CC BY
10
¡mtîyaz SAHiBi | Proprietor Burhan ÇAGLAR
SORUMLU YaZI i$LERi MüDÜRÜ | Managing Editor Ömer Faruk CAN
S
-a
Osmanli ara§tirmalarina münhasir, alti ayda bir (Nisan ve Ekim) ne§redilen, agik eri§imli, gift kör hakem sistemli akademik dergi
Double-blind peer-reviewed open-access academic journal published semiannually (April and October) in the fields of Ottoman Studies ^
S 8
SAYI | ISSUE 3 • NiSAN | APRIL 2022
a
£
iRTiBAT | Contact Kadim • Sakarya Üniversitesi
Esentepe Kampüsü, Fen-Edebiyat Fakültesi, C Blok, Ofis: 113, Serdivan/Sakarya (Turkey) 54050 Telefon | Phone • 00 90 264 295 60 15
Internet Adresi | Webpage • dergipark.org.tr/kadim • kadim.sakarya.edu.tr E-posta | E-mail • kadim@sakarya.edu.tr
Tasarim | Design Hasan Hüseyin CAN
Baski | Printed by
MetinCopyPlus • Arti Dijital & Baski Merkezi
Turkocagi Cad. 3/A Cagaloglu/Fatih/lstanbul
Basim TaRiHi | Print Date • NiSAN | April 2022 ISSN 2757-9395 • e-ISSN 2757-9476 UcRETSiz | Free of Charge
Kadimdeki makaleler, Creative Commons Alinti-Gayriticari 4.0 (CC BY-NC) Uluslararasi Lisansi ile lisanslanmigtir. Bilimsel ara§tirmalari kamuya ücretsiz sunmanin bilginin küresel payla§imini artiracagi ilkesini benimseyen dergi, tüm içerigine aninda Libre açik erigim saglamaktadir. Makalelerdeki fikir ve görü|lerin sorumlulugu sadece yazarlarina ait olup Kadim'in görü§lerini yansitmazlar.
Articles in Kadim are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 (CC BY-NC) International License. Kadim provides immediate Libre open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge. Authors are responsible for the content of contributions; thus, opinions expressed in the articles belong to them and do not reflect the opinions or views of Kadim.
Dergi Park
Edïtôr Editor-in-Chief
Mïsafïr Edïtôr Guest Editor
Yayin Kurulü Editorial Board
Yazim ve Dïl EdïtôrlerI Writing and Language Editors
Tûrkçe Dïl EdïtôrC Turkish Language Editor
Ingïlïzce Dïl EdïtôrlerI English Language Editors
Mïzanpaj EdïtôrC Layout Editor
Sosyal Medya EdïtôrC Social Media Editor
Yayin SekreterI Secretariat
Arif BÎLGÎN | Prof. Dr., Sakarya Oniversitesi
Fatih BOZKURT | Doç. Dr., Sakarya Oniversitesi
Necmettin ALKAN | Prof. Dr., Sakarya Oniversitesi Fatih BOZKURT | Doç. Dr., Sakarya Oniversitesi Ömerül Faruk BÔLÛKBA§I | Doç. Dr., Marmara Oniversitesi Kerim ilker BULUNUR | Doç. Dr., Sakarya Oniversitesi Bü§ra ÇAKMAKTAÇ | Dr. Ögr. Oyesi, Sakarya Oniversitesi M. Talha ÇiÇEK | Doç. Dr., istanbul Medeniyet Oniversitesi Filiz DIGIROGLU | Doç. Dr., Marmara Oniversitesi Miraç TOSUN | Dr. Ögr. Oyesi, Karadeniz Teknik Oniversitesi Kenan YILDIZ | Doç. Dr., istanbul Medeniyet Oniversitesi
Ömer Faruk CAN | Sakarya Oniversitesi Burhan ÇAGLAR | Sakarya Oniversitesi Burak ÇITIR | Sakarya Oniversitesi Mehmet KERiM | Sakarya Oniversitesi Bünyamin PUNAR | Sakarya Oniversitesi
Sedat KOCABEY | Sakarya Oniversitesi
Bü§ranur KOCAER | Sakarya Oniversitesi
Muhammed Emir TULUM | Dr., istanbul Medeniyet Oniversitesi
Didar Ay§e AKBULUT | Marmara Oniversitesi irem GÛNDÛZ-POLAT | Sakarya Oniversitesi Hâcer KILIÇASLAN | Sakarya Oniversitesi
Hasan Hüseyin CAN | islâm Araçtirmalari Merkezi (iSAM)
Bü§ranur BEKMAN | Sakarya Oniversitesi
Yusuf islam YILMAZ | Sivas Cumhuriyet Oniversitesi
Remarks on the Part of Ottoman History in Nigancizâde's Mir'âtû'l-Kâinât
niçancizade nin
mîr'Atû'l-kAînAt adli
eserinde osmanli tarihi kismina dair tespitler
GÖKER iNAN*
ABSTRACT OZ
Nifancizade Mehmed Efendi (d.1031/1621) was a famous chronicle writer and one of the prominent scholars of the seventeenth century. He was born during the reign of Suleyman I and lived under the reign of seven Ottoman sultans, including Osman II; and became well-known with his work Mir 'dtu 'l-Kdindt, covering significant events from the beginning of the universe to the end of the Suleyman I's reign. Thus, in the chronicle, the part dealing with Ottoman history covers the period from Osman Gazi to the end of Suleyman I's rule. This article analyzes this part of Mir 'dtu 'l-Kdindt as it is one of the most significant contributions to the details of Nifancizade's life. For instance, some sources have contradictory information about his birthday. Whereas the year he was born becomes apparent thanks to the details he provided in Mirdtu'l-Kdindt about his relatives. The primary source of this article is Mir dtu 'l-Kdindt's autograph copy in the State Library of Berlin. As a result of a comparative analysis of this manuscript along with other chronicles and biographies, the study deducts that Hoca Sadeddin Efendi's Tdcu 't-Tevdrih is the primary source for the Ottoman history part ofMir dtu 'l-Kdindt.
Keywords: Nifancizade Mehmed Efendi, Mir 'dtu 'l-Kdindt, Ottoman History, Tdcu 't-Tevdrih.
MAKALE BiLGiSi | ARTICLE INFORMATION
Makale Türü: Ara§tirma Makalesi | Article Type: Research Article Geli§ Tarihi: 15 5ubat 2022 | Date Received: 15 February 2022 Kabul Tarihi: 5 Nisan 2022 | Date Accepted: 5 April 2022
Ni^ancizäde Mehmed Efendi (0.1031/1621) me^hur bir kronik yazari ve XVII. yüz-yilin taninmi^ älimlerindendir. Kanuni Sultan Süleyman döneminde dogmu§ ve II. Osman dönemi de dähil olmak üzere yedi Osmanli padi^ahinin saltanatini gör-mü§ olan Ni^ancizäde, älemin yaratili^indan Kanuni'nin saltanatinin sonuna kadar gelen Mir'atü'l-Kainat adli tarih eseriyle me^hur olmu^tur. Bu makalede Mir'atü'l-Kainat'in söz konusu kismi incelenip degerlendiril-mi^tir. Eserin bu kisminin en mühim yön-lerinden bin de yazarin hayatina dair bilgi-lere sagladigi önemli katkilardir. Örnegin Ni^ancizäde'nin dogdugu yil, kaynaklarda iki farkli bilgi ile yer almaktadir. Oysa Mir'atul-Kainatta kendi akrabalari hakkinda verdi-gi malumattan yazarin dogdugu yil da net olarak ortaya ^ikmaktadir. Eserin Berlin Devlet Kütüphanesi'nde (Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin) kayitli bir nüshasinin müellif hat-ti oldugu tarafimizca tespit edilmi^ ve maka-ledeki degerlendirmeler bu nüshaya göre ya-pilmi^tir. Kroniklerin ve biyografi kaynaklari-nin da bu eserle mukayeseli olarak okunmasi neticesinde Mir'atü'l-Kainatin Osmanli tarihi kisminin ana kaynaginin Hoca Sadeddin Efendi'nin Tacü't-Tevarih adli eseri oldugu ortaya ^ikmi^tir.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Ni^ancizäde Mehmed Efendi, Mir'atü'l-Kainat, Osmanli Tarihi, Tacü't-Tevarih.
lij?' ATIF | CITATION
inan, Göker. "Remarks on the Part of Ottoman History in Ni§ancizâde's Mir'âtû'l-Kâinât". Kadim 3 (Nisan 2022), 107-132. doi.org/10.54462/kadim.1074183
* Dr., Türkiye Yazma Eserler Kurumu Ba^kanligi, gokerinan@gmail.com, ORCID: 0000-0003-1280-4041.
INTRODUCTION
i. The Life of Nipncizade Muhyiddin Mehmed
The information about Nijancizade Muhyiddin Mehmed's life is limited. There are two different dates, 962V15552 and 968V1560-61, as the year of his birth found in the sources. In addition, Nijancizade also gives information about his life in Mir'dtul-Kdindt, in the part he devotes to the Ottoman Empire. For example, at the end of the aforementioned part, he mentions Abdullatif Efendi (d. 971/1564), whom he indicates as his mother's father. Nijancizade dated his grandfather's death to Shawwal 971 and noted that he was three years old in Istanbul with his parents.4 In this case, it can be concluded from this detail that the year of his birth was 968, not 962.
There is no exact information about his place of birth. However, according to the information given by Nev'izade Atayi (d. 968/1561), his grandfather Ramazanzade Mehmed ^elebis (d. 979/1571) served as a sealer (ni^anci) in the Imperial Council (Divan-i Humayun) between 965 and 970/ 1558-1563/ In addition, the information in Mir'dtu'l-Kdindt enlightens that Mimarzade Mehmed Efendi (d. 934/1527), Nijancizade's grandfather, was in Istanbul before these years. While Mimarzade was teaching in Kalenderhane Madrasa, Ramazanzade became his student.7 Mimarzade passed away while he was the judge of Aleppo. In conclusion, this studentship of his grandfather was before 934.
Ramazanzade Mehmed is also known as "Nijanci" because he served as a sealer (nijanci). He was also called "Little Nijanci" to distinguish him from Celalzade Mustafa ^elebi (d. 975/ 1567), who lived in the same period and also served as a sealer (nijanci).8 Muhyiddin Mehmed and his father Ahmed Efendi (d. 986/1578) were referred to as "Nijancizade" in relation to Ramazanzade's title.
1 Nev'izade Atayi, Hada'iku'l-Haka'ik fi Tekmileti'$-§akaik: Nev'izade Atayi'nin §akaik Zeyli, ed. Suat Donuk (Istanbul: Turkiye Yazma Eserler Kurumu Ba^kanligi Yayinlari, 2017), 2/1622.
2 These years, added with square brackets, represent the Gregorian equivalent of the written Hijri year.
3 Katib Qelebi, Fezleke, ed. Zeynep Aycibin (Istanbul: Qamlica Basim Yayin, 2016), 2/571.
4 Ni^ancizade also narrated in the same section that Abdullatif Efendi was the disciple and son-in-law of Nak^ibendi sheik Mahmud Efendi (d. 938 /1531) while he was a student at the madrasa, and that he took over the duty of guidance as his deputy when Mahmud Efendi passed away. He also wrote by giving examples that Suleyman I (1520-1566) gave great importance to Abdullatif Efendi, but that his grandfather stayed away from establishing close relations with the sultan. See Miratu 'l-Kainat (Berlin: Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin Ms. or. quart. 1381), fol. 216b. This manuscript is the author's copy. Detailed information about this copy is given below. In future references to the copy, only the name of the work and the leaf number containing the information given will be written.
5 Ni^ancizade's grandfather Ramazanzade wrote a concise general history book known as Tarih-i Ni^anci, from the beginning of creation to the time of Suleyman I. This work was also influential in Ni^ancizade Mehmed Efendi's writing Miratu l-Kainat. Ni^ancizade points to this issue in the part (sebeb-i te'lif) where he explains the reason for writing Miratu l-Kainat. Below, information on this subject is given under the title of "Miratul-Kainat" in the section of "Ni^ancizade's Works" In addition, in the section where we mentioned the sources of Mir'atu'l-Kainat, the impact of this work on Mir'atu'l-Kainat is explained by giving examples under the title reserved for Tarih-i Ni^anci.
6 Nev'izade Atayi, Hada'iku'l-Haka'ik, 1/578.
7 Mir'atu'l-Kainat, fol. 211b.
8 Abdulkadir Ozcan, "Mehmed Qelebi, Ramazanzade", Turkiye Diyanet Vakfi Islam Ansiklopedisi (Ankara: Turkiye Diyanet _ Vakfi Yayinlari, 2003), 28/449.
According to Atâyî, Muhyiddin Mehmed's father Niçancizâde Ahmed Efendi was born in 934/1527-28. Like Ramazanzâde Mehmed Efendi, Ahmed Efendi was one of the scholars who held government positions and produced works. When the institutions where Ahmed Efendi worked from 963 to 971/1556-1564 are examined, it becomes clear that he worked in Istanbul when his son Muhyiddin Mehmed was born in 968.' In this case, most likely, the author of Mir'âtu 'l-Kainât, and even his father, Ahmed Efendi,10 were born in Istanbul, considering the information above about Ramazanzâde.
One of the details he shares about his father's family lineage in his work is that "Imâm Ali-i Amasiyyevî" (d. 927/1520-21), who was among the scholars of the Bayezid II period (1481-1512), was the father of his paternal grandmother.11
Niçancizâde's brother, Kudsi Efendi (d. 1030/1621), was also a member of the scholars' branch and served as a teacher in various madrasas and as a judge (kadi) in different cities.12 Some sources confuse Muhyiddin Mehmed Efendi and his brother and attribute Mir 'âtu 'l-Kâinât to Kudsi Efendi.13
Mir'âtu 'l-Kainât also determines details about the marriage of the author. One of these details is in the section of Mevlânâ Mahmud (Koca Efendi, d. 774 /1372), which Niçancizâde mentions first while talking about the scholars and sheiks of the reign of Murad I (1362-1389). Niçancizâde narrated that Musa Çelebi (d. after 844/1440), who was the grandson of Koca Efendi and known as "Kadizâde-i Rûmî," was the paternal great-grandfather of his father-in-law, Salih Molla, who retired from the military judgeship of Rumelia.14 Accordingly, it becomes evident that Niçancizâde married the daughter of the military judge Salih Molla.
There is no detailed information about the madrasas at which Niçancizâde studied. However, looking at the duties he undertook, it is evident that he was well-equipped and had a high level of knowledge in the basic sciences of his period. Besides, Niçancizâde improved himself by completing his apprenticeship (mulâzemet) before becoming a teacher (mudarris), alongside Hoca Sadeddin Efendi (d. 1008/1599), whom he often benefited from in Mir'âtu 'l-Kainât. After completing his education and apprenticeship period, he was appointed to various madrasas as a teacher. He also served as a judge in important provinces. Details about Niçancizâde's working career are chronologically listed as follows:15
........................................... <
9 Nev'îzâde Atâyî, Hadâ'iku'l-Hakâ'ik, 1/780. <
10 While Ni^ancizâde was describing the death of Suleyman I in Mir'âtu'l-Kâinât, he included in his work the Persian poem con- ¡z; sisting of 15 couplets written by his father Ahmed Efendi for the death of the Sultan, and mentioned his father on this occasion.
See Mirâtul-Kâinât, fol. 209b. m
t
11 Mir'âtu'l-Kâinât, fol. 185b. £
12 See for detailed information: Nev'îzâde Atâyî, Hadâ'iku'l-Hakâ'ik, 1/1609-1612. ^
13 Mehmed Tahir, Osmanli Muellifleri (Istanbul: Meral Yayinevi, 1975), 3/141; Ozcan, "Mehmed Çelebi, Ramazanzâde", 450.
14 Mir'âtu'l-Kâinât, fol. 135b.
15 Nev'îzâde Atâyî gives the most detailed information about the author. Hadâiku'l-Hakâ'ik was taken as the basis for Ni^ancizâde's professional knowledge.
Table 1: Career steps of Nipncizäde
HIJRI AD EVENTS
990 1582 Became a teacher at Ba^^i Ibrahim Madrasa with a daily wage of 30 akchas.
993 1585 Transferred to the Cezeri Kasim Pasha Madrasa in Eyup. Then, his degree was increased, and he reached the rank of "hari^" (outer).
Rajab 999 April / May 1591 The newly built madrasa of Fatma Sultan, the wife of Siyavu§ Pasha, was first given to him, and he received the Sahn rank (teachers of Inner).
Shawwal 1002 June / July 1594 Transferred to the Sahn-i Seman Madrasa.
Muharram 1004 September 1595 Appointed to the Sultan Selim I Madrasa.
Jumada al-awwal 1004 January 1596 Appointed as the judge of Baghdad.
Shawwal 1006 May 1598 Dismissed (mazul).
Rabi'al-awwal 1008 September / October 1599 Became the judge of Yeni^ehir.
Muharram 1009 July / August 1600 Dismissed (mazul).
Safar 1012 July 1603 Appointed as the judge of Uskudar.
Rajab 1013 November / December 1604 Left this post in a month.
Dhu al-Hijjah 1014 April 1606 Reappointed to the same post.
Dhu al-Qa'dah 1016 February / March 1608 Dismissed (mazul).
Shaban 1020 October / November 1611 Became the judge of Aleppo, replacing Sun'i Efendi.
Jumada al-akhir August 1612 Transferred to Baghdad as judge.
1021
Muharram 1022 February/ March 1613 Dismissed (mazul).
Rabi'al-awwal 1025 March / April 1616 Reappointed as the judge of Aleppo.
Jumada al-akhir June 1617 Appointed as the judge of Mecca, replacing his brother Kudsi Efendi, who left his post.
1026
Rajab 1027 June / July 1618 Left his post.
Muharram 1030 November 1620 Worked at the Tahvil Office, one of the branches of the Imperial Council.16
Safar 1031 December 1621 Appointed as the judge of Edirne, but he died on the way to his duty.17
According to the list above, Ni^ancizade served in many provinces one after another following his first duty as a teacher when he was appointed at the age of 22. He was last appointed as a judge to Edirne in 1621 and died on his way to the city. Thereupon, his corpse was brought to Istanbul and buried in the vicinity of Emir Buhari Lodge in Edirnekapi.18
Atayi noted that the author had superior virtues, avoided being in public, read constantly, and worked his mind day and night to solve complicated issues. He also added that Ni^ancizade did not receive the value he deserved in his time, although he was worthy of higher degrees and positions.19
2. Nipncizade's Works
Although there are other works attributed to Ni^ancizade Mehmed Efendi, there are two works that definitely belong to him.
16 This information, which is not included in Atâyî, was determined in a document at the Ottoman State Archives. see Ba^kanlik Osmanli Arçivleri (BOA), D.BÇM.d, 138/3.
17 Nev'îzâde Atâyî, Hadaiku'l-Hakaik, 2/1622-1623.
18 Nev'îzâde Atâyî, Hadaiku'l-Hakaik, 2/1623.
19 Nev'îzâde Atâyî, Hadaiku'l-Hakaik, 2/1623-1624.
2.1. Mir'atu'l-Kainat
Mir'atu'l-Kainat is a history book that covers the period from the creation of the universe to the end of the Suleyman the Magnificent's reign (1520-1566). It is unknown when Ni^ancizade first produced the book since even the author's copy does not bear a specific date. Nonetheless, since there are numerous copies of this work and it was printed several times, it is obvious that there was a heavy demand for Mir 'atu' l-Kainat.20
In his "Sebeb-i Te'lif" (Reason-for-writing) part where he explains the motivation behind his work Ni^ancizade refers to his grandfather Ramazanzade Mehmed Efendi's history book known as Tarih-i Ni§anci. He highly praises his grandfather's book. Yet he also noted that it fell short in terms of addressing specific topics, and he stated that with Mir'atu 'l-Kainat, he aimed to give more in-depth explanations of the issues and make them more beneficial.21
Mir'atu 'l-Kainat begins with the creation of creatures. By quoting from Islamic resources, it also discusses topics such as the creation of humankind with Adam, the descending of Adam and Eve from heaven to earth, the conflict between Cain and Abel.22 It then exhaustively covers the lives of the prophets mentioned in the Qur'an and Hadith under separate headings.23
The section of the period of Muhammed (pbuh) begins following the prophets' history. This part begins with the names of Muhammed's (pbuh) grandfathers, continues with the assignment of prophethood and various subjects related to his life in-depth under separate headings.24
The next part is about the period of the first four caliphs, Hasan and Hussein, Umayyads, and Abbasids.2S Each caliph and significant events during the particular era were discussed under separate titles and subtitles.26
It then provides a good deal of information about the Umayyads of Andalusia.27 After comprehensively covering the periods of the Fatimids, the Ayyubids, the Samanids, the Ghaznavids, the Seljuks, and the Mamluks, respectively, the author moved on to the era of the Ottomans.28 It also gives information about the Pishdadian, the Keyaniyans, the Askhanians, the Sasanids, the Copts, the Qahtanis, the Jurhum tribes, the leaders of Bani Israel, the Greek Maliks, the Greek rulers, the Gassan Maliks. The author completed his work by touching on various topics such as the reason why nations were given different names and how they scattered across the earth, scholars, and philosophers.29
20 Details are given below about the manuscript copies of the book. As for the printed copies, two copy were printed by Matba'at Bulaq in 1257 and 1269 Hijri, the other one was printed by Tatyos Divitciyan Press in 1290 Hijri.
21 Ni^ancizade Mehmed Efendi, Miratul-Kainat (Istanbul: Tatyos Divitciyan Press, 1290/1873), 1/4-5.
22 Ni^ancizade, Miratul-Kainat, 1/8-109.
23 Ni^ancizade, Miratul-Kainat, 1/113-394.
24 For the complete part devoted to Muhammed (pbuh), see Ni^ancizade, Miratul-Kainat, 1/394-630.
25 Ni^ancizade, Miratul-Kainat, 1/631-706.
26 Ni^ancizade, Miratul-Kainat, 2/2-139.
27 Ni^ancizade, Miratul-Kainat, 2/139-140.
28 For the part prior to the Ottomans, see Ni^ancizade, Miratu 'l-Kainat, 2/140-274. Details about the part devoted to the Ottoman history are given below.
29 Subsequent parts following the Ottomans, see Ni^ancizade, Miratu 'l-Kainat, 2/523-688.
2.2. Nuru'l-Ayn fi Islahi Cami'i'l-Fusuleyn
This book is based on §eyh Bedreddin's (d. 823/1420) work on Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh), which is called Cami'u'l-Fusuleyn. In the introduction of his book, Ni^ancizade noted that he wrote Nuru'l-Ayn after rectifying some parts and eliminating the repetitive sections of Cami'u'l-Fusuleyn from which he benefited while he was working as a judge.30
Other than his two works mentioned above, Ni^ancizade's name appears in the first pamphlet (risalah) of manuscript number 4493 of the collection of Haci Mahmud Efendi in the Library of Suleymaniye. The title, written in Arabic with red ink at right top of ib in this copy, says that this risalah is Ni^ancizade Mehmed's translation of Madenu'l-Cevahir and Rahatu'l-Havatir, the works of Zeynulkudat Ahmed bin Muhammed. It is an Arabic risalah that contains the hadith of the Prophet, the sayings of his companions and religious scholars, along with some wise words from anonymous individuals. The translator penned every phrase in Arabic before translating them. There is not any information about the translator in the risalah and there is no date info identified. Just as Ni^ancizade could be the one who did the translation, the book could be ascribed to him by either the one who copied it or by someone else. Besides, although Siyeru l-Enbiyai'l-Izam and Husulu l-Meram were ascribed to Ni^ancizade, he is not the author of these works. Siyeru'l-Enbiya belongs to his grandfather Ramazanzade Ni^anci Mehmed Qelebi.31
3. Mir'atu'l-Kainat's Part on Ottoman History
The Ottoman history in Mir' atu'l-Kainat comprises an introduction along with ten chapters, and the sultans were mentioned in chronological order. Namely, one sultan and his reign were covered in each chapter from the first ruler Osman Gazi (1302-1324) to the tenth Ottoman sultan, Suleyman the Magnificent. The basic details such as the birth dates and birthplaces of the sultans', the dates of enthronements, the dates of their passing were mostly given with Persian inscriptions. The sultans' children, viziers, their battles, the lands they conquered, the sheiks and ulamas of their periods were mentioned in separate parts called "Fasl." Supplemental information with subheadings as "faide" was also given sporadically in relation to the mentioned subject. Furthermore, single and multiple poetic verses were written at the beginning of each chapter and in the midst of topics.
Some subjects were discussed under subheadings such as "conquests, battles, stories, affairs, humorous comments, ceremonies, raids, sorcery, treaties, revolts, events." This type of subdivision not only makes it easier to read but also helps the reader view the subjects well-coordinated.
Ni^ancizade probably benefited from the chronicles compiled before his work, even engaged in comparative analysis of these chronicles while he was writing the Ottoman history
30 Tahsin Ozcan. "Ni^ancizade Muhyiddin Mehmed", Turkiye Diyanet Vakfi Islam Ansiklopedisi (Istanbul: TDV Yayinlari, 2007),
33/161. Nuru'l-Ayns 1-6. chapters Rukiyye Hacifettahoglu Gule^yuz, 7-11 chapters Meryem Yilmaz, 12-19. chapters Esra
Karadeniz, 20-24. chapters Esra Nur §agban, 25-31. chapters Fatma Sena Yasan, 32. chapter Betul Akta^, 33. chapter Humeyra
Yorulmaz, 34-39. chapters Suheyla Ak^ay Bi^en and 40. chapter have been studied by Resul Aygumu^, as master degree thesis
at the University of 29 Mayis, with the title "Ni^ancizade'nin Nuru'l-Ayn Adli Eserinin Tahkik ve Tahlili"
31 Ozcan. "Ni^ancizade Muhyiddin Mehmed", 33/161.
in Mir'atu 'l-Kainat. It is suggested that he had recourse to some reference sources he did not mention by name or some anonymous sources for the Ottoman history part. It is certain to say that Hoca Sadeddin's Tacu't-Tevarih is the primary source of Ottoman history part. When Mir 'atu 'l-Kainat is thoroughly examined, those traces are noticeable not only in its contents but also in its language and style. However, while there is plenty of rhymed prose in the book, the author made grammatical fragments in some parts and skipped some key points as he summarized certain events. For this reason, reading Mir atu l-Kainat alone by individuals without sufficient basic knowledge of Ottoman history may create difficulties in comprehending the historical events.
Ni^ancizade benefited from Ta^koprizade Ahmed Efendi's (d. 968 /1561) §akaik-i Numaniyye, one of the primary sources for the biographies of scholars and sheiks ofOttomans, for ulamas and sufis' biographies, and made direct reference to this book in some parts.32
Ni^ancizade noted that he, as explained above, put an introduction at the beginning of his Ottoman history part and broke it down into ten chapters, with each chapter divided into a few parts.33 Below is the basic template the author listed at the beginning:
• Introduction: The Rise of the Ottomans and Their Family Lineage
• First Chapter: The Era of Osman Gazi
• Second Chapter: The Era of Orhan Gazi
• Third Chapter: The Era of Murad I
• Fourth Chapter: The Era of Bayezid I
• Fifth Chapter: The Era of Mehmed I
• Sixth Chapter: The Era of Murad II
• Seventh Chapter: The Era of Mehmed II
• Eighth Chapter: The Era of Bayezid II
• Ninth Chapter: The Era of Selim I
• Tenth Chapter: The Era of Suleyman I
Ni^ancizade gave an explanation about the last chapter, the era of Suleyman I, following the list. In his explanation, he pointed out that the last chapter was not as well-organized as the previous ones, and he was unable to thoroughly cover the era of Suleyman I as he was too young to have extensive knowledge of the events of that era.34 Besides, Hoca Sadeddin's Tacu 't-Tevarih, being the determinant and primary source, ends with the Era of Selim I (15121520), not including the Era of Suleyman I. One of the reasons for not having an in-depth narration ofSuleyman I's era, despite being the closest to Ni^ancizade, could be Tacu 't-Tevarih
32 Details are given in the part of sources.
33 Miratu l-Kainat, 119b.
34 Miratu l-Kainat, 119b.
not covering this particular era. Yet, he could have given an in-depth narration of the era of Suleyman I by resorting to the chronicles and Suleymannames written in the same era if he wished to provide more details. After all, it is obvious that Ni^ancizade preferably kept brief records of the events of this era.
4. Sources of the Ottoman History Part in Mir'atu'l-Kainat 4.1. Tacu't-Teyarih
As previously mentioned, Hoca Sadeddin's Tacu 't-Tevarih is the most significant and primary source for Mir ' atu 'l-Kainat's Ottoman history part. Ni^ancizade pointed out, in his Mir'atu'l-Kainat s introdution, the particular emphasis he had on Hoca Sadeddin, alongside whom he completed his apprenticeship prior to becoming a mudarris, and on his work Tacu t-Tevarih. In this part, before listing the family lineage of Ottomans, he also noted that there are some differences in respected history texts about the names of the Ottomans' ancestors. Then he wrote two praising couplets for his master Hoca Sadeddin before listing the lineage of Ottomans in precisely the same way as it was recorded in Tacu 't-Tevarih, according to his statement." When Mir'atu 'l-Kainat and Tacu 't-Tevarih are studied with comparison, there is a lot of evidence to suggest that Ni^ancizade utilized this book as his primary source.
He summarized some ofthe administrative and military regulations that took place during Orhan Gazi's era (1324-1362) from Tacu 't-Tevarih?6 The details under the main heading for conquests in the chapter of Bayezid I (1389-1403) are summarizations from Tacu 't-Tevarih. One incident under this heading was recorded by referring to Idris-i Bitlisi's (d. 926/1520) history known as He§t Behi^t; however, He^t-Behi^t was referred to while the same incidents were narrated in Tacu 't-Tevarih as well. When all the evidence is assessed, it becomes obvious that this reference, along with other details, was taken from Tacu'.t-Tevarih.37 The point here is that Tacu 't-Tevarih is the primary source of Ni^ancizade, and he organized his work in line with this source. For instance, details from Negri's (d. 926/1520?) history were noted while narrating the status of the sons of Bayezid I during the Interregnum period. Yet, this time it was stated that these details also were in Tacu 't-Tevarih.3
The reference from Idris-i Bitlisi below came from Tacu 't-Tevarih while narrating the conflicts during the Interregnum period. But, Ni^ancizade summarized the details in his own style: 3
K &
<
Z
35 Mir'atu 'l-Kainat, 119b; Tacu t-Tevarih see Hoca Sadeddin Efendi, Tacu 't-Tevarih (Istanbul: Tabhane-i Amire, 1279), 1/15.
Z
36 cf., Mir'atu'l-Kainat, 127a-b; Hoca Sadeddin Efendi, Tacu 't-Tevarih, 1/37-41.
37 cf. the whole part, Mir'atu'l-Kainat, 136b-138a; Hoca Sadeddin Efendi, Tacu t-Tevarih, 1/126-143. Molla idris reference at ^ 137b in Ni^ancizade, while it is noted at p.143 in Tacu 't-Tevarih. It is highly likely that the reference of Idris-i Bitlisi at 148b in S Miratu 'l-Kainat was made through Tacu t-Tevarih. cf. Hoca Sadeddin Efendi, Tacu 't-Tevarih, 1/283-284. ~
38 Miratu 'l-Kainat, 144b. Tacu t-Tevarih see Hoca Sadeddin Efendi, Tacu't-Tevarih, 1/221. For the reference of Ne^ri at 159a % Tacu 't-Tevarih is not noted, yet when gathered together with the details given before, it can be understood that Ni^ancizade
once again made a summary from Tacu 't-Tevarih, meaning the reference of Negri's history was made through Tacu t-Tevarih as well. cf. Hoca Sadeddin Efendi, Tacu t-Tevarih, 1/390. The narration of the event begins at p. 388; the reference of Tarih-iNepri is noted at p. 390 _
Table 2: The same event in Tacu't-Tevarih and Mir'atul-Kainat
Mir'atu'l-Ka'inat
[cisa Qelebi] baht-i berge^te ile kuh u de§te du§up sahra-yi cihan-da bi-nam u ni§an oldi. Ba'z-i rivayetde bacd-i zaman Eski-§ehr etrafin-da gizlu idugini sultan i^idup boluk gonderup hammamda bulup bog-dilar. Tarih-i Monla idris'de sultanun ba'z-i muluk-i etraf haklarindan geldugi, 'isa katlinden sonra oldi diyu mezkurdur, vallahu aclem. (145b)_
Tacu't-Tevarih
...baht-i berge^te ile kuh u de§te du§up nezil-i kunc-i hamuli ve mulazim-i ku§e-i feramu^i olup defter-i §uhuda dan ismi mahkuk ve vucud u c ademi me^kuk oldi. Ba'z-i nakale-i ahbar rivayeti bu vech uzredur ki "Bir muddetden sonra Eski-§ehr etrafinda muhtefi idugi ma' lum olup mute§ cessisan-i ahval bu kissayi dergah-i sultana isal eylediler. Sultan-i dilaver iki yuz er intihab idup ol ga3ile refine irsalde §itab eyledi. Ol guruh-i pur-§ukuh dahi mela3ike-i acal gibi isti'cal idup hasma mecal virmeyup hammamc da bulup hamame-i ruhini feza-yi himama u?urdilar ve raht-i bahtini diyar-i 'ademe go^urdiler." Mevlana idris Tarihi'nde mastur olan budur ki: "'isa Qelebi'nun emri tamam oldukdan sonra sultan-i sutude-hisal ferag-i bal ile ahz-i intikam makaminda kiyam idup izmir-ogli'ni te 3dlbe 'azim olup vekayi'-i mezbure bu kissadan sonra zuhura gelmi§ ola." Vallahu a' lem.39
It is apparent that the details written by Ni^ancizade in the chapter of Murad II (14211444, 1446-1451), by noting that these details were mentioned in certain history books, are based on the commentaries of the relevant text in Tacu 't-Tevarih.4°
The details in the part narrating the abdication and second reign of Murad II, also in certain history books, are a summarization of Hoca Sadeddin's poetic text.41 It was noted that these details with the related poetic text in Tacu't-Tevarih were mentioned in many history books as well.42 The Bu^uktepe Incident in these two books was narrated as seen in the below table. It is another example of Ni^ancizade's summarization from Tacu't-Tevarih:
39 Hoca Sadeddin Efendi, Tacu't-Tevarih, 1/235-236.
40 cf. Mir'atu'l-Kainat, 157a-b; Hoca Sadeddin Efendi, Tacu't-Tevarih, 1/374-75.
41 Mir'atu'l-Kainat, 158a-b.
_ 42 Hoca Sadeddin Efendi, Tacu't-Tevarih, 1/384-387.
Table 3: The same event in Tacú 't-Tevaríh and Mir'atü 'l-Kainat
Mir'atü'l-Ka'inat
Bacz-i tevaríhde mezkürdur ki Murad Han gazadan geldükg de Edirne'de bir müddet turup saltanati evvelki gibi Sultan Muhammed'e virüp havass-i huddamiyla kendü Magnisa'ya gidüp Sultan Muhammed kendü ismine yeñi ak?a kesdürüp o zamanlarda Edirne'de ihrak-i cazím olup §ehrüñ bezzazistani dahi kethudasiyla ve bek?ileriv yle yanup yeñi?eri ba§ kaldurup Hadim §ehabeddín Pa§a sarayin basup o dahi ard kapudan padi^ah sarayina ka?up, yeñi?eriler Bu?uk Depesi'ne ^ikup halki korkudup bu?ugar ak?a terakkí virilmegin nevcan fitne sakin olup bacdehü Halíl Pa§a, ishak Pa§a, Beglers begi Uzgur-ogli ittifakla^up sekiz yüz kirk tokuz evahirinde Murad Han'i ?agirdup o dahi deryadan ge?üp Bu?uk Depe'ye konup §ikara ?ikup yeñi?eril§ erüñ zamírin bilüp tahta ge?üp Muhammed Han'i Magnisa'ya gonderüp Saruca Pa^a'yi aña lala idüp Zaganos Pa^a'yi cazl itdi. (158b)_
Tacü't-Tevaríh
Amma bacz-i tevaríhde bu vech üzre mezkür olmi^dur ki Varna Gazasi'ndan gelüp Edirne'de bir müddet aram itdükden soñra üslüb-i sabik üzre saltanatini Sultan Muhammed Han'a tefvíz idüp havass-i huddamlari ile Magnisa canibine hiram itdiler. Sultan Muhammed Han dahi yeñi ak?a kesdürüp nam-i namlsi ile menabir ü mehafil müzeyyen olup ol evanda Edirne'de hark-i cazím vakic oldi. Bezzazistan etrafi ile Tahte'l-kalca cev-anibi ve ni?e pazarlar dahi yandi. Hatta bezzazistan kethudasi H'ace Kasim bezzazistancilar ile bezzazistan i?inde yandilar ve yeñi?eri ba§ kaldurup Hadim §ehabeddln Pa^a'yi basdilar. Pa§a dahi i? kapudan ^ikup Eski Saray'a ka?up saye-i himayet-i sultaníde halas oldi. Bu?uk Depesi'ne ?ikup kulüb-i nasa ilka-yi hiras itdiler. Bu?ugar terakkí ile nevcan teskín bulup fi'l-cümle ictidal gelicek vüzera ve ümeradan Halíl Pa§a ve ishak Pa§a ve Beglerbegi U[z]gur-ogli ittifak-i nihaní idüp Sultan Murad'i dacvet itdiler. Ve bu vekayic sünüh itdü-gi sal evahirinde sene tisca ve erbacín ve seman mi3e idi, Sultan Murad Han deryadan cubür idip Edirne'de Bu?uk Depe'de nüzül itdi. §ikar nami-na ?ikup yeñi?erinüñ zamírin bilüp serír-i salta-nata mükerreren cülüs idüp Sultan Muhammed Han'i Magnisa'ya gonderdi. Ve Saruca Pa^a'yi bile gonderüp vezaretleri hidmetine tacyín buyurdi ve Zaganos Pa^a'yi cazl idüp Balikesrí'de tekacüd ile me3mür itdiler.43
It was stated under the title "Serguze^t-i Cem" in the chapter of Bayezid II, where the experiences of Cem Sultan (d. 900 /1495) after he took refuge in Rhodes were narrated, that these details were thoroughly covered in the Cem-name. Ni^ancizade probably personally examined the Cem-name; though it is more probable that he once again had quotations from Hoca Sadeddin. Because the same work, cited as "the risalah covering the condition of Cem Sultan" but not as Cem-name, was referred to while narrating the related incidents in Tacu' t-Tevarih. The referred part in these two books was presented in the table below:
43 Hoca Sadeddin Efendi, Tácü't-Tevárih, 1/387.
Table 4: The same event in Tacu't-Tevarih and Mir'atu'l-Kainat
Mir'atu'l-Ka'inat
...gah berden gah bahrden ni?e bilad ve ma'ber-i pur-hatardan guzar itmi^dur ki tefasili Cem-name diyu bir mustakil risalede mubeyyen u muharrerdur.44
Tacu't-Tevarih
.gah berden ve gah bahrden sefer idup ni?e bilad a^dilar ki tefasil-i esami-si beyanina bu kitab tahammul itmez. Hassaten Cem Sultan ahvalini beyana mutekeffil olan risalede masturdur.45
While narrating the conflicts with the Safavids in the chapter of Bayezid II, Tacu't-Tevarih was cited again, and it was noted that all details up to this part were taken from this book.46 Besides, when the details given before this note are analyzed, it becomes clear that the poem under the heading which tells the story behind Qizilbash is also in Tacu't-Tevarih where the same details were narrated with the title "Poem."47
It is also evident that the details in the chapter of Selim I about his conflicts with his brothers are also summarizations from Tacu't-Tevarih. In addition, the poems in Tacu't-Tevarih were quoted in Mir' at.4
One 'bend' from the elegy written by Kemalpa^azade (d. 940/ 1534) was quoted in the part that mentioned the death of Selim I. Same verses were quoted in Tacu't-Tevarih by noting the ownership of Kemalpa^azade.49 The details by Ni^ancizade with references from Hasan Can Qelebi (d. 974/1567), who was the companion of Selim I and Hoca Sadeddin's father, were also mentioned in Tacu't-Tevarih. Hoca Sadeddin noted that he quoted these details from his father.50
When Mir'atu'l-Kainat and Tacu't-Tevarih are comparatively examined, one of the most striking subjects would be their poetry. This was partially touched upon in previous parts, but it is important to discuss further as these poetry parts show how much Ni^ancizade took advantage of Tacu't-Tevarih. It was found that most of the poetry in Mir'atu'l-Kainat was taken from Tacu't-Tevarih, and these were found to be in the poetry recorded with the title "li-muellifihi" in Tacu't-Tevarih. In other words, these poems belong to Hoca Sadeddin, and Ni^ancizade quoted them at numerous places in his Mir'atu 'l-Kainat by choosing some verses among these poems. Here are a few examples:
Osman Gazi's farewell to his son Orhan at his deathbed and the verses implicating the will of Osman to his son were quoted from the poetry recorded with the title "li-muellifihi" in Tacu't-Tevarih.51
44 Ni^ancizade, Mir'at, 2/423.
45 Hoca Sadeddin Efendi, Tacu't-Tevarih, 2/32.
46 Ni^ancizade, Mir'at, 2/438.
47 cf. Ni^ancizade, Mir'at, 2/437; Hoca Sadeddin Efendi, Tacu't-Tevarih, 2/126.
48 cf. Mir'atu'l-Kainat, 191a-192a; Hoca Sadeddin Efendi, Tacu't-Tevarih, 2/224-238.
49 cf. Mir'atu'l-Kainat, 199a; Hoca Sadeddin Efendi, Tacu't-Tevarih, 2/399.
50 Mir'atu'l-Kainat, 199a-b; Hoca Sadeddin Efendi, Tacu't-Tevarih, 2/394-97.
51 cf. Mir'atu'l-Kainat, 126a-b; Hoca Sadeddin Efendi, Tacu't-Tevarih, 1/29-30.
The verses of Orhan Gazi's pious advice to his son Murad in the part of the narration of Orhan Gazi's death were again chosen and quoted from the poetry recorded with the title "li-muellifihi" in Tdcu't-Tevdrih.S2
The verses narrating the martyrdom of Murad I were quoted from the poetry recorded with the title "li-muellifihi" in Tdcut-Tevdrih.5
Five verses, the last of which is in Persian, narrating the death of Yildirim Bayezid, were quoted from twenty-five sequential verses in Tdcu't-Tevdrih.54 The following six verses as well were quoted from the poetry recorded with the title "li-muellifihi" in the same book."
S ome verses, recorded along with the narration of incidents involving Emir Suleyman, one of Bayezid I's sons, were also quoted from the poetry recorded with the title "li-muellifihi" in Tdcu 't-Tevdrih.56
There are more examples of quotations, and the author's preference for poetry parts. It is also suggested, as one of the reasons, that Ni^ancizade's talent for writing poetry was not on the same level as Hoca Sadeddin. In addition to this, when the massive impact of Tdcu't-Tevdrih on Mir'dtu'l-Kdindtas a whole is examined, it becomes clear that Ni^ancizade preferred Tdcu't-Tevdrih as the primary source for his book's Ottoman history part because of the respect and high regard he had for Hoca Sadeddin and his work. It is even possible to consider the relevant sections of Mir'dtu'l-Kdindt as, to a large extent, the summarization of Tdcu't-Tevdrih.
4.2. Tarih-i Ni^anci
Tdrih-i Ni^dnci is the work of Muhyiddin Mehmed Efendi's grandfather Ramazanzade Mehmed Qelebi who was the reason why Muhyiddin was given the title "Nijancizade."S7 As mentioned before, this book, which compiled a summary of the common history starting from the first creation up to the era of Suleyman I, had a significant influence on the writing of Mir'dtu'l-Kdindt. Tdrih-i Ni^dnci was explicitly referred to once in the section of Ottoman history in Mir'dt;5 yet, when these two books are comparatively read, it becomes obvious that Tdrih-i Ni^dnci had a noticeable impact on the pattern of Ottoman history in Mir'dtu 'l-Kdindt. Some examples of this:
Mir'dtu'l-Kdindt sporadically provides more details, or it has certain differences, but the basic information about the sultans, at the beginning of each chapter, in both of these books
52 cf. Mir'ätü'l-Käinät, I29b-i30a; Hoca Sadeddin Efendi, Täcü't-Tevärih, 1/64-65.
53 cf. Mir'ätü'l-Käinät, i35a-b; Hoca Sadeddin Efendi, Täcü't-Tevärih, 1/123-124.
54 Mir'ätü'l-Käinät, 141b; Täcü't-Tevärih, 1/210.
55 Mir'ätü'l-Käinät, 141b; Täcü't-Tevärih, 1/212-13.
56 Mir'ätü'l-Käinät, 146a-b; Täcü't-Tevärih, 1/251. For other examples see Mir'ätü'l-Käinät, 129b, 147b, 150a, 159a, 159b, 160a, 164a, 165b, 171b-172a, 172b. in order. Täcü't-Tevärih comparison Hoca Sadeddin Efendi, Täcü't-Tevärih, 1/63, 273, 304-305, 395, 398, 404-405, 408-409, 453-454, 527, 539-540.
57 Thesis studies were conducted on the work. See Sibel Nazlihan Nakipoglu, Ramazan-zäde Mehmed'in Ni^anct Tarihi (Kayseri: Erciyes University, The Institute of Social Sciences, Master's Thesis, 1990); Mehmet Yasti, Nifänct Mehmed Pa$a Tevärih-i Äl-i Osmän (ib-i20a) Metin-Dil Özellikleri-Sözlük (Konya: The Institute of Social Sciences, Master's Thesis, 2005); Rukiye Özdemir, Ramazän-zäde'nin Tärih-i Nifänct Pa$a Isimli Eserinin Tahlil ve Tenkidi (Erzurum: Atatürk University, The Institute of Türkiyat Researches, Ph.D. Dissertation, 2018).
58 This part is shown in the table below where these two works are compared.
GOKERINAN
was predominantly in Persian. The single verse compliments at the beginning of chapters by Ramazanzade, were mostly quoted in Mir'atu 'l-Kainat. Then, he made quotations as well, in the chapter of Osman Gazi, from Tarih-i Ni^anci by referring to his grandfather's book. Relevant parts in this chapter were given as they are in both of these books:
Table 5: The same event in Tarih-iNi^anci and Mir'atu 'l-Kainat
Mir'atu'l-Ka'inat
Mebde3-i çahan-i hilafet-çicar Hazret-i cOsman-i vilayet-medar
Nesr: Veladet-i ba-sacadeteç der-kasaba-i Sôgutcuk fî sene 656. Àmeden-i sancak ez-Sultan Ala3eddïn Keykubad-i Sanî fî sene 688. Culuseç ber-taht-i saltanat fî sene 699. Tarîh-i Monla Îdrîs'de "Culusi eva3il-i çuhur-i sene-i sebca-mi3ede idi." diyu mezkurdur. Muddet-i cômreç sene 69. Muddet-i saltanateç sene 26. Vefateç der-kasaba-i Sôgutcuk fî sene 726. Cenaze-i rahmet-endazesi bacd-i zaman Burusa çehrine nakl olinup Hisar-içi'nde Manas-tir'da defn olindi. Nazm:
Hakk ani ridvana karîn eyleye Anda dahi taht-niçîn eyleye
Nesr: Muharrir-i sutur olan cabd-i pur-kusurun cedd-i emcedi Ramazan-zade Niçanci Emîr Muhammed'un tarîh-i muhtasar-i mucteberinde muharrerdur ki merhum Osman Han gayetde ehl-i kerem u ihsan ve sahib-i adl-i firavan idi. Ol ehl-i hayr u birr uç gunde bir matbahinda vafir tacam biçurdup fukara vu eramil u eytam ziyafet ve itcam olinup sibyan ve rical ve nisveye sadaka ve kisve taksîm ve lutf-i belîg-i bî-dirîgini tacmîm iderdi. Merhum-i merkum dar-i ukbaya rihlet itdukde; nazm:
^¿ijj j\ji JU JJ^J ùliJjjT
JLÎ^P jj ^T ¡J^U- JJ jJ
mefhuminca hazînesinde mevcud nukud bulinma-yup heman birkaç atlari ve bir kilici ve bir cebesi ve birkaç koyunlari bulindi. Hala Burusa çehrinun etrafinda gudilen beglik koyunlar, teberruken alikonup beslenilen ol koyunlarun neslidur dirler. (121a)_
Tarih-i Niçanci
Mebde3-i çahan-i hilafet-çicar Hazret-i cOsman-i vilayet-medar
Tafsil-i îbtida3-i Zuhur-i Dev-let-i Àl-i cOsman ve Menakib u Tevarih u Kisas-i içan
Veladet-i Hazret-i cOsman Gazi der-Sôgutcuk fi sene 656. Culuseç fi sene 699. Kirk uç yaçinda padiçah oldi. Muddet-i saltanateç sene 26. Muddet-i cômr sene 69. Vefateç der-Sôgutcuk sene 726. Mezar-i çeri-fi Burusa'dadur.
Merhum gayetde ehl-i kerem ve nihayetde sahib-i cata vu nicam olup cadl u sehada sani-i cÔmereyn ve fer u behada salis-i kamereyn idi. Her uç gunde bir matbahinda vafir tacam piçurup fukarayi ziyafet iderlerdi. Ve eramil u eytama kulli incam ey-leyup sa3ir fukara-i nasa kisve vu libas uleçdurup ihsan-i bila-im-tinan iderlerdi. cOsman Gazi merhum vefat itdukde hazine-sinde nukud cinsinden mevcud nesne bulinmayup heman birkaç atlari ve bir kilic ve bir cebesi ve iki uç suri koyuni kalmiç idi. §im-di Burusa havalisinde çera-gahda yuriyen beglik koyun, teberruken ol koyunlar cinsindendur dirler.59
_ 59 Ramazanzâde Mehmed Çelebi, Târîh-i Niçânct (Istanbul: Matbaa-i Âmire, 1290), 92-93.
The following part where the details for Osman Gazi's beys were given is consistent with his grandfather's book60, similarly as in the part where the conquered lands were listed, before narrating details of battles and conquests of Osman Gazi. Yet, that list was not made at one time by Ramazanzade, and the information covering details was very limited.61
These are general similarities between the two works as the analysis of the chapters indicate. That is, Ni^ancizade utilized his grandfather's book as a primary source in classifying the sections while giving certain essential details. Both of these books present differences in their own content or narration of certain sultans, the similarities and common pattern were given as follows. Basic details about the sultans given at the beginning of each chapter are either totally or predominantly in Persian. Details about the children of the sultans were given under separate headings. They present details about viziers and army commanders of the sultans. Battles and conquered lands were narrated under separate headings. Details of the sultans' charity works were given with the same title. Specific headings were given for the ulama and sheiks.
As previously pointed out, Mir'dtu'l-Kdindt contains more detailed information compared to Tdrih-i Ni§dnci. As a matter of fact, Ni^ancizade began writing his book with the intention of providing more details than his grandfather's work. Nonetheless, as mentioned above, Ni^ancizade's primary source for the details in his Ottoman history was Tdcu't-Tevdrih; but this book did not cover the era of Suleyman the Magnificent. Ni^ancizade did not clearly mention the sources he utilized when narrating the political history of this period. However, it is obvious that in this last chapter, he considerably benefited from his grandfather's work just like he did with the other ones. Here are a few examples:
The military campaigns of Suleyman I's era were numbered in both of these books. While there were fourteen military campaigns listed in Mir'dt with Persian titles as sefer-i evvel, sefer-i sani ... sefer-i rabi'a^er, it was thirteen in Tdrih-i Ni^dnci recorded with Ottoman Turkish titles.62
While previous chapters ordinarily ended with ulama and sheiks, different headings were presented at the end of Suleyman I's chapter. For instance, the first two headings were given with muftis and military judges, respectively.63 While in Tdrih-iNi^dnci as the first heading in this part was recorded with ulama and fuzala, the second one was given with military judges as in Mir'dt64
There are indeed more examples of Tdrih-iNi§dnci's influence on Mir'dtu'l-Kdindtwhen they are examined entirely. However, in conclusion, and regarding the subject, the point is
60 cf. Miratu'l-Kainat, i2ia-b; Ramazanzade, Tarih-i Ni^anci, 94.
61 cf. Miratu'l-Kainat, 124b; Ramazanzade, Tarih-i Ni^anci, 96-94. While the interval given for Ramazanzade contains the listing and details of the part, the listing by Ni^ancizade is given at 124b and continues with detailed information towards the end of 126a.
62 However, while Ramazanzade highly praises Suleyman I at the beginning of the chapter, and thoroughly covers the sultan's charity works, he did after every battle, and their descriptions, there is no part containing this kind of detail in Miratu'l-Kainat. As Ramazanzade lived in the era of Suleyman I and he was assigned to several posts under the sultan's rule, he highly praises the sultan and gives detailed information about his reign, this kind of approach is known as one of the aspects of classical history writing. For the entire period of Suleyman I. see Miratu'l-Kainat, 203b-2i6b; Ramazanzade, Tarih-i Ni^anci, 286-195.
63 Miratu'l-Kainat, 210b.
64 Ramazanzade, Tarih-i Ni^anci, 273.
that Ni^ancizade, for the Ottoman history in Mir'atu 'l-Kainat, utilized his grandfather's Tarih-i Ni^anci while forming his main template and providing certain essential details.
4.3. Hejt Behi^t
He§t Behi^t is Idris-i Bitlisi's Ottoman history book which was written in Persian. Ni^ancizade utilized this book as well while writing his Mir'atu l-Kainat. But, as previously pointed out above in Tacu't-Tevarih part, it is clear that some of the references to He§t Behi^t were noted through Tacu't-Tevarih. The details taken directly from He§tBehi^t by the author are as follows:
The date of Osman Gazi's succession to the throne, at the beginning of the first chapter, was noted with reference to He§t Behi§t.H Some details regarding the first battle of Osman Gazi, following his father Ertugrul Gazi's passing, were also recounted by referring to this book.66
While narrating the story of Mehmed Pasha, son of Hizir Bey, who was one of the viziers of Bayezid II, according to He§t Behi^t he was killed on account of the sultan's rage.67
A comment in the introduction part possibly refers to Bitlisi's book even though no particular name was mentioned. After recounting the Ottoman's family tree from Tacu't-Tevarih, it was noted that there were accounts by some indicating that Kayi Han was actually Ays, son of prophet Ishak.68 This detail appears in He^t Behi§t.6
4.4. Kemalpapzade / Selim-name
One of the sources Ni^ancizade utilized was Selimname in which Kemalpa^azade covered the era of Selim I. Ni^ancizade noted that he, prior to Safavids part in his Mir'atu'l-Kainat, provided details from Tacu't-Tevarih, while also getting the subsequent details from Kemalpa^azade's Selimname. The quotations were given in the table below as examples from both of these books.
65 Miratu'l-Kainat, 121a; Hept Behipt see Vural Gen^, ldris-i Bitlist Hept Bihipt Osman Gazi Donemi (Tahlil ve Tercume) (Istanbul: Istanbul University, The Institute of Social Sciences, Master's Thesis, 2007), 164.
66 Miratu'l-Kainat, 121b; Hept Behipt see Gen^, ldris-i Bitlist Hept Bihipt Osman Gazi Donemi, 170-173.
67 Ni^ancizade, Mir at, 2/419; for Hept Behipt see Vural Gen^, Acemden Rum'a: ldris-i Bidltst'nin Hayati, Tarih^iligi ve Hept Behipt'in II. Bayezid Kismi (1481-1512) (Istanbul: Istanbul University, The Institute of Social Sciences, Ph.D. Dissertation, 2004), 604. But the name given in this work is not "Mehmed", it is "Mustafa".
68 Miratu'l-Kainat, 120a.
69 Gen^, ldris-i BitlistHeptBihipt Osman Gazi Donemi, 103.
Table 6: The same event in Selim-name and Mir'atü'l-Kainat
Mir'atü'l-Ka'inat
§ah ísmacil'üñ ceddi Cüneyd, Erdebil ocaginda §eyh-i celil iken azup gaza namiyla casker cemc idüp Gürcistan'a garet ve dönü^de vilayet-i §irvan'a hayli hasaret idüp bacdehü §irvan§ah elinde mahzül u maktül oldi. Bacd-i zaman Cüneyd'üñ ogli Haydar-i pür-gill fitne ve §ür u §erre ma3il cevan-i §Ir-dil olup Uzun Hasan'a dahi damad olmagin o hanedana istinad ile pederi kanin taleb i?ün hem?ü Ye3cüc askerle hurüc ve zirve-i fesada Curüc idüp bu dahi §irvan§ah caskerinden maglüb u maktül oldi. Bacdehü diyar-i CA-cem'de Uzun Hasan evladinuñ fitne ve feterat-i cazlmeleri zuhür itmegin Haydar'uñ kü?ük ogli H'ace Kemal fursat bulup tokuz yüz be§de hurüc idüp ismini §ah ísmacIl koyup heman ü? yüz adem-le Erzincan'a gelüp ekser-i memalik-i Anatoli'da kadim-den bunuñ ecdadi hulefasi olmagin anda ni?e kimesnel-er padi^ah Moton ve Koron fethlerine me^gül iken fursat bulup bunuñ yanina varup va-fir casker cemc oldukda varup §irvan§ah'i tutup §I§e sancup kebab idüp bacdehü Tebriz padi^ahiyla sava^up ani siyup §ehre girüp tahta ge?üp §ehrde katl-i camm idüp hatta kendü validesini dahi nasihat itdügi i?ün eliyle katl idüp bacdehü tedricle memalik-i cAcem'i
Selim-name
Ol pür-mekr ü keydüñ ceddi Cüneyd dahi Erdebil ocaginda §eyh-i celilü'l-kadrken bir defa nar-i fit-neyi yakmi^di. Cihad adina calem kaldurub hayl-i cerrarla seyl-var Gürcistan'a akmi^di. Ol diyaruñ bir kenarin urub harab eylemi^di. Donü^de §irvan vilayetine hayli hasaret eylemi^di. Soñra §irvan §ah elinde makhür oldi. Bir zamandan soñra ogli Haydar §ah zuhür buldi. Cüvan-i §ir-dil idi, §ür u §erre ma3il idi. Sultan-i íran Uzun Hasan'a damad olub dururdi. Ol hanedana istinadla §evketi izdiyad bulub dururdi. Sultan Ya'küb zamaninda zirve-i iktidara Curüc itdi. Atasi kanin alub helak i?ün sipah-i Ye3cüc-kirdar ile §irvan §ah üzerine hurüc itdi. §irvan §ah'uñ anuñ-la mukavemete kudreti yog idi. Sultan Yacküb'dan istimdad itdi. Aralarinda calaka-i musaheret var idi, aña binaren imdad itdi. Türkman le^kerini gonderdi, vardilar hayl-i Erdebil'i tagitdilar (...) Hasan Han'uñ nebireleri tebire-i hilafi hurü^a ve derya-yi masafi cü§a getürdiler (...) Ol esnada §eyh Haydar'uñ ki?i ogli §ah ísmacil firsat bulup hurüc itdi. Ü? yüz mikdari ademle togru Erzincan'a indi; ol bed-nihaduñ ecdadinuñ hulefa-yi bed-rayiyla Anatoli'nuñ ekser yerleri toliydi, i^iden ^ikdi gitdi. Ol zamanda merhüm Sultan Bayezid Han inebahti, Motün ve Koron fethine ihtimam idüb dururdi; Anatoli vilayetinüñ casker-i sefer-rehberin ol sefere bile alub, gidüb dururdi. Mezkür diyar-i macmüruñ havalisi hali kalub dururdi; anuñ-?ün ol bed-siret ol araya gelüb, oynamaga firsat bulub dururdi. Qün bir müddet ol nahiyetde ikamet itdi, yaninda hayli adem cemc olub sit ü sadasi calemi tutdi. (...) Kü?e-i fakrda adi Hoca Kemal iken §ah ismacil oldi. Bu kaziye-i gayr-i merziye Hazret-i Risalet hicretinüñ tokuz yüz be^inci yilinda vukuc buldi. (...) Mezkür bed-nihad evvel cadde-i fesada kadem basdi, §irvan'a el urub, ol vilayeti harab ey-ledi. §irvan§ah-i sefid-ri§e bu kadar i§ idüb komadi, diriyle §i§e san?ub kebab eyledi. Ol zamanda Hasan Han bendelerinden Mirza Yüsuf ogli Mirza Elvend diyar-i Ázerbaycan'da §ehriyar idi, mezkür makhüri Kur Suyi kenarinda kar^uladukda, bilesince otuz biñ mikdari süvar-i karzar vardi.
cazim muharebeler ile alup Muslimanlari kili?dan ge^urup Cengiz ve Timur gibi tefasil-i aziimeye muhtac bi-hadd §err u §ur zuhur itdurdi. Nazm: Dime bunca durlu fesad ol lacIn idup nice oldi beladan emin
Bu imhali sanma ki ihmaldur "Ve umli lehum inne keydi metin"
Turu^ub uru^madin, seyf u sinan biri biriyle goru^medin sindi, gerusine dondi. (...) Tebriiz'e togrulub bi-munazac u mudafac geldi §ehre girdi. Akkoyunlu cemacatinden buldugina eman vir-medi, kirdi. (...) Ol gumrah-i kabih-siret kendu anasini, ki Hasan Han'un kiziydi, kenduye hayr-h'ah olub kufr u ilhaddan ve zulm [u] bi-daddan menc itdugi-?un kakiyub kendu eliyle oldurdi. Bacdehu seyl-var cirak'a akub Kazvln'i ve is-fahan'i, Kum'i ve Ka^an'i ve Rey'i ve Hemedan'i ve Semnan'i ve Damgan'i aldi. (...) Bagdad hali kalicak, hasm-i bed-nihad gelub ol §ehri alicak rifzla muttehem olup hali mubhem olanlar kur-tuldilar, anlar ki ashab-i sunnet u cemacat idi, garkab-i cazabda boguldilar. Ol ki^verde envac-i fesadi bu gul-nihad, Mogol'dan artuk itdi. (...)
Dime bunca durlu fesad ol lacin idup nice oldi beladan emin
Bu ihmali sanman ki imhaldur Ve umli le-hum inne keydi metin70
4.5. §akaik-i Nu'maniyye
There is one heading or individual headings at the end of each sultan's chapter in Mir'atu 'l-Kainat, giving details about the scholars and sufis of that particular period. Ni^ancizade made direct reference to Ta^koprizade's §akaik for some ofthe names he mentioned in these sections, but he did not indicate any sources for the others.71 Yet, it is apparent that Ni^ancizade utilized §akaik-i Nu'maniyye as his primary source for the parts where he did not reveal any reference if these books are comparatively examined. It is clear not only from the details but also from the poetry in Mir'atu'l-Kainat, which was quoted from §akaik 7
In addition, while Ni^ancizade provided details about his relatives or individuals who were close to them, he also shared his own details in his book.73 As well as, there were individuals, apart from the given persons, in some parts, whose names were not mentioned as in §akaik-i Nu'maniyye. The majority of the biographies of ulama and sufis in the first nine chapters were in line with Ta^koprizade's sequence. Yet, they consist of summarized details taken from §akaik.74
70 Ahmet Ugur, The Reign of Sultan Seltm I in the Light of the Seltm-name Literature (Scotland: The University of Edinburgh, Ph.D. Dissertation, 1973), 86-92.
71 Miratul-Kainat, 130a, 150a, 161a, 176b, 181b, 182a, 182b, 184a, 186b, 187a, 189a, 202a, 213a.
72 As examples in order, cf. Miratul-Kainat, 161a, 180a, 184a, 201a and b. Ta^kopruluzade Ahmed Efendi, ep-§aka'iku'n-Numa-niyye ft Ulemai'd-Devleti'l-Osmaniyye, Osmanli Alimleri, ed. Muhammet Hekimoglu (Istanbul: Turkiye Yazma Eserler Kurumu Ba^kanligi Yayinlari, 2019), 164-165, 334-335, 466-467, 650-651.
73 These are benefited while details are given about his life, and related parts of Miratul-Kainat are referred to.
_ 74 For comparison of the scholars and sheikhs of Osman Gazi period see Miratul-Kainat, 126b; Ta^kopruluzade, ep-^aka'i-
The format changed a little in the last chapter about the era of Suleyman I. The author utilized §akaik while writing this part, yet he chooses different headings, and the sequence of names was not totally in line with §akaik. His grandfather's work had its influence on the titles partially.75 However, the given details in "Molla Yusuf" part under the heading of military judges clearly show that the author totally stuck with §akaik. His statement notes that Molla Yusuf was known as Sinan Qelebi, but as it was not mentioned in §akaik, he did not have other details concerning his life. Ni^ancizade76 clarified the fact that he not only read over §akaik for all the names but also utilized other sources to find the individuals who were not mentioned in §akaik.
In conclusion, even though Ni^ancizade seemed to concentrate more on making changes with the headings and sequences of scholars and sheiks in the last chapter compared to other parts, he utilized §akaik-iNumaniyye as his primary source for the details about scholars and sheiks.
4.5.1. Various References
The author made some references with generic notes. For instance, in 124b, after giving the list of the fortresses and lands conquered by Osman Gazi, the details from various history books about how these lands were conquered were provided in summary. These summaries can be considered details Ni^ancizade filtered out of the sources he utilized. The details recorded in 189b, the era of Selim I, in which Selimnames were referred to with a generic note, were recounted in summary from thoroughly narrated topics in Selimnames. In the same part, in 190b, details were given from Selimnames.
5. The Copies of Mir'atu'l-Kainat
There are numerous copies of Mir' atu' l-Kainat. Nonetheless, it was found that most of these obtained copies had repetitive misspellings. These misspellings in some copies almost make it impossible to read them correctly.77 On the other hand, some of these copies are not satisfactory when read without assistance; however, they contain some pretty respectable texts that are an observant copyist's work.78
ku'n-Nu'maniyye, 24-28. For Orhan Gazi period see Miratu'l-Kainat, i3oa-i3ob; Ta^kopruluzade, e^aka'iku'n-Nu'maniyye, 30-40. For Murad I period see Miratu'l-Kainat, I35b-i36a; Ta^kopruluzade, e$-§akaikun-Numaniyye, 42-52. For Bayezid I period see Miratul-Kainat, I42a-i44a; Ta^kopruluzade, e$-§akaikun-Numaniyye, 54-110. For Qelebi Mehmed period see. I50a-i5ia; Ta^kopruluzade, e$-§akaikun-Numaniyye, 112-140. For Murad II period see i6ob-i63a; Ta^kopruluzade, ef-^aka'iku'n-Numaniyye, 142-198. For Mehmed II period see 176a-182b; Ta^kopruluzade, e^aka'iku'n-Nu'maniyye, 200434. (In this part where the conquest of Istanbul is narrated, some events are narrated with two separate reference to §akaik. see Miratu'l-Kainat, 164b-165a; Ta^kopruluzade, e^aka'iku'n-Numaniyye, 374; 418). For Bayezid II period see Miratu'l-Kainat, 183a-189a; Ta^kopruluzade, e^aka'iku'n-Nu'maniyye, 440-596. For Selim I period see 199b-203a; Ta^kopruluzade, e$-§aka'i-ku'n-Nu'maniyye, 598-696. (reference is made to §akaik for a narrative about the entrhronment of Selim I, and it is noted that the given detail is more reliable than the ones narrated in Selim-names. see Miratu'l-Kainat, 190b-191a. For the said narrative in §akaik see. Ta^kopruluzade, ef-^aka'iku'n-Nu'maniyye, 552-554.)
75 An example for this was given above in "Tarih-i Ni^anci" part.
76 Mir'atu'l-Kainat, 211a.
77 The first one to look for, the library of Suleymaniye, Sami Benli Collection, the copy recorded at No. 1.
78 The first example to cite for this would be, Millet Library, Ali Emiri History Collection, the copy recorded at No. 536.
As the author's copy was examined for this study, the abovementioned errors did not affect the text in terms of comprehension. Only the author's copy was mentioned below in detail, while other copies were given with their tag info.
5.1. Berlin State Library, Ms. or. Quart. No. 1381 (author's copy)
It has 300 folios. There are some scratches and anecdotes in "zahriye" parts prior to ib. It was calligraphed in naskh (nesih). From its beginning, the Umayyads, it is obvious that the book has its first volume containing the preceding parts; however, this volume has not been found yet. The Ottoman history part was covered between folios ii9b-2i6b. No dating info was given for the "ferag" part of the copy, yet it is assumed that the copy was acquired by one of Ni^ancizade's companions or relatives after eighteen years from his passing (1049 / 1639) because a birth record was noted, at the end of the book, by a father for his boy, who was born in 1049 and was given the name "Mehmed." There are many evidences in the abovementioned copy, which belongs to the author, that Ni^ancizade wrote its text. As it is not practicable to review all the evidence in this study, the author's imprints were illustrated with a few texts given below.
Ni^ancizade occasionally invalidated some of his text by striking them out and made additions to his text with emendations. There is a brief expansion and retraction in the below part taken from the first chapter. Though not mentioned here, other brief additions are made on each side on the same page.
Figure 1: Berlin State Library, Ms. or. Quart. No. 1381 (author's copy) f. 121a
The author's added text, and deleted verse was given below part from the chapter of Murad I. The author used this verse later in the chapter of Mehmed II while narrating the conquest of Istanbul.79
^^J^JJkjs^rii IVjs-^Jj -UVJ 1
M
Figure 2: Berlin State Library, Ms. or. Quart. No. 1381 (author's copy) f. 134b
In the below part from the chapter of Bayezid I, it is evident that some texts were struck out, and additional texts were noted on the sides.
_ 79 Miratu'l-Kainat, 164b.
/^jLiai jAs f
% if .M. I" . 'I . t _ « . ...vvl .li ij • .l..«il-Lr - il...»
£
■J-^—iijji J^jp'^bli liu/ji | I I J->
Is rJaw- rol^l "-T
Figure 3: Berlin State Library, Ms. or. Quart. No. 1381 (author's copy) f. 136a
There are deleted texts and additions towards the bottom of the page in the first one of the below examples from the same chapter. There are deleted verses in the other example. The author used three of these deleted verses later in 208b while narrating the era of Suleyman I:
Figure 4: Berlin State Library, Ms. or. Quart. No. 1381 (author's copy) f. 141b.
Figure 5: Berlin State Library, Ms. or. Quart. No. 1381 (author's copy) f. 147b The below part from the chapter of Selim I has some deleted and added texts:
Figure 6: Berlin State Library, Ms. or. Quart. No. 1381 (author's copy) f. 191
There are more examples for these emendations, but those shown above are sufficient.80
The other copies of Mir'dtu'l-Kdindt, categorized with "Dated Copies" starting from the oldest version and "Undated Copies" for those without a date written or printed on them, are listed as follows:
5.2. Copies with Dates
• Suleymaniye Library, Fazil Ahmed Pasha Collection, no. 1158. 423 folios. Copy date A.H. 1028 / A.D. 1619.
• Millet Library, Ali Emiri History Collection, no. 536. 522 folios. Copy date 1028 / 1619.
• Suleymaniye Library, A. Tekelioglu Collection, no. 760. 286 folios. Copy date 1031 / 1622.
• Topkapi Palace Museum Library, Revan Section, no. 1135. 290 folios. Copy date 1047 / 1637-38.
• Topkapi Palace Museum Library, Revan Section, no. 1365. 154 folios. Copy date 1053 /
i643.
• Topkapi Palace Museum Library, Revan Section, no. 1134, 260 folios. Copy date 1055 / i645-46.
• Suleymaniye Library, Haci Mahmud Efendi Collection, no. 4771. 360 folios. Copy date 1067 / 1656-57.
• Suleymaniye Library, Nuruosmaniye Collection, no. 3420. 195 folios. Copy date 1071 / i660-6i.
• Suleymaniye Library, Fatih Collection, no. 4479. 380 folios. Copy date 1078 / 1667.
• Suleymaniye Library, Fatih Collection, no. 4478. 587 folios. Copy date 1084/1673.
• Suleymaniye Library, Kili^ Ali Pasha Collection, no. 763. 584 folios. Copy date 1092 / i68i.
• The British Library, Or. 1129. 134 folios. Copy date 1095 / 1684.
• National Library of Turkey, Nev^ehir Damat Ibrahim Pasha Collection, no. 170 / 1-2, 373+350 folios. Copy date 1104 / 1693.
• The British Library, Or. 1130. 66 folios. Copy date 1118 / 1707.
• National Library of Turkey, 32 Hk 219. 436 folios. Copy date 1135 / 1722.
• National Library of Turkey, Yz B 1135. 257 folios. Copy date 1141 / 1728.
• Suleymaniye Library, Fazil Ahmed Pasha Collection, no. 251. 178 folios. Copy date 1145
/ 1732-33.
• Suleymaniye Library, Lala Ismail Efendi Collection, no. 372. 457 folios. Copy date 1147 / 1734-35.
_ 80 127a, 139a, 142a, 182b, 183a, 190a, 191b, 192a, 192b, 199a, 199b, 208a clearly shows the author's imprints.
Sadberk Hanim Museum, Huseyin Kocabaj Manuscripts, no. 429. 366 folios. Copy date
1168 / 1754-55-
Suleymaniye Library, Fazil Ahmed Pasha Collection, no. 252. 377 folios. Copy date 1172
/ 1758-59.
National Library of Turkey, 06 Hk 1907, 308 folios. Copy date 1222 / 1806.
Suleymaniye Library, Husrev Pasha Collection, no. 175. 272 folios. Copy date 1232 / 1816-17.
Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin, Hs. or. 2302, Copy date 1238 / 1822-23.
Presidency of Religious Affairs Library, Turkish Manuscripts, no. 800, 111 folios. Copy date 1239 / 1823.
Suleymaniye Library, Yazma Bagi^lar Collection, no. 5508. 256 folios. Copy date 1258 /
1842-43.
Copies without Dates
Suleymaniye Library, Atif Efendi Collection, no. 1933. 318 folios. Suleymaniye Library, Haci Be^ir Aga Collection, no. 458. 586 folios. Suleymaniye Library, Hamidiye Collection, no. 989. 533 folios. Suleymaniye Library, Kadizade Mehmed Collection, no. 367. 167 folios. Suleymaniye Library, Murad Molla Collection, no. 1466. 507 folios. Suleymaniye Library, Murad Molla Collection, no. 1467. 554 folios. Suleymaniye Library, Nuruosmaniye Collection, no. 353. 477 folios. Suleymaniye Library, Nuruosmaniye Collection, no. 3417. 577 folios. Suleymaniye Library, Nuruosmaniye Collection, no. 3418. 478 folios. Suleymaniye Library, Nuruosmaniye Collection, no. 3419. 258 folios. Suleymaniye Library, Nuruosmaniye Collection, no. 3040. 78 folios. Suleymaniye Library, Sami Benli Collection, no. 1. 507 folios. Suleymaniye Library, Yazma Bagi^lar Collection, no. 3450. 283 folios. National Library of Turkey, Yz B 1204. 249 folios. National Library of Turkey, Yz B 1097. 302 folios. National Library of Turkey, 37 Hk 3272. 205 folios. National Library of Turkey, 06 Hk 318. 374 folios. National Library of Turkey, 45 Hk 5158, 572 folios.
Kayseri Ra^it Efendi Manuscript Library, Ra^id Efendi Supplement, no. 904. 366 folios.
• Cairo Khedivial Library, no. 6061, 302+445 folios.
• Sadberk Hanim Museum, Huseyin Kocabaj Manuscripts, no. 428, 323 folios.
• Topkapi Palace Museum Library, Emanet Hazinesi Section, no. 1388. 294 folios.
• Topkapi Palace Museum Library, Bagdat Section, no. 239. 665 folios.
• Topkapi Palace Museum Library, Revan Section, no. 1355. 81 folios.
• Topkapi Palace Museum Library, Revan Section, no. 1364. 326 folios.
• Topkapi Palace Museum Library, Emanet Hazinesi Section, no. 1388, 294 folios.
• The British Library, Or. 7858. 263 folios.
• The British Library, Sloane 787/1. 126 folios.
• Egyptian National Library, S. 4381. 85 folios.
• Egyptian National Library, Turki Talat 17. 392 folios.
• Egyptian National Library, Turki Talat 163, 302 folios.
• Egyptian National Library, Turki Talat 25, 232 folios.
• Iraq Public Foundations Library, Turkish Manuscripts, Prophet Shet Madrasa Collection,
no. 18 / 12. 438 folios.
CONCLUSION
The traditional manuscript culture of the Ottoman era has bequeathed a massively rich heritage to the next generations, with the works covering a broad range of areas. Mir'atu 'l-Kainat, the subject of this article, is a general history book written by Ni^ancizade Mehmed Efendi, who was born during the time of Suleyman I and witnessed the periods of seven Ottoman sultans, including Osman II.
A significant number of its handwritten copies and given that it was printed by two different printing houses (Bulaq and Divitciyan) during the late era of the Ottoman Empire, indicates that this work was admired and studied by Ottoman intellectuals. One of the sections of Mir'atul-Kainat is dedicated to Ottoman history. One of the most critical aspects of this part is its significant contributions to the details of the author's biography.
Ni^ancizade highlights the influence of his grandfather Ramazanzade Mehmed Efendi's Tarih-i Ni^anci, known as a general history book, on his Mir'atu 'l-Kainat in "sebeb-i te'lif" part. Yet, he also noted that Tarih-i Ni^anci was not decently utilized as it fell short in terms of covering specific topics. Then he intended to write Mir'atu'l-Kainat with the aim of giving more in-depth explanations of the topics and making them more beneficial. When the Ottoman history parts of Mir'atu 'l-Kainat and Tarih-i Ni^anci are comparatively analyzed, it suggests that Ni^ancizade, as penning the relevant text benefited from his grandfather's work not only on creating the template of his Mir'at but also on some essential details.
The comparative analysis shows that Ni^ancizade's primary source for the political history of the Ottomans is Hoca Sadeddin Efendi's prominent work Tacut-Tevarih. Ni^ancizade completed his apprenticeship alongside the author of Tacut-Tevarih, Hoca Sadeddin Efendi, before qualifying as a mudarris. His respect for Hoca Sadeddin, whose fame reached its height in that particular era with his Tacut-Tevarih, could lead Ni^ancizade to choose this work as the primary source of Ottoman history part. It is inferred that Ni^ancizade tried to emulate Hoca Sadeddin in language and style. For instance, he used plenty of rhymed proses in his work. The author seems to have used sentences with grammatical fragments in some parts and skipped some key points as he summarizes certain events. These flaws could be the result of occasionally overly summarization of the events narrated with style and further detail in Tacu 't-Tevarih.
Ta^koprizade's §akaik-i Numaniyye was utilized as the main source for the ulama and sheiks parts. It becomes evident that both Ni^ancizade's references and the indications within the texts when a comparative analysis is conducted.
Ni^ancizade did not clearly mention the sources he utilized for the incidents of the era of Suleyman I that were not covered in Tacut-Tevarih. While it is evident from all the direct quotations and mentions that he, for the most part, utilized Tacut-Tevarih in the first nine chapters, there is no information about precisely which sources he referred to in the chapter of Suleyman I. However, it is obvious that he more or less benefited from his grandfather Ramazanzade's Tarih-i Ni^anci for this last chapter, just as he did for other chapters.
Ara^tirma & Yayin Etigi: Bu makale, en az iki kör hakem tarafindan incelenmi^ ve iThenticate taramasiyla intihal ve < benzerlik raporu olu^turulmu^tur. Makale, ara^tirma ve yayin etigine uygundur. z
Etik Beyani & Çikar Çati^masi: Bu makalenin yazari çikar çati^masi bildiriminde bulunmami^, makalenin hazir-lanma sürecinde bilimsel ve etik kaidelere uyuldugunu ve yararlanilan tüm çali^malara atifyapildigini beyan etmi^tir.
Libre açik eri^imli bu makale, CC BY-NC 4.0 lisansina sahiptir. ^
t
Research & Publication Ethics: Two or more blind peers reviewed this article, and an iThenticate scan generated ^
a report for potential plagiarism and similarity. The article complies with research and publication ethics. £ Ethical Declaration & Conflict of Interest: The author of this article declares no conflict of interest, and the article ^ follows scientific and ethical principles and cites all the sources appropriately. This is an Libre open-access article under the CC BY-NC 4.0 license.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bafkanlik Osmanli Arfivi (Turkish Presidency, Department of Ottoman Archives, Istanbul) (BOA). D.BÇM.d, nr. 138/3.
Bursali Mehmed Tahir. OsmanliMüellifleri. Istanbul: Meral Yayinevi, 1975.
Gelibolulu Mustafa Âlî. Künhü'l-Ahbär. ed. Ali Çavufoglu, Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Yayinlari, 2019.
Genç, Vural. Idris-i Bitlisî Heft Bihift Osman Gazi Dönemi (Tahlil ve Tercüme). Istanbul: Istanbul University, Institute of Social Sciences, Master's Thesis, 2007.
Genç, Vural. Acem'den Rum'a: ldris-iBidlîsî'nin Hayati, Tarihçiligi veHeçtBehiçt'in II. BayezidKismi (1481-1512). Istanbul: Istanbul University, Institute of Social Sciences, Ph.D. Dissertation, 2014.
Hoca Sadeddin Efendi. Tâcû't-Tevârîh. Istanbul: Tabhâne-i Âmire, 1279.
Karatay, Fehmi Edhem. Topkapi Sarayi Müzesi Kütüphanesi Tûrkçe Yazmalar Katalogu. Istanbul: Topkapi Sarayi Müzesi Yayinlari, 1961.
Kâtib Çelebi. Fezleke. ed. Zeynep Aycibin. Istanbul: Çamlica Basim Yayin, 2016.
Kökoglu, Ali. Kemal Paça-zâde'nin Selim-nâmesi. Kayseri: Erciyes University, Institute of Social Sciences, Master's Thesis, 1994.
Meyan, A. Faruk. Mir'ât-i Kâinât, I-II, Istanbul: Berekât Yayinlari, 1987.
Nakipoglu, Sibel Nazlihan. Ramazan-zâde Mehmed'in Niçanci Tarihi. Kayseri: Erciyes University, Institute of Social Sciences, Master's Thesis, 1990.
Nev'îzâde Atâyî. Hadâiku'l-Hakâ'ik fî Tekmileti'ç-^akâ' ik, I-II. ed. Suat Donuk. Istanbul: Türkiye Yazma Eserler Kurumu Yayinlari, 2017.
Nifancizâde Mehmed Efendi. Mir'âtü'l-Kâinât. Berlin: Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin, Ms. or. quart. 1381.
Nifancizâde Mehmed Efendi. Mir'âm 'l-Kâinât, I-II. Egypt: Matba'at Bulaq, 1257.
Nifancizâde Mehmed Efendi. Mir'âtü'l-Kâinât, I-II. Istanbul: Tatyos Divitciyan Matbaasi, 1290.
Özcan, Abdülkadir. "Mehmed Çelebi, Ramazanzâde". Türkiye Diyanet Vakfi Islam Ansiklopedisi 28/449-450. Ankara: Türkiye Diyanet Vakfi Yayinlari, 2003.
Özcan, Tahsin. "Nifancizâde Muhyiddin Mehmed". Türkiye Diyanet Vakfi Islam Ansiklopedisi 33/161. Istanbul: Türkiye Diyanet Vakfi Yayinlari, 2007.
Özdemir, Rukiye. Ramazân-zâde'nin Târîh-i Niçânci Paça Isimli Eserinin Tahlil ve Tenkidi. Erzurum: Atatürk University, Research Institute of Turkology, Ph.D. Dissertation, 2018.
Ramazanzâde Mehmed Çelebi. Târîh-iNiçânci. Istanbul: Matbaa-i Âmire, 1290.
Tafkôpmtozâde Ahmed Efendi. eç-^akâ'iku'n-Nu'mâniyyefî Ulemâid-Devleti'l-Osmâniyye. ed. Muhammet Hekimoglu. Istanbul: Türkiye Yazma Eserler Kurumu Bafkanligi Yayinlari, 2019.
Ugur, Ahmet. The Reign of Sultân Selîm I in the Light of the Selîm-nâme Literature. Scotland: Ph.D. Dissertation, The University of Edinburgh, 1973.
Yasti, Mehmet. Niçânci Mehmed Paça Tevârîh-i Al-i Osmân (ib-i20a) Metin-Dil Özellikleri-Sözlük. Konya: Selçuk University, Institute of Social Sciences, Master's Thesis, 2005.
