím
olunup haftada yüz gemi hÀøır iderler. “İki hafta te’òír buyuruñ iki yüz pÀre gemimiz daòı
270
gelur ve Atina gemileriniñ her birine ikişer gemimiz müstevlí olup ? me’mÿldür ki àÀlib
olavuz bre yabana söylemek benim åikadan òaberim vardur ki anlar sizi gördükleri gibi
teb‘iyyet iderler. HemÀn tez oluñ üzerlerine gidesiz!”
Bi’ø-øarÿre ‘Acem ùonanması dört beş yüz pÀre gemi olup ve ùaúımları [89a] ve
tedÀrikleri daòı bir òoşca óÀøır değil iken nÀçar ceng içün Atina ùonanması üzerine yürüdüler.
Ve şÀh daòı dört beş kere yüz biñ ‘asker ile İsina nÀm maóalde çadur ve sÀyebÀnlar úurup
zeyn-i taót üzerine cülÿs idüp ùonanma cengini seyrÀn iderdi. Ve Atina ùonanması bir miúdÀr
muúÀbele gösterüb ve güyÀm maóalde çadur ve sÀ’ir .. úurup ze[rri]n taót üzerine culÿs idüp
ùonanma cengini seyrÀn iderdi ve Atina ùonanması bir miúdÀr muúÀbele gösterüb ve güyÀ ki
maàlÿb oldılar deyu firÀra başladılar. Ve ‘Acem ùonanması, “Biz bunlara àalebe eyledik”
deyu ta‘úíb eylediler ve Atina ùonanması maàlÿbiyyet gösterüb úa‘rí ya‘ní ardın ardın firÀr
itmeğe başladılar. Ve ‘Acem ùonanması kurarak Úolori’ye büyük kayÀ ki, pek dar olan
yerlerine ‘Acem ùonanmasını sokdılar ve Atina óílekÀrları yigirmi otuz pÀre gemi[y]i úaùrÀn
ve zift ve neft ve kibrit ile mülemmÀ idüp ve ateş gemilerini ateş idüp havÀ ardlarından
olmaàla otuz yerden ‘Acem ùonanması üzerine yürüyüb ‘Acem ùonanması àÀyet ùar yerde
olmaàla úaçub ve ãavaşmağa imkÀn bulamayub mezbÿr ateş gemileri envÀ‘ ateşler [89b] ve
.. tutanlar içinde kalup ve otuz yerden ateşler íúÀõ birle ‘Acem gemileriniñ ekåerine ateş iãÀbet
idüp yanmağa başladılar. Ve Rÿmili yakasına úaríb olan sefíneleriñ ‘askeri, gemileri başdan
kara idüp çıkdılar; ve úaradan ba‘íd olanlar daòı boş gemilere girdiler de eyne’l-òalÀã úaraya
çıkarız ümidiyle çokca girdiler. Gemiler taóammül itmeyüp bi’l-cümle àarú oldılar. Gerüde
olan iki yüz miúdÀrı gemi òalÀã olupve üç yüz miúdÀrı ‘Acem gemileri àarú ve iòrÀú olup ve
derÿnunda olan ‘askeriniñ ekåeri àarú ve iòrÀú oldu.
‘Acem şÀhı úaradan ùonanmasına olan iòrÀú ve àarúı gördükce tehevvüründen kendüyi
zerrín-i taót üzerinden bir kac kere aşağıya atdı. Hele úıyılara gelen ba‘øı yerleri iòrÀú
olunmuş yüz miúdÀrı gemi daòı òalÀã eylediler. Ve ‘askerden otuz biñ miúdÀrı adam iòrÀú ve
àarú olmuş ve bu óíleleri Moravíler ve Atinavíler eyledi” deyu ãaóíó òaberin aldık. Ol sÀ‘at
otuz biñ taúsím olunan on bölük ‘askeri Mora üzerine [90a] yarar ser‘askerler ile irsÀl ve
öyle tenbíh eyledi ki, “Bi’l-cümle Mora`nıñ úaãÀbÀt ve kılÀ‘ların iórÀú ve òarÀb itmezseñiz
cümleñizi úatli‘Àm iderim” Ve fi’l-óaúíúa anlar daòı on úol olup Mora`nıñ cemí‘-i úaãÀbÀt ve
úılÀ‘larına şöyle ateş ve úılıc urdular ki aãlÀ hedm olunmadıú bir úal‘a ve iórÀú olunmadıú bir
menzil daòı bırakmadılar. Ve Mora`nıñ cümle ahÀlísi bir seneden beru ‘Acem şÀhınıñ keåret
‘askeri ile geldiği mesmÿ‘ları olmaàın cümle nefís eşyÀ ve emvÀlleriniñ cümlesini Mora`nıñ
ãarb ùağlarında olan maàaralara ve úuyulara ve ezvÀc u ‘ıyÀllerin óarb u êarba úÀdir olmayan
evlÀd u iòtiyÀrların ãarb derbendler içine ùoldurup cümle ceng-Àrí úaba eşyÀları úal‘a ve
271
úaãÀbÀt ve úaralarda kaldı. Ve úal‘alarda úalan ‘asker daòı gelen ‘Acem ‘askeriyle
muúÀbeleye úÀdir olmadıúları [90b] ecilden cümlesi derbendlere ve ãarb yerlere taóaããun
eylediler ve ‘Acem ‘askerine úarşu kimse gelmediğiñden anlar daòı boş buldukları úal‘a ve
úaãÀbÀt ve úaraları bi’l-cümle iórÀú ve òarÀb eylediler. Ve ba‘øı úulag[v]uzlar ile ôafer
buldukları ãarb yerleri daòı fetó ile bir miúdÀr esír ve eşyÀ ve emvÀl daòı aldılar. Ve üç ay
Mora`nıñ òarÀbına sa‘y eylediler.
Ve bu ùarafda ‘Acem şÀhı úuãÿr úalan ùonanma içün adamlar ta‘yín idüp ve biñ
miúdÀrı sefíne[y]i ceng içün müheyyÀ idüp ve Megara ile Úolori`niñ dar yerlerine úayıúlar ile
beş on köprü peydÀ idüp Úolori`yi daòı iórÀú bi’n-nÀr eyledi ve Atina ve Mora gemileri
Úolori ve .. aùaları óavÀlísinde ùuramayub firÀr eylediler. Ve ‘Acem şÀhı üç yüz ceng
sefínesine birer yarar vezírini ser-‘asker naãb eyledi. Ve dört yüz gemi üzerine daòı vezír-i
a‘ôamını ser‘asker naãb eyledi. [91a] Ve “Mora ve Atina ùonanmasını ne yerde istimÀ‘
iderseñiz aãlÀ te’òír itmeyüp üzerine varasız. Ve cümleñiz birbirne imdÀdı terk etmeyesiz”
deyu te’kíd-i tenbíhler eyledi. Ve ‘Acem ùonanması üç kere yüz biñ ‘asker ile Mora ve Atina
donanmalarınıñ ardına düşüb ve aãlÀ amÀn vermeyub bir yere Mora ve Atina ùonanması üç
gün ùurmağa úÀdir olamadılar. Aùalardan ne aãl aùaya yanaşdılarsa uğratmadılar. Ve Mora
sevÀóiline daòı ÀrÀm mümkün olmadı. Bi’ø-øarÿre Mesina898 aùasına firÀr eylediler. Ànda daòı
‘Acem ùonanması ta‘úíb idüp aóşamdan Mesina üzerine gider gibi Àndan daòı firÀr idüp
İspanya úıyılarına saldılar. Ve ‘ale’s-seóer ‘Acem ùonanması Mesina`ya girdiler ve gice firÀr
eylediklerin òaber aldılar. VelÀkin İspanya úıyılarını bilür úulaguzları olmayup ve Mesina`da
olan úulaguzları bi’l-cümle Mora ve Atina ùonanmaları aòõ eylediklerinden [91b] ‘Acem
ùonanması úulaguz bulmadılar. Ve bir ay miúdÀrı Mesina`da mekå eylediler. Ve eùrÀf-ı
Mesina`nıñ küçük úayıúlar ile cüst u cÿ eylediler ancak ne semte giddiklerin bulamadılar. Ve
eyyÀm-ı şitÀ úaríb olmaàın bi’ø-øarÿre ‘avdet eylediler. Ve şÀh daòı ùonanma üzerine olan
vüzerÀsı kemÀl-i ihtimÀm eylediklerin òaberi olmaàla cümlesine fÀòir òil‘atler giydürdi ve
‘askerine teraúúíler baòşíşler ve iósÀnlar eyledi. VelÀkin on iki kere yüz biñ ‘asker bi’l-cümle
‘Acem`den gelen õaòíreyi tamÀm eylediler ve aùalarda olan õaòíreyi aùalarda kışlayan
ùonanma tamÀm eylediler. Ve Rÿmili`nde óÀãıl olup orduya gelen õaòíre kifÀyet etmeyub ve
Atina ve Mora`dan zirÀ‘at ve òırÀset merfÿ‘ olduğundan derÿn-ı ‘askere ‘aôím úaóù u galÀ ùÀrí
oldu. Ve Rÿm şÀhları ve ümerÀsı bi’l-cümle şÀha gelüp taôallum-i óÀl [92a] eylediler ki:
Bundan aúdem on dirhem gümüşe aldığımız bir ölçek òınùa[y]ı óÀlÀ yüz dirheme
almağa rıøÀ verdik. Ancak ol daòı bulunmaz ve õaòíre òuãÿãunda eylediğimiz sa‘y u ihtimÀm
898
Sicily
272
ve iúdÀmımıza re‘ÀyÀmız daòı ùÀúat geturemeyub Anaùolı cÀnibine firÀr eylediler. Ve evvel
olan zirÀ‘at ve òırÀsetiñ el-yevm nıãfı olmaz. Ve aùa ahÀlísiniñ ekåeri açlıkdan helÀk oldılar.
ElóamdulillÀhi te‘ÀlÀ murÀd Atina óazÀnı iken Mora, Atina`ya imdÀd eylediğinden ol daòı
òarÀb oldı. Ve Atina ahÀlísinden Atina`da Mora ve bu eùrÀflarda bir aóad bulunmaz oldı,
cümle murÀd u maúãÿdumuz bi’l-cümle óÀãıl oldı. VelÀkin bizim aóvÀlimiz díger-gÿn oldı;
zírÀ mübÀya‘a olunan õaòíreyi aãlÀ tÀb u tuvÀnımız kalmadı. Ve sulùÀnımıñ elóamdulillÀhi
Te‘ÀlÀ maúãÿdu bi’l-cümle óÀãıl oldı ve ba‘de’l-yevm bu eùrÀfda sulùÀnımıza úarşu úor
bulunmaz ve úarşu ùurur düşmÀn daòı yokdur, fermÀn [92b] sulùÀnımıñdur” deyüp òatm-i
kelÀm eylediklerinde, şÀh fermÀn eyledi ki: “Biñ miúdÀrı õaòíre gemisi Anaùolı yakasına
gidüp yarar mübÀya‘acılar ile ceste ceste yüzer ve ellişer gemi her gün õaòíre getürsünler!”
deyüp fermÀn eyledi, ve mübÀya‘aya adamlar ta‘yín eyledi. Ba‘deóÿ birkac gün mürÿrundan
soñra ‘Acem ùarÀfından i‘lÀmlar geldi ki; Özbek ve Hind ùaraflarından ba‘øı óareketler olup,
‘Acem bilÀdından ve şÀha tÀbi‘ olanlardan ba‘øı ‘iãyÀn idüp òaserÀt írÀå eylediler deyu ‘arø
olunmuş. ŞÀh daòı õaòíre øarÿretinden ‘avdete bahÀne isterdi, çünki bu ‘arø ve i‘lÀm ôuóÿr
eyledi. Bi’ø-øarÿre ‘Acem ùarafına ‘aùf-ı ‘inÀn eyledi. VüzerÀsından yüz biñ cengÀver ‘asker
ile bir vezírini Atina ve Mora üzerlerine dÀ’imÀ àÀrÀt etsünler deyu Eàriboz ve İstefe ve
Livadiye ve İzdin Yeñişehir`e varınca kışla ve yaylÀú ta‘yín idüp ve eåúÀl-i ‘askerín piyÀde
[93a] olanlarıñ bi’l-cümle ùonanma sefÀyinine taómíl idüp bir kac def‘a cümlesini Anaùolı
yaúÀsına irsÀl eyledi.
Ve Rÿmili úaòù olmaàla şÀh, iki yüz biñ ‘asker ile Rÿmili`nden Anaùolı`ya naúl eyledi.
Ve muúaddemÀ Anaùolı`dan fermÀn ile naúl olunmuş õaòíreyi elinde úalan ‘asÀkir içün
bırağıldı. Ve bir sene ol ‘asker ol õeòÀyir ile ta‘ayyüş eylediler. Ve ol õaòíreniñ Rÿmili
ahÀlísine ‘aôím imdÀdı oldı. Ancak ol õaòíre daòı tamÀm oldukda yine úaòù-ı ‘aôím oldı; zírÀ
Rÿmili`nde ekåer mevÀøı‘ıñ re‘ÀyÀsı firÀr etmeğin zirÀ‘at ve òarÀset merfÿ‘ oldı ve Mora ve
Atina`dan bi’l-külliye merfÿ‘ olmaàın
ve Anaùolı ùarafından daòı úalíl naúl olunmağın
mezbÿr ‘asker êarb-ı dest ile buldukları yerde ve mesmÿ‘ları olan maóalden õaòíreyi almağa
başladılar. Ol vechile cümle Rÿmili ol ‘askerden muteêarrır oldukların şÀh ‘arø-ı maóøar
[93b] ile taôallum-i óÀl eylediler, ol ‘askerden ‘aôím şikÀyet eylediler. ‘Acem şÀhı daòı
beyhÿde ol ‘askeriñ maãraf ve levÀzımı ve Rÿm óalúına olan ôulm ve te’addílerin def‘ u ref‘
içün fermÀnlar gönderup ol vezíri daòı Rÿmili`nde ref‘ eyledi, bi’l-külliye Atina ve Mora ve
Rÿmili ahÀlíleri ol ‘askeriñ maêarratından òalÀã oldılar. Ve Atina ahÀlísine Mora ve Rÿmili
ahÀlíleri ‘aôím bu‘ê u ‘adÀvet eylediler. Üç sene ‘Acem ‘askerinden çekilen bu úadar
òasÀratlara bÀ‘iå ve bÀdí olduklarıyçün ancak Atina óükemÀsı ve ahÀlísi bu eånÀda úarÀr ve
iòtifÀ sebebiyle úatl u helÀk olmadılar ve cem‘ olup niçe dil-nüvÀzlıúlarıyla ahÀlí-yi mezbÿr
273
ile yine òoş oldılar ve iòtifÀ eyledikleri emvÀllerine bi’l-cümle mÀlik oldılar ve iki üç senede
Atina`nıñ úal‘a ve varoşunu bi’l-cümle mÀlik oldukları úal‘a ve varoşu bi’l-cümle ma‘mÿr
eylediler. Ve sefíneleri bi’l-cümle ma‘mÿr ve maófÿô olmaàla yine limanlara ke’l-evvel bi’lcümle ma‘mÿr oldı.
Ancak Mora ahÀlísi Atina`nıñ ma‘mÿriyetlerin [94a] istimÀ‘ eylediklerinde nÀr-ı óased
çekerlerin iórÀú idüp ve Atinalı`ya bu‘ê u ‘adÀvetlerin iôhÀra başladılar. Ve Atina`dan
Mora`ya gelenleri bilÀ-emÀn soyub ve úatl ider oldılar. Ve bu eånÀda Atinaví ve Moraví
[bir]birlerine ‘adÀvetden murÀd Mora`nıñ taòríbine bÀ‘iå olduklarından anlar daòı ‘adÀvet
iôhÀrına cesÀret idemediler. Ve vÀfir hedÀyÀ ve vÀfir sefÀyin ile baóren serdÀrları olan
æemostoúli`yi ol vaúitde bi’l-cümle Mo[r]a şÀhı olan Mizistre şÀhı olana irsÀl eyledi. Ol daòı
Benefşe ùarafından Mizistre şÀhına delÿle meãÀà bulup şÀha hedÀyesin ‘arø eyledi ve bir úaç
günden soñra Mizistre şÀhı dívÀn idüp Atina`dan gelen æemostoúli getürdi ve nÀmeleri Atina
óükemÀsı rü’esÀsından alup ‘aôím iltiyÀm eylediler. Ve ba‘øı adamlar Mora ùarafından
òasÀret-zede oldukların taôallum-ı óÀl eylediler. Ve ol vaúitde Mizistre ve Mora ‘askerlerine
berren ve baóren ser-‘asker olan Bafsaniye [94b] nÀmında bir cerí ser-‘askeri olup ve cümle
şÀh onıñ re’yinden òÀric söylemezlerdi. Ve re’yiyle dÀ’imÀ ‘amel iderlerdi. Ol dívÀnda óÀøır
bulunmağın Atina`dan gelen æemostoúli didi ki:
“Siz bir alay mürÀ‘í ve meóíl ve ehl-i òud‘a adamlarsız. Kendü emvÀl u eşyÀlarıñızı
óÿb óıfô eylediñiz. Ve size nuãret iden derd-mendleriñ àÀrÀt u òasÀrlarına bÀ‘iå ve bÀdí
olduñuz. Ve istióyÀ eylemeyüb ve aãlÀ hÀùır gözedmeyub kendü úal‘a ve varoş ve úaralarıñıza
úadímden daòı a‘lÀ-yı revnaú ve şÀn verup binÀlar ve bÀğ u bağceler ve daòı ziyÀde her
şeyiñize teraúúíler virup kibr u kíniñizden nÀşí Mora ahÀlísine íãÀl eylediğiñiz maêarratı
óÀùırıñıza getürüp ve sebeb olduğuñuz ahÀlí[y]e òasÀrete lisÀn ile olsun bir tayyib úaydında
olmayup hemÀn dÀ’ire-i nÀ-pÀkinizi evvelden a‘lÀ ve terakkíler ile mübÀóeåeye başladınız.
PÀdişÀhları ref‘ eylediñiz. Ve óükemÀlık pÀyendí ile òalú-ı ‘Àleme óíle ve òud‘a ve fitne ile
[95a] tasalluù eylediñiz òoş ancak Mora`nıñ cümle berren ve baóren biz daòı ‘asÀkirini cem‘
idelim ve gelüb ‘Acem şÀhından ziyÀde dÀr u diyÀrıñızı òarÀb ve yebÀb ideyim. Ve vücÿd ı
menóÿsuñuz ãafóa’-i ‘Àlemden ref‘-i ref‘iñiz òaberi dillerde dÀstÀn olsun!” didikde,
æemestoúli bildi ki, kendüye daòı necÀt yokdur. Bi’ø-øarÿre óíl[e]ye sülÿk idüp nifÀúÀne
bukÀlar iôhÀr idüp dedi ki:
“Cümle kelimÀtıñız óaúdur, ancak bu úullar ki mÀ-ãadaú değildür. Ve òilÀf-ı inhÀ ile
efendilerimiz ile bizi düşmÀn etdirdiler. Bu úullarıñız rÿz u şeb Àh ve eníndeyiz. Ve bizim
yüzümüzden Mora`nıñ aàniyÀ ve fuúarÀsı bu kadar òasÀrat-zede oldılar. ‘AcabÀ ne vaút biz
274
daòı cümleniñ òidmetinde bulunuruz deyu ıøùırÀb ve elemdeyiz. Ve çünki bizim aàniyÀ ve
fuúarÀlarımız emvÀl u eşyÀlarını iòtifÀ ve kendüleri düşmÀna úarşu varamadılar. HelÀk
olanlarımız pek azdur. Ve gelüb ol vech ile herkes òÀnesini óar u berdden óıfô içün bir miúdÀr
ta‘mír eyledik. [95b] Ve erÀzilimizden maófÿô olmak içün kal’amızı daòı mehmÀ-emken
ta‘mír eyledik. Ol daòı maãrafımıza àÀyet úalíl olduğundan dÀ’imÀ úıllet ile ta‘yíş
eylediğimizden bir miúdÀr ta‘míre úudretimiz müyesser oldı. Ve eğer benim bu maúÀleme
taãdíú isterseñiz mu‘temedun-’aleyh olan eşrÀfıñızdan birkac devletlu irsÀl buyuruñ, ãaóíó
òabere vÀãıl olsunlar. Ve bu bendeñiziñ òilÀfı ôuhÿr ider ise mÿcib-i ‘ibret içün beni murÀd
olunan ‘aõÀb ile úatl eyleñ!” didi. Anlar daòı “Bunuñ keõbi muúarrerdir ? kendü ùalebiyle úatl
olunsun” deyüp ve ãÀdıúu’l-úavl olan Mizistre ümerÀsından birkac mükellef adam ãıóóat-ı
óÀle vÀãıl olsunlar deyu irsÀl eylediler ve mezbÿr æemostoúli bir adamını úulaàuz intiòÀb idüp
irsÀl eylediler. Ve mektÿb taórírinde .. eyledi ki şÀyed .. ve ‘öõr ba‘dehÿ müfíd olmaz deyu
ada Misina lisÀnen te’kíd tenbíh eyledi ki; Atina óükemÀsınıñ rü’esÀsına maófí [96a] diyesin
ki; “Eğer benim ãıóóatim me’mÿl iderler ise Mizistre ùarafından giden ümerÀyı ben ol ùarafa
vuãÿl bulmayınca anları bu ùarafa irsÀl eylemesünler” didi ve mezbÿr Atina`ya vuãÿl buldukda
Atina ‘uôemÀsı bunlara ‘aôím ri‘Àyetler ve ikrÀmlar eyledi.Ve mezbÿrlara taórír etdirdiler ki
æemostoúli cemí‘-i aóvÀlinde ãÀdıúdur hemÀn mektÿbumuz vuãÿlunde aãlÀ te’òír itmeyüp bu
ùarafa irsÀl idesiz ve mezbÿr æemostoúli bu ùarafa vuãÿl bulmayınca bizler ol ùarafa ‘aôímet
emr-i muóaldur” didiklerinde Mizistre şÀhı daòı óíleye vÀúıf olup æemostoúli`yi Atina`ya
irsÀl eyledi Atinalı daòı ‘aôím ikrÀmla ümerÀyı Mizistre`ye irsÀl eyledi ve ba‘øı nuãó u pendi
óÀví ve kemÀl-i meveddet ve òulÿãu cÀlib kelimÀt ile úulÿblarını taùyíb idüp beynlerinde olan
nÀr-ı fitneyi iùfÀ eylediler kemÀ-kÀn síne-ãÀf oldılar. Ve ittifÀú u ittióÀd ile ‘Acem şÀhı oldığı
aùalarıñ [96b] fetóine ‘aôímet eylediler.
Ve evvel bahÀrda Atina ve Mizistre ùonanmaları ittióÀdıyla varup, aùalardan bir úaç
ãaàír aùa fetó eylediler. Ve ertesi sene daòı varup daòı ziyÀde fetó eylediler. Ve ‘Acem
ùarafından olan muóÀfıôları úatl, seby u àÀrÀt, àanÀ’im-i keåíre ile Atina`ya ve Mizistre`ye
‘avdet eylediler. Ve üçüncü sene bir eyüce ruùÿbet taóãíl eylediklerinden ‘Acem`e mÀni‘ olan
Rÿmili sevÀóilini daòı fetó eylediler. Ve varduúca Atina`nıñ yine Àb u tÀbı úadímden daòı
ziyÀde olmaàla ‘aôamet ãÀóibi oldılar. Ve devletleri efzÿn olup iki yüz pÀre sefíne[y]i cengleri
olup yigirmi biñ cengÀver ‘asker ile ùonadub beher sene evvel bahÀrda huceste-i ÀåÀrda
Akdeñiz aùaları sevÀóiline çıkarlardı. Ve Atina ùonanması úapudÀnı bir melíóu’l-vech ve
leõíõu’l-kelÀm adam olup suhÿlet birle cemí‘-i Akdeñiz aùalarını Atina`ya tÀbi‘ [97a] etdirdi.
VelÀkin Mizistre úapudÀnı bir óaşín seyyi’ü’l-òulú adam olmaàla óuşÿnet ile
kimesneye ünsiyet mümkin eylemezdi. Yüz sefíne ile dÀ’im Mora cÀnibinden Atina
275
ùonanması ma‘iyyet ile çıkub ol daòı ba‘øı aùalara müstevlí olurdu, ancak dÀ’imÀ òuşÿnet
üzere olduğundan suhÿlet ile bir aùa ve úal‘anıñ fetói müyesser olmadı, cengle alurdı; ol
ecilden fetói müyesser olmadı. MinvÀl-i meşrÿó üzere bi’l-cümle Rÿmili sevÀóilini ve
Akdeñiz aùalarını ba‘øılarını ‘unfle ve ba‘øılarını rıfúla fetói müyesser olup àanÀyim-i vÀfire
ve üserÀ-yı mütekÀåire ile Atina`ya Mizistre`ye ‘avdet iderdi. Ve beşinci sÀl-i feróunde yine
iki yüz pÀre gemi ile Atina ùonanması ve yüz pÀre gemiyle Mizistre ùonanması ‘aôím şevket
ile gidüp Sakız ve Midillu ve Boğcaaùa ve İstankö[y] ve Rodos ve Úıbrız aùalarını bi’l-cümle
beş altı ayda úabêa’-i tesòíre getürüp ol üserÀ-yı vÀfire ve àanÀyim-i bí-gÀye ile Atina`ya
[97b] ve Mizistre`ye ‘avdet eylediler; çünki bi’l-cümle Akdeñiz`iñ ãaàír ve kebír aùaları fetó
olındı. Bundan aúdem Atina`ya tÀbi‘ olup ve Atina ahÀlís ile memlÿ’ olan on iki pÀre úal‘a ve
şehirleri ‘Acem şÀhı fetó ve kendüye teb‘iyyet itdürdüb ve ùarafından mustaófıôlar vaø‘ itmiş
idi. Çünki úadími kendülere tÀbi‘ olan úal‘a ve aùalara bi’l-cümle Atina óükemÀsı mÀlik
oldılar. Anaùolı`da daòı olanlarıñ tesòíriyçün otuz biñ miúdÀrı müceddiden kara ‘askeri
aùalardan ve sevÀóilden ve Atina`dan taórír ve tedÀrik idüp ve üzerlerine úapudÀn olan
æemestoúli ser-‘asker ve Atina bahÀdurlarından ‘asker kullanmak ‘ilminde mahÀreti olan
namında bir müdebbir ve cesÿr adamı ùonanma üzerine úapudÀn eylediler ve mezbÿr úapudÀn
otuz biñ ‘askeri iki def‘a Anaùolı`ya geçirup ve æemestoúli ‘unfla ve rıfúla bir iki senede ol on
iki şehri ve úal‘aları fetó idüp ve ùaraflarından mustaófıôlar ta‘yín idüp ve êÀif [98a] ve
ta‘yínlerin ‘alÀ-vechü’l-kifÀye ta‘yín idüp eyüce niôÀmların virup iútiøÀ itmeyen ‘askeri
Atina`ya ‘avdet itdirdi. Ve ba‘dehÿ meftÿó olan cezírelere ve sevÀóile taóammüllerine göre
teklíf ve ‘öşr ta‘yín olunup ùonanma serdÀrları ùarafından cem‘ iderlerdi.
Ancak ‘Acem şÀhı MÀverÀünnehr`de ve Hind`den ôuóÿr iden düşmÀnlara meşàÿl
olduğundan bu ùaraflara muúayyed olamadı. Ol vechden bu ùaraflarda düşmÀn olmadığından
Atina àÀyet ma‘mÿr olup ehl-i óikmet ve a‘yÀn ve kibÀr ve ehl-i ãanÀyi‘ ve tüccÀr keåret üzere
olup ve şehr ve eùrÀfı àÀyet ma‘mÿr olup ve ceng olmadığı gibi òastalık ve ùÀ‘ÿn daòı
olmayup ve keåret üzere tevellüd olup şöyle ma‘mÿr ve müzeyyen oldı ki cümle Rÿmili ve
Mora ahÀlíleri derÿnunda maósÿd oldı. Ve Mora ahÀlísi ba‘øı iôhÀr-ı ‘adÀvet itmeğe
başladılar. Ve ùonanma serdÀrları olan àÀyet óaşín teklíf ve mÀl-ı ‘öşr taóãílinde re‘ÀyÀya
[98b] ‘aôím cebr ve úahr eylediklerinden şikÀyeti dÀ’ima òÀlí değil idi ve Atina`nıñ donanma
serdarı olan Aristidi899 àÀyet laùíf ve rıfúlı olduğundan cemí‘-i re‘ÀyÀ Atina serdÀrını
severlerdi ve dÀ’imÀ õaòíreye müte‘alliú olan hediyye’[y]i keåret üzere verirlerdi. Bu sebeb ile
899
Aristides
276
Mizistre serdÀrı re‘ÀyÀyı rencíde idüp ve Atina serdÀrına dÀ’ima güç naôÀr idüp küsmeye ve
gavgāya bahÀne arar idi.
Ve bu aóvÀle Atina óükemÀsı òabír oldukda yine óíle enbÀ’nına dest urup bir óíle
peydÀ eylediler ki, ‘Àlemde olmuş değil idi ve ôuhÿr iden şikÀyeti terbiye idüp ve mevøi‘ ve
mevúi‘inde şikÀyetleri tertíb idüp ve Mizistre kapudÀnını envÀ‘ töhmetler ile mütehemmim
eylediler. Ve yine ba‘øı ta‘mír eylediler ki gerçi cevr ü ôulmü bu haddedür, lÀkin nÀdirü’lvücÿd ve maóall-i gav[gā]da vücÿdu lÀzım bir adamdur. Gelin, siz ve biz donanma meãÀrifini
terk idelim; zírÀ düşmÀn olmadığından beyhÿde maãrafdur. Mücerred [99a] cizye ve ‘öşrün
taóãílinden àayrı bir meşàalemiz yokdur; ol ise ÀsÀn vechile taóãíl olunur. Ùarafeynden birer
mír ve birer defterdÀr herbir defterdÀra ‘ilm-i óesÀbda mahÀreti olan beşer kÀtib ta‘yín
eyleyelim. Ve mezbÿrları ‘öşr ve cizye taóãíliyçün beşer mükemmel gemi ùarafından ta‘yín
idelim. Ve ba‘øı münÀfıúlar ùarafına íkÀz eyledikler fitne ve fesÀd ateşlerini itfÀ’ içün
Mikonoz nÀm ada úurbunda olan Mermercik adasında olan ma‘bed
úadím ve kebír
olduğuyçün bi’l-cümle Rÿmili ve adalar Siroz ne kadar iltifÀt ve raàbet olındığu ma‘lÿm
devletler ol ma‘bed-i úadímin sur ve havÀlísi vasaùında òazíne olmak içün bir kule-yi aôím
binÀ idelim ve ol kule derÿnuna birkaç òazíne odası ifrÀz idelim ve taóãíl olunan gümüşü ve
altını .. ve külçe idüp vezn ve kıratla kÀtibler defterlerine úayd eylesünler ve ol òazíne [99b]
ùarafından mÀlı kabø içün òazínedÀr naãb idelim ve òazínedÀr içün kulenin kapusu ùarafına
itbÀ‘larıyla süknÀ binÀ idelim. Ve bundan mÀ‘adÀ ol òazíne óıfô içün ùarafeynden biner adam
ile birer míri muhÀfıô ta‘yín idelim ve meõkÿr mírler ile ‘askerlerine, süknÀlarına kifÀyet
miúdÀrı menÀzil binÀ idelim. Ve muhÀfıô ta‘yín olunan mírler ile ‘askerleri beher sene tecdíd
oluna; zírÀ tezevvüc ve te’ehhül semtine raàbet iderler. Ve emír-i muóÀfaôa “kemÀ hüve
óaúúuhÿ” óuãÿl bulmaz; zírÀ ‘iyÀl u nafaúası úaydiyle muúayyed olup sÀ’ir adalara ve ba‘íd
olan maóalle nafaúa ‘iyÀl taóãíliyçün perÀkende olmÀları emr-i muúadderdir deyu bu vechile
fünÿn u óílelerine bÀsiù-i merÀm eylediler.
Ve Mizistre şÀhına ve ‘uôemÀsına bu tedbír, óüsn görünüb rıøÀ verdiler. Ve minvÀl-i
muóarrer üzere mezbÿr adada ol binÀları iódÀå eylediler. Ve birer míri ile birer defterdÀr
kÀtibler ile ùarafeynden beşer gemiyle ‘öşr ve cizyeyi taóãíl içün [100a] ta‘yín eylediler. Ve
taóãíl olunan ‘öşrü úabø içün birer òazínedÀr kÀtibleriyle ve tevÀbi‘leriyle ta‘yín eylediler. Ve
ol òazíneyi òıfz içün biñer adam daòı birer mír ta‘yin eylediler. Ve bu vechile bir miúdÀr nifÀú
ile óasedi def‘ u ref‘ eylediler. Ve her sene taóãíl içün ilóÀó olunup ve taóãíl olunup ba‘de’lmeãÀrif kalan mÀlı òazíneye vaø‘ olunup defterlerini Mizistre ve Atina òazínelerine teslím
olunurdu. MinvÀl-i muóarrer üzere on sene ol mÀl taóãíl olunup ol ada òazínesinde maófÿô
olunurdu. Ve sinín-i mezbÿrede Atina ol mertebe ma‘mÿr olup ‘acíb ve àaríb binÀlar ile
277
müzeyyen oldu. Ve cevÀnib-i erba‘asında ta‘límòÀneler, kılıç ta‘lími içün müfrez ta‘límòÀne;
ve mızrak ta‘límiyçün müfrez ta‘límòÀne; ve yine ceríd ve cündíler içün müfrezòÀne. Ve
‘umÿm üzere zevú u sürÿr erbÀbına mu‘ayyen mesíre-gāhlar ifrÀz ve ta‘yín olunup; ve güleş
erbÀbına daòı [100b] mu‘ayyen güleş meydÀnı binÀ olunup ãÿret-i suverísi bu vech üzere
vaż‘ u binÀ olunmuşdur.
Atina şehriniñ şark ùarafında iki tepe mÀ-beyninde olan çukur meãÀfeyi düzleyüp ve
taşı bi’l-külliye taùhír idüp ve yumuşak olmak üzere kumlar döşeyub ve ol maóallin cevÀnib-i
erba‘asını pÀk beyÀø mermerler ile süllemi nerdibÀn şeklinde ãuffeler ol sed gibi beyÀø
mermerlerden binÀ olunup ve ol ãuffelerin zíri teng olup nerdibÀn-ÀsÀ yukarusu yapulub
yigirmi miúdÀrı dÀ’iren-mÀ-dÀre birbiri üzerine ãuffeler ùaró olunup zírde oturanlara a‘lÀda
oturanlara aãlÀ hÀyil olmayup ve seyircilerin cümlesi güzel seyr idüp óuôÿô-ı vÀfire óÀãıl
iderlerdi. Ve güleş tutanlardan her kim maàlÿb olur ise kemÀl-i şerm ve óicÀb eylesun deyu
şimÀl ùarafında olan tepeniñ zírinde bir lağm óafr olunup mezbÿr tepeniñ altında şimÀl
ùarafından nüfÿz iderdi. [101a] Ve güleşcilerden her kim maàlÿb olur ise eåvÀbın kapub ve
óafr olunan lağm derÿnunda aãlÀ sükÿn ve mekåe rıøÀ verilmeyen şimÀl ùarafından tepe altına
çıkub kimse görmeden firÀr iderdi. Maóall-i mezbÿrede ve sÀir ta‘límòÀnelerde erbÀbıyçün ve
seyirci içün haftada mu‘ayyen günler ta‘yín olunmuş idi. Ve ‘askerleri çok olup eùrÀf
diyÀrlarına òavf ettirüb dÀ’imÀ òafv iderlerdi. Ve mezbÿr ta‘límòÀnelerin el-Àn binÀları
mevcÿddur ve óÀlÀ müşÀheddür.
Ve úadímden olan binÀlarda nezÀket ve ôerÀfet ehl-i mün‘adim olduklarından matbÿ‘
ve meràūb değiller idi. Bu ‘aãırda ehl-i ‘ilm ve ãÀóib-i ma‘rifet ve erbÀb-ı óikmet ve ãÀóib-i
nezÀket olduklarından cemí‘-i binÀları ve resm ve ta‘lím ve erbÀb-ı hendeseye müşÀveresiyle
óÀãıl olur idi; ol ecilden àÀyet laùíf ve meràūb olup eùrÀf u eknÀfa ôerÀfet ve leùÀfet ile Atina
meşhÿr oldu. [101b] Ol ‘aãırda ziyÀretgÀh olmuş idi; zírÀ Àb u havÀ ve müzeyyen menÀzil ve
meràūb ebniye ve keåret-i mehÀbíb ile memlÿ’ olmaàın erbÀb-ı ‘aşk u hevÀ dÀ’imÀ Atina
ziyÀretinden münfekk olmazlardı.
Ve nice şehõÀdeler ve beyõÀdeler daòı dÀ’imÀ ziyÀrete gelurler idi. Ve berren
Atina`nıñ ‘askerí ùÀ’ifesine şark ùarafında kışla ta‘bír olunan süknÀlar her bölüğe dÀ’iren-mÀdÀr bir dÀr ki buyÿt-ı müte‘addídeyi müştemil ve óÀví olup bölükbaşı, odabaşı ve ketòudÀsı ve
‘alemdÀr ve çavuş odaları ve maùbaò, herbir bölüğe lÀzım olan odaları ‘alÀ-óaddihi binÀ
eylediler. Ve herbir bölük ÀlÀt-ı cengin herkangisiyle me’lÿf ise ol kışlanıñ bir cÀnibine ta‘lím
içün birer ta‘lím-òÀne binÀ olunmuş idi. Ve herkes odasında ta‘lím idüp eyüce mahÀret
taóãílinden soñra ‘umÿm içün binÀ olunan ta‘límòÀnelere varup mu‘tÀd olunan günlerde
278
iôhÀr-ı ma‘rifet iderdi. Ve eğerçi üstÀdlar pesend [102a] iderdi ise cümle ‘indinde pesendíde
olurdu. Mezbÿr odaları mücerredler içün yapmışlardı. Ve Atina`nıñ àarb ùarafında bahrí olan
‘asker içün kışlalar binÀ olunup, kapudÀn ve re’ís vesÀ’ir ôÀbitÀn içün odalar ve ùulÀní neferÀt
içün fÿ-veş odaları; ve berrí olan ‘askerin kışlalarına úaríb kılıççılar ve mızrakçılar ve
serrÀclar ve meùÀflar ve üzengiciler ve ‘askerí ùÀ’ifesine maòãÿã terziler ve berberler ve
fırıncılar ve şerbetciler ve okcular ve yaycılar ve her neye lüzÿmu mukteêídir; her birine
müfrez çarşular binÀ olunmuşdur.
Ve keõÀlik erbÀb-ı ãanÀyi‘ bi’l-cümle kışlaları ùarafına úaríb müfrez çarşular binÀ
olunmuş. Ve donanmaya ve sefÀyine lÀzım olacak katrancı ve halatcılar ve demirciler ve
kalÀfatcılar sirincíler ve kürekçiler ve yelkenciler ve cümle lüzÿmu olan erbÀb-ı ãanÀyi‘i àarb
ùarafında ve liman úurbunda pÀk kÀr-gír binÀ olunmuş idi. [102b] Peksimetçiler ve sefíne
mi‘mÀrları ve gürelteciler ve tokmakçılar ve dülgerler vesÀyir lüzÿmu olan donanma ‘askerine
ve sefínelere bi’l-cümle Ejder limanı ùarafında binÀ olunup herbir ãan‘at ve levÀzımÀt başka
maòõenler ve dükkÀnlar müfrez binÀ olunmuşdur. Ve berren yigirmi biñ ‘asker; ve baóren
daòı yigirmi biñ ‘asker, ki mecmÿ‘u kırk biñ ‘asker taórír olunup ve iútiøÀ iden veôÀyifleri ve
ta‘yínÀtları yevmiyye ve şehriyye ve seneví ‘alÀ-úadrihim ta‘yín olunmuş idi. Ve ‘askerí
olanlar ceng ãan‘atlarından àayrı bir ãan‘at öğrenmezlerdi ve ticÀret itmezlerdi. Ve evine ve
òısm aúrabÀya haftada bir kerre gitmek içün şehr içine girerlerdi. Ve úuãÿr hafta eyyÀmını
kışlalarında ve ta‘lím-òÀnelerinde olup olup ve ta‘lím idüp me’mÿr oldukları òidmeti görürler
idi. Ve ‘askerí ùÀ’ifesi da‘vÀları görülmek içün kışlaları cÀnibinde maókemeleri [103a] ta‘yín
olunmuş idi ve cezÀları ôÀbitleri ma‘rifetiyle görülür idi.
Ve cenÿb ùarafında ya‘ní Atina`nıñ şağ ùarafında óükemÀ ve erbÀb-ı óikmet ve medÀris
ve mu‘allim-òÀneler ve kağıdcılar ve mürekkebciler ve mücellidler vesÀ’ir ‘ilm u ma‘rifete
lüzÿmu olanlar cümle ol ùarafa meskenleri binÀ olunmuş idi. Ve şimÀl ùarafında beledí olanlar
tüccÀr ùÀ’ifesi ve ‘umÿm üzere erbÀb-ı ãanÀyi‘ ve fuúarÀ ve øu‘efÀ ve bímar-òÀneler ve tabíb
dükkÀnları, ancak cerrÀòlar ‘askerí ùarafında olurdu. Ve ırgād ve bi’l-cümle úal‘aya ve şehre
lüzÿmu olan erbÀb-ı ãanÀyi‘ bi’l-cümle şimÀl ùarafında binÀ olındı. DükkÀnları ve meskenleri
ve ‘arabaları ve óükemÀ ve ehl-i ‘ilm ve ãÀóib-i ma‘rifet da‘vÀlarını istimÀ‘ içün óükemÀ-yı
‘uôemÀdan maókeme-i müfrez ve maòãÿã ta‘yin olunmuş idi. Mezbÿr maókemede
meõkÿrlardan àayrınıñ da‘vÀsını istimÀ‘ eylenmezdi. Vasaù-ı şehrde ‘umÿm içün daòı bir
maókeme-i mu‘aôôama [103b] ta‘yín olunmuş idi. Her kimin da‘vÀsı kenÀr maókemelerinde
faãl olunmaz ise faãl-ı òusÿmet içün maókeme-i kebíre gelüp elbette faãl-ı òusÿmet olur idi.
ZírÀ bir rivÀyetde her mÀdde içün bir maókeme vaø‘ olunmuş idi. Rÿy-i ‘arøda ol vaúitde
Atina`ya iódÀå olunan umÿr-ı ‘acíbe bir diyÀrda olmuş değil. Çünkü ceng u nizÀ‘ kimse ile
279
yok idi ve umÿrları cumhÿr müşÀveresiyle olurdı. Cümle re’yle her gün birer emr iódÀå
iderlerdi. Ve ‘askeri ùÀ’ifesine ta‘yín olunan ‘alÀ-úadrihim veôÀif ve ta‘yínÀtları yevmí ve
şehrí tecÀvüz itmeyüp ta‘yín olunan müddet ‘aúabinde teslím olunurdı. Ve bir ùÀ’ife fevúinde
olanlarıñ libÀs u ùa‘Àmlarına aãlÀ taúlíd itmeğe úÀdir değiller idi. HemÀn herkese ta‘yín olunan
miúdÀrı cins ve nev‘inden ziyÀdeye úÀdir olup tecÀvüz itmezdi. Eğerce ta‘annüt idüp bir nefer
øÀbiùine [104a] yÀòÿd küçük øÀbiùler büyük øÀbiùleriñ ekl u şurb ve libÀslarına taúlíd eylese
mezbÿr muúallidiñ óaseb u nesebine ve şefí‘lerine bakılmayub ve kelÀmları aãlÀ iãgÀ
olunmayub ol muúallidi bilÀ-emÀn úatl iderlerdi. Ve keõÀlik fuúarÀ, aàniyÀ libÀslarına ve
ùa‘amlarına taúlíd eyleseler úatl olunurdı. Ve pespÀye olanlar bilÀ-pÀye olanlara gerek ùa‘Àm
ve gerek libÀs ve gerek menÀzil ve meskenlerine pespÀye taúlíd eyledikde aãlÀ amÀn
verilmeyub muúallid úatl olunurdı. Ve mecma‘ yerlerine nefer øÀbiùine ne úadar óaseb u
neseb u mün’im õí-úudret ise de teúaddüm ve muúÀbele ve kelÀm-ı fuøÿle úÀdir olmazdı.
Eğer tecÀvüz iderdi ise ol sÀ‘at úatl olunurdı. Ve keõÀlik pespÀyeler bÀlÀyelere ve fuúarÀ
aàniyÀya teúaddüm ve muúÀbele ve kelÀm-ı fuøÿle úÀdir olmazlar; ve illÀ úatl olunurlardı.
Bu Àyín u erkÀn Atina ahÀlísi ri‘Àyet etdikce, Atina şöyle ma‘mÿr ve meràÿb ve
müzeyyen oldu ki [104b] eùrÀf u eknÀfda bunuñ miåli olmayup maósÿdu’l-enÀm oldı. Ve
eùrÀf óÀsidleri óasedlerini iôhÀra úÀdir olmazlardı; illÀ Mizistre ahÀlísi òaãm itmeyüp ba‘øı
iôhÀr-ı óased ve ‘adÀvet itmeyin òÀlí olmazdı. Ancak Atina ahÀlísi kendü zevúlerine òalel
virmemek içün iğmÀz-ı ‘ayn iderlerdi ve dÀ’imÀ niôÀm-ı memleketlerine muúayyed olurlardı.
Ve óÀkimleri ve øÀbiùler ve ‘ammÀl ve aãóÀb-ı defter kendülere ve ma‘íşete ta‘yín olunandan
sırr-ı mütecÀvize úÀdir olmazlardı. Ve kendülere değil Àòara daòı aldurmağa úÀdir olmazlardı;
eğer vÀúi‘ olsa aãlÀ amÀn verilmeyub, cümle re’yle úatl olunurdı. Ve herkes umÿrına dÀ’ir
kelÀmdan tecÀvüz etmeğe úÀdir değiller idi. Ve niôÀm-ı memleket umÿrı her ne ise niôÀm-ı
müşÀveresine ta‘yín olunandan àayrı kimesne lisÀna almağa úÀdir olmazdı. Ve herkes ta‘yín
olındığı òidmetiñ dÀ’im itmÀmına sa‘y iderdi. Ve eğer ‘öõürsüz úuãÿr [105a] ve küsÿru vÀúi‘
olur ise cürmü miúdÀrı cezÀsı görilürdi. Bunuñ emåÀli niôÀm içün vaø‘ olunan umÿruñ
ihmÀmında ‘aôíminde taúayyüd olunurdı. Ve Atina`da yevmen fe-yevmen ferÀàat olunan
óuúÿú icrÀsı Mizistre`ye ‘aks vÀúi‘ oldı; zírÀ vardıkca ‘askerí ùÀ’ifesi øÀbiùlerine àalebe idüp
kelÀm-ı neferÀta intiúÀl idüp her bir seróÿş diledi ki, ôulmü icrÀ iderdi. Ve aàniyÀ fuúarÀya
muúÀbele úÀdir olmazdı. Zíret olanlar zengínlerin emvÀline dest-rÀzlıú itmeğe ekåer tüccÀr ve
ehl-i ‘arø ve ehl-i ‘iffet olanlar ve ‘Àúil ve müdebbirleriñ kelÀmları iãgÀ olunmadığından
meõkÿrlar cümle Mizistre`den hicret idüp niôÀm-ı memleketleri iótilÀlden àayrı írÀdları daòı
àÀyet úalíl olup úadímden yüz elli pÀre sefíne ióøÀrına úÀdir iken yüz sefíne ióøÀr úÀdir
olamaz oldılar. Ve söz ayakda olmaàla diyÀrları [105b] iótilÀlden aãlÀ òÀlí olmazdı ve ‘askerí
280
ùÀ’ifesiniñ øabt u rabùı mümkün değil idi. Vardıkca írÀdları mütezÀyid iken nÀúıã olmağa
başladı ve beyhÿde maãrafları mütezÀyid oldı. Ol yüz elli sefíneyi kifÀyet miúdÀrı maãrafa
kÀdir olup ùÀrí olan iótilÀlden nÀşí yüz sefíne ihêÀrına úÀdir olmazlardı. VelÀkin Atina ahÀlísi
umÿrlarına niôÀm ve intiôÀma muvaffıú írÀdları ziyÀde ve maãrafları írÀddan àÀyet noúãÀn
olup írÀd muêÀ‘af gelüri óattÀ ol ‘aãrda iki yüz pÀre sefíne ióøÀrına úudret ve miknet óÀãıl
eylediler. Her bir sefíneye mellÀóandan àayrı yüzer ‘asker-i levend ùoldurup iki yüz sefíneye
yigirmi biñ ‘asker ta‘yín olunup beher evvel bahÀrda mezbÿr iki yüz sefíne bi’l-cümle
levÀzımÀtıyla ùonanup Akdeñiz aùalarını muóÀfaôa içün altı mÀh devr iderlerdi. Dest-i tetÀvüli a‘dÀdan bütün Akdeñiz`i óıfô iderlerdi. Bunlarıñ aóvÀli müferreóü’l-bÀl ve müreffehü’laóvÀl evúÀt-güõÀr iken ‘Acem şÀhı daòı Hind ùarafından [106a] ôuóÿr iden düşmÀnları meşàÿl
olup Atina ve Mizistre tecÀvüzlerine bi’ø-øarÿre iàmÀê-ı ‘ayn iderdi. VelÀkin dÀ’im derÿrunda
kin ve ‘adÀvetlerin aãlÀ iòrÀc itmezdi. On beş sene miúdÀrı MÀverÀunnehr ve Hind düşmÀnları
ile meşàÿl olup ve anları ber ùaraf etdikden soñra yine Atina ve Mizistre úaydlarıyla
muúayyed olmağa başladı. Ve İran ‘askerine kemÀ-hüve óaúúuhum cezÀlarına kifÀyet itmez;
belki Atina ve Mizistre ‘askerísi ‘uôemÀsından ‘Acem ‘askeriyle me‘an müdebbir ve erbÀb-ı
cengden adam olmayınca olmaz deyüp ve óÀlÀ Atina`da ve Mizistre`de tedbír ve taãarruf ve
cerí ve cesÿr ve òud‘a-yı ceríde mehÀret-i külliyesin-kelbiyyesin olanlar kim olduğın su´Àl ve
istifsÀr idüp Atina`da æemestoúli ve Mizistre`de .. olduğın òaber aldıkda mezbÿrları ãayd içün
niçe hedÀyÀ ve õí-úıymet cevÀhir úısmından tuófeler ile [106b] ve her birine vüzerÀ-i ‘iôÀmın
ve menşÿr u fermÀnınıñ irsÀli ile mezbÿrları ‘Acem şÀhı òiõmetine da‘vet eyledi. .. fermÀn u
mürsel vüsÿl buldukda .. icÀbet etmeyub ve hedÀyÀyı daòı úabÿl eylemedi, ancak .. icÀbet
edup ve hedÀyÀyı úabÿl eyledi. Ve cevÀb eyledi ki: “Çok değil baña şÀh bu ùarafı elli biñ ve
cengÀver ‘asker irsÀl eylesun bi’l-cümle Mora`yı ve Atina`yı ona teshír edeyim gelen ile
bugÿne cevÀb eyledi ve ba‘dehÿ ba‘żı umÿr daòı lÀzımü’l-i‘lÀm olmaàın kendü tevÀbi‘inden
birini tebdíl edüp ‘Acem şÀhına mektÿblarıyla irsÀl eyledi. Ve mektÿblarında taórír eylemiş
ki: “Mektÿblarım vuãÿl bulup mefhÿmları ma ‘lÿm oldukda, bu sırr ifşÀ olmasun!” deyu “İrsÀl
olunan adamıñ cezÀsı görüle” demiş irsÀl olunan adam daòı àÀyet aóvÀl bilür adam olmaàla
böyle esrÀr ile [107a] irsÀl olunan mektÿblarda “niçe derd-mendler òaraca sürülür” deyu
Mizistre`den bir miúdÀr çıkub gitdikden soñra bir tenhÀ yerde mektÿblar açub úıra’at
eyledikde cÀn başına ãıçrayub ve gice gelüp Mizistre`ye girüb erkÀn-ı devlete aóvÀli iòbÀr ve
mektÿbları gösterüb cümle erkÀn-ı devlet aóvÀle muùùali‘ ol vaúitde cümlesi cem‘ olup
Bafsaniye`yi ùutmak murÀd eylediklerinde ol daòı aóvÀli òaber alup Mizistre`de bir ma‘bed-i
úadímleri olup her kim ol ma‘bede varup girse úanlu daòı olurdı ise kimesne aòõ u ta‘arruø
eylemeğe úÀdir olmazdı. Bafsaniye ol ma‘bede girdi ancak cürmü, ‘afv olunur cürm değil idi.
Ve vÀlidesini ióøÀr eylediler ve didiler ki: “LÀ-muóÀl seniñ oàlun úatl oàludur! Oàluñ içün
281
úanúi ölümü tercíó idersiñ?” didiklerinde, açlık ölümü bir kac gün mürÿr ider ol eyyÀmda
belki beynlerinde muãÀlaóa olup òalÀã olur ümídiyle vÀlidesi, [107b] açlık ölümünü iòtiyÀr
eyledi. Ve vÀlidesine didiler ki: “Açlık ölümünü iòtiyÀr eylediğin delÀlet eylesun ki, evvelÀ
sen bir ùaş alup ma‘bed úapusuna úoy!” didiler, ol daòı bir ùaş alup ma‘bed kapusuna úoydı.
Ve sÀ’ir òalú daòı bir ùaş vaø‘ idüp deyrin cemí‘-i úapularını kÀr-gír ùaş binÀ eylediler. Ve
eùrÀfını bir kac biñ adam óıfô idüp çıkub gitmesün ve kimse ùa‘Àm virmesun ve böyle aclıú ile
ma‘bed içinde fevt Bafsaniye oldı.
VelÀkin ol vaúitde Mizistre ve Mora ve Atina ahÀlísiniñ dilekleri ol idi ki kendü
cürmleri ãÀdur olsa cezÀnı taóammül idüp úudretleri var iken kendü diyÀr le kendü ve
òalÀãıyçün óarb u úıtÀl idüp kimesne[y]i úatl itmezlerdi; ammÀ Bafsaniye Mizistre`ye değil
cümle Mora`ya úarşu úor adam idi bu vechile fevt oldı. Ve Atina re’ísü’r-rü’esÀ olan
æemestoúli ‘Acem şÀhından gelen mektÿblar Bafsaniye`de olup terekesinde bulundı. [108a]
Çünkü Mizistreli`niñ æemestoúli`ye óased u ‘adÀvetleri àÀlib olmaàın ol sÀ‘at berren Atina
óükemÀsına ol mektÿbları irsÀl eylediler. Ve Atina óükemÀsı ol mektÿbları gördüklerinde
æemestoúli óaúúında olan meveddet, ‘adÀvet u òıyÀnete mübeddil olup ve æemestoúli
óaúúında Atinalı müşÀvere iderken æemestoúli`niñ òaberi olup firÀr eyledi. Ve æemestoúli
firÀrında Atinavíler æemestoúli`niñ óıyÀnetini taãdíú eylediler. Ve æemestoúli Aròūs[a] ilticÀ
eyledi velÀkin Aròūs Atinalı mezbÿru ùaleb eyledi ve anlar daòı müdÀfa‘a idemediklerinden
æemestoúli Aròūs`dan firÀr idüp tebdíl olup Anaùolı yakasına gidüp ‘Acem şÀhınıñ
vüzerÀsından birine ilticÀ eyledikde ol daòı şÀha ‘arø eyledi, şÀh daòı mesrÿr olup ve kendüye
buluşdurup ikrÀm eyledi ve beylerbeyi rütbesinde sancak ve arpalıú tevcíh eyledi.
Ve Anaùolı ve ‘Arabistan sevÀóilinde ‘aôím ùonanma tedÀrikiyçün eùrÀf u eknÀfda
[108b] kerÀste kesdurub bÀ-òuãÿã Karadeñiz`de ol úadar kerÀste úaù‘ ve sefÀyin binÀ olunmuş
ki, tavãífi mümkün değildür. Ve æemestoúli Karadeñiz ve Akdeñiz sevÀóilinde úaù‘ olunan ve
kurulan sefÀyin üzerine me’mÿr olup ve altı yüz kebír sefíne kurulub her bir sefíne
mellÀóından mÀ‘adÀ beş yüz cengci içine almak üzere sefíneler üç senede itmÀm olup ve üç
kere yüz biñ cengci beşer yüz her bir sefíneye va‘ê olındı ve cümle mühimmÀt ve tedÀrikler
kemÀ-yenbaài görilub ve her bir sefíneye re’ís ve úapudÀn ve cümle sefÀyine baş úapudÀn
Paşalıú ile æemestoúli naãb ve ta‘yín olup ve her yüz sefínede olan elli biñ ‘askere birer vezír
ser-‘asker vaø‘ olunup altı vezír üzerine bir vezír-i a‘ôam naãb cümle ‘askeri ve çengci
üzerine serdÀr [109a] ve ser-‘asker naãb olındı. MinvÀl-i muóarrer üzere Karadeñiz`de binÀ
olunan üç yüz kebír gemiye yüz elli biñ ‘asker ile üc vezír binub ve Akdeñiz`e çı[k]mak içün
her bir yüridikleri ve uğradıúları yerlere bir úal‘a ve úaãÀbÀt ahÀlísi úarşu úoyamayub cümle
tÀbi‘ oldılar.
282
Ve bu ùarafdan Şam Ùrablus limanına yine üç yüz pÀre sefíne müheyyÀ olup ve cümle
vezír ve úapudÀnlara sefíneler teslím olunup çıkacak gicesi æemestoúli tefekkür eyledi ki, “Bu
‘asker-i bí-şümÀr Atina`ya her ne úadar òasÀret virirler ise Atinalı benden bilüb ve baña
beddu‘À etseler gerekdir; bÀ-òuãÿã bu úadar aúrabÀ ve ta‘alluúÀtım bu òasÀreti çekdikden
soñra benim içün cümle Atina`nıñ ãaàír u kebíri anlara idecekleri cürÿb ve şütÿmuñ óadd u
óaãrı olmasa gerek. Ve illÀ yevmi’l-úıyÀme benim nÀmım bed-nÀmlıú [109b] ile ma‘rÿf ve
meşhÿr olmakdan ise baña mesmÿmen fevt olmak evlÀdır” deyüp ve bu maúÀli bir parca
kÀğıda yazub ve bir kÀse zehirli şerbet óÀøır idüp ve gice yatacaú vaúitde cümle itbÀ‘ı
yatdıúdan soñra mezbÿr kÀğıdı yatÀğınıñ yasdığına koyub ve zehri nÿş idüp ol sÀ‘at rÿó teslím
eyledi. Ve itbÀ‘ seóer vaúti efendilerini kaldurmak murÀd eylediklerinde, meyyit buldılar. Ve
cümle bu aóvÀli bilüb ve gelüp gördiler. Ve itbÀ‘dan olmak iótimÀli olmak ôannıyla itbÀ‘ı aòõ
murÀd eylediklerinde muóarrer olan vaãiyyetnÀmeyi buldılar. Ve diyÀr-ı àayretine ölümünü
iòtiyÀr eylediğine cümle ‘Àlem pesend eylediler. Ve ‘aynı vaãiyyetnÀmesini ve aóvÀlini
mübeyyin-i ‘arø muóøırlar idüp şÀhlarına münzil ile irsÀl eylediler. Ve kÀğıdlar şÀha vuãÿl
buldukda, ‘aôím maòzÿn olup ve bu helÀkinden tefe‘ül eyledi ki, bu meãÀrif bi’l-cümle
beyhÿde yere gitse gerekdür ancak, çünki müheyyÀ oldı.
Ve Kara [110a] deñiz`den óareket iden ùonanma uğradıúları yerleri fetó ve teb‘iyyet
itdürdiklerimizde òaberlerini pÀy-ender-pÀy ta‘Àkub eylediğinden bi’ø-øarÿre baş úapudÀn
paşa àayrısın naãb idüp Atina ve aùaları fetóe iõin verildi. Ve Şam Ùrablıs`dan üç yüz pÀre
kebír gemi çıkub ve Úırbız aùasına ãarılub ve muóÀãara birkac úol olup bir ay olmadan bi’lcümle Úırbız aùasını fetó eylediler. Ve cümle aùanıñ niôÀmın virdikden soñra Rodos úal‘asını
muóÀãar[a] içün gidilüb ve aãlÀ göz açdurmayub Rodos cezíresini cümle taòrí eylediler. Ve
Atina ve Mizistre ùarafından úal‘ada ùaşra buldıklarını mustaófıôları bi’l-cümle úatl eylediler.
Ve yüz elli biñ ‘asker ile Rodos úal‘asın muóÀãara eylediler ve fetóe úaríb oldılar.
Ancak bu ùarafdan Atina ahÀlísi daòı iki yüz pÀre kendü sefíneleri ve aùalardan ve
sevÀóilden [110b] yüz pÀre sefíne daòı ióøÀr idüp ve otuz biñ cengci ‘asker koyub ve
iótimÀldur, ‘Acem ùonanması ôafer bulup ve gelüp Mermercik aùasından on beş seneden beru
cem‘ olunan òazÀ’ini olur bahÀnesiyle varup ol òazíne[y]i cümle Atina`ya getürüp úal‘a
òazínesine vaø‘ eylediler; ve Mizistre ahÀlísine aãlÀ i‘şÀr eylemediler.
Ve Mizistre a‘yÀnı Àh idüp, didiler ki: “Bafsaniye900 ãıóóatinde olãaydı Atinavíler bu
cesÀreti itmeğe úÀdir olamazlardı; ancak yine ümídimiz vardur ki, yine ma‘bÿdımız bize fırãat
900
Pausanius
283
iósÀn ider” deyüp sÀkit oldılar. Ve bu ùarafdan şikÀyet úayıúları gelüp Úıbrız aùası yed-i
‘Acem`e intiúÀl eyledi. Ve Karadeñiz bedeli üzerine bi’l-cümle sevÀóili ‘Acem devletine
intiúÀl eyledi. Bunlar daòı cümle tedÀriklerin görüb ve àÀyet mÀhir mellÀólar bulup ve me‘an
her kime istiãóÀb olunup
[111a] Rodos cezíresine ùogrı ‘aôímet eylediler. Ve gelüp ve
derÿnuna úaríb cÀsusladılar ve gördiler ki, ‘Acem ùonanması bi’l-cümle boşanub deryÀ
ùarafından àÀfil yaturlar. Atina ùonanması bir gün seóer vaútinde Rodos limanı derÿnuna
yürüdüler ve ‘Acem ùonanması yaturken cümlesi bir aradan çatub buldukları adamı úatl ve
sefíneleri iórÀú ile meşàÿl iken Karadeñiz ùarafından gelen üç yüz pÀre sefíne gelüp ve aóvÀle
muùùali‘ oldukda Atina sefínelerine catdılar. VelÀkin Atina sefíneleri ãaàír olmaàla yılan
balığı miåÀli ãıyrılub açıldılar ve imdÀd sefíneleri üzerlerine yürüdüklerinde imdÀd sefíneleri
àÀyet kebír ve içinde tír-endÀzlıú àÀyet çok olduğundan Atina ùonanmasından úarşu ùuranlar
ve çatanlarıñ ‘askeri şöyle kırıldı ki óarekete ve cenge mecÀlleri olmayup çünki ãaàír gemileri
olmaàla ‘Acem gemileri àÀyet büyük olup güç ile ‘Acem gemileri [111b] illetinden òalÀã olup
ve cümlesi selb-ÀrÀ idüp Mıãır enginine ùogrı firÀr eylediler. Ve ‘Acem ùonanması gördiler
şikÀrları òalÀã olup firÀr eyledi, bunlar daòı ãabr itmeyüp Atina ùonanmasını ta‘úíb eylediler
ve Atina ùonanması anlarıñ ta‘[ú]íb eylediklerin gördüklerinde vÀfir mahôÿô oldılar ve yÀb
yÀb oú yetişir yetişmez .. firÀr eylediler. ‘Acem ùonanması büyük olmaàla ağır yürürlerdi var
úuvveti bÀzÿya getürüp Atina gemilerine yetişmek içün altışar adam her bir küreğe girmişler
idi; ancak Atina gemileri ãaàír olmaàın firúate miåli olup körükde çok yürürlerdi.
Ve böyle bütün gice anlar úaçub bunlar úovarlar idi ãabÀó oldukda engín vasaùında
bulundılar. Aùalar ve kara aãlÀ görünmeyub deryÀ ve gökden àayrı bir şey görünmez oldı. Ve
güneş çıkdıkca ríó şedíd olup ‘aôím furùuna ôuhÿr eyledi ve ‘Acem ùonanmasında olan ceng
‘askeriniñ bi’l-cümle deñiz ùutub [112a] ve başları dönüb cümlesi ‘amelden kalup yatdılar.
MellÀólardan ayakda olanlar ‘avdet idüp úıyıları istediler ve gücle bir vírÀn aùa bulup ve
limanını bilmedikleri ecilden gemilerini başdan kara eylediler. Ve úıyılar kısmı úayÀ olmaàla
ùaşa çarpan gemilerden aãlÀ biri daòı òalÀã olmayup pÀre pÀre oldılar. Ve içinde olan
‘askerleri furùuna sersemi olduklarından àÀyet úalíl òalÀã oldılar. Ve üç yüz miúdÀrı sefíne
başka aùaya düşüb ve liman bulup anlardan daòı yigirmisi helÀk olup sekseni òalÀã oldılar.
VelÀkin Atina ùonanması ol vírÀn aùanıñ limanını bilürlardı. Ve cümlesi limanı bilüb òalÀã
oldılar ve aùaya çıkdıklarında ‘Acem ‘askerinden úaraya çıkub òalÀã olanları aòõ eylediler. Ve
‘Acem sefíneleri şikest oldukları yere gelüp dirileri esír olmuş, boğulmuşları soyub, iki yüz
pÀre sefíneden yüz miúdÀrı gemi birbiri üzerine düşmekle ùaşa [112b] çarpmayub ãÀğ kaldı.
Ve furùuna ref‘ oldukda Atina ùonanması şikest olan ‘Acem ùonanması üzerine ãÀğ
úalan gemileri ayırup ve şikest olan yüz geminiñ kürek ve yelkeni ve òalÀù ve temurlerin ve
284
sÀ’ir Àme yarar eşyÀlarını bi’l-cümle ãÀğ úalan yüz gemi ùoldurup ve aòõ olunan on biñ
miúdÀrı üserÀ ile ol gemileri ol ùarafa úaríb olan İstankö[y] ve Sakız cezíresine irsÀl eylediler.
Ve anlar yine ùonanub úırıúların düzüb ve noúãÀn ‘askerleriñ itmÀm idüp yine Rodos üzerine
yürüdüler. Ve Rodos`da bi’l-cümle óareket itmeğe úÀdir iki yüz yetmiş pÀre ‘Acem
sefínelerinden cem‘ olup Atina ùonanması òavfından óÀøır müóeyyÀ ùururlardı. Ve òaber
aldılar ki, bi’l-cümle Atina ùonanması yine üç yüz pÀre sefíne üzerlerine gelurler. Ve Atina
ùonanması aãlÀ göz açdurmayub ‘Acem gemilerini iórÀú içün óÀøır eyledikleri ateş
gemileriniñ otuz miúdÀrını yine ‘Acem ùonanması üzerine yelkenlerin açub yulladılar.
[113a] Ve ‘Acem gemileri aóvÀli bilmeyüb ve deryÀ cenglerinden olan òud‘aları
bilmediklerinden ol ateş gemileri iãÀbet idüp yüzden ziyÀde ‘Acem gemisi iórÀú oldı. Ve
iórÀú olmayan yüz altmış miúdÀrı gemiye Atina ùonanması gözlerine kesdürüp ve kücük
gemilerini elli miúdÀrı ãÀğ gemi aldılar. Ve elli miúdÀrını daòı Atina ùonanması óíle ile àarú
etdürdiler ve óíleleri bu idi ki; Atina ùonanmasında üstÀd tÀan olup ‘Acem gemiler mezbÿrlara
çatdıkları óínde ùalgıclar fırãat bulup gemilerin altına girüb ve büyük burgular ile ‘Acem
gemilerini delub ve ‘Acem ‘askeri cümle sefíneler üzerinde iken ve cenge meşàÿller iken
bakılmayub ve su ùolup àarú oldı. Ve altmış pÀre ‘Acem gemileri àÀyet kebír olmaàla Atina
gemileri çatamayub içlerinde tír-endÀz àÀyet çok olmaàla açıkda kaldılar. Ancak anlar daòı
ùalgıc ve burgÿ òavfından ùuramayub “Eyne’l-meferr?” derlerken Rodos úal‘ası [113b]
muóÀãarasında bÀúí úalan üç dört vezír gördiler ki muúÀvemete iútidÀr kalmadığından bi’øøarÿre şikest ve iórÀú olan sefÀyiniñ bir iki yüz miúdÀrı ãandallarına girüb ve bi’ø-øarÿre úal‘a
muóÀãarasın terk idüp vüzerÀ ile on biñ miúdÀrı adam ãandallar ile gücle Atina gemilerinden
òalÀã bulup altmış pÀre büyük gemilere girdiler. Ve Atina`nıñ yüz elli pÀre gemisi ve altmış
pÀre büyük ‘Acem gemiler úarşusunda ok ermez yerden aãlÀ ayrılmadılar. Ve úuãÿrÀtınıñ yüz
elli pÀre gemisi Rodos limanına ‘avdet idüp ve baúıyye úalan ‘Acem ‘askerine yüz elli pÀre
sefíneniñ on beş biñ miúdÀrı ceng ‘askeri ve Rodos ahÀlísinden ve Atina ve Mizistre
ùaraflarından Rodos`a mustaófıô olup úal‘aya maóãÿr olanlar ùaşraya dökülüb otuz kırk biñ
Rodos cezíresinde kalup [114a] firÀra miknet bulmayan ‘Acem ‘askerine şöyle úılıc çaldılar
ki, ‘Acem ‘askeri daòı òalÀãları mümkün olmadığın müşÀhede idicek anlar daòı ölüm-ÀrÀ
ölüm ùarafeyn şöyle ceng eyledi ki, ùarafeynde yaralu olup óarb u êarba ve óarekete úÀdir
olmayanlar kaldı.
Ve mezbÿr ‘Acem gemileri eyyÀm bulup ‘Arabistan semtine ùoğrı bÀdbÀnların küşÀde
idüp gitdiklerinde Atina`nıñ daòı yüz elli pÀre gemisi dönüb gelüp Rodos cezíresinde olan
óarb u úıtÀli güc ile tefríú ve faãl eylediler. Ve ùarafeynden otuz biñ miúdÀrı úatl olunmuş
buldılar. Ve úatl olmayanlarıñ daòı yarısı kalmadı. Ve ‘Acem mecrÿólarından ãıóóati me’mÿl
285
olanları ibúÀ idüp ve olmayanları bi’l-cümle úatl eylediler ve on biñ miúdÀrı esír eylediler. Ve
kırk elli miúdÀrı sefíne ta‘mír idüp ãÀğ ey[le]diler. Ve bu seferde Atina`nıñ daòı nıãf miúdÀrı
‘askeri úatl olındı. Ve Rodos úal‘asında [114b] Atina`nıñ ve Mizistre`niñ mustaófıôlarından
àÀyet úalíl adam òalÀã buldılar. Ol daòı mecrÿó çolaú ve ùobÀl kalup nefs-i Rodos cezíresinde
mustaófıô ve yerlu yigirmi biñ adam helÀk oldı. Ve Atina ùonanması ne óÀl ise Rodos
úal‘asına bir miúdÀr niôÀm virup ve ba‘dehÿ aùalardan ve Anaùolı`da olan on iki pÀre úal‘a ve
şehir bi’l-cümle yigirmi otuz biñ úadar óarb u êarba úÀdir adamlar peydÀ idüp dört yüz pÀre
gemiyle yüz ‘Acem gemisi ‘Acem ùonanmasından aòõ olunan sefíneler ile varup Úırbız
aùasını fetó eylediler. ZírÀ Ànda mustaófıô olan ‘Acem mustaófıôları ‘Acem ùonanması
òasarÀtına ‘ilm taóãíl eylediler ol sÀ‘at úayıúlara binub Anaùolı yaúÀsına gecdiler. Ve bunlar
úal‘aları boş bulmağla øabt idüp ve mustaófıô úodılar. Ve niôÀmların ve õaòírelerin ve
mevÀciblerin bi’l-cümle müstevfÀ görilub ve ba‘dehÿ ‘avdet olunup Rodos`uñ daòı bi’l-cümle
noúãÀnı itmÀm olup ana daòı mustaófıô ve õaòíre ve sÀ’ir levÀzımÀtı maa-ziyÀde [115a]
görilub ve Karadeñiz`den gelüp ‘Acem ùonanması fetó eyledikleri yerleri ve úal‘aları fetó ve
úaãÀbÀtları yine cümle Atina`ya teb‘iyyet itdürdüler. Ve gelüp sÀ’ir limanı ve açığında cem‘
olup ve eyyÀm-ı úÀsım úaríb olmaàla cümle aktarma ve Atina sefínesi bir yere cem‘ olup
mecmÿ‘ı dört yüz ve otuz pÀre gemi yüz otuz aktarma olmak üzere Atina`ya ‘avdet eylediler.
Ve beş pÀre gemi muúaddem müjde içün Atina`ya irsÀl ve bunlar daòı ta‘úíb idüp dört
yüz otuz pÀre gemi yelkenlerin küşÀde görilub ahÀlí-i úal‘a ol gemi keåretine bakdıklarında
‘Àúılları çÀk olup óayrÀn dem-beste kaldılar. Ve müjde ile gelenlerden òaber aldılar ki; yüz
otuz pÀre aktarma ve yigirmi biñ esír ve bu úadar emvÀl u eåvÀb ve ÀlÀt-ı óarb ve mühimmÀt
ve ùonanma sefÀyini envÀ‘ zínet ile müzeyyen olup bu úadar sancak ve filÀndura ve bayrÀúlar
açub ve ol vaúitde olan illÀ lehv ve ùarÀb çalınub ve Atina`nıñ a‘lÀ ve ednÀsı ve refí‘ u vaêí’i
ve àaní ve faúíri cümle istiúbÀle çıkub [115b] ve erbÀb-ı ùonanmaya tenbíh olındı ki; cengde
helÀk olanları su´Àl idenlere cevÀb virsunler ki, anlar fetó olunan úal‘alara mustaófıô
bıragılmışdur. Ve hem öyle maútÿlleri su´Àl iden ezvÀc u evlÀd ve ‘ıyÀllerine bu gÿne cevÀb
virdiler. Ve cümle sefÀyin ‘aôím şennikler ile limana dÀòil oldılar. Ve limandan Atina
úal‘asına varınca iki ùarafda ricÀl u nisvÀn ve ãibyÀn iki yaúālu dizilub selÀma ùurdılar. Ve
erbÀb-ı ceng daòı úarada alaylar düzüb her ãınıf øÀbiùiyle ve mertebesinde yüriyüb ve yigirmi
biñ esíri geçirup ve úapudÀnlar ve ser-‘asker olanlar ile re’ísü’l-rü’esÀ olan mekÀn-ı
óükÿmetinde ve her biri ‘alÀ-úadr-i rütbihi òil‘atler giyüb ve Atina úal‘ası ve şehri bi’l-cümle
úumÀş ile vesÀ’ir zínet ile ùonanub ve erbÀb-ı óükÿmet sarÀyları díbÀ ve zíbÀ ile ùonanub ve
herkes ‘alÀ-úadrihim menÀzillerini ùonadub kırk gün ve kırk gice olan şennikler [116a] ve
sürÿrlar ve herkes mÀhir oldığı ãan‘at mahÀretlerin iôhÀr idüp ve bu ni‘metiñ şükri olmak
286
üzere aàniyÀ fuúarÀya iósÀnlar ve eytÀm ve erÀmile lüùuflar ve ikrÀmlar olunup beş on úonÀú
yerden bu şenliği seyr içün beyõÀdeler ve a‘yÀnõÀdeler vesÀ’ir erbÀb seyr içün geldiler.
Şöyle bir temÀşÀ olunurdı, cemí‘-i ‘ömürlerinde gördükleri ve işitdikleri değil idi. Ve
aàniyÀ ve fuúarÀsı ol şenlik içün cedíd libÀslar giymişlerdi. Ve bu fetó-i fütÿó ve sürÿr u
óubÿr, hübÿù-ı Ádem (‘aleyhi’s-selÀm)`dan soñra dört biñ beş yüz elli beş senesinde
mürÿrundan soñra vÀúi‘ olmuşdur. Ve bu sÀl-i tÀríòde nefs-i Atinalı äofronisúo901 nÀmında bir
kimseniñ SoúrÀù902 nÀmında bir oàlu dünyÀya gelüp ve ‘ilm-i óikmetde yekdÀ olup Atina`da
cemí‘-i erbÀb-ı óikmetiñ a‘ôamı olmuşdur. Ve ‘ilm-i óikmetin deúÀyıúına kimse muùùali‘ olup
İşrÀúıyyÿn ‘uôemÀsından ve MeşşÀí úudemÀsından [116b] nÿr-ı tevóíd ile mütecellÀ ve
müzekkÀ bir õÀt-ı nÀdirü’l-vücÿd ve bu dünyÀ-yı deniyyeden tevellüd itmişdir. Ve Atina`da
ziyy-i óükemÀda olanlarıñ cümlesine tevaúúuf itmişdir. Ve mu‘allim ve müderrisleri[n] re’ísi
olmuşdur. Ve kücük dersòÀnelere ùalebeleri ãığmayub meõkÿruñ ùalebesi dört úısma taúsím
eylediler. Ve dört dersòÀne-yi kebír binÀ olunmuşdur. Ve her bir dersòÀnede yedişer biñ
ùalebesi olurdı. Ve haftada her bir dersòÀneye birer kere kürsi üzerine cıkub İşrÀúıyyÿn ve
MeşşÀí mesleği üzere óikmet derslerini ta‘lím iderdi. Ve mezbÿr dört dersòÀnede rÿz u şeb
yigirmi sekiz biñ ùÀlib mevcÿd bulunmalıydı.
Ve tÀríò-i mezbÿra gelince Atina tedbír ve taãarruf ve niôÀm-ı memleket içün óükemÀyı ‘iôÀmdan dokuz óakím feylosof” tercíó ve taúdím olunurdı. Ve mezbÿrlar tamÀm bir sene
óükÿmet idüp [117a] sene tamÀmında ‘azl olunup tis’a-yı Àòar taúdím olunurdı. Ve mezbÿr
“dokuz óÀkim” tercíó ve taúdímleriñ óikmeti ol idi ki; cünki bu gÿn ve fesÀdıñ tedbír u
taãarrufu, eflÀk-ı tis’aya münóaãırdur. Bunlar óikemiyyü’l-meõheb olmaàla kendü diyÀrlarına
tedbír ve taãarruf içün óükemÀdan dokuz óÀkim feylosof tercíó ve taúdím iderlerdi. TÀríò-i
mezbÿrede minvÀl-i muóarrer üzere idi, ancak bu ‘aãırda keåret-i nüfÿsdan keåret-i vakāyi‘
vÀúi‘ olup infÀõ u icrÀsında dokuz óÀkim iôhÀr-ı ‘acz ve úuãÿr iderlerdi. Ve ol tÀríòde Atina
ahÀlísi on úısma taúsím olunmuş idi; ve her úısmından ellişer adam umÿr-ı ‘Àmme içün ifrÀz
ve ta‘yín olunmuş idi. Ve cümlesi óükemÀdan olup ãÀóib-i tedbír ve erbÀb-ı óikmet [117b] ve
feylosof adamlar idi. Ve meõkÿrlar içün ma‘iyyeti ve müfrez dívÀn-òÀne binÀ olındı. Cemí‘-i
binÀsı beyÀø mermerden olup, haftada beş gün ol beş yüz feylosof, ol dívÀn-òÀnede cem‘ olup
vÀúi‘ olan vaúÀyÀyı, úavÀ’id ve úÀnunlarına taùbíú iderek görürler idi.
Ve ba‘dehÿ ol beş yüz feylosof icinde kırk feylosof tercíó olunup başka dívÀn-òÀne
anlar içün daòı müzeyyen ve mükellef binÀ olındı. Ve mezbÿr kırklardan yedi feylofos olunup
901
902
Sophroniscus
Socrates
287
anlar içün başka müzeyyen úonÀúlar ve dívÀn-òÀneler binÀ olunup ve mezbÿr yediden daòı
üçü tercíó ve anlar içün daòı dívÀn-òÀne müzeyyen ve mükellef binÀ olındı. Ve üçden daòı
biri tercíó olunup re’ísu’l-rü’esÀ ve cümleye óÀkim ve cemí‘-i umÿra melce u menÀt olmak
üzere naãb u ta‘yín olındı. Ba‘dehÿ [118a] umÿr-ı ‘Àmme aókÀmınıñ icrÀsıyçün fermÀnlar
taórír olunurdı. Ve ol evÀmirler kırklara ‘arø olunurdı. Kırklar daòı ol evÀmiriñ icrÀsıyçün
işÀret-i maòãÿãaları var idi; ol işÀreti fermÀnlara idüp yedilere ‘arø iderlerdi. Yedileriñ daòı
Àòar-i vechile işÀret-i maòãÿãaları olup anlar daòı her bir fermÀna işÀretlerin idüp üçlere ‘arø
iderlerdi. Üçleriñ daòı işÀret-i maòãÿãaları olup anlar daòı her emrde kırklar ve yedileriñ
işÀretlerin gördükden soñra üçler daòı işÀret idüp vÀlí ve şÀh maúāmına úÀ’im olan bir óÀkime
‘arø iderlerdi. Ol daòı büyük dívÀn-òÀneden ki, ol beş yüzüñ cem‘ oldığı dívÀn-òÀne-yi kebír,
ki anıñ ismi; Arpanyaàū tesmiye olunan dívÀn-òÀne aãóÀbı taórír eylediği fermÀnıñ ‘alÀmetini
ve kırklarıñ ve yedileriñ ve üçleriñ işÀretlerini idüp meõkÿr olan ‘alÀmet u işÀretler maùlÿb
olan [118b] aókÀm fermÀnlarında cem‘ oldukdan soñra elbette ol fermÀn icrÀ olunurdı.
Ve ol óÀkim-i vÀóid, Atina úal‘ası derÿnunda beşinci úapu úaríbinde ãÀfí beyÀø
mermerden anlarıñ lisÀnıñda “BÀlÀù” tesmiye olunan bir mu‘aôôam sarÀy binÀ olunup cümle
rüsÿm-ı şÀhí ve taót-ı pÀdişÀhi ãÿretinde ùaró olunup öyle mu‘aôôam ve müzeyyen ki, ol
‘aãrda bir şÀhda ve taót-gÀhda bulunmazdı. ŞÀh maúÀmında iclÀs olunan şaòã-i vÀóid, ol
nÀdíde sarÀyda olurdı. Ve haftada iki gün ta‘ùíl ve beş günleri ùaró olunup ve beş gün umÿr-ı
‘Àmme ile meşàÿl olurlardı. Ve meõkÿr olan dört dívÀn-òÀnede cem‘ olan ve me’mÿr olan
óükemÀ iki gün ta‘ùíl ve beş gün umÿr-ı ‘Àmme ile dívÀn-òÀnelere cem‘ olup iştigÀl iderlerdi.
Ve şaòã-ı vÀóid içün sÀ’ir óükemÀ meclislerine ve sarÀylarına ve teferrüc içün mesíregÀhlarına da‘vetsiz icÀbet itmek mümkün değil idi. VelÀkin [119a] mezbÿr ta‘yín olunan ta‘ùíl
günlerinde mezbÿr şaòã-ı vÀóid kendü ve itbÀ‘ıyla murÀd eylediği yerlere av ve seyrÀn
iderlerdi.
Ve meõkÿr şaòã-ı vÀóid tamÀm bir sene riyÀset idüp ba‘dehÿ ‘azl olunup kendüye
teúÀ‘ud ve ta‘yinÀt virulurdı. Ve ma‘zÿl olan ‘umÿm da‘vetine gidüp, maòãÿã da‘vet olunsa
icÀbet itmezdi. Ve haftada bir gün óükemÀ şaòã-ı vÀóidiñ ziyÀretini idüp ba‘dehÿ gelüp,
ma‘zÿlun daòı ziyÀretini iderlerdi. Ve kendü aúrabÀsı ve itbÀ‘ından àayrı kimesne meclisine
gelmezdi. Ve mezbÿr şaòã-ı vÀóid, sene tamÀmında ma‘zÿl oldukda, üçlerden biri intiòÀb
olunup, şÀh maúÀmına úÀ’im olurdı. Ve ba‘dehÿ yedilerden birinci olan üçlere intiúÀl iderdi.
Ve ba‘dehÿ kırklardan birinci olan [119b] yedilere intiúÀl iderlerdi. Ve ba‘dehÿ Arpanyaàū
dívÀn-òÀnesinden birinci olan beş yüzden biri kırklara intiúÀl iderdi. Ve baş mülÀzım olan
ùaşradan ol beş yüze lÀóık olurdı ve müsta’idlerden biri yine baş mülÀzım olurdı.
288
MinvÀl-i meşrÿó üzere her sene silsile-i mezbÿre vÀúi‘ olurdı ve mülÀzımlar mezbÿr
dört mu‘allim-òÀnede olan yigirmi sekiz biñ ùÀlibden ve ‘ilm ve rüşdleri intiòÀb olunırdı. Ve
mezbÿr dört mu‘allim-òÀnede olan yigirmi sekiz biñ tÀlib dört úısma taúsím olunmuş idi; bir
úısmı, óükemÀ-i İşrÀúıyyÿn903 ve MeşşÀ’iyy ùaríúine mülÀzım olurlardı. Ve bir úısmı úuêÀt ı
óukkÀm ùaríúine mülÀzım olurlardı. Ve bir úısmı tedbír-i diyÀr ve niôÀm-ı memleket ve ehl-i
dívÀn ùaríúine mülÀzım olurlardı. [120a] Ve bir úısmı daòı maóalle mu’ídlerine iútiøÀ iden
Àyin-i ‘ubÿdiyetlerini ma‘bedlere ‘ibÀdet içün gelenlere ta‘lím ve muútedÀ ve donanmada
mu‘allim ve kÀtib olmak içün mülÀzım olurlardı. Ve erbÀb-ı ma‘Àrifÿn her kim merÀtibe ve
megÀãıba sulÿk itmek iderdi. Ol dört mu‘allim-òÀneye şÀy[k]ird olunmayınca meõkÿr
merÀtibe mülÀzım olmak iótimÀli olmazdı. Ve bu meõkÿr olan ùalebe ve mülÀzımlara daòı
yevmiyye vaôífe ve ta‘yín verilurdı.
VesÀ’ir erbÀb-ı merÀtibe mertebelerine göre vaôífe ve salyÀne ta‘yín olunmuş idi. Ve
ifrÀd-ı nÀsda
keyf erbÀbından yÀòÿd kebír ãafÀy[h]etle muttaãıf olanlardan biri meõkÿr
óükemÀya ve mülÀzımlara ve ùalebelere óaúÀret naôarıyla taóúír idüp yÀòÿd ‘arøına dÀ’ir
kelimÀt ile rencíde eylese ol sÀ‘at ol úaóúar nÀôıra óaúÀret olunup, [120b] cürmüne göre
cezÀsı görilürdi. AãlÀ kimesneniñ şefÀ‘atine naôar ve iltifÀt olunmazdı, ancak meõkÿr óükemÀ
ve mülÀzimín ve ùullÀb daòı efrÀd-ı nÀs ile iòtilÀù emri müsteb’ad idi. Ve mezbÿr óükemÀ ve
mülÀzimín ve ùalabeden daòı bir cürüm ãÀdır olsa anlarıñ vaø‘ olunan úÀnÿnları üzere te’díb
ve ta‘õírleri aãlÀ te’òír olunmazdı. Ve óÀkimler, her kim te’díb ve cezÀ[y]ı te’òír iderdi ol sÀ‘at
ol daòı ‘azl olunup yerine Àòar naãb iderlerdi. Ve münÀdíler nidÀ etdürdürler ki, filÀn óÀkim
filÀn cezÀ[y]ı yÀòÿd taúdíri yÀòÿd úıãÀã yÀòÿd te’díbini te’òír etdirdiğinden ‘azl olunmuşdur,
deyu münÀdíler nidÀ iderlerdi.
Ve bu tÀríòde donanma baş úapudÀn başları olan Aristidi fevt olup úapudÀn Paşa
Miliåyari [121a] oàlu ÓínmūnÀ904 olup üç yüz pÀre sefíne ile ve sefÀyin derÿnunda otuz biñ
baórí cengÀver ‘asker ile evvel bahÀrda bi’l-cümle üç yüz pÀre sefíne donanmasıyla
Akdeñiz`e cıkub ve cemí‘-i aùaları geşt idüp ve Atina donanmasınıñ nÀm ahÀlísi eùrÀf u eknÀfa
cür’et ve cesÀret ile meşhÿr ve mütevÀtir olup ve altı yüz kebír ‘Acem ùonanması parçalarını
bir kac def‘a catub ve bozub ve iórÀú u àarú ve perÀkende ve períşÀn eyledikleriñ otuz biñ
adam ile üc kere yüz biñ ‘askeri perÀkende ve períşÀn eyledikleriñ eùrÀf u eknÀfda olan insÀn
istimÀ‘ eyledikde engüşt ber-dehÀn iderlerdi. Ol ecilden rÿz-ı óıêırdan yevm-i úÀsımdañ
903
904
Cimon
289
Akdeñiz`i ve cemí‘-i Anaùolı ve Rÿmili sevÀóilini devr u cevelÀn idüp aàyÀrdan biri
karşularına çıkub [121b] müdÀfa‘a ve ceng itmeğe úÀdir değiller idi.
Ve ol vaúitde Boğaz óiãÀrlarından Atina donanması güzÀr idüp Gelibolı ve Tekfurdağı
ve Silivri ve SarÀyburnu`nda ol vaúitde Vijandiyo905 namında bir úaãaba var idi. Ve ol
vaúitlerde Atina donanması SarÀyburnu`ndan güzÀr idüp kÀhíce Karadeñiz sevÀóilini daòı
varup àÀret iderlerdi. Ve ‘aôím àanÀyim ve üserÀ ile yine úÀsımda Atina`ya ‘avdet iderlerdi.
Ve donanma geldikce manãÿren ‘aôím şenlikler idüp üc gün ve üc gice şehr donanması
iderlerdi. Ve çünki Atina ahÀlísi vardıkca, istiàlÀl bulunub Mizistre ahÀlísini óükÿmetlerine
idòÀl eylemediler. Ve bi’l-cümle Girít ve Úırbız ve sÀ’ir bi’l-cümle aùalar ve Rÿmili ve
Anaùolı sevÀóili ve Boğazlar ve Marmara eùrÀfı [122a] ve Karadeñiz sevÀóilinden Rÿmili
ùarafından Minúalibe`ye varınca cümle cizye ve ‘öşr ve rüsÿmÀt óÀãıl olup, ol úadar emvÀl-i
keåíre alınub bi’l-cümle Atina`ya vÀãıl olup òaõíne olurdı. Ve aãlÀ Mizistre úarışmazdı. Ve
Atina ùarafından meõkÿr memleketlere ‘Àmi[r]ler ve øÀbiùler ve beyler ve úapudÀnlar naãb ve
ta‘yín olunup, ‘Acem cenginden soñra on sene miúdÀrı Atina minvÀl-i meşrÿó üzere niôÀm u
intiôÀm üzere yevmen fe-yevmen keåret-i ‘asker ve keåret-i emvÀl ve keåret-i emlÀk ve eşyÀ
ile neşv u nemÀ buldılar.
Ve meõkÿr on seneden soñra Atina re’ísü’l-óükemÀsından Periúli nÀm bir óakím õÿfünÿn ve ‘ilm u ‘amel ile ve keåret-i ‘aúl u kiyÀset ile ve keåret-i emvÀl ve emlÀk ile ve evlÀd
u itbÀ‘ ile neşv u nemÀ bulup ve ‘aãrında fÀyıúu’l-aúrÀn [122b] olup ve cümle kalup tevcíhiyle
re’ísü’r-rü’esÀ olup şÀh maúÀmında iclÀs olındı. Ve şöyle ‘adl u dÀd ile maóbÿbu’l-úulÿb oldı
ki, óaúúında kimesne kec naôar değil, ùoğrı baúmağa daòı úÀdir değil idi. Ve sene tamÀmında
kendü kendüye ‘azl murÀd eyledikde, cümle óükemÀ ittifÀúıyla ibúÀ olunurdı. Kendüde olan
isti‘dÀdın mu‘tÀd òulúı àÀyet óüsn ve pür idrÀk idi. Ol cihetden sínin-i keåíre Periúli906`ye
riyÀset-i ‘uômÀ ibúÀ olındı. Ve àÀyet mütecessis olup úable’ô-ôuhÿr nice beliyyeleri tecessÿs
ile muùùali‘ olup def‘ u ref‘ ider idi.
Ez-cümle Mermercik aùasında Atina ahÀlísi ve Mizistre ahÀlísi ‘ale’l-iştirÀk cem‘ ve
mezbÿr aùada òaõíne etdikleri emvÀl-i keåíre Atinavíler bi’l-cümle mezbÿr mÀlı, ol aùadan aòõ
idüp ve Mizistreli`ye [123a] bir óabbe virmediklerinden Mizistreli dÀğ-ı derÿn olmuşlar idi.
VelÀkin çünki ahÀlísi ile muúÀvemete muúÀteleye úudret ve iútidÀrları olmadığı ecilden bi’øøarÿre sükÿt ve teraúúub-i fesÀd üzere fırãat gözedirlerdi. Ve iôhÀr-ı ùaleb idemediklerinden
óíle ve òud‘a ile Atina ahÀlísi beynlerine iòtilÀf ve tefríúa ‘amellerine sülÿk idüp ve nice
905
906
Byzans
Pericles
290
müzevvir ve ehl-i fitne adamlar peydÀ idüp ve anlara tezvír u fitne ilúÀ itmek içün Atina`nıñ
kara ve şehürli fuúarÀsına tebdíl idüp irsÀl iderlerdi. Ve Atina ùarafından ‘Àmiller ‘öşr ve
rüsÿmÀtı taóãíl etdükce mezbÿr fitneler fırãat-yÀb olup fuúarÀya dirlerdi ki: “Bu sözüñ
óükemÀ ve revÀ-i ? aãlÀ meróamet ve şefúat yokdur bu úadar memleketlerden cem‘ olan
emvÀl-i keåíreyi kendü zevúlerine [123b] ãarf itdükden soñra sizden daòı bu úadar ‘öşr ve
rüsÿmÀt aòõ iderler. Ve cümle mÀlı óuôÿô-ı nefsÀnílerine ãarf iderler, size aãlÀ meróamet
eylemezler. VelÀkin cümle fuúarÀ bir yere cem‘ olup anlardan cem‘ olunan mÀl içün
muóÀsebe ùaleb olunsa bi’ø-øarÿre üzeriñizden ‘öşr ve rüsÿmÀt ref‘ olurdı.” Bunuñ emåÀli
efsÀneler ile Atina fuúarÀsına iàvÀ virirler idi. Ve bu iàvÀlar fuúarÀya ve sÀ’ir cizye ve rüsÿm
cem‘ iden aàniyÀya daòı àÀyet leõíõ gelüp ve eyyÀm-ı ta‘ùíllerinde bi’l-cümle ‘öşr ve rüsÿm
virenler lonca yerlerine cem‘ olup müşÀvere itmeğe başladılar. Periúli`niñ çÀsusları cust u cÿ
iderken, mezbÿrlarıñ müşÀverelerine muùùali‘ olup ve gelüp Periúli`ye òaber virdiklerinde
intiúÀl idüp bu değil ve illÀ Mizistre ahÀlísiniñ fitneleridür, buña iğmÀz olunur ise [124a]
müfside-i ‘aôímeye ? diyub ve bu óaúları olan Mermercik mÀlınıñ nıãfını edÀ itmek emr-i
muóÀldir; zírÀ bizim sufehÀmız buña rıøÀ virmez. Ancak bu mÀla ber-òudÀ-yı maãraf olsa
ùarafeyn mÀl kalmadığı vaúitde nizÀ‘ úaù‘ olunur, deyüp ve müşÀvereye ãÀlió olan óükemÀ
feylofosları cem‘ eyledi. Ve Mizistre ùarafından fuúarÀya ilúÀ olunan fitneyi tafãíl eyledikde
cümlesi ya buña re’y-i óüsn nedür didiklerinde cevÀb virdiler ki: “Re’y-ı müstaósen oldur ki,
biz bu mÀlı bir nÀdíde ve bÀúí kalur òaberÀta ãarf idelim. ZírÀ biz fevt oldukdan soñra
Mizistreli evlÀdlarımıza ôafer bulduklarında nıãfın değil bi’l-cümle nice eê‘Àf ve muêÀ‘af
alurlar” didikde, cümle óükemÀ taãdíú eylediler. VelÀkin buyurduğuñuz òibrÀt-ı bÀúıye ne aãl
óayrÀtdur?” didikde, Periúli daòı didi ki:
“ÓÀlÀ Úudüs-i şeríf`de Óaøret-i Süleyman (‘aleyhi’s-selÀm) bir nÀdíde ma‘bed-i
meràÿb binÀ itmişdir ki, cümle òÀã u ‘Àmm [124b] ziyÀretine müştÀúlardür. VelÀkin mezbÿr
Rÿmili`nden àÀyet ba‘íd olmaàla Rÿm òalúı ziyÀretine gitmeğe ‘aôím ‘usretleri vardur. Ancak
biz daòı ãÀfí beyÀø mermerden dört divÀrı binÀ olındıkdan soñra saúfını daòı beyÀø mermer
kirişler ve beyÀø mermerden taótlar ile ùavÀnlar döşenub bir nÀdíde ve mesbÿú bi’l-miål
olmayan mu‘aôôam ma‘bed idelim. Çünki diyÀrımız ‘ilm u ma‘rifet kesb olunacaú ve ekåer
ahÀlísi semt-i zühd ve ‘ibÀdete zÀhiddir. Ma‘úÿl ve münÀsib olan ol mÀlın böyle bir ma‘bede
ãarf eylediğimizde Mizistreliye sebeb-i ilzÀm olunur. Ve eğer anlar ta‘annüd idüp mülzim
olmayup her kim taôallum iderler ise anlara cevÀb-ı ilzÀmı olur. Bu vechile ki Atinavíler
müşterek cümle mÀlı alup bizim óiããemizi virmezler” didiklerinde, cevÀb bu olur ki, [125a]
Atinavíler ol mÀlı kendü óuôÿô-ı nefsÀnílerine ãarf itmeyüp belki cümleye .. Àòiret olmak
üzere ma‘bÿdumuza bir meràÿb mesbÿú bi’l-miål olmayan kebír ‘ibÀdet-òÀne ãarf eylediler.
291
Siz de ve anlar da bu mÀlı beyhÿde ãarf olmayup böyle ‘aôíô ve şeríf ma‘bed ãarf olındığına
hezÀr kere secde-i şükr ve úurbÀn nicün itmezsiñiz?” deyüp “KelÀmlarına kimse iãgā ve iltifÀt
itmezler” didikde, cümlesi “Pek münÀsib” didiler.
Ve daòı budur ki, ol mÀl-ı keåír cümle maóøarında ol aùadan buraya naúl olunup ve
cümleniñ naôarı ta‘alluú eylediğine ve mÀl-ı fitne olduğuna şübhe yokdur ve mÀl ãÀóibine
düşmÀn çokdur. Ve bizim fuúarÀmız òaõíne mÀl çokdur. Bu seneden soñra cizye ve rüsÿmÀt
virmeziz. EùrÀf daòı òaber aldıkda anlar daòı virmezler. Taóãíl içün nicelerini úatl itmek lÀzım
gelur. NÀmımız ‘Àdil olmuş iken ôÀlim ve cebbÀr olur. Ve eğer cümle mÀlı cebr ile cem‘ itmez
iseñiz kimesneyi [125b] cizye ve rüsÿmÀta dÀ’ir óabbe virmez. Ve óÀlÀ ta‘yín olunan veôÀyif
u meãÀrif ba‘øılarından úaù‘ olunmak lÀzım gelur ise bÀ‘iå-i fitne ve fesÀd olunmasa aãlÀ
şübhe yokdur. Ve eğer ol mÀldan vaôífe ve ta‘yínen virilur ise beş sene tamÀm olmadan ol
mÀla infidÀd ùÀrí olur ve tükenur. Ve ba‘dehÿ cizye ve rüsÿmÀt virmeyenler ve virmezler bu
iótimÀlÀt heb vÀritdir. Ancak ol ma‘bed-i kebíre şurÿ‘ olındıkda, elli biñ miúdÀrı ‘amele-i
fuúarÀmızdan yevmiye ücret olmaàla taãavvur etdikleri sözleri-sÿdları(fayda) ferÀmÿş iderler.
Ve evlÀd ? Mizistreli muùÀlebesinden emín olurlar. Ve pederlerimiz àÀyet ‘Àúíbet-endíş
adamlar imiş ki Mizistreli muùÀlebesi beliyyesinden kendülerini ve bizi òalÀã eylediler.
KemÀl-i diyÀnet ve taúvÀlarına bu ma‘bed binÀsı delÀlet ider” deyüp du‘Àmız òidmetinde ezcÀn-ı derÿn úÀ’im olurlar. “‘ömr ve úÀl fÀní ve eåer bÀúí” olduğın kemÀl-i infÀúlarından bu
eåer-i celíli ve ma‘bed-i cemíli idüp ibúÀ idüp gerek evlÀdlarımızıñ cemí‘-i ‘Àlem böyle dirler
deyüp òatm-i kelÀm eylediler.
[126a] Ol müşÀvereye óÀôır olanlar bu re’y-i óüsnü müstaósen görüb ve envÀ‘ delÀ’il-i
mülzime ile ve muúaddemÀt müncíyÀtlarına taósín ve Àferin eylediler. Ve cümle, “saña ve
seniñ re’yine tÀbi‘ olduk. HemÀn lüùf u mürüvvet buyurup, bize ve evlÀdlarımıza ve
diyÀrımıza óüsn olanı terk eylemen!” deyüp cümlesi òÀk-i pÀyine yüzler sürdiler. Ve ma‘bed-i
meràÿbuñ binÀsına ricÀ istid‘À eylediler. Mezbÿr Periúli daòı ez-cÀn-ı derÿn-i kemÀl-i
muóabbet ve meveddet ile mezbÿr binÀnıñ ve ma‘bed-i meràÿbuñ binÀsına şurÿ‘ eyledi. Ve
Atina`ya üc sÀ‘at ba‘dí olan Mendil ùÀğında bir ùaş ma‘deni buldı, ki ãÀfí beyÀø mermer ki,
aãlÀ mÀ’í ve àayrı renge baúar damarı bu úadar süt gibi ãÀf beyÀø mermerler ol ma‘bed icün
birer bucuk zirÀ‘ úalın ve birer bucuk zirÀ‘ ‘arøí olup ve ùÿlí úaù‘ olunan mermer ne miúdÀr
ãÀğ cıkar ise zírÀ ba‘øı mermeriñ ùÿlí beş zirÀ‘ ve ba‘øı mermeriñ on [126b] zirÀ‘ cıkmışdur.
Ve mezbÿr mermerleri úaù‘ icün eùrÀf-ı eknÀfda olan ùaşcıları ve lağımcıları da‘vet ile cem‘
idüp ve ùaş óaúúında àÀyet mÀhir óaúúÀklar cem‘ idüp maóallinde mezbÿr úat‘ olunan ùaşları
ùaşlarlardı. Ve kızaú ve ‘araba ile Atina`ya naúl icün ırgÀd ve rencber yevmiye ücretleri ile
istícÀr olunup binÀlar ve üstÀdlar ve ırgÀdlar ve ‘ameleler, elli biñ miúdÀrı cem‘ ve ücret ile
292
istiòdÀm ve ziyÀde yevmiye ile ve ma‘bed òiõmetidir, deyu aôím teràíbler ile ve úat‘ olunan
mezbÿr ùaşlar .. maóallerden Atina úal‘ası derÿnuna maóalline gelince ba‘øı ãaàír taşlar bir
günde ve ba‘øı kebír ùaşlar üc günde ve beş günde ve àÀyet kebír ùaşlar on beş gün ve bir ayda
güc ile gelurdi. Ve naúl olunacaú ãaàír ùaşı kızÀúlarına ellişer adam ve vasaù ve kebírlerine
yüzer ve beşer yüz ve biñer adam çekmek içün ta‘yín olunmuşdı.
Ve ol ùaşcılar mezbÿr [127a] ùaşları şöyle düzüb ve rendelerler idi ki saykal sayaklar
gibi ol ùaşları ôiyÀlandurup şa‘şa virirdi. Ve binÀya vaø‘ olındıkda, cümle mermer-i vÀóidden
binÀ olındı úıyÀã olunırdı. Ve ba‘dehÿ Atina úal‘asınıñ vasaùında ‘aôím temeller óafr olunurdı.
Metín temeller yerleri bulunca úazdılar ve ba‘dehÿ ùaşlıú óÀm ùaşlar ile temeli vaø‘ eylediler.
Ve temel dÀ’iren mÀ-dÀr çÀr köşe ve cümle ùÿlen ve ‘arøen vasaùan temel ferş-i vÀóid gibi
döşenib ve temel yeryüzine çıkdıkda cevÀnib-i erba‘ası úaãr olunup ma‘bediñ ve saúfınıñ
muóíù oldığı miúdÀrı rÿy-ı ‘arødan dört zirÀ‘ miúdÀrı terfi‘ olındıkdan soñra ve mezbÿr
ma‘bediñ cevf-i derÿnı ve ùÿl ve ‘arøı me’òaõimiz olan Rÿm ve Laùín ve Efrenc tÀríòleri zirÀ‘
ve arşın ile ta‘bír olunmayub ayak ve úadem ile ta‘bír eylediklerinden ve ol ‘aãrıñ insÀnından
úadd u úÀmeti ve úademlerinde bu ‘aãra úıyÀã ile tefÀvüt muóaúúaú olduğında şübhe
olunmayub bi’ø-øarÿre faúír [127b] daòı ayak ve úademe ta‘dÀd ile ta‘bír eyledim. Ve
mezbÿr ma‘bed döşemesiniñ ùÿli iki yüz on sekiz úademedir. Ve ‘arøı ùoksan sekiz úademe
olup cevÀnib-i erba‘ası altı yüz otuz iki úademedir. Be-óesÀb-ı terbí‘-í döşeme saùóı on bir biñ
dört yüz altmış dört úademe olmuşdur. Ve döşeme mermerleri ol mertebe düz ve ãıú
döşenmişdür ki, nÀôırlar naôarında mermer vÀóid döşenmişdür úıyÀã olunur. Ve keõÀlik
cüdrÀn-ı erba‘a daòı böyle ãıú ve mülÀóíú binÀ olunmuşdur. Ve temel eùrÀfı àÀyet metín ve
müstaókem vaø‘ olunmuşdur. Ki eğer bir ùaşını iòrÀca bir adam külenk ile on gün ursa úal‘ ve
ifrÀz itmeğe úÀdir olmaz.
Ve ma‘bed divÀrlarınıñ ‘arøı üc zirÀ‘dan mütecÀvizdür. Ve binÀya vaø‘ olunan ùaşlar
bi’l-cümle mezbÿr beyÀø mermerden olup, dört köşeli ve birer bucuk zirÀ‘ úalınlığı ve üc zirÀ‘
her bir ùaşı ùÿlí vÀúi‘ [128a] olmuşdur. Ve àÀyet muãanna‘ mermer vaø‘ olunup ve úaví binÀ
olup gerci ve úÿm vaø‘ olunmayub ãÀfí úurşun ve kinedler ile binÀ olunup ve ôÀhirde úurşÿn
ve kined aãlÀ görünmez. Ve divÀrlar mermer-i vÀóid görünür. Ve cevÀnib-i erba‘asında olan
ãofalarınıñ saúfeleriyçün vaø‘ olan sütÿnların bir mertebe àaríb ve ‘acib ve ‘adímü’l-miål
muãanna‘ şeş-óÀne resminde müdevver ùavíl ve ‘aríø ùaró olunmuşdur ki, nÀôırlar òayrÀn ve
dem-beste olur. Ve mezbÿr sütÿnlarıñ ùavÀnlarınıñ ref‘i otuz zirÀ‘ miúdÀrı úadd u úÀmet
verilmişdir. Ve tedvíriniñ úalınlığı üc adam úulÀclarıñ altında ve vefúinde vaø‘ olunan
kürsüleriñ tedvíri dört úulÀc miúdÀrı olmuşdur. Ve ãofalar ãaúfı içün bi’l-cümle vaø‘ olunan
sütÿnlar kırk altı sütÿn vaø‘ olunmuşdur. Ve her bir sütÿnüñ Àòirinden mÀbeyn ve ba‘dí onar
293
[128b] úademe ùaró olunmuşdur. Ve mezbÿr ãofalarıñ vüs’at ve ‘arøı on yedişer úademe
vüs’at olunmuşdur. Ve ma‘bed-i mezbÿr derÿnuñ cevÀnib-i åelÀåesinde muãanna‘ maófil ùaró
olunup, maófil-i mezbÿruñ altında daòı õikri sebúat iden sütÿnlar miåillü kırk altı şeş-òÀne ve
muãanna‘ vaø‘ olunmuşdur. Ve maófil üzerinden ùavÀna dek úadd verilmiş keõÀlik kırk altı
maùbÿ‘ ve meràÿb ve muãanna‘ mermerden direkler vaø‘ olunmuşdur. Ve bi’l-cümle meõkÿr
olan sütÿnlarıñ úalınlığı ücer úulÀcdur. Ve ma‘bed-i mezbÿruñ üstü úubbe olmayup meõkÿr
olan mermerden ikişer zirÀ‘ çÀr köşe úalınlığı ve otuz zirÀ‘ ùÿli beyÀø mermerden kirişler vaø‘
olunup ve üzerine mezbÿr mermerden taótlar ile muãanna‘ nÀdíde ùavÀnlar ùaró olunup ve yine
mezbÿr ùaşdan ma‘bediñ derÿn u bírÿnu nuúÿş-ı àaríbe ile naúş olmuşdur.
Ve muúaddemÀ meõkÿr olan SíseyÀ [129a] nÀm míriñ bahÀdurlıkları ve cengleri ve
bÀ-òuãÿã eski Aràilída vÀúi‘ olan şecÀ‘at varlığı ma‘bediñ ùaşra ùarafından saúf altı bi’l-cümle
ol úarı ve kız düğünden úapan ùÀ’ife atlarına binmişler, mermerden taãvír olunmuşdur.
VelÀkin mezbÿr ùÀ’ife meõkÿr olan düğünde adÀba müsÀfereti mürÀ‘Àt idüp ãıfat-ı insÀniyyeti
yerine geturmedikleri ecilden göbeklerine dek insÀn ve göbeklerinden aşÀğısı óayvÀn
ãÿretinde taãvír olunmuşdur. Ve meõkÿrlarıñ fezÀóati ve SíseyÀ`nıñ cesÀret ve şecÀ‘ati bi’lcümle ma‘bed-i mezbÿruñ ùaşradan saúfı altında taórír ve taãvír olunmuşdur. Ve SíseyÀ`dan
mÀ‘adÀ beyleriñ vÀúi‘ olan erlikleri ve şecÀ‘at ve cengleri bÀ-òuãÿã Süleyman Óakím`iñ vÀúi‘
hünerleri bi’l-cümle taórír ve taãvír olunmuşdur.
Ve ma‘bed-i mezbÿruñ şarúı ùarafında miórÀbı vÀúi‘ olup mermerden nÀdíde nuúÿş-ı
‘acíbe ile tezyín olunmuşdur. [129b] Ve miórÀb eùrÀfı úÀúma zer-i ãÀfí ile nuúÿş-ı ‘acíbe-i
keåíre ile àÀyet meràÿb ve maùbÿ‘ tezyín eylemişler. Ve ãÀfí altÿndan daòı nice elvÀó ile
derÿn-i ma‘bedi tezyín eylemişler. Ve Atina ahÀlísi[nin] úadímden ma‘bÿd ittiòÀõ eyledikleri
bir “kız ãÿreti”dur. Ol ãÿreti on iki biñ úıyye ãÀfí òÀliã altÿndan döküb miórÀb icine
oturtdular. Ve àÀyet ve óadd u pÀyÀnı olmayan envÀ‘ incu ve cevÀhir ile tezyín eylediler. Ve
mezbÿr puùuñ yüzünü insÀn yüzünüñ levniyle mülevven eylemişler. Ve gözleri yerine birer
şems cerÀú[ğ] ùaşı oturdmuşlar. Ve şems çerÀğ ùaşı orùÀsında birer siyÀh yÀúÿt vaø‘
eylemişler. Ve her kim ol puùu görse óayÀtdur úıyÀã iderdi. Ve ? ile naôar ider ôan iderdi ãÀfí
sırma ile işlenmiş elbise-i fÀòire ile ilbÀs eylemişler idi. Ve bir cevÀhir ile müzeyyen zerrín
taót üzerine iclÀs eylemişler.
Ve devr-i Ádem`den [130a] ol zamÀna gelince öyle müzeyyen puù kimesne görmüş ve
erişmiş değil idi. ZírÀ ol vaútiñ ma‘bed-i mezbÿra şol ‘aôímet üzere şurÿ‘ eylediler ki devr-i
Ádem`den beru bizden soñra daòı mesbÿú bi’l-miål olmaya ve ‘aôímetleri üzere binÀya
294
muvaffaú oldılar. Ve mezbÿr puùuñ önüne bir ãÀfí sırmadan kırk õirÀ‘ ùÿli ve yigirmi õirÀ‘
‘arøı elvÀní nuúÿş-i ‘acíbe ile işlenmiş zÀr-perde cekdiler.
Úadímden Rÿm ùÀ’ifesiniñ Àyin-i bÀùıllarıdur ki, cihÀzı olmayan kızlara tezevvüce
raàbet itmezler. FuúarÀ úulÿbunu taùyíb icün cümleniñ re’ísi olan Periúli, cümle ‘indinde
pesendíde ve müstaósene olan bir Àyin-i maúbÿl ícÀd eyledi ki, ‘adímü’-l miål idi. Ve mezbÿr
Periúli emr eyledi Atina derÿnunda fuúarÀ kızlardan bülÿğa irup cihÀzı olmamağla tevzícine
raàbet olmayan kızlardan seneví yüz kız cem‘ olunup ve ma‘bÿdeleri olan puùuñ perdesini
sırma [130b] ile işlemek icün ma‘bed derÿnuna mezbÿr yüz kızı idòÀl iderlerdi. Ve bir sene
tamÀm mezbÿr kızlar ma‘bed derÿnunda mezbÿr perdeyi işlerlerdi. Ve sene başında cedíd
perdeyi puùuñ öñüne cekerler idi. Ve ‘atíú perdeyi yüz barca idüp cedíd perdeyi işleyen
kızlara ‘atíú perdeden birer barca virirler idi. Ve mezbÿr kızlar ma‘bÿdemize òiõmet eylediler.
Ve ma‘bÿdemiz òademe ve òavÀãlarından her kim mezbÿr kızlara ikrÀm ve muótÀc oldukları
cihÀzlarıñ görüb urur ise ma‘bÿdeye taúarrüb ve rıøÀsında bulunmuş olur i‘tiúÀdıyla Atina
aàniyÀsından yüz adam mezbÿr kızlarıñ kemÀliyle bi’l-cümle mÀlzeme olan cihÀzıñ görüb
urmak içün ma‘bed úabusunda kızlarıñ òurÿcu gün mülÀzim olurlardı. Ve şÀh yerine úÀ’im
olan Periúli, bi’õ-õÀt kendü óÀôır olup ve kızlar ve aàniyÀ defterin yedinde olup her münÀsib
olan àaníye teslím [131a] iderdi.
Ve mezbÿr kızlar, ma‘bÿdeleri perdesinden yedlerinde olan parça[y]ı başlarına örtüb
ve ma‘bÿdeye envÀ‘ ‘ubÿdiyyet iôhÀr iderek ve óüzn u bükÀ ve yaşlar dökerek faúrí ya‘ní
ardın ardın ma‘bed úabusundan cıkub ve mezbÿr kızlarıñ cihÀzıñ görüb bÀbÀlıú olan her bir
àaní ehl u ‘iyÀl u evlÀd u itbÀ‘ ve enãÀrıyla mezbÿr kızın önüne düşüb maúbÿlleri olan envÀ‘
ta‘ôímÀt ve tekrímÀt ile kızları alup giderlerdi. Ve bi’l-cümle Atina`da mevcÿd olan nisvÀn u
ricÀl ma‘bed kabusuna dek selÀma dizilurlar idi. Ve ol àaní óareminde maòãÿã ve mu‘ayyen
oùa ol kız icün döşenub iclÀs iderlerdi. Ve òiõmetiycün cÀriye ve òademe ta‘yín ider ve
mücerred olan aàniyÀ ve a‘niyÀ evlÀdları tezevvüclerine ùÀlib olurlardı. Ve mezbÿre kızlar
ma‘bÿdemiziñ òavÀãã-i òademesindendir, deyu herkez ta‘ôím u tekrím [131b] idüp õüll u
óaúÀret naôarıyla kimesne naôar itmeğe úÀdir değiller idi. Ve düğün ve mecma‘ yerlerine
mezbÿr kızları ãadra iclÀs iderlerdi. Ve mezbÿr kızlar her bir bulunduúları mevcÿd olanlar
bi’l-cümle ta‘ôím bÀúí kalur idi.
Ve eğer mezbÿr kızlarıñ kendülerine veyÀòÿd evlÀdlarına nafaúa ve kisve øarÿreti ùÀrí
olsa kimesneniñ ãadaúasına muótÀc etmeyub mírílerinden úader-i ma‘rÿf ta‘yín iderlerdi. Ve
cedíd kızlar daòı ‘atíúler cıkmadan ma‘bed derÿnuna duòÿl iderlerdi. Ve ‘atíú kızlar
ma‘bÿdeye iútiøÀ idi. Òiõmeti tavãiye ve ta‘lím iderlerdi. Ve her bir ‘atíúa, cedíd[d]en birini
295
kendi maúÀmına iclÀs iderdi. Ve kızlar içün maòãÿã ùa‘Àm ve úaêÀ-yı óÀcet yerleri gösterirdi.
ZírÀ ùa‘Àm ve úaêÀ-yı óÀcet yerleri ma‘bedden òÀric kızlar icün maòãÿã binÀ olunmuş ve
ricÀlden kimesne ma‘bede [132a] girmeyub ancak kızlarıñ òiõmetine ta‘yín olunan iòtiyÀr
karılar girerdi. Ve ma‘bed derÿnunda ibúÀ ve iútiøÀ iden úanÀdili kızlar yakarlardı. BÀ-òuãÿã
mezbÿre ma‘bÿdeniñ zÀr icinde vaø‘ olunan úandíl-i kebír ki, iki yüz vaúıyye altÿndan
dökülmüş idi, her dÀ’im yanub aãlÀ iùfÀ olunmaz idi.
Bi’l-cümle ma‘bÿde ve ma‘bed òiõmetleri ol yüz kız görüb anlardan àayrı kimesne
ma‘bed derÿnuna girmeğe úÀdir değil idi. Bi’l-cümle mezbÿr kızlar her iútiøÀ iden òiõmeti
görürlerdi. Ve kızlardan biri òasta olsa mu‘ayyen òasta icün ma‘bedden òÀric ma‘bed
úurbunda bímÀr-òÀneler binÀ olunup òasta kızlar icün ve nisvÀn, ùabíbeleri gözetmek òastaları
vaôífeli mu‘ayyen ta‘yín olunmuş idi.
Ve ma‘bed eùrÀflarında i‘tiúÀdlarına göre ‘Àbid ve zÀhid adamlar ehl u ‘iyÀlleriyle
iskÀn olunmuş idi. Zír cemí‘-i òaõíneleri [132b] enfes emti‘aları ma‘bed eùrÀfında òaõínelerde
vaø‘ olunmuş idi. Atina şÀhları ve vÀlíleri úal‘a derÿnunda ãÀfí beyÀø mermerden, vÀlí ve şÀh
icün bir mu‘aôôam mükellef sarÀy binÀ olunmuş idi. Ve keõÀlik ikinci úabu derÿnunda üc
óakím feylosof icün yine beyÀø mermerden bir vasaùu’l-óÀl sarÀy binÀ olunmuş idi. VÀlí tebdíl
olunmak murÀd olındıkda, mezbÿr üc feylosofuñ biri olurdı. Yediler icün daòı vasaùu’l-óÀl bir
sarÀy daòı binÀ olunmuş idi. Ve üc feylosofuñ biri vÀlí oldukda, yediniñ biri üce naúl
olunurdı. Ve kırklar içün daòı vasaùu’l-óÀl dívÀn-òÀnesiyle binÀ olunmuş idi. Ve yedilerden
biri üce naúl olındıkda, kırklardan biri yedilere naúl olunurdı. Ve keõÀlik beş yüz feylosof
içün daòı bir mu‘aôôam kebír sarÀy binÀ olunup àÀyet kebír dívÀn-òÀne umÿr-ı ‘Àmme içün
ùaró olunmuş idi. Ve kırklardan [133a] biri yedilere naúl olındıkda, beş yüzden tercíó olunan
biri kırklara naúl olunurdı. Ve óÀlÀ meõkÿr sarÀylarıñ ÀåÀr-ı binÀları mevcÿd[d]ur.
Ve meõkÿr vÀlíleri olan Periúli ? òayrÀt murÀd idüp ve ma‘bÿd-ı kebír resminde şehr-i
şimÀlíde bir ãaàír ma‘bed binÀ idüp ve óÀlÀ ol ãaàír ma‘bed bÀúídir ve óÀlÀ Atina meşhediniñ
şimÀlinde meõkÿr ma‘bed-i ãaàír mevcÿd[d]ur. Ve “Kırk direkli kinisÀ” nÀmıyla ma‘rÿfdur.
Ve úal‘a derÿnunda binÀ olunup meõkÿr olan ma‘bed-i kebír daòı biñ doksan sekiz senesinde
Venedik istílÀsında ma‘bed-i mezbÿr derÿrunda cebòÀne olmaàla atılan Venedik hamíreleri
cebòÀneye iãÀbet idüp, ma‘bed-i mezbÿr mükellef cÀmi‘-i şeríf AyÀãofya mÀnend olmuş idi.
Derÿnunda olan ehl-i İslÀm`dan ricÀl u nisvÀn ve ãıbyÀndan yedi yüz miúdÀrı cÀmi‘-i mezbÿr
ma‘bed münhedim olmaàla şehíd olmuşdur.
Ve Venedik [133b] keferesi ol cÀmi‘niñ hedmine sebeb oldukdan soñra Venedik
cumhÿruna neks óÀãıl olup doksan dokuz senesi Eàriboz`u muóÀãara idüp maóRÿmen ‘avdet
296
eyledi. Ve keõÀlik yüz üç senesi Girít cezíresinde ÓanyÀ`yı muóÀãara idüp yine maórÿmen
‘avdet eylemişdür. Ve yüz altısında Sakız`ı alup altı aydan soñra donanma-yı menóÿsunu
İslÀm donanması dört ‘aôím úalyonlar iàrÀú ve donanma -yı menóÿsunu perÀkende ve períşÀn
itdukden soñra Sakız úal‘ası bilÀ-ãarb fetó eyledi. Ve yed-i İslÀm`a fetói müyesser oldı. Ve
Àndan soñra meróÿm úabudÀn Paşa .. kac kerre mesfÿruñ donanma-yı menóÿsuyla muúÀbil
oldı ise iàrÀú ve períşÀn eylemişdir. Ve óÀlÀ Atina keferesiniñ i‘tiúÀd-ı bÀùılları Venedik
keferesine vÀúi‘ olan inhizÀmÀtı ol ma‘bed-i úadímiñ inhidÀmına sebeb oldığındandur. Ancak
bizim i‘tiúÀdımız MevlÀ-yı Müte‘Àl ümmet-i [134a] Muóammed`e iósÀn eylediği úuvvet ve
úudret-i nuãretlerindendur.
Ve mezbÿr Periúli ma‘bedler binÀlarındañ soñra Atina aàniyÀsınıñ ricÀl u nisvÀnından
ãÀdur olan cürmleriniñ cezÀsını ôÀhir icrÀ eylese mücrimiñ aúrabÀsından ser-kÀra gelen
re’ísler intiúÀm úaãd itmesünlar deyu gerek mücrimlere ve gerek sÀ’irine ‘ibret ve terbiye
óÀãıl olsun deyu bir mülk-i nÀdíde ve bir úÀnÿn-ı nÀ-şiníde ícÀd idüp úal‘anıñ evvelki kabusı
derÿnunda cenÿbí olan ÓiãÀr .. içinde óÀlÀ mevcÿd olan tekyeniñ zírinde bir iki dönüm ùÿlÀní
‘arãa ùaró olunup ‘arãa-yı mezbÿreniñ cevÀnib-i erba‘asını muóíù bir ùÿlÀní ‘arãaya taòliye ve
iki zirÀ‘ ‘arøı ve bir bucuk zirÀ‘ úaddi ãofa ùaró olunup ve keõÀlik mezbÿr ãofanıñ ‘ulvünde
süllemi ya‘ní nerdibÀn ãÿretinde on bir ãofa daòı dÀ’iren mÀ-dÀr ùaró olunup zírde oturanlar
bÀlÀda oturanlara mÀni‘ olmazdı. Ve bÀlÀda oturanlar bÀlÀda maóall-i naôar [134b] olanlara
keõÀlik mÀni‘ olmazdı. Ve çÀk-ı zírde ùÿlÀní bir iki dönüm miúdÀrı ‘arãa[y]ı biñ mermerden
döşeyub ve keõÀlik ãofalar daòı beyÀø berrÀú mermerden ùaró olunup derÿnunda vÀúi‘ olan
muúallidlerin kelimÀt ve naãíó taóôírlerini istimÀ‘ ve seyr icün àÀyet cÀy-ı muêarrı‘ ùaró
olunmuş idi. Ve aàniyÀ ve óükemÀ ve feylosoflardan ehl-i ‘arø ve rütbe ve şÀn ãÀóibi olup ve
aãíl u nesl iddi‘Àsında olanlardan her kim ki bir òilÀf-ı mülke sÀlik olsa yÀòÿd bir fi‘l-i úabíóa
mübtelÀ olsa gerek ricÀlden ve gerek nisvÀndan ve ta‘õír ve óadde müsteóaú olsa eğer ol
mübtelÀya ôÀhiren taódíd olunsa ol mübtelÀnıñ aàniyÀdan ve ‘uôemÀdan olup ehl-i rütbe olan
òısm u aúrabÀsı olup rütbe ve şÀn ãÀóibi olanlara şerm ùÀrí olmasun deyu yÀòÿd ol mübtelÀ
veyÀ aúrabÀsı rütbe-i ‘ulyÀya veyÀ óükÿmet merkezlerine nÀ’il [135a] olur ise kendüye ‘alÀmele’i’n-nÀs ta‘õír ve óadd iúÀmet idenlerden intiúÀm ve àarazını icrÀ ãadÀdında olmasun
deyu iclerinden kemÀl-i ‘ilm u ma‘rifet ve zeyreklik ve kiyÀset-i mustaúíme ve maúÀm
mefhÿmuna serí’u’l-intiúÀl ve àÀyet faãíóu’l-kelÀm ve óüsn-i ifhÀm ve òoş edÀya iútidÀrı
olanlardan yedi şaòã sebük-rÿó intiòÀb idüp ve maãÀríflerine kifÀyet miúdÀrı ta‘yinÀt ve
yevmiye veôÀyif ta‘yín olunup yedlerine berÀtlar verilub ve õikri sebúat iden aàniyÀ ve
óükemÀ ve ãÀóib-i rütbe ve ehl-i münÀsib meclislerine bilÀ-izn duòÿla ve mezbÿrlarıñ her
aóvÀlini tecessüse ve óaremlerine duòÿla ve cemí‘ Atina ‘uôemÀsınıñ esrÀrlarına ıùùılÀ‘
297
meõkÿr yedi şaòã me’õÿn ve muraòòaã olup mecÀlis-i aàniyÀdan ve óaremlerinden görüb
iz’Àn eylediğiniñ ve yedi cezíresinde sebt ve taórír iderlerdi.
Ve bi’l-cümle evãÀf-ı óamíde [135b] ve òiãÀl-i õemíme-i nÀs maófÿôları ve her bÀôÀr
günü ník u bed evãÀfı taóãíl olunan kimesneler mezbÿr ãofalı maúÀma da‘vet olunurlardı.
Mezbÿr ãofalara ‘alÀ-úadr-i merÀtibihim otururlardı. Ve zírde olan dÿz düşmeye meõkÿr yedi
şaòã-ı mütecessis cem‘ olurlardı. Ba‘dehÿ bir haftalıú aàniyÀdan taóãíl eyledikleri òiãÀl-i
óamíde úabíóayı mezbÿr yedi şaòã taúrír-i beyÀn itmeğe biri başlardı ve altısı muòÀùab olup
ník olan taúrírini taósín iderlerdi. Ve bed taúrírini taúbíó iderlerdi. MeåelÀ taúríre bed iden
mesmÿ‘ ve meksÿbu olan aòlÀú-ı óamíde-i ãÀbí içün dirdi ki: “MuòÀùablarına ne dirseñiz
şöyle evãÀf-ı celíle ile mevãÿf olan maódÿm ve kerime ki aãíl-õÀdeliğiñ iåbÀt idüp aãlÀ erÀzil
ile görüşmeyub mevÀøı‘ töómet olan meclislere gitmeyüp mÀ-lÀ-ya‘nile beyhÿde evúÀt
gecirmeyub [136a] ‘ilm u ma‘rifet ricÀliyle dÀ’im görüşüb eyuler lisÀnında dÀ’im iyilik ile
yÀd olunup ‘Àúıbet òayırlığı kendüye teveccüh eyledi. Genclik bir ateşden gömlek iken nefs u
hevÀsına uymayub cebr-i nefs ile mücÀhede idüp eyuler mülküne sülÿk eylemişdür.”
MuòÀùablar daòı cevÀb virup dirler ki: “Ol õÀt-ı şeríf maóbÿbu’l-úulÿb yaúında nice
münÀsib refí‘aya nÀ’il olup beyne’l-aúrÀn müşÀr bi’l-benÀn olur. Ba‘dehÿ şaòã-ı mu‘berin
maófÿôı olan erbÀb-ı úabÀóat úabÀyıólerini daòı ãÀóib-i úabÀóatiñ ismini õikr etmeden aãl
fer’iyle úabÀóatleri birbir tafãíl idüp durdı ki; “Ne dursiz? Ol ‘ırú-ı pÀk maòdÿm olacak sefíh
ve rezíle ki ÀbÀ ve ecdÀdında olan evãÀf-ı óaseneyi kesb itmeyüp sefíh ve nÀ-dÀnlar ile
hemníşín olup õikri müstehcen ef‘Àl-i úabíóa irtikÀb ider.” [136b] MuòÀùablar daòı cevÀb
iderlerdi ki: “Õíkr itduğuñ ef‘Àl ãÀóibi ma‘lÿmumuz olsa filÀn úabaóatiyçün ta‘õír-i şedíd ve
filÀn fi‘liyçün óabs-i medíd ve filÀn cürmiyçün nefy-i ba‘íd iderdik” deyu cevÀb-ı ãevÀb ta‘bír
iderdi. Ve ol yedi şaòãıñ biri daòı tekellüm idüp dirdi ki: “Ol ‘afífe-i muòaddereye ki hevÀ-yı
nefsine tÀbi‘ olmayup ‘ırø ve edebiyle muúayyed olup ve bí-’iffet olan òÀtÿnlar ile
görüşmeyub ceng u cefÀne ve envÀ‘ lehv u ùaraba mÀ’ile olmayup õÀt-ı celílesine lÀ’iú olan
ma‘Àrif kesbiyle meşàÿledür. Şaòã-ı Àòarlar cevÀb virirler ki: “Şöyle evãÀf-ı merêıyye ile
mevãÿfe olan ‘afífe-i naôífeyi yaúında meóÀzim-i kirÀmdan bir kerímü’ş-şÀn ‘adímü’l-aúrÀn
maòzÿm ‘Àlí-şÀn tezevvüc idüp emåÀli beyniñde maósÿde-i [137a] aúrÀn olur.
Ve bir şaòã-ı Àòar daòı tekellüme bed’ idüp ricÀlden ve orùa yaşlı bir adamıñ evãÀf-ı
óasenesin taúrír iderdi. Ve bir orùa yaşlı adamıñ evãÀf-ı úabíóasın daòı tafãíl iderdi. Ol bir
şaòãlar ef‘Àl-i óaseneye lÀ’iú óüsn u ikrÀmı ta‘bír ve ta‘yín iderlerdi. Ve ef‘Àl-i úabíóaya
müsteóaú oldığı cezÀyı ta‘yín iderlerdi. Ve keõÀlik bir şaòã-ı Àòar tekellüm idüp, pír-i sÀl-i
òurde olup evãÀf-ı óaseneye muvaffaú olanları ve evãÀf-ı rezíleye mübtelÀ olanları taúrír u
298
beyÀn eyledikde ol bir şaòıãlarına müsteóaú oldukları ikrÀm ve cezÀyı ta‘yín iderlerdi. Ve bir
şaòã ‘acÿzeleriñ evãÀf-ı óasene ve úabíóalarıñ taúrír iderdi. Ve ol bir şaòıãlarına istióúÀúları
olan lüùf u gaêabı ta‘yín iderlerdi. Ve şaòã-ı Àòar tekellüm idüp, aàniyÀdan evlÀd u itbÀ‘ı øabù
u terbiyesine muvaffaú olanları ve muvaffaú olmayan aàniyÀnıñ ‘Àcizlerini taúrír [137b]
iderdi. KeõÀlik yine istióúÀúları ikrÀm ve ezÀyı ol bir şaòıãlar ta‘yín iderlerdi. Ve yine ol
şaòıãlarıñ yedincisi ‘aôím dÀ’ire ãÀóibesi olup aàniyÀdan olan kebíre òÀtÿnlar ki, kızlarına ve
cÀriyelerine óüsn-i edebe muvaffaúa olanları ve muvaffaúa olmayanları taúrír idüp, ol bir
şaòıãlar müsteóaúúa oldukları ikrÀm u cezÀyı ta‘yín iderlerdi.
Ve bi’l-cümle evãÀf-ı mezbÿre aãóÀbı ol meclisde óÀøır olurlardı. Ve bu taúríb ile
kendülere medó u taúríb olunup metíne olurlardı. Ve me’lÿf oldukları evãÀf-ı óaseneniñ
izdiyÀdına bÀdí ve ef‘Àl-i úabíóanıñ terkine mü’eddí olurlardı. Ve bu vech ile aàniyÀ pend u
siyÀsetleri óÀãıl olurdı. Ve aàniyÀ mÀbeynlerinde gıybet ve mesÀví münúati‘ olurdı. Ve
mezbÿr vÀlí olan Periúli eyyÀmında cemí‘-i ehl-i ‘ırø rÀóat idüp ve cemí‘-i ehl-i fesÀd tövbekÀr idüp bi’l-cümle Atina sükkÀnı rehÀbet ve resÿde óÀl olmuşlar [138a] idi. Ve meõkÿr vÀlí
àāyet óüsn-i tedbíre muvaffaú oldığı óasebiyle berren ve baóren iútiøÀ iden zeòÀyiriñ daòı
úaydlarıñ görüb õaòíre òuãÿãunda Atina sükkÀnı aãlÀ øarÿret cekmediler. Ve her sene vÀlí
tecdíd-i úÀnÿnı bölük óaúúında terk iderler. Ve bunı fevt olmayınca ‘azl itmeyuz, deyu cürm u
‘aôímet eylediler. Ve yine meõkÿr vÀlí ‘usret ve meşúını Şamil olan bir úÀnÿn daòı ref‘ eyledi
ki, mezbÿrdan muúaddem ma‘õÿl olan vÀlíler ‘azilleri zamÀnında itbÀ‘larından àayrı
aàniyÀdan ve fuúarÀdan kimesneler ile görüşmezlerdi. Ancak mezbÿr vÀlí ãÀfdil olup ‘azilden
aãlÀ òavfı olmadığı ecilden ma‘zÿllere iõin virdi ki, murÀd itdikleri her kimesne ile görüşüb,
ãoóbet eylesünler. Ve murÀd eyledikleri müferreó maúÀmlara devr idüp ãoóbet [138b]
eylesünler. Ve bu úÀnÿnuñ ref‘i daòı cümle úulÿbuna müstaósen olup vÀlí-yi mezbÿr
óaúúında muóabbetleri teraúúí bulmuş idi.
Ve meõkÿr vÀlí gününde olan .. ve óüsn-i ‘íşet bir vÀlí gününde müyesser olmamış idi.
Ve şehr-i Atina bir mertebe ‘aôím ve kebír olmuş idi ki, eğer bir piyÀde adam şeb-i vasaù ile
Atina`nıñ cevÀnib-i erba‘asını ùavÀf murÀd eyleseydi sekiz sÀ‘atde güciyle tavÀf iderdi. Ol
úadar aàniyÀdan õí-úudret adam cem‘ olmuş idi ki, aàniyÀda otuz biñ ehl-i ãanÀ‘í esír mevcÿd
olup ve mezbÿr esírleri seyyidleri yevmiye úısùa kesub her esír ãan‘atınıñ bir vÀcibine göre
gündüz ãan‘atıñ işleyub her aòŞam seyyidine gelüp úısùunu teslím iderdi. Ve bir mertebe
nüfÿs-i keåíre cem‘ olmuş idi ki, óadd u ta‘dÀddan mümteni‘ idi; òattÀ SelÀnik ve eùrÀfı ve
Yeñişehir ve eùrÀfı ve İzdin ve Livadiye ve İstefe úaøÀlarından [139a] Atina ùarafından
mubÀya‘acılar ta‘yín olunup zeòÀyir ve óubÿbÀtı her sene cem‘ iderlerdi. Ve bi’l-cümle
299
Rÿmili sevÀóili zeòÀyiri kifÀyet itmeyüp Anaùolı sevÀóilinden Úaødağı úıyıları Candarlı ve
Ayazmand iskelelerinden daòı zeòÀyir mubÀya‘a olunurdı.
Ve õaòíre-i mezbÿre[y]i Atina`ya naúl içün iki yüz pÀre yük sefíneleri aàniyÀ ticÀret
içün yabmışlar idi. Her bir sefíne derÿnunda re’ísler ve mellÀólar vaø‘ olunup fÿl ile zeòÀyir
Atina`ya naúl iderlerdi. Rÿmili sevÀóilinden õaòíre naúl icün yüz sefíne ta‘yín olunmuş idi.
SevÀóilde Atina mübÀya‘acıları cem‘-i devr-i maózen eyledikleri óubÿbÀt bi’l-cümle óÀøır
olup sefÀyin vuãÿl buldukda te’òír olunmayub taómíl olunurlar idi. Ve elli sefíne daòı Anaùolı
sevÀóilinden ba‘de’l-vuãÿl te’òír olunmayub taómíl olunurlardı. Ve keõÀlik Mıãır`da daòı
bÀzergānları [139b] olup Mıãır õaòíresi ve emti‘ası taómíliyçün elli sefíne daòı ta‘yín olunmuş
idi. Ve mezbÿr sefíneler her günde beşer ve onar Atina`ya vÀãıl olurdı. Bu vech ile mezbÿr
vÀlí õaòíre óuãÿlünü vüs‘at ile tedbír itmiş idi.
Ve ol ‘aãrda Atina`nıñ seferi olmayup àaríb ve ‘acíb úÀnÿnlar ve ãan‘atlar ícÀd olunup
herkes maúbÿl ve meràÿb olan nÀdíde ícÀda ve iòtirÀ‘a me’õÿnlar idi. Ve mezbÿr zeòÀyir
sefÀyini furùunadan limanlarda úapanub ve õaòíre øarÿreti mess iderdi. Ve mubÀya‘acılar ve
sefÀyin aãóÀb-ı sefíneler şikest ve àarú olmasun ‘aôím ölüm üzere olurlardı. Ve bu gÀ’ile ve
óüzn ve elem aãóÀbına SoúrÀù óakím meróamet idüp ve sefíneler aóvÀline ıùùılÀ‘ içün pusulÀ
‘ilmini Şamil bir raãad inşÀ ve ícÀd eylemişdür. Ve óÀlÀ mezbÿr pusulÀnıñ hey’et ve ..
bÀúídür. Ancak ‘ilm u ‘amelini bilüb ve isti‘mÀline úudret [140a] ve iútidÀrı olur kimesne
olmaduğundan óÀlÀ muaùùal durur. Ve mezbÿr bu pusulÀnın şekli şöyle ùaró olunmuş ki, Atina
varoşu derÿnunda cemí‘ rÿzigÀrlar óubÿb itdikce iãÀbet ider bir ‘arãalı tercíó eyledi. Ve
mezbÿr SoúrÀù óakím ta‘límiyle beyÀø mermerden müsemmenü’ş-şekl ya‘ní sekiz köşeli kireç
ve úÿm olmayup ãÀfí kined ve úurşun ile pusulÀ resminde binÀ idüp ícÀd idüp ve sekiz rÿzgārı
ol binÀnıñ sekiz ùarafına beyÀø mermer ùaşdan birer cengí cÀriye ãÿretinde taãvír eylemişler.
Ve her bir cengíye iútiøÀ iden lehv u ùarab ÀlÀtından mermerden taãvír olunup def ve
envÀ‘ından sÀzlar taãvír olunup cengíler ãÿreti yedlerinde óÀlÀ durur ve taãvír olunan
rÿzgÀrlarıñ üstünde rÿzgÀrlara iútiøÀ iden kerteler ve ikisi ortası ve derecÀt ve daúíúaları bi’lcümle mermerden muãavver [140b] ùaró olunmuşdur.
Ve mezbÿr pusulÀnıñ úubbesini güyÀ erre ile bicilmiş mezbÿr mermerden taótalar
‘ulví ùarafı sivri ve süflí cÀnibi yaããı ùaró olunup .. vatyü’ş-şekl ya‘ní balùacı külÀhı resminde
mezbÿr pusulÀ úubbesi ùaró olunup binÀ olunmuşdur. Ve bir kebír leylek ãÿreti taãvír olunup
pusulÀ úubbesi zirvesinde vaø‘ olunup ancak bir ãan‘at ile vaø‘ olunmuş ki rÿzgār ne ùarafa
óubÿb ider ise mezbÿr leylek ãÿretini daòı ol ùarafa teveccüh ider ve burnı ucu taúsím olunan
her bir rÿzgÀrıñ kerte ve ikisi orùası ve derecÀt ve daúíúaları üzerine durur idi. Ve ol burunuñ
300
óareketi rÿzgÀrıñ şiddet ve sükÿnu miúdÀrı óÀãıl olurdı. Ve Mıãır engínini ve Anaùolı ve
Rÿmili sevÀóillerini ve cezíreler arasını úÀrış bilüb òaber virenlerden [141a] sekiz re’ís-i
mÀhir intiòÀb idüp yevmiye vaôífe-i keåíre ile pusulÀ òiõmetine ta‘yín olunmuş idi. Ve
mezbÿr sekiz re’ísiñ ikisi Mıãır`a ta‘yín olunan sefÀyin aóvÀlinden òaber verirlerdi. Ve ikisi
daòı Anaùolı sevÀóiline ta‘yín olunan sefÀyini karadan kullanub òaber virdi. Ve ikisi daòı
Rÿmili sevÀóiline ta‘yín olunan aóvÀlini kullanub òaber virdi ki, ve ikisi daòı cezírelere ta‘yín
olunan sefÀyini kullanub aóvÀllerinden òaber virir idi. Ve sefÀyin aóvÀllerinden mezbÿr
re’ísleriñ òaberleri şöyle taúrír olunmuşdur ki, Atina`da oturup sefínesiyle deryÀya sefer
itmeyen sefíne ãÀóibi yÀòÿd sermÀye ãÀóibleri meåelÀ Atina zeòÀyiriniñ naúliyçün Mıãır`a
ta‘yín olunan sefÀyinden biri Atina limanından kal‘-i lenger idüp Mıãır`a ùoğrı bÀdbÀnlarına
küşÀd virse Atina`da filÀn ãÀóib yÀòÿd [141b] ãÀóib sermÀye sefíne ol sÀ‘at óareket eyledi,
deyu mezbÿr pusulÀda Mıãır engíni taãarrufuna ta‘yín iki re’íse òaber virirdi. Ve ol re’ís daòı
seneyi ve seneniñ úanúı ayı ve ayıñ kacıncı günü ve ol günüñ úanúı sÀ‘ati olduğun meõkÿr
Mıãır re’ísleri defterlerinde sebt u taórír iderlerdi. Ve sefíneyi ve ãÀóibini taórír iderdi. Ve ol
sÀ‘atde óubÿb iden rÿzgÀrı kertesiyle ve ikisi orùasıyla ve derecÀt ve daúíúasıyla bi’l-cümle
taórír iderdi. Ve óubÿb iden rÿzgÀrıñ şiddet ve sükÿnunu mezbÿr leyleğin burnunuñ şiddet ve
sükÿnundan vÀúi‘ óareketden fehm iderdi. Ve mezbÿr rÿzgÀr ile bir sÀ‘atde kac míl
yürüdüğünü ol leylek burnunuñ óareketinden istiòrÀc iderdi. Ve mezbÿr sefíne úanúı rÿzgÀr
ile Mıãır yoluna seyriderdi ve úanúı rÿzgÀr ile yürümeyub limanlarda úabandığını burùulan ve
òariùadan [142a] ma‘lÿmu olup sefíneniñ seyrini ve sükÿnunu her gün baãíret olup ve
Mıãır`a giden sefíneyi ãÀóibi re’ísden su’Àl itdikce seniñ sefíneniñ óÀlÀ filÀn deñizde ve filÀn
aùaya úaríb bu rÿzgÀr sefíneye muvÀfıúdur kullÀnub gider yÀòÿd bu rÿzgār muòÀlifdir filÀn
limanda kabanmış yatur, deyu taúríben òaber virurdı.
Mıãır yolunu re’ísler òÿb bildiklerinden óubÿb iden rÿzgÀrlardan úanúısı Mıãır`a giden
sefínelere muvÀfıú ve úanúı rÿzgÀr gelenlere muvÀfıúdur aãlında ma‘lÿmları olduğundan ve
Mıãır`dan yükleri İskenderiye óÀøır mıdur ve yükü óÀøır oldukda kac günde yüklenebiliyor,
cümle re’ís maøbÿùu olduğından ve pusulÀ üzerinde muãavver olan leylek yüzünüñ
óareketinden rÿzgÀrıñ ne mertebe úuvveti olduğundan ve kimisi ol rÿzgÀr muvÀfıú oldukda
sÀ‘atde [142b] kac míl úaù‘ idebilür taúríben mezbÿr pusulÀdan istiòrÀc idüp sefíne ve
sermÀye ãÀóiblerinden re’íse su’Àl idenlere şöyle cevÀb virup òaber virdi ki; sefíneniñ filÀn
deñizde kullanub gider yÀòÿd gelur ve bugün İskenderiye`ye girer; yÀòÿd bunda gelur, deyu
òaber virdiği sefíne ãÀóibleri deñize nÀôır yüksek yerlere çıkub gözedirlerdi. Ve elbette ol gün
bir sÀ‘at evvel yÀòÿd bir soñra görinub gelurdi. Ve Anaùolı ve Rÿmili ve cezírelere ta‘yín
olunan sefÀyin aóvÀlini òaber virmek müvekkel olan re’ísler Mıãır ùaríúinden òaber viren
301
re’ísler miåillü òaber virirlerdi. Ve bu taúríb ile ahÀlí-i diyÀr ve sefÀyin ãÀóibleri ve sermÀye
ãÀóibleri ‘ilm-i taúríbi óÀãıl idüp zeòÀyir ve sefÀyin óaúúında teselli-yi óÀùır olurlardı. Mezbÿr
pusulÀ yeñiçeri orùasınıñ cÀdurı şeklinde olduğundan ol şekilde olan binÀ leylek [143a]
ãÿretinden mÀ‘adÀ óÀlÀ mevcÿd olup Atina ahÀlísi ol pusulÀya “cÀdur” tesmiye iderler.
Ve mezbÿr vÀlí olan Periúli`ye óükÿmetden evãÀn gelüp kimesneniñ òaberi olmadan
kendüyi ‘azl eyledi. Ve müste‘idd olanlardan birini vÀlí naãb eyledi. Ve mevcÿd olan òazÀyini
bi’l-cümle vÀlí-yi cedíde teslím ve kırk sene vÀúi‘ olan zamÀn-ı óükÿmetinde írÀd u maãraf
defterlerini daòı görüb ve düzüb teslím eyledi. Ve Miúonoz cezíresi úurbunda Mermercik
aùasında Mizistre donanmasıyla müşterek cem‘ eyledikleri òazíneniñ Atina`ya naúl olunan
miúdÀrıñ aãlı iki biñ yedi yüz yigirmi dört úanùÀr olup ve mezbÿr altÿndan otuz altı biñ
vaúıyye altÿn úal‘a derÿnunda binÀ olunan ma‘bed-i mezbÿre derÿnunda vaø‘ olunan Àvíze ve
puùlara ve kız ãÿretinde olan kebír puta ve bi’l-cümle tetimmÀtına ãarf [143b] olunmuş, deyu
müfredÀt defteri virmeyub icmÀlice defter virdiğinden óükemÀnıñ ekåeri ol maãrafı istikåÀr
eylediler. VelÀkin müfredÀt defteri ùalebine cesÀret idemediler.
Ve ma‘õÿl olan vÀlíniñ kırk senede vÀúi‘ olan cırÀúları ve itbÀ‘ı Atina`nıñ ahÀlísiniñ
åülüåü miúdÀrı olup ekåer ehl-i óÀcÀt ma‘õÿl vÀlíye mürÀca‘at eylediklerinden vÀlí-yi cedíde
óased ùÀrí olup ma‘õÿl vÀlí[y]e ne ùaríú ile bir miúdÀrı maúdÿó ve ma‘yÿb ve úulÿb-ı nÀsda
ma‘êÿb iderim deyu ba‘ø semtlere sülÿk idüp ve óükemÀdan bir kacına va‘d idüp sırrına vÀúıf
eyledi. Ve ma‘bed-i mezbÿr maãrafınıñ muóÀsebesi ùalebinden àayrı bahÀne bulamadılar. Ve
muóÀsebe-i mezbÿre[y]i lisÀna getürüp ma‘õÿl vÀlíden ùaleb eylediler. Periúli, ki ma‘õÿl
vÀlídür, şöyle bÀsiù-i kelÀm idüp temhíd-i cevÀb eyledi ki: “Gerci [144a] bu maãrafı ibtidÀ
õikre ben sebeb oldum; velÀkin cümle ittifÀúıyla maãraf vÀúi‘ olmuşdur. Ve defterlerim àÀyet
pÀk müfredÀt üzerine her mÀdde taórír olunmuşdur. Ve cümleñize óesÀb virmeğe ‘aczim
yokdur. Ve ma‘bed-i mezbÿra ve tetimmÀtına maãrÿfım yedi yüz elli beş úanùÀr altÿndur ki,
otuz altı biñ úıyye altÿn ider ki ol vaútiñ ol miúdÀr altÿnı yetmiş iki biñ kíse aúce iderdi. ZírÀ
gümüş daòı altÿn gibi àÀyet òÀliã idi. Bu úadar kíse aúceniñ müfredÀt defterini birer birer
oúuyub siziñ her biriñize tefhím baña göre àÀyet ‘asír olmaàın ol åıúleti cekmeden ise ol
miúdÀr meblaàı òazíneñize teslím idüp ve òayrÀt-ı mezbÿr bi’l-cümle baña nisbet olunup
benim òayrÀtım olsun. Ve òayrÀt-ı mezbÿre úapularında vÀúi‘ tÀríò yerlerinde benim nÀmım
taórír olunsun” deyu cevÀb virdi.
[144b] Ve cümlesi bu cevÀbı istib‘Àd eylediler. Bu úadar mÀla mezbÿr Periúli mÀlik
olduğını cümlesi istiàrÀb idüp ãaóíó midür deyu maãraf-ı mezbÿrı ùaleb ãadÀdında oldılar. Ve
yetmiş iki biñ kíse aúceyi ùaleb idüp, bir gün evvel teslím-i òaõíne olmasını iltimÀs eylediler.
302
Ol daòı “FilÀn gün teslím iderim” deyu va‘de ta‘yín eyledi. KeõÀlik teslím-i mezbÿrı yine
àÀyet istiàrÀb eylediler. Ve “Şu adam biñ kíse aúceye mÀlik olmasında daòı iştibÀhımız var.
ZírÀ altmış biñ kíse aúce istidÀne itmeğe muótÀcdur. Bu diyÀrda altmış biñ kíse aúce on biñ
adamdan ancak istidÀne olunur. Ve on biñ adamdan meblaà-ı mezbÿruñ istidÀnesi àÀyet
müte‘assir ve giru edÀsı daòı àÀyet mümteni‘ oldığı òafí değildür, bunda bir iş var?” deyu
müteraúúıb oldılar. Ve kimden aúce istidÀne ider, deyu tecessüse başladılar. Ve aãlÀ
kimesneden [145a] istidÀne ùalebine ve aldığına vÀúıf olmadılar ve bu aóvÀle àÀyet
müte’accib oldılar. Ve yevm-i mezbÿr oldukda kac úaùar yük altÿn; yÀòÿd kac úaùÀr gümüş
yükler olur, deyu cemí‘-i nÀs müteraúúıblar iken, mezbÿr Periúli, sarÀyından binub itbÀ‘ınıñ
birine bir kitÀb yükledüp vÀliye geldi ve cümle óükemÀyı cem‘ eyledi. Ve mezbÿr kitÀbı
orùaya getürüp ve mezbÿr kitÀbı beş yüz varaú olup ve her ãaóífesi de ùavÀif-i mülÿkdan biñ
pÀdişÀh ile ‘ahd-i ekíd eylemiş ki; “Her úangimiziñ başına bir óÀl ôuóÿr idüp aúceye muótÀc
olur ise biñ kíse aúce aóad-i hümÀ Àòara aúca virsun” deyu ‘ahidlerini ãaóíó olsun deyu her
bir pÀdişÀh ãÿretin taãvír idüp ve ãÿreti başında imzÀ idüp ve mührün baãmışdur. Ve aóad-i
hümÀ, Àòara ol ãÿreti virmişdür. Ve óín-i øarÿretde muótÀc olan pÀdişÀh Àòar-i pÀdişÀha
mümzÀ [145b] olan ãÿretini irsÀ eyledikde aãlÀ te‘allül itdirmeden biñ kíse aúce[y]i teslím
ider. Eğer fevt oldı ise oàlu virur, eğer oàlu pÀdişÀ[h] yok ise naãb olunan Àòar-i pÀdişÀh,
meblaà-ı mezbÿr; biñ kise aúceyi virir. Ol vaúitde bir pÀdişÀh bir ‘ahd eylese ol diyÀr òalúı
‘ahd iden pÀdişÀhıñ ‘ahdini bozmayub pÀdişÀhları fevt olsa daòı ol ‘ahdi bozmayub biñ kise
aúceyi virurlardı.
Mezbÿr Periúli kitÀbı küşÀd idüp, biñ pÀdişÀh ile ‘ahd-i ekíd idüp ãÿretlerini ve
imêÀlarını gösterdikde, Atina óükemÀsınıñ cümlesi cezm eylediler ki; mezbÿr Periúli, yetmiş
iki biñ kíse aúceyi bi’t-tamÀm bilÀ-úuãÿr edÀ idecekleriñ cezm eylediklerinden müşÀvereye
ihÀle eylediler. Ve cümlesi dívÀn-òÀnelerine cem‘ olup encÀm-ı müşÀvereleri şuña bÀlià oldı
ki; mezbÿr [146a] Periúli yetmiş iki biñ kíse aúce[y]i virup ve bu Atina`da meblaà-ı mezbÿr
ile binÀ olunan ma‘bed-i kebír ve tetimmÀtı ve bu úadar mu‘allimóÀne ve ta‘õíróÀne ve pusulÀ
vesÀ’ir ‘acíb ve àaríb ebniyyeler bi’l-cümle Periúli`ye naãb oldukdan soñra bi’l-cümle Atina
Periúli`den ‘ibÀret olmuş olur. Ve Atina diyÀrında “Periúli`den mÀ‘adÀ ehl-i óayr ve dindÀr
gelmiş yokdur” deyu ilÀ-yevmi’l-intihÀ dillerde destÀn olsa gerek. Ve meblaà-ı mezbÿrı biñ
pÀdişÀhdan ùaleb ile alup bize virse, gerü ol pÀdişÀhlar Periúli`niñ muóabbeti olduklarından
şek yokdur. Ve cümlesi bizim aóvÀlimize vÀúıf olduklarında bize ‘adÀvetleri muóaúúaúdur ve
óÀlÀ òaõínelerimiz dolu olup iótiyÀcımız yokdur; eyusu bu sevdÀdan fÀrià olup ve bu óesÀb
ùalebi icimizden bir iki adama iånÀd idelum ve ol iki adamı naúí idelim ve varup Periúli`den
303
‘öõr-i ‘aôím ile i‘tiõÀr [146b] idelim, Periúli yine deryÀdildir, ‘öõrümüzü úabÿl ider ve
menfíleriñ ıùlÀúıñ daòı murÀd ider, didiler.
Ve içlerine bir ca‘lí-yi iòtilÀf iôhÀr idüp ve iki adama óesÀb ùalebini isnÀd eylediler ve
ol iki adama nefy eylediler ve varup cümlesi Periúli`den i‘tiõÀr eylediler. Beriúli daòı ricÀlarıñ
maúbÿl idüp menfíleriñ ıùlÀúını murÀd eyledi. .. ãÀf oldılar ve bi’l-cümle merÀm ve
makãadlarınıñ óuãÿlı yine Beriúli re’y-i munøamm olmayınca óÀãıl olmazdı ve Atina
fuúarÀsına ‘ilm u ma‘rifet ùÀliblerine raóím ve şefíú olup ùa‘Àm ve elbÀs ve süknÀlarını ve her
bir iótiyÀcları olan malzemeleriñ görürdi. Ve Atina derÿnunda ‘aôím sarÀylar resminde kebír
binÀlar ãÀfí kÀrgír-i kirec ile ve ùaş ve úÿm ile binÀ iderler ve Atina şehri derÿnunda kara sıvÀ
ve kerpiç ile binÀ olunmuş ev ve havli bulunmazdı, bi’l-cümle [147a] kirec ile derz ve sıvÀ
olunurdı. Ve el-yevm yine Atina`da kerpiç ve balçıú ile kara binÀ ve óavlí-i divÀrları yokdur.
Ve zamÀn-ı mezbÿrda Atina seyrine ve ticÀretine gelüp Atina şehrini görenler cemí‘-i
dünyÀnıñ aàniyÀsı Atina`da cem‘ olunmuş úıyÀã iderdi. Ve bu niôÀm ile Periúli ãoóbetinde
Atina şehri müzeyyen ve muntaôam ve meràÿb ve maósÿd-ı aàyÀr olup ník u evãÀf-ı
müstaósene ile beyne’l-enÀm meşhÿr olmuş idi.
Ve bu tÀríò-i me’òÿõumuz olan æÿcízízí nÀm óakím tÀríòinde şöyle naúl eylemişdür
ki; devr-i Ádem (a.s.)`dan äoúraù óakím tevellüdüne gelince be-óesÀb-ı şemsiyye dört biñ
yedi yüz altmış iki sene mürÿr itmişdir. Ve Buúrat óakím daòı sene-i mezbÿrede tevellüd
eylemişdi ve diyÀrınıñ aãlı İstanköy cezíresindendür. Ve mezbÿr ma‘bed-i kebír binÀsına bed’
olındıkda Soúrat beş yaşında idi ve dört biñ [147b] yedi yüz yetmiş sekiz tÀríòinde Atina`da
EflÀùÿn-ı ilÀhí tevellüd itmiş ve Soúraù, EflÀùÿn`dan on beş yaş büyükdür; velÀkin Soúraù ‘ilmi óikmetde üstÀd-ı küll olmuşdur ve ‘aãrında olan óükemÀnıñ cümlesine tevaffuú itmişdür. Ve
BuúrÀù, SoúrÀùla ‘ilm-i óikmetde şerík olmuşdur; velÀkin yine BuúrÀù907, SoúrÀù`dan ‘ilm-i
óikmeti ta‘lím itmişdir ve soñra BuúrÀù ‘ilm-i ùıbba tevaààul idüp’ilm-i ùabÀbetde cümleye
tefavvuú itmişdir. Ve EflÀùun908, ‘ilm-i óikmeti SoúrÀù`dan ta‘lím itmişdür ve SoúrÀù`dan soñra
üstÀd-ı küll olmuşdur.
Ve Períúli`niñ kız úarındÀşı oàlu nÀmında dünyÀya EflÀùÿn-ı ilÀhiyle bir gecede
doğmuş ve EflÀùÿn ile ‘ilm-i óikmetde şerík olmuşlardur ve mezbÿr ElcūyÀõí daòı EflÀùÿn
kadar ‘ilm-i óikmetde mahÀret taóãíl etmiş; velÀkin ElcūyÀõí ve EflÀùÿñ Atina`nıñ kübbÀr ve
óükemÀ evlÀdın[dan]dur ve ElcūyÀõí`niñ úuvvet ve cesÀreti àÀlib olduğundan ceng aletlerini
daòı ta‘límòÀnelere varup [148a] ta‘lím iderdi ve bi’l-cümle evúÀtıñ EflÀùÿn gibi ‘ilm u
907
908
Hippocrates
Platon
304
óikmete ãarf itmezdi. Ol vechiyle EflÀùÿn-ÀsÀ ‘ilm-i óikmetde ma‘rÿf ve meşhÿr olmadı
velÀkin EflÀùÿñ ve üstÀdı olan SoúrÀt`dan mÀ‘adÀ cümle üzerine ‘ilm-i óikmetde tefavvuú
eylemiş ve ÀlÀt-ı ceng mahÀretlerinde cümleye àÀlib olmuşdur. Güreş ve silaóşörlüú ve
mızrÀú ve hışt ve gürz ve topuz urmasında ve tíà-zen olup tízdestliğinde cümleye àÀlib olurdı.
Ve ol kadar óüsn-i cemÀle mÀlik idi ki ol ‘aãrda nisvÀn, ricÀlde miål-i niddi bulunmazdı. Ve ol
‘aãrda Atina`nıñ nisvÀn, ricÀl-i merúÿmuñ üftÀde-i dildÀrlarıydı. DersòÀnelere ve dívÀnlara
gitdikce ùaríú-i cÀniblerinde ‘Àşıú ve üftÀdeleri olanlar dizilub cemÀline naôar itdikce òayrÀn
ve dem-beste kalurlardı. Ve dívÀna duòÿl itdikce “Mihr-i münír ùulÿ‘ itdi” deyu birbirlerine
tebşír iderlerdi. ãagír ve kebíriñ bi’l-cümle maóbÿbu’l-úulÿb idi.
[148b] Ve ol ‘aãırda yine Atina varoşunda úal‘aya úaríb düz yerde cevÀnib-i erba‘ası
yüzer ‘arşın olmak üzere ãÀfí beyÀø mermerden bir binÀ-yı nÀdíde iódÀå eylediler ki, mesbÿú
bi’l-miål değil idi. Ve cevÀnib-i erba‘ada olan dört divÀrıñ ‘arøıları ikişer zirÀ‘a ve ùÿlleri
yüzer zirÀ‘ ve úaddleri yigirmişer zirÀ‘ tereffu‘ olunup ãÀfí derÿnlarından kínd ve úurşun ile
tevúíd olunup ve mezbÿr binÀ mermerleri bir mertebe êıyú ve mulÀóÀú idi ki, ôÀhirde görenler
dört divÀrı mermer-i vÀóid ôann iderdi. Ve be-óesÀb-ı saùranc binÀ-yı mezbÿruñ derÿnı, on biñ
õirÀ‘ idi. Ve binÀ-yı mezbÿr daòı ãÀfí beyÀø mermerden döşenub melsÀ-i semmÀ’-i vÀóid
menzilesine ôann olunurdı. Ve mezbÿr dört divÀrıñ üzerinde her bir gün tengrisi bir pÿùdur,
deyu üç yüz altmış altı pÿù vaø‘ idüp dizmişler idi. Ve muvaóóid olmayup “taãarruf, [149a]
‘uúÿl-ı ‘aşerededur” i‘tiúÀd iden êarb-ı şeyÀùin óükemÀsı ‘uúÿl-i ‘aşere taãarruf ve i‘tiúÀdını,
cühelÀya tefhímde ‘usretleri olmaàın üç yüz altmış altı pÿù ùaşdan rendeleyub, mezbÿr binÀ
üzerine vaø‘ eylediler. Ve envÀ‘-ı libÀslar ile mezbÿrları, ilbÀs eylediler ve bir pÿù òiõmetine
birer adam ta‘yín eylediler. Ve her bir pÿùa cühelÀ ùapmak içün birer gün ta‘yín ve her bir pÿùa
ùapmak içün ta‘yín eyledikleri gün geldikde, ol pÿùu, envÀ‘-ı zínetler ile müzeyyen iderlerdi.
Ve cühelÀdan nice biñ ol binÀ derÿruna ricÀl u nisvÀn ve ãıbyÀn cem‘ olup ol pÿùa ùaparlardı.
Ve envÀ‘-ı taøarru‘ ve niyÀz ile def‘-i iótiyÀclarıyçün duÀ ve ricÀ iderlerdi.
Ve bu taúríb ile ol óannÀl ve muêill olanlar fuúarÀyı daòı iêlÀl iderlerdi. Ve óaúíúatbín olan EflÀùÿñ ve ElcūyÀõí êÀll ve iêlÀli görüb mute’accib olurlardı. Ve böyle [149b]
behÀyim maúÿlesi olan cühelÀnıñ i‘tiúÀd ve ‘ubÿdiyyetleriñ istiàrÀb iderlerdi; zírÀ mezbÿr
pÿùlar, ùaşdan olup ve düzen ùaşcılar daòı ma‘lÿm ve ol pÿù olan ùaşlar bí-ruó oldukları
cümleniñ ma‘lÿmları iken “Nice bu óayvÀn maúÿlesi olan adamlar nice bu ùaşları ilÀh ittiòÀõ
idüp ùaparlar” derlerdi. Ve bunlar iútiøÀ-yı i‘tiúÀdları olan “‘Uúÿl-ı ‘aşara” i‘tiúÀdını daòı
mu‘teúıd olmadılar; ve ‘Àlemiñ óudÿåu bÀbında ba‘ø-ı şübheler óÀãıl eylediler. Gördiler ve
tecrübe eylediler ki; bir seneniñ ãayf u şitÀ taàayyurları sene-yi Àòar ile mutteóid ve muttefiú
değildür. Ve eflÀúda olan şems u úamer óareketleriniñ taàayyur-ı iòtilÀflarından daòı ‘Àlemiñ
305
óudÿåuna ve eflÀk óudÿåuna daòı istidlÀle başladılar. Ve bu şübhelerini óall içün üstÀdları
Soúraù`a tenhÀ oldukca ‘arø itmeğe başladılar ve Soúraù óadÀået-i sinnlerinden òavf idüp taàlíô
ve tevfíú iderdi.
[150a]
Bir iki sene mürÿrundan soñra bunların istiúāmet-i tab‘-ı tevhídi iş’Àr eder,
delÀ’il-i kÀtı‘a temhídine başladılar. Ve Soúraù fehm eyledi ki EflÀtÿn ve ElcūyÀõí berÀhín-i
mübrehine ile tevhídi isbÀt ederler. LÀkin ôÀhiren isbÀt ederler ise kıdem-i ‘Àleme zÀhib olan
cumhÿr-ı óükemÀ ímÀn vermeyub Soúraù`ı ve bunları úatlederler deyu Soúraù òavfından
tevhíde dÀ’ir mübÀóeåeyi tenhÀ olan mekÀn-ı òuãÿãa ta‘yín eyledi ve Soúraù, umÿm-i
derslerini ta‘lím eyledikten soñra EflÀtÿn ve ElcūyÀõí için maòãÿã tenhÀ mekÀna tevhíde dÀ’ir
ve óudÿå-i’Àlemi müş‘ir mükÀlemet idüp ? mezbÿrlar óudÿå-i ‘Àleme itkÀn ve tevhíd-i bÀrí’ye
i’tikÀd nÀm eylediler. Ve Soúraù dÀ’im óudÿå ve tevhídi aúrabÀ ve eãdiúÀsından sakınub “Bir
aóade keşf etmeyesiz” deyu tevhídden òÀlí olmazdı. VelÀkin aúrabÀ ve eãdiúÀnıñ hilÀf-ı
[150b] i’tikÀdlarını gördükçe meróamet ve ref’etleri mütezÀid olup aúrabÀlarına tevhídi ta‘lím
içün Soúraù`tan .. òÀlí olmazlardı. Ve Soúraù daòı bunları tevhídi ketm üzere olsunlar deyu
tenbíhden münfekk olmazdı. MinvÀl-i meşrÿó üzere sinín-i vÀfire güzer idüp EflÀtÿn-ı ilÀhí
ulÿm-ı ilÀhiyyede şeríklerine tefavvuú idüp Soúraù ile ilmde aúrÀniyyet mertebesine vuãÿl
buldu. Ve EflÀtÿn, kibÀr ve uômÀ evlÀdlarından olup ancak aãlÀ riyÀset semtine sÀlik olmadı.
HemÀn cemí‘-i evkÀtını, İşrÀúıyyÿn ve MeşşÀ’í meslekine sÀlik olup ‘ilm-i óikemiyyede
Soúraù`dan soñra üstÀd-ı küll olmuşdur. Ancak ElcūyÀõí909 riyÀset meslekine sülÿk idüp
EflÀtÿn-ÀsÀ nÀm ve şÀn ile ‘ilm-i óikmetde ma‘rÿf ve meşhÿr olamadı.
Ve ol vaúitde Atina ber-mertebe ma‘mÿr ve ? ve ÀdÀbÀn olmuş idi ki Rÿmili ve
Anadolu diyÀrlarında azamet [151a] ve úudret ve iútidÀr ile ma‘rÿf ve meşhÿr olmuş idi. Ve
Rÿmilinde ve Anadolu`da herkangı diyÀrda bir düşmÀn àalebe ile mütevellí olsa Atina`da
istimdÀd ile def‘ iderlerdi. Ve zamÀn-ı mezbÿrda Mizistre diyÀrına bir aôím zelzele ôuhÿr idüp
kal‘a ve binÀları münhedim olup Mizistre ahÀlísiniñ ricÀl ve nisvÀn ve sıbyÀnlarıñ nıãf-ı
mertebesi binÀlar altında kalıb helÀk oldu. ÓattÀ cerí ve cesÿrların ekåerísi helÀk olmuş ve ol
òuãÿãda Mizistre ‘asÀkírine àÀyet za’f ùÀrí olup ve sükÿn üzere olan düşmÀnları iôhÀr-ı ‘adÀvet
etmeğe başladılar. Ve Mora derÿnunda ve Moton ve Koron ahÀlísi Mizistreliden àÀyet Àzÿrde
hÀtır olduklarından vÀfir-i ‘asker cem‘ idüp Mizistreliden aòõ-ı intiúÀm murÀd eylediklerin
Mizistre ahÀlísi òaber alup ve muúāvemet edecek ‘askerleri olmadığından bi’ø-øarÿre
Atina’dan istimdÀd için ‘asker istediler. [151b] Atina vÀlisi daòı vÀfir-i ‘asker ile .. nÀmında
bir ser-‘asker naãb idüp Mizistre imdÀdına irsÀl eylediler. Moton ve Koron ‘askeri Atina`dan
909
Alcibiades
306
gelen imdÀdı istimÀ‘ eylediklerinde ol vaúitde Atina ‘askerinin cesÀret ve bahÀdurlıkları
elsine-i nÀsda tedÀvül ile şöhret bulduklarından Moton ve Koron ser-‘askerlerinden Atina ser‘askerine imdÀd etmesunler diye vÀfir ricÀ-nÀmeler irsÀl eylediler ve àÀyet õí-úıymet
hediyyeler daòı irsÀl eylediler. Ve “Bizim sizinle aãlÀ ‘adÀvet ve düşmÀnlığımız aãlÀ bir asrda
vÀúi‘ olmuş değildür; ve ma‘lÿmuñuzdur ki, bize Mizistre ahÀlísinden aôím ziyÀn ve
òasÀratlar vÀúi‘ olmuşdur. Ve mÀl ve ırzımıza úaãd idüp bizi kaç kere hÀk ile yeksÀn
eylemişlerdur. El-Àn bize daòı bir miúdÀr fırãat yüz gösterdi mÀni‘ olman. Biz daòı bir miúdÀr
intiúÀm aòõ edelim” deyu nÀmelerinden aôím niyÀz eylediler. VelÀkin serdÀrı hediyelerin
úabÿl etmeyip [152a] ve ricÀları daòı maúbÿl olmayup Atina serdÀrı cevÀb-nÀmesi böyle oldu
ki; “Mademki siz Mizistreliyle ‘adÀvet üzere olup ceng edersiz biz daòı sizinle ‘adÀvet üzere
olup ceng ederiz” deyu cevÀb-nÀmesi hatm eylemiş, bi’ø-øarÿre Koron ve Moton serdÀrları
daòı lÀ-ilÀç kılıp ‘askerlerini Mizistre üzerinden ref‘ eylediler.
Ve Atina serdÀrı daòı Mizistre’ye vÀãıl olmadan ‘avdet idüp Atina’ya geldi. Ve
Atina`nıñ erkÀn-ı devleti olanlar serdÀr-ı mezbÿr-ı alay ile Mizistre`ye girüb ‘askerimizin
úuvvet ve úudretleriñ ve silÀó ve .. mükemmel ve mürettebliğini göstermedu deyu aôím
úabÀóat ‘add idüp ve kebír dívÀnhÀneleri Aryūnpaàū910 nÀm dívÀnhÀneye cem‘ oldılar. Ve
cevÀbları mezbÿr serdÀra böyle dediler ki: “Sen bizim şÀn ve şevketimizi ketm idüp ve
derÿnunda diyÀrımıza sÿ’-i úaãdın vardur ki bizim büyük düşmÀnımız bu eôrÀfda Mizistre
ahÀlísi olduğun bilirken [152b] düşmÀnlarımıza böyle mükemmel ‘askerlerimizin alayların
göstermeyesin. Mizistre derÿnunda böyle müretteb ‘asker alayıyla gerisin nisÀ ve sıbyÀnı
görüb derÿnlarında ru’b-i ahrÀs óÀãıl olacağı emr-i muúarrer idi. Ve her zamÀn bizim şevket
ve aôametimiz derÿnlarından gitmeyüp ol sıbyÀndan kebír oldukda eğer bize daòı bir øa‘íf ùÀrí
olsa üzerimize gelmeğe cesÀret etmezlerdi. Bu òuãÿãda úatli mÿcib úabÀóatin ôuhÿr eyledi.
Mezbÿr serdÀrın úatli için fermÀn-ı taórírí emr oldukda vÀlí-yi sÀbıú .. òaber alıb gelüp úatli
men‘ eyledi; velÀkin bi’ø-øarÿre óaps eylediler.
Ve bu esnÀda Anadolu’da olup
Atina’ya tÀbi‘ olan on iki kal‘a üzerine ‘Acem
ùarafından ‘asker ile ser-‘asker ta‘yín olunup mezbÿr kal‘alarının feryÀdcıları gelüp imdÀd
ùaleb eylediklerinden maóbÿs olan mezbÿr ?
Mizistre òuãÿãunda kesb [153a] eylediği bed-
nÀm ref‘ etsin deyu iki yüz sefíneye serdÀr olup aôím ‘asker ile Anadolu sevÀóilinde Atina’ya
tÀbi‘ olan kal‘alara imdÀd içün irsÀl eylediler. Ol daòı varup ve yetişub düşmÀn def‘içün rÿz u
şeb aôím cengler eyledi. LÀkin ‘Acem ‘askeri àÀyet keåret üzere olup bir vechiyle def‘ olmak
mümkin olmadığından úahrından mevte úarín hasta oldukda ‘askeriniñ reislerine şöyle
910
Aeropagus
307
vaãiyyet eyledi ki: “Bu ‘Acem ‘askeri .. keåreti var ve bunların intifÀ’ı mümkin değildür.
HemÀn sakınub benim fevtimi ifşÀ eylemek ve benim fevtimi me‘an alup’arżınız yerinde iken
Atina`ya bir gün ‘avdet eyle! ZírÀ ben dÀ’im àayret cengí iderdim ve àayretten helÀk oldum.”
deyüp fevt oldu. Ve Atina ‘askeri daòı ol sÀ‘at meyyitini bir sefíneye vaz‘ idüp ve sefínelere
dolup bir gece kalkub Atina`ya ‘avdet eylediler. [153b] Ve gelüp mezbÿr serdÀrıñ vaãiyyetini
teblíà eylediklerinde mezbÿrdan òulÿã müşÀhede eylediler. Ve meyyitini ta‘ôím ile defn idüp
üzerine türbe eylediler.
Ve ol ‘asrda Arnabudluk içinde Dirac911 nÀmında bir úal‘a Mora`da olan Gördes
begine tÀbi‘ idi; ve cümle a‘şÀr ve tekÀlífini Gördes ùarafında aòõ olunurdı. Ve mezbÿr
Diracın õí-úudretleri àalebe idüp Dirac diyÀrından a‘şÀr ve rüsÿmÀtı cem‘ idüp kendüleri
imsÀk idüp Gördes begine irsÀl itmezlerdi. Ve Gördes Beyi ùarafından taòvíf ve tehdíd; ve bir
gün evvel rüsÿmÀtı irsÀl ilen ve illÀ bir gün varup diyÀrıñızı òarÀb iderim, tenbíhlerinden
fuúarÀ òavf idüp ve “Bu rüsÿmÀtı bizden her sene cem‘ olup Gördes Beyine vÀãıl
olmadığından bir gün àaøÀba gelüp mír-i mezbÿr diyÀrımızı, òarÀb ve ‘ıyÀl ve evlÀdımızı esír
ider hemÀn eyusu cem‘ olunan rüsÿmÀtı refú ile aàniyÀ merden [154a] ùaleb idelum, virirler
ise maóalline irsÀl idelum; ve ta‘annüd idüp rıfúla virmezler ise cebr ile taóãíl idelum” diyub
aàniyÀdan rıfúla mÀlı ùaleb eylediler, virmediler. FuúarÀ daòı cem‘ olmuş iken aàniyÀlar
üzerine ‘unf u cebr ile hücÿm eylediler, úarşu koyub aàniyÀdan faúír eli uranları fuúarÀ aãlÀ
emÀn virmeyub úatl eylediler ve aàniyÀnıñ ekåeri úarşu komayub Gördes cezíresinde firÀr
eylediler. Ve fuúarÀ firÀr iden aàniyÀnıñ evlerini basub bi’l-cümle rüsÿmÀtı terekelerinden ve
mülklerinden taóãíl idüp Gördes beyine irsÀl eylediler. Ve Gördes begi Körfese firÀr iden
aàniyÀyı Körfes vÀlisinden ùaleb eylediler, Körfes vÀlisi daòı virmege ‘Àr eylediğinden Gördes
Beyi Körfes üzerine sefer eyledi ve Körfes vÀlisi muúÀvemete úÀdir olmayup ve Körfes
Atina`ya tÀbi‘ olmaàla Atina`dan imdÀd ùaleb eylediler. Ve Atina`dan Körfes imdÀd-ı óareket
üzere iken Gördes ahÀlísi daòı Mizistre`den istimdÀd eylediler. [154b] Ve Mizistre vÀlisi
imdÀd tedÀrikinde olup Atina`ya nusó ve pendi Şamil bir mektÿb irsÀl eylediler: “Size lÀyıú
değildür ôulm ùarafına imdÀd edüp fuúarÀya àadr idesiz”. Ancak bu pendnÀme Atina`ya vuãÿl
bulmadan Atina`nıñ imdÀdı Körfes`e vÀãıl olup ve varup Dirac fuúarÀsını karup ve aàniyÀsını
Dirac`a iskÀn eylediler.
VelÀkin Atina`nıñ óükemÀsının bu maúÿle ôulme ùarafında olduklarından bi’l-cümle
eùrÀfdan Atina`ya tÀbi‘ olan cezíreler ve úal‘alar bu vaø‘ı istib‘Àd idüp muóibler i‘rÀø ve
tevÀbi‘-i i‘tirÀøıyla ‘adem-i inúıyÀda yüz gösterdiler. Ve berren ve baóren Atina ‘aôím
911
Durres
308
‘askerler tedÀrikinde olup ve i‘rÀø iden cezíreler ve sevÀóil-i úal‘elerinde olanlar êarb-ı dest
ile yine tÀbi‘ kalmak içün úalyon mÀnendi otuz kebír pÀrçeler donatup Aròas İstirÀyÿ nÀmında
bir serdÀr naãb-ı irsÀl eylediler. Ancak serdÀr-ı mezbÿr varup i‘rÀø iden úal‘alarda ‘aôím
metÀnet müşÀhede idüp ve ol miúdÀr tedÀrik ile mezbÿr úal‘aları yine Atina`ya inúıyÀd
mümkün olmadığından [155a] daòı sefíne ve ‘asker ùaleb eylediler. Ve Atina`dan mezbÿr
serdÀra imdÀd içün kırk úalyon-ÀsÀ pÀrce-yi kebír dolu ‘asker irsÀl eylediler ve varup rıfúla
yine i‘rÀø idenleri yine Atina`ya inúıyÀd itdürdiler ve bu aralıúda bi’l-cümle Mora ‘askeri
Atina üzerine iken yine muãÀlióÿn tavassuù idüp ve mezbÿr Dirac a‘şÀr ve rüsÿmÀtı yine
Gördes beyine virilmek üzere bi’l-cümle ke’l-evvel yine ‘aúd -i ãuló u ãilÀó olındı. Ve
Gördes derbendinde Gördes deñize nÀôır İbãÀtoz nÀmında bir iskele olup bir metín َúal‘ası
olup muúaddeman Atina`ya tÀbi‘ olup ve evvel daòı i‘rÀø idenler ile me‘an i‘rÀø eylemiş idi
ve lÀkin àÀyet metÀnetinden nÀşí inúıyÀd eylemedi ve bu ãulóa idòÀl olunmadı ve Atina
ùarafından sinín-i keåíre muóÀãara olındı.
Áòirü’l-emr bi’l-cümle Mora ahÀlísiniñ iúdÀmıyla yine Atina`ya teb‘iyyet itdirdiler.
Bi’l-cümle Mora ve Mora`nıñ eùrÀfıyla in‘ıúÀ-yı ãuló vÀúi‘ olup ber-zamÀn bilÀ-nizÀ‘ [155b]
zevú u sürÿr ile evúÀt-güzÀr oldılar. Ve ba‘dehÿ Mizistre ve bi’l-cümle Mora`nıñ Atina`ya
derÿnlarından muêmer olan kín ve ‘adÀvetlerini iôhÀr idüp ednÀ bahÀlar ile bi’l-cümle Mora
‘askeri cem‘ olup Atina üzerine sefer eylediler. Ve Atina`nıñ vÀlí-yi ‘atíúleri olan Periúli yine
vÀlí bulunub ve bi’l-cümle Atina úarÀlarında olan mevÀşí ve çobÀn ve iòtiyÀr ve ãıbyÀn ve
nisvÀn ùÀ’ifesini İstefe ve LovÀdiye semtlerine naúl eyledi. Ve yüz pÀre sefíneye on biñ
miúdÀr ‘asker vaø‘ idüp ve Atina`ya úaríb adaya mekå itdürdi; ve tenbíh eyledi ki: “Mora
‘askeri bizi muóÀãara eyledikde siz daòı lenger-i úal‘a idüp Mora sevÀóiliniñ taòríbine
gidesiz” deyu ekíd-i tenbíh eyledi. Ve bi’l-cümle úarada ve eùrÀfda óarb u êarba úÀdir olanları
úal‘aya aldı. Ve yüz biñden mütecÀviz ‘asker ile bi’l-cümle Mora ‘askeri ve Mora`ya tÀbi‘
olanlar cem‘ olup Atina üzerine yürüyüb hücÿm eylediler ve Atina ‘askeri bir miúdÀr muãÀfcengí eylediler. VelÀkin [156a] Mora ‘askeri keåír oldığından àalebe üzere oldılar ve Varis
úal‘asına ve İc úal‘aya maóãÿr oldılar. Ve bunlar maóãÿr oldığını gördükde, Atina sefíneleri
Mora sevÀóiline gidüp àÀret itmege başladılar ve sevÀóil sÀkinlerinden Mora ‘askerinden
Atina muóÀãarasına olanlardan diyÀrlarınıñ àÀretini òaber alınca durmayub taòlíã-i diyÀr içün
Mora`ya ‘avdet eylediler. Ve Mora ‘askerine bu taúríb ile muãÀlaóa olunup tekrÀr ‘aúd -i
ãuló-i ãaóíó eylediler.
Ve síne-ãÀf olup herkes diyÀrına ‘avdet eyledi ve beş sene mürÿrundan soñra yine
Mizistre ve Mora ahÀlísi tecdíd-i ‘adÀvet eylediler. Ve Mizistre vÀlísi ile Aròos míri ittifÀú
idüp Atina`ya sefer-i muóaúúaú eylediler. Ve Atina serdÀrlarından bundan aúdem õikri sibúat
309
eyledi ki; EflÀùÿn şeríklerinden ElcūyÀõí nÀm óakím ecdÀdı erbÀb-ı riyÀsetden olmaàın ol
daòı riyÀsete sülÿk idüp ‘asker üzerine ser-‘asker olurdı. Ve mezbÿr àÀyet mülÀhü’l- [156b]
vech ve leõíõü’l-kelÀm ve faãíóu’l-edÀ olup ve i‘tiúÀdında daòı tevóíd-i BÀrí`ye muúırr idi.
Atina óükemÀsınıñ sem‘ine Mizistre ve Aròos tedÀriki ilúÀ olındıkda, mezbÿr ElcūyÀõi, vÀfir
‘asker ile sefÀyine girüb Benefşe altına yanaşub ve Mizistre`ye varup Mizistre eúrÀmıyla
mükÀleme idüp ve cümlesini ilzÀm ve iskÀt idüp Atina seferinden ferÀàat itdürdi. Ve gelüp
Aròos ahÀlísi ile ‘aôím cengler idüp ve her muúÀbelede àÀlib olup Aròoslı yalñız Atina
‘askerine òaãm-ı úaviyy olmadığın müşÀhede eyleyüb bi’ø-øarÿre yine Mizistreli tavassuù
idüp barışdılar ve üçyüz miúdÀr Atina ‘askeri Aròoslıdan esír itmiş iken ÀzÀd eylediler.
Ve bu aralıúda yine İslambol semtine úaríb ba‘ø-ı diyÀrlar Atina`ya beher sene
viregeldikleri cÀizeyi virmediklerinden yine Atina`dan NícÀ nÀmında baóren bir úapudan naãb
olunup varup mezbÿr diyÀrlardan bi’t-tamÀm úalan rüsÿmÀtı taóãíl idüp ve yine tecdíd-i
mütÀba‘at itdirdi. Ve ‘avdetde dÀ’imÀ òoşnÿt ve ‘adem-i teb‘iyyet [157a] üzere olan
Değirmenlik912 nÀm adasını fetó idüp sÀlimen ve àÀnimen Atina`ya ‘avdet eylediler. Ve bir
müddet zevú ile evúÀt-güzÀr oldukdan soñra Misina adasınıñ fetói yine derÿnlarına ùulÿ‘ idüp
ve ‘aôím tedÀrikler görüb iki yüzelli pÀre sefíne ve úalyon óÀôır idüp altmış biñ miúdÀrı
úaraya çıkub kara cengini ider. ‘Asker mezbÿr sa‘yine taómíl idüp ve mezbÿr óakím ElcūyÀõi
ol ‘asker üzerine ser-‘asker naãb olunup óÀôır ve müóeyyÀ oldukdan soñra bu seferiñ
nuãretiyçün “Ma‘bÿdemizden niyÀz idelim” deyüp ve ma‘bÿd-ı kebír içinde altÿndan dökülüb
dizülen kız ãÿretinde olan pÿùu ma‘bÿd-ı kebírden iòrÀc idüp ve bir feøÀda àÀyet mürtefi‘ bir
kürsi üzerine durdurdılar. Ve Atina`nıñ ãaàír ü kebíri ve vaêí‘ u refí‘i ve nisvÀn u ãıbyÀnı ol
feøÀda cem‘ ve rÿy-ı ber-òÀk koyub ve nice taøarru‘ ve niyÀzlar ‘arø idüp bukÀlar ve nice
feryÀd u fiàÀnlar ‘arø idüp ol sefer içün ôafer ve nuãretler ùaleb eylediler.
Ve bunlar böyle rÿy-ı ibtióÀl ile niyÀzda iken, [157b] bir kac úuzàÿn gelüp ol pÿùuñ
başını minúarlarıyla urmaàa başladılar. Ve görenler bu àulÀmatı òayra yormayub şerdür,
didiler ve bu seferi terk murÀd eylediler. VelÀkin merúÿm ElcÿyÀõí rıøÀ virmeyüb “Elbette bu
úadar tedÀrik görülmüşiken bu seferiñ terki münÀsib değildür. Bir kac óayvÀn mürÿr iderken
bir mürtefi‘ yer bulup bÀ-òuãÿã zer-i zíver ile muóallÀ görüb ve raàbet idüp úondılar. Ol
murà-i bí-idrÀkleriñ úonduàu nuòs ve menòÿse óaml iylemek ãÀóib-i óikmet olan ‘uúelÀ
mesleği değildür” deyüp ve rıêÀ virmeyenleri iskÀt idüp ve ‘askeri sefÀyine taómíl idüp ve
kendü daòı girüb ve cümleye vedÀ‘ idüp ve bÀ-òuãÿã üstÀdı Soúraù`ıñ destini bÿs idüp ve
du‘Àsını istid‘À idüp ve yine Soúraù tavãiye eyledi ki “Sakınub ol yerler úıdeme õÀhib
912
Antimilos
310
óükemÀdan òÀlídür úıyÀãıyla iôhÀr-ı tevóíd eylemesin. ZírÀ ol iôhÀrıñ òayrı olmaz saña ve
bize êiyÀn u øarÀrı muúarrerdir” deyu ekíd-i tenbíhler eyledi. VelÀkin muúadder olan elbette
[158a] vücÿda gelur.
Ve merúÿm ElcÿyÀõí muvÀfıú havÀlar ile Misina adasına vuãÿl bulup ve göz
acırmayub fi’l-óÀl bir kac úal‘a fetó u tesòír eyledi. Ve mezbÿr úal‘a sükkÀnını àÀyet
òÀliyyetü’õ-ôihn oldığından mezbÿrlara tevóídi ‘arø idüp mezbÿrlar daòı aãlÀ mu‘Àraøa ve
muòÀlefet itmedi, tevóídi úabÿl eylediler. Ve ElcÿyÀõí`niñ òalúa tevóídi ta‘límini Atina`ya
taórír eylediler. Ve ol sÀ‘at ElcÿyÀõí`yi ser-‘askerlikden ‘azl idüp Atina`ya da‘vet eylediler.
Ve Misina ahÀlísi ElcÿyÀõí`niñ şedíd cenglerinden gözleri úorúub ve eùrÀf u eknÀfdan
istimdÀd eylediler; óattÀ yigirmi biñ cengÀver ‘asker ile Mizistre ser-‘askeri gelüp Misina`ya
vuãÿl bulmuş idi. Ve ElcÿyÀõí ‘azlini bilüb ve Atina`ya da‘vet olındığını fehm eyledi ki, Atina
ahÀlísi tevóídi iôhÀr eylediğinden aãlÀ emÀn virmeyub úatlitseler gerekdür. Bi’ø-øarÿre cÀn
’azíz [158b] oldığından Mizistre ser-‘askerine dÀòil düşüb oturdı ve Atina ‘askerinden
ElcÿyÀõí cıkdığından Atina ‘askerine bir òavf u òaşyet ùÀrí olup düşmÀn ile cenge iútidÀrları
kalmayub düşmÀn ile her muúÀbil oldukca münhezim oldılar. Ve Misina`ya imdÀda gelen
eùrÀf sefíneleri ve Mizistre sefíneleri ittifÀú idüp ve Atina sefÀyinini òÀlí ve àÀfil iken gelüp
üzerlerine ekåeri aàrÀú u óarú ve güc ile elli sefíneye bir miúdÀr ‘asker ile Atina`ya firÀr ile
‘avdet eylediler. Ve úarada úalanları ve ÀlÀtlarını düşmÀn esír ü aòõ idüp Atina daòı böyle
òasÀreti görmüş değil idi.
Ve bu òasÀreti mezbÿr ElcÿyÀõí`niñ tevóíd iôhÀrından bildiler. “Ve ElcÿyÀõí bu tevóíd
i‘tiúÀdını Soúraùdan ta‘lím eylemişdir. Gerci Soúraù cümleniñ üstÀdı ve bu diyÀrda ve bu
günde üstÀd-ı külldür; ancak cümle óükemÀ-yı úudemÀya muòÀlefet idüp i‘tiúÀd-ı Àòara õÀhib
olmuşdur. Soúraù bu i‘tiúÀdı bu diyÀrıñ
[159a] nÀ-puòte olan óikmet ùÀliblerimiziñ
sefínelerine ifşÀ ider ve ider ise ‘aôím fitne ve fesÀda bÀ‘iå ve bÀdí olması emr-i muúarrerdir.
SoúrÀù`a ya cünÿn yÀòÿd ‘ateh yÀòÿd sefeh ‘Àrıø olmuşdur ki ‘ukÿl-ı ‘aşere taãarrufuñ
i‘tiúÀdını münkir olup alÀ-vÀóid i‘tiúÀdına õÀhib olmuşdur. EvlÀsı oldur ki SoúrÀùıñ tedÀriki
görülüb bir gün evvel vücÿdı ref‘ ola. Yoòsa ol i‘tiúÀdı daòı iôhÀr ider ise diyÀrımızıñ
fesÀdına bÀ‘iå olur”, diyub ve SoúrÀù`ıñ úatliyçün dívÀn-òÀne-yi kebírleri olan nÀm dívÀnòÀneye cem‘ oldılar.
Ve óükemÀ-yı sufehÀnıñ re’y-i menóÿsları SoúrÀù`ıñ úatline õÀhib olup ve SoúrÀù`ıñ
úatliçün fermÀn taórír eylediler ve ne aãıl ölüm ile úatl idelim deyu taóayyürde kaldılar.
Müte‘Àrif olan ãalb ve úaù‘-ı re’s ve boğmak ve bunuñ haúúında lÀiú ve siyÀset-i zehr ile úatl
olunmuş daòı vÀúi‘ olmuş değildi. BilÀòare lÀ-‘ilÀc [159b] kalup re’y-i menóÿsları buña õÀhib
311
oldı ki, “SoúrÀù`ıñ kendüni muòtÀr idelim herúanúı ölümi iòtiyÀr ider ise anıñla fevt olsun”
diyub bu re’yi cümlesi müstaósen görüb öyle eylediler. Ve SoúrÀù úatliyçün olanı fermÀnı bir
miúdÀr zehr ile irsÀl eylediler ve ba‘d-ı vuãÿl-i fermÀn üc sÀ‘at te’òír-i vaãiyyet içün müsÀ‘ade
eylediler.
Ve ba‘d-ı vuãÿl-i fermÀn SoúrÀù EflÀùÿn`ı ùaleb eyledi. Ve EflÀùÿn`a vaãiyyet itmege
şurÿ‘ eyledikde, EflÀùÿn SoúrÀùıñ úatlini muóaúúaú bildikde ve “Ben bunı men‘ iderim”
ümídiyle dívÀn-òÀne-yi kebíre varup aúrabÀsından olan óükemÀya SoúrÀùıñ úatliniñ def‘içün
‘aôím niyÀzlar eylediler. Ancak muúayyed olmayup “Sen de bu òuãÿãda müõõehimsin” deyüp
kelimÀtına aãlÀ iltifÀt eylemediler ve taòvíf ile kacurdılar. Ol daòı lÀ-‘ilÀc kalup, kalkub
SoúrÀùıñ yanına gelüp ‘ilm-i óikmetde olan şübhelerini SoúrÀù`a ‘arø iderdi. Ve bir rivÀyetde
SoúrÀùıñ [160a] úatliyçün üç nev‘ zehirlü şerbet tertíb eylediler. Şerbetiñ bir nÿş olındıkdan
soñra üc günlük ãıóóat kalurdı. Ve ikinci şerbet nÿş olındıkda iki günlük ãıóóat kalurdı. Ve
ücünci şerbet nÿş olındıkda üc sÀ‘at ãıóóat yÀòÿd bir sÀ‘at ãıóóat kalurdı. Ve bu inşÀda
tercüme-’i fermÀnları úarín ve münÀsib olmaàın şikeste ve beste taórír olunmuşdur.
Kudve-i aãóÀb-ı úudemÀ-yi İşrÀúıyyÿn ve zübde-i erbÀb-ı ‘uôemÀ-yi MeşşÀiyyÿn olup
sen ki SoúrÀù óakímsun bu emr-i celíl lÀzımu’l-imtiåÀl ve fermÀn-ı úaêÀ vÀcibü’l-muùÀ‘À mÀãadaú olmak óasebiyle óaúúında taórír olunup saña irsÀl olunmuşdur ki, bundan aúdem
cenÀbıñız ‘ulÿm-ı uãÿl-i óikemiyyede üstÀd-ı küll olup ve istinbÀù u naúl eyledügün ‘uúÿl-i
‘aşere ve ‘aúl-ı fa‘al taãarrufÀtına ilÀve taàyír-i i‘tiúÀdıñ ‘ind-i cumhÿr-ı óükemÀ åÀbit ve
tebdíl ile òilÀfa ‘aùf-ı ‘itÀn ile ‘uúelÀ-yi ‘uôemÀya muòÀlefetin [160b] müteóaúúıú olup ve
ma‘lÿmdur ki seniñle bu bÀbda mübÀóaåe muúayyed olmayup zírÀ her cevÀbımıza muàÀlaùayi cÀmi‘ nice edille-yi nÀ-sezÀ ile redd-i cevÀb idüp úadímden ‘inde’l óükemÀ-yi rÀsiò ve
metín olan úıdem-i ‘Àlem i‘tiúÀdına nice òalel ve şübhe írÀåı mütteúín olmaàın ve nÀ-puòte
olan óükemÀ ve taãarruf-ı ‘aúla úÀdir olmayan ùalebe-yi büdelÀ mÀ-beynlerinde iòtilÀfÀt-ı
keåíreden nÀşí nice fitne ve fesÀd bÀ‘iå ve bÀdí olmaàın ve bu dÀ‘iye cenÀbıñıza úuvÀ-yı
òamse-yi bÀùınaya ùÀrí olan øa‘f u fuùÿrdan nÀşí óadd-i atehe vÀãıl oldıñız. Ve bu meslek-i
maraø-ı müzmine asÀ-mevti mÿriå oldığın ‘adem-i ta‘aúúuldan nÀşí mühlek olan baór-i
ta‘aúúule ùaldıñız. Ve úaêıyye-i müsellemedendür ki øarÀr-ı òÀã ve øarÀr-ı ‘Àmm üzerine
tercíó olunagelmişdür ve ref‘-i vücÿdıñız úaêıyye-i øarÿriyye oldığı bedíhídür. Ve bu i‘tiúÀd-ı
? cumhÿr-ı óükemÀ-yı felÀsifeniñ ‘indlerinde vaê‘-ı müstaósen görülmeyüb úatli mÿcib
olmaàla [161a] bu emír vÀcibü’l-imtiåÀl taórír ü irsÀl olunmışdur. Ancak cenÀbıñızıñ cezÀsı
sÀ’ir efrÀd-ı nÀssda icrÀ olunan ãÀlib u seyf ile münÀsib görülmeyub üc meşrebe zehirli
şerbetler ta‘ôímen tertíb olunup ve te’òíre müsÀ‘ade olunmuşdur. Çünki úıdem-i ‘Àleme
münkir oldıñız ve cemí‘-i ‘avÀlim óudÿåına õÀhib olup muãırr oldıñız. ÓÀdiå olan vücÿdıñızıñ
312
ifnÀsı bi’ø-øarÿre lÀzım olmaàın fermÀn-ı celíl lÀzımu’l-imtiåÀl vuãÿlünde ‘avú u te’òírden
müberrÀ maømÿn-ı münífi icrÀsında kemÀl-i diúúat ve ihtimÀm üzere olasız.
SoúrÀù óakím daòı úatli bir sÀ‘at süreñ meşrebe[y]i iòtiyÀr ve üc gün ãıóóat ile
tavãiyye-yi istid‘À idüp ve EflÀùÿn`ı meclisine maórem idüp tevóíde dÀ’ir ‘ulÿm-ı nÀfi’ayı ve
evãÀf-ı reddiyeyi üc gün EflÀùÿn`a tefhím-i müncí ile ta‘lím eyledi. Ve ücünci gün EflÀùÿn`a
nihÀyet vaãiyyeti benim fevtimden soñra bu diyÀra mekå itmeyüp kebír oàlumı alup [161b]
ve benden me’òaõiñ olan i‘tiúÀdı sen daòı aña ta‘lím ve tefhím idesiz. Ve oàlunı EflÀùÿn`a
teslím idüp ve EflÀùÿn`ı oàlu ile óücresinden ùaşra iòrÀc idüp ehli ile ãaàír evlÀdlarıñ yanına
cem‘ idüp ve anlarıñ óÀline lÀyıú olan ? idüp ve ba‘dehÿ bir sÀ‘atlik ãıóóati olan sím úatlı
meşrebesinden nÿş idüp ve yurğanı yüzüne gelüp tevóídi iôhÀr iderek bir sÀ‘at ve óarreke-i
ıøùırabında kendi óÀlinde meşàÿl olup ba‘dehÿ vücÿdı óareketden sÀkín oldıkda zevcesi yüzüñ
acdıkda teslím-i rÿó itmiş buldı.
Ve SoúrÀù`ıñ dört dersòÀnesinde olan yedişer biñ ùalebesi olup mecmÿ‘ı yigirmi sekiz
biñ ùÀlib fevti òaberini istimÀ‘ eylediklerinde bi’l-cümle cem‘ olup ve “üstÀdımızıñ sebeb-i
úatli ne olmuşdur?” deyu feryÀd-ı fiàÀn ile su’Àle başladılar ve bu bÀbda feylesÿf-ı óükemÀya
ùalebe-yi mezbÿre hevm-i hücÿm idüp ‘aôím taøyíú eylediler. Cem‘ olan [162a] ùalebeniñ
aúrabÀ ve eãdiúÀları cem‘ olup ve herkes SoúrÀùıñ fevtini birer gÿne ãadÀ ve iódÀåıyla
tekellüme başlayınca óükemÀnıñ cÀn başlarına sıcrayub dürÿà-ı bí-füruğ temhídden soñra
SoúrÀùıñ fevti içün nice óüzn ve elem-i Şamil buñlar iôhÀr eylediler. Ve böyle nefÀúÀte
kelÀmlar dizüb didiler ki: “Bu diyÀrımızıñ òaõíne-yi ‘ilm-i óikmeti idi ve cümlemizi yetím
bırağub gitmişdir. Ve fevtiniñ nÀrı, cümlemizin derÿn u cigerimizi iórÀú u kebÀb itmişdür.
Ancak ne diyelim her şeye cÀre olur ammÀ mevte cÀre olmaz. Ve fevti bu yüzden itmiş ve
fevt olan bir daòı durulmaz ancak ãıóóatiniñ úadri ‘indimizde ‘Àlí oldığı gibi keõÀlik
meyyitiniñ úadri daòı ‘Àlí olsun. Ve cevÀnib-i erba‘ası yüzer zirÀ‘ olan binÀ-yı meràÿbuñ
vasaùında defn idelim ki cemí‘-i ilÀhımız ortasında merúad ve türbesi vÀúi‘ olup ilÀhımıza her
gün ùapmaya gelen maòlÿú türbesin ziyÀret idüp kendüye du‘À [162b] iderler ve üc yüz altmış
altı teñgriniñ vasaùında meyyiti defn olunup ve üzerine türbe olunmuş ‘Àlemde kimesne
yokdur. Ve bu úadar teñgriniñ vasaùında defn olunan Àdemiñ cihÀn ùolusı cürm-i günÀhı olsa
bi’-cümle ‘afv u maàfiret olunur. Ve bu maúÿle efsÀneler ile SoúrÀùıñ şÀkirdleri cem‘iyyetini
iskÀt eylediler ve ol binÀnıñ orùÀsında SoúrÀù`ıñ meyyitini defn idüp üzerine türbe-yi
mu‘aôôama binÀ eylediler. Ve bi’l-cümle ãandÿúasıyla türbesini şöyle tezyín eylediler, ki ol
vaútde dek kimesneniñ ãandÿúa ve türbesine olmuş değil idi.
313
Ve SoúrÀù`ıñ sinni doksanı mütecÀviz olup ve ba‘ø-ı rivÀyetde sinn-i ùabi’í olan yüz
yigirmi seneye bÀlià olmuş ve bu taúríb ile ol kefere-yi ôaleme-i SoúrÀù gibi nÀdürü’l-vücÿdı
ifnÀ eylediler. Ve bundan aúdem Misina adasında vÀúi‘ muóÀrebede Atina ùarafından ser‘asker olan ElcÿyÀõí tevóíd iôhÀr eylediğinden [163a] ve fetó eyledigi úal‘alara daòı tevóídi
ta‘lím itmegin Atina óükemÀsı mezbÿr ElcÿyÀõíyi ‘azl idüp ve Atina`ya ma‘zÿlen da‘vet
eylediklerinden merúÿma òavf ùÀrí olup Mizistre şÀhına dÀòil düşdi ve şÀh-ı mezbÿr daòı
‘aôím ri‘Àyetler idüp Mizistre`de óaremeyn-i derÿnunda maòãÿã odalar döşeyüb ve nisvÀn u
ricÀlden òademe ve òÀdimler naãb eylediler ve òidmetine àÀyet maóbÿbe kızlar ta‘ôimen
ta‘yín eylediler.
Ve merúÿm ElcÿyÀõí óüsn ü leùÀfetde yektÀ ve nÀdürü’l-meåel olmaàın Mizistre`niñ
cemí‘i ‘uôemÀ-yı nisvÀn-ı mezbÿre mÀ’il olup cemí‘í kebíren ve ‘azmen kızları ve zevceleri
merúÿm-ı óaremlerine da‘vetler ve maòãÿã øiyÀfetler tenhÀ ãoóbetler ile mücÀma‘atlar vÀúi‘
olup merúÿmı da‘vet içün Mizistre nisvÀnı beyniñde kim evvel da‘vet itsun, deyu nizÀ‘lar
vÀúi‘ olup óattÀ Mizistre şÀhınıñ zevcesi daòı merúÿme àÀyet mÀ’il olup kendüyi temkín ile
ióbÀl vÀúí‘ [163b] oldı. Ve merúÿmuñ viãÀlinden maórÿme olan ba‘ø-ı rü’esÀ zevceleri keyd u
emkire sÀlike olup ve şÀhıñ zevcesi ElcÿyÀõí ile ‘iyş u ‘işreti ve ãoóbet ve cimÀ‘a ve mübÀlaàa
ile ülfete meşàÿl oldığından ve sÀ’ir ‘uôemÀ ve küberÀ kızları ve zevceleri maórÿmiyyet
óislerinden derÿnlarını nÀr-ı óased u óasret iórÀú eylediğinden mekr u ekyedi endíşe ve her
dÀm-ı óíle-yi píşe idüp ve ifk u buàø-ı iftirÀyı Şamiller nÀme ve ‘arø-ı óaller taórír idüp ta‘bíri merÀm eylediler ki:
“Ma‘lÿmumuzdur ki devletlu şÀhımızıñ evlÀdı olmayup diyÀrımızıñ úÀnÿn-ı
úadímiñdendür ki her bir cesÿr ve óürri ve óüsn ü leùÀfet ile meşhÿr olanlardan gebe olup ve
ol miåillÿ evlÀd óÀãıl olsun deyu ‘uôemÀ ve küberÀ kızlarına ve zevcelerine nefslerini temkíni
içün me’õÿnlar olup müsÀ‘ade-yi úadímedir. VelÀkin óÀlÀ devletlü efendimiziñ zevcesi olan
SulùÀn Óaøretleri Atinalı ElcÿyÀõí`den [164a] yalñız gebeliğe úÀni‘ olmayup merúÿm
ElcÿyÀõí`ye àÀyet mÀ’ile olup kemÀl-i vefret üzere meveddet ü muóabbetden nÀşí nÀn u
nemek ve muóabbet-gerí bi’l-külliye ferÀmÿş eyledi. Ve “Merúÿm ElcÿyÀõí`yi şÀh idüp ve
ãultÀnımı helÀk itmek tedÀrikinde oldı” deyu ‘arø-ı óÀllerinde òatm-i kelÀm eylediler.” Ve bu
söz şÀha àÀyet te’åír idüp ve zevcesine tertíb-i cezÀya ‘aôímet idüp ve óuøÿrına da‘vet idüp ve
ióbÀle ŞÀh ùarafından iõn oldığını inkÀr ve ‘adem-i müsÀ‘ade bahÀnesiyle zevcesi olan SulùÀna
cezÀ emr eyledikde, cümle ümerÀ ve vükelÀ ve zevceniñ aúrabÀsı cem‘ olup ŞÀha cevÀb
virdiler ki:
314
“Sen ElcÿyÀõí içün maòãÿã derÿn-ı óareminde oda döşeyüb ve iskÀn itdiàini iõni
müteêammın değil midür? Ve ol maúÿle cerí ve cesÿr ve bahÀdurlıàı ile ma‘rÿf adamlar ile bu
diyÀr nisvÀnı ülfet ve ãoóbetleri kÀnÿn-ı úadím olup [164b] kişi zevcesini ve kızını ve
cÀriyesini ve hemşíresini ve vÀlidesini ol maúÿle adamlar ile görüşüb ülfet ve ãoóbetlerini ve
cimÀ‘larını men‘e úÀdir olmadığını òÿb bilirsin ya bundan murÀdıñ hemÀn bu diyÀra yine bir
fitne-yi ‘aôím iódÀå itmek midür, murÀdıñ nedür ve òavfıñ nedendür? Bize söyle!” didiler.
ŞÀh daòı iôhÀr-ı mÀ-fí’ê-êamír idüp, murÀdım budur ki: “Mezbÿr Atinalı ElcÿyÀõí, bu diyÀrda
ba‘de’l-yevm durmamakdur” didikde anlar daòı rÀøı oldılar. VelÀkin ãaríóan kendi gelüp
istímÀn ile dÀòil dÿşini úabÿl itmeyüp ve ba‘de’l-úabÿl nefy ve ‘adem-i úabÿl-i müteêammın
kendüden bir fi‘l-i úabíó ãudÿr itmeyince anı nefy itmek lÀyıú değildür. Úaríben nefyi mÿcíb
kendüden bir fi‘l-i úabíó ãudÿr ider ise bi’ø-øarÿre ol zemÀn nefy ederiz, deyüp òatm-i kelÀm
eylediler.
LÀkin bu meclis kelimÀtlarıyla ElcÿyÀõí`niñ sem‘ine vÀãıl oldukda yeri pirelenüb ve
şÀhıñ mekrü keydinden emín olmayup ve bilÀòare fırãat [165a] bulup úarÀr-ı firÀra tebdíl idüp
ve Mizistre İskelesi olan aluzdan sefíne peydÀ olup ve òavfından Atina`ya daòı uğramayub
Anaùolı yakasına cıkub ve ‘Acem şÀhınıñ vüzerÀsından birine ilticÀ idüp dÀòil düşdi. Ve
merúÿm ElcÿyÀõí óüsn-i leùÀfetde bí-naôír ve kemÀl-i ma‘rifet-i ‘ilm-i óikmetde bí-miål olup
ve cesÀret ü óayratda mÀnend-i şír olup ve àÀyet faãíóü’l-kelÀm ve .. edÀ ile meclis-arÀ
olmaàın ‘Acem şÀhı vezír-i merúÿma ‘aôím iltifÀt eylediğinden meclisine maórem eyleyüb
bir an ãoóbetinden münfekk olmazdı. Ve mu‘ayyen serÀylar ta‘yín idüp ve ta‘yín-i ta‘yínÀt u
òavÀããlar ve arpÀlıúlar ile iànÀ eyledi. Ve müte‘ayyin olan eyyÀm-ı ta‘ùíl binişlerinde me‘an
istiãóÀb idüp merúÿm ElcÿyÀõí daòı celÀlet ve cesÀret meydÀnlarında her gün nice óarb u
ãarba iútiøÀ ider mahÀret ve celÀletler iôhÀr iderdi.
Ve bu ùarafdan Atina ahÀlísi ve Mizistre ahÀlísiniñ [165b] nisvÀn u ricÀl merúÿm
ElcÿyÀõí ‘Acem şÀhı vezírine ilticÀ ile dÀòil olup ve àÀyet maúbÿl ve meràÿbi oldığun òaber
aldılar. Ve Mizistre nisvÀnı aôím ye’s u mÀtemler eylediler. Ve Mizistre`ye ‘avdet içün
aàniyÀ-yı nisvÀnı tuóef-i behiyye ile da‘vet mektÿbları irsÀl iderlerdi. Ve Mizistre şÀhı ve
erkÀn u devleti ElcÿyÀõí`ye mektÿblarında elbette ‘Acem şÀhı vezírini Atina seferine teràíb
eyle deyu ‘aôím tavãiyeler olunup ve vezír-i mezbÿre lÀyıú hedÀyÀlar ve Atina seferine
taóríãler idüp ve bundan aúdem Atina ahÀlísiniñ ‘Acem şÀhı ‘askerine ve şÀh behna itdikleri
mekr u keyd ve óíleleri taórírden aãlÀ òÀlí olmazlardı. Ve vezír-i mezbÿr daòı ElcÿyÀõí ile
müşÀvere itdikce Atina seferine cevÀz göstermezdi. AhÀlísi ve ‘askerisi hüd‘À-yı êarbı òÿb
bilürler anlar ile şÀh-ı behmene berren ve baóren on iki kerre yüz biñ ‘asker ile gelüp Atina`ya
ôafer bunca ne zaómetler cekdi. [166a] Ve anlara olan seferiñ aãlÀ fÀ’idesi olmaz; zírÀ anlar
315
òavf itdiài düşmÀnden cemí‘-i nefs-i mÀllarını ve eşyÀlarını ve ãıbyÀn u nisvÀnı àÀreti óÀøıra
gelmeyub ve yaàma olunmayacak yerlere iòtifÀ iderler ve diyÀrlarını taòliye iderler ki düşmÀn
diyÀrlarına ôafer bulsa bir úuru óaãır daòı almağa bulmaz. Ve óílekÀr ve ehli hüd‘Àsı
düşmÀnlarınıñ eùrÀfından münfekk olmaz ve ôafer buldukca raóata ve øarÀr ve ziÀndan òÀlí
olmaz ve düşmÀn diyÀrlarına kalmak murÀd eylese aãlÀ raóat virmezler. Ve düşmÀnıñ gelen
õaòíresini her dem àarÀt üzere olup õaòíre òuãÿãunda düşmÀnı taøyíú üzere olurlar. Ve lÀ-‘ilÀc
kalup bi’ø-øarÿre düşmÀnlarını diyÀrlarını úorkidir bir maãraf zÀiddür ol diyÀra sefer zírÀ
düşmÀn ôafer bulsa cizye úabÿl eylemez. Ve üzerlerine øÀbiù ve óÀkim naãb olunsa ve
muóÀfaôa içün ‘asker ta‘yín olunsa bir sene olmadan cümlesini óíle ile helÀk idüp müstaúill
olmak üzerine kendüleri [166b] øabù iderler.
Netíce-i kelÀm anlara sefer beyhÿde maãrafdur deyüp bu maúÿle tevcíhler ile vezíri
Atina üzerinden seferden men‘ ve def‘ iderdi. Ve bu meclisler Atina ahÀlísine ‘aks olup
Mizistre ahÀlísi Atina üzerine sefer itmek içün vezíre eyledikleri teràíbleri ElcÿyÀõí dÀ’imÀ
Atina seferinden vezíri men‘ u def‘ itdigin òaber aldıkca, ElcÿyÀõí`ye tecdíd-i muóabbet
iderlerdi. Vaùan muóabbeti kendüde rÀsiò ve metín olduğuna fehm ü intiúÀl iderlerdi. Ve yine
donanmalarına ser-‘asker ve úapÿdÀn naãb itmek arzÿ iderlerdi. Ve Atina devleti Misina
saúarí-i reònesinden ‘aôím mutaêarrır olup kendülere donanma òuãÿãunda øa‘f-i ‘aôím ile
nÀmeler irsÀl idüp ElcÿyÀõí`yi donanmalarına úapÀdÀn-ı ser-‘asker itmek içün ricÀ ve niyÀzlar
[167a] eylediler. Ve vezír daòı ElcÿyÀõí`ye tekeffül idüp yine Atina donanması üzerine
úapÿdÀn olmak içün bir kac sefíne gelüp ElcÿyÀõíyi Atina donanmasına ilóÀú eylediler ve
Atina ùarafından úabÿdÀna tenbíh ve te’kíd ve iltimÀs ve ricÀ ãÿretleriyle elbette ve elbette
Mizistre donanması her nerede ise arayub ve bulup ve muúÀbil olup ceng idesin ve .. semtine
taóarrí üzere olup .. intiúÀm alaydıñ deyu úapdÀn-ı merúÿma tavãiye ve niyÀz eylediler. Ol
daòı òaber aldı ki Mizistre donanması Karadeñiz`e cıkub gitmiş úapdÀn-ı mezbÿr daòı ta‘úíb
idüp ve Karadeñiz`e varup ve Mizistre donanmasına muúÀbil olup bir kac def‘a ceng-i ‘aôím
eylediler ve bilÀòare àÀlib olup Mizistre donanmasını bozdılar ve ‘aôím raòne virup bir kac
sefínesin iàrÀú ve bir kacın esír idüp ve nıãf-i miúdÀrı güc ile òalÀã oldı. Ve Karadeñiz`de
Mizistre`ye [167b] tÀbi‘ olan úaãabÀt u úal‘aları bi’l-cümle yine Atina`ya teb‘iyyet itdirdiler.
Ve ba‘dehÿ İslambol olan maóallde bir óuãn-i ãaàír olup ve boğaz agzında olmaàla
anıñ daòı fetóini murÀd idüp ve muóÀãara eylediklerinde ‘Acem vezíri ùarafından ol maóalle
úaríb cÀyırlar olup ve pek eyü ıãlÀó atlar olup, ol cÀyırda olmaàla Atina ‘askeri ol atları daòı
esír aldılar ve óaêê-i ãaàíri daòı fetó idüp aôím àanímet ile Atina`ya ‘avdet eylediler. Ve
‘Acem şÀhı vezíri cÀyırından aldıkları atlar àÀyet ıãlÀó olup küheylÀn ve cins atlar olduğından
mezbÿr atları sefÀyine taómíl idüp Atina`ya me‘an getürdi. Ve üstÀdı SoúrÀù`ıñ maôlÿmen ve
316
mesmÿmen maútÿl olduğını Atina óükemÀsına àÀyet kín ve elem ve ıøùırÀbı var idi; lÀkin
óasret ü iftirÀú-ı ehl ü ‘iyÀl u aúrabÀ ve muóabbeti bi’ø-øarÿre Atina`ya yine ‘avdeti müeddí
oldı. Ve elli sefíne aktarma ve bu úadar àanÀyim-i keåíre ve userÀ-yı bí-nióÀye [168a]
Atina`ya úaríb vardıkda müjde içün bir sefíne irsÀl idüp ve óükemÀdan àayrı bi’l-cümle
Atina`nıñ ãaàír ü kebíriniñ ElcÿyÀõí`ye olan muóabbet ve meveddetleri bÀ-òuãÿã nisvÀn
ùÀ’ifesiniñ muóabbet ve meveddetleriniñ ve fert ü keåretiniñ óadd ü beyÀnı óadd-i imkÀnda
değil idi. Ve Atina`dan donanma göründükde nisvÀn ü ricÀl ü ãıbyÀn ü àılmÀn bi’l-cümle
liman ùaríúi cÀnibiniñde ãÀf baàlayub durdılar. Ve erkÀn-ı devletleri ve ‘uôemÀ-yı óükemÀ
vÀlíden àayrı bi’-cümle limana gelüp úapdÀnı istiúbÀl eylediler. Ve úapudÀn daòı kendi ve
‘askeri daòı donanub ve mükellef ve müzeyyen alaylar kurup ve userÀsın dizüb ve mezbÿr elli
atları daòı serÀser cuvallar ile örtüb ve böyle atlar Atina`ya bir tÀríòde gelmediàinden àÀyet
zínet ile ve mükellef ile alay ile Atina limanına ‘aôím şenlikler ile ve şehrine me’lÿf oldukları
çalàılar ile ve lu‘b-ı levendÀnlar iôhÀr iderek ve Atina bÀzirgÀn ve ehli beledí [168b] envÀ‘-yı
aúmişe úapdÀn ElcÿyÀõí`niñ atı ayakları altına döşediler bÀ-òuãÿã ‘uôemÀ-yı nisvÀnı ve
óükemÀ-yı òavÀtibini bi’l-cümle merúÿm ElcÿyÀõí úapdÀnıñ atı ayağı altına envÀ‘-yı şeyler ve
díbÀlar döşediler ve böyle bir ta‘ôím ile ElcÿyÀõí úapdÀn paşÀların ve ser-‘askerlik menãÿbu
daòı üzerine alup ve muóabbetleri vefret üzere olduğından ve alay ile Atina ahÀlísi istiúbÀl
eylediler ki bundan aúdem bir ser‘asker ve úapudÀna olmuş değil idi.
Ve mu‘aôôam sarÀylar döşeyüb bi’l-cümle maãraflarını mírlerinden ãarf üzere oldılar.
Ve Atina şehriniñ derÿnında ve ùaşra olan úaãabÀ ve úarÀlarında on gün on gece donanmalar
ve şenlikler olındı. Ve gÿyÀ ElcÿyÀõí`niñ úudÿmi Atina ahÀlísine tÀze cÀn baàışladı. Ve ol kış
òavÀããıñ ricÀli ve nisvÀnı merúÿm úapudÀna maòãÿã øiyÀfetler ve ãoóbetler idüp zevú u sürÿr
u óubÿr ile evúÀt-güzÀr oldılar. Ve bunlarıñ ElcÿyÀõí ile olan zevúlerini Mizistre`niñ ricÀli
[169a] ve nisvÀnı taóammül idemeyüb nÀr-ı óased cigerleriñ kebÀb eyledi. Ve ol vaúitlerde
ricÀl ü nisvÀn cemí‘-i umÿrda müşterekler idi. Zevci ve ricÀl istiúlÀl üzere bir emre taãaddi
idemezdi ve nisvÀn içün setr ü perde olmayup, ecÀnib ile iòtilÀù u ãoóbet nisvÀn ùÀ’ifesi iderdi.
Ve zevci ve aúrabÀsı men‘e úÀdir olmazlardı.
Ve bu taúríb ile Atina nisvÀnınıñ ElcÿyÀõí ile olan zevúini Mizistre nisvÀnı
óasedlerinden óazm idemeyub ve Atina üzerine sefer içün zevclerine teràíb ve taóríãleri
bilÀòare zevclerine àayret ve ‘aôímeye mü’eddí olup ve ‘asker ve donanma-yi ‘aôíme
tedÀrikine iúdÀm eylediler ve bi’l-cümle Mora`dan ‘asker ve sefÀyin ve Girít adasından ve
Misina adasından istimdÀd ile ‘asker-i vÀfire ve donanma-yı mütekÀåire óÀôır ve müretteb
eylediler. Ve üc yüz pÀre mükemmel ve müretteb ‘asker ile dolu sefÀyin Atina
donanmasından muúaddem Akdeñiz`e cıkub ve Atina`ya [169b] tÀbi‘ olan cezíreleri bi’l317
cümle êarb-ı dest ile Mizistre`ye tÀbi‘ eylediler ve bi’ø-øarÿre Atina óükemÀsı daòı iki yüz
pÀre úalyon ceng sefíneleri peydÀ idüp ve otuz biñ miúdÀrı ‘asker eùrÀfda daòı cem‘ idüp bi’lcümle levÀzımÀtlarıñ görüb ve ElcÿyÀõí yine serdÀr u ser-‘asker olmak üzere ta‘yín olındıkda
íbÀ idüp zírÀ merúÿm ‘ilm-i nücÿmda mahÀreti olmaàın bu sene Atina donanması Mizistre
donanmasıyla muúÀbil olup ceng ider ise naòs-ı ekber istiòrÀc eylediğinden íbÀ iderdi. Ve
Atina óükemÀsına “Elbette bu sene bizim donanmamıza inhizÀm muúarrerdir” derdi.
Ve lÀkin olacak olur çÀr-nÀ-cÀr óükemÀ mütenebbih olmayup donanma iòrÀcına ıãrÀr
iderlerdi. Ve merúÿm ElcÿyÀõíniñ óazer u imtinÀ‘ı mütezÀyid oldukca Atina óükemÀsınıñ
óırãı mütezÀyid olurdı. Ve donanma ahÀlísiniñ ittifÀúı bunuñ üzerine ‘aúd olunmuş idi ki;
“Eger ElcÿyÀõí úapÿdÀn ve serdÀr u ser-‘asker olur ise bu sene cümlemiz bu sefere gideriz.
Ve eger [170a] ser-‘asker olmaz ise cümlemiz bu sefere gitmeyüz” deyu cevÀb virirlerdi.
Merúÿm ElcÿyÀõí bunları men‘ u def‘ itdikce “el-Mer’u óaríãun limÀ men‘u” fehvÀsınca
bunlarıñ óırãı àÀlib olup ve merúÿm üzerine cümlesi hücÿm idüp gördü ki taúdír ile ceng ü
cidÀl olmaz; ve úaêÀ-yı mübrem ve cehle def‘ olmaz. Ve bu sene Atina nisvÀnıyla bütün kış
sürdiği zevú u sürÿruñ redífi olan óüzn u hümÿm istílÀsı emr-i muúarrerdir” deyüp bi’ø-øarÿre
serdÀr u ser-‘askerliài úabÿl idüp ve ba‘dehÿ vaãiyyetnÀmeler ehl ü ‘iyÀliyçün taórír idüp ve
cümle ile óelÀlleşub ve bí-úıyÀã-ı óüzn ü elem ve ıøùırÀb ile gÿyÀ úabre veyÀòÿd úatl u
siyÀsete gider gibi donanmayı kaldurıb Akdeñiz`e cıkdı.
Ve yine yedinde noúùa úalemi ve öñünde taóta-’i reml ayrılmayub noúùa döküb ve
remli istiòrÀc itdikce nuòs-ı ekber Atina donanması üzerinden [170b] aãlÀ münfekk olmazdı.
Ve bilÀòare yine tedbíre sÀlik olup ve on yürük sefíne intiòÀb idüp ve kendü ve mezbÿr on
sefíne[y]i istiãóÀb idüp ve sÀ’ir yüz doksan sefíne ve úalyon üzerine AårÀåílÿ nÀmında bir
úapÿdÀnı cümle üzerine serdÀr naãb idüp ve şöyle tenbíh ve ekíd eyledikde; her ne mekÀndaki
Mizistre donanması sizlere muãÀrıf olup ve muúÀbil olup ceng murÀd ider ise, siz ceng
itmeyüp dÀ’imÀ firÀr ile muúayyed olasız deyu tavãiye mü’ekked eyledi. Ve kendü daòı on
pÀre sefíne ile donanma eùrÀfından aãlÀ münfekk olmazdı. Ve kac kerre Mizistre donanmasına
müãÀdif ceng murÀd itdikce Atina donanması dÀ’im firÀr ider idi. Ancak úaêÀ-yı mübrem firÀr
ile def‘ olmadığı emri bedíhí oldığından bir gün Sakız açığında Atina donanması àÀfil
yaturken Mizistre donanması .. esÀhir [171a] bir Atina donanması üzerine ücer dörder
döşenub yüz on pÀre Atina sefínesini on vÀóide iàrÀú u àarú idüp ve seksen pÀre sefíne
gördiler ki maàlÿblara yardım u nuãret muúayyed olmaz “el-firÀru fe-mÀ lÀ-yuùÀú” deyüp
Atina semtinde úarÀrı firÀra tebdíl eylediler.
318
Ve Mizistre donanması orùalıàı boş ve óÀlí bulduğından yüz on pÀre sefíneniñ altmışı
esír ve ellisi iórÀú u àarú eylediler. Ve icinde olan ‘askeriniñ bir miúdÀrını esír-bend-i zincír
ve ekåerini tu‘me-’i şimşír eylediler. Ve yüz on pÀre sefíneniñ ricÀlinden bir Àdem úatl u
esírlikden òalÀã olmadı. Ve ElcÿyÀõí on pÀre sefíne ile cezíreler arasında muòtefí olup durdı
deyu vÀúi‘ olan inhizÀm aóvÀliyçün ElcÿyÀõí óaúúında óaúimÀne tedbír ider deyu sırran
istifsÀr içün birkac Àdem Atina`ya irsÀl eyledi. Ve Atina`ya cenginden firÀr idüp ‘avdet iden
sefíneler vuãÿl bulup bu inhizÀm-ı keåíri Atina óükemÀsına [171b] teblíà eylediklerinde óüzni ‘aôím mÿriå olup ve ElcÿyÀõíden suÀl eylediklerinde, cevÀb virdiler ki: “Merúÿm on pÀre
sefíne ile ayrılub ve AårÀåílÿyı yüz doksan sefíne üzerine serdÀr naãb eyledi. Ve her dÀ’im
Mizistre donanmasına müãÀdif oldukca sakınub ceng itmeyesiz ve dÀ’imÀ firÀr üzere olasız!”
deyu tenbíh-i ekíd idüp yÀn cizdi deyu cesÀret-i ‘aôíme belki ol donanmada olaydı, olmazdı
deyu bi’l-cümle inhizÀm vuúÿ‘ınıñ sebebini ElcÿyÀõí üzerine ‘aùf eylediler. Ve óükemÀdan
ElcÿyÀõíyi sevmiyenler ve maútÿl ve esír olanlarıñ evlÀd u ‘ıyÀl ve aúrabÀ ve eãdiúÀlarınıñ
ElcÿyÀõí óaúúında olan muóabbet ve meveddetleri ‘adÀvete mübtedil olup ve muóabbetleri
rÀsiò ve metín olan aúrabÀ ve eãdiúÀ daòı òavf u şerrlerinden tekellüme úÀdur olamayub bi’lcümle ElcÿyÀõí óaúúında su-i úaãd ile murÀdın úatlin eylediler.
ElcÿyÀõí ùarafından olan mütecessisler òaber alup su-i [172a] úaãdı ElcÿyÀõíye teblíà
eylediler. Ve ol daòı ictinÀb üzere oldığı muúteøÀ-yı nücÿm ve reml oldığını írÀd eylemedi.
ZírÀ Atina óükemÀsı ‘ilm-i nücÿm u remli münkirler olup ve aãlÀ istiòrÀcÀtı nücÿm u remle
i‘tiúÀdları olmayup ve ta‘allüm idenlere ‘aôím buàø ve ‘adÀvetleri olduğun ElcÿyÀõí, “Òavf u
óazerim muúteøÀ-yı ‘ilm-i nücÿm u remldir” deyu i‘tiõÀr idemedi. Ve bi’ø-øarÿre Anaùolı
semtine varup ‘Acem serdÀrı olan vezíre emÀn ile ilticÀ eyledi. Ve yine ke’l-evvel vezír
‘indinde maúbÿl ve meràÿb oldı.
Ve Mizistre erkÀnı ElcÿyÀõíniñ ‘Acem şÀhı vezíriyle àÀyet òoş-óÀl üzere oldığı òaber
aldıklarında iótimÀldir, vezírden istimdÀd ile ‘asker alup ve Atinalıya nuãret ile üzerimize
sefer ider òavfından óíle bÀbına şürÿ‘ idüp ve iclerinden àÀyet tekellüm ve feãÀóat ve belÀàat
ve edüpÀne edÀlar ile ta‘bír-i merÀma úÀdir olanlardan beş on Àdem intiòÀb [172b] idüp ve
‘aôím hediyye-i behiyye ile ‘Acem şÀhı vezírine irsÀl eylediler. Ve merÀm-ı maúãadlarınıñ
òulÀãası ElcÿyÀõí dÀ’imÀ mekr u óíleyi píşe ve keyd u òıyÀneti endíşe etmiş bir Àdemdir ve
nÀn u nemek óaúúına ri‘Àyet olmaz òabíåü’ù-ùab‘ nÀdÀndur. ZírÀ merúÿm Atina ùarafından
Misina seferine serdÀr u ser-‘asker naãb olunup Misinaya vuãÿl ve ba‘ø-ı úılÀ‘anıñ fetói
müyesser oldukda àÀyet òodbínliginden dín ü i‘tiúÀdında bile meslek-i Àòara sülÿk ve kendü
iòtirÀ‘ıyla dín-i Àòar ícÀd idüp istímÀn ùaleb idenlere cizye ve rüsÿm vaø‘ itmeyüp, ol dín
üzere istidÀmeleriñ ùaleb iderdi.
319
Ve bu aóvÀli Atina ahÀlísi mesmÿ‘lar olup ve ser-‘askerlikden ‘azl idüp ve úatl murÀd
eylediler. Ve firÀr idüp ve gelüp bizim şÀha dÀòil düşdi ve bizim şÀh ‘aôím ikrÀm idüp; óattÀ
óarem-i òÀããında maòãÿã odalar döşeyub ve bu úadar civÀrı òiõmetine ta‘yín eyledi [173a] ve
òavÀãã meclisinde devr eyledi ve buña bu úadar civÀrı ve kızlar cimÀ‘ içün mübÀó itdikden
soñra úanÀ‘at itmeyüp şÀhıñ zevcesi sulùÀn ile daòı cimÀ‘ idüp ve nÀn u nemek ve bu úadar
izzet ü ikrÀmı bi’l-cümle ferÀmÿş idüp ve sulùÀnı gebe eyledi. Ve ba‘dehÿ duyuldukda şÀh
yine úatl itmege kıymayub eròÀn-ı ‘itÀn ile firÀr idüp devletlu sulùÀna ilticÀ eyledi ve sÀye-i
saÀdetiñizde óaddünden ziyÀde mükerrem olup himmetiñiz ve naôar-ı ‘inÀyetiñiz berekÀtıyla
yine Atina donanması üzerine serdÀr u ser-‘asker olup ve gelüp bizi Karadeñiz`e bulup ve
bize biñ dürlü óíle ve òud‘a ile àÀlib olup ve bu úadar diyÀrımızda bir sene miúdÀrı olan
ikrÀm-ı nÀn-ı nemeki ferÀmÿş idüp ve elli sefínemizi alup ve icinde olan ‘askerimizi ekåeriñ
meróamet itmeyüp úatl eyledi. Ve úuãÿruñ esír-bend ü zincír eyledi. Ve bundan mÀ‘adÀ
devletlu SulùÀnımıñ daòı bu úadar lüùf u iósÀnınıñ gördükden [173b] soñra küfrÀn-ı ni‘met
olup cerÀà itdiàiñiz sene İstanbul yerinde olan VizdÀndiyÿ úal‘asını muóÀãara idüp ve úal‘a-yı
mezbÿre yeñi cerÀàıñızdur deyu sulùÀnımdan istimdÀd idüp ve imdÀdıñızı óaùırıñız içün
ri‘Àyet itmeyüp bi’l-cümle úatl eyledi. Ve cÀyirde olan küóelÀn yüz elliñizi esír idüp ve alup
Atina`ya getürüp kendü ùavlasına bağlamışdur didikleri i‘timÀd gelmeyub atları bir kac seneyi díge şÀh içün beslerdi. Ve erkÀn-ı òademesine atları suÀl eyledi, cevÀb virdiler ki; “Atları
bir senedir ElcÿyÀõí cÀyırdan almışdur ve atlar óÀlÀ ùavlasında Atina`dadur” didiklerine yine
i‘timÀd gelmeyub ve müstaúill Àdemler irsÀl idüp Atina`da ElcÿyÀõí sarÀyında bi’l-cümle
atları buldılar. Ve alup Rÿmili cÀnibinden karadan atları yine yerine getürdiklerinde bi’øøarÿre ElcÿyÀõí`de olan muóabbetleri ‘adÀvete mübtedil olup ve úatl olunsun deyu fermÀn
eyledi.
Ve firÀr ile bir sığınacak yer kalmadığı ecilden ve ceng daòı muúayyed [174a]
olmadığın ‘aúlı cezm eyledi bi’ø-øarÿre úÿlle resminde bir menzile girüb teóaããun eyledi Ve
úatl içün üzerine gelenler dört beş biñ Àdem cem‘ oldılar velÀkin biri daòı úÿlle úuyÿsundan
iceru girmege cesÀret idemeyub lÀ-‘ilÀc oldılar ve vezír ùarafından úatl içün fermÀnlar te‘Àküb
eylediğinden ceng eyleseler bir kac yüz Àdem úatl ideceàini cezm eylediler. Bi’ø-øarÿre
mezbÿr úÿllayı ateşe virup ve eùrÀfını bi’l-cümle evvel ateşler yakub merúÿm ElcÿyÀõí gördi
ki cevÀnib-i erba‘ası ãÀfí ateş olup òalÀãã mümkün olmaduğından tevóídi i‘lÀn idüp bi’l-cümle
úatline óÀôır olan ‘asker tevóídi işidüp tevóíd iderek yanub kül oldı. Ve cesedinden kemik ve
kül daòı teşòíã idemediklerinden bütün Úullayı itbÀ‘ı iştirÀ idüp türbe eylediler. ElcÿyÀõí`niñ
fevti òaberi Atina`ya ‘aôím yÀs ve mÀteme mü’eddí olup ve Mizistre ahÀlísi ‘ıyd-i ekber
eylediler. Ve tez elden [174b] yÀb olup üc yüz pÀre sefíneleri hÀôır bulunub ve úaradan daòı
320
‘asker tedÀrik idüp ‘ale’l-àafle Atina üzerine geldiler. Ve Ejder limanına óÀôır buldıkları
sefÀyini bi’l-cümle øabt eylediler. Ve liman úal‘ası olan BiryÀ nÀm úal‘a[y]i fetó eylediler.
Ve Atina`da re’ísü’r-rü’esÀ olan Períúlí fevt olmuş idi. Ve SoúrÀù óakímiñ cezÀsı ve
ElcÿyÀõí`niñ ceôÀsı anlara irişub bir tedbíre ve bir müdebbire muvaffaú olamadılar. Ve
muúÀbil oldukca maàlÿb oldılar ve bilÀòare maóãÿr oldılar. Ve õaòíre tedÀrikleri
olmadığından bilÀòare Mizistre`ye tÀbi‘ olup ‘öşr ve teklíf virecek oldılar. Ve Mizistre
ùarafından aókÀm icrÀsiycün ve tekÀlíf ve rüsÿmÀtı cem‘ içün otuz ôÀlim ve cebbÀr Àdem vaø‘
eylediler. Ve meõkÿr óÀkimleriñ ôulmüne Atinalıdan nice Àdemler ùÀúat geturmeyub eùrÀfa
firÀr eylediler. Ve Eàriboz ve Livadiye ve Yeñişehir`e varınca Atinalıyı kimesne úabÿl
itmeyüp ancak İstefeliler [175a] úabÿl eylediler. Ve Atinalınıñ ekåeri kacub Atina`da İstefe`ye
cem‘ oldılar ve Mizistre ùarafından Atina`ya naãb olunan otuz cebbÀrıñ ôulmü ‘Àleme
münteşír olup ve İstefe bahÀdurlarına bir àayret ve meróamet ùÀrí olup ve Atinalılar ile yek dil
ve yek-cihet olup ve ‘ale’l-àafle varup ol otuz cebbÀrı Atina`da bi’l-cümle úatl eylediler. Ve
Mizistre ùarafından Atina üzerine gelüp velÀkin İstefeli Ànda óÀôır olmaàla dÀ’imÀ Mizistreli
maàlÿb oldılar. Ve bir kac def‘a Atina üzerine ol sene Mizistre`den ceng içün ‘asker gelüp
velÀkin her geldikce münhezim oldılar. Ve Mizistreli gördi olmaz ferÀàat eyledi.
Ve Atina ahÀlísi yine eùrÀfdan bi’l-cümle cem‘ olup yine müstaúill oldılar ve
mektebleri ve medreseleri küşÀde olup medreselerine yine ders ve tedríse başladılar. Bir sene
miúdÀrı Atina ma‘mÿriyyete yüz ùutdıàını [175b] Mizistreli işidüp ve yine nÀr-ı óased ve
cigerlerüñ òÿn idüp ve óazm idemeyub yine Mora`dan ve eùrÀfdan ‘aôím ‘asker cem‘ idüp
‘ale’l-àafle gelüp Atina`yı yine muóÀãara eylediler. Ve Atinalı İstefeliniñ àÀyet maócÿbları
oldıklarından istimdÀd idemediler ve bi’ø-øarÿre lÀ-‘ilÀc kalup yine Mizistre şÀhına teb‘iyyet
eylediler. Ve Atina`yı “Seneví şu úadar biñ altÿn Mizistre ŞÀhına teslím eylesünler” deyu
maúùÿ‘ eylediler. Ve Atina derÿnuna óükÿmet içün vÀlí ve óÀkim naãb eylediler velÀkin
Atina`nıñ ba‘ø-ı ‘aôímetlerine müş‘ir olan vaãıflarını ve úÀnunlarını ve ba‘ø-ı ‘aút-ı írÀå ider
‘alÀmetlerini ref‘ eylediler. Ve iótimÀldur İstefeli yine Atina imdÀdına gelur deyu bırağub
Atina`yı Mizistre`ye tezce ‘avdet eylediler. Ve bu vaê‘dan Atinalı cokluk müteêarrır
olmadılar; ve tezce yine diyÀrlarına niôÀm virup [176a] ma‘mÿr olmaàla başladılar ve beş altı
ay mürÿrundan soñra Atina`nıñ limanı ùaríúiniñ iki cÀnibi ùarafında vÀúi‘ olan bÀà bÀàcelerini
donanma ‘askerinden muóÀfaôa içün ùaríúiñ iki cÀnibinden limandan Atina`ya varınca iki
ùÿlÀní divÀr binÀ olunmuş idi. Mizistreli istílÀsından mezbÿr divÀrlar hedm olunmuş idi; ve
“Min-ba‘d evvel divÀrlar binÀ olunmasun” deyu Mizistreli şurÿùında idòÀl olunmuş idi.
VelÀkin mezbÿr divÀrlar Atina ahÀlísine àÀyet lüzÿmı olmaàın bi’ø-øarÿre binÀya şürÿ‘
eylediler. Ve eger mírli ùarafından binÀ olunır ise àÀyet kíç olur deyu aàniyÀları ‘alÀ
321
iútidÀrihim beynlerinde iútisÀm eylediler ve her bir àaniyye kacar zirÀ‘ düşdiyse tez elden
binÀya şürÿ‘ eylediler; bir kac yüz yerden binÀ olunmağa başladı.
Ve binÀ nıãfa úaríb oldukda Mizistreli òaber alup ve istiòbÀr u teftíş içün [176b]
Atina`ya Àdem gönderdiler. Ve Atina re’ísü’r-rü’esı olan Dimosteni Mizistre`den gelen adamı
Atina`da mekå itdirüb ve kendü bi-nefsihí Mizistre şÀhına òaber virmek içün Mizistre`ye
‘aôímet eyledi ve Atina`da olan vekíline tenbíh ve te’kíd eyledi ki; “BinÀdan aãlÀ el
cekmesünler ve tezce itmÀma sa‘y eylesünler”. Ve bu daòı Atina`dan Mizistre beş úonÀú
meãÀfe iken on beş úoñaú eyledi ve divÀrıñ itmÀmı òaberi kendüye vuãÿl buldukdan soñra ol
daòı Mizistre`ye vuãÿl buldı ve ŞÀh dívÀnında òilÀf-ı şarù olan divÀrı niçün binÀ eylediñiz
deyu suÀl olındıkda mezbÿr Dimosteni inkÀr eyledi ve Mizistre ŞÀhı cevÀb virdi ki;
“TevÀtüren åÀbit olan binÀnıñ inkÀrı keõb-i ãaríódür deyu keõbi benim dívÀnımda ve
muvÀcehemde òavf itmedin nice cesÀret eylediñ?” Dimosteni daòı mülÀyemet ile [177a]
cevÀb virdi ki: “Devletlu ŞÀhım, benim kelÀmımı taãdíú itmez ise devletlu şÀhım òavÀããından
mu‘temed-i ‘aliyye ãÀdıúu’l-úavl olanlardan dört beş dÀne emín-i mu‘temed adamlar irsÀl
buyuruñ, varsunlar bi-nefsihim binÀ yerine naôar buyursunlar, ol vaúitde ãıdú u keõb ôÀhir
olur” didikde, şÀh daòı ma‘úÿl görüb mu‘temed-i ‘aliyye olan òavÀããdan beş mükellef emín
adamı Atina`ya ãıdú-ı óÀle vuúÿf içün irsÀl eylediler.
Ve mezbÿr Dimosteni daòı bir adamını mezbÿrlar ile me‘an irsÀl eyledi ve ol
adamıysa şöyle tenbíh eyledi ki: “Madem ki ben Atina`ya varmayınca anlar daòı bu beş adamı
Mizistre`ye ‘avdet itdirmesunler ve eger beni bu ùarafda şÀh úatl ider ise anlar daòı dem
diyetim içün ol beş adamı úatl eylesünler” deyu ekíd-i tenbíh eyledi. Ve mezbÿrlar Atina`ya
vuãÿl bulup ve divÀr-ı binÀsını tamÀm bulup ve ‘avdet murÀd eylediklerinde Atina óükemÀsı
pÀk-ı cevÀb virdiler ki: “Mademki [177b] bizim şÀhıñız yanında olan adamımız bu ùarafa
gelmeyince sizlere daòı ol ùarafa ‘avdete iõin yokdur. Ve eger şÀhıñız ol adamımızı kiõbi ôÀhir
oldı deyu úatl ider ise biz daòı size emÀn virmeyub úatl ideriz hemÀn bir sÀ‘at muúaddem
aóvÀliñizi ŞÀhıñıza i‘lÀm ilen ol divÀrıñ vücÿdında sizlere øarÀr u ziyÀn yokdur. Ve
‘ademinden bize øarÀrı var sizlere aãlÀ fÀ’idesi yokdur ve mezbÿrlarıñ cÀn başlarına sıcrayub
‘aúılları períşÀn olup ve tez elden şÀhlarına i‘lÀm ve taórír idüp, didiler ki: “Gerci bir divÀr
binÀ olunmuş ancak şurÿùa muàÀyir değildür, şÀhımıza vücÿdından bir øarÀr yokdur, belki
fÀ’ide muúarrerdir. ZírÀ mezbÿr divÀr Atina bÀà u bÀàcesini donanma erÀzilinden ve cezírler
eşrÀrından muóÀfaôa içündür; zírÀ Atina fuúarÀsı ve nisvÀnı me‘an bÀà u bÀàcelerinden aãlÀ
münfekk olmazlar. Ve eşrÀr ve erÀzil bÀà u bÀàceye yol buldıkda fesÀdları emr-i muúarrerdir.
Mezbÿr divÀrıñ ‘ademi [178a] bir fÀ’ide óÀãıl itmez deyu òatm eylemişler. Ve bu i‘lÀm
Mizistre şÀhına vuãÿl buldukda Dimosteni`yi da‘vet ve bu kiõbi niçün iòtiyÀr itdiñ didikde,
322
“ŞÀhımıñ kemÀl-i òoşnÿtuñ gördiğimde edebe ri‘Àyet idüp ve edebden ‘addolunan inkÀrı
eyledim.” YÀ niçün beş adam irsÀline teràíb eylediñ?” “Kendi òalÀãım içün irsÀline teràíb
eyledim; cünki kemÀl-i ‘ınef u şiddetiñüz müşÀhede eyledim ve ben cenÀbıñız ile istiòrÀc
óÀãıl itmedin. Atina`da vÀúi‘ olan divÀrıñ vücÿdınıñ ãıóóati üzere åebat bulur ve iótimÀldir
SulùÀnıma Àêab mütezÀyid olur ve bize cezÀ tertíbi fermÀn olunur. Mezbÿr adamlar daòı
diyÀrımda evlÀd u aúrabÀ yedlerinde bulunur ve dem u diyetim heder olmayup anlar ile iútiãÀã
olunur; yÀòÿd anlara meróamet idersiñiz bize daòı meróamet olunup halÀã oluruz” didikde,
şÀh meclisinde ba‘ø-ı óafífü’l-‘aúl adamlar; “şÀhım şu miktÀr óílekÀrı úatl buyuruñ ki ‘ibret-i
‘Àlem olup [178b] bir miktÀr daòı böyle mekr ü óíleyi irtikÀb iylemesunler!” ve ‘uúelÀdan
olanlar cevÀb virdiler ki: “Ma‘lÿm oldu ki bunı bunda úatl idersin Atinalı daòı bunuñ dem u
diyeti içün ol bizim beş adamımızı anlar daòı úatl iderler ve ol beş adam òavÀããdan ma‘dÿd
erkÀn-ı devlet adamlarıdur. Ve bu úadar kibÀr u erkÀn-ı devletden òıãm u aúrabÀları vardur
cümlesine anlarıñ úatli gírÀn gelüp ve cem‘ olunup ve elbette yine Atina seferi emr-i
muóaúúaúdur. Ve Atinalı İstefeli ile te’líf-i úulÿb idüp bir dayandıúları vardur ki bi’l-bedÀhe
óadd-i imtinÀ‘a bÀlià oldılar şimdilik zevú ile evúÀt-güzÀr iken yine sefer meşàÿlesi ve
mezbÿr beş adamımızıñ óüzn-i elemi dÀà-ı berdÀà olur. Mu‘Àrıølar cevÀb virdiler ki: “Ya
Atinalı bizim óÀlÀ maàlÿb maókÿmumuz iken anlarıñ óÀlÀ bu vaø‘ı aúrÀniyyet iddi‘Àsıdur
yanlarına kalur ise maókÿmiyyet bir daòı olur mı?” Muãlióÿn cevÀb virdiler ki: “Ya biz bunda
bir adam úatl [179a] itmekle anlar Ànda beş Àdem úatl iderler bu taúdírce ne aãl-ı óükÿmet icrÀ
itmiş oluruz, evvelÀ ve aòiren oldur ki biz bu adamı Atina`ya irsÀl idelim ve anlar daòı bizim
beş adamımızı bize irsÀl eylesünler, ba‘dehÿ óükÿmet icrÀsında olursuñ mÀni‘ değildür”
didiler.
Ve cümle erkÀn-ı devlet olanlar bu re[y]i óüsn-i istiãvÀb eylediler. Ve mezbÿr
Dimosteni`yi Atina`ya küşÀd virup irsÀl eylediler ve Atina ahÀlísi daòı ol beş adamı küşÀd
virup Mizistre`ye irsÀl eylediler. Bu taúríb ile divÀr da‘vÀsı faãl olındı. Ve ba‘dehÿ Mizistre
a‘yÀn u erkÀn-ı devleti cem‘ olunup müşÀvere eylediler ki bu cür’et ve cesÀretleri değil illÀ
İstefeliye olan a‘sÀ ve dayandıúlarıdur. Ve fi’l-óaúíúa biz Atinalıyı bir gÿne maàlÿb ve
maókÿmımız oldı diye derÿnlarında otuz øÀbiù naãb eyledik. Ve ol øÀbiùler Atina ahÀlísine
óadd u miúdÀrlarıñ göstermiş idi ve öyle [179b] úalsalar óÿr u óaúír olup dÀ’imÀ yed u
pÀyımız taúbíl ile dÀ’im òalúa bi-gÿş bendlerimiz gibi olurlardı. Ancak İstefeli ahÀlísi àÀyet
fodul úavm olup ve daòı bir şÀhdan bir gÿşímÀl görmedikleri ecilden ve bir úaviyy-i òaãımdan
yumruk yemedikleri ecilden kendi yumruklarıñ gürz-gírÀn úıyÀãıyla mertebeleriñ bilmeyüb
ba‘ø-ı giryelerine nuãret ile arslan úuyruàına basmağa başladılar. İútiøÀ eyledi ki İstefeliye
óadd u óudÿdlarıñ bildirib ve óayyiz u mertebelerini ta‘yín idelim. ZírÀ böyle kalursa anlarıñ
323
‘avn u nuãretleriyle Atina devletine teraúúí bulup ve ele ve avuca sığmadan kalur. HemÀn bize
lÀzım olan bi’l-cümle óurri ve cesÿr ve bahÀdur ‘askerimizin güzídeleriñ cem‘ ve eùrÀf-ı
eknÀfda bundan aúdem bizim imdÀd eylediàmiziñ büldÀnıñ yarÀr ve iş görmüş bahÀdurlarıñ
da‘vet ile cem‘ idelim. Ve ne ise mü’enneå ve maãraflarıñ kemÀ-yenbaài görülüb [180a] ve
İstefe seferini devletin muóarremlerinden àayrı kimesne bilmeyüb ‘ale’l-àafle üzerlerine
varalım ve kendüleriñ úatl-i ‘Àmm ve diyÀrlarıñ òarÀb ve vírÀn idelim deyüp bi’l-cümle
ittifÀú-ı úaviyy-i tedÀrik itmege başladılar.
Ve derÿn-ı Mizistre`de ve úurrÀ ve úaãabÀtlarında olan bahÀdurları ve istimdÀd
eyledikleri sÀ’ir ümerÀdan daòı cümle nÀm u şÀn ve ‘indlerinde düşmÀn üzerine gurgÀn u
arslan-mÀnend meşhÿr olanları da‘vet u cem‘ eylediler. Ve efvÀh-ı nÀsda Àòar diyÀrlar seferi
tedÀvül idüp aãlÀ İstefe nÀmı lisÀnda meõkÿr değildür. Ve bütün kış mükemmel tedÀrik
görilüb evvel bahÀdurda on iki biñ nefs Mizistre úaøÀsından nÀil olup beynlerinde àÀyet
bahÀdurlık ile ma‘rÿf olanları bi’l-cümle taórír ve cem‘ eylediler. Ve sÀ’ir ümerÀdan daòı
keõÀlik on iki biñ bahÀdur cihÀd ‘Àleminde mÀhir adamları cem‘ eylediler. Mecmÿ‘ı [180b]
yigirmi dört biñ pÀk ‘asker óÀøır olup Kalavrata dÀàlar arasından taómíl-i zeòÀyir iderek Ve
Kalavrata sevÀóilinden muúaddem óaøır eyledikleri ãÀl ve úayıúlara binüb İstefe ùarafınıñ
aãlÀ òaberi yoğiken İstefe tuzlÀsına bi’l-cümle yigirmi dört biñ diger nisbet iddi‘Àsında olan
‘asker òÿnòÀr ? úayıúlardan ve ãallardan selÀmet cıkub ve aãlÀ te’òír itmeyüp gice yürüyüb
İstefe`ye bir sÀ‘at ba‘dí olan Úuúla nÀm mevøi‘de cem‘ oldılar. Ve Tuzla úaryelerinde olan
ba‘ø-ı İstefelilerden evvel ‘askeri görüb ve gice gelüp İstefe`ye òaber virdi. İstefe ahÀlísiniñ
cÀn başlarına sıcrayub ve İstefe`de mevcÿd olan üc biñ miúdÀrı adam anlar daòı mevøi‘-i
meõkÿrda Mizistre ‘askerine mülÀúí olup ve Mizistre [181a] ‘askeri İstefe ‘askerini böyle
eúall-i úalíl gördüklerinden bunlar bizim óÀøır óelvÀmız deyüp ve öküz boynuzı uzanub ve
yÀlın úılıc olup İstefeliye söz söyletmeyub ve göz acdurmayub şöyle bí-raóm oldılar ki hemÀn
İstefeliyi bütünce yutmak ãadÀdında oldılar derd-mend İstefe ‘askeri daòı bi’ø-øarÿre “kennÿri
yeãÿlu ‘ala’l-kelb” feóvÀsınca bunlar daòı ölüm eri olup gÿr-àÀn .. asÀ Mizistre ‘askeri üzerine
sille seyf ve cÀn-ı göñülden şöyle ãÀtver oldılar ki úurı úamışa girür ateş gibi girdiler, ancak
keãret-i düşmÀn bunları zebÿn ider gibi oldılar. Ve İstefeliden daòı bÀà u bÀàce ve köylerde
olanlardan óabír olanlar biñ miúdÀrı daóí imdÀda gelüp İstefe ‘askeri zebÿn iken evvel gelen
imdÀdına İstefeliye tÀze cÀn baàışladı.
[181b] Ve yine Mizistreli göz acdurmayub ‘aôím hücÿmlar eylediler ve derd-mend
İstefe ‘askerini bi’l-cümle ùu‘me-’i şemşír ideriz ümídiyle biñce girdiler. Ve bu ùarafdan İstefe
iòtiyÀrları eùrÀfında olan İstefeliye òaberler idüp ikindi vaútine dek biñ miúdÀrı İstefeli daòı
cem‘ olup düşmÀn üzerine her biri şír-i zebÀn mÀnend-i sille seyf olup düşmÀn üzerine
324
yürüyüb derd-mend İstefe ‘askeri àÀyet êa‘íf olmuş iken yine taúviyyet cenginden mest
oldılar. Ve düşmÀnı bir miúdÀr gözlerine aldılar ve àayret-i terÀtibeden nÀşí şöyle úılıc
urmaàa başladılar ki demet demet dizmege başladılar ancak düşmÀn daòı keåretinden àayrı
merd-i da‘vÀ ile geldiklerinden aãlÀ aşağı komayub bütün gice birbirlerine ‘aôím uğrÀş idüp
birbiriniñ úÀnını icmege ile aòşam ve gice àıdÀsı eylediler. Ve Eàriboz`da [182a] Ve
Livadiye`de ve sÀ’ir úaãabÀt-ı úılÀde olan İstefeliden bölük bölük gelüp ikinci gün úuşluú
vaútine dek ellişer ve yüzer adam gelen İstefeli hemÀn sille seyf olup aãlÀ göz acdurmayub
ordılar düşmÀna seyf u ãılÀı ve beşer onar daòı münfek olmayup ikinci gün ikindi vaútine dek
bi’l-cümle İstefe ‘askeri altı biñe vÀãıl oldı ve İstefe ãıbyÀn u nisvÀnı su ve ùa‘Àm yüklenub
gelmede velÀkin ne aãıl-ı su ne aãıl-ı ùa‘Àm úaydı düşmen àÀyet úaví oldığından ve firÀr
idecek maóalli olmadığından bi’ø-øarÿre aşÀ komayub àayret cengin iderlerdi.
Ve İstefe ‘askeri gerci àÀyet úalíl olup ancak turÀblarında ve yurdlarında olmaàın
àayret ile her biri zerre-i arslÀn ve şír-i ziyÀn olup evlÀd u ‘ıyÀllerine úarşu şöyle bir ceng
cidÀl u óarb-i úatl eylediler ki meåbÿú [182b] bi’l-miål olmayup ve aãlÀ meróamet itmeyüp
aclıú ve [su]suzlıkdan bí-ùÀúat olan düşmeni hemÀn seyf ile úaù‘a re’íslerini bíåe ve
cesedlerini níme níme itmege endíşe eylediler. Ve ücünci güne dek nÀr-ı ceng iùfÀ olunmayub
şöyle úılıc urdılar ki Mizistre ‘askerinde tÀb u tevÀn kılmayub bahÀdur ve cesÿrları bi’l-cümle
maútÿl ve àÀlibler maàlÿbları esír itmeyüp hemÀn úatl iderlerdi. Ve İstefeli`ye vardıkca
úuvvet ve şecÀ‘at mütezÀyid olup mest-i ejder gibi her birisi cesÀret ve ãalÀbet ile óamle idüp
Mizistreli “EmÀn, el-amÀn!” ãadÀlarıñ peyveste-i ÀsumÀn eylediler. Ancak İstefe bahÀdurları
.. devler gibi ve àaêaba gelen Tímÿr ve esed-mÀnend ãadÀ-yı emÀn úulÀklarına girmeyub ve
raóm u meróamet úalblerine ulaşmayub Mizistre ‘askerini şöyle kırdılar ki yigirmi dört
[183a] biñ adamdan iki biñ miúdÀrı bir elli ve colaú ve ùÿbÀl kaldı úuãÿr yigirmi iki biñ adamı
kılıcdan gecirüb aãlÀ emÀn virmeyub úatl iylediler. Ve üzerlerine olan serdÀrları ve biñbaşıları
ve yüzbaşıları ve onbaşıları ve odabaşı ve bölükbaşı ve bayrÀúdÀr ve cÀvuşlarından bir aóad
òalÀã olmayup cümlesi İstefeniñ arslÀn ve úablÀnlarınıñ yedinde maútÿl oldılar. Ol ãÀà
úalanlar daòı leşler arasında yatmış olup maútÿl olmuşlar úıyÀãıyla terk olındılar; yoòsa
İstefeliniñ evvel óiddet ve àaêablarından anlar daòı aãlÀ òalÀã olmazlardı. ÓattÀ nice cÀn
virmiş maútÿlleri yine tekrÀren calup ikişer pÀre iderlerdi. Ve aãlÀ öñlerine durur düşmen
bulmadıklarından bi’ø-øarÿre leşler arasından cıkub meãÀf kenÀrında başları sersemliğinden
dönüb yere düşdiler. Ve òÀr òÀr sulayub yatdılar ve İstefe iòtiyÀrları gelüp leşleri [183b]
yoklayub gümüş ve altÿnlarını alup ve silÀòlarını soyub meydÀn kenÀrına yığarlardı ve
buldıkları Mizistre mecrÿólarını yardım idüp güşÀd virirlerdi.
325
Ve İstefeliden biñ iki yüz maútÿl ve beş yüz mecrÿó olup mÀ‘adÀsı dört biñ üc yüziniñ
burunları daòı úanamayub ãıóóat nÀm ile bÀúí kaldılar. Ve Mizistre maútÿlleriniñ gümüş ve
altÿnlarını ve silÀó ve libÀsları bi’l-cümle cem‘ olunup bir àanímet-i ‘aôíme oldı ki işidenler
engüşt ber-dehÀn iderlerdi. Ve eùrÀf u eknÀf bi’l-cümle Rÿmili ve Anaùolı diyÀrlarında
İstefeliniñ bu mertebe cesÀret ve bahÀdurlıúlarına taósín ü aferín eylemişlerdür. Ve şÀ‘ir ve
meddÀólar lisÀnında Rüstem-i dÀsitÀn vaãfında bir úahramÀn-asÀ memdÿó ve meşhÿr oldılar.
Ve Mizistre maútÿlleriniñ ãulb ü emvÀliyle cemí‘-i fuúarÀsı daòı ednÀ ve gedÀsı àınÀ ve
iótiyÀcdan müstaàní olmuşlar. VelÀkin [184a] Mizistreliden İstefeliniñ şimşír ateş tÀbından
òalÀã olan mecrÿólar ikibiñ miúdÀrı olup ve yine úÀyıúlara girüb ve Mora yakasına cıkub ve
Mizistre`ye varınca biñ úulÿb ve ãıóóat bulan miúdÀrı daòı colÀú ve ùÿbÀl ve kör ve cÀliú bi’lcümle ‘amel mÀnende kalmışlar. Ve maútÿlleriñ evlÀd u ezvÀcı ve òıãm u aúrabÀ ve ãadíúleri
öyle feryÀd u fiàÀn ve yÀs u mÀtem eylemişler ki kırk sene siyÀh eåvÀbları baùnen ba‘de baùn
üzerlerinden çıkarmadılar. Ve İstefe seferiñ değil nÀmını daòı kimesne lisÀnında olmasun
deyu Mizistre derÿnında na‘letle eyler.
Ve Mizistreliniñ bir úÀnÿn-ı úadímleri var idi ki iclerinden cengden muóannetlik idüp
firÀr eylese òıãm u aúrabÀları ol adamı iclerinden ùard u ib‘Àd eyledikden soñra úatl ile
úÀni‘ler olmayup kırk sene yÀs u mÀtem tuùub siyÀhlar giyerlerdi. VelÀkin İstefeliniñ şír ü ?
Mizistre úulÿbuna şöyle òavf u ru‘b írÀå eylemişler idi ki [184b] İstefe nÀmı gÿşlerine girse
ÿãları gidüp bí-hoş olurlardı. Nice sinín-i vÀfire bu óüzn ü elem ve ıøùırÀb Mizistre ahÀlísi
úulÿblarından zÀil olmayup iki üc baùn İstefeli nÀmını mesmÿ‘lar oldıkda úalbleri óazÀn
yabraàı gibi dír dír titrerdi. Ve bu zevú u sürÿr ile İstefe şöyle ma‘mÿr ve şen abÀdÀn oldı ki
bundan aúdem böyle ma‘mÿriyyet gördükleri nev‘ idüp ve bi’l-cümle êarÀb ùobrÀúları zirÀ‘at
ile ve vírÀn bÀà u bÀàceleri cubÿú ve fidÀn àarsiyle şöyle ma‘mÿr oldı ki cemí‘-i eùrÀf-ı
İstefeniñ ol ma‘mÿriyyetine ta‘cíb u hayrÀn oldılar. Ve Atina daòı İstefe sÀyesinde bir zemÀn
Mizistreli şerr u şürÿr ve istílÀsından òalÀã olup ol daòı ke’l-evvel ma‘mÿr olup yine erbÀb-ı
êÀyi‘ ve ehl-i óıref dekÀkíni küşÀde olup ve yine ceng sefíneleri tedÀrik idüp Akdeñiz
cezírelerini Atina`ya teb‘iyyet itdirdiler.
Ve günden güne írÀdları [185a] mütezÀyid olup doksan miúdÀrı úalyon ve sefíne
peydÀ eylediler ve her sene donanma yine ke’l-evvel donadub Akdeñiz cezírelerinden rüsÿmÀt
ve a‘şÀr cem‘ iderlerdi. Ve yine bir sene eyüce mükemmel donanma tedÀrik olunup ve Rÿmili
sevÀóilinden ve Eylimbe cezíresinden yigirmi üc pÀre sefíne daòı ióøÀr olunup Karadeñiz
àÀretine irsÀl olındı. Ve İsrÀtilu nÀm re’ísi, úabÿdÀn ve cümle üzerine serdÀr naãb eylediler.
Ve donanmaları itdikden Karadeñiz`e irsÀl itdikten soñra Kuluri cezíresi ahÀlísi beynlerinde
‘umÿm üzere úabÀóatler ôuhÿr idüp ve Kuluri ahÀlísine Atina óükemÀsı ùarafından ziyÀdece
326
óadd u ta‘õír vuúÿ‘ından nÀşí ilí derÿnlarına àÀyet cÀy-gír olup ve bi’ø-øarÿre varup Mizistre
şÀhına ilticÀ ile şikÀyetler eylediler. Ve Mizistre şÀhı erkÀn-ı devletiyle müşÀvere idüp ve
cümlesi yine Atina seferine ‘aôímet eylediler. Ve óÀlen Atina [185b] donanması
Karadeñiz`dedür ve bizim limanımız olan Alÿz`da óÀlen altmış pÀre donanmış mükellef ceng
sefíneleri ‘askeriyle me‘an óÀøırdur. Ve Misína cezíresiniñ daòı otuz pÀre sefínesi bu
eùrÀflarda óÀøır mükemmel dolaşur anları daòı istimdÀd idüp ve Atina`ya ‘aôím reòne virup
bir miúdÀr intiúÀm almış oluruz diyub serdÀr ve ‘asker üzerine ser-‘asker ta‘yín idüp Atina
üzerine ‘aôímet idüp óareketlerini Atinalı daòı mesmÿ‘ları olup ve limanlarında bulunan
zeòÀyir gemilerinden ve Karadeñiz seferine úÀdir olmayan ceng sefínelerinden kırk miúdÀrı
sefÀyin óÀøır idüp ve mükemmel ‘asker ile donadub úarşu düşmen üzerine irsÀl eylediler.
Ve Atina óükemÀsından ba‘øıları kırk pÀre sefíneniñ altmış pÀre mükemmel ceng
sefíne üzerine irsÀl olındığı rÀêí olmadılar. VelÀkin ba‘øıları teselli óÀôır eylediler ki; óÀlen
Mizistre`de ceng görmüş erbÀb-ı ceng [186a] ve àaví kalmayub zírÀ ol bahÀdurlarıñ cümlesi
İstefe cenginden helÀk olmuşlardur. Bizim kırk pÀre sefínemiz anlarıñ altmış pÀre sefínesine
àÀlib olmasında aãlÀ şekkimiz yokdur, didiler. Ve fi’l-vÀúi‘ Atina`nıñ kırk pÀre sefínesi Ejder
limanından İyne Cezíresi muhÀzesinde muúÀbil oldılar. Ve ‘aôím ceng idüp Mizistre sefÀyini
zebÿn olup firÀra úarín iken istimdÀd eyledikleri ve otuz ‘aded Misina sefÀyini imdÀdlarına
erişüb ‘aôím taúviyyet bulup ve Atina ahÀlísi Misina imdÀdını bilmedikleri ecilden böyle àÀfil
bulundılar. Yoòsa úal‘a ve şehr eùrÀflarına eyüce taúviyyet virup aãlÀ úarşu sefÀyin irsÀl
eylemezlerdi. Ancak olacak ulÿ çÀr nÀ-çÀr ve düşmen doksan bi’l-cümle ceng sefínesi olup ve
ceng sefÀyini ziyÀde meydÀn-ı àazÀ olan mu‘allim atlar gibi cüst-ı óareket idüp düşmen
êarbından maófÿô [186b] olup ve düşmene murÀd eylediği cÀnibinden irişub urur. Ancak
Atina`nıñ yigirmi beş sefínesi yük sefínesi olup yük gemisiyle ceng àÀyet müte‘assir
oldığından yük gemilerine Misina ve Mizistre birer ikişer catub iórÀú u àarú eylediler. Ve
Atina`nıñ on beş ceng gemilerinden ikisin iórÀú u àarú ve on üci daòı eyne’l-meferr diyub
Atina`ya firÀr eylediler. Ve Atina ahÀlísi bu cengi Atina`da seyr iderlerdi. Ve ol yigirmi yedi
bÀre geminiñ iórÀú u àarú ve òisÀret-i àayrı müteraúúıbe kendülere ‘aôím elem ve ıøùırÀb ile
óayrÀn-ı sergerdÀn oldılar. Ve óarb u êarbe úÀdir olanlar bi’l-cümle ‘askeri ve beledi ve
zincír-i ÀlÀt-ı óarb ile liman ağzında ve eùrÀfında cem‘ olup iótimÀldür düşmen gemilerinden
dökülüb şehri àÀret itmesün deyu Atina sevÀóilini bi’l-cümle muhÀfaôa üzere oldılar. Ve
düşmen ol tedÀriki gördiğinden ùaşra [187a] ‘asker cıkarmayub Koluri cezíresine olan körfeze
girüb ve Koluri`de olan Atina øÀbiùlerini Koluri ahÀlísinden ùaleb eylediler. Ancak Koluri
ahÀlísi cevÀb virdiler ki; bizden maùlÿbıñız olan adamları biz size ol zemÀn viririz ki, siz
Atina donanmasına bi’l-cümle ve Atina şehrine daòı àÀlib olasız. Ol zemÀn biz siziñ òalúa be-
327
gÿş úullarıñız oluruz. Ve illÀ Atina donanması Akdeñiz`e bí-pervÀ ùolaşırken ve şehr-i Atina
sizden òavf u cerÀsı yoğiken biz değil cemí‘-i edÀlar size teb‘iyyet yüzüñ daòı göstermez,
didiklerinde Mizistre serdÀrı daòı bu cevÀbı istiãvÀb idüp Atina donanmasını muúÀbil gelüp
ceng itmek içün SÀkız ùarafına bÀd-bÀnlarına küşÀd virup yürüdiler. Ve Atina ahÀlísi daòı
evvel on üc sefíneyi Karadeñiz`e olan donanmalarına òaber iylesun deyu úarşu yolladılar.
Ve Atina donanması [187b] Karadeñiz`den ‘avdet idüp Boğaz óiãarlarına mezbÿr on
üc sefíne müãÀdif olup Atina`ya vÀúi‘ olan òasÀreti taúrír eylediler. Ve Sakız ùaraflarında
bunlara müteraúúıb oldıklarıñ ve òaber virup anlar daòı Sakız üzerine olan düşmen ùarafına
‘aôímet eylediler. Ve ta‘cíl iderek Sakız`a varup Mizistre donanmasını bulup ve aãlÀ bilÀte’òír cenge başladılar. Ve ol gün iki ùarafı àÀyet ‘aôím ceng eylediler ve gice oldıkda Misína
donanması ùÀúat getüremeyüb firÀr eylediler. Ve yÀrındÀsı gün Mizistre donanması dayanub
àayret cengi eylediler ve Mizistre donanmasından on sekiz sefíne àarú u iórÀú olındı. Ve gice
oldıkda Mizistre donanması daòı úarÀrı firÀra tebdíl eyledi. Ve Atina donanması daòı aãlÀ bir
yere mekå itmedin envÀ‘ı şenlikler ile Atina`ya vuãÿl buldığından Atina ahÀlísine [188a]
Koluri cezíresi yüzünden vÀúi‘ olan òasÀret sebebiyle óÀãıl olan elemi bi’l-cümle def‘ idüp
cedíden şenlikler eylediler. Ve yine Mizistreli ayaklanmağa başladılar ve yine bize ulaşmağa
başladılar bunlarıñ bir eyüce tedÀrikinde olalım dirken Anaùolı sevÀóilinde vÀlí olan ‘Acem
şÀhı vezírini şÀh Mısır ùarafında vÀúi‘ olan sevÀóil ‘isyÀn itmegin anları yine şÀha teb‘iyyet
itdirmek içün ol vezíri ta‘yín eyledi. Atinalı ve Mizistreli şerlerinden AnÀùulı sevÀóilini emín
itmek içün Mizistre ve Atina beynlerinde tavassuù idüp barışdurdı. Ve mezbÿrlardan donanma
‘ilminde mÀhir úabÿdÀn ve re’íslerden ve efrÀdım aàır ‘ulÿfler ile ùaleb eylediler. Anlar daòı
ketm itmeyüp vÀfir donanma reísleri ve úapudÀnları ve üzerlerine diyÀr ‘ilminde mÀhir ve
òarita ve .. bilub ve diyÀrda çıkan sefÀyíne úapudÀn ve serdÀr olmuş .. [188b] nÀmında ser‘askelik için Atina tarafından ‘Acem Şahı vezírine irsÀl eylediler ve meõkÿrlar Anaùolı`ya
varıp vezir-i mezbÿrun ?ıñ bus edüp hiõmet maúÀmında olmağı ùaleb eylediklerinde vezír-i
mezbÿr bunlara òil‘atler ve iósÀnlar edüp dört beş yüz sefÀyin miúdÀrı ‘asker donanma vaø‘
olunup ve iki yüz bin miúdÀrı ‘asker ile vezír-i merúÿm daòı Şam Trablus sevÀóilinde
yürüyüb ve donanma daòı sevÀóil kenarından ayrılmayub ve İskederiyye donanması gelüb
muúÀbele oldılar ve vÀfir cenkler edüp ve bi’l-cümle ‘Arab sefÀyinini biñ miúdÀrı olub ve
lÀkin reísler ve úapudÀnları muntaôam olmadığından her dÀ’im bozulub períşÀn olurlar ki bir
iki sene ‘Arabistan sevÀóilinde olub ‘Acem ŞÀhı iùÀ‘atinden [189a] .. olanları yine teb‘iyyet
etdirdiler zírÀ Şam Mısır İskenderiyesine varınca bi’l-cümle êarb-ı dest ile muùí‘ eylediler ve
Vezír daòı ‘Antab ve Haleb ve Şam Trablus .. ve Şam ve Kudus-i şeríf bunları bi’l-cümle ol
daòı êarb-ı dest ile muùí‘ eylediler. Ve vezíriyle üzerine gelüb ve Mısır üzerine tevcíhi ‘azm ü
328
cezm eylediğinden Mısır ŞÀhı dahı bi’ø-øarÿrí muùí‘ olub beher sene ‘Acem ŞÀhına bir miúdÀr
şey vermeğe rÀøı olub ve bu taúríb ile bi’l-cümle ‘Arabistan ‘Acem ŞÀhına tÀbi‘ oldılar ve
beher sene ‘Acem ŞÀhına şu miúdÀr şey vermek üzere emvÀl-i keåíre maúùÿ‘ bağlandı. Ve
Atina reís ve úapudÀnları fermÀn olunan limana gelüb bi’l-cümle sefÀyini sağ ve sÀlim
bağladılar ve vezír-i a‘ôÀm bunlara iósÀnlar edüp ve òil‘atler giydürüb ve sefer
àanímetlerinden yedlerine vÀfir emvÀl-i keåíre [189b] ve emti‘a-i vÀfire girüb beğendikleri
sefÀyinden Atinalı`ya ve .. sefíne-i metíne ve Mizistreli`ye beş sefíne híbe edüp mu‘azzez ve
mükerrem Atina`ya ve Mizistre`ye ‘avdet edüp ‘aôím şenlikler ile diyarlarına vÀãıl oldılar ve
birkaç sene zevú ve surÿr ile evúÀt-güzÀr oldılar ve İstefe ile Atina imtizÀc edüp birbirlerine
varup gelmeler ve øiyÀfetler ve da‘vetler derÿn .. zevú ü surÿr ile dÀ’im ùalÿb ve İstefeli àÀyet
i‘tinÀya düşüp ve kendilere vücÿd-i ‘aôím iåbÀt edüp kibr ve ‘aôamet ile muttaãıf olub
maàrÿrÀne óareketler itmeğe başaldılar velÀkin bu kÀr-òÀne ‘Àlemde müsÀ‘ade-i mühted
olmayub maàrÿr ve mütekebbir òaãmı mevlÀ-i müte‘Àl olub ol maàrÿra yine bir mütekebbir-i
bí-raóme musallaù kılub ol maàrÿruñ enfini yerlere sürdüb óaúír-i faúír edegelmişdür.
Ve bu eånÀda Rÿmili şÀhlarınıñ a‘ôam ve eşbehi [190a] olan İskender-i Rÿmí`niñ
pederi olan Filikos913 olup ve taót-gÀhı ile Selanik ile Úaterin mÀ-beyniñde olan Cetroz
úaãabası ol vaútde şehr-i mu‘aôôam olup Rÿmili`niñ taót-gÀhı a‘lÀsı idi ve Filikos Ànda olurdı
ve Livadiyye úurbunda olan Saluna úal‘asınıñ ahÀlísi Filikos`a ‘iãyÀn idüp iùÀ‘atinden inóirÀf
eylediler. Filikos daòı üzerlerine sefer eyledi velÀkin Saluna úal‘ası derÿnında bir deyr-i ‘aôím
olup ve derÿnında kÀhinler olurdı. Ve eùrÀf u eknÀf rü’yÀlarını ve müşkillerini mezbÿr
kÀhinlere ta‘bír ve óall itdürdürlerdi. Ve Filikos seferini müteóaúúaú bildiklerinde
Ağriboz`dan ve Atina`dan ve İstefeden ve Livadiye ve sÀ’ir eùrÀfdan istimdÀd eylediler. Ve
Filikos bunlarıñ imdÀdlarını me’mÿl eylediği ecilden àÀyet óafíf ‘asker ile geldi. Ve İskender
daòı sekiz dokuz yaşında ãabí olup babası Filikos ile me‘an ol sefere gelmiş idüp ve Saluna
‘askeri [190b] cokca cem‘ olup ve Filikos üzerine Saluna ‘askeri hücÿm eyledikde ibtidÀ
İstefe ‘askeri yürüyüb Filikos ‘askerini şöyle kırdılar ki bir veche ile Filikos ‘askeri ùÀúat
getüremediler. Ve Eàriboz ve Atina ‘askerleri bir miúdÀr meróamet üzere oldılar. Ancak
İstefe ‘askeri aãlÀ meróamet itmeyüz şÀh Filikos`uñ ‘askerini úoyÿn ãürisi fi’l-óÀl ‘ilmleri
üzerine yakdılar. Ve Filikos: “Bu ‘asker-i òÿnòÀr kimlerdür?” deyu sÿÀl eyledikde, İstefe
‘askeridür deyu òaber virdiler, Filikos daòı òoş … [191a] cağırdılar. Ve elbette Filikos`a
İstefe ‘askerinde bu yazuğımız kalmasun intiúÀm aluruz didiler. Ve Filikos aãlÀ durmayub
bi’l-cümle Rÿmili`nden ve Anaùolı eùrÀfından zírÀ ol vaútde Anaùolı eùrÀfı bi’l-cümle Filikos
913
Phillip the Macedonian
329
óükmünde idi ve iki yüz biñ miúdÀrı ‘asker cem‘ idüp kendüye muùí‘ olmayup Saluna`ya
imdÀd idenleriñ üzerine yüridiler. Ve bi’l-cümle muòÀlifler ol ‘askeri şumÀr ile Filikos
üzerine sefer idecegin istimÀ‘ eylediklerinde bi’ø-øarÿre buğazlarına kefen sarup ve nice …
[191b] yürüyüb İstefe ma‘mÿrca olmaàın yigirmi biñ miúdÀrı êarb ve êarbe úÀdir adamları
cem‘ olup ve Filikos`uñ muúaddimetü’l-ceyş olan ‘askerine aãlÀ emÀn virmeyub úatl
iderlerdi. ÓattÀ muúaddem gelen yigirmişer biñ ve otuzar biñ ‘askerine göz acdurmayub ve
yük indürmeyub ve cadur úurdurmayub, urup helÀk iderlerdi. Ve oñlardan firÀr iden òalÀã
olurdı ve bu taúríb ile Filikos ‘askerinden İstefe ‘askeri otuz biñ miúdÀrı adam helÀk eylediler,
deyu Filikos`a feryÀdcılar geldi.
Ve Filikos aôím àaêab ile bi’l-cümle ‘askerini İstefe üzerine sürdi İstefe ‘askerini
orùaya alup şöyle bir ceng óÀúÀnı ve Ceberrud SulùÀnı oldı ki vaããÀflar vaãfa ve muóarrirler
taóríre úÀbil değiller idi. Gerce İstefe ‘askeri àÀyet úalíl ancak hücÿm-ı vuãÿlede seyl-i ‘aôím
ve ribó-i ‘aúím [192a] gibi uğradıkları ãÀfları perÀkende ve períşÀn iderlerdi ve şír-i ziyÀn ve
pelenk ve arslÀn-ı bí-raóm olup pençelerine girenler aãlÀ òalÀã olmazlardı. Bu vech üzerine
àayret-i turÀbiyye içün sÀm u nerímÀn cengleriñ iderlerdi. Ve minvÀl-i meşrÿó üzere üc gün
ve üc gice cengden el cekmeyub ekåeri helÀk ve úuãÿrı mecrÿó ve dem-beste-yi bí-idrÀk olup
bi’ø-øarÿre İstefe úal‘asına ‘avdet ile teóaããÿn eylediler. Ve Filikos ‘askerinden elli biñ
miúdÀrı adam úatl u helÀk eylediler. Ve àÀyet İstefe úal‘ası müstaókem olup ve eyüce
tedÀriklerin evvelden görüb õaòíreleri keåír ve suları vÀfir olup er ve ‘avratları bi’l-cümle
burc-ı bÀrÿya cem‘ olup düşmÀna beden ardından ve mazàÀl deluğundan ve ùaş ve oú
atarlardı. Ve nisvÀn ùÀ’ifesi ùaş cem‘ idüp ve ıssı sular kaynadub úal‘a divÀrı dibinde yürüyiş
[192b] içün gelen düşmÀna óaşlı sular dökerlerdi.
Ve minvÀl-i meşrÿó üzere üc ay úadar maóãÿr oldılar. Ve Filikos her gice oàlu
İskender ile İstefeliniñ bu mertebe cesÀret-i metÀnetlerine ta‘accüb iderlerdi. Ve Filikos
‘aôímet eyledi ki ricÀl u nisvÀndan ve ãaàír u ãıbyÀndan bir aóad terk itmeyüp cümlesini úatl u
helÀk ve rü’esÀsın envÀ‘-ı ‘aõÀb ile istihlÀk eyleye. LÀkin İskender dÀ’im pederiñ teskín idüp
dirdi ki: “Böyle yarÀr ve bahÀdur ve cesÿr adamlarıñ ‘ırúlarını bi’l-külliye úaù‘ itmek
SulùÀnım gibi ‘aôímü’ş-şÀn pÀdişÀha lÀyıú değildür”. Ve Filikos oàluna derdi ki: “Eyü
söylediñ oàul benim gibi ‘aôímü’ş-şÀn PÀdişÀh bu yaramazlar üzerine iki yüz biñ ‘asker ile
gelüp ve bunlar benim òavfımdan bir diyÀr yardım itmeyüp bunlar böyle eúall ü úalíl-i
şerzime iken úalblerine òavf u ru‘b ùÀrí olmayup öñüme cıkub ve benim muúaddem [193a]
gelen ‘askerime úılıc düşürüb otuz biñ adamı úatl eylediler. Ve ba‘dehÿ bi’l-cümle ‘askerüme
úarşu koyub üc gün üc gice lÀ-yenúaùı‘ yorulmayub ve uãanmayub elli biñ adamı daòı úatl u
helÀk eylediler. Ve yigirmi biñ miúdÀrı ‘askerimi mecrÿó eylediler. Mecmÿ‘ı seksen biñ
330
adamı úatl ve yigirmi biñ mecrÿó cümlesi yüz biñ ‘askerimi yoğ eylediler. Böyle kelbleri ben
bir daòı ãÀà kormıyım?” didikde, İskender yer öpüb du‘À idüp cevÀb virdiler ki: “Ey benim
baş tÀcım devletlü efendim, êa‘íf olup dÀ’imÀ òavf u òaşyet üzere olanları zemm idüp
yanımızda ùard u ib‘Àd ideriz. Ve cerí ve cesÿr olanları úahr u àaêab idüp úatl ideriz bu aóvÀl
böyle gidince ya ne aãıl ‘asker ile úaví düşmÀn gelse ceng ideriz” ve Filikos didi ki: “Ey
benim cÀnım ve ‘ömrüm óÀãıl yavrum! Sen benim yerimde olsan bu günde bu kelblere ne
mu‘Àmele [193b] iderdiñ?” İskender yine edebÀne zemín bÿå olup ve gevher-i nisÀr olan
óoúúa-’i dehÀnlarından şöyle dürr ü cevherler ãacdı ki:
“Ey benim bÀ‘iå-i óayÀtım ve sebeb-i rif‘atim veliyyü’n-ni’am efendim! Bu bende-yi
óaúír ve ‘abd-i pür taúãír Eàriboz ve Atinalılarıñ tavassuùuyla bunlar ile ãuló olurdım. Şol şarù
ile ki, dÀ’im bunlardan der-sa‘Àdetimden beş biñ adam aãlÀ münfek olmaya. Ve üc senede bir
kerre ol beş biñ adam gidüp ve yerlerine yine beş biñ adam gele. Ve bir muøÀyaúa istílÀåı
düşmÀn deminde bunlar úalb-i ‘askerim olmak üzere def‘-i düşmÀn içün gözedüp beslerdim.
ZírÀ óaú bu ki el-Àn bunlar úahramÀn ve nerímÀn cenglerini ve rüstem-i dÀsitÀn ãaf şeginligin
itmiş adamlardur. Gerce bundan aúdem üstÀdım Arisùo`dan ve ÁrisùÀlis`den mesmÿ‘um oldı
ki, Atina ahÀlísi şÀh-ı behmen gibi ‘aôímü’ş-şÀn pÀdişÀha muòÀlefet eylediler. Ancak şÀh-ı
[194a] mÿmÀ-ileyh bi-nefsihí Atina üzerine vÀãıl oldukda Atinalı úarşu gelüp bir sÀ‘at olsun
muúÀbele idemediler. Belki bi’l-cümle ‘amelleri óíle ve óud‘a olup yoòsa bunlar gibi
bahÀdurlıú ve merdÀnlık meydÀnında durup ceng itmiş bir diyÀrıñ úavminde vÀúi‘ olmuş bu
úadar ancak devletlu meróametlü sulùÀnımıñ merÀóim-i ‘aliyyelerinden ricÀ ve niyÀz idirmege
bu bende-yi nÀcíze müsÀ‘ade buyurup iõn viresiz ki Atina ve Eàriboz erkÀn-ı devletleriniñ
cem‘ idüp ve bi’l-cümle gelüp ‘inÀyetlu efendimiñ òÀk-i pÀyine yüz sürüb ve bu maóãÿr olan
ehli úal‘anıñ istímÀnlarıñ úabÿl idesiz. VÀúi‘ olan cürm ü úabÀhatleriñ ‘afv idesiz deyu ricÀ ile
söyler ve meróametlü sulùÀnım daòı ricÀlarını òayyiõ-i úabÿle ircÀ‘ idesiz. ZírÀ sulùÀnıma daòı
kesr-i ‘arødur ki böyle bir şerzime-i úalíle yokdur. ‘Askeriñiz úatl ü istihlÀk [194b] ve üc
aydur maóãÿrdurlar ve anlardan ‘askerimizin gözi àÀyet òavf eylediğinden úal‘aya cÀn u
göñülden yürüyüb almağa daòı cesÀret idemediler. Ve iótimÀldür bu muóÀãara mümted ola;
zírÀ maóãÿr olanlar õaòíreye ve suya aãlÀ øarÿret cekmediler.
Ve eyyÀm-ı .. daòı geldi ve ba‘dehÿ şitÀ eyyÀmı daòı úaríb oldı. Ve bu eùrÀf ‘askeri
İstefe ahÀlísi ile ekåer ya òıãm u aúrabÀya yÀr-i ãÀdıú olduklarında anlar ile òaãımÀne ceng
itmezler. Ve bizim ‘askerimizin úılleti ve cenge ‘adem-i raàbeti ve devletlu SulùÀnımıñ
‘adem-i meróameti ve kendüleriñ İstefeliye olan muóabbeti bir àayret írÀå idüp bir gice bizi
şeb-òÿn iderler ise perÀkende ve períşÀn münhezimen ‘avdet ü firÀrımız emr-i muúarrerdir
deyüp ve bunuñ emåÀli nice muúaddemÀt-ı malzeme serd idüp netíce olan ãaàíri ve küberÀlar
331
ile Filikosa maóall-i ilzÀma úarín eyledi. Ve İskender`e cevÀb eyledi ki: “Buyurdığın úuãÿrlar
bi’l-cümle der-kÀrdur ve ma‘úÿl [195a] ve münÀsibdir ancak şol şarù ile emÀn virup
úabÀóatleriñ ‘afv iderim ki úal‘alarıñ bi’l-külliye hedm ü ùaşlarını deryÀ úaríb olan maóalle
naúl eylesünler. Ve bu şarùdan nükÿl-i emr-i muóÀl şarù-ı mezbÿr ile emÀnı úabÿl iderler ise
emÀnlarıñ úabÿl iderim” didi ve İskender daòı bi’l-cümle Atina ve Eàriboz ve sÀ’ir eùrÀf
‘askerleriniñ ümerÀ ve serdÀrlarıñ cem‘ idüp ve recÀ-yi mezbÿrı òaber virup ve cümlesi
istiãvÀb ve úabÿl idüp ve İskender ile me‘an gelüp bi’l-cümle şÀh Filikos`uñ òÀk-i pÀyine
düşüb vech-i meşrÿó üzere ricÀ ve niyÀz eylediler. Ve şefÀ‘atleri óayyiõ-i úabÿle rÀci‘ olup
şarù-ı mezbÿr üzere İstefeliye emÀn ve güõeşte cürm ü fesÀdlarını ‘afv u iósÀn eyledi. Ve
minvÀl-i meşrÿóa İstefe ahÀlísi daòı bi’ø-øarÿre rÀøı olup ve Filikosa úulluú ‘arø
eylediklerinde úabÿl itmeyüp İskender ricÀ eyledi anıñ bendeliàiñ úabÿl itsünler deyu fermÀn
eyledi. Ve bi’ø-øarÿre [195b] İstefe a‘yÀn u serdÀrları daòı píş-gÀh-ı İskender`e varup bÿs-ı
zemín idüp ve bey‘at ile bendeliğin úabÿl eylediler. Ve cümle ahali[y]i İstefe úal‘alarınıñ
hedmine ta‘yín eylediler. Ve bu aralıúda Atina a‘yÀnı ve óükemÀsı şehõÀde-yi İskender`i
òÀceleri ArÀsùo ve ArisùÀlís Atina seyrine da‘vet eylediler. Ve ‘ilm-i óikmeti mezbÿr ArÀsùo
ve ArisùÀlís Atina`da EflÀùÿn`dan ta‘allüm eylediklerinden Atina ziyÀretine ‘aôím òÀhişleri
olup ‘aôímet eylediler.
Ve mezbÿr ArÀsùu Cetrÿzli olup ve ArisùÀlís Eàribozlı olup bunlar ‘ilm-i óikmeti
ta‘lím idüp ve ba‘dehÿ bunlarda tevóíd-i isti‘dÀdı müşÀhede eylediğinden ‘ilm-i tevóídi daòı
ta‘lím eyledi ve bunlar daòı ãıdú ile muvaóóid olmuşlar idi ve bunlarıñ EflÀùÿn`dan ta‘lím
itdikleri ‘ilm-i tevóídi Atina evvel müfsed [196a] óükemÀsı òaber aldıklarında EflÀùÿn`ı ve
bunları úatl murÀd eyledikleriñ ma‘lÿmları olup EflÀùÿn Maàrib`e ve bunlar Filikos`a firÀr ile
ilticÀ eylediler. Ve Filikos`uñ ol vaútde óedÀset sinni oldığından bunlardan ‘ilm ü ma‘rifet ve
siyÀsete dÀ’ir úÀnÿnlar ta‘allüm idüp bunlara ‘aôím ikrÀmlar idüp ve ba‘dehÿ oàlu İskender`e
òÀce ta‘yín eyledi. Ve EflÀùÿn Maàrib diyÀrında Maàrib şÀhına ol daòı üstÀd olup ve şÀh
úuvvetiyle bir münÀsib òÀlí maúÀma raãd-ı òafr itdürüb ve birisine derÿn-ı raãadda riyÀøat ile
olup ‘ilm-i óikmete nice ‘ulÿm-ı keåíre daòı êamm u cem‘ eyledi. Ve ba‘dehÿ Maàrib şÀhı
fevt oldukdan soñra eşrÀr u óüssÀd şerrinden Maàrib`den Anùakiye`ye hicret eyledi. Ve
İskender derÿnunda hÀceleri EflÀtÿn ziyÀretiyçün İskenderi Anùakiye`ye uàratdılar. Ve
EflÀùÿn ‘ilm-i simyÀ úuvvetiyle İskender`iñ devletinden hezÀr-ı müteraúúí bir devlet ve
‘aôímet ve şevket ve iclÀl göstermişdir ki İskender daòı [196b] dem-beste ve óayrÀnda kalmış
deyu İskender nÀmelerde tafãíl olunmış bir emr-i müstaàrebdir. Ol ‘acÀyib ü àarÀyibÀta ùaleb
olanlar İskender nÀme rücÿ‘ eylesünler bu tÀríóiñ bu maúÀmda ãidÀd oldıgım Atinavíler
İskenderi ve òÀcelerini Atina`ya seyr ü sülÿk itmek içün İskender óimÀyesinde olmak içün
332
da‘vet eylediler. ZírÀ İskender ùulÿ‘ında ‘aôamet-i kübrÀ ve celÀlet-i ‘uômÀ müşÀhede
eylediklerinde Atina ahÀlísi daòı İskender bey‘atine ve òiõmet ve bendeliàini ùÀlib oldılar.
Filikos úabÿl idüp Atina`yı daòı İskender`e òÀã ta‘yín eyledi ve bu taúríb ile Atinalı İskender
ve òÀcelerini alup Atina`ya getürdiler.
Ve cümle Atina`yı ve seyrÀn-gÀh ve mesír-gÀh ve ‘acíb ve àaríb taãnifÀtlarıñ gezdürüb
da‘vetler ve maòãÿã êiyÀfetler ve envÀ‘ı tuóaf ve yÀdigÀrlar virup ve ol zemÀnda tÀbi‘
oldıkları şÀhıñ ãÿretiñ gümüşden ve altÿndan yapub ma‘bedlerinde korlardı. Ve ùaşdan düzüb
[197a] úal‘a úapÿları üzerine kime tÀbi‘ oldıkları ma‘lÿm olsun deyu korlardı. Atinalı daòı
İskender ãÿretini gümişden ve altÿndan düzüb cemí‘-i ma‘bedlerinde úoduúdan soñra
mermerden daóí düzüb úal‘a úapÿlarına dizdiler ve kırk gün miúdÀrı İskender Atina`da seyr u
sülÿk ve zevú itdikden soñra İstefe`de pederi Filikos`a ‘avdet eyledi.
Ve İstefe mu‘aôôam úal‘a oldığından ùaşları İstefe`den iki bucuk sÀ‘at meãÀfe olup
deryÀ kenÀrı LÿcíşÀ914 nÀm maóalle naúli fermÀn olındığından ve günde ikişer yol itmek üzere
ta‘yín olındı velÀkin mümkün olup cümle úal‘a ùaşını getürmediklerinden eyyÀm-ı gÿz daòı
münúaøí olması úaríb oldığından bir gün evvel ùaşlar naúl olunsun deyu İstefeli üzerine
mübÀşir ve çÀvuşlar ta‘yín eyledi. ÓattÀ rütbe-i ‘aliyye ãÀóibi olan bir çÀvuş bir ‘avrat-i güzel
İstefeliniñ mübÀşiri oldı. Ve çÀvuş [197b] òiõmetkÀrları ùaş naúlinde İstefeliyle me‘an giderdi
ve çÀvuş evde kalurdı. Ve ‘avrat ile úurbÀn murÀd eyledikde ‘avrat rÀøı olmazdı. Ve mezbÿr
çÀvuş àÀyet úaviyy-i úuvvetli adam oldığından øor ile ‘avrata úurbÀn ve bu mertebeye rÀøı
olmayup ‘avratıñ inci ve gümüş altÿn ve cevÀhire müte‘alliú olan şeyleri ‘avratdan aldı ve
elbette daòı vardur deyu ‘avrata cebr u úahr itmege başladı. ‘avrat ‘Àcize kaldığından, “Seniñ
òavfından bu úuyunuñ icine atlarım!” didi. Ve çÀvuş gördü ki, úuyu icinde ãÿ azdur,
tama‘ından çÀvuş kendü úuyÿ derÿnına girdikde ‘avrat úuyu eùrÀfında olan kebír ùaşları
çÀvuşuñ başına ùoàrı yuvarlardı ve çÀvuşu úuyu icinde manùar gibi yaããıldub helÀk eyledi.
Ve ‘avrat daòı ùaşlar yuvarlarken çÀvuşuñ òiõmetkÀrlarıyla zevci gelüp ve ‘avratıñ
úuyu derÿnuna ùaş itdiğin gördiler. Ve kuyu icine bakdıklarında çÀvuşu [198a] maútÿl
gördiler. Ve ‘avrat daòı inkÀr idemeyüb sıóóati üzere òaberi virdi varup çÀvuş òiõmetkÀrları
aóvÀli Filikos`a ‘arøıóÀl eylediler. Ol daòı ‘avratı ióøÀr idüp istinùÀú olındıkda ãıdú-ı maúÀl-i
sergüõeştesini ‘avrat bi’t-tamÀm söyledikde, Filikos meróamet idüp ‘avratı ÀzÀd eyledi. Bu
aralıúda İskender daòı fırãat bulup bÀúí úalan úal‘a ùaşlarınıñ naúli daòı ‘afv olunsun deyu
‘aôím ricÀ eyledi. Kış úaríb oldığından Filikos daòı bahÀne-òÀh idi. ‘Avratıñ úaêiyyesi
914
Lachea
333
ôuhÿrundan sebeb oldı. Ol ùaş naúliniñ beliyyesinden İstefe ahÀlísi òalÀã oldılar. Ve Atina
ahÀlísiniñ tekÀlífiniñ ekåerini ArÀsùu ve ArisùÀlís şefÀ‘atiyle taófíf eylediler.
Ve eyyÀm-ı şitÀ úaríb olmaàın Filikos İstefe üzerinden óareket idüp taót-gÀhı olan
Cetroz`a gitdi ve Filikos Óükÿmeti bi’l-cümle Rÿmili`nden soñra Anaùolı`nıñ
[198b]
‘Arabistan ile ve ‘AcemistÀndan mÀ‘adÀ óavza-yı taãarrufunda idi. Ve ‘Acem şÀhı ol vaútde
DÀrÀ idi. Ve Filikos ile ba‘ø-ı sınır àavàaları óarb ü úıtÀle mü’eddí oldı. Ve bir kac def‘a
‘Acem şÀhı vüzerÀsıyla Filikos muúÀbil olup àÀlib oldı. Ba‘dehÿ ŞÀh DÀrÀ Benefşe ‘asker-i
bí-pÀyÀn ile Filikos üzerine gelüp ‘aôím uğrÀşdan soñra DÀrÀ àÀlib olup Filikos ‘askerini
períşÀn eyledi. Ve Filikos`uñ zevcesini daòı esír idüp ve cimÀ‘ idüp ióbÀl eyledi. Ve ba‘dehÿ
Filikos ‘avratını taòlíã içün ve DÀrÀ`nıñ istílÀsın def‘ u ref‘ içün tavuk yumurtası miúdÀrı ücer
yüz altÿndan yumurta virmek üzere ‘avratıñ esírlikden òalÀã ile ãuló oldı. Ve ba‘ø-ı Rÿm
tÀríòlerinde bÀlÀda taórír olunan Saluna ve İstefe cengleri DÀrÀ cenginden soñra vÀúi‘
olmuşdur. ZírÀ İskender`i DÀrÀ`dan vÀúi‘ olan ióbÀlden tevellüd eylemişdür, deyu taãríó
[199a] eylemişler. ZírÀ “Filikos`uñ evlÀdı olmazdı” deyu ‘indlerinde şuyÿ‘ eylemiş idi.
Ve Filikos ‘avratını DÀrÀ esírliàinden òalÀã eyledikde ‘avrat DÀrÀ ile olan cimÀ‘ını
inkÀr eyledi ve gebelik esír olmazdan muúaddem Filikos`dan óÀãıl oldı deyu ‘avrat gebeliàiñ
nice berÀhin-i úÀùı‘a ki Filikos ‘indinde müsellemdür serd idüp iåbÀt eyledi. Ve ol óamlden
İskender óÀãıl oldı. Ve İskender on beş yÀşına bÀlià oldukda pederi Filikos fevt olup ve
Filikos ãıóóatde oldukca ücer yüz altÿn yumurta DÀrÀ`ya irsÀl iderdi. İskender taóta cülÿs
eyledikde mezbÿr yumurta irsÀline müsÀmaóa eyledi ve üc sene mürÿr eyledi İskender
yumurtaları DÀrÀ`ya irsÀl eylemedi. DÀrÀ daòı İskender`iñ óedÀset-i sinnine óaml idüp üc sene
ãabr eyledi. Ancak mesmÿ‘ı oldı ki Rÿmilinden ve Anaùolı`da Filikos taót-ı óükÿmetinde olan
diyÀrlar şÀhları Filikos fevt oldukdan soñra [199b] İskender uşakdur deyu itÀatden rÿ-gerdÀn
olanlara İskender bi-nefsihí sefer idüp ve nice celÀlet ve cesÀretler ‘arż etmekle itÀatden
inhirÀf idenleri yine êarb u dest ile muùí‘ eyledi. İskender`in tulÿ‘undan DÀrÀ çokluk rÀhat
olamayub ve bu oğlan óÀlen daòı mansur olup şÀnına tedbír-i siyÀset ve niôÀm-ı memleket
menãÿb değül iken bi’l-cümle itÀatinden münharif olanları úahr eyleye yine muùí‘ eyledi. Bu
oğlan buyurdukça aúl u rüşd ve cesÀreti mütezÀyid olmasında híç şübhe yoktur ve intiúÀm-ı
pederiyçün bize bir óareket incÀsında edecekdur, hemÀn daòı sinn-i kemÀl ve ‘aúl-ı niôÀm
bulmadan bunuñ daòı hayyiz ve miúdÀrın bildirmekdür deyu ve ibtidÀ elçi gönderup üçer yüz
yumurta[y]ı ùaleb eyledi. Ve İskender gelen elçiye cevÀb bi-eåvÀbları bu oldu ki: “Devletlu
şÀh pederimizin destlerini bÿs idüp, duÀ-yı hayırların istid‘À edesiz ve bu oğullarından nÀmeyi ‘Àlílerinde [200a] üc senelik irsÀl olunmayab dokuz yüz yumurta ùaleb eylediler. Ma‘lÿm-ı
devletleridür ki ol yumurtaları toğurañ tavuk fevt oldı. Bu oğullarında olana .. bunlardur
334
deyüp bir mücevher ùobuz-ı bí-naôír ve bir müzeyyen nÀdíde ve şimşír-i elçiye virup irsÀl
eyledi.
DÀrÀ daòı irsÀl olunan ùobuz ve şimşír remizlerine idrÀk ve fehmi erişüb ve vüzerÀsın
cem‘ idüp bu oğlanıñ cevÀbını ve irsÀl eylediği ùobÿz ve şimşíri gösterüb ve bunlardan
yumurta toğurañ tavuk fevt oldı ve biz de óÀlÀ mevcÿd olan ùobÿz ve şimşírdir dimenin remzi
nedür deyu suÀl eyledikde cümlesi edeb idüp remzi yine şÀha ‘aùf eylediler. “Bunuñ remzi
bedíhídir, ol oğlan dimek ister ki; ba‘de’l-yevm bizden yumurta ùaleb olunur ise anı sizlere
viriñ dişe emåÀlinden tavuk miåillü ‘Àciz ve úÀãır olandur; [200b] yoòsa bizim gibi merd-i
meydÀn ve şír-i ziyÀndan teklíf ile ùaleb iden almaz. İllÀ başına êarb-ı ùopuz ve cesedine àÀyet
cÀrió olan şimşír-i tíz alır dimekdür”, deyüp ve bi’l-cümle óavza-yı óükÿmetde olan arêa-yı
büldÀn mevcÿd olan umerÀ ve şÀhÀne-nÀmlar gönderup ve herkeze úudret ve iútidÀr-ı miúdÀrı
techíz-i ‘asker òÿnòÀr ta‘yín idüp ve evvel bahÀr .. aåÀrda ãaórÀ-yı ‘arø-ı Rÿm`da cem‘ ve
ictimÀ‘larına ekíd ve mü’ekked fermÀn vÀcibu’l-imtiåÀl göderup ‘aôím ‘asker bi-nihÀye cem‘
olunup arø-ı Rÿm üzerine geldiler. Ve bu ùarafdan İskender daòı bi’l-cümle Rÿmili ve Yunan
ve Anaùolı sevÀóili ve eùrÀfından ‘asÀkir-i ‘aôíme cem‘ idüp ol daòı DÀrÀ cem‘iyyeti üzerine
yürüyüb ùarafeyn-i muúÀbil olup beynlerinde nice mukÀlemÀt vÀúi‘ olup, DÀrÀ ‘aôímetiyle
‘askerine maàrÿr olup [201a] ve İskender kendi cesÀretine ve ‘askeriñ cengÀverliğine ùayanub
birbirine ser-fervÀ itmediler.
Ve nice def‘a ceng idüp ùarafından àalebe mümkün olmadı. Ancak İskender ve
‘askerine her ceng itdikce baòşíşler ve teraúúíler iósÀn idüp ve erkÀn-ı devletine nice
menãÿblar êamm idüp vüzerÀsına dÀ’imÀ rÿy-ı dil gösterüb cümle itbÀ‘ını ‘abídu’l-iósÀn ve
‘abídu’l-lisÀn idüp cümlesi şÀhları üzerine cÀn ve başlar eylemede idi. Gerci ‘asker DÀrÀ`ya
göre az idi ancak her biri maóall-i meãÀfede her biri bünyÀn-ı merãÿã-ÀsÀ durup ve düşmÀn
keåretinden aãlÀ yüz cevirmezlerdi. VelÀkin dÀ’imÀ kibr u ‘aôamet ile durup ve dil-Àvizlik
itmeyüp dÀ’imÀ dil-ÀrÀz olındığından ‘askeriniñ ve erkÀn-ı devlet ve vüzerÀsınıñ kendüye
muóabbetleri aãlÀ olmayup ve cümlesi gaêab u siyÀsetinden rÿz u şeb emín olmayub dÀ’imÀ
DÀrÀ`nıñ zevÀl ve inhizÀmıñ [201b] istid‘À iderlerdi ve İskender ile vÀúi‘ olan uğraşlarda ve
cenglerde ‘askeri àÀlib olmadığı ecilden erkÀn-ı devletine ‘aôím siyÀsetler ve vüzerÀsına
gaêab üzere oldığından cümleniñ anıñ şerrinden emniyetleri olmadığı ecilden bir def‘a daòı
DÀrÀ İskender ile muúÀbil olup ve ceng iderken İskender ‘askerinden ba‘ø-ı àalebe nişÀnlarını
DÀrÀ müşÀhede eylediğinden erkÀn-ı devletine nice gaêablar ve nice úatl ile tehdíd ve va‘dler
daòı eylediğinden ve ekåeriyÀ va‘dini daòı incÀz üzere me’lÿf olduğundan ve vüzerÀsına ve
erkÀn-ı devletine òavf-ı ‘aôím ùÀrí olduğundan bi’ø-øarÿre iki cerí ve cesÿr ve çÀvuşlara ve
335
vüzerÀsına ve erkÀn-ı devleti va‘d-i ‘aôímler idüp ve DÀrÀ`yı úatli içün teràíbler idüp ve
İskender yanında ‘aôím meràÿblar olursuz deyu mezbÿr çÀvuşlara àayretler virdiler.
Ol òÀinler daòı fırãat-yÀb gözedürken [202a] İskender ‘askeri DÀrÀ ‘askerine àalebe
idüp kaçan kaçan sürdüğüni DÀrÀ gördükde pür-àaêab olup ve yanında olan úalb-i ‘askeriyle
òavÀãã-ı ‘askerini İskender üzerine ta‘yín eyledikde kendi àÀyet yalñız kalup ve yemín ve
yesÀrına naôar itmeyüp bí-şu‘ÿr olduğundan ol iki òÀin çÀvuş ferãıyÀb olup iki ùarafdan úılıc
uşurup úatl úaãdıyla birkac yerinden urup ‘aôím pÀreler ile mecrÿó idüp atından yere
düşürdiler. Ve òÀinler müjde içün İskender şÀha ùoğrı gitdiler ve “DüşmÀnıñ olan DÀrÀ`yı biz
úatl itdik!” deyu müjde eylediler. Ve İskender daòı yüzlerine gülüb ve her birine birer avuc
cevÀhir virup ve “Gelin baña meyyitini gösterin!” deyu ve mezbÿr çÀvuşları kendi òavÀãã u
úalb-i ‘askeriyle DÀrÀ`nıñ düşdiği yere gelüp ve atından inub DÀrÀ`nıñ başını kendi dizi
üzerine koyub ve deste-mÀlıyla [202b] toz ve ùobrağını yüzünden silüb ve ‘aôím te’essüf ile
ağladığından DÀrÀ`nıñ daòı rÿóı úabø olunmadığından gözüñ acub İskender`i gördükde bilüb,
“Ey oğul! Ùulÿ`uñ kemÀlde ve baòtıñ küşÀde ve cÀhıñ dem be dem terfi‘ ve irtiúÀ‘da olmaàın
felek bizi òÀk ile yeksÀn ve cesedimiz ? úan eyledi. Yürü var şimdiden gerü ve ùob ile
çevgÀndır ..
İskender şÀh vÀfir teselli-yi óÀùırdan soñra “Ey şÀh-ı õí-şÀn ve şehinşÀh-ı ‘aôímu’ş-şÀn
bu kadar ‘aôím yalñız sulùÀna olmuş değildür; belki bu kÀròÀne-yi ‘Àleme devvÀr olan çaròıñ
maôrÿfları encÀmlarında dÀ’imÀ üftÀn olagelmişdür. Elóamdulillahi te‘ÀlÀ cenÀb-ı sa‘Àdet ..
meydÀn-ı úavgada ma‘yÿb-ı maútÿl olmadığıñız belki dilberÀne ve merdÀne maôlÿmen
maútÿl oldıñız. LÀkin vaãiyyet sebeb-i ãıóóatdur bu oàluñuza naãíóati şamil bir vaãiyyetiñiz
var ise tevcíh buyuruñ icrÀsında bi’l-cümle maúdÿrımızı [203a] maãrÿf bilesiz” didikde DÀrÀ
daòı bir Àh-ı cihÀn-sÿz çekdi ki Àyine-yi cihÀn-nümÀ-yı İskender`i siyÀh etdi ve didi ki: “Beni
úatle mübÀşeret idüp nÀn u nemek bilmez hÀyınları úÀnım içün iútiãÀã idesin, vesÀ’irleriñ ‘afv
idüp velÀkin òiõmetine istiòdÀm itmeyesin! Ve kızım tezevvüc idüp ve meyyitime ve ÀbÀ ve
ecdÀdıma ola gelen ta‘ôím ile ÀbÀ ve ecdÀdım türbeleri úurbunda defn idüp baña daòı
mu‘ayyen türbeler idesin!” deyüp ve bir Àh-ı ciger-sÿz daòı idüp cÀn teslím eyledikde
İskender şÀh daòı ‘aôím óüzn u elem iôhÀrıyla bükÀlar idüp ve DÀrÀ meyyitini vaãiyyeti üzere
defn içün İskender şÀh kendi vüzerÀsından iki vezír-i bí-naôír kırk biñ kÀr-güzÀr ‘asker i
úahhÀr ile irsÀl eyledi. Ve maóall-i merúade varınca ‘ıùr-ı şÀhi ve rÀyióa-yı ‘anber ile meyyit
eùrÀf u vüzerÀsından olanlarıñ meşÀmları ta‘tírinde bí-hÿş u ser-gerdÀn olmuşlar idi ve ta‘ôími ‘aôím ile [203b] merúadine defn idüp meşàale-yi dünyÀdan ve İskender`deñ òalÀã oldı. Ve
DÀrÀ meyyitine olan ta‘ôím ve tekrím ecdÀdından birine olmayup ve türbesiniñ vüs’at u óüsn
ve .. meåbÿú bi’l-miål olmadı. Ve İskender daòı DÀrÀ úÀtillerini DÀrÀ`nıñ maútÿl olduğı
336
mekÀnda dÀra cekdi. Ve erkÀn-ı devletini ve vüzerÀsını teúÀ‘ud ile eùrÀfa sürdi ve kızını
tezevvüc ile kenÀra cekdi ve taótına culÿs idüp cem cÀmını bir zamÀn nÿş etdi. Ve ba‘dehÿ
Semerúand ve BuòÀrÀ semtlerine ‘aùf idüp bi’l-cümle tesóír ile Hind`e gecdi.
Ve Hind ve Sind`i fetó idüp Roma tÀríòlerinde tecÀvüz bÀbu’l-ebvÀb ve sedd-i Ye’cÿc
ve Me’cÿc ve duòÿl-ı ôulumÀt ve istiãóÀb-ı Óıêır (‘aleyhi’s-selÀm) muóarrer değildür. Ve
İslÀmını ve bir kitÀb ve ímÀn ve peygambere teb‘iyyetini aãlÀ Rÿm tÀríòleri taórír ve beyÀn
eylemediler. Ve Õülúarneyn laúabıyla mülaúúab eylemediler; ancak Tefsír-i ÚÀêı`da [204a]
Õülúarneyn`den murÀd İskender-i Rÿmí`dur ve Rÿm ile FÀrísi ve Maàrib ile Maşrıú mÀbeynlerini ùavÀf ve fetó eylediğinden “Õülúarneyn” tesmiye olındı; yÀòÿd zamÀn-ı
óuúÿmetinde iki úarn münúariø olduğundan yÀòÿd başında iki boynuz gibi şey olduğundan
yÀòÿd tÀcında cevÀhirden iki boynuz gibi sorguclar olduğundan yÀòÿd şecÀ‘atli ve cerí ve
cesÿr adama “úoc” ta‘bír olındığı gibi ve isti‘Àre mekíne murÀd olunup “Õülúarneyn” daòı
tesmiye olunur deyu İskender-i Rÿmí`nin nübüvvetine iòtilÀf olunup İslÀm ve ãalÀóiyyetine
ittifÀú olunmuşdur.
Ve Õülúarneyn peygamberimizden suÀl idenler .. Yehÿd ùÀ’ifesi yÀòÿd müşrikín-i
Úureyş`dir deyu tefsír-i ÚÀêı`da taãríó ve ta‘yín olunmuşdur. Ancak tefsír-i Ebu’s-Su‘ÿd
(‘aleyhi ve raómetu’l vedÿd) “Ve yes’elÿneke ‘an-Õÿlúarneyn” Àyet-i kerímesi tefsírinde
buyurdular ki: “Ve hüve Õÿlúarneynu’l-ekber ve ismehu el-İskender Filikosí YunÀní, [204b]
kemÀ teşhedü bih kütübü’t-tevÀríò” deyu taãríó buyurdular. VaútÀkim babası fevt oldı, YunÀn
ve Rÿm`ı cem‘ idüp ve mulÿk-ı àarbı tesóír idüp úahr ile àÀlib ve ba‘dehÿ Óaêar`dan fetó
idüp Mıãır`a ‘avdet idüp fetó eyledi. Ve İskenderiye`yi binÀ eyledi ve kendi ismiyle tesóíle
eyledi. Ve ba‘dehÿ Şam`a dÀòil olup ve Bení İsrÀil`e úaãd idüp ve Beyt-i Muúaddes mekÀnına
varup meõbaóada õebó idüp ve ba‘de Ermeniyye bÀbu’l-ebvÀb ve FirÀúıyyÿn ve’l-Úıbù ve
Berberi`den çıkub cümlesin tesóír eyledi ve ba‘dehÿ ‘Acem`e ‘avdet idüp DÀrÀ ile taórír
olunan vech üzere muúÀtele olunup ve DÀrÀ úatl olunup cümle ‘Acem memÀlikine mÀlik olup
ve Hind`e daòı varup fetó eyledi. Ve Serendib`de bir şehr-i mu‘aôôam binÀ eyledi ve daòı
nice ? mu‘aôôam binÀ eyledi. Ve ba‘dehÿ Çin`e gidüp ve ‘aôím àazÀlar idüp ve bi’l-cümle
Çin memÀlikine mÀlik oldukdan soñra Horasan`a rücÿ‘ eyledi ve Ànda daòı medÀyin-i keåíre
[205a] binÀ eyledi. Ve ba‘dehÿ ‘IrÀú`a rücÿ‘ idüp şehr-i RuzÿmÀt’a vÀãıl oldukda maraø
mübtelÀ oldı deyu buraya dek tefsír-i Ebu’s-Su‘ÿd İmÀm Faòru’r-RÀzí`den naúl ider.
Ve rivÀyetde gelmiş ki her bir fetó eylediği diyÀrda cem‘ eylediği ol diyÀrda kenz idüp
ve ism u resmiyle óazíne úapusunda taórír idüp ve “Ol mÀla kim mÀlik olacakdur” deyu
beyÀn idüp kendüde olan .. yÀòÿd müneccimleriniñ iòbÀrıyla ol òaõíne[y]i ùılsım edüp ãÀóibi
337
ve zamÀnı gelinceye değin mürÿr iden mulÿk-ı vÀfir ol òaõíne[y]i acub almağa úÀdir
olmazlardı. Ve zamÀnında istiãóÀb eylediği ehl-i nücÿm İskender-i merúÿmuñ fevti
zamÀnından şöyle òaber virdiler ki; “Temürden ‘arø üzerinde ve ağacdan gök altında fevt olsa
gerek” didiler ve herkes bu edÀya ta‘accub iderlerdi ve ma‘lÿmları olan rÿy-ı arøun àayrı arø
ve gökden àayrı gök úıyÀã iderlerdi.
Ve İskender-i [205b] mezbÿr şehr-i BÀbil`e vuãÿl buldukda maraø-ı mevte mübtelÀ
olup ancak yine àayret ile ata binub giderken burnı úanayub ve cokca akub ve at üzerinde
bayılub atdan düşdi. Ve cümle ağırlık ileru gidüp ve bir düşünecek ferş olmadığından òavÀãã-ı
‘askerinden olan incu yumuşak zırhları döşeyüp İskender`i zırhlar üzerine yaturdılar ve
üzerine gölge içün kalkanları tutdılar. Ve İskender gözüñ acub altında timur zırhları ve
üstünde ağac kalkanları gördükde “İşte timurdan yer ve ağacdan gök budur!” deyu mevtinden
ol mekÀnda òaber virdi ve hem ol mekÀnda fevt oldı ve sini, biñ altı yüz yaşına bÀlià olmuş ve
bir rivÀyetde ve ba‘øıları üc biñ sene mu‘ammer olmuş deyu òaber virmişler. Ve İbn Keåír
TÀríòinde taórír itmişdür ki ve aàrab-ı àarÀyibdendür ki İbn ‘AsÀkir tÀríòinde der ki: “Baña
bÀlià oldu ki İskender, [206a] otuz altı yaşında yÀòÿd otuz iki yaşında fevt oldı. Ve Óaøret-i
DÀvÿd ve Óaøret-i Süleyman (‘aleyhimes-selÀm)`dan soñra gelmişdir. Ve bu òayr-ı munùabıú
olmaz el-İskender-i åÀniye munùabıú olur. Ve rivÀyet olındı ki İskender-i Õÿlúarneyn olan
Ekber mÀşiyen hacc eyledi. “felemmÀ semi’a İbrÀhim (‘aleyhis-selÀm) teleúúÀhÿ” ilÀ Àòiri’r
rivÀyet ve Óaøret-i İbrÀhim (a.s.) Õülúarneyn mÀşiyen óücceti mesmÿ‘ı oldukda ‘aôím nüzÿl-i
ni‘met ile istiúbÀl eyledikde bindürmek içün bir at daòı getürdi. LÀkin İskender cevÀb virdi ki:
“Allah dostu olan yerde ben binmiş gitmem” didi. Bu óaccında Óaøret-i İbrÀhim (a.s.) müjde
virup didi ki: “Allah Õü’l-CelÀl bulutı musaòòar idüp seni ve ‘askerini ve ÀlÀt u eåúÀlini
ba‘de’l-yevm seóÀb getürür” deyu tebşírinden soñra fi’l-óaúíúa ba‘de edÀ-yı erkÀnu’l-óacc
kendüyi ve ‘askerini ve ÀlÀt ve eåúÀlini bi-l cümle seóÀb [206b] yükletub murÀd eylediği yere
getururdı. Ve bu seóÀb rivÀyeti Óaøret-i ‘Ali (keremellÀhu vecheh)`den daòı mervídir. Buraya
gelince Faòru’r-RÀzí`den ve İbn ‘AsÀkir`den olan rivÀyetler cümle, Õÿlúarneyn-i Ekber içün
idi. Ve İskender-i åÀní ensÀbını TÀríò-i İbn Keåír rivÀyet ider ki: “el İskender ibn Masrim
Hermes bin Miton bin er-Rÿm bin Líùí bin Yunan bin Yafet bin Nona bin Şaròon bin Rusya
bin Nevfil er-Rÿmí el-Eãfer ibn-i ‘Anter bin ‘Íã bin İshaú bin İbrahim ..
Ve keõÀlik İbn ‘AsÀkir el-makdÿmü’l-YÿnÀniyyü’l-Mıãrí daòı İskender-i åÀnísini
böyle taãríó ve beyÀn eylemişdür. Ve åÀní, evvelkiden dehr-i ùavíl müteaòòir gelmişdür; óattÀ
iki biñ sene mu’aòòar gelmişdür deyu taãríó olunmuşdur. Ve åÀníniñ vezír-i müşíri ArisùÀlis
idi; zümre-i feylosoflardan idi ve İskender-i åÀnídir ki DÀrÀ`yı úatl eyledi ve cümle ‘Acem
mülÿkuna [207a] àÀlib oldı. Ve İbn ‘AsÀkir der ki: “Niçün åÀníniñ aóvÀlini Õülúarneyn
338
tefsírinde beyÀn eyledim; zírÀ nÀsdan cok müverriò ôann eylemişlerdür ki; İskender-i
Õülúarneyn dünyÀya bir gelmişdür ve Úur’Àn`da mesùÿr olan İskender-i åÀnídür deyüp óaùÀ-yı
‘aôím ve fesÀd-ı keåír i‘tiúÀd itmiş olur. ZírÀ Úur’Àn`da meõkÿr olan ve tefsírde mesùÿr olan
Õülúarneyn-i evveldür. ZírÀ ‘abd-i sÀlió ve mü’min-i münekkí ve felek-i ‘Àdildür ve vezír-i
Óıêır (a.s.) ve ba‘øıları peygamberdur dimiş. Ve ammÀ İskender-i åÀní olan Rÿmí-i kÀfir idi.
Ve vezír-i Arisùalisu’l-filosof olup ikisiniñ arası beyniñde iki biñ sene zamÀn mürÿr
eylemişdir. Ve bu araya dek bi-lcümle tefsír-i Ebu’s-Su‘ÿd`dan naúl olunmuşdur fezleke-i
kelÀm-ı Úur’Àn`da meõkur iki biñ sene zamÀn mürÿr eylemişdür. Ve bu araya dek bi’l-cümle
tefsír-i Ebu’s-Su‘ÿd`dan naúl olunmuşdur.
Fezleke-i kelÀm-ı Úur’Àn`da meõkÿr olan
Õülúarneyn`den murÀd, ÚÀêı BeyêÀví tefsírinden münfehim olan İskender-i Rÿmí`dür. Ve
Ebu’s-Su‘ÿd tefsír-i şerífinden münfehim olan İskender-i [207b] Rÿmí`den iki biñ sene
muúaddem gelen İskender-i ekberdür ki dünyÀda biñ seneden mütecÀviz ‘ömr sürmüşdür.
ZírÀ Õülúarneyn içün nisbet olunan fütÿóÀt bí-nihÀye ve muúÀbele-i bí-gÀye ve binÀ-yı
müdün-i keåíre ve ùalÀsım-ı vÀfire ve binÀ-yı sedd-i Ye’cÿc ve duòÿl-i ôulumÀt ve istiãóÀb-ı
Óıêır (a.s.) meõkÿr olan kÀr ve ‘ameller óuãÿlı ömr-i ùavíle muótÀcdur. İskender-i Rÿmí ise
ekåer-i tevÀriòde otuz altı sene ‘ömr ile mu‘ammer olmuş deyu muóarrer ve meõkÿrdur; óattÀ
tercih itdiğimiz Rÿmí ve Efrenc ve Laùin ve Yunan tevÀríòlerine daòı otuz altı sene
mu‘ammer oldı deyu taãríó ve beyÀn eylemişlerdur òuõ mÀ ãafÀ da‘mÀ keder
Ve İskender fevt oldukdan soñra İskender`iñ óavza-yı óükÿmetinde olan memÀlikine
ãıóóatinde naãb eylediği vÀlíler yedlerinde kalup bi’l-cümle memÀlik-i mülÿk-i ùavÀyif olup
her bir diyÀrıñ şÀhı İskender ãıóóatinde mutaãarrıf olan vÀlí oldı ve Rÿmili`nde İskender
[208a] úaymaúÀmı olan vüzerÀsından Endepatro915 nÀmında bir Rÿmí oldı. Ve Atina ahÀlísi
İskender`iñ fevtini tayakkun itdikden soñra bir yere cem‘ olup didiler ki: “İskender bir
‘aôímü’ş-şÀn pÀdişÀh oldığından bi’ø-øarÿre úulluğu úul eyledik ba‘de’l-yevm kimseye tÀbi‘
olmayalım ve óükÿmetimiz mustaúil olsun” deyüp ve İskender tab‘iyyetine ‘alÀmet olan
İskender ãÿretleri úal‘a kapusundan ve ma‘bedleri úıblelerinden ref‘ eylediler. Ve istiúlÀl
üzere óükÿmete ‘aôímet eylediler. Ancak “‫ ”ﺍﻟﻌﺒﺪ ﻳﺪﺑّﺮ ﻭﺍﷲ ﻳﻘﺪّﺭ‬mefhÿm-i ma‘lÿmları ve
mu‘tekıdleri olmaduğundan istiúlÀl óükme temşiyyet ãadÀdında oldukların ve ãÿret-i
İskender`i úal‘a úapuların ve ma‘bedlerinde ref‘ eylediklerini Rÿm diyÀrlarına pÀdişÀh olan
Endepatro ve mesmÿ‘ı oldukda bi’l-cümle Rÿm ‘askerini cem‘ idüp ve her kanúı diyÀr-ı
muòÀlefet etdiyse fetó idüp úahr ve cebr ile kendüye teb‘iyyet itdirdi.
915
Antipater
339
[208b] Ve ba‘dehÿ Atina üzerine daòı gelüp ve Atina ahÀlísi karşu koymayub muùí‘
oldılar. Ve İskender, ãÿretlerini úal‘a kapularından ve ma‘bedlerinden ref‘ idenleri ùaleb
eyledi. Ve Atina ahÀlísi ol úabÀhatleri iclerinden yedi adama ‘aùf eylediler ve Endepatro
gelmezden muúaddem Ayna cezíresine sürmüşlerdi. Ve úabÀóat ãÀóibi olanlarıñ birisi
cümleniñ re’ísi olan Dimosteni916 olup ve Atina erkÀn-ı devletleri olanlar: “Biz anları Ayna
cezíresine nefy eyledik” deyu òaber virdiklerinde mezbÿr şÀh rÀøı olmayup: “Tez ‘acele ile
ióøÀr olunsunlar!” deyu emr eyledi ve ióøÀr içün Ayna cezíresine vÀãıl olanlardan yedi neferiñ
re’ísi olan Dimosteni ‘adem-i òalÀãını tayaúúun eylediğinden pírÿze yüzüğü derÿnunı zeh-i
úÀtil ile memlÿ olduğundan ol sÀ‘at yüzüğü emub zehirlenub mürd oldı ve úuãÿr-ı altısı
mezbÿr şÀh aãlÀ emÀn virmeyub envÀ‘-ı siyÀsetler ile úatleyledi ve ùarafından vÀlí naãb idüp
[209a] tekÀlíf-i ‘aôíme ile Atina`dan mÀl-ı keåír aòõ eyledi ve ba‘dehÿ şÀh-ı mezbÿr
cihÀngirlik sevdÀsına düşüb ve Anaùolı`ya gecüb fetó ve tesóír itmeğe başladı ve Anaùolı ve
‘Arab ve ‘Acem ve mulÿk-i ùavÀyifi ittifÀú ile cem‘ olup ve eğer buña müsÀ‘ade olur ise bu
daòı bize İskender olup başımıza bir .. olur deyüp ve mezbÿr Endepatro üzerine yürüyüb mühr
ve tedbír idüp ve kendüyi daòı ùutub ve emÀn vermeyub úatl eylediler.
Ve ‘asker períşÀn Rÿmili`ne ‘avdet idüp ve Úasandro917 nÀmında oàlunı terk itmekle
cümle Rÿm óalúı oàlunı babası Endepatro ve taótına iclÀs idüp cümle Rÿm òalúı bey‘at
eylediler ve babası ùarafından Atina`da vÀlí olan Fecuo918 ve Atina ahÀlísine şiddet üzere olup
tekÀlíf-i şaúúa cem‘inde aãlÀ kimesneye meróamet itmediğinden Atina ahÀlísi mezbÿr vÀlí[y]i
úatl murÀd eyledikleriñ òaber alup ve şÀh Úasandro‘ya varup ilticÀ eyledi. Ve Atina [209b]
ahÀlísi ‘aôím hediyeler ile varup firÀr iden Fecuo`nun úabÀyıólerini naúl eylediler. Ve mezbÿr
ŞÀh daòı babam içün bu ôulümleri irtikÀb eyledi didi ve benim ..” didi hemÀn mezbÿr
Fecuo`yı aòõ idüp ve Atina`dan gelenleriñ yedlerine teslím eyledi. VesÀ’ir babasından
úalanlar taòlíã içün ‘aôím sa‘y eylediler. ŞÀh-ı mezbÿr şefÀ‘at ve ricÀ úabÿl itmeyüp elbette bu
maúÿle cebbÀrlar ‘ırúları úaù‘ olunmak lÀzımdur deyu ôulümleri mezbÿr Atina vÀlísine hep
babañ itdürdi diye gördiler babam daòı böyle ôulümlere rÀøı olduğundan behremend olmayup
nÀ-kÀm helÀk oldı. Ve Atina adamlarına tenbíh eyledi ki: “Bu ôÀlim ve cebbÀrı diyÀrıñıza
getürüñ ve dilediğiñiz óaúÀret ve mezellet ile ‘alÀ melei’n-nÀs bi’l-cümle ôulmiyyeti mÿcib-i
‘ibret içün úatl olsun!” deyüp ve Dimitri Kalovira nÀmında ùarafından Atina`ya bir vÀli-yi
raóím naãb eyledi ve Atina ahÀlísi ‘atíú ve cedíd vÀliler ile Atina`ya gelüp ve vÀli-yi ‘atíúi
[210a] her gün bir mecma‘ olup maóalle cıkarup ve ãaàír ve kebír ol maóalle cem‘ olup ve
916
917
918
Demosthenes
Cassander
Phocion
340
bi’l-cümle müvÀcehesinde her bir maôlÿm ve ma‘õÿr-ı mezbÿr ùarafından her kim ise gelüp ve
herkese ôulm ettiği úadar ôulmı taúrír idüp yüzüne úarşu şetÿm-ı àalíôa şetm-i ‘aôím iderdi.
Ve kırk gün ‘ala’t- tevÀli maôlÿmlar ve ma‘õÿrlar gelüp ‘öõr-i ôulümleriñ taúrírinden
soñra şetÿm-i şení‘a ile şetm iderlerdi. Ve kırkıncı gün maôlÿm ve ma‘õÿrlarıñ eşeddlerine
ùaşlarıyla urdurup úatl eylediler. Ve vÀlí-yi cedíd olan Dimitri selefiniñ böyle muãíbetiñ
müşÀhede eyledikden soñra öyle óalím ve selím ve ra’ÿf raóím oldu ki Atina`nıñ ãaàíri ve
kebíri başına and icerlerdi. Ve àÀyet muóabbetlerinden taãvíriñ düzüb ve ma‘bedlerinde vaø‘
itmişler idi.
Ve şÀh Úasandro ve böyle revişler ile celb kalup idüp ve ‘aôím ‘asker cem‘ idüp ol
daòı babası intiúÀmıñ aòõ içün Anaùolı [210b] ùarafına gecüb ùavÀyif-i mülÿk ile on sene
miúdÀrı ‘aôím cengler idüp ve cok úal‘alar ve şehirler fetó eyledi. Ve ùavÀyif-i mülÿk şöyle
re’y-i müstaósen gördiler ki Anaùolı şÀhlarından Andaàno919 nÀmında bir cerí ve cesÿr ve
muóÀrebe muúÀteleye mÀhir ve óarb-i òud‘alarında kÀmil olmaàın cümlesi ‘alÀ iútidÀrihim
merúÿm Andaàno`ya ‘asker ve zaòÀyir ve ÀlÀt irsÀl eylesünler. Ve ol Rÿm şÀhı Úasandro ile
dÀ’im muóÀrebe ve muúÀtele eyleye ve hem öyle eylediler ve merúÿm Anaùolı ŞÀhıyla Rÿm
ŞÀhı dÀ’im uğraş üzere olurlardı. VelÀkin Rÿm ŞÀhı seòÀ ve iósÀn ve rÿy-ı dil ve meróamet ve
şefúat yüzün gösterdiğinden kendi ‘askeri metÀnet üzere oldukdan soñra Anaùolı ‘askeri daòı
raàbet idüp ve Anaùolı ŞÀhı Andaàno920 firÀr idüp Rÿm ŞÀhına intisÀb iderlerdi. Ol vechile
dÀ’im Rÿm ŞÀhı manãÿr olurdı.
Ve Anaùolu ŞÀhı ‘Àciz olup ve bir àayrı [211a] tedbír taãavvur idüp Anaùolu
sevÀóilinden vÀfir sefÀyin peydÀ idüp ve nice vÀfir ‘asker koyub ve Dimitri921 nÀmında bir
müdebbir oàlu olup ve anı donanma üzerine ser-‘asker naãb idüp ve şöyle tenbíh eyledi ki:
“Rÿmili medíneleriniñ a‘ôam ve eşbehi Atina`dür. Ùoğrı donanma ile Atina`ya varsun ve
rıfúıyla Atina ahÀlísini bend itmeğe sa‘y-i belíà idesin. Ve anlara bir teklíf itmeyesin ve
muótÀc oldığın õaòíre vesÀ’ir eşyÀyı iki úÀt bahÀsıyla iştirÀ idesin ve fuúarÀ ve øu‘efÀ sına
keåret üzere iósÀnlar idesin. Ve eğer Atina úabø-ı taãarrufuna eyüce rÀm olur ise bu ùarafa
òaber ile saña keåret üzere ‘asker ve òaõíne irsÀl ideyim” deyüp ve òaõíne-i keåíre ve ‘asker-i
mütekÀåire ile Atina`ya irsÀl eyledi. Merúÿm Dimitri donanma bí-nihÀye ile ùoğrı Atina`ya
gelüp ve Atina ahÀlísi ol donanma-yı ‘aôíme[y]i gördüklerinde cÀn başlarına sıcrayub ne ide
[211b] cekleriñ bilmeyüb Dimitri daòı ba‘ø-ı adamlarıñ me’kÿlÀt iştirÀsiyçün ùaşra gönderup
919
920
921
Antigonos Gonatas
Antigonus Gonatas
Demetrius
341
ve bir altÿnluú õaòíreye beş altÿn virdiler. Ve Atina bunlara buraya uğramadan murÀdıñız
nedür? cevÀb virdiler ki: “Biz misÀfiriz Àòar diyÀra me’mÿruz ancak ser-‘askerimiz
şehõÀdedür ve Atina`nıñ evãÀf-ı celílesiniñ ve ‘acÀyib u ebniyyesin mesmÿ‘ı olmaàın
Atina`yı seyr itmek içün ve hem yolumuz üstü olmaàın uğradı.” didiklerinde anlar daòı bir
miúdÀr nüzÿl-i ni‘met ve hediye-i behiyye ile donanmaya inub şehõÀdeye buluşdılar. Ve
diyÀrlarını seyrÀn itmek içün da‘vet eylediler.
ŞehõÀde daòı bir miúdÀr istifnÀdan soñra icÀbet idüp ve ‘askerine tenbíh olunmuş idi
ki; ücer yüz ve beşer yüz muttaãıla[n] ta‘úíb eylesünler ve fi’l-vÀúí‘ öyle olup şehõÀde Atina
sarÀyına vuãÿl ve cülÿsdan soñra donanmadan kırk elli biñ miúdÀrı [212a] ‘asker şehõÀdeniñ
olduğı sarÀy eùrÀfına cem‘ oldı ve bir eóade turş-rÿy olmadılar. Ve me’kÿl ve meşrÿblarıñ
iø‘Àf ve muøÀ‘af bahÀ ile iştirÀ eylediler. Ve Atina ahÀlísi şehõÀde[y]i üc gün êıyÀfet
eyledikden soñra dívÀn idüp Atina ahÀlísi rÿy-ı dil ile murÀd ve maúãadı olan Atina tesòírini
beyÀn eyledi Atina ahÀlísi daòı lÀ-‘ilÀc olup şehõÀde úabÿl eylediler. Ve Rÿm şÀhı ùarafından
vÀlí olan Dimitri`yi rencíde itmeyüp küşÀd virdi. Ol daòı Rÿm şÀhına varup aóvÀli beyÀn
eyledikde, Rÿm şÀhı daòı kırk elli biñ ‘asker ile bir ser-‘asker Atina`ya mustevlí olan
şehzade[y]i ref‘ içün irsÀl eyledi. Ve ol ser-‘asker gelüp Atina`ya bu‘di dört sÀ‘at olan Lisina
nÀm maóalle kondukda şehõÀde Atina ahÀlísine zaómet virmeyüb kendi ‘askeriyle ser-‘askere
muúÀbil olup bir kac kere muúÀtele ve uğrÀş olup [212b] ve encÀmında şehõÀde àÀlib olup
ser-‘askeri úatl ve yanında olan Rÿmíleri perÀkende ve períşÀn eyledi. Ve ba‘dehÿ Atina`yı
istiúlÀl ile óükÿmet idüp ve úÀnÿn olan tekÀlífi ‘afv itmeyüp üzerlerine vaø‘ eyledi. Ve
Atina`ya şehõÀdeniñ istiúlÀl üzere óükÿmetiñ mesmÿ‘ı olan Anaùolı ‘askeri Atina`ya raàbet
idüp şehõÀdeniñ pederi ùarafıñ terk idüp ulam ulam Atina`ya gelmeğe başladılar. Ve ol ecilden
şehõÀdeniñ pederiniñ ‘askerine úıllet ùÀri olup Rÿm şÀhı àalebe itmeğe başladı ve bu ùarafda
şehõÀde yanında Atina`da yüz biñden mütecÀviz ‘asker cem‘ oldı. Ve lÀ ‘ilÀc olup şehõÀdeniñ
pederi şehõÀde[y]i imdÀd içün yanına da‘vet eyledi. Ve şehõÀde daòı icÀbet idüp ve varup ve
pederine imdÀd idüp Rÿm ŞÀhını bozub períşÀn eylediler. Ve bu ùarafda Atina şehõÀdeniñ
vekílini nefy idüp ve Atina`dan sürdiler. Ve iclerinden [213a] Lazkiro922 namında bir vÀlí naãb
eylediler ve bir de’b-i úadím istiúlÀl ãevdÀsında oldılar. Ve mezbÿr şehõÀdeye Atina`ya
úÀymaúÀm naãb eylediği adam varup Atina ahÀlísiniñ istiúlÀl sevdÀsını teblíà eyledikde
şehõÀde yine aôím ‘asker ve donanma ile Atina`ya geldi ve Atina inúıyÀd itmeyüp muúÀbil
olup muúÀtele eylediler. Ancak şehõÀdeniñ ‘askeri àÀyet .. cengÀver olduğundan Atina ‘askeri
münhezim olup úal‘aya maóãÿr oldılar. Ve úal‘a àÀyet ãarb olduğundan müddet-i muóÀãara
medíd olup õaòíre ve su òuãÿãunda ‘aôím åiúletler ùÀrí oldı ve lÀ-‘ilÀc olup istímÀn ile úal‘ayı
922
Laskaris
342
teslím eylediler. Ve şehõÀde meróamet idüp ve ãaàír ve kebíriñ suclarını ‘afv eyledi. Ve bi’lcümle şehõÀdeniñ òÀk-i pÀyine cümlesi düşüb bendliği úabÿl eylediler.
Ve müddet-i vÀfire şehõÀde Atina vÀlisi olup ve úaóù senelerinde Anaùolı yakasında
õaòíre-i vÀfire [213b] ile fuúarÀyı ve aàniyÀyı iànÀ eyledi. Ve cümle Atina`nıñ ãaàír u kebíri
merúÿm şehõÀdeden òoşnÿd olup ve şehõÀde daòı Atina`nıñ Àb u havÀsından àÀyet óaôô
eylediğinden Atina`dan ra‘nÀ ve óüsn ve leùÀfetde bí-hemtÀ kızlar ile izdivÀc ile ülfet ve
leõõetli ãoóbetlere vÀãıl oldığından babası Andaàno daòı fevt oldukda Anatolu taótıgÀnda
úÀymaúÀmlar naãb idüp ve Atina`dan óareket eylemedi ve bir sürÿr u zevú ile Atina`da ve
Anaùolu`da şÀhlıú eyledi.
Ve ba‘dehÿ fevt olup iki oàlu kalup biri Anatolu taótına heves idüp biri Atina`da kaldı.
Ve bunlar daòı bir müddet Atina`da sürÿr u óubÿr ile evúÀt-güzÀr iken Roma pÀdişÀhı ‘azamet
ile müteraúúí olup ve Atina`nıñ ùarafından Anatolu vÀlísi olduğundan hazm itmeyüp ve ‘aôím
donanma peydÀ idüp ve ‘asker bí-nihÀye cem‘ idüp àÀyet mükemmel tedÀrik ile Atina`ya
Sila923 nÀmında ve kÀr u zÀr ‘ilminde mÀhir bir vezíriñ [214a] irsÀl eyledi. Ve sibÀríş eyledi
ki:
“Elbette Atina tesòírini senden isterim. ZírÀ Atina erbÀb-ı ma‘Àrif ile memlÿ olup ve
derÿnunda bu úadar óükemÀ-yı feylosof olup rÿy-ı arøda medíne-yi merúÿmsa genc-i
ma‘Àrifdur ve benim daòı anı tesòírden murÀdım yine medíne-yi mezbÿreyi nice medÀris ve
kütübòÀneleri binÀ idüp ve erbÀb-ı ehl-i ma‘Àrif ve bí-úıyÀã zümre-i ãÀóib-i dÀniş ve óikmet
ile toldurayım. HemÀn baãíret üzere olup dilberÀne ve merdÀne óareketler idüp fetó u tesòíri
sa‘y-ı belíà üzere olasın. Ve eğer ‘asker ve mühimmÀta daòı muótÀc olursañ i‘lÀm eyle, saña
imdÀd içün istiãóÀb eylediğin ‘askeriñ øu‘efÀ mertebesi daòı ‘asker irsÀl iderim. Ve eğer daòı
ziyÀdeye muótÀc olursañ biõõÀt kendim daòı mÿr u mÀr mÀnend ‘asker-i bí-şümÀr ile
imdÀdına gitmeğe óÀøır ve muóeyyÀ üzereyim. HemÀn ne vech ile olur ise olsun fetó u tesòíri
içün iúdÀm-ı sa‘y bir an terk [214b] itmeyesin!” deyüp dört beş yüz pÀre yelken ile mezbÿr
Sila vezíri serdÀr ve ser‘asker idüp Atina üzerine irsÀl eyledi. Ve muvÀfıú-ı eyyÀm ile bir gün
gelüp Atina úıyılarına yanaşub ‘asker dökdi ve Atina vÀlísiniñ ve ahÀlísiniñ bu düşmÀndan
aãlÀ òaberi olmadığı ecilden àÀyet tedÀriksiz bulundular. Ve her ne óÀl ise mevcÿd bulunanlar
düşmÀna muúÀbil olup birkac gün meãÀf-ı cengi lÀkin düşmÀn-ı keåír ve tedÀriki àÀyet kebír
olmaàın bi’ø-øarÿre zebÿn olup velÀkin meãÀf-ı cengi eyyÀmında muóÀãara tedÀrikin daòı
Atina ahÀlísi görüb úal‘a derÿnunda ‘aôím zeòÀyir ve ÀlÀt-ı ceng tedÀrik eylediler. Ve fuúarÀ
923
Silas the Roman
343
ve øu‘efÀ larıñ ve nisvÀn ùÀ’ifesiniñ ekåerini Eàriboz ve İstefe diyÀrlarına irsÀl eylediler.
Ancak hemÀn óarb u êarba úÀdir olanlar kaldı. İòtiyÀr u nisvÀn u ãıbyÀn bi’l-cümle İstefe ve
Eàriboz`a irsÀl olındı. Ve Roma ùarafından ‘asker ve zeòÀyir azdı. AãlÀ [215a] úaù‘
olunmayub bir gün mürÿr itmezdi; illÀ beş on pÀre sefíne ‘asker ve zeòÀyir ile gelurdi. Ve
vardıkca Roma ‘askeri taúviyet ve Atina ‘askeri øa‘f ve úıllet üzere olmaàın bi’ø-øarÿre Atina
‘askeri úal‘aya maóãÿr oldılar.
Ve muóÀãarada ‘aôím metÀnet üzere oldılar; lÀkin Roma ser-‘askerini tedÀrik-i keåír
ve ‘asker-i cerí ve cesÿr ve vÀfir olmaàın yevmen fe-yevmen úuvvet ve úudretleri mütezÀyid
olup ceng u muóÀãara hevesleri teraúúí bulup ve derÿnlarına füùÿr aãlÀ ùÀrí olmazdı. Ve
Atinavíler`den ve úal‘adan ve Romavíler`den muóÀrebe ve muúÀteleden münfekk olmayup ve
bir kac def‘a Atina vÀlisiniñ Anaùolı`da olan úarındaşından ve imdÀd ve õaòíre geldi. Ancak
Roma ‘askeri vardıkca mÀr u mÿrden ziyÀde olup gelen imdÀd ve õaòíreniñ bir ferdini ve bir
óabbesini derÿn-ı úal‘aya duòÿl mümkün olmayup [215b] úahr ve àalebe ile imdÀdı bozub ve
õaòíre[y]i aòõ iderlerdi. VelÀkin Roma`dan her gün ‘asker ve õaòíre Roma ‘askerine vÀãıl
olmada idi. Bu vechile bir iki sene maóãÿr olup ve õaòírelerine infidÀd ùÀrí olup ve muøÀyaúai ‘aôíme maóãÿr olanlara terettüb ve te‘Àúub óÀãıl olup bi’ø-øarÿre àayret cengini iderlerdi.
Ve maóãÿrlar aclıúdan àÀyet øa‘íf-i fevt olmağa ba‘øıları úarín olmuşlar iken fırãat
bulup derÿn-i úal‘adan firÀra başladılar. Ve úal‘adan cıkanları Roma öñüne götürüb ve
bunlara rÿy-ı dil gösterüb úal‘anıñ maóall-i ôafer ve yürüyüş olan yerlerini òaber alup ve
eyüce tedÀrik görüb maóall-i ôafer olan yerlerden yüriyüş eylediler. Maóãÿr olanlar muúÀbele
ile müdÀfa‘aya úÀdir olamayub çÀr-nÀ-cÀr àalebe eyleyüb yürüyiş ile bir tÀríòinde altmış úal‘a
değil iken bu def‘a [216a] yüriyüş ile fetó olındı ve Roma ‘askeri maóãÿrlarıñ ekåerini ùu‘me-i
şimşír idüp boğaz kefen sarup “amÀn el-amÀn!” ãadÀsını peyveste-i ÀsumÀn idenlere amÀn
virdiler. Ve bi’l-cümle Atina`nıñ derÿn ve bírÿnını bi’l-cümle fetó eylediler. Ve Roma şÀhına
Atina fetói müjdesiyle gidenlere ‘aôím iósÀnlar idüp manãıblar virmişdür. Ve mezbÿr Roma
şÀhı erbÀb-ı dÀniş ve ma‘Àrifden olup kendiniñ ‘ulÿm-ı óikemiyyede intisÀbı olmaàın bi’lcümle Roma erbÀb-ı ma‘Àrifiñ ve dÀniş-i óikmet zümresinde olanları yanına bi’l-cümle
istiãóÀb idüp bi’õ-õÀt bi-nefsihí ‘aôím donanma ile Atina`ya gelüp ve Atina`nıñ medreseleri
tevsí‘ ve tekåír idüp ve nice kütübòÀneler binÀ idüp ‘ulÿm-ı óikemiyye-i naôariyye ve
sÀ’irlerini kitÀblara tedvín itdürup ve bi’l-cümle Atina`nıñ óÀãılını medreselere ve ùalebe-i
‘ulÿma ve faúr u ta‘yín idüp ve tedrís [216b] ve derse bir mertebe teràíb ve taóríã eyledi ki,
Atina şehriniñ nıãfından ziyÀdesi medrese ve dersóÀne ve kütübòÀne ve mekteb binÀ olunmuş
idi.
344
Ve şÀh-ı mezbÿr Atina`ya sÀkin olup ve bi’l-cümle Rÿmili eùrÀfı ve cezírelere ‘asker
irsÀl idüp Roma şÀhı`na tÀbi‘ úıldılar ve her bÀr meclisinde futÿn-ı şitÀya mÀhir medreseler ve
dÀnişmendler da‘vet idüp münÀôara ve müùÀraóa itdürup zevú-yÀb olurdı. Ve Atina derÿnunda
olan ma‘bedler eflÀka menãÿb olmaàın şÀh-ı mezbÿr bir gün dívÀn idüp Atina ahÀlísine cevÀb
eyledi ki: “Bi’l-cümle ma‘bedleriñiz eflÀk-ı şu‘Àya nisbet olunur ya ‘arø göklerden daòı úaríb
olup ve bu úadar menfa‘at-ı keåíresine nÀ’il olursuz; ya arø içün bir ma‘bed olsun niçün binÀ
eylemediñiz?” deyüp ve bilÀòare Bitri nÀmındaki kiniseyi binÀ eyledi. “Yer ma‘bedi” dimek
olur ve óÀlÀ ol [217a] kenisa .. nÀmında mevøi‘de durur. Ve Roma Frenkleri Atina`ya óÀlÀ
geldikce ol kiniseye ‘aôím raàbet ile ta‘ôím iderler. Ve bunuñ emåÀli nice müfsideleri var idi.
Ez-cümle ol vaútde ma‘bÿda taúarrup içün olan úurbÀn ve me’kÿlÀt úısmından olan
ãadaúÀtı ma‘bedler óavlisinde maòãÿã yerlerde iórÀú iderlerdi. Ve şÀh-ı mezbÿr arø
tengrisiyçün binÀ eylediği kiniseye emr eyledi ki; arødan münbit olan óubÿbÀt vesÀ’ir dÀneler
ve yemişlerden her ne ki anlardan intifÀ‘ idersiz anlarıñ ãadaúalarını sakınub Àòar kinisÀlara
varup iórÀú itmeyesiz, deyu anlar daòı arødan intifÀ‘ eyledikleri óinùa ve şe’ír vesÀ’ir
óubÿbÀtıñ cümlesinden iútiøÀ iden ãadaúÀtı Roma şÀhınıñ arø tegrisiyçün binÀ eylediği kinisÀ
óavlusından ùaşıyub iórÀú iderlerdi. Ve bundan aúdem mufaããal-ı tafãíl olunan güleşciler
meydÀnını [217b] şÀh-ı mezbÿr mÀl-ı vÀfir ãarf idüp tevsí‘ eylemişdur ve àÀyet maùbÿ‘ ve
meràÿb eyledi.
Ve Atina üzerine Roma devletiniñ óükÿmeti mutemÀdi olup Roma şÀhlarından
Aàustoz924 nÀmında olan şÀh devrinde ‘ÍsÀ (a.s.) dünyÀya gelmişdür ve Atina ahÀlísini dín-i
‘ÍsÀ (a.s.) üzere da‘vete ÓavÀriyyÿndan biri Atina`ya Apolsotoli nÀmında gelmişdür. Ve
Atina úadímü’l-eyyÀmda bir vebÀ-yı ‘aôím olup ve mezbÿr ùÀ‘ÿnı def‘ içün ‘uúÿl-ı ‘aşar içün
binÀ olunan kinisÀlarına cem‘ olunup ãaàír ve kebír ve envÀ‘-i .. meõellet birle ‘arø-ı
‘ubÿdiyyet itdikce tÀ‘ÿn-ı mezbÿr müzdÀd olurdı. Ve bi’ø-øarÿre lÀ-‘ilÀc kalup ne vechile
mezbÿr vebÀ[y]ı def‘ idecekleri taóayyurunda oldukca óÀùırlarına bu geldi ki; “Bizim
bilmeyüb ve i‘tiúÀd eylediğimiz bir tañrı vardur ki ol tegri bize àaêab idüp bu ùÀ‘ÿnı irsÀl
eylemişdir gelin bilmediğimiz tañrı içün daòı bir ma‘bed binÀ idelim” [218a] didiler ve cümle
ittifÀú idüp bilmedikleri tañrı içün daòı bir kinisÀ binÀ eylediler. Ve bi-emrillÀhi te‘ÀlÀ ol
vebÀ-yı ‘aôím üzerlerinden def‘ u ref‘ oldı ve ÓavÀriyyÿndan mezbÿr rÀhib Apolsotoli925
Atina`ya da‘vet içün geldi ve Atina óalúını küfr üzere àÀyet şedíd buldı. Ve dín-i ‘ÍsÀ (a.s.)
da‘vet içün bahÀne- òÀh iken mezbÿr bilinmeyen tañrı içün binÀ olunan kinisÀnıñ úapÿsı
924
925
Augustus
Apostle Paul
345
üzerinde ùÀ‘ÿn def‘iycün “Bilinmeyen ma‘bÿd kinisÀsıdür” deyu taórír olındı. Ve mezbÿr
Apolsotoli bu ùÀ’ife[y]i dín-i ‘ÍsÀ (a.s.) da‘vet içün “Bu bir eyü bahÀnedir” deyüp ve da‘vete
bed’ eyledi. Ve Atina ahÀlísiniñ senÀdid-i ‘anídleri ol da‘vetleri mesmÿ‘ları oldukda ma‘bed-i
kebírleri derÿnunda cem‘ olunup ve mezbÿr dín-i ‘ÍsÀ`ya da‘vet iden Apolsotoli`yi iclerine
ióøÀr eylediler. Ve “Sen kimsin ve nereden gelursin ve da‘vet eylediği dín nasıl díndir?” deyu
suÀl [218b] eylediklerinde Apolsotoli cevÀbında “Ben babasız ve bí-zevÀl olan Allah`ıñ
kelimesi olup ve mürsel beyàamberi olan ‘ÍsÀ (a.s.) da‘vet eylediği díne da‘vet iderim”
didikde, Atina keferesi didiler ki: “Ol oğlan tañrı naãıl tañrıdur?” didiler Apolsotoli daòı didi
ki: “Ol bir olan tañrı[y]ı siz bilürsiz ve ol tañrıya siz ímÀn geturduñuz ve ricÀ ve niyÀz idüp ve
ùÀ‘ÿn def‘iycün ve niyÀzıñız maúbÿl olup ùÀ‘ÿnı üzeriñizden def‘ eylemişdir. Ve ol ma‘bÿd bir
bí-zevÀl içün başka ‘ibÀdet içün bir ma‘bed ve kinisÀ binÀ eylediñiz” didikde mebhÿt u
óayretde kalup ve ùÀ‘ÿn òavfından inkÀr daòı idemediler ve Apolsotoli taãdíú eylediler ve kırk
gün ‘avÀm ve cehelelerine bu da‘veti teblíà içün kırk gün mühlet aldılar zírÀ óüsn-i ta‘bír ile
‘avÀm ve cehelemize bu da‘veti teblíà eylesiñ icimizde fitne ve fesÀd óÀãıl olur” didiler ve
fi’l-vÀúi‘ öyle eylediler bi’l-cümle ãaàír u kebír [219a] ve vaêí‘-i refí‘ ma‘bed-i kebírlerinde
cem‘ olup ve óulÀãa-yı kelÀmları buña müncerr oldı ki vebÀnıñ ref‘iycün ricÀ ve niyÀz
eylediğimiz görünmez ve bilmediğimiz tañrıya da‘vet içün ve ol díne girmek içün müstaúil
adam geldi, ne dirsüz? Eğer ol da‘veti ve díni úabÿl itmez iseñiz iótimÀldür ol tañrı bize
àaêab idüp ve yine bize ol ùÀ‘ÿnı gönderir ve eğer úabÿl ider isek ‘atíú tañrılarımızı terk itmek
iútiøÀ ider, cümleñiz re’[y]i nedür? Buyuruñ!” didiler. LÀ-‘ilÀc kalup cümlesi ùÀ‘ÿn òavfından
da‘veti úabÿl ideriz” didiler. Ve mezbÿr Apolsotoli`yi ol meclise da‘vet eylediler ve dín-i ‘ÍsÀ
(a.s.) telúín ile deyüb niyÀz eylediler. Ol daòı ber-muúteøÀ-yı İncíl Atina ahÀlísi bi’l-cümle
dín-i ‘ÍsÀ (a.s.) úabÿl eylediler. Ve cümle kenisÀlarına ín dín-i ‘ÍsÀ (a.s.) Apolsotoli telúín
üzere icrÀ eylediler. Ve Apolsotoli926 bir sene Atina`da olup ‘ilm-i İncíl`i úabÿl-i dín idenlere
[219b] ta‘lím eyledi. Ve cümlesi ta‘allum eylediler ve ba‘dehÿ bi’l-cümle Rÿmili`ne dín-i
‘ÍsÀ (a.s.) neşr eylediler.
Ve bi’l-cümle Rÿmili dín-i ‘ÍsÀ (a.s.) úabÿl eylediler ve her bir diyÀrdan gelüp dín-i
‘ÍsÀ (a.s.) Atina`dan ta‘allum iderlerdi. VelÀkin Atina óükemÀsı bi’l-cümle ‘ulÿm-ı
óikemiyyeyi terk itmeyüp ‘ilm-i óikmet medreseleri ‘uúÿl-ı ‘aşara ile oldukları i‘tiúÀdını terk
eylediler ancak sÀ’ir mesÀ’il-i óikmeti ta‘lím ve ta‘allum iderlerdi. Ve Atina`dan ‘askerí
ùÀ’ifesi olmayup ekåeri ‘Àlim ve ùÀlib-i ‘ilm olup ve úuãÿr-ı erbÀb-ı ãınÀi‘ ve rencber ve zirÀ‘at
ehli olup ‘Àlim ve ùÀlib-i ‘ilmlerine evúÀf ta‘yín olunup medreseleriyle köyler ve ùÀliblerine
926
Paul the Apostle
346
vaôífeler ta‘yín olındı. Roma şÀhları ol ‘askerí àÀ’ilesini anlardan ref‘ eylediler. Ve Roma
devleti dem-À-dem müteraúúí olup bi’l-cümle Atina Rÿmili ve cezírelerden ve Anaùolu
sevÀóili ve Karadeñiz sevÀóili ve ‘Arabistan ve ‘Acemistan surlarına varınca bi’l-cümle Roma
[220a] şÀhları óükmünde olup ve bir şÀh elbette bir kere olsun Atina seyriycün Atina`ya
gelurlerdi. Ve her biri birer aåÀr-ı celíle ve úÀnÿn-ı meràÿbe iódÀå iderlerdi.
Yine Roma şÀhlarından
927
ryanuEnde nÀm bir şÀh-ı mu‘aôôam gelüp Atina`nıñ i‘tidÀl
Àb u havÀsından nÀşí Atina`da cokca oturup vesÀ’ir diyÀrlarda ba‘ø-ı maraølara mübtelÀ olup
ve gelüp Atina`da iúÀmeti müddetinde mezbÿr maraølardan bi-lÀ-‘ilÀc òalÀã oldığından Atina
ebniyye-i ‘aôíme iódÀå eyledi bÀ-òuãÿã óÀlÀ “Belúıs taótı” tesmiye olunan serÀy-ı ‘adímü’lmisli Enderyanu binÀ eyledi ve àÀyet kebír olup arø u ùÿli dÀ’iren mÀ-dÀr bir meyl-i istí‘Àb
iderdi. Ol mertebe müzeyyen ve maóbÿb ve ãÀfí muãanna‘ binÀ olunmuş ki, ol vaútde
‘adímü’l-miål olup her gelüp seyr iden óayrÀn ve ãer-gerdÀn kalurdı. Ve yüz yigirmi ‘amalí
sütÿn-ı ‘acíb u àaríb binÀ eyledi ki her biriniñ ùÿl u úaddi yigirmişer [220b] zirÀ‘a şeşòÀne
müdevver u tedvíriñ arøı dokuz zirÀ‘a olup ve ol sütÿnlar üzerine bir cihÀn-nümÀ-yı ‘Àlem
binÀ eyledi ki, ol daòı ‘adímü’l-miål idi. Ve bi’l-cümle cihÀn-nümÀdan àayrı serÀy-ı mezbÿruñ
odaları taótÀní olup ve döşemesi ãÀfí beyÀø mermerden ve bi’l-cümle divÀrları daòı beyÀø
mermerden olup ve revzenleri pirinc úafeãler ile ve bi’l-cümle úapÿlar ve revzen úapaúlar
pirinc ve tÿ[n]cdan dökülmüş idi ve óücerÀt derÿnları sedli ve divÀrlı ãÀfí mermerden
muãanna‘ ve meràÿb binÀ olunmuş ve óücerÀt ùavÀnları daòı ãÀfí mermerden muãanni‘ vaø‘
olunup ve zeberced ile tezyín olunmuş ve àÀyet ‘Àlí úubbeli dívÀn-òÀneler ve bi’l-cümle
óücürÀt ve dívÀn-òÀneleri sedli olup ve her bir dívÀn-òÀne ve óayÀt üzerlerine óavlu icinde
ãu‘ÿd içün iki cÀnibli on beşer úademe nerdbÀnlar ãÀfí kÀr-gír ve muãanni‘ mermerlerden binÀ
olunup ve óavlu derÿnunda [221a] dört beş kerre yüz biñ ‘asker girse ùolmazdı. Ve óavlı
úapusunuñ kemeri óÀlÀ bÀkídir. Ve dört beş yük yan yana girse sığar. İstanbul cÀmi‘leriniñ
úubbe kemerleri úadar ‘iôÀm ve vüs‘ati var. Ve óÀlÀ mezbÿr sütÿnlardan on dokuz sütÿn
minÀre úad mevcÿddür.
Ve mezbÿr ŞÀh ol sarÀyı binÀ itmek murÀd eyledikde dört koyun õebó eyleyüb ve
soyub Atina`nıñ cevÀnib-i erba‘asıda birer yüksek dürek üzerinde ber-havÀ .. eylediler. Ve
üzerlerin istişmÀmları úaví adamlar ta‘yín eylediler. Ve tenbíh ve sipÀriş eylediler ki, her
úankızıñ koyunu kokmağa başladıkda gelüp şÀha òaber eylediler àarb ùarafı bir bucuk günde
kokdı ve şimÀl ve cenÿb ùarafları iki bucuk günde kokdı ve şarú ùarafında olan meõbÿó koyun
üc günde kokdı ve ol sarÀyı ol ùarafa binÀ eyledi. Ve fi’l-vÀúi‘ol cÀy-ı muferreóiñ havÀsı àÀyet
927
Hadrian
347
laùíf ve óafífdir. [221b] Ol semte düşen maóallÀtıñ insÀnı sarÀya úaríb olanlar àÀyet úaviyyü’lbeden cerí ve cesÿr ve her dÀ’im òoşnut üzere olup ekåer ya kibr u ‘aôamet üzereler. Ve
derÿn-i sarÀyda òazíneler ve kütübòÀneler ùaró olunup úadímden Atina`da bÀúí úalan
müzeyyen ve ãÀfí õeheb u fuêêa ve mücevher puùlu kiniselerden ref‘ olunup ol òaõínelere vaø‘
olındı ve keõÀlik ‘ulÿm-ı ‘aúlí ve naúlí ve àarÀib u ‘acÀyib ve nÀrnecÀt ve ùalÀsım ve envÀ‘
fütÿn-i şitÀda mü’ellef olan ‘ulÿmuñ aãl nüsóaları pirincden elvÀóa yazılub serÀyda binÀ
olunan kütübòÀnelere vaø‘ olındı. Óín-i iútiøÀda eğer nüsóası ùaşra bulunmaz ise ol pirinc
elvÀódan istinsÀò iderlerdi.
Ve ol serÀy-ı bí naôírde şÀhlardan àayrı kimesne sÀkin olmazdı. Ve ol serÀy-ı
‘adímü’l-naôíriñ cihÀn-nümÀsı muúÀbilinde úal‘a zír-i dÀmeninde [222a] iki kebír mermer
direk vaø‘ olunup rÿy-ı deryÀ úarşusunda olup ve bir ayine-i cihÀn-nümÀ vaø‘ eylediler ki
serÀy cihÀn-nümÀsı rÿy-ı deryÀyı muóÀù oldığı mevÀøı‘ı ve cezírelerden her úanúı gemi ve
úayıú ve sefíne mürÿr ider ise Àyin derÿnuna naúş olup ve Àyine daòı serÀy cihÀn-nümÀsına
‘aks olup mürÿr iden sefÀyin derÿnlarında her ne kim mevcÿd ise nümÀyÀn olurdı, dostu ve
düşmÀnı farú iderlerdi.
Ve daòı bunlarıñ emåÀli ãanÀyi‘ iódÀå eylemişler idi ve minvÀl-i muóarrer üzere Roma
şÀhlarından vÀfir şÀhlar mürÿr eyledi ve sinín-i keåíre ve vuóÿr-i? vÀfireden soñra Roma
şÀhlarından Úosùanùín928 nÀm şÀh-ı ‘aôím ôuhÿr idüp ol daòı rub‘-i meskÿnuñ ekåerine úahr ile
àÀlib olup ve ‘Àlemi devr iderken óÀlÀ İstanbul oldığı mekÀna geldikde ol mekÀnı beğenüb bir
şehr-i mu‘aôôam [222b] binÀsı derÿnuna ilhÀm olunup ve bi’l-cümle memÀlikinde olan
binÀları ve mühendisleri ùaşcı ve òÀkkÀklar cem‘ idüp ve rub‘-i meskÿnda òarÀb olmuş
şehirleri ve mu‘aùùal kalmış binÀları òabír olanları cem‘ idüp ve elli biñ miúdÀrı ıràÀd ve elli
biñ binÀ ve ùaşcıları cem‘ idüp ve bir rivÀyetde ol şehriñ binÀsı ve mekÀnı ve miúdÀrı bi’lcümle vÀúı‘asında tenbíh olındı. Ve bir rivÀyetde İstanbul eùrÀfında ‘askeriyle konmuşken ava
cıkub ve bir ceyrÀn ôuóur idüp ve bi’õ-õÀt kendü ceyrÀn ardından ayrılmayub ve ‘askerinden
dûr olup óÀlÀ İstanbul óıãnı olan yere ceyrÀn vÀãıl oldukda àÀib olup ve bir şaòã-ı vaúÿr şekl
ôÀhir olup şÀh şaòã-ı mezbÿrı gördükde suÀl eyledikde, “Sen kimin adamısın?” dedikde, şaòã-ı
mezbÿr cevÀb virdi ki: “Ben saña bir şehr-i mu‘aôôam ve mekÀnını göstermek [223a] içün
ta‘yín olunmuş kimesneyim, bu mekÀn bir maúÀm-ı mübÀrekdür ki rÿy-ı arøda aãlÀ naôíri ve
niddi yokdur. ZírÀ Akdeñiz ve Karadeñiz cem‘ olındığı mekÀndur. Ve bu bir mekÀndur ki
bunda olan şehr, úaóù u àalÀ sebebiyle òarÀb olmaz. ZírÀ bu şehre Karadeñiz`den ve
Akdeñiz`den ve Rÿmili`nden ve Anaùolı`dan ve ‘Arabistan`dan ve Hind`en zeòÀyir berren ve
928
Constantin the Great
348
baóren lÀ-yenúaùı‘ gelur. Ve emtí‘a-ı nefíse ve òaysíse aãlÀ münfekk olmayup gelmekde ve bir
ùaraf úaóù olur ise ùaraf-ı Àòar bol olur bu şehriñ sÀkinleri ziyÀde úaóù cekub ve àalÀdan helÀk
ve perÀkende ve períşÀn olmaz. Nitekim medÀyin-i úadíme-i kebíreniñ úaóù u àalÀdan ahÀlísi
helÀk ve períşÀn olup ve şehirler òarÀb oldığı gibi bu şehir úaóù u àalÀdan òarÀb olmaz” ve
bunuñ emåÀli teràíbÀù ile şÀh-ı Úosùanùín `iñ úalb ve derÿn-i şehir binÀsına [223b] şöyle mÀ’íl
oldu ki ol Ànda yapmağa ‘aôímet eyledi. Ve şaòã gelindi şÀhım saña cürmiñi göstereyim
deyüp dÀ’iren-mÀ-dÀr şÀha şaòã-ı mezbÿr, mezbÿr İstanbul úal‘asınıñ istib‘Àb eylediği cürmi
gösterüb ve nişÀnlar vaø‘ iderek bi’l-cümle İstanbul úal‘asınıñ dÀ’iresini gösterdi. Ve úal‘anıñ
mükÀlemesi tamÀm oldukdan soñra şaòã-ı mezbÿr àÀib oldı. Ve şÀhıñ ‘askeri ôuhÿr eyledi ve
minvÀl-i muóarrer üzere ‘illet-i mÀddiye ve fÀ‘iliyyesine şurÿ‘ eyledi. Ve şaòã-ı mezbÿr içün
şÀh taóayyürde kalup bilmedi, kim olduğı ve vüzerÀ vükelÀsı şaòã-ı merúÿmı cok aradılar
velÀkin bulmak mümkün olmadı; ve bi’ø-øarÿre şaòã-ı merúÿm yÀ melekdur veyÀ Óıøır`dur
didiler.
Ve elli biñ ıràÀd temel úazdılar ve àÀyet ‘aríø u ‘amíú úazdılar ve aãlÀ fenÀ bulmasun
deyu bir sÀ‘at istiòrÀc eylemişler idi. Ve bi’l-cümle kirec ve ùaş emele úonmak içün [224a]
óÀøır dururdı. Ve sÿr-ı mezbÿruñ cevÀnib-i erba‘ası da olan temel bırağılmak içün yerden
óÀøır dururdı. Ve yerden temeli bırakmak içün İstanbul vasaùında minÀre-mÀnend míller
düzüb ve kebír çañlar úodılar ve ol kebír çañlar yanında müneccimler óÀøır durup sÀ‘ati
gözedirken “el-‘abd yüdebbiru v’Allahÿ yukadduru” fehvÀsınca murÀdullÀh olmadığından ve
bir leylek bir ilanı alup giderken ilan cÀn havliyle ıøùırÀbından leylek minúarından òalÀã olup
ve çÀnın birine uàrayub çÀnıñ biri ötünce cümle çÀñlara êarb urulub ve temel yerden vaø‘
olındı ve müneccimler sÀ‘at gelmedi deyu cağırdılar ammÀ fÀ’ide eylemedi. Ve Úosùanùín
daòı bildi ki ol sÀ‘at muúadder değil imiş ve binÀya şurÿ‘ olunup bu úadar burçlar ve maúaslar
ve bendler ùaró olunup lÀkin nÀ-tamÀm iken Úosùanùín `iñ òaõíneleri tamÀm oldı. Ve Úosùanùín
taóayyürde iken [224b] bir beyÀølar kir beyÀø ùevÀşi ãÿretinde bir şaòã-ı vaúÿr ôuhÿr eyledi.
Ve şÀhıñ taóayyüründen suÀl eyledikde şÀh daòı infÀ-dÀdí òaõínede şikÀyet eyledi ve ol şaòã
didi ki; bende bu binÀnıñ itmÀmına kifÀyet idecek úadar mÀl vÀr hemÀn yÀrıñ ‘ala’s-seóer kırk
katır ile bir mu‘temed vezírini me‘an irsÀl eyle inşÀ´allah te‘ÀlÀ kifÀyet idecek úadar altÿn
irsÀl idelim” didi. ŞÀh bu òaberden mesrÿr olup, “Lüùf idersiz inşÀ’allah te‘ÀlÀ bizim daòı
‘Àmillerimizden bu yakında ‘Àmiller aúcemiz gelur, mÀlıñızı edÀ ideriz” didi.
Ve ‘ala’s-seóer bir mu‘temed vezír otuz úaùar ile irsÀl eyledi ve “On úaùar daòı
ardından gelsun” deyu ısmarladı. Ve varup mekÀn-ı mezbÿrda ol şaòãı buldılar. Ve şaòã-ı
mezbÿr on úaùar ùaleb eyledi ol on úaùar daòı gelüp tamÀm kırk úaùar ile İstanbul`dan bir iki
sÀ‘at òÀric yerde ve iki ùaà arasında bir serÀy-ı ‘aôím ôuhÿr idüp ve ol [225a] şaòã ol serÀya
349
girüb ve òedm u òışm-ı istifÀl idüp ve bir òaõíne küşÀde olup bi’l-cümle rÀyih fi’l-vaút
meskÿñ kırk úaùar yük altÿnı úaùarlara yükledüb ve şÀha geldiler. Ve şÀh alup dil-òÀh üzere
binÀ ve itmÀmına iúdÀm-ı tÀm eyledi.
Ve ba‘de’l-itmÀm kayser kızı äafiyye`yi929 tezevvüc eyledi. Ve äafiyye maríøa olup
‘aôím òastalıklar cekdi ve mevtini müteyaúúıne oldukda Úosùanùin`e vaãiyyet eyledi ki
terekesinden bir kinisÀ-yı kebíre-i nÀdíde äafiye içün eyleye. Ve äafiye`niñ àÀyet mÀl-ı
keåíreye mÀlike idi. Ve äafiyye fevtinden soñra AyÀãofiyÀ`yı binÀ eyledi. Ve cemí‘-i rub‘-i
meskÿnda bir mÀhir òakkÀk ve ùaşcı ve binÀ kılmayub illÀ AyÀãofiyÀ binÀsıyçün da‘vet olındı.
Ve böyle bir nÀdíde kenisÀ binÀ eyledi ki, fi’l-vÀúi‘ ‘Àlemde ‘adímü’l-miål oldı ve
AyÀãofiyÀ`yı tavãífe óÀcet yokdur. Görenler bilür ve görmeyenler heves iderler ise óÀlÀ
mevcÿddur, varup [225b] görsünler. Ve Úosùanùín memÀlikinde olan meşhÿr rÀhibleri bi’lcümle mezbÿr AyÀãofiyÀ vaãfını işiden rÀhibler ve Úudüs-i şerífden daòı dín-i ‘ÍsÀ (a.s.) üzere
olan rÀhibler cem‘ oldılar ve pehríz üzere olup zeytÿn ve zeytÿn yaàından ve nÀndan àayrı bir
şey yemezlerdi.
Ve Maàrib diyÀrında İdrís peyàamber (a.s.) neşr eylediği ‘ulÿm-ı ‘arabiyyeyi ve
nücÿm ve ùalÀsım ve òavÀã ‘ilimlerinde mÀhir erbÀb-ı ma‘Àrifden bir nÀdirü’d-devrÀn ve
‘adímü’l-aúrÀn rÀhib olup ve ma‘Àrifiñ iôhÀr ile úabÿle rÀci‘ bir şÀh-ı ‘aôímu’ş-şÀn isterdi.
Úosùanùin`i òaber alup ve keåret da‘vet eylediği ruhbÀnları mesmÿ‘ı oldukda Úosùanùiniye`ye
‘aôímet eyledi ve gelüp şehr-i İstanbul`ı ve AyÀãofiyÀ`yı beğendi. Ve bir ma‘rifet iôhÀr
eylemek murÀd eyledi ki Úosùanùin`i cem‘ eyleduği rÀhibler me’kÿlÀtı àÀilesinden òalÀã
eyleye. Ve altÿndan bir [226a] Sığırcık kuşu úuyumculara dökdürdi ve bir zeytÿn cekirdeği
ãÿretinde bir elmÀs ile mezbÿr sığırcığı zeyn idüp minúarı arasına vaø‘ eyledi. Ve ol ãÿreti
AyÀãofyÀ`nıñ úubbesine asdı. Ve ‘Acem`de bir bekÀr vardur ki ol bekÀr äıfahÀn nÀóiyesinde
olup ol bekÀrıñ ismi Sığırcık savbi bekÀrı tesmiye olunur. Ve eğer ‘Acem diyÀrlarından bir
diyÀra cegirye ôuhÿr eylese ol diyÀr úavmi gelüp sığırcık úuyusu suyundan bir kac şíşe alurlar
ve bi-emrillÀhi Te‘ÀlÀ ol suvardan ol úadar sığırcık tÀbi‘ olup me‘an gider ki óesÀbıñ Allah
bilür. Án-ı vÀóidde cegiryeyi helÀk iderlerdi.
Mezbÿr rÀhib daòı Úosùanùin`e söyleyub beş yüz şişe suyu mezbÿr úuyudan Úosùanùín
adam gönderup geturdi ve beş yüz alay sığırcık ol suya tÀbi‘ olup me‘an geldi. Ve zeytÿnuñ
silkimi vaúti oldukda AyÀãofiyÀ òÀricinde [226b] bir óavø-ı kebír binÀ olunup ve óavøıñ
vasaùında bir míl-i ‘aôím binÀ olunup ve ol altÿndan sığırcık ãÿretini derÿn-ı AyÀãofyÀ`dan
929
Sophia
350
iòrÀc olunup ùaşrada olan óavøıñ míliniñ zirvesine asarlardı. Ve mezbÿr rÀhib nice òavÀãdan
mürekkeb bir levó cem‘ itmiş idi. Ve ol levói ol sığırcık ãÿreti gerdÀnına asardı. Ve bÀ-emr-i
ÒudÀ ol beş yüz alay sığırcık ki óesÀbıñ Allah bilürdi eşcÀr-ı zeytÿn mekÀnlara neşr olup
olmuş zeytÿnlardan her sığırcık ücer dÀne zeytÿn bir minúarında ve bir dÀne daòı ayakları
pencelerine alup her bir sığırcık ücer dÀne zeytÿn getürüp mezbÿr óavøıñ derÿnına dökerlerdi.
Ol óavø-ı kebír ùoldukca icinde zeytÿnları alup şÀh dÀnesi rÀhibleri àıdÀ içün óıfô iderlerdi. Ve
úuãÿruñ ‘uãr idüp zeytÿnyaàı iòrÀc iderlerdi. Ve kırk gün tamÀm ol levóıñ tamÀm-ı te’åíri
olup mezbÿr sığırcık [227a] úuşları zeytÿn ùaşırlardı. Ve bi’l-cümle AyÀãofiyÀ rÀhibleriniñ ekl
idecek zeytÿnleri ve zeytÿn yaàları ve AyÀãofyÀ`nıñ úanÀdíline bir seneden bir seneye varınca
bi’l-cümle kifÀyet iderdi. Ve kırk günden soñra ol sığırcık ãÿretini ve levói ol óavø üzerinde
olan mílden ref‘ idüp ve AyÀãofiyÀ úubbesi icine vaø‘ iderlerdi. Ve mezbÿr úuşlar İstanbul
eùrÀfında yuvalar yabub ölürlerdi. Ve yine zeytÿn vaútinde mezbÿr sığırcık ãÿretini ve levói
mezbÿr óavøıñ míli üzerine vaø‘ iderlerdi. Ve kırk gün sığırcık úuşları zeytÿn ùaşıyub óavøı
nice def‘ ùoldurırlardı. Ve kifÀyet miúdÀrı dÀne zeytÿn ile zeytÿn yaàı óÀãıl olup bir seneden
bir seneye dek rÀhiblere úatıú ve AyÀãofiyÀ úanÀdíline ãarf olunurdı. Nice sinín-i keåíre ve
vahÿr-ı vÀfire minvÀl-i meşrÿó üzere zeytÿn ve yaà cem‘ olunurdı.
[227b] Ve yine Maàrib diyÀrından bir rÀhib daòı rÀhib-i evvelin .. işitdikde ol daòı
gelüp İstanbul`a vÀãıl olup ve Úosùanùin`e buluşub ve bundan aúdem zeytÿn ícÀd iden rÀhib
benim şeríkimdür ol zeytÿn .. ícÀd etdiyse ben balık .. ícÀd itsem gerek deyüp ‘arø eyledikde
Úosùanùín daòı maóôÿôen malzemesin ta‘yín eyledi. Ve rÀhib-i åÀní gümüşden bir müdevver
küb ãÿreti ùob gibi döñdürdi ve icini zíve ile ùoldurup ve altÿndan bir balık ãÿreti yabdurup ol
gümüş küb ãÿreti icine balık ãÿretini vaø‘ eyledi. Ve İstanbul`ın Yedi úullesi semtinde deryÀ
icinde bir míl-i ‘aôím kÀr-gír sütÿndan vaø‘ eyledi. Ve mezbÿr kübi ol míl üzerine vaø‘ eyledi
ve vaút-i êuóÀ ya‘ní úuşluú vaútinden vaút-i ‘aãra dek ol míl döñüb gönderdiài rÿy-ı deryÀ
icinde mürÿr iden semek ùÀ’ifesi ol [228a] míl neôôÀresinden òurÿca úÀdir olamayub kebír
balıklar ãaàírlerini ekl içün míl cÀnibine bi-emrillÀh sürüb ve míl eùrÀfında balık aòõ içün
müvekkil olanlar gelüp cem‘ olan balıkları bilÀ-ta‘b ve lÀ-meşaúúat aòõ idüp ve me’òÿõ olan
balıklar bey‘ olunup ãayyÀd u bÀyi‘leriniñ ücreti ve meãÀrif ne ise iòrÀcından soñra rÀhiblere
maãraf görilub ve ziyÀd úalan meblaàı yine rÀhibler içün òaõíne olunurdı. Bu .. daòı nice
sinín-i keåíre ve vahÿr-ı vÀfire ‘amel olunup bu iki òaõíne írÀdından AyÀãofiyÀ meãÀrifi ve
rÀhibler me’ÿneti görilub sÀ’ir írÀda muótÀc olunmadı.
Úosùanùini ve ol .. rÀhibler vefÀtından soñra eùrÀfda olan mulÿk bu ‘amellere óased
idüp zevÀlleri bÀbında nice óílekÀrları istiãóÀb idüp ve envÀ‘-ı va‘dler idüp ol ‘amelleriñ ref‘i
bÀbında nice tedbírlere muúayyed oldılar ve zeytÿn [228b] beliyyesi eùrÀf-ı İstanbul`da olan
351
eşcÀr-ı zeytÿn aãóÀbına ‘aôím zaómet olduğundan zeytÿn ãÀóiblerinden bir kac adam bir
‘ayyÀr-ı ùarrÀre emvÀl-i keåíre va‘d olunup ol daòı ruhbÀn ãÿretine girüb ve ãÿret-i ãalÀó iôhÀr
iderek àÀyet úıllet üzere olup ve ben-i Àdem ùÀúat geturemediài pehrízler ile gelüp ‘ayyÀr-ı
mezbÿr ve derÿn-ı AyÀãofyÀ`ya duòÿl idüp ve cümle rÀhibler bunuñ iôhÀr eylediği ‘ibÀdÀt ve
pehrízlere óayrÀn olurlardı.
Ve cümleniñ emín-i mü’temmeni olup ve bir gice fırãat bulup ãÿret-i mezbÿr ki
altÿndan sığırcık ãÿretinde düzülmiş idi. AyÀãofiyÀ úubbesi derÿnunda vaø‘ olunmuş olan
ãÿreti sirúa idüp ve AyÀãofiyÀ ùaşrasında bir yer òufr idüp ãÿreti güm eyledi. Ve zeytÿn vaúti
oldukda ãÿret bulunmayub ‘aôim tecessüsler olunup adamlara nÀ-óaú yerde cezÀlar tertíb
olındı. [229a] Ancak ol sular AyÀãofiyÀ derÿnunda olmaàla ve ãÿret u levó úurbunda kum
olmaàla derdmend úuşlar yine zeytÿnı getürüp AyÀãofiyÀ úubbesi üzerine dökerlerdi. Ve
AyÀãofiyÀ úubbesinden düşenleri müvekkiller cem‘ idüp yine me’ÿnete ãarf iderlerdi. Ve ol
‘ayyÀr-ı ùarrÀr intiúÀl eyledi ki yine zeytÿn beliyyesi def‘ olunmadığı sığırcık ãÿretinde ve
büyük derÿní fütÿn fitneye sulÿk ile şíşelerden sığırcık suyunı aòõ idüp mÀ-yı Àòar ùoldururdı.
Ve ãÿreti kim eylediği yerden aòõ ve istihlÀk idüp ve levó daòı helÀk eyledi. Ve sığırcık
úuşları bi’l-cümle firÀr eyledi. Vaúti ol vaúitde belki yine sığırcık úuşu AyÀãofiyÀ úubbesine
ve eùrÀfına zeytÿn getürüp döker deyu müteraúúıb oldılar zeytÿn vaúti mürÿr eyledi. Bir
sığırcık úuşı görünmedi, bi’l-külliye ‘amel-i ibùÀl olduğına cümleniñ ma‘lÿmı oldı. Ve ol
‘ayyÀr u tarrÀrdan [229b] tedríc ile rÀhibler arasından ve balıklar ‘ameline efrÀd-ı nÀsdan
fırãat bulmak kimesneye müyesser olmadı. ZírÀ meydÀnda olmaàın bekcíleri àÀyet cok idi.
Ve bir tÀríòde Mısır şÀhlarından biri baóren İstanbul`a sefer eyledi ve àÀlib olup balık
‘amelin daòı Mıãır şÀhınıñ ‘askeri gümüş kübe ve altÿn balıàa ùama‘larından nÀşí anlar daòı
balık ‘amelin ibùÀl eylediler. Bu kÀr-òÀne-yi kevn u fesÀdıñ muóaddeåÀtına elbette ve elbette
helÀk ve fesÀd ùÀrí oldılar. CenÀb-ı Rabbü’l-‘Àlemín birine yabdurır ve birine yakdurır. Ve
me’òÿõumuz olan Efrenc ve Laùin ve YunÀn ı Rÿm tÀríòlerinde böyle müverraòdir ki; ebu’lbeşer Óaøret-i Ádem (‘aleyhisselÀm)`dan ùÿfÀn-ı Nÿó (‘aleyhi’s-selÀm)`a gelince iki biñ iki
yüz kırk sene mürÿr eylemişdur ve yine Óaøret-i Ádem (‘aleyhi’s-selÀm)`dan Óaøret-i
İbrÀhim (‘aleyhi’s-selÀm)`a gelince üc biñ üc yüz doksan sekiz sene mürÿr [230a] eylemişdir.
Ve Óaøret-i İbrÀhim (‘aleyhi’s-selÀm)`dan Óaøret-i MÿsÀ (‘aleyhi’s-selÀm)`a gelince dört yüz
otuz sene mürÿr eylemişdur. Ve Óaøret-i MÿsÀ (‘aleyhi’s-selÀm)`dan Óaøret-i DÀvÿd
(‘aleyhi’s-selÀm)`a gelince yüz yetmiş dokuz sene mürÿr eylemişdur. Ve Óaøret-i DÀvÿd
(‘aleyhi’s-selÀm)`dan Óaøret-i ÍsÀ (‘aleyhi’s-selÀm)`a gelince biñ elli üc sene mürÿr
eylemişdur. Ve Óaøret-i ÍsÀ (‘aleyhi’s- selÀm)`dan Roma şÀhlarından Úosùanùiniye binÀsına
gelince üc yüz on sekiz sene mürÿr eylemişdir. Ve bir rivÀyetde Úosùanùiniye biñÀsına
352
muøÀyaúa maãraf cekilmeyub belki ol àÀibden ôuhÿr idüp beyÀø òÀdım AyÀãofiyÀ binÀsına
muøÀyaúa olup Úosùanùín óayretde iken ol beyÀø òÀdım àÀibden ôuhÿr idüp elli úaùar yüki
altÿn AyÀãofiyÀ itmÀmı imdÀdı içün virmiş deyu taãríó olındı. Ve Türkí [230b] AyÀãofiyÀ
tÀríòlerinde daòı meõkÿr elli úaùar altÿn àÀibden imdÀd olındı deyu taãríó u taórír olunmuşdur.
Ve ba‘d-i itmÀm AyÀãofiyÀ bu úadar biñ úurbÀn ve mÀl-i ferÀvÀn fuúarÀya taãadduú
olındı ve aàniyÀya êiyÀfetler ve òil‘atler ilbÀs olındılar bÀ-òuãÿã binÀlara ve ıràÀdlara
ücretlerinden mÀ‘adÀ keåret üzere baòşíşler ve iósÀnlar olındı. Ve kırk gün derÿn-ı
AyÀãofyÀ`da şarÀbları mebõÿl oldı; zírÀ kefere derÿn-i ma‘bedlerinde òayr içün olan ekl u
şurblerini isti‘mÀl itmek ‘indlerinde åevÀb-ı ‘aôímdür. Ve Úosùanùín binÀ-yı AyÀãofiyÀ ile
meşàÿl iken Tatar ‘askeri sÀ’ir milel-i kefere diyÀrları derÿnundan mürÿr idüp varup Roma`yı
úahr u àalebe ile fetó eylediler. Ve eùrÀf-ı kefere diyÀrlarını bi’l-cümle yaàmÀ ve alÀn u tÀlÀn
eylediler ve Roma`yı ve maúarr u me’vÀ edindiler. Ve Úosùanùín [231a] AyÀãofya
itmÀmından soñra Milsari nÀmında bir vezírini Tatar ref‘iyçün ‘asker-i firÀvÀn ile Roma`ya
irsÀl eyledi. Ve merúÿm vezír Roma`ya vÀãıl olup ve ‘ÍsÀ díninde olan mileli bi’l-cümle cem‘
idüp Tatar ‘askeriyle ‘aôím cengler ve uğrÀşlar idüp vezír-i mezbÿra eùrÀfdan şer ve sürÿrlarıñ
ref‘ eylediler. Ve mezbÿr Úosùanùín otuz altı sene pÀdişÀh olup dín-i ‘ÍsÀ (a.s.) ki ol dín-i
NaãÀra`dur ol dín üzere fevt oldı.
Ol vaúitde óaú dín dín-i ‘ÍsÀ (a.s.) idi ve oàlu kalmadığından úarındaşı oàlu Furbilati
şÀó oldı. Ve mezbÿr ŞÀh-ı Úosùanùín memÀlikini ta‘mír ve tetmím ile muúayyed olup ve
zamÀnında kimse ile nizÀ‘ itmeyüp on üc sene şÀh olup dín-i NaãÀrí üzere fevt oldı ve oàlu
Civri nÀm kimesne şÀh olup bunuñ daòı [231b] zamÀnında nizÀ‘ aãlÀ ôuhÿr itmedi. Dört sene
şÀh olup ol daòı dín-i NaããÀrí üzere fevt oldı. Ve erkek oàlu kalmadığından dÀmÀdı
Mavriciyo930 şÀh olup ol daòı bilÀ-nizÀ‘ yigirmi sene şÀhlıú idüp dín-i NaãÀrí üzere fevt oldı.
Ve mezbÿr şÀh zamÀn-ı óükÿmetinde bir elsiz ve gözsüz bir oğlan ùoàdı ve altı ay mezbÿr
oğlan mu‘ammer olup ba‘dehÿ fevt oldı. Ve bir arslan yüzli ve altı ayaklı bir kelb ùoàmışdur
ve mezbÿr kelb yedi yaşında mürd olmuşdur. Ve bu ‘alÀmetler şÀhlarıñ úatline delÀlet
itmişdir. Ve merúÿm Mavriciyo şÀhı taótında otururken úatl itmişlerdir. Ve ba‘dehÿ şÀhı ol
úÀtil olan Fuúa931 nÀm şaòã pÀdişÀh olmuşdur. Ve sekiz sene òirÀş-ı cÀn ile Fuúa şÀh iken
úıtÀl-i dehr ve felek-i ‘umÿm óüzünler icinde anı daòı úatl idüp ve yine Úosùanùín neslinden
aòlÀk-ı óamíde ve evãÀf-ı pesen-díde ile mevãÿf [232a] Óarúin932 nÀm şehõÀde şÀó oldı.
930
931
932
Maurice
Phocas
Heraclius
353
Ve merúÿm Óarúin Roman vilÀyetinde iki cihÀn faòri Seyyid-i kÀ’inÀt ve zübde-i
mevcÿdÀt ve şefí‘u’l-’uãÀt fí-yevmi’l-‘araãÀt Óaøret-i Resÿl-i Ekrem ve Óabíb-i Muóarrem
Muóammedu’l-MuãùafÀ (ãallallÀhu Te‘ÀlÀ ‘aleyhissellem) mihr-i mízÀn-ÀsÀ ùulÿ‘undan bi’lcümle ôulmet-i küfr mürtefi‘ olup nÿr-ı ímÀn ile ‘Àlem münevver oldı. Ve Óaøret-i ‘ÍsÀ (a.s.)
zamÀn-ı tevelludünden Óaøret-i Resÿlullah Muóammedu’l-MuãùafÀ (ãallallÀhu ‘aleyhi ve’ssellem) Óaøretleriniñ zamÀn-ı tevellüdüne gelince altı yüz sene zamÀn mürÿr eylemişdür. Ve
Nÿşi’r-RevÀn evlÀdlarıyla merúÿm Óarúin cok ceng idüp vÀfir diyÀrlar fetó idüp Úosùanùiniye
şÀhlarından olan İslÀmına tafavvuú eylemişlerdür. Ve merúÿm içün İslÀm tÀríòleri ve aòbÀr-ı
şurÿóunda Resÿl`ümüz mezbÿrı İslÀm`a da‘vet eyledikde, risÀleti taãdíú maòfíce nÿr-ı
ímÀnıyla münevver olmuşdur. Ve senÀdif-i NaãÀrí [232b] ve .. ruhbÀnlarda eşedd-i küfr
müşÀhede eylediğinden i‘lÀn-ı İslÀm idemedi. Ve otuz bir sene pÀdişÀhlıú idüp kendi nefsinde
mü’min fevt olmuş deyu dimişler. Ve ba‘dehÿ oàlu Úosùanùín-i åÀní şÀh olup ol daòı peder
mÀnend-i óüsn-i sülÿk ile ùulÿ‘ idüp bÀy u gedÀ óüsn-i teveccüh ile bendeliàin úabÿl itmişler
idi. Ve iki vÀlidesinden tevellüd iden li-ebb úarındÀşına şÀhlıú müyesser olmaduğundan
mekkÀre oñu vÀlidesi óasedinden bilÀòare fırãat bulup altı ay şÀh olup mesmÿmen mekkÀre
yedinden maútÿl olmuşdur. Ve ba‘dehÿ mekkÀre oàlu Irakli şÀh oldı. VelÀkin vÀlidesi mekr
ve àaddÀrelikle şÀó oldığından erkÀn-ı devletiyle óüsn-i mu‘Àşerete muvaffaú olamayub bir ay
mürÿr itmeden ‘azl olunup nefy olunmuşdur. Ve ‘ammísi oàlu Úosùa şÀó olup ve Maàrib
şÀhlarıyla òıãm olup yigirmi sene miúdÀrı anlar ile ceng ve uğrÀş [233a] idüp ba‘dehÿ fevt
oldı. Oàlu Úosùanùín-i åÀliå933 şÀh oldı.
Merúÿm daòı baóren varup donanma-yı ‘aôíme ile Maàrib diyÀrlarından pederi
intiúÀmıñ aldıkdan soñra ‘avdet idüp ve Mesina cezíresin daòı fetó idüp ve bu daòı deryÀ
seferleriyle me’lÿf olup Akdeñiz cezíreleriniñ ekåerini fetó eyledi. Ve on yedi sene şÀhlıú
idüp fevt oldı. Ve Rigosiyanuş934 nÀmında bir şaòã daòı şÀh olup ba‘dehÿ bunuñ zamÀnında
Venedik cumhÿrunu fersiyÀb olup Roma devleti infirÀøına sebeb oldılar. Ve bi’l-cümle Roma
şÀhlarından seksan altı şÀh Atina`ya ve İstanbul`a óükm eylemişlerdur. Ba‘dehÿ Venedik
cumhÿrı neşf u nemÀ ve àalebe ôuhÿrıyla Roma devletine àÀlib olup İstanbul`ı ve Atina`yı
Roma yedinden aldılar. Ve mürÿr iden seksan altı Roma şÀhlar her biri Atina`yı ziyÀret idüp
bir eåer iôhÀr iderdi. Ve bunlarıñ gününde [233b] Atina`da ‘asker taóríri ve ceng içün sefÀyin
ióøÀr olunmamışdur. Ve bi’l-cümle ol eyyÀmda Atina derÿnı ders ve tedrís ile meşàÿl
olunmuş olup ve dín-i ‘ÍsÀ (a.s.) ders u tedrís üzere olmuşlar idi.
933
934
Constantine III
Justinian II
354
Ve velÀdet-i faòr-i kÀinÀt Óaøretlerinden Venedik cumhÿrına gelince dört yüz elli bir
sene mürÿr eylemişdur ve Venedik cumhÿrı Fransız vesÀ’ir-i milel ‘avniyle gelüp İstanbul`ı
almışdur. Ve İstanbul şÀhı óükm eylediği Rÿmili diyÀrlarınıñ cümlesine óattÀ Atina ve
Mora`ya bi’l-cümle óükm eyledi. Ancak Anaùolı yakasına mürÿr idemedi. Ve Venedik
cumhÿrı elli sene İstanbul`a ve bi’l-cümle Rÿmili`ne óükm ve Rÿmili diyÀrlarını maúùÿ‘an
rüsÿmÀtını her bir diyÀr vÀlísine vermiş idi. Ve Atina`yı SelÀnik vÀlisine øamm eylemiş idi.
Ve Atina`nıñ rusÿmÀtı SelÀnik vÀlísi ùarafından cem‘ olunurdı. Ve Fransız ve Venedik
cumhÿrına İstanbul [234a] fetóine yardım ettiàiycün bir kac sene Rÿmili`nden aldığı
maúùÿ‘uñ nıãfını Mizistre virirdi, ba‘dehÿ úaù‘ idüp vermedi. Fransız úrÀlı daòı Venedik`e
‘avn u nuãretden el cekdi. Ve İstanbul ‘uôemÀsı Venedikli ôulm u cevrine ùÀúat
geturemedikleri ecilden Anaùolı eùrÀfına neşr olmuşlar idi. Ve Fransız Venediğe ‘avn u
nuãretden íbÀ eylediği mesmÿ‘ı olduklarından İstanbul a‘yÀnı bi’l-cümle Anaùolı şÀhlarına
istimdÀd ve mürÀca‘Àt idüp ve ‘aôím ‘asker cem‘ idüp ve İstanbul üzerine yürüyüb ve
Venedikli`ye göz acdurmayub ve úahren ve cebren İstanbul`ı fetó idüp iclerinden birini şÀh
naãb eylediler. Ve bunlar İstanbul eùrÀfıyla úanÀ‘at idüp cokluú yayılub acılmadılar.
Ve bunlara “tekfÿr” tesmiye eylediler. Ve mezbÿr tekfÿrlardan on iki şÀh İstanbul`a
óükÿmet idüp, on ikinci tekfÿr üzerinden sulùÀnu’l-àazÀ ve’l-mücÀhidín ve niôÀm-ı baòş-ı
umÿr-ı [234b] müslimín nÀãır-ı dín-i mübín Rabbü’l-‘Àlemín berk-endÀz hÀtimÀn-ı müşrikín
ôıllullahi fi’l-arøeyn fÀtió-i ekber SulùÀn Muóammed-ÒÀn bin SulùÀn MurÀd bin Çelebi SulùÀn
Muóammed bin Yıldırım SulùÀn Bayezid bin áÀzi SulùÀn MurÀd bin SulùÀn OròÀn bin áÀzi
SulùÀn ‘OåmÀn òÀn bin áÀzi Erùuàrul (raómetullÀhi ‘aleyhim ecma‘ín) muhbiù-i Ádem-i äÀfi
(‘aleyhi’s-selÀm)`dan fÀtió-i ekber SulùÀn Muóammed-ÒÀn Óaøretlerine gelince altı biñ sekiz
altmış bir sene mürÿr eylemişdir. Ve tÀríò-i mezbÿrda cülÿs-i taót-ı ‘Àlí-baót-ı ‘OåmÀn-ı
óÀúÀniye mihr ü münír-ÀsÀ ùulÿ‘ eylediler. Şehr-i Edirne-i meymenede ve ‘avn-i nuãret-i
rabbÀní tevfíúıyle eùrÀf-ı Rÿmili fetóine ve eùrÀf-ı Rÿmili óavøa-i taãarruf-ı óÀúÀniyeye mülóıú
oldukdan soñra Mora fetói daòı zamír-i münírlerine ùulÿ‘ idüp ve ‘asÀkir-i gazanferÀn-ı mihr-i
münír-ÀsÀ derecÀt-ı merÀóilde derecÀt úaù‘ iderek [235a] otÀk? vakÀrları ve hıyÀm-ı sa‘Àdet-i
encÀmları Yeñişehir ãaórÀsında tınÀb-endÀz oldukda ru‘b-ı savle-i şevketleri kalup mu‘Ànidíni kefereye óurrÀs-ı ‘aôím ilúÀ eylediğinden İstefe ve Atina ahÀlísi hedÀyÀ-yı ‘aôíme ile SulùÀn
FÀtió a‘ôam Óaøretleriniñ pÀy-ı semend-i na‘llerine envÀ‘-ı meõellet ile rÿy-ı .. ve cebín-i
rukyelerin (rikıyyet?) fersÿde kalup òalúa be-gÿş bende-i sulùÀní olmaklığı envÀ‘-i ricÀ ve
niyÀz ve temenníler idüp ve cizye-i óÀúÀní ve ruãÿmÀtı cihÀndÀrÀyı úabÿl eylediler. Ve
Yeñişehir ãaórÀsından óareket-i hümÀyÿn-i óÀúÀní olup Eàriboz ve Mora ùaríúi üzerinde
Çatalca ve Ezdín .. ve Saluna ve LivÀdiyye úilÀ‘ u úaãÀbÀtı ahÀlíleri pÀy-ı semend cihÀn
peymÀları te‘alüllerine rÿ be-rÀh olup bende-i ra‘iyyetleri maùlab-ı a‘lÀları oldı. Ve Eàriboz
355
cezíresi Rÿmili`nden Çesar ile mürÿr u ‘ubÿra muótÀc olduğundan [235b] Çesar`ı úaù‘
eylediler. Ve úal‘anıñ bir miúdÀr ãa‘b ve sarplığına iğtirÀr Adaboyu? cihÀndÀrı bir miúdÀr
ta‘vík eylediler. Ancak Eàriboz tedÀruki berren ve baóren mükemmel görildiàinden
Gelibolı`dan donanma-yı hümÀyÿn şevket-i maúrÿn Eàriboz ve Mora tedÀrükiyle .. mürÿr
iderken bir miúdÀr bÀd-ı muòÀlif bÀdbÀnlarıñ Eàriboz üzerinden taóvíl idüp İstendil
darboğazını cÀy-ı me’mun ittiòÀõ eylediklerinde bir kac gün bÀd-ı muòÀlif óubÿb
eylediğinden donanma derÿnunda olan àuzÀt-ı muvaóóidín ùaşra dökülüb ve eshel vech ile
İstendil úal‘ası fetó olunup ve bi’l-cümle İstendil cezíresi daòı tesòír olunup ve bi’l-cümle
taóammüllerine göre cizye ve rusÿmÀtları maúùÿ‘ olup memÀlik-i óÀúÀniyye-i ‘OåmÀniyye
êamm olındı.
Ve ba‘dehÿ Eàriboz ùarafına bÀdbÀnlara küşÀd verilub Eàriboz cezíresine sulùÀn
[236a] CihÀngír ile me‘an vÀãıl oldılar ve sulùÀnu’l-mücÀhidín Rÿmili ùarafından donanma-yı
şevket-maúrÿn ‘asÀkiri Eàriboz úal‘asını muóÀãara eylediler ve aãlÀ göz acdurmayub ùob ve
mezbÿrunları
Eàriboz úal‘ası derÿnuna yaàdurdılar ve on güne varmadan savle ve
gazanferÀne ve óamle-i SulùÀn-ı úahramÀna ùÀúat getüremeyüb ãadÀyu’l-emÀnı peyveste-i
ÀsumÀn úıldılar. Ve gerdÀnlarına kefen asub SulùÀn İskender-ÀsÀ .. paylarına envÀ‘-ı teõellül
ile rÿy ber-turÀb kalup riúıyye úabÿl eylediler. SulùÀn-ı cihÀnàíriñ baóren re’fetleri cÿşÀn ve
emvÀ-ı meróametleri bí-pÀyÀn olmaàın sebúat iden temerrud-i ‘inÀdları cürmleri ‘afv olunup
sÀ’ir rÀye-i òalúa be-gÿş zümresine ilóaú olındılar. Ve úal‘a muóÀfaôa ve mustaófıôları
[236b] lüzÿm-ı miúdÀrı vaø‘ olunup ve zeòÀyir ve cebeòÀneler ta‘yín olunup ve sulùÀn-ı
selÀùín içün kenisÀ-yı ekberi cÀmi‘ ve sÀ’ir-i vüzerÀ daòı birer kiníse[y]i mescid ve cÀmi‘ idüp
imÀm ve mü’eõõinler ve úayyım ve ferrÀş, bevvÀblar ve vÀ‘iô ve müderrisler ta‘yín olunup ve
evúÀflar müstevfÀ vaø‘ ve her birine ‘alÀ-kadr-i cihetih ta‘yín olunup ve heft üzere cizye ve
muúÀùa‘Àtı taórír u vaø‘ olunup bi’l-cümle levÀzımÀtı ba‘de’l-fetó on gün icinde görilüb bilÀúuãÿr ba‘d-i itmÀm-ı meãÀlió Eàriboz`dan Mora cÀnibine ‘aùf .. ãÀóib-úırÀnı olup taùhír .. içün
bildirirler? ve muóÀfaôa-yı mu‘ber içün .. nÀmdÀrlar ta‘yín olunup meróale ve derecÀt iktÀr-ı
úaù‘ iderek İstefe`den mürÿr ve cibÀl-i talÀli? ‘ubÿr iderek Meàara nÀm menzile nüzÿl
olındıkda Meàara`dan Gördes`e varınca olan derbendler àÀyet ãa‘bu’l- [237a] mürÿr olmaàın
teúaddüm iden zeòÀyir ve cebòÀne ve ùob ‘arabalarınıñ baùí’ óareketleri olmaàın sedd-i ùaríú
eylediklerinden sulùÀn-ı cihÀngír Meàara menzilinden bir gün mekå iútiøÀ eylediğinden
sulùÀn-ı ‘Àlemgír ol eùrÀfda ãayd u şikÀr iderken geşt ittiài talÀl ve cibÀlden úulaàuzlara su’Àl
iderken ba‘ø-ı óabbÀl Atina`dan gider deyu òaber virdiklerinde ùab‘ı hümÀyunlarına Atina`nıñ
aòbÀrında mesmÿ‘-ı hümÀyÿnları olan ‘acÀyib u àarÀyib-i ebniyyeleri .. hümÀyÿnları
oldığından Atina seyriyçün ãavb-ı Atina`ya licÀm-ı fers bÀdbÀnlarıñ ‘aùf idüp ve òavÀãã-ı
hümÀyÿn ‘asÀkirinden on biñ miúdÀrı ta‘úíb etsun deyu fermÀn-ı úaêÀ cereyÀnları oldukda
356
‘asker-i cezzÀr-ı òunòÀrdan on biñ miúdÀrı yarÀr ve bahÀdur sebük-bÀr her biri birer esb-i bÀdbÀnÀ süvÀr ve sulùÀn-ı cihÀn- şÀh[ı] Rüstem tenhÀ süvÀrı ta‘úíb [237b] eylediler.
Ve àurÿb-ı şemse úaríb Atina`ya àÀyet yaúın maóalle nüzÿl-ı hümÀyÿnları olup ve
ta‘akúub iden ‘asker-i ôafer-i şi‘Àr daòı vuãÿl bulup ve ba‘ø-ı zeòÀyir ve òayme ve sÀyebÀnlar
irişüb ol gice cÿybÀr-ı küfrÀnda beytÿtet olunup ‘ale’s-seóer ãalat-ı ãubó .. nizÀlleri ve ol esb-i
cihÀn peymÀlarıñ süheyl-avÀzeleri gÿş-zed-i zümre-i êalÀlet şi‘Àr fecere-i Atina olındıkda rÿóı òabíåleri bed-esferlerine? ãu‘ÿd idüp mihr i münír cÀnib-i şarúdan ùulÿ‘ eyledikde gördiler ki
ùaraf-ı àarbdan ôulümÀt-ı küfrü mÀhí-yi mÀh ‘Àlem-i tÀb yemíñ u yesÀrında hezÀr encümín ile
ôuhÿr eyledi. Gördiler ki ol ehl-i ímÀn ve şírÀñ-ı dín tutan? bir heybet-i salÀbet ile ‘ayÀn
olmuşlar ki SÀm-ı NerímÀn görse “eyne’l-mefer” derdi. Ve Rüstem-i dÀstÀn işitse esfendbÀre “‫ ”ﺍﺫﺍ ﺟﺂﺀ ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎ ﻋﻤﻰ ﺍﻟﺒﺼﺮ‬derdi. Ve derÿn-ı Atina`da [238a] olan êalÀlet-i encÀm bu heybet u
şevket-i ehl-i ímÀn ve ol ‘aôamet-i ãalÀbet Àl-i ‘OåmÀní naôar-ı òabÀået ? ta‘alluú eyledikde ne
idecekleriñ ve ne gidecekleriñ bilmeyüb ve göremeyub meslÿbu’l-’aúl oldılar ve gelüp ãÀóib
úırÀn devrÀnıñ semend pÀyları türÀbına yüz süremediler ve ãaàír u kebír ru‘b u óırÀs u òavfları
istílÀsından bi’ø-øarÿre Atina úal‘ası derÿnuna taóaããur ve maóãÿr oldılar.
Ve sulùÀnu’l-muvaóóidín gördi ki Atina feceresinden esb-i cihÀn peymÀları türÀbına
bir eóad gelüp rÿy-ı ibtióÀl ile ‘ubÿdiyyet iôhÀr eylemediler pür-àaêab olup Atina`nıñ şimÀle
cÀnibi revzÀt-ı cenÀn-ÀsÀ bÀàceler ile müzeyyen ve bir mekÀn-ı irtifÀ‘ ile ‘ÀlíşÀn olduğından ol
cÀnibe ‘aùf i ‘inÀn eylediler ve òıyÀm-ı sÀyebÀnlar kurulub ve bir miúdÀr zeytÿn eşcÀrı Atina
şehri ve úal‘ası ùaríúine [238b] óÀil olmaàın ‘asÀkir-i ôafer şi‘Àrdan üc yüz miúdÀrı balùacı ol
eşcÀrı úaù‘ içün ta‘yín olunup óÀil olan eşcÀrı bi’l-cümle úat‘ eylediler. Ve cünki balùacıları
eşcÀr úaù‘ı serí‘an inúıyÀda sebeb oldı rikÀb-ı hümÀyÿnda ve derÿn-ı òavÀãda balùacı ocÀàı
müfrez bir ocak ta‘yín olındı. Ve óÀlÀ Atina ahÀlísi “balùacı ocÀàı” bizim diyÀrımızda ícÀd u
vaø‘ olunmuşdur, deyu tefÀòur iderler ve úÀùı‘ raúabe ehli ùuàyÀn olan sulùÀn-ı cihÀn Atina`da
òayme-endÀz oldığı bÀàceler mekÀnına “pÀdişÀh bÀàceleri” nÀmıyla ol bÀàceler nÀmdÀr
oldılar. Ve kefere pÀdişÀh dimeyüp Batşa nÀmıyla ol bÀàceleri tesmiye iderler. Ve Atina
keferesi bu aóvÀle óayrÀn u dem-beste kaldılar. Ve her bir balùacı bir günde onar eşcÀr-ı
zeytÿn úaù‘ eylediler ve bi’l-cümle ol günde üc biñ eşcÀr úaù‘ eylediler. Eğer bir kac gün
eşcÀrı [239a]
böyle úaù‘ iderse zeytÿn eşcÀrı kalmaz deyüp muúaddemÀ istímÀl içün
Yeñişehir ãaórÀsına Atina ùarafından giden Úocabaşı manastırıñ rÀhibini yine ‘aôím hedÀye ile
òÀk-i pÀy-ı hümÀyÿna irsÀl eylediler.
Ve mezbÿr rÀhib ‘ubÿdiyyeti müştemil olan sefÀreti píşgÀó-ı hümÀyÿn-ı ‘Àlemgíre rÿy
ber-òÀk teblíà eyledikde sulùÀn-ı cihÀn ‘adem-i istiúbÀllerini istifsÀr eyledikde rÀhib-i mesfÿr
envÀ‘-ı teõellül ile ‘ubÿdiyyeti óÀví temenníler ile cevÀbları şevket-i sulùÀn-ı ‘ÀlemiyÀn
357
úulÿblarına kemÀl-i ru‘b u óurrÀs ídÀå idüp şehinşÀhı cihÀnşÀh-ı úudÿm ve bi’õ-õÀt meymenet
aåÀrlarıyla bu diyÀr-ı celílu’l-i‘tibÀr-ı meymÿn ve mübÀrek ideceklerinden òaber ve agÀhları
olmayup ve iótimÀldür görüneniñ àaøanferÀn her biri gürgÀn u şírÀñ ziyÀn olmasunlar deyu
emvÀlu evlÀd ve nisvÀnlarını óıfô içün úal‘aya taóaããun u maóãÿr oldılar. CihÀngír-i ‘Àlem
[239b] daòı ãıóóat-i òabere vÀãıl olsun deyu Atina aãlında SelÀnik vÀlisine mülóıú olmaàın
SelÀnik sancaàına mutaãarrıf olan Duraú Bey maóãÿr olan ahÀlí[y]i Atina aóvÀllerine ıùùılÀ‘
içün rÀhib ile me‘an derÿn-ı úal‘aya duòÿl içün fermÀn olındı. Ve mír-i mÿmÀ-ileyh úal‘aya
dÀòil olup ve ahÀlí-i Atina DurÀú Bey Óaøretlerini envÀ‘ ta‘ôím u tekrím ile úal‘a úapusundan
òÀric gelüp istiúbÀl olunup derÿn-ı úal‘ada aósen-i maúÀm-ı maúarrları olan maúÀma iclÀs
eylediler. Ve envÀ‘ ten‘imÀt ile i‘zÀz ve ikrÀm olındıkdan soñra píş-i hümÀyÿnda rÀhibiñ iôhÀr
eylediği i‘õÀra cümlesi muúırr u mu‘teríf oldılar. Ve mír-i merúÿmı şefÀ‘at içün taúdím idüp
ve bi’l-cümle istiróÀm me’mÿliyle kefen ber-gerdÀn koyub píş-gÀh-ı sulùÀn-ı ãÀóib úırÀna rÿy
ber-zemín vaø‘ı ile ùÀpu-yı ‘ubÿdiyyet iôhÀr eylediler. SulùÀn-ı [240a] ‘adímu’l-aúrÀn
óaøretleriniñ daòı emvÀc-ı bahr-re’fetleri daòı telÀtum idüp cürm bí-edebleriñ ‘afv idüp ve
bi’õ-õÀt úal‘a derÿnunda vÀúi‘ ba‘ø-ı ebniyye-i ‘acíbe seyr itmek içün óareket-i hümÀyÿn
murÀd olındıkda píş-i sÀyebÀndan derÿn-ı úal‘aya varınca semend-i murà-endÀz pÀylarına
envÀ‘-ı akmişe ferş olındı. Ve úudÿm-ı meymenet aåÀrları ol mekÀn-ı bí-hemtÀyı meymÿn ve
mübÀrek idüp ve cesídelerinden leme‘Àn iden envÀr-ı dín-i Muóammedí nÿrıyla ôulmet-i cehl
u küfri ol ma‘bed ‘adímu’l-emåÀlden úam‘ u ref‘ idüp ve naôar-ı ‘ayn u ‘inÀyetleri ol kinísÀya
‘acíbu’l-mebnÀya ta‘alluú eyledikde “Óayf ola bu secdegÀha! ôulmet i küfriyle olmuşdur ?”
deyüp sÀ’ir meftÿóÀt olan úilÀ‘ ve úaãabÀtda ióyÀ olunan cevÀmi‘ ve mesÀcid-ÀsÀ bu ma‘bed-i
úadími daòı òayrÀt-ı hümÀyÿna ilóÀú ile ióyÀ buyurup iki imÀm ve dört mü’eõõín ve úayyum-i
úandíl-fürÿz ve ferrÀş ve bevvÀblar [240b] ve vÀ‘iô u müderris vaø‘ olunup ve her birine
kifÀyet miúdÀrı veôÀyif ta‘yín olunup ve sÀ’ir meãÀrif-i cÀmi‘ müstevfÀ görilub ve cÀmi‘
sebebiyle bi’l-cümle kefere úal‘a derÿnundan iòrÀc ve dizdÀr kifÀyet miúdÀrı neferÀtıyla ve
keõÀlik ser-àarbÀn ve ser-cebeciyÀn ve ser-ùobciyÀn bi-l cümle kifÀyet miúdÀrı neferÀtlarıyla
vaø‘ u ta‘yín olunup derÿn-ı úal‘ada vÀúi‘ olan ebniye-i úadíme-i ‘acíbe seyrÀn idüp ve dört
kız ãÿretinde olan sütÿnlar üzerine ãÀfí beyÀø mermerden binÀ olunan köşküñ ‘adímu’l-miål
cülÿs-i hümÀyÿnları olup ve bundan aúdem tÀríò-i mezbÿrda tafãílen taórír olunan Atina`nıñ
‘acÀyibÀt u àarÀyibÀtına tevcíh-i naôar-ı hümÀyÿnları ta‘alluúi óasebiyle bir kac gün Atina`da
mekåe bÀ‘iå ve bÀdí olmuşdur. Gerek derÿn-ı úal‘ada ve gerek derÿn-ı varoşda ve gerek şehr
eùrÀfında aåÀr-ı úudemÀya seyr u sülÿk [241a] itmişdir.
358
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Primary Sources
Ahkam Defters of Morea, vol. 4 dated 1742-1747 to vol. 17, dated 1801-1806. Başbakanlık
Osmanlı Arşivleri.
Ahmedi, Iskendernâme, Haz. İsmail Ünver: Ankara: Türk Dil Kurumu, 1983.
Babin, Jacques Paul. Relation de L’etat Present de la Ville d’Athenes. Ancienne Capitale de
la Grece. Bâtie Depuis 3400. ans. Avec un Abbregé de son Histoire et de Ses
Antiquités [Herausgegeben von Jacob Spon]. A Lyon: Chez Loüis Pascal. ruë
Merciere. Vis à Vis la Petite Porte S. Antoine. au Livre Blanc. 1674.
Chandler, Richard. Travels in Asia Minor and Greece or an Account of a Tour Made at the
Expence of the Society of Dilettanti. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1825.
Ciriaco, d’Ancona. Later Travels. Ed. and trans. by Edward W. Bodnar with Clive Foss
Cambridge [M.A.]: Harvard University Press, 2003.
Evliya Çelebi, Seyahatname, İstanbul: Yapı Kredi Publication, 2003.
Gelibolulu Mustafa Ali, Künhül Ahbar C. II.: Fatih Sultan Mehmed Devri1451-1481 prepared
by Hüdai Şentürk, Ankara:Türk Tarih Kurumu, 2003
Guys, Peter A. A Sentimental Journey through Greece. Dublin: 1773.
Kıvami. Fetihname, prepared by Ceyhun Vedat Uygur. İstanbul: YKY, 2007.
Kontares, G. Ίστορίαι παλαιού και πάνυ ωφέλιμοι της περίφημου πόλεως Άθήνης, Venice
1676.
Lütfi Paşa ve Tevarih-i Al-i Osman. prepared by Kayhan Atik. Ankara: Kültür Bakanlığı
Yayınları, 2001.
Machiavelli, Niccolo. The Letters of Machiavelli. Allan Gilbert. ed. and trans. Chicago:
Chicago Univ. Press, 1961.
Mehmed Hemdeni Çelebi. Solakzade Tarihi. haz. Vahid Çubuk. Ankara: Kültür Bakanlığı
yay., 1989.
359
Mehmed Süreyya. Sicill-i Osmanî. İstanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yurt Yayınları, 1996.
Mehmed Tevfik. Esatir-i Yunaniyan. Konstantiniyye: Mekteb-i Harbiye Matbaası, 1913.
Meydanis, Harisios. Περί του κατ' Έτος τελουμένου κοινού Μνημοσύνου υπέρ των
Συνδρομητών των εν Κοζάνη Σχολείων Ελληνικού τε και κοινού περί της
Εξετάσεωςτων Μαθητών εν Έτει 1819 κατά Μήνα Φευρουάριον, και περί της Αρχής,
Προόδου, και της νυν Καταστάσεως της Ελληνικής Σχολής, και των εξ αυτής επί
Παιδεία αναφανέντων Εγχωρίων τε και Ξένων. Βιέννη: Εκ του τυπογραφείου
Σβεκίου, 1820.
Monsieur De la Guillatiere. An account of a late voyage to Athens : containing the estate both
ancient and modern of tat famous city and of the present Empire of the Turks. London:
J.M. for H. Herringman, 1676.
Oruç b. Adil. Oruç Beğ tarihi: Giriş, Metin, Kronoloji, Dizin, Tıpkıbasım, haz. Necdet
Öztürk. Istanbul: Çamlıca Basım Yayın, 2007.
Secondary Sources
Abu-Lughod, Ibrahim. Arab Rediscovery of Europe: A Study in Cultural Encounters.
Princeton NJ: Princeton Univ. Press. 1963.
Açık, Tansu. “Evliya Çelebi’de Yunan- Roma Dünyası” in Çağının Sıradışı Yazarı: Evliya
Çelebi. Haz. Nuran Tezcan. İstanbul: YKY, 2010.
Adams, Laurie. Italian Renaissance Art. Boulder. Co. Westview Press. 2001.
Adanır, Fikret. “İkinci Dünya Savaşı Sonrası Balkan Tarih Yazınında Osmanlı
İmparatorluğu.” Toplum ve Bilim 83 (1999/2000): 224-240.
Adıvar, Adnan. Osmanlı Türkleri’nde İlim. İstanbul: Maarif Matbaası. 1943.
Agard, Walter R. “Theseus: A National Hero” The Classical Journal 2 (1928): 84-91.
Akasoy, Anna. Die Adaptation byzantinischen Wissens am Osmanenhof nach der Eroberung
Konstantinopels in Carsten Kretschmann. Ed. Henning Pahl. Peter Scholz. Wissen in
der Krise Berlin: Institutionen des Wissens im gesellschaftlichen Wandel. 2004. 43:56
360
Alcock, Susan E. Archaelogies of the Greek Past: Landscape. Monuments and Memories.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2002. 131.
Allan David. “The Age of Pericles in the Modern Athens: Greek History. Scottish Politics.
and the Fading of Enlightenment.” The Historical Journal 44. no. 2 (June 2001): 391417.
Ampolo, Carmine. “Modern States and Ancient Greek History”: www.stm.unipi.it/Clioh/tabs/
libri/3/08-Ampolo_101-118.pdf
Anawati, G.C. “Fakhr al-Din al-Razi.” EI2 new edition. v. II. 751:755
Apostolopotlos, Dimitris G. “«Νέοι Έλληνες» Ο νεολογισμός και τα συνδηλούμενά του στα
1675” in Ho Eranistes/The Gleaner 25 (2005), pp. 87-99
Arel, Ayda. Onsekizinci Yüzyıl İstanbul Mimarisinde Batılılaşma Süreci. İstanbul: İstanbul
Technical University Architecture Faculty, 1975.
Artan, Tülay. “18.yy’da Yönetici Elitin Saltanatın Meşruiyet Arayışına Katılımı”. Toplum ve
Bilim 83 (1999/2000): 292-321.
........... “Arts and Architecture”.The Cambridge History of Turkey: The Later Ottoman
Empire, 1603-1839 3 Ed. Suraiya N. Faroqhi: New York: Cambridge University Press.
(October) 2006. 408-480.
Artemis Leontis. Topographies of Hel