Abstract
A Millet Library copy of an Ottoman Turkish text entitled Hikâyet-ı Zuhûr-ı Âl-i ‘Osmân; Der Beyân-ı Tevârîh-i Âl-i ‘Osmân (The Story of the Emergence of the House of Osman; The Account of the Histories of the House of Osman) bears a catalogue note, most probably written by Ali Emîrî: ‘This is an Ottoman quasi-history spanning the period up until the ascension of Sultan Selim the First; yet from beginning to end and from top to bottom it consists of a series of spurious and fabricated lies.’ This ‘quasi-historical’ narrative’s extant eleven known, mostly undated, copies with varied titles held in Turkish collections, however, attest to its repeated reproduction. This article focuses on this set of underappreciated narratives about Ottoman dynastic beginnings to explore not only the narrative convergences they exhibit with the earliest Ottoman chronicles, but also their fictionality as related to their functionality in their contexts of production.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
This copy is in the collection Ali Emîrî personally catalogued. For Ali Emîrî (b. Diyarbakır 1857–d. Istanbul 1923), an Ottoman bibliophile who worked in the classification of the archives of the Sublime Porte in Istanbul, see Mantran (2012, 391).
Except for Hedda Reindl-Kiel’s important introductory study that recognises the Hikâyet-i Zuhûr-ı Âl-i ‘Osmân as ‘folk history’ (i.e., ‘Volkschronik’), contemporary Ottoman scholarship has yet to commit to historicising these narratives; see Reindl-Kiel (2002).
For the purposes of the present article, the narrational differences between different reiterations of the text will be noted but, due to limitations of space, will not be detailed.
In his article ‘İstanbul Kütüphanelerinde Tanınmamış Bazı Osmanlı Tarihleri,’ which includes a detailed inventory of lesser-known Ottoman historical material and narratives, Atsız suggests that such sources, which reveal original historical viewpoints that diverge from the ‘classical’ Ottoman historical mindset, should be utilised in historical inquiries (1957, 47).
I am currently working on a critical edition which will make full comparative and contextual analyses of the eleven reiterations of the Hikâyet-ı Zuhûr-ı Âl-i ‘Osmân to further deduce, through detailed archival, textual, and codicological analyses, their individual contexts of reproduction.
Untitled. Istanbul, Süleymaniye Library, Tercüman Gazetesi collection, Y189, 34b.
Istanbul, Süleymaniye Library, Fatih No. 4206/1, 76b. This copy has been transcribed in two MA theses; see Köklü, S. 2004, and Olcay, Ş. 2019. In my text, I will refer to this copy, hereafter Fatih No. 4206/1, since these two theses have already made the text available digitally for readers.
For a narrative outline of the Menâkıb-ı Mahmûd Paşa and its relation to ‘anti-imperial’ legends, which Yerasimos introduced in his study (2010), see Stavrides (2001, 369–78 and 384–88).
For theoretical discussions on orality, oral manuscript cultures, and their interrelations in terms of intertextuality and cultural production and/or consumption with later written cultural practices, see Ong (2012, 115–35).
See References for the details of these known extant copies with differing appellations.
In the remainder of this article, although sometimes the full titles may be used, if no other indication is given then the term ‘narratives’ will refer to the Hikâyet-i Zuhûr-ı Âl-i ‘Osmân corpus, while the term ‘chronicles’ will refer to the Tevârîh-i Âl-i ‘Osmân corpus.
‘Ghazi,’ a term used in Ottoman studies focusing on the earliest dynastic beginnings, refers to a Muslim ‘warrior of the faith’ (some of whom might have been converted), especially in the ‘ghazi thesis’ proposed by Wittek (1965) to explain the fast-paced territorial expansion under the rule of the Ottoman dynasty.
Atsız notes a lesser-known Ottoman history in Arabic that recognises Ertuğrul’s brother as ‘Gündoğdu’ (literally, ‘one who was born with the sun/morning’ and figuratively, ‘one who was born auspiciously’), diverging from the consensus in ‘classical’ chronicles, which name him Dündar (1957, 55). ‘Gündoğdu’ and ‘Erdoğdu’ notably have a similar cadence.
Interestingly, the Moroccan traveller Ibn Battuta, in his account of his 1330–1332 travels through Anatolia, notes that during his son Orhân’s (r. 1326–62) rule, ‘Osmân was indeed called ‘Osmancuk’ in the diminutive, to distinguish him from the seventh-century caliph ‘Uthmān; see Ibn Battūta (1962, 450–55).
Imber, in his critical article on the ‘ghazi thesis,’ notes that in Ottoman popular belief, God can speak directly to persons through their dreams, and so the dream motif plays a significant role in the legends surrounding ‘Osmân and his father; see Imber (1987).
For another lesser-known Ottoman history, which makes Ertuğrul the dreamer and the Seljukid ruler ‘Alā ad-Dīn’s vizier ‘Abd al-‘Azīz the oneiromancer, and also includes a detailed version of the conversion of Köse Mihal, which is omitted in the Hikâyet-i Zuhûr-ı Âl-i ‘Osmân narratives, see Atsız (1957, 55).
Another interesting point about the source mentioned in the previous note (no. 16) is the fact that it names Ertuğrul’s father as a ‘Hürmüz Ebûbekir, from the city of Hāmān in the Isfahan region’ of Persia, much as the narratives name Ahmed Beg from Tebriz in Persia (Atsız 1957, 55).
While Sunni Islam opposes political succession based on Muhammad’s bloodline, Shi’ite Islam supports the idea that ‘Alī, Muhammad’s cousin and son-in-law, and his descendants are the rightful successors to Muhammad.
Historically, Hasan-ı Kâşî was a sixteenth-century poet of Safavid Iran, and he was especially known for his poems about the Karbala incident (680 CE); cf. R. Kurtuluş (2002, 272–74).
‘Hünkâr,’ an appellation used most often for Ottoman sultans, was also used as a term of endearment for some important Sufi figures, such as Rūmī (as seen in the Menâḳıbü’l-‘Ârifîn) and Hacı Bektaş-ı Veli (in Manakıb-ı Hacı Bektâş-ı Velî, which also calls Rūmī ‘Molla Hünkâr’). See Diyanet İslâm Ansiklopedisi (2022).
Another, lesser-known Ottoman history portrays Jalāl ad-Dīn Muhammad Rūmī in a different light, as a kind of traitor who wishes the Seljukid sovereignty for the Tatars, yet is opposed by Hacı Bektaş, Ahi Evren, and Edebali, making ‘Osmân the next sovereign; see Atsız (1957, 54).
A beg (beğ or bey) was, during this period, a local ruler of an administrative unit called a beylik, and typically also the leader of a raiding force.
This episode, inscribing a comic/satirical/parodic mode into the narratives, is also used in the Velâyetnâme-i Seyyid Ali Sultan as a motif, albeit there in quite a solemn, ‘serious’ mode. I thank Oktay Özel for pointing out this example. For the Velâyetnâme text and its context, see Yıldırım (2007).
In Fatih No. 4206/1, there are thirty instances of such immediate focal or episode changes in the narrative executed directly by the narrative voice, as an external focaliser.
Reindl-Kiel also notes this narrative convergence: see Reindl-Kiel (2002, 176).
This topos, frequently employed in the ghazi/dervish milieu of the Tevârîh-i Âl-i ‘Osmân, is reminiscent of the role played by Medea in the legends of Jason and the Golden Fleece, though with a slight change in configuration from ‘flight’ to ‘conquest.’
For White’s discussion of history and narrative vis-à-vis the difference between ‘truth’ and ‘reality,’ see White (2005, 147–48).
Inalcık explains the period of formation of the Ottoman political entity from the earliest beginnings to the end of the sixteenth century as ‘classical,’ with ‘post-classical’ being the period of economic, demographic, and political difficulties and transformations from the late sixteenth century onwards: see Inalcık (1998, 15–30).
References
Hikâyet-i Zuhûr-ı Âl-i ‘Osmân Manuscripts in Turkish Collections
Çorum, Çorum Hasan Paşa Public Library, 19 Hk 1292, fol. 10b–71b. [Risâle der Beyân-ı Menâkıb-ı Zuhûr-u Âli-i’Osmân (Treatise on the Account of Legend of the Emergence of House of Osman)].
Erzurum, Atatürk University, Seyfettin Özege Collection, 0137897. [Tarih-i Zuhûr-ı Âl-i ‘Osmân (History of the Emergence of House of Osman)].
Istanbul, İBB Atatürk Library, BEL_Yz_O.000039/02, 69b–174b. [Der Beyân-ı Menâkıb-ı Zuhûr-ı Âl-i ‘Osmân (Account of the Legend of the Emergence of House of Osman)].
Istanbul, İBB Atatürk Library, MC_Yz_K.000084. [Der Beyân-ı Menâkıb-ı Zuhûr-ı Âl-i ‘Osmân (Account of the Legend of the Emergence of House of Osman)].
Istanbul, Millet Library, AE Mnz 144, 1a–51b. [Hikâyât-ı Zuhûr-ı Âl-i ‘Osmân; Der Beyân-ı Tevârîh-i Âl-i ‘Osmân (Stories of the Emergence of the House of Osman; Account of Histories of House of Osman)].
Istanbul, Millet Library, AE Mnz 11159. [Hikâyât-ı Zuhûr-ı Âl-i ‘Osmân; Der Beyân-ı Tevârîh-i Âl-i ‘Osmân (Stories of the Emergence of the House of Osman; Account of Histories of House of Osman)].
Istanbul, Süleymaniye Library, Fatih 5444. [Hikâyet-i Zuhûr-ı Âl-i ‘Osmân (Story of the Emergence of House of Osman)].
Istanbul, Süleymaniye Library, Fatih No. 4206/1, 1a–76b. [Hikâyet-i Zuhûr-ı Âl-i ‘Osmân (Story of the Emergence of House of Osman)].
Istanbul, Süleymaniye Library, Tercüman Y189. [Untitled].
Istanbul, Süleymaniye Library, İbrahim Efendi 670. [Hikâyet-i Zuhûr-ı Âl-i ‘Osmân (Story of the Emergence of House of Osman)].
Istanbul, Süleymaniye Library, Yazma Bağışlar Collection, 2981/ 1–2. [Untitled].
Other:
Âşıkpaşazâde. 1914. Tarih-i Âl-i ‘Osmân. Edited by ‘Ali Beg. Istanbul, Turkey: Matba’a-ı ‘Amire.
Atsız, Hüseyin Nihal. 1957. ‘İstanbul Kütüphanelerinde Tanınmamış Osmanlı Tarihleri.’ Türk Kütüphaneciler Derneği Bülteni 6(1–2): 47–81.
Austen, Jane. 2006. Northanger Abbey. Edited by Barbara M. Benedict and Deirdre Le Faye. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
‘Hünkâr.’ 1998. In İslâm Ansiklopedisi. Istanbul: Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı Center for Islamic Studies. https://islamansiklopedisi.org.tr/hunkar.
Ibn Battūta. 1962. The Travels of ibn Battūta, A.D. 1325–1354, volume II. Translated by H.A.R. Gibb.. London: Hakluyt Society.
Imber, Colin. 1987. ‘The Ottoman Dynastic Myth.’ Turcica 19: 7–27.
Inalcık, Halil. 1964. ‘The Rise of Ottoman Historiography.’ In Historians of the Middle East, edited by Bernard Lewis and P. M. Holt, 152–67. London: Oxford University Press.
Inalcık, Halil. 1994. ‘How to Read Aşık Paşazade’s History.’ In Studies in Ottoman History in Honour of V.L. Ménage, edited by Colin Heywood and Colin Imber, 139–56. Istanbul: Isis Press.
Inalcık, Halil. 1998. ‘Periods in Ottoman History.’ In Essays in Ottoman History, 15–30. Istanbul: Eren.
Kafadar, Cemal. 1996. Between Two Worlds: The Construction of the Ottoman State. Berkeley, USA: University of California Press.
Köklü, Sebahattin. 2004. ‘Anonim Tevârîh-i Âl-i Osmân: Hikâyet-i Zuhûr-ı Âl-i Osmân Transkripsiyon, İnceleme, Dizin.’ MA Thesis, Marmara University.
Kurtuluş, Rıza. 2022. ‘Kerbelâ: Arap, Fars Edebiyatında Kerbelâ.’ In İslâm Ansiklopedisi. 1st ed. Vol. 25: 272–74. Istanbul, Turkey: Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı Center for Islamic Studies.
Mantran, Robert. 2012. ʿAlī Amīrī.’ In Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition, edited by P. Bearman, T. Bianquis, C.E. Bosworth, E. van Donzel, and W.P. Heinrichs. Leiden: Brill. Accessed October 7, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1163/1573-3912_islam_SIM_0518.
Ménage, Victor Louis. 1964. ‘The Beginnings of Ottoman Historiography.’ In Historians of the Middle East, edited by Bernard Lewis and P. M. Holt, 168–79. London: Oxford University Press.
Neşrî, Mevlânâ Mehmed. 1949. Kitâb-ı Cihannümâ. Edited by Faik Reşit Unat and Mehmed A. Köymen. Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Basımevi.
Norton, Claire. 2006. ‘Fiction or Non-Fiction? Ottoman Accounts of the Siege of Nagykanizsa.’ In Tropes for The Past: Hayden White and The History/Literature Debate, edited by Kalle Korhonen, 119–30. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill.
Olcay, Şükrü. 2019. ‘Hikâyet-i Zuhûr-ı Âl-i Osmân (Metin, Dil İncelemesi, Dizin-Sözlük).’ MA Thesis. İstanbul University.
Ong, Walter J. 2012. Orality and Literacy: The Technologizing of the Word. London and New York: Routledge.
Orlemanski, Julie. 2019. ‘Who Has Fiction? Modernity, Fictionality, and the Middle Ages.’ New Literary History 50 (2): 145–70.
Oruç Beğ. 2008. Oruç Beğ Tarihi. Edited by Necdet Öztürk. Istanbul: Çamlıca Basım Yayım.
Reindl-Kiel, Hedda. 2002. ‘Fromme Helden, Wunder, Träume: Populäre Geschichtsauffassung im Osmanischen Reich des 18. und frühen 19. Jahrhunderts.’ Journal of Turkish Studies 26 (1): 187–91.
Stavrides, Theoharis. 2001. The Sultan of Vezirs: The Life and Times of the Ottoman Grand Vezir Mahmud Pasha Angelović (1453–1474). Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill.
White, Hayden. 2005. ‘Historical Fiction, Fictional History, and Historical Reality.’ Rethinking History 9 (2–3): 147–57.
Wittek, Paul. 1965. ‘The Taking of Aydos Castle: A Ghazi Legend and Its Transformation.’ In Arabic and Islamic Studies in Honor of Hamilton A. R. Gibb, edited by George Makdisi, 662–72. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill.
Yerasimos, Stefanos. 2010. Kostantiniye ve Ayasofya Efsaneleri. Translated by Şirin Tekeli. Istanbul: İletişim.
Yıldırım, Rıza. 2007. Seyyid Ali Sultan (Kızıldeli) ve Velâyetnâmesi. Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu.
Zirinski, Roni. 2004. ‘How did the Ottomans Become Ottoman?: The Construction of Imperial Brand Name in the Time of Cultural Big Bang.’ Archivum Ottomanicum 22: 125–58.
Acknowledgements
I am grateful for the insightful criticisms I have received from my two anonymous reviewers, the editors of postmedieval, and have tried to reorient the text in line with their suggestions. My earliest work on these narratives was done in my dissertation (Bilkent 2016) under the supervision of Özer Ergenç, whom I gratefully name here. Any shortcomings that may remain in the text are mine.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
About this article
Cite this article
Aksoy Sheridan, R.A. Fictional(ised) beginnings of the Ottoman Dynasty: Notes on the Hikâyet-ı Zuhûr-ı Âl-i ‘Osmân. Postmedieval 13, 517–532 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41280-022-00254-y
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41280-022-00254-y