Métanyes enn oe es Studes réunies et présentées par Albdeljelil Temi Fublications du Centre d'Etudes ob de Recherches Oltomanes, Utorisques, de Documentation eb dl Tnformation aaghouan 1988THE OTTOMAN NASIHATNAME AS A DISCOURSE OVER « MORALITY » Rifaat ABOU HADJ In a body of Ottoman literature called nasihamameler, or advice letters, two characters, as if in a morality play, take center stage, the virtuous cavalier, i.e, sipahi, and an avaricious but in the main an unidentified «other ». Not entizely by accident, the Ottoman genre of this literature first appeared in the second half of the sixteenth century at least, and continued into the eighteenth (1). Todate, nearly all those who have studied this Iterature have in the main viewed it as the contemplations of thoughtful Ottoman thinkers on internal conditions and their relationship to the status of the Ottoman empire in the world power structure. Almost invariably, as historians and social scientists, they have taken ‘the Ottoman genre as an authentic indicator of actual « dectine ». This essay is aimed as much at the continuation of the «revision » in our understanding of ‘the Ottoman writers as it is intended to be a reassessment of their latter day ob- servers, Since I have commented on the multiple social uses of this nasihat genre from several perspectives in carlier studies, here, I will confine myself primarily to the moral or akilak, the least understood dimension of the nasihatnameler. The authors of these tracts adopted as their form of discourse social psychology in which they pitied the «virtuous» sipahi against the unidentified avaricious «other ». Like their contemporaries in Western European (2), the Ottoman nasi- hatnameler writers were political thinkers who, late in the sixteenth century through the eighteenth, were maneuvering between two cultures : the «ancient » and the modern. The analogy des not stop here, however. At the same tim the two political cultures were also anchored materially but simultaneously in an agrarian economy for the ancient, a commercial one for the modern, and mixed, but sometimes confusing variations of both. It is difficult to characterize the economy of these two centuries since no single form of surplus extraction was ascendent. Its transitory character is (1) Cornell Fleischer, « From Shehzade Korkud fo Mustafa Ali : Cultural Origins of the Ottoman Nasihainame ». 1983, Forthcoming. (2) Quentin Skinner, The Foundations of Modern Political Thought. 2 vols. Cambridge, 1978 ‘and most recently, the provocative work on the parallel developments in England of the 47th and 181h es. Is by J.G.A. Pocock, Virlue, Commerce and History. Cambridge (England). 41985, See expecially chapters 3, « Authority and property », and chapter 4, « The mobility of property and the rise of eighteenth century sociology ».18 RIFAAT ABOU Hapy I is important to immediately indicate that the state formation in early modern times was the classstate, Simply put, there was hardly any distinction Ta the transitional period, 1600-1800's, the noted change in the state for- mation was a reflection of these economic transformations (5), The centralizing class-state of the Ottoman classical period gave way to rule by oligarchy, especial- |y characterized by a loosening hold of Istanbul's political and economic grip orer the provinces. By the eighteenth century the Process culminated in the rise of the dynast-run semi-independent Principalities. The central state became more The Ottoman advice letters, like those emanating from contemporary Western Europe, seem to dwell on parallel themes and issues, and offer correlative advice. I have in mind both the obviously analogous work of The Prince by Ma- chiavelli and the less evident, but Sontemporary and similar political and psy. cho-social tracts from England and France, discussed in Pocock’s study, Virtue, Commerce and History (7), Mate itferences between the early modecn and modern ‘Ottoman state is discussed in Rica Al Abou-El-Hal, « The Otloman Stag vison er 1800 ». Forthcoming, Ottoman Stale and Society : 4500-1600, (Eds. oA Abou El-Haj and C. H. Fleischer). A brief intrede BF Hecteusslon isin R.A. Abou-EI-Hel, « The Note he Ottoman State in the lator part Sette, Seventeenth Century », In Andrene Terese (editor), Otioman-Habsburg Relations Vienna, 1985, Pocock, Virtue, Commerce and History, discusses the diference between mobile property a3 distinct real property. (5) For reference see note 3 above Fhe Ot lifelong fax farming is discussed in R. A, Abou-El-Hal, « The So- Gy pes. the Ottoman Kanun ». Forthcoming: aca ent gene In note 3 above, (7) Pocock, Virtue, Commerce and History yepecialy chapters, « Authoriy and Property » ‘and chapter 4, « The Mobily of Property ena iene Eighteenth Century Sociology », i i‘THE OTTOMAN NASIHATNAME 19 In both «litterary traditions », some of the writers dwell on, as they decry, the growing «corruption » in contemporary political and economic practices and the perceived consequent general degradation of moral and social life. In- cidentally, another underlying but corollary but commion sub-theme is that of the delegation of authority, and dependent thereunto social specialization, These same writers, however, invatiably dwell on the contrasting psychological or psy- cho-social consequences of these economic transformations, Accordingly, the first resulted in a responsible or « integrated » man whose material base was secured by private or neatly private property. For a good number of these writers, it was this individual on whom society could count for spontaneous and honow- rable social service. The contrasting «personality» is one displayed by the merchant or in- vestor who had taken the place of the civic minded ones, The shift is in focusing energies not on social service, but om accumulation and self-enrichment. Under these circumstances, the business of the public is delegated to specialists. Since the specialist is beholden to others for his position, due to a lack of autonomous “material base, he is vulnerable to the ensuing «corruption ». In no time, howe- ver, the specialist manages to subordinate to his own secondary interests the primary public ones, ultimately usurping power to serve his narrow goals (8). To illustrate the morally polarized phenomena that we abstracted above we turn to the writings of two Ottoman writers, from the late sixteenth century, Ali and from the first half of the seventeenth century, Kochu Bey. (9). Both find it hard to assimilate into their socio-economic and socio-political framework, the specialists that the kul janissary or standing army had become. It would seem that the root problem was the devshirme whose primary goal was the creation of such a specialized and narrow class. Its sole purpose was « government » : administration and soldiering. The pay for these specialists was in the form of cash «salaries ». The chief distinction between the new military class of administrators and the old, i.c. the virtuous sipafi, is that the new class was from first to last, «created » to specialize in making war and providing internal security. The old military class, according to the elaborated set-up of Kochu Bey, was composed of individuals whose integrity and virtue were derived from the stability that the timar provided and whose loyalty can be depended upon since as sipahis they were drawn from the producer-subjects or reaya. Unlike the «alienated » ones who become specialized, the sipahis fulfilled, all at once, economic, social and Political functions, Because they were integrated, or whole, they ate spontaneous- ly responsible, loyal and civio-minded. Besides their presumed exclusive mono- poly over the méri lands, their stability was further enhanced by heredity into their class. It may be recalled that in contrast the kul class was payed in cash. As originally conccived the standing army, or the janissary class also had no occasion to reproduce itself, ie. it was not hereditary, Each fresh generation of the standing army was therefore the result of a new «recruitment » attained by way of the devshirme, (8) lam currently engaged in the study of the parallels in political thought in contemporary Ottoman and European history in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. (9) For Mustafa All, relied on the edition and translation by Andreas Tietze, Counsel For Sultans. Vienna 1979-82. For Kochu Bey, | relied on my own translation of Risale-i Kochu Bey. Istanbul, (Waits Press Edition) :' 1277/1861,20 RIFAAT ABOU Hapy specialization bred corruption, since it oa as assigned by favour, not by «right » or prece. ment to public positions or favour was that moved every sector of state, society venue increased, The following is a composite abstract of themes, isolated as moral or Gkilak character traits of the two personality {Pes which some of the Ottoman authors had emphasized and their respective political, social and psychological Homa tal features, Because they considered the subtle, combinations and transi- onal manifestations as aberrations, they insisted or arguing in terms of the two Personalities as dialectical opposites : (11), CHARACTER TRAITS : VIRTUOUS (as epitomized by) AVARICIOUS. Sipahi-cavalier «other » self-controlled : governed by his passions ; autonomous ; dependent ; Political consequences : — self-governing — governed by others — gtowing specialization Social consequences : — everyone in place — fluidity of classes and social and has a place mobility ; everything gers ; Psychological consequences : — integrated — alienated, flexible, disintegra- tive, — incorruptible — cortuptible, everyone and thing has a price — Gaba, crude — tefined manners, etiquette Prone ; — masculine, austere ~ effeminate : prone to luxury ~ reliable — Unreliable, itresolute, shifty ; — content — greedy and insatiable. (40) Scattered references in Ali and Kochu Bey. (11) In addition to those cited Ging Sansists of Lutt Pascha, Das Asafname, beri 1910, my own translation of R. Toho, forjution : the literary and travel notes of an art from Egypt who sought, in vain, his fortune in Istanbul, Ahmad b. Muhamed 4: Omar al-Khafaji, Rihane! al’ ahibba, 2 vores Frnt 267 3 Delterdar Mehmed Pasha, Neri ahvuzera ve'l-umera. Princeton, 1935 (translation and edition by W.L- Weight)THE OTTOMAN NASTHATNAME at SS Eee eee According to most of the nasikatnameler authors, the psychological or character profiles which these abstractions represent are embodied in the sipahi on the one hand and an unspecified personality (we have already identified as merchant-investor) on the other. Closer examination, however, shows that by the beginning of the soventeenth century, even the historicity of the first « cha- racter > becomes quite dubious. Although he is an historical figure, by the time of their writing, for Kochu Bey 1640's and especially for Defterdar Mchmed 1715 respectively, the sipahi figure, had for all practical purposes vanished from history. Not only has he lost his central position as the one who guaranteed the state as ever-prosperous and well-protected («ma’mura ve mahrusa »}, the ins- titution itself became open to all and every walk of life, The loss of this monopo- ly was not confined to office but also undermined the integrity of their rimar- ziamets. (Bven by the middle of the sixteenth century in some areas, close to half of the timars had been diverted to other uses. At the turn of the next century, the «alienation » had become nearly total 90 % (12). Jt is obvious that the sipafi, of these tracts, is an abstraction. He is wooden and undynamic, bearing the masks of literary invention or reinvention. The attributes assigned to him could hardly have existed simultaneously. This sipahy- cavalier is an idealized, made-up figure. If as constructed, this figure is a figment of the imagination of the nasihatnameler writers, then what were the purposes for its invention ? ‘The clues are inferred from the akhlak of the « other », Whereas the cha- racter traits of the sipahi are made up of an ahistorical composite, the other's are elaborated as if they were historical, vivid and demonstrably concrete, and vibrant, Yet the spontaneity of the virtuous, reliant and self-motivated and civic minded sipahi, is pitied against that of the vividly drawn, but shifty, unreliable, dependent and selfish other. While the stability of the sipahi draws upon a secure material base and heredity rights to office, for the other there is none. He relies on bribery for the opportunities to invest in income-sources, office and social position, A telling consequence is the concept of friend and friendship. Accor- ding to one of the writers, human relations are no more what they used to be. (13) For the reliable individual of old, mostly there are only unreliable, or occasional- ly reliable ones. One is therefore exhorted to expect only partial faithfulness and loyalty from friends. Their qualities are but variations on the characteristics of a pragmatic personality in a mainly commercial relationship. Perhaps the best example we have of the social incorporation and norma- lization of the commercial ethos, is expressed in a beautifully and richly execu- ted, late 18th century book which advocated an openly materialist and hoarding philosophy akin to the power of « positive thinking », In this little booklet of supplication-prayers called « du'a», the individual who commissioned the work, is exhorted to make his plea directly with his Maker, not only for the blessing (12) Douglas Howard, MESA presentation November, 1986 on « Ayn ‘Ali Efendi and the Literature of Decline ». The author maintained that in accordance with "Ayn-i ‘Ali's obser vations the sipahis had the following proportions of jimars : several years prior fo 1558 : 63% j in 1558, 53,9 % ; 1576, 19.8% ; and in 1600 less than 10%). (13) Delterdar Mehmed, Nasa’ih.22 RIFAAT ABOU Hany Of his riches and its augmentation, but also for tendering « halal » op fairly got. ten, whatever others that have been gotten or « haar » (14), Jn the Ottoman nasihatnameler, the lines between the two worlds are too Sharply drawn. Sometimes, not argued because they were real, ate the economic and social experiments represented in the Subtle combinations of the civic minded With the investor. He das not only Pontancously endow socially useful phitarr thropies, but also, voluntarily as oa a battcipates in military campaigns and contributes to the public treasury. ie the same transitional period thers Fe also examples of investor-sipahis, tenakt¥-artisans, and state officials who {4 The text ian Arab-Ottoman Turkish sn ty Which the du'a’ prayers are in Arabie Texans ltstuctions that show the perlite re in Ottoman Turkish the copy which Coiailned dates from later part of ane {he Wlara, 186A. or tras cp lemnich Sileations. Manuscripts Divisions saneertily of California at Los’ Angels Collection eras: 118. discussed the importans’ey es {ex In «The Ottoman Dervish Gone oe {isculturating Institutions », forthe ANT DE Arersedinas of CORDRE Des Be Oe er TreglIVERS GROUPES SE RecLamANT ne WO RCERTACH. Strasbourg. The co yer made by dervish Ali, Here is my translones sie Arabic text for the fll quoteney, SAL y tlzk (livelihood or fortone) ig Me hreaven, bring It down (to earth) ereane 1 F824 in (on) the earth, bring ut, and if it were limited, in Ginnie) And I it wore haram (lorbidder’at iMegitimate), make it hall (le. Gihiate) and it were hala, then bicee if (lee increase ijn», (18) For the Westera European writers oe FPocatk, Vittue, Commerce and History. (16) Detterdar Mehmed, Nasa’,THE OTTOMAN NASIHATNAME 23 —_——— ‘malikane tax farmers) (17). However, his new recommendation is couched in an old form. Defterdar Mehmed advises those in power (the grand vezirs especia!- {y) to return to the practice of collecting taxes through the use of salaried agents, emins (18). In the past, it should be pointed out, the emins had a limited and specialized function, the collection of revenues from the havas lands or sultanic private domain. However, in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, the mir lands out of whish the simar-ziamet were carved, represented by far the greater propor- tion of pudl’c lands, The rimar-ziamets, it may be recalled, had in the eyes of some of the nasihamameler writets, become the monopoly of the sipahis (19). As an catly modern state, the Ottoman’s had neither the capacity nor the resources for the collection of « taxes» from all the miri lands, the sipahis along with cul- tivating their own plots of land, were in effect collecting «state » revenue for their own upkeep. It may be recalled further that by the time Defterdar Mehmed wrote, beginning of the eighteenth century, the sipali institution and way of life had virtually disappeared, and the greater proportion of the timar-ziamets had been turned into either tax farms, evkaf or other forms of exploitation ranging from semi-private to private property. In addition, the same had become the fate of a good proportion of the sultans’ estates or havas. In light of these changes in the form of holding public lands, Deftetdar Mehmed’s recommendation a~ mounts to a new, if not revolutionary, system of taxation. The revital of the old practice, here for a new use and context, in the beginning of the eighteenth century, is based on a totally different state-formation, Our author was opting for a modern one totally dependent on tax revenue for its upkeep. Had his recom- mentation been taken seriously, the number of emins would have to be substan- tially increased. A whole new bureaucratic set up would also have to be financed at great expense (to assure integrity of the corps of tax-collectors), with new stan dards, principles and code of ethics. What Defterdar Mchmed is recommending amounted to the proto-type of a ministry of taxation in a modern state. Although in the literature, the character of the « other » is perhaps more vividly drawn and appears more imminent than that of the virtuous sipahi, none- theless it is not any more historical. This character seems to be as much of a crea~ tion of the late sixteenth and seventeenth centuries as was the character of the ‘sipahi, Jn explanation of the phenomenon before us, a historian will be hard put to find such a pure version of avarice as depicted by these authors. If neither one of these 1wo characters is historical, then why were they creoted. When viewed within the context of the discussed context, the nasihamameler are best approached as ideological tools for arguing the case for one political faction or another of the ruling class. As such they are only oversimplifications, and therefore seem to be handy devices for the conduct of political discourse. That this oversimplification is partially apprehended by its perpetrators is evident especially by the ambivalence of most of our authors toward the «hard » posi- tion which they might otherwise take toward the very antagonist which they were ever ready to detide, This ambivalence is evidenced by their reproduction, as has already been noted, even in the cases of the advocates of commerciali- zation, of the idealized sipahi. In some instances, we encounter these as verba- tim quotations from the polemical writings of their opponents, its original « de- (17) Abou-El-Haj, « The Social Uses of the Ottoman Kanun ». (18) Defterdar Mehmed, Naza’ih. (19) Kochu Bey, Risale.24 RIFAAT ABOU HaDs fenders ». In summary there are at east three explanations for this phenome- non : rine Position which the Ottoman polemice took would overly simplified ani ible, if only one side was Presented ; 2) perhaps more signi action of the continued adherence sna therefore relevance of tt00us sipalti, and the implied comm: i tment to a secular mo: ich such a retention would evidence. (It can aiso | be argued that the ideal of civic res Was retained to temper the devas. tating insatiabiti until such time in the future as 4 wholly indepe: Out, {0 vindicate and justify the : other in it nal natue of this period, no clear. cut shite Hence layers of the old are retai, ned. When viewed from this OF tracts seem to retain the his. torical specificity of the exp: Ottoman society was undergoing 88 they developed concepts useful for the ensuing political discourse, Before concluding, let me take up the subject of the wlema, which Defter- dat Mehmed drops from treatment, perhaps unintentionally signifying its inne. Tevance to the understanding of carly eighteenth century Ottoman society, The author’s omission of the ulema is the mye SurDrising since by the second half of the seventeenth century the iimiye bad come to display all the characteris tics of'a truly entrenched aristocracy, i.e, inherited positions and monopoly over the evkaf. The bulk of the Private, real property which was not Tegarded as either State owned, i.e. miri, or private PiCpetty owned by individuals, was at the wdema’s disposal. In that sense by the end of the seventee they displayed ali the characteristics which, According to the writers, had distinguished the imagi- is is d collectively if not actually “nent of Delerdar Mehmed’s omission Of the iimiye from it ‘ety, will have to await the the consideration of thei mozal Posture hete I will dwell very briefly on the relations of in Ottoman political society there was an ongoing he relationship of the secuine law or kanun to the canon law ofTHE OTTOMAN NASIATNAME 25 ttt the ilmiye becomes crucial in pronouncing the legality of the transformations in Iand use, i.e. the new practices and innovations jn the exploitation of miri lands, which were the underlying themes of the nasihatnameler discourse. During the period under consideration, the production of the kanun had become not only fluid (many sources for it), but also ad hoc (frequent changes on the spot), ultimately bordering on the arbitrary. As noted above, through the evkaf, the ulema disposed of a substantial amount of property, including capital. The latter was extended as credit and especially to the central state (22). Given these considerations and in face of the evidence that the ilmiye had, during the previous half century at least, grown into a formidable institut- tion, Defterdar Mehmed’s silence on this institution’s role in Ottoman society becomes so much more crucial. We do know that the ulema were actually consul- ted during the debates over the changes in the forms of land exploitation, for example, in the transforming malikane tax farming from on-term to life awards, By leaving it out of consideration in his recommendations, Defterdar Mehmed seems to be placing the ilmiye completely outside the on-going political discourse, In this, he is not unlike the catlier nasihatnameler writes. This may suggest a collective wish to maintain their political discourse at a « secular» level. An observation of this nature should not be taken to be strictly exclusive. A parallel political discourse may have been conducted by members of the ilmiye. There is at Jeast one known, but unstudied, nasihainame by a member of the ilmiye, written earlier than Defterdar Mehmed’s tract (23), Finalilly, by deleting the ilmiye from any serious consideration, Defterdar Mehmed Pasha’s nasthatname provi- des evidence to argue that the tracts cannot serve as objective assessments of contemporary historical reality. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS : Since the purpose of this essay was to give a preliminary and suggestive rather than a definitive explanation for the seemingly anomalous interplay and opposition between two contrasting personalities in the nasihatnameler, the fol- lowing is an attempt at outlining the directions suggested by this study for future research. I. Chronology : if commercialization was a major transforming force in Ottoman history, as it is suggested in this study, then how far back chronologically should its transforming foree be noted ? The nasihatnameler writers considec the beginning of specialization (in government service) and delegation of autho- rity as key factors symptomatic of this change (some refer to it as corruption) The signal for it is the growing dependence of the Istanbul authorities on the paid Janissaty corps as the instrument of ccercion and administration at the expense of the sipahis. We know that the janissary corps played a major role in some (2) Late in the seventeenth century, the surplus income from the evkaf under the super- Vision of the grand vezir, sheyhulislam and several high government officials was diverted foward meeting the extraordinary expenses of the campaigns of Mustafa Il. Furthemore, at the beginning of the reign of Ahmed il, the coronation gifts for the soldiers came in the form of leans from the «orphans’ fund » yet another source of potential investment. (23) Attributed fo Feyzullah Efendi, the sheyhulislam and mentor of Mustafa It (a. 17032). hhave been unable to focate a copy of this work. It should prove important since the dynamic Feyzullah Efendi was an advocate of the return to an adive sultanate, and had ‘argued against control by oligarchy.26 RIFAAT ABOU HaDJ of the contentions over power which up to now in the scholarly literature have been portrayed mainly as sometimes quite deadly internecine Struggles among the Ottoman princes over the royal succession, Furthermore, the recruitment tuachanism for the standing army, the desshirme, did not only Produce janissaries, but also its « graduates » had come to occupy the highest posts of government on both the central and provincial levels. Thus both spectaliantion and delegation of authority were manifested well before the nasihamamelen authors had begun to write late in the sixteenth century. By the second hall of the sixteenth century the process of change was set on course for at least one hundred nt one hundred and fifty years. Can we associate the phenomenon of Specialization and delega- ferring mirilands into mobile property, out of the timar-ziamets, mast be pushed back in time to at least the second half of the fifteenth century. It may be recalled that the revenue accruing from this transformation was intended for the upkeep of the specialized administrators cum military commanders By the second half of the sixteenth century, Ali's observation that corruption » had already set in during Suleyman Kanuni’s reign becomes intelligible, IL. Dass the discourse represented by the nasihatnameler suggest the “evolution » of a secular political culture ? If so, what is that culture, and how sigoificant is it to our understanding of the political debates of the late eighteenth Century to the beginning of the twentieth, and therefore also our understanding pa the course of Ottoman history for the same period ? There are indications logical stance, For example, Kochu Boy's Risale seems to be well suited to argue the case of the «martyred » Osman II. In addressing himaself ro Murad IV, was Kochu Bey advocating a «restoration » ideology ? By favouring restraint on the Janissaries, he seems to support Osman IT who had favoured the outright elimina- tion of the devshirme, the backbone of the standing army, It may be recalled that it was to the consequent specialization and delegation of authority, represented by a salaried standing army, that the ensuing « corruption » is attributed by Kochu Bey, Ekewhere I had argued that the historian Mustafa Naima wrote in defence Of the then status quo and for an oligarchy which had come to dostrate Otto- aan political, economic and social life in the second half of the seventecrth cons ‘ary Q5). By accepting the change that had taken place, the ideology which ho (24) References in note 3 above. Gap RA: Abew-ELHal, Rebellion of 4709 and the Structure of Ottoman Polilcs. The Hague, Cantu tnd Idem, «The Nature of the Ottoman State Inthe latter parvot ire geet eee: Contury ».THE OTTOMAN NASIHATNAME 27 ee eses—C espoused seems to be in direct contrast to that of Kochu Bey. In this paper, we had suggested that a contemporary of Naima’s Defterdar Mehmed seems to fol- Jow the same political line. The evidence we have already cited points not only to an acceptance of the change as @ given, but seems to actually advocate the has- tening of the process of commercialization, It may be recalled that he not only accepted the status quo, but suggested adopting a nearly modern method of tax collecting, Furthermore, unlike Kochu Bey, in his own tract, Defterdar Mehmed dees not actually advocate a return to the sipahi form of government, and to the timar-ziamet mode of surplus extraction. Instead, he devotes a whole chapter to the standing army, the Bektashi corps as he calls it. Whereas Kochu Bey regards the sipahi as the man of virtue most suitable for governing, and therefore the best check on the standing army’s ability to « usurp » power, Defterdar Mehmed wrote in praise of the janissary as «... very essential and necessary for good order in the Exalted Gouvernment », (26) IV. The nasihatnameler as a manifestation of the theme of decline. If we were to accept this premise, it would amount to attributing the same preoc- cupation with decline by the political tract writers of Western Europe, who were also concerned with their societies loss of virtue (and innocence) (27). Hume or Montesquiou were involved in the current debates over decline, as some of their contemporaries argued in favour of the civic monded but agrarian citizen, whose virtue and therefore his independence was predicated on his ow- nership of private property. It should be pointed out here, that some of the Euro- pean polemics’, decried the rise of commercialization in this same period and seem to have favoured the civic, and virtuous citizen warrior. To some of them, as it seemed to be for their Ottoman contemporaries, there was equal nostalgia. for the virtuous one, To them, this change in their respective societies, from that personality model, was equally taken as a harbinger of decline. Like their counterparts in contemporary Western Europe, the navihat~ nameler writers seem to be engaged in a profound intellectual discourse far re- moved from those concerned with actual decline, As viewed in this paper, they Tepresont an ongoing debate on contemporary economic, political and social issues, suggesting as they reflected a struggle, as much political as it was intellec- tual and moral, to find the forms and modes appropriate for contending with the new and especially economic experiments that their society was undergoing at this point. We have already noted that sometimes the Ottoman polemics use old modes to convey completely new processes, as illustrated by Defterdar Mehmed’s recommendations on tax collection, Since these were experiments, the social and institutional consequences could not leave the writers unambiva. lent about the phenomenon which they and their contemporaries were experien- cing. We saw this displayed even by the most ardent partisans of commercial zation, As they forgo ahead in their « normalization » of commetce, they conti- nue to be preoccuried with its ethical and social consequences, How do you curb greed, or convert it into a socially useful characteristic, these ate the very ques- tions that seem to continue to preoccupy them, (26) Defterdar Mehmed, pp. 110-111. (27) On Hume and Montesquieu, see Pocock, Virtue, Commerce and History.28 RIFAAT aBou Hapy Rifaat Abou Hadj Professor of History History Department CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY Long Beach, CALIFORNIA Visiting Research Associate : 1985-31 Fernand Braudel Center STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YoRK Binghamton, NEW YORK (3) Th's paper was the subject of e dscussion in March, 1987 with my colleagues Samira AbULHa} of University of California aioe gaigeles, Talal Asad of Hull University we fate Stan of Temple University. My graivegeg2 all three for their substantial and come, tructive criticism.‘THE OTTOMAN NASIHATNAME 29 ‘APPENDIX STATISTICS ON ILIMIYE 1080's-1120's (1670-1715) Sub-total Total Us = 140 039 042 046 08s Total ULS (which inctudes ULS (©) 41.98% 310 ULS (0) = 019 004 013 014) HU 00% 002 006 009 012 4hO% 033 (hus ost 005 006 015 O17 074) Numbers represent frequency of appointment ULS = ulema (sulale, family) ULO (©) = ulema (provinclal, etc. other) MIL = military MERCH = merchant, (ariisan, craftsmen) H-U = ulema household he H-G = grandee household he BUR = bureaucracy OTHER = (all others) of other origins but with H-U intisap cof other origins but with H-G intisap PROY - E = provinces Europe (including Crimea) PROY = AR = provinces Arab lands PROV - AN = provinces Anatoli PROV - OTHER = Mediterranean Isles, CAPTS = capitals : fstanbul (an since all belong to one culture, ia Eastern fands (bilad-i sharklye) and Acem 'd its environs), Edirne and Bursa (this category adopted i.e. Istanbul based culture).30. RIFAAT ABOU: HADI MiL= o10 003 000, 01 003 2.26% 017 MERCH = 169 036 019 035 054 4.78%, 13 HG = o10 000 004 005 006 3.33% 025 (heg = 13 008 003 003 007 034) BUR= 2.00%, os OTHER = 4.80% 036 THE GRAND TOTAL PRO’ 9.05% 067 PROV - ARs» 3.78% 028 PROV - AN= 30.94% 229 PROV - OTHER 581% 048 PROV = 367 CAPTS = 49.86% 369 = ca. 740 Numbers represent frequency of appointment ULS = ulema (sulale, family) ULO (0) = ulema (provincial, etc. other) MIL == military MERCH = merchant, (artisan, craftsmen) H-U = ulema household hu = of other origins but with H-U intisap H-G = grandee household beg = of other origins but with H-G intisap BUR = bureaucracy OTHER = (all others) BROV - E = provinces Europe (including Crimea) PROV = AR =. provinces Arab lands PROV - AN = provinces Anatolia, PROV ~ OTHER = Mediterranean isles, Eastern lands (biladei shaurkiye) and Acem CAPTS =capitals : Islanbu! (and its environs), Edirne and Macq (this category adopted since all belong to one culture, ie. Istanbul based culture),