Appropriation of ancient athens via greek channels for the sake of
Transkript
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