Defterology Revisited: Studies on 15th and 16th Century Ottoman Society 9781617191527, 1617191523

Citation preview

Defterology Revisited

Analecta Isisiana: Ottoman and Turkish Studies

101

A co-publication with The Isis Press, Istanbul, the series consists of collections of thematic essays focused on specific themes of Ottoman and Turkish studies. These scholarly volumes address important issues throughout Turkish history, offering in a single volume the accumulated insights of a single author over a career of research on the subject.

Defterology Revisited

Studies on 15th and 16th Century Ottoman Society

Heath W. Lo wry

The Isis Press, Istanbul

preSS 2010

Gorgias Press LLC, 954 River Road, Piscataway, NJ, 08854, USA www.gorgiaspress.com Copyright © 2010 by The Isis Press, Istanbul Originally published in 2008 All rights reserved under International and Pan-American Copyright Conventions. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning or otherwise without the prior written permission of The Isis Press, Istanbul. 2010

ISBN 978-1-61719-152-7

Printed in the United States of America

Since 1993 Heath W. Lowry has been the Atatürk Professor of Ottoman & Modern Turkish Studies at Princeton University. Prior to that time he was a founding member of the History Department at the Bosporus University in Istanbul (19731980), and a Senior Research Associate at Harvard University's Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection in Washington, D.C. (1980-1983). Between 1983 and 1993 he established and directed the Institute of Turkish Studies in Washington, D.C. His earlier publications include: The Islamization and Turkification of Trabzon (Trebizond), 1461-1583. Istanbul (Bosporus University Press), 1981 [in Turkish]; Continuity and Change in Late Byzantine and Early Ottoman Society [with A. Bryer et. al.] Birmingham, England & Washington, D.C. (Univ. of Birmingham & Dumbarton Oaks), 1986; Fifteenth Century Ottoman Realities: Christian Peasant Life on the Aegean Island of Limnos. Istanbul (EREN), 2002; The Nature of the Early Ottoman State. Albany, N.Y. (SUNY Press), 2003 & Ottoman Bursa in Travel Accounts. Bloomington (Univ. of Indiana: Ottoman & Modern Turkish Studies Publications), 2003. His earlier 'Isis Press' books include: The Story Behind Ambassador Morgenthau's Story. Istanbul (Isis), 1990; Studies in Defterology: Ottoman Society in the Fifteenth & Sixteenth Century. Istanbul (Isis), 1992; R. S. Hattox & H. Lowry (Eds.): Proceedings of the IHrd Congress on the Social and Economic History of Turkey. Istanbul (Isis), 1989, and: H. Lowry & D. Quataert (Eds.): Humanist and Scholar: Essays in Honor of Andreas Tietze. Istanbul (Isis), 1993.

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

4

GENERAL STUDIES I.

II.

III.

IV.

V.

"Impropriety and Impiety Among the Early Ottoman Sultans (1351-1451), in The Turkish Studies Association Journal, Vol. 26, Number 2 (Fall 2002), pp. 29-38 "Pushing the Stone Uphill: The Impact of Bubonic Plague on Ottoman Urban Society in the Fifteenth and Sixteenth Centuries," in The Journal of Ottoman Studies (Osmanli Aragtirmalan), Vol. 23/2. Istanbul, 2004. pp. 93-132 "Random Musings on the Origins of Ottoman Charity: From Mekece to Bursa, Iznik and Beyond," in N. Ergin, C. Neumann & A. Singer (Eds.): Feeding People, Feeding Power: Irnarets in the Ottoman Empire. Istanbul (Eren Yayinlari), 2007. pp. 69-79 "Some Thoughts on the Meaning of Gaza and Akin in Early Ottoman Usage," in E. Kermeli & O. Ozel (Eds.): The Ottoman Empire: Myths, Realities and 'Black Holes' [Contributions in Honour of Colin Imber]. Istanbul (The Isis Press), 2006. pp. 47-50 "The Role of the Bursa Palace in Preparing Bread for the Ottoman Sultans," in International Journal of Turkish Studies, Vol. 13, Nos. 1 & 2 (2007), pp. 43-49

7

17

51

63

67

BIOGRAPHICAL ESSAYS VI.

"A Note on Three Palaiologon Princes as Members of the Ottoman Ruling Elite," in The Ottoman Empire, the Balkans, the Greek Lands: Toward a Social and Economic History. Studies in Honor of John C. Alexander. Edited by E. Kolovos. Ph. Kotzageorgis, S. Laiou & M. Sariyannis. Istanbul (The Isis Press), 2007. pp. 279-288

75

6 VII.

VIII.

DEFTEROLOGY

REVISITED

"From Trabzon to Istanbul: The Relationship Between Siileyman the Lawgiver and His Foster Brother (silt karinda§i) Yahya Efendi," in Osmanh Ara§tirmalari (The Journal of Ottoman Studies), Vol. 10 (Istanbul, 1991), pp. 39-48

85

"Suleyman's Formative Years in the City of Trabzon: Their Impact on the Future Sultan and the City," in Siileyman the Second and His Time. Ed. by H. Inalcik & C. Kafadar. Istanbul (The Isis Press), 1993. pp. 21-36

93

URBAN & RURAL HISTORY IX.

X.

XI.

"Ottoman iznik (Nicaea): Through the Eyes of Travelers & as Recorded in Administrative Documents, 1331-1923," in iznik Throughout History. Edited by t. Akbaygil, H. Inalcik, & O. Aslanapa. Istanbul (Türkiye Is Bankasi), 2003, pp. 135-174 "When Did the Sephardim Arrive in Salonica?: The Testimony of the Ottoman Tax-Registers, 1478-1613," in Jews in the Ottoman Empire. Ed. by A. Levy. Princeton (Darwin Press), 1994. pp. 203-214 "The Fifteenth Century Ottoman 'Province of the Monks' (Vilayet-i Ke§i§lik)," in Humanist and Scholar: Essays in Honor of Andreas

109

209

Tietze. Ed. by H. Lowry & D. Quataert.

Istanbul (The Isis Press), 1993. pp. 15-26

219

I IMPROPRIETY & IMPIETY AMONG THE EARLY OTTOMAN SULTANS, 1389-1451

Among the myriad unstudied aspects of the formative years of the Ottoman polity are the use of alcohol and the practice of young boy pederasty among the early Sultans, as well as an understanding of the degree to which the fourteenth and fifteenth century rulers observed Islamic precepts in general. In a preliminary attempt to fill this lacuna, the present study focuses on the reigns of Bayezid I (1389-1402), the Interregnum (1403-1413), Mehmed I (1413-1421) and Murad II (1421-1451), and examines extant contemporary sources to see what light they shed on these questions. The choice of reigns and dates examined in this study has been dictated by the available sources. There are simply no known narrative sources from the reigns of the earlier rulers: Osman (ca. 1299-1324), Orhan Gazi (1324-1362), or Murad I (13621389). Given the fact that there are likewise no contemporary Ottoman chronicles written prior to the end of the fifteenth century (even were there they could hardly be expected to discuss such a sensitive topic as the use of alcohol and the sexual predilections of members of the dynasty), it must focus on two types of primary sources. First, the writings of those with whom the Ottomans came into contact. Particularly important in this latter regard are the Byzantine chronicle sources. Secondly, are the scattering of traveler accounts which have survived from the period. Needless to say, no contemporary Ottoman source or modern Turkish historiography refers to the specific sexual predilections of any of the Ottoman rulers. Young boy pederasty was, and still is today, a taboo topic (not only in present day Turkey but throughout the Islamic world), which (with the exception of this study) remains generally unbroken. Bayezid I was the first Ottoman ruler whose drinking was of such a scale that it found its way into the later Ottoman chronicle tradition. Similarly, he is one of the only rulers whose addiction to alcohol has even warranted mention in modern Turkish historiography. Even the semi-official historian of the early years of the Turkish Republic, Ismail Hakki Uzun^argih

8

DEFTEROLOGY

REVISITED

(basing his assessment on these chronicle accounts) argues that Bayezid's "addiction to alcohol had destroyed his nerves His general lack of regard for religious observances is also discussed by the twentieth century Turkish scholar Mukrimin Halil Yinan? in his islam Ansiklopedisi article on 'Bayezid / ' , where he reports that he had been corrupted in this regard by his Serbian wife (Olivera) and his Vezir [£andarli] Ali Pa§a, and adds the story that the famous §emseddin Muhammad [Molla]Fenari, the kadi (religious judge) of Bursa refused to accept Bayezid as a witness in a court case on the grounds that he had given up the practice of public prayer. 2 By far the most damning account of Bayezid's irreligiosity is linked to his addiction to drink and concerns his relationship with his son-inlaw Emir Sultan, who, despite their relationship, was far older than his fatherin-law and is revered as one of the most holy and saintly figures in early Ottoman history. As the account goes, Bayezid before departing on his Nicopolis campaign in 1396, reportedly vowed that should his endeavor be successful he would endow and build twenty mosques. Following his victory, with typical Ottoman pragmatism he instead undertook the construction of the Ulu Cami in Bursa with its unique twenty domes. As the mosque neared completion he asked his son-in-law to accompany him on a tour of inspection of the site. As they walked around the building he enquired of Emir Sultan as to whether or not all was in order. The saintly Emir Sultan responded that everything was all right. Then he continued by saying: "there is however one element which is missing, if you complete it, it will reflect well on your Sultanate." Eager to please Bayezid asked: "what is itT The reply was: "If you were to construct four meyhanes (saloons) in the four corner of the mosque, it would give you a reason to come to the mosque and it would make a great place for you to drink with your friends." Shocked by his statement, Bayezid replied: "But would it be proper to have meyhanes in a mosque?" Completely undaunted, Emir Sultan replied: "My Sultan, one's heart is similar to a house of God; for one to drink forbidden wine turns it into a meyhane, and one's body into a temple of idolatry. This is no different than constructing a meyhane inside a mosque,"3 Bayezid's reputation among his contemporaries as a heavy drinker is likewise recorded in the anonymous fifteenth-century Ottoman chronicle Tevarih-i al-i 'Osm&n, where it is attributed to the influence of his Christian wife, the Serbian princess Olivera:

2

Ismail Hakki Uzunarsili: Osmanli Tarihi. Vol. I. Ankara, 1947. p. 322.

Mtikrimin Halil Yinang: "Bayezid I.." in Islam Ansiklopedisi, Vol. II (Istanbul, 1962), pp. 369-392. See: pp. 389-390], 3 Hasan Turyan: Bursa Evliyalari ve Tarihi Eserleri. Bursa, 1982. See: pp. 44-46].

IMPROPRIETY

&

IMPIETY

9

"Vulkoglu, kizini Yildirim Hana verdi. Doniir ddnure§ oldular. Ta Vulkoglu km gelmeyince Yildirim Han sohbet ve i§ret neydiigin bilmezdi. Hig igmezlerdi ve ¡¡arab sohbeti olmazdi. Osman, Orhan, Gazi Htinkar zamamnda §arab igilmezdi" ("Vulkoglu gave his daughter to Yildirim Han [Bayezid I]. They became in-laws. Until Vulkoglu's daughter came to him Yildirim Han did not know what drinking and carousing was. They did not drink at all and held no wine parties. In the times of Osman, Orhan, [and] Gazi Hiinkar [Gazi Ruler = Murad I] wine was not drunk"). ^

T h o u g h we have no m e a n s of corroborating the a n o n y m o u s chronicler's assertion that Bayezid was the first Ottoman ruler to imbibe, his contention that in the days of the first three rulers of the dynasty wine had not been consumed is contradicted by a contemporary Genoese source. That Bayezid was not the first of his line to have shown a fondness for the fruit of the vine may be inferred from a list of gifts provided by the Genoese envoys Andalo de Mari and Tommaso di Magnerri in ca. 1351 to Orhan Gazi's court in Bursa. W e know that in addition to silver bullion, f u r s and silks, they presented Orhan with "42 hectoliters (4,200 liters = 1,109.5 gallons) ofTrilia [Triglia] wine."1 Clearly, wine had permeated the royal commissary during the reign of Orhan Gazi. It is unlikely that the Genoese envoys would have included wine among their gifts if he were known not to have imbibed. This reference is the earliest I am aware of which establishes the presence of wine at the Ottoman court. A s for the anonymous chronicler's linking of Bayezid's dissipation to the influence of his Serbian wife, it too is hard to sustain. The Byzantine ruler Manuel II Palaeologus, who as a vassal of Bayezid's accompanied him on his Anatolian campaign in 1391 (shortly after he had assumed the Sultanate), makes it clear Bayezid had more than a passing familiarity with the fruit of the vine even before he met his future spouse Olivera in 1392. In his work titled Dialogue With A Muslim, Manuel II complains about the rigors of campaigning with Bayezid in December of 1391: "Above and beyond all this, should we not mention the daily hunting, the dissipation at meals and afterwards, the throngs of mimes, the flocks of flute players, the choruses of singers, the tribes of dancers, the clang of cymbols, and the senseless laughter after the strong wine? Is it possible for those who suffer through all this not to have their minds dulled.

1 Friedrich Giese (Editor): Die Altosmanischen Anonymen Chroniken. Breslau, 1922 [Hereafter: Giese, 19221. See: p. 29. y Michel Balard: "A propos de la Bataille du Bosphore. L'expédition génoise de Pagatiitio Doria à Constantinople," in Travaux et Mémoires, Vol. IV (1970), pp. 431-469. See: p.457. ^ George T. Dennis: The Letters of Manuel 11 Palaeologus - Text, Translation, and Notes. Washington, D.C. (Dumbarton Oaks), 1977 [Hereafter: Dennis, 19771. See: pp. 50-51.

10

DEFTEROLOGY

REVISITED

In the course of the same campaign (against the Turkish rulers of Sinope and Kastamonu) in the winter of 1391, Manuel II also addressed a letter to his friend and tutor Cydones. This letter, which provides a detailed description of the deserted and devastated nature of the Anatolian landscape through which they were passing, a phenomenon which Manuel ascribes to the fear of Bayezid that existed among the local Muslim inhabitants of the region, who were repeatedly plundered by both the Ottoman soldiery and by his Balkan Christian vassals, ends with the following plaintive passage: "This is just what I am doing as I bring this letter to a close. For already, I can all but make out the messengers inviting us to go off to the ruler [Bayezid]. I suppose he again wants to drink a few toasts before dinner and to force us to fill ourselves with wine from his various collection of golden bowls and cups. He thinks that these will assuage the depression caused by what we have been writing about, while, even if I were in good spirits, they would only fill me with sadness."^

The tone in which Manuel II refers to Bayezid's penchant for debauchery is matter of fact and in no way can be interpreted as some kind of anti-Ottoman diatribe. He was writing to a confidant and had no way of knowing that anyone else would ever read his words. He is simply relating his own displeasure at having, night after night, to join the Ottoman ruler in his revelries. The explanation advanced by the English Ottomanist Colin Imber, that all such references to Bayezid's corruption and drinking, are the result of interpolations by late fifteenth century Ottoman chroniclers who were attempting to rationalize a cause for his ignominious defeat at the hands of Timur (Temurlenk = Tamerlane) in 1402, is impossible to sustain in light of the Byzantine ruler Manuel's eyewitness account of events in December of 1391.2 The Byzantine chronicler Doukas is even less circumspect in detailing Beyazid's debauchery. In describing the aftermath of the 1396 Nicopolis campaign, i.e., the very period that the Emir Sultan story related earlier is set in, he writes: "In Prusa [Bursa] Bayezid enjoyed the many fruits of good fortune and reveled in the daily homage of many nations. He lacked nothing that was beautiful from the coffers of nations... Boys and girls, selected for their unblemished bodies and beauty of countenance, were there - young and tender youths, and girls who outshone the sun. From where did they come? Romans, Serbs, Vlachs, Albanians, Hungarians, Saxons, Bulgarians and

1

Dennis, 1277: pp. 42-51. Colin Imber: "Paul Wittek's 'De la défaite d'Ankara à la prise de Constantinople,'" in Osmanli Ara$tirmalan, Vol. V. (1986), pp. 65-81. See: pp. 72-73],

2

IMPROPRIETY

&

IMPIETY

11

Latins, each speaking his own language and all there against their will. And Bayezid, living idly and wantonly, never ceased from lascivious sexual acts, indulging in licentious behavior with boys and girls."'

Doukas, a contemporary of Bayezid, is generally fair in his assessment of the Ottoman rulers (although he does show a preference for those such as Mehmet I and Murad II who honored their treaty obligations with the Byzantine rulers). His inclusion of this description may not be simply dismissed as some kind of anti-Ottoman invective. Rather, it must be seen as reflecting the reputation which Bayezid had acquired among his contemporaries in the closing years of his reign. As such, it fits the general assessment of this ruler which is likewise (albeit, more subtly) found in the later Ottoman sources, i.e., an individual given to hedonistic pleasures. As to the question of a terminus a quo for the practice of pederasty among the Ottoman rulers, it is to the anonymous fifteenth-century Tevdrih-i al-i 'Osman that we must turn in search of an answer. There, the anonymous author links it (together with whatever else he doesn't like in contemporary practice) to the evil influence of the Persians and the Karamanids. More specifically, to Q'andarii Halil Hayreddin Pa§a, and his son and successor, £andarh 'Ali Pa§a, whom he says brought scholars (ulema) into the circle of the rulers.2 It was as part of that trend that he links the appearance of catamite boys in the Ottoman court to 'Ali Pasa (ca. 1381): "As soon as Kara Halil's son 'Ali Paga became Vezir. Lewdness and debauchery increased. He gathered loveable catamite boys to his side. They were called if oglan" ("Hemanki Kara Halil oglu 'Ali Paga vezir oldi. Fisku-fucur ziyade oldu. Mahbub oglanlar yanina aldi. Adina if oglani koydu ")?

In our unknown author's eyes it was the (^andarli family of vezirs who introduced tax registers and other forms of government to the Ottomans, together with all forms of illicit conduct including the drinking of wine and pederasty.4 Paradoxically, in the eyes of this author, it was the learned class of Islamic scholars who joined the Ottomans from earlier Islamic states who bore the responsibility for introducing the Ottoman rulers (beginning with Murad I) to the sinful act of pederasty. Of particular interest is his statement that the catamite boys thus introduced to the court by 'Ali Pa§a were called

1 Harry J. Magoulias: Decline and Fall of Byzantium to the Ottoman Turks by Doukas. Detroit (Wayne state Univ.), 1975. See: pp. 87-88 [Hereafter: Doukas, 19751. 2 Ismail Hakki (Izun