BERAT AÇIL
Conventional scholars have described the Ottoman Empire as being in a long period of gradual decline in the last decades of the sixteenth century. But a new generation of revisionist scholars have challenged this view and describe this time as the beginning of a long period of imperial crisis and change. According to these scholars, from the 1580s onward, the Ottomans witnessed a series of transformative problems that not only created changes in their full-fledged empire’s political, military, and economic structures but also in various areas of social and cultural life. Based on this new perspective and on the so-called seventeenth-century Ottoman imperial crisis, this essay discusses some hitherto unexplored developments in the field of Ottoman literature. Focusing on the life and work of seventeenth-century Ottoman poet and scholar ʿAzmizade Haleti Efendi (d. 1570–1631), a study of his writings demonstrates the transformation that was taking place within Ottoman society in the late 1500s.
CHANGE(S) IN POWER RELATIONS AND THE RISE OF HAREM EUNUCHS
The Ottomans had a well-established patrimonial system that governed almost all managerial activities until the mid-sixteenth century. This system reached its level of perfection in the reign of Suleiman the Magnificent (r. 1520–1566), described as a time in which “one did not need to wonder about who was going to be the next grand vizier.”1 This kind of a world encouraged an easy-going lifestyle in many ways as one would be able to easily predict his or her near future. Baki Tezcan refers to the subsequent era in which transformative structural changes took place as “the Second Empire.”
[M]y suggestion [is] to call the period of circa 1580–1826 the Second Empire. If the political structures of the feudal kingdom and the patrimonial empire were to be represented by a pyramid at the apex of which stood the sultan, the Second Empire would best be symbolized by a spider web with the monarch at the center but not on top of anyone else.2
He continues by suggesting that “the Second Empire as a whole is marked by the gradual demilitarization of the upper ruling class, or its civilization—civil in the sense of being nonmilitary.”3
Indeed, from the reign of Murad III (r. 1574–1595) onward, the Ottomans went through a period of change pertaining to court and dynastic politics, which in turn had critical repercussions on the intellectual and literary life of many parties. For instance, when the Ottoman dynasty stopped sending their princes to sanjaks (mostly in Anatolia) with the aim at training them in statecraft, all main political and cultural patronage networks shifted to the capital city of Istanbul, and a new center of power and patronage emerged together with a new Ottoman ruling class. Naturally a prince ascending the throne would bring many of his favorites to Istanbul. Politically speaking, the abandonment of sanjaks resulted in power relations being centered at the Topkapı Palace. When a new sultan came to the throne, he brought his favorites with him to the palace, which set them on a collision course with the old power holders.4 Hence factions emerged in the palace that sought to be closer to the sultan at the expense of other parties.
Two parties appeared to have benefited from these emerging new conditions: valide sultans5 (sultanas) and darussaade agası (chief eunuch of the imperial harem of the Ottoman Empire). Jane Hathaway confirmed this observation, pointing to the power vacuum being filled by the sultan’s mother and the Chief Harem Eunuch. The valide sultans are well documented in various academic and nonacademic works, but the effects of the Chief Harem Eunuch on Ottoman culture require some additional explanation. Hathaway describes this as a time of crisis in the empire and suggests that the inauguration of the office of the Eunuch was a reaction or adaptation to that crisis.
What is intriguing about the office of Chief Harem Eunuch is that it emerged and developed during the era of what used to be called “decline,” which has now been recast as a period, beginning in the late sixteenth century and running through the seventeenth century, when the Ottoman Empire passed through a profound crisis to which it was forced to adapt. Where the palace was concerned, this crisis affected the manner in which the Ottoman dynasty reproduced itself and projected its authority. The evolution of the Chief Harem Eunuch’s office is, I would argue, an integral part of the palace’s adaptation to the crisis.6
This dramatic change had an immediate influence on the patronage system of the empire.
Although some recently published works address patronage, significant ground remains to be covered. Hatice Aynur writes: “In spite of the importance of patronage in the Ottoman world, no encompassing study of this institution does as yet exist. High Ottoman officials and also the sultans themselves, many of whom wrote poetry, acted as protectors of poets. Both people born in Istanbul and newcomers from the provinces were on the lookout for patrons.”7 After Murad III, the characteristics of both the sultan and the Eunuch were transformed. Tezcan argues that Murad III was trying to destabilize the status of the grand vizier while beginning to establish an alternative and stable power that had its center within the palace. For that purpose, he empowered the Eunuch and made him the most important administrator in the palace and strengthened his position even further by attaching to it financial resources of the empire. Tezcan continues by arguing that Murad III was trying to reduce the power of vizier families and the people of justice elite for the sake of establishing an empire ruled from the palace strictly administrated by people such as the Chief Eunuch Mehmed Aga (d. 1590) whom he fully trusted.8
To understand the power the Eunuch gained in the empire, it is important to note that it was Eunuch Mustafa Aga who had enthroned Osman II (r. 1618–1622).9 Mustafa Aga (d. 1624) and his predecessors were powerful in the patronage system as well. The first Harem Eunuch, Habeşi Mehmed Aga (d. 1590), was the most effective and powerful patron of the arts in the empire in his time,10 and those that followed began to select poets and other artisans and bring them under their protection. Meddah Medhi (d. after 1620) was one of those poets; he was not actually a poet but rather a public storyteller (meddah) and was sponsored by the Eunuch himself.11
GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY
There were many transformative changes in the seventeenth century; among them, if not the most important one, was the regicide of Osman II, a traumatic moment in Ottoman history that had different levels of impact in varied areas. The symbolic meaning of that regicide revealed the weakness of the sultan in the now changed or transformed empire. “When analyzed through the perspective provided by Ottoman intellectual traditions of governance, it is possible to see that the regicide of Osman II and other depositions of the seventeenth century broke the ties that held together ethics, economics, and politics and thus brought limitations to the power of the sultan.”12
These changes brought about changes in the main characteristics of Ottoman literature in general, and especially poetry, in the seventeenth century.13 Aynur states that “from the seventeenth century onwards many writers show a tendency to refer to the environments in which they themselves lived,” and therefore it can be said that “poetry in Turkish acquired a local flavour.”14 Aynur’s argument seems to provide an answer to the age-old bias that Ottoman literature is abstract and has nothing to do with society and nature. Aynur continues to point out evidence of daily life in Ottoman literature by asserting that “divans of the seventeenth and following centuries tended to contain more references to daily life than had been true in earlier periods. From the collected poems of Nabi [d. 1712] it is possible to compile his biography, while Cevri [d. 1654] was the first to mention the palace women by their names, particularly the ruler’s powerful mother, Kosem Sultan (d. 1651).”15
Another important feature of the seventeenth century was the diversification of inscriptions. Art, poetry, and architecture converged in that era and almost every building or other construction contained some embedded poetry.16 These poems generally consisted of a chronogram commemorating the date of the construction of the building, palace, mosque, medrese, bridge, and so on.
Stone and marble occupied a special place. From the seventeenth century onwards, inscriptions, which in earlier times had simply recorded the person or persons responsible for the construction and the date at which a given mosque, school or fountain was completed, often came to consist of several couplets. In these verses the functions of the relevant building were spelt out in some detail. For a prominent structure, several poets might compose such verses; but only one of them, usually either from the ruling circles or at least close to the powers that be, was honoured by having his work thus immortalized. Even public competitions for such purposes were on record.17
Kasides also increased in both number and importance. “This type of poem gained in popularity in the course of the seventeenth century, and the large number of kasides composed in praise of important people may indicate that relations between authors and members of the ruling group became closer in this period.”18 The popularity of both the inscriptions and the kasides attest to the fact that both laypeople and members of the ruling class wanted to record things that they deemed significant.
In addition to biographical dictionaries, which provided brief information about both the poets’ lives and their poems, a new genre called vefeyat gained popularity. “Beginning with the seventeenth century, the biographical dictionaries tell us that some poets and prose writers produced works that they called vefeyat. These volumes contain the death dates of the people treated, and that is why they are referred to by a term derived from the word for death (vefat); otherwise, the books in question are short biographical dictionaries.”19
Ottomans were constantly attempting new things in this era; so much so that Cemal Kafadar described this period as “the age of chelebis.”20 The chelebis in this context could be marked by their curiosity. The pioneering figure among them is Evliya Chelebi (d. after 1682). His stunning masterpiece, Seyahatname (The Book of Travels), is one of the most analyzed of all Ottoman texts, and it contains descriptions of almost everything about the early modern Ottomans and also the Europeans: customs, mosques, bridges, inscriptions, quarters, populations, geographical elements of a given territory, and so forth. It can easily be argued that all academic disciplines treat Seyahatname as the main source for their subject area because Evliya’s curiosity encompassed all knowable aspects of society.21
The literary, architectural, and artistic accumulation is another distinguishing characteristic of the seventeenth century. Hikemi style poems (poems about wisdom and philosophy) of the seventeenth century, especially those written by Nabi, as I argue, are evidence of the accumulation in poetry.
In understanding an age of change, it is important to recognize the foresighted poets because they were keen observers of society. ʿAzmizade Haleti was one of the most insightful poets of that time, and his work reflected the transformations taking place within Ottoman literature. I begin with a brief survey of the life and the works of Haleti, paying special attention to his Divan. Then some excerpts of his Divan are presented, which offer a taste of the different genres of his transformative poems.
ʿAZMIZADE HALETI, HIS LIFE AND WORK
‘Azmizade Haleti (b. 1570) was one of the most famous poets and scholars of his time.22 He was born in Istanbul and was a member of a renowned family; many of his relatives were both high-rank government officials and poets. Among them were his father, ʿAzmi (d. 1582), the well-known tutor of princes and also a poet, who began to write his Mihr u Musteri (a translation from Persian poet Assar-ı Tebrizi [d. 1383]) but was unable to complete it. Haleti’s grandfather, worked as the head of the financial department (defterdar), and a famous uncle, Nisancı Mehmed Nami Pasa —known by his penname Nami (d. 1595)—was both a poet and a very high-ranking official. He was also the father-in-law of Haleti.
As a member of this esteemed family, Haleti had acquired an excellent education through the medrese (Islamic school attached to a mosqoue). His master (hodja) was Hoca Sadeddin Efendi (d. 1599) who was also the imperial teacher to the Ottoman sultans. Haleti became a muderris (the teacher of the medrese) at the young age of twenty-one. Haleti was appointed to several high-ranking official posts over time. He first became a muderris in 1588–1589. His first judgeship (kadılık) was that of Sam (Damascus) in 1602. Then he became the judge (kadı) of Kahire (Cairo) and was the district governor (kaymakam) of Egypt for a short time. After waiting for a new office for two years, he was appointed as the judge of Bursa, but he was dismissed due to the lack of public order in the city. He became the judge of Edirne in 1611 but was dismissed after a short time and given the judgeship (kadılık) of Sam. He became the judge of Istanbul in 1614, the judge of Kahire in 1618, and the judge of Uzunca-Ova in 1621. He became the Anadolu military judge (kazasker) in 1623 and the Rumeli military judge in 1627. Each of these office was held for only a short period of time.
As one of the most renowned scholars of his age, Haleti had a fairly large library of his own containing about 4,000 books and one hundred miscellaneous items (mecmu’a).23 Haleti read them all, took notes on the marginalias, and even redacted them when necessary. Looking at his poems, one may describe him as a scholar rather than a mystical poet as there is little reference to mysticism in his poems. His strength resides in his poetic power in stanzas, which defined him as a scholar-poet.
Haleti was from Istanbul and may be called an Istanbulid (Istanbullu), which constitutes a specific category in classical Turkish poetry. Some other members were Necati (d. 1509), Baki (d. 1600), and Nedim (d. 1730). The main characteristic of poets falling under this category is their use of simple and local language. Haleti also used rather simple language and attached importance to his Istanbulid roots, writing an ode to praise Abu Ayyub Ansari (d. 672 or 674), whose tomb is in Istanbul today.
Haleti has written many important works that can be divided into two categories: scholarly and poetic works. His scholarly works include Hasiye ‘ala Durer al-Hukkam (marginal notes on Durer al-Hukkam), Hasiye ‘ala Serh al-Menar (marginal notes on Serh al-Menar), and Mugni al-Lebib. These are very difficult texts to read, understand, and explain in the medrese curriculum, so one can speculate as to the high level of his scholarship. I personally agree with the scholar-poet adjective attributed to him. His poetic/literary works include the following:
1. Hasiye ‘ala Mihr u Musteri (marginal notes on Mihr [Moon] and Musteri [Jupiter]), which was originally written by the Persian poet Assar. Haleti’s father had started to translate it, but the text remained unfinished. Haleti wanted to continue this work, but he was not able to finish it either.
2. Munseat (Epistles) consists of epistles Haleti addressed to prominent scholars and statesmen of his age.
3. Saki-name (The Book of the Cupbearer) is a work about wine, the cupbearer, the beloved, love, and the rules of good manners related to drinking.
4. Ruba’iyyat (Stanzas) were a part of his Divan, but thanks to their quality they were also compiled as a distinct work of 1,000 stanzas. Haleti is the first poet that comes to mind when discussing Turkish stanzas because of both the number of stanzas he wrote and their quality. Haleti is generally called the “Hayyam-ı Rum” (Hayyam of Anatolia) because his reputation is similar to that of Hayyam (d. 1131).24 Thirty-one copies of his stanzas reside in different manuscript libraries.
5. Divan (compilation of all poetic genres except the mathnawis) is one of the most copied works in the history of classical Turkish poetry (twenty-eight manuscript copies). According to Kaya, there are 1,712 different poems in the Divan.
Next, I introduce some poetry from Haleti’s Divan to show the transformative and novel characteristics of Haleti’s poems. An explanation of the properties of each poem is provided before the translation to contextualize it in terms of both history and literature.
TRANSLATIONS AND NOTES FOR EXCERPTS FROM HALETI’S DIVAN
ON THE PORTRAITURE OF ABU AYYUB ANSARI MAY GOD BE PLEASED WITH HIM
This poem was chosen because of its uniqueness. Abu Ayyub Ansari had hosted Prophet Muhammed (d. 632) in his home after the Prophet’s hijra (emigration) from Makkah to Madina, and then he became one of the Prophet’s most important companions. Abu Ayyub Ansari fell as a martyr during one of the earlier sieges of Instanbul, and his grave is in Istanbul. Haleti was considered to be among the Istanbulite poets, who used the local aspects of that city as well as language of the city in their poems, which later was labeled mahallilesme (localization). From this perspective, Haleti also tried to demonstrate his poetic stance. This poem is selected because of the way it weaves all of these elements together.
1 O reed pen! Come let us be co-lingual
Let us be the standard-bearer of heart’s estate
2 To mention the standard-bearer of that Excellency
Is reason enough for Lover’s mercy
3 The intercessor of sins, the pride of his friends
Namely His Excellency Abu Ayyub
4 He was with the Prophet in every holy war
Hence he’s known for virtue, no wonder
5 When the shah [prophet] emigrated from Makkah
His honorable house became the chosen destination
6 The moon of the sky of mildness and dignity
Stayed at his home for seven months
7 Is it a surprise that his status is so high?
Since Huma descended onto his destination
8 It became like a whirling dome
His holy tomb, the source of lights
9 Its dome is the wheel of the beautiful universe
The dust of his tomb is the Kaabe of the angels
10 If the synagogue were to find the fog of its firewood
It would make it varnish-kohl for its eye
11 The fog of the candle of his grave, every time
Engenders mercy-scattering clouds
12 The bowl of the upside down sky getting dark
It is worthy to make its fog-like soot rapidly
13 Maybe they are made from that soot every single time
The task of the Divine Book and the Pen, orderly
14 The earth of his grave and the pivot on the dome
Is worthy to be used by the eye of the star as kohl
15 Each stone of the ground of his dervish lodge became
The pearl of the crown of the royal crown
16 The light wind in the twilight coming from his ground
Makes pure bosom a rose garden
17 For they may find life via grace
Dead bodies surround his placed
18 In order for him to be Rum’s guard
He sent that sultan, the almighty God
19 O inferior heart, do it!
Endless praises to the Protector’s Excellency
20 You became a helpless slave at his sill
You became a servant of servants of the Messenger
21 Allah judged you suitable for his service
That bliss is enough for you in this world
HEXAGONAL POEM ON THE LACK OF NEED
This museddes indicates another distinct usage by Haleti because there is no other poem entitled “On the Lack of Need.” When we consider Turkish literature speaking “on the lack of need,” Ziya Pasha (d. 1880), a famous nineteenth-century Ottoman poet, comes to mind. Before Ziya Pasha, no poet, as I remember, is known to have written about the lack, which seems to be a modern theme.
I
I am lovesick from the sorrow of the love of the captivating beloved, if I die, I do not cure myself
If I were left in darkness, I would not use the torch of the moon as a lantern
I am a king-natured slave; that is why I do not concur with kings
If my heart would be the king of the entire world I would not be pleased
I am the king of love; I do not use sky and sun as throne and crown
I am a wandering dervish; even if I die I do not offer my need to the world
II
I am a heavy-waved sea full of overflows
I am the follower of the Mansoor al-Hallaj in the land of love (affection)
I neither have a will from that world nor do I need somebody
My throne is the ground of abasement; my crown is the cap of poverty
I am the king of love; I do not use sky and sun as throne and crown
I am a wandering dervish; even if I die I do not offer my need to the world
III
You know the throne of king in the end becomes the wood of his coffin
That tinhorn crown you see has beheaded many (people)
Since there remains no trace from kings apparent such that
I contemplated myself that I should not set eyes on crown and throne
I am the king of love; I do not use sky and sun as throne and crown
I am a wandering dervish; even if I die I do not offer my need to the world
IV
I enjoy myself if I keep myself off worldly pleasure
I will not suffer when I die, if I remain as a beggar in the doorstep of love
It does not protect my state from not expressing; were I to become voiceless
If I could not find a good place that is fitting, I would stay out in the cold
I am the king of love; I do not use sky and sun as throne and crown
I am a wandering dervish; even if I die I do not offer my need to the world
V
O my king! Beware! Do not be deceived by that prosperous-in-trouble palace
You will leave the emerald throne, the golden crown of this world
Do not look at the heart of the miserable dervish with outrage
Although I seem to be a dervish, it is only on the surface, verily
I am the king of love; I do not use sky and sun as throne and crown
I am a wandering dervish; even if I die I do not offer my need to the world
VI
Suffice it to make the fume of the fire of sighs my flag
Royal trumpet is never required when I have my wailing
The heart does not want dignity and rank with that world’s suffering,
If the world i destroyed, Haleti vallahi billahi (upon my oath)
I am the king of love; I do not use sky and sun as throne and crown
I am a wandering dervish; even if I die I do not offer my need to the world
The Ottomans had wanted a conquering sultan since the time of Murad III, who had not joined any military campaigns. This fact was a cause of discomfort among subjects because they had been used to “warrior rulers” (ghazi sultan). The lack of a fighting (ghazi) sultan continued until the reign of Sultan Mehmed Khan III (r. 1595–1603), who picked up fighting once again and participated in military campaigns. Egri campaign (1596), in that sense, was of particularly significance for both the Ottoman rulers and their subjects; it had been quite a long time since an Ottoman victory in war demonstrated the power of the empire. So many poems commemorating the date and victory of Egri were penned due to its symbolic importance. As in the title of the kaside, it is observed that after the Egri campaign Sultan Mehmed Khan III was named as “the second conqueror,” the first being Fatih Sultan Mehmed II (r. 1451–1481), the conqueror of Constantinople.
It was composed and submitted when the second conqueror, Sultan Mehmet Khan III, returned from the Egri campaign.
1 The renowned king has polished off all enemies
He has made his reach his post, like a full moon
2 When Suleiman of his time has come to his place
The light wind of the conquest and victory showed highly care
3 The rose would be used to bestow all of its clothes to the morning breeze’s messenger
If a message were conveyed to the rose garden of his arrival
4 Now that the war time had passed by
The time of refreshment and pleasure came, the time of drinking arrived
5 It is not surprising if desire-bud blossoms like a rose
The blood of the enemy made the earth’s surface tulip-red in color
6 The body of the enemy that has reached its trouble
Quick-arriving sword has gone through that reach
7 Although the army of the enemy was so grand in number
Yet the grandness and the bones vanished in an instant
8 The king’s body became a radiant candle, so to speak
Darkness had covered the universe with the dust of the battlefield
9 As the enemy looked at his mirror-like sword
Defeat-surface became for them as face-displayer
10 It was not oscillating alongside him but sword
As brigadiers oscillate in the battlefield
11 Rivals’ blood would not be spilled onto the ground if
There was no influence of the star of King Mars of revenge
12 Would not override underfoot the horse-herd of the state’s enemy
If the dapple-gray of sky would not bend the knee
13 There was a need to thrust a sword into the enemies of religion
They were asleep by blindness completely
14 If his brightness of sun of steamroller would not touch
The state’s enemy would remain crude in this world’s garden
15 The sea of his supremacy quenching his sharp-sword
Became a cloud, pelted enemy’s head with trouble
16 His sword cut the tongue (language) of the enemy of religion
Under his sovereignty, there had not remained any word
17 He has presented his ponderousness to the day of the fight of the world
Is it surprising if he enjoys the bride of conquest and victory?
18 Survival of the universe is by essence of sword
Because if there were no essence, attribute would not stand
19 Were it not for averting his sacred body from catastrophe
The dome of sky would not have set up nine tents on end
20 If Cem had seen his gathering he would break his chalice
If Sam had looked on his fight he would become dizzy and dazed
21 If it knew his embroidery of fortune’s seal
With jealousy, marble would be mild, like a candle
22 Unable bath that is in the wrath (of God)’s aura
Do not give a body that is large as cheap grain to stars
23 Skies would not come upon each other, successively
If there weren’t any conflux to fall upon his feet
24 Is it capable of that, in his time of reign from time to time
Each tiger of the forest does not heal to the sheep’s wound
25 Eyes of stars are in need of the earth of your lodge
The nose of the evening is full of fragrance by the flavor of your justice
26 Thinking that there is something akin to the scent of your endowment
Morning wind sounds rosebud’s mouth out, constantly
27 Refreshed me, the earth, with the abundance of your grace,
He who made your clear body the source of fountain of generosity.
28 My reed pen: what it reveals is lawful magic
Everything has been forbidden to it but your praise
29 He would not obey Nizami in poetry (writing)
If such order existed in your servant Haleti’s state
30 It is time to favor that ancient slave
Your grace may particularly be universal to the folk of world in general
31 So that your tasks in that world may hit the target like arrows
Make the awry, the target of distress permanently
32 In mattress of honor and tranquility with safety
May The Ever-living (God), who never sleeps, preserve you constantly
ABOUT THE PRAISE OF SULTAN AHMET KHAN, WHICH WAS RECITED WHEN I BECAME THE JUDGE OF ISTANBUL
Kasides were written to praise a patron in classical Islamic literature. This fact is current also in the Ottoman literature. Haleti recited the following kaside to praise Sultan Ahmed I (r. 1603–1617) when Haleti became the judge of Istanbul around 1611. He regarded the sultan as the main force behind his appointment.
1 It is me who by revering the lap of the sultan, the guardian of the world
There did not remain my jealousy of the possession of Solomon with that bliss
2 While I have shed my tear footed-in-silt at the place of worry
My foot has gone to an abundant treasure suddenly
3 I am that ant that became an ear of grain gleaning at the harvest of benevolence
When vicious enemy had not let me take a grain from it
4 I am that bird that embosomed the rose-essence of desire to my breast
While the enemy presumed my chest as teasel’s thorn
5 Whenever I recall the district of throne-place of Husrev of time
The fume of the candle of my longing rises to the whirling roof
6 His Excellency the Han Ahmed, the clean essence that
No one would changes, the interior stone of his way with the essence of heat
7 What a khan this king is, that every piece of stone in the place of his prosperity
Worth the tax and tribute of the estate of China, to be thrown to desert
8 How fortunate and wise he is that the dust of his beneficence’s horse,
Is proven kohl to the brilliant star-like eye
9 No one aims at the other’s head during his reign
But men of gathering aim at the head of the candle of darkness’s land
10 In his days of justice destiny does not participate in murder
Because bloodshed is restricted to the eyelashes of the beautiful
11 If the light did not beg from his golden threshold
The sun of bliss would not give glory to the zodiac of possibility
12 If he handles a golden stick made from the beam of brilliant sun
No one will esteem Saturn worthy of being his gateman
13 His breath of Jesus of grace picks up from the ground of contempt
Upon looking at the wise men soulless with dolor
14 It is I that has tested the sword of my nature in many places
Is it surprising that I always invite my fellows to the field of contest?
15 No chance! To be similar to my own essence
If the paw of sun goes into the pouch of blood a thousandfold
16 O Haleti! You would, in the state of king of earth, enter, one day into
The inner of high-dome of the rotating universe of the imperial council
17 Rose of my hopes blossomed; it is proper from now on
If you sing in his garden of praise like a nightingale
18 By taking a share from everlasting-life like prophet Khidr
Let the world be the state to that king of the time, like Alexander
19 His virtuous hand as an example of the paw of the most brilliant sun,
May always give the blessing of divine light of benevolence to his subjects
ODE 15: “ON PORTRAITURE OF THE SULTAN’S HORSES”
This kaside is chosen because it demonstrates another less known feature of the genre; sometimes the patron, in this case the sultan, would want the poets to recite an ode on a specific issue. Sultans generally ordered odes to be written on religious holidays called iydiyye, on spring they were called bahariyye, on summer they were called temmuziyye, on baths they were called hammamiyye, on fasting they were called ramazaniyye, and so on. In this case, the sultan had ordered a kaside to be written on the portraiture and praise of the majesty’s horses. This is not a tradition in Ottoman poetry; one could find few if any such commissions before Haleti. Although a genre called rahsiyye consisted of odes on praising horses and was made famous by the kasides of Nef’i (d. 1635), what is new to the tradition of poetry was the commission by the patron itself.
Recited when I was entrusted by our holiness sultan with portraiture of his horses called Habib-i Siyah (Black Beloved) and Arslan (Lion)
1 How lovely! That night-colored horse of the esteemed night of Qadr
Its body from top to bottom is the absolute might of Allah
2 O! That horse that its bliss-hoof’s move has become
Quite mild like the light wind of spring
3 If a bristle from its neck has gone into the hands of the morning breeze
It would have made it a present for the beautiful women of Khata
4 If a drop of sweat fell from his body onto the ground,
The earth of that ground would become musk until the Day of Judgment
5 If I called that rest-giver horse the horse of javelin
Its arms would become the pride of time for the javelin-thrower
6 It has coquetry in every step, he would not resemble it
If a coquettish beloved took off his garments,
7 Its foot’s every horseshoe is a crescent in shape
What a night it is, that its crescents are four
8 If Solomon of the time weren’t the one riding it,
It would not share the speed of the morning wind
9 It is as if running water were running in slow-pace
It does not admire wind in running, becomes a mountain in time of standing
10 When it gets permission to speed, it passes the courier of wind
Exhibits stars of night as sparks break out from its hoof
11 Should they make its rein from the beam of the sun, it is worthy
If the saddle blanket were of halo constantly, it has a point
12 As the Excellency, king of the world mounts it
As if he were Hamza riding on the black whale
13 As if beaming pearl of tutor has come from the Black Sea
Whenever it oozes with sweat as fortunate king runs
14 Khosrow, generous as Khatem, Sultan Murad exalted as Cem (Dionysos)
If dust arises from his path, it becomes kohl to the eye of stars
15 King who is Alexander-natured, Alexander who is Chosroes-mannered
The just having stars as servants, the sultan who is the ruler of fate
16 The world is full of his grandeur that the useless rival supposes
The neigh of his horse, that noise of the Trumpet (of Raphael)
17 May not run away without making its wings fly—ruler of pigeon
The heart-hunter hawk, in his days of justice
18 Whenever he comes onto the Lion with his realm
He is the king of the east, apparent from the zodiac of the lion
19 It has a point if the king of seven-climes were inclined toward it
It is he on the Lion, owner of wardship and the lion-rider
20 O! My king, lionize the horse of Haleti’s nature always
Forasmuch as sultans esteem the agile horse
21 If I were honored with high benevolence of the king
I would bind the kettledrum of fame to the white elephant of the world
22 As far bounded with a degree of fortune and the bliss of a king
Let the hard-nosed horse of time make its enemy miserable
23 Dark swarthy horse of night become mottled horse of day for ever and ever
With the labor of the hostler of his imperial order, compatible with folk
“DUST OF SORROW”: THE ELEGY UTTERED WHEN OUR NOBLE SON NAMED ABD AL KADIR DIED
This elegy is uttered upon the death of Haleti’s son.25 Until the sixteenth century, there was rarely a glimpse of the individual in Ottoman literature. As stated earlier about vefeyat, the Ottomans began to talk about the individual’s death, but there was no tradition of uttering an elegy upon the death of a relative. In this elegy, Haleti expressed his emotions through his son, and he transformed literary figures of speech into a personal theme. It can be argued that this elegy is a demonstration of current life in Haleti’s poetry.
1 His dust of sorrow gives untidiness to the mind
Might as well break down, this fusty iwan of sky
2 What would be done with the pillar of sighs of the world’s people
Even if the structure of the palace of this world were strong
3 That burnisher and bowl always show embroideries of hardship
Do not mention the stars and the rotating wheel of sky by my side
4 Maybe the name of the body of the universe is removed
The title does not necessitate that it be used for that which is mortal
5 Why do we feel proud since it is we who know
The game of Time has cleared away the Seal of Solomon
6 Why lodge a person to that brutal host’s home
That at last, s/he does not give up the guest without killing
7 What a white-bearded old man to that world is that
A thousand Rustams have become impuissant under its hands
8 At last, it winds up the rope of relevance to the wheel of fate
Then makes bands of braves defeated with magic
9 Constantly making the crescent and the star sling and stone,
It breaks down the mirror-like heart of the human
10 Showing no respect to his two eyes, it brings
Always, decline to the sun and inadequacy to the moon
11 It is not the paw of coral that stands at the base of sea
Which always makes the heart of the ocean bloody
12 It separates the heart from his part by torment, then makes
It near to the place of worry in the heart of wisdom-lovers
13 Was it not fate that made Yusuf captive of trouble?
Was it not fate that made the old man of Ken‘an a weeper?
14 I conceived it as a tender friend but gradually
It has made the moaning heart fall into the bizarre troubles
15 Time, with the stone of hardship from my rose-garden
Scared a pleasantly nice-singing nightingale
16 How could the heart endure that cold hand of death?
It plucked the new-blossomed rosebud of the heart’s rosery
17 Ax accidentally touching a mine of possibility
Shattered a bright gem-like essence
18 Where is that young and fresh sapling of my life’s rosery
His mouth was a pistachio, his chin was an apple
19 To the fruit-laden tree in the rose-garden of heaven
His swinging stature throws the stone of condemnation
20 Where is that Jesus of time in the cradle of nobility
Where is that second Joseph at the throne of beauty
21 Where is his hair, the ambergris-colored hyacinth coated with rose
Where is his mouth, the jewel-scattering pearl box
22 It is a shame and grievance that under the stone of the grave
Remained neither his inkpot-like lip nor pearl-like teeth
23 Help! That fragrance of your spot and the quince of your dimple
Was deemed worthy to rose-pink coffin by the time
24 What a heart-melting sorrow blew suddenly
To make the smiling-rose down at the heels before blossoming
25 The brilliant sun of that sky of heart
Became as if not risen, in his place; I do not know what to do
26 That eye of the candle of my heart had gone off
Is it a surprise that the mortal world would be seen of darkness
27 Epitaph of that child’s grave is worthy
To forget this world if neglect manifests
28 He made me go to the Garden of Eden but
Left the dolor of Hell in the sorrow of separation
29 The Joseph of my heart became the king of immortality’s throne
It is a surprise! How I would wait in that dungeon
30 Let me drink the sherbet of death with pleasure of memory
If it is the cure of that grief of separation
31 Let me rend the robes of this body, otherwise
There did not remain the collared dress of gown and chemise
32 It would be harmonic with the trumpet of resurrection
Would they match it with my sorrowful moan?
33 However much fire and melting occur in darkness of grief!
That shining candle never comes once more to this gathering
34 It is worthy that Haleti gives languor to fortune
By way of welcoming the judgment of God
35 O my Lord! For his fair face, destroy
Figures of riot from my records of deeds
36 When doomsday comes and my deeds be evaluated
Let that second Joseph make the balance light
37 For the sake of tear-child of the heart of trouble-victims
For the sake of his warm sigh and cold breath and hidden wound
STANZA 20: “THE DAY OF KERBELA”
Because Haleti is known as the Hayyam of Ottoman literature, we should definitely examine his stanzas. Stanza number 20 is chosen because of its allusion to the names of Hasan (d. 669), Ali (d. 661), and Huseyin (d. 680), who are the main figures ehl-i beyt (the family of the Prophet Muhammad). This stanza alludes to Kerbela, the place in which one of Ali’s sons, Huseyin, was killed by Yazid (d. 683). The poet compares Yemisci Pasa to Yazid in this stanza by alluding to Hasan, Huseyin, and Ali.
Recited when Yemisci Paşa killed Tırnakcı Hasan Pasa, Ali Agha, and Huseyin Halife on the same day [October 16, 1603]
It would not be strange for that day of mourning
If it were said that it is severer than Kerbela
Where none remained, not Ali, nor Hasan, nor Huseyn
A Yazid made all of them martyred
STANZA 94: “PIPE-BOWL”
Stanza number 94 is a sign of Haleti’s use of everyday life in his poems. As will be later analyzed through the ghazals, Haleti was one of the first poets, if not the first, to use smoke in his poems. This stanza shows how Haleti transformed an element of everyday life into a figure of speech for Ottoman poetry.
Do not suppose that they hold down the pipe-bowl to smoke
In every corner the brothers gather at one place
Bird of sorrow, does not allow the fruit of purpose to be grown
Friends, put the mouth-tambourine to their mouths today
STANZA 98: “SORROW OF JACOB”
Stanza 98 is chosen because of its allusion to Jacob and Joseph, who are both frequently cited figures in poetry. What characterizes this stanza is Jacob’s gloom and grieving, which is aroused by Jacob’s separation from his lovely son Joseph. This story related the separation of a lover (Jacob) and a beloved (Joseph) in Ottoman poetry.
It is you who has put Jacob in the hut of glooms
By separating him from his eyes’ light, Joseph
By bringing divine love to the home of heart
Oh, sorrow of the world! I should make you just look from the threshold
STANZA 111: “A CLEAN RELATER OF POETRY”
Stanza 111 resembles a fahriyye (self-praise) that is generally included in kasides. This stanza is chosen to demonstrate Haleti’s self-confidence toward his poetry. He states that his poetry resembles the cheek or lovelock of the beloved and that its smell spreads all around the world. To compare poetry to cheeks is the product of a new imagination probably unique to Haleti. Therefore, this stanza illuminates the new use of poetic figures of speech by Haleti and his self-praise in a form other than kaside.
Refreshing-breath of my poetry spreads far and wide; for what I have mentioned
It is a rose-colored cheek of a charming or musk-smelling lovelock
I have never mentioned a vile enemy in my poems
I am a clean relater of poetry, a clean relater of poetry
STANZA 134: “HOLDER OF MEANING”
Stanza 134 is another self-praise in which Haleti identifies himself as the holder of meaning with claims of true poetry. In the process, Haleti uses a maxim to prove his argument because no one can disagree with a maxim. Using such arguments and making poetry more philosophical is a general characteristic of the stanzas. Hence it can be easily argued that Haleti uses hikmet (philosophy) in his poem and praises himself.
Holder of meaning like me
Oh Haleti! It is proper for him to claim poetry
Claims should not always be in words
It is a maxim that claims are in need of meanings
GHAZAL (LYRIC) 14: “ON TOBACCO”
Ghazal (lyric) is one of the most uttered forms in Islamic literature. When one writes about a poet’s ability, the writer generally analyzes the poet’s ability to write a ghazal. This is the most prominent genre in both Islamic and Ottoman literature. I focus on a few of Haleti’s ghazals to show his poetic competence.
The first ghazal exemplifies Haleti’s inclination to transform the poetic tradition as well as to include novelties in Ottoman society. Tobacco was totally new to the Ottomans in Haleti’s time and was of great importance. Although it is new, Haleti uses tobacco for the first time as a poetic image, replacing centuries’-old motifs. His aim is to transform poetry and to be open to change in a world that had been determined by tradition. Haleti uttered this ghazal as a yek-ahenk, meaning that the ghazal was written around just one theme, in this case, tobacco. Tobacco and related themes such as fog are used in every couplet.
Tobacco first appeared in the last decade of the sixteenth century or the first decade of seventeenth century.26 According to Fehmi Yılmaz, tobacco was banned by imperial decree in 1609, 1610, 1614, 1618, and 1619. It can be argued that tobacco gained its attraction and reaction in society at the same time. Haleti passed away in 1631, so we can assume that he wrote this ghazal due to the attraction and the reaction caused by tobacco.
1 That houri-like (beloved), got a tobacco pipe
As if they have put into the River in Eden a pipe
2 Tobacco suits very well to your bud-like mouth
That brightener lip which is like a garnet of fire-color
3 You are smoking with foreigners but the fire of jealousy
Has burned my soul; fogs have sprung up
4 Since I fall into separation my unique job is smoking
So that the fog of my soul fumes and the enemy may not know
5 Because of the sorrow of the fog in the home of the soul, my darling
I am afraid that Haleti shall fume till he transumes to nonexistent
GHAZAL (LYRIC) 57: “ON SIGH”
This ghazal is about separation. In the case of separation, the lover acts in two ways: the lover either sighs or has tears. The lover resembles Jacob and Zuleyha because they were both the real lovers of Joseph. Therefore, it can easily be said that this ghazal is about separation from the beloved and the patience of the lover against that separation as narrated through Jacob, Zuleyha, and Joseph.
1 The smoke of my sigh gave grief to the high world
Stars of my fortune began to be ashamed from the stars
2 Where are those times that I used to irrigate your threshold with my tears?
Now there remains no water in my eyes because of the bosom’s heat
3 Do not escape from the lover who has been given the beauty of Joseph
Water with tears of Jacob and heat with fever of Zuleyha
4 Oh my master-rider! Do not be warmhearted with lovers
Do not teach quickness to lives of each of them
5 The memory of Jacob is contented even when morning wind does not blow
The smell of tunica is not the gate in the land of my patience
6 Oh Haleti! I have turned to inanimate figures because of my weakness
The beloved has right not to make me the object of her/his glances at the gathering
GHAZAL (LYRIC) 144: “ON FIRE OF LOVE”
This ghazal resembles the previous one in some respects. In Ottoman literature, a sigh is thought to have smoke in it because it stems from a heart on fire. Considering fire and smoke, it is not wrong to argue that tobacco and sight resemble each other. This ghazal relates some main characteristics of the lover and the beloved in one poem. Those characteristics are identified as sigh, sorrow, coquetry, and love for gold and silver, respectively.
1 Having made the smoke of my sigh the fire-wyvern
That beloved has begun to scare the world with me
2 Our nutrition is food of sorrow in the day and night
Love is our benefactor, each and every time,
3 Without even setting foot on the stirrup of coquetry and whims
That master-rider bewitched the estate of the heart
4 If a lover has no gold and silver,
The beloved neither pities on his tears nor looks at the lover’s face
5 Is it surprising that its delight lasts until the end of life?
There is no powder in the universe like the floss of your lips
6 O Haleti! If the arrow of the wheel of fate faces with words
Its mouth gapes with astonishment like a pinhole
GHAZAL (LYRIC) 170: “FINGER OF ASTONISHMENT”
This ghazal relates the psychological and spiritual conditions of a lover who has withdrawn from the felicity of this world and has turned to loneliness in which the person can enjoy his or her love. Therefore, the only purpose of the lover’s life is the beloved and his or her destination. In this psychological state, the lover accepts being the subject of the beloved’s coquetry.
1 I’ve withdrawn from this gathering’s pure honey long since
What it brings to my brackish mouth is only the finger of astonishment
2 My crimson wound is a garnet ring that is aware of me
My bent-doubled stature is a sealed-ring of the king of affection
3 At whichever destination you settle down, it again turns out to ranges of the moon
Wherever you coquet it is the coquet-place of chance and bliss
4 A trouble-suffering lover like me is never granted
This beloved’s silver-colored bosom is a breast of bliss
5 Is it surprising if the fearless coquette does not remember?
As the body of the fearful Haleti is made of sorrow
I would like to thank Ayşe Handan Konar, Metin Noorata, Niaz Ahmad, Ayşe Tek Başaran and Günhan Börekçi for reading drafts of this paper.
1. Baki Tezcan, “The Second Empire: The Transformation of the Ottoman Polity in the Early Modern Era,” Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East 29, no. 3 (2009): 563.
2. Tezcan, “The Second Empire,” 567.
3. Tezcan, “The Second Empire,” 568.
4. For this change in the court politics, see Günhan Börekçi, “Factions and Favorites at the Courts of Sultan Ahmed I (r. 1603–1617), and His Immediate Predecessors” (PhD diss., The Ohio State University, 2010), 148–97.
5. For further information see Leslie P. Peirce, The Imperial Harem: Women and Sovereignty in the Ottoman Empire (New York-Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993), 91–112.
6. Jane Hathaway, “Habeşi Mehmed Agha: The Frist Chief Harem Eunuch (Darüssaade Ağası) of the Ottoman Empire,” in The Islamic Scholarly Tradition: Studies in History, Law, and Thought in Honor of Professor Michael Allan Cook, ed. Asad Q. Ahmed, Behnam Sadeghi, and Michael Bonner (Leiden: Brill, 2011), 182. Also see Jane Hathaway, Beshir Agha, Chief Eunuch of the Ottoman Imperial Harem (Oxford: Oneworld, 2006).
7. Hatice Aynur, “Ottoman Literature.” In The Cambridge History of Turkey, ed. Suraiya N. Faroqhi (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008), 481–520, 504.
8. Baki Tezcan, “Tarih Üzerinden Siyaset: Erken Modern Osmanlı Tarihyazımı,” in Erken Modern Osmanlılar, ed. Virginia H. Aksan-Daniel Goffman, çev. Onur Güneş Ayas (İstanbul: Timaş, 2011), 238.
9. For a discussion on the issue, see Tülün Değirmenci, İktidar Oyunları ve Resimli Kitaplar: II. Osman Devrinde Değişen Güç Simgeleri (İstanbul: Kitap Yayınevi, 2012), 82.
10. See Hathaway, “Habeşi Mehmed Agha,” 184–91.
11. See Değirmenci, İktidar Oyunları ve Resimli Kitaplar.
12. Tezcan, “The Second Empire,” 563.
13. Ottoman literature refers to a branch of Islamic literature that consists of Arabic, Persian, Chagatai, Urdu, and Kurdish literatures. Although identifying the literature of Muslim Turks, who had lived around Anatolia before the twentieth century, is disputable (Divan literature, classical Turkish literature, Old Turkish literature are among them), the timespan of this literature encompasses the eleventh to the last quarter of the nineteenth centuries. Fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, in general, are seen as the golden period of Ottoman literature due to the presence of many great Ottoman poets. For the discussion on naming of that literature, see Ömer Faruk Akün, “Divan Edebiyatı,” TDV İslam Ansiklopedisi 9 (1994): 389–427.
14. Aynur, “Ottoman Literature,”482, 496.
15. Aynur, “Ottoman Literature,” 509.
16. For architectural transformation in seventeenth-century Istanbul, see Maurice Cerasi, “Istanbul 1620–1750: Change and Tradition,” in The City in Islamic World I, ed. H. Altenmüller (Leiden: Brill, 2008), 465–89.
17. Aynur, “Ottoman Literature,” 498.
18. Aynur, “Ottoman Literature,” 510.
19. Aynur, “Ottoman Literature,” 489.
20. Cemal Kafadar, “Sohbete Çelebi, Çelebiye mecmua…,” in Mecmua: Osmanlı Edebiyatının Kırkambarı, Hatice Aynur vd. (hzl.) (İstanbul: Turkuaz Yayınları, 2012), 45.
21. For a good analysis of Seyahatname, see Nuran Tezcan, Semih Tezcan, and Robert Dankoff, eds., Evliya Çelebi: Studies and Essays Commemorating the 400th Anniversary of His Birth (Istanbul: Republic of Turkey Ministry of Culture and Tourism General Directorate of Libraries and Publications, 2012).
22. The information related to the life and work of Haletî substantially comes from Bayram Ali Kaya, The Divan of ʿAzmizade Haleti, Introduction and Critical Edition: ʿAzmizade Haleti Divanı Tenkitli Metin (Cambridge: Department of Near Eastern Languages & Civilizations, Harvard University, 2003). The poems cited are from this edition as well.
23. Nev’î-zade Ataî, Şaka’ik-i Nu’maniye ve Zeylleri (Hada’iku’l-Hakayık fî Tekmileti’ş-Şakayık), ed. Abdülkadir Özcan (Istanbul, 1989), C. 3, 741.
24. Kaya, The Divan of ʿAzmizade Haleti, 24.
25. Although the exact date of his death is unknonwn, the most probable date is December 1612 or January 1613: Kaya, The Divan of ʿAzmizade Haleti.
26. See Fehmi Yılmaz, “Tütün,” TDV İslam Ansiklopedisi 42 (2012): 1.
FURTHER READING
Aksan, Virgina H., and Daniel Goffman, eds. The Early Modern Ottomans: Remapping the Empire. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007.
Andrews, Walter G. Poetry’s Voice, Society’s Song. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1985.
Andrews, Walter G., Najaat Black, and Mehmet Kalpaklı. Ottoman Lyric Poetry: An Anthology, exp. ed. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2006.
Faroqhi, Suraiya. Subjects of the Sultan: Culture and Daily Life in the Ottoman Empire. London: I. B. Taurus, 2005.
Halman, Talat S. A Millennium of Turkish Literature: A Concise History. Ed. Jayne L. Warner. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 2011.