Navigation – Plan du site
Evliyâ Çelebi et l'Europe
Le « Frengistân »

Did Evliyâ Çelebi “fall in love” with the Europeans?

Evliyâ Çelebi est-il « tombé amoureux » des Européens ?
Robert Dankoff
p. 15-26

Résumés

Quelle était l’attitude d’Evliyâ envers les Européens ou les Francs comme il les appelle ? Il se réfère toujours à eux en termes péjoratifs mais, à titre personnel, Evliyâ n’eut aucun problème à être ami avec des Européens individuellement. Cette communication montre que sur différents niveaux, religieux, politique, social, scientifique, moral et esthétique, Evliyâ apprécie en Europe l’ordre, la loi, la justice, les fortifications, les techniques horlogères, médicales, l’imprimerie, les bibliothèques... même s’il ne peut accepter le comportement des femmes ou la consommation de vin. Il n’est pas tombé amoureux des Européens, mais parfois il les a utilisés pour faire passer des critiques à ceux qu’il aimait, les Ottomans.

Haut de page

Texte intégral

1In my book An Ottoman Mentality I characterized Evliyâ’s view of Europeans in comparison with other groups, such as Turks, Jews, Iranians, etc., as follows:

  • 1 Robert Dankoff, An Ottoman Mentality: The World of Evliyâ Çelebi (Leiden: Brill, 2004; 2nd edition, (...)

Europeans are always referred to disparagingly: Fireng-i pür-reng, Fireng-i bed-reng, İfrenc-i pür-renc (tricky Franks). Yet, the overall negative judgment that these terms imply does not hinder his positive evaluation of aspects of their civilization. On the personal level, Evliyâ had no problem befriending individual Europeans. In Vienna he hobnobbed with a German physician who knew some Turkish and whom he used as an informant for phrases in German and Italian. He became so absorbed watching this physician’s treatment of a patient with dropsy that he delayed returning to the Ottomans’ quarters until the time when the gates of Vienna are closed, and when he did return in the late evening he regaled the envoy, Kara Mehmed Pasha, with the amazing operation he had just observed… Another Viennese associate was the son of Marshall De Souche, with whom he became very close friends (gayet yakın dost), and who allowed him to inspect the Habsburg munitions. He also befriended the Moscovite envoy during his travels in southern Russia, and expressed reluctance to leave him behind after returning to Azov in 1667; for which his Crimean host reproached him in the following terms: You have travelled so much in the land of the infidels that you have fallen in love with the infidels (Kâfiristanda geze geze kâfirlere mahabbet etmişsin).1

2In Evliyâ’s terminology, Kafiristan and Frengistan are more or less coterminous. We may loosely translate Kafiristan as “Christendom” and Frengistan as “Europe.” But we should keep in mind that Kafiristan would not include the Christian populations of the Ottoman Empire, nor would Frengistan include what today we call Eastern Europe. So did Evliyâ “fall in love” with the kâfirs, meaning in particular the Europeans? More generally we may ask: What was Evliyâ’s attitude toward the Europeans, or the Franks as he calls them? To answer this, I will analyze his judgments on various levels: religious, political, social, technological and scientific, moral, and aesthetic.

Religious level

3The designation of Europeans as kâfir encapsulates Evliyâ’s religious attitude, a prejudgment, no doubt typical of Ottoman attitudes, as people on the other side, who hold mistaken beliefs and who are worthy objects of warfare considered as gazâ or jihad. While this underlying sentiment is clearly present, it is not held in a doctrinaire fashion. So, for example, while he readily assimilates icons and statues in churches to “idols”, he also is at pains to record conversations with priests where he takes an ironic stance, even mocking his own prejudice, as in the Stephansdom in Vienna:

There are so many statues and icons in this church, images of the sons of Adam, and so many idols — I had not seen so many since the conquest of Uyvar when I toured the great cathedrals of Poland, Czechia, Sweden, Hungary, Dunkerque, and the port of Danzig. I was on good terms with several priests and, partly as polemic, partly in jest, I said:

‘How many gods you have — God forbid! — that whenever you pass by one of them, you remove your hats and bow down and worship.’

  • 2 VII 60b; translation in An Ottoman Traveller: Selections from the Book of Travels of Evliyâ Çelebi (...)

‘God forbid,’ they replied, ‘that we should consider them gods. The sole Creator of you and of us is God, the Holy Spirit. God forbid that we should bow down and worship these images, or that we should pray to them for sons and daughters, blessings and worldly fortune and long life. They are only images of our prophet Jesus and his disciples, of our saints who came afterward and our monarchs who were world conquerors and pious endowers of good works. Whenever we behold these images, we respectfully offer our benedictions. Most of all, we show reverence to the prophet Jesus, because he is the Spirit of God [Rûhullâh, a designation of Jesus, based on Koran 4:171 a spirit from Him]. In our religion, it is permitted to make images. When our priests harangue the people, just as your sheikhs do, they have difficulty conveying their message with fine words alone. So we convey the message through images of the prophets and saints and paradise, depictions of divine glory. And we show hell with demons, flaming fire and boiling water, depictions of divine wrath. When our priests give sermons, they point to these images saying, ‘Fear God!’ But we do not worship them in any way.’2

4Evliyâ expresses his admiration for the artistry in these images, as in the architecture of the cathedral, in hyperbolic terms. He goes so far as to suggest divine inspiration, when he speaks of

  • 3 Ibid.

a jeweled gallery reserved for kings, the work of a German master who truly demonstrated his skill. The master architects of old expended their best efforts and the master builders executed their finest work on this gallery and on this highly wrought church. No ancient architect on the face of the earth produced such a masterpiece. Only the Eternal Master (üstâd‑ı ezel, i.e. God) could inspire such a marvelous work.3

Political level

5On the political level, the Franks — more precisely, the Habsburg and the Venetians — are enemies of the Ottomans. Evliyâ depicts himself as fully engaged in combatting them, most prominently in the battle on the Raab (battle of St. Gotthard) and in the siege of Candia, as well as participating in diplomatic missions. In Dubrovnik / Ragusa he expresses his suspicions of Frankish wiliness (as opposed to Ottoman straightforwardness):

  • 4 VI 151a; translation in An Ottoman Traveller, 205-06.

Despite the fact that they have renewed their treaty with the Ottomans every year since Orhan Gazi, still they are like the great plague under the wing of the Ottoman state, damnable swine who maintain the pretense of truth but whose satanic machinations infect all the infidels. To be specific: it is these Dubrovnik infidels who have led astray those of the great Bundukani Venedik — the Venetians, who are now our enemy — and secretly supply them with grain. They are the wealthiest of all the infidel kings, but make a show of poverty and humility in order to protect their state, and craftily maintain peaceful relations with all other rulers.4

  • 5 VI 152b-153a; translation in An Ottoman Traveller, 211-12.
  • 6 See An Ottoman Mentality, 58, 101 (IV 303a: the Ottomans are plain and simple folk who know nothing (...)
  • 7 Cf. VII 68b where Evliyâ insists that the Ottoman envoys to the Habsburgs must be open-handed and p (...)

6Having got this off his chest, he goes on to praise the courtesy and kindness they showed the Ottoman envoys. And he relates a hilarious incident about Abaza Pasha’s antics that hardly reflects well on Ottoman diplomatic practice.5 As for Ottoman straightforwardness, or naïveté, in contrast to the crafty Europeans — this is a theme that Evliyâ sounds in contrast to Persian trickiness as well,6 so we can extrapolate that his arrière-pensée is to warn Ottoman diplomats to be as cagey as their enemies.7

Social level

7Law and order (zabt u rabt) is what Evliyâ misses at home and admires, say, in Vienna:

  • 8 VII 64a: Ve bu şehrin cümle şey’i memdûh [u] meşhûrdur, ammâ hezâr ahsend pesend cümle hukemâ ve ce (...)

Everything in this city is praiseworthy, but especially noteworthy are all the physicians and surgeons, phlebotomists and oculists, painters and watchmakers, musket manufacturers and lathe turners; the cleanliness of the streets; the law and order maintained by the magistrates; the uniformity of scales and the honesty of merchants in the marketplace; the practice of justice and the fact that the subjects of the realm live in tranquility and are not subject to oppression…. The people live amicably among themselves and are hospitable to strangers. And all their provinces enjoy security — God bless them! Such security and practice of justice cannot be found in the lands of Islam.8

8By “lands of Islam” Evliyâ means the Ottoman Empire, since he has a very similar positive judgment about Safavid Iran:

  • 9 II 298b: Bu mezkûr ağavâtlar ile şehr‑i Tebrîz’i zabt u rabt edüp eyle adl [ü] adâletleri var kim g (...)

With such officers they maintain law and order in Tebriz, exercising justice like that of Anushirvan [referring to the 6th-century Sassanian king, proverbial for his just rule], such that no one can lay a hand on even a mustard seed of anyone else…. But let me express my boundless admiration for the justice of his [the Safavid governor’s] administration, the safety and security of the city, his fostering care for his subjects, the law and order, the cleanliness of the marketplaces, the schedule of fixed prices of Sheikh Safi [referring to the eponymous founder of the Safavids, Safi al-Din Ardabili, d. 1334] and the prevailing orderliness.9

9These contrast with his judgment of prevailing conditions among the Ottomans:

  • 10 III 173b: Ammâ nitekim Anatolu’da İpşir Paşa ve Seydî Ahmed Paşa ve Tayyâroğlu Ahmed Paşa ve Mirzâ (...)

In Anatolia, Celali rebels and outlaws and irregulars — such as İpşir Paşa and Seydî Ahmed Paşa and Tayyâroğlu Ahmed Paşa and Mirzâ Paşa and Kara Hasan Paşa — ravage the countryside and destroy the subjects of the realm. As long as they are ruining the provinces, no vizier is able to exercise authority, practice law and order and justice, and exact tax revenue.10

10So we can say that Evliyâ’s admiration of law and order in Europe, as in Iran, is a vehicle for his critique of the Ottoman Empire. The same holds true for other positive things he says about Europe, such as his remarks about currency. In chapter 3 of my book, An Ottoman Mentality, which deals with Evliyâ’s “Ottomanness,” I wrote:

In general, Evliyâ bemoans the poor condition of the Islamic regions (İslam diyarı) compared to Christendom (Kafiristan). Describing the Venetian gold ducats circulating in Split in 1660, he remarks:

“In the period of Sultan Ahmed [I, reg. 1603-17] I saw many of these in my father’s possession. But these days we never see them — even viziers don’t have them. We get by with pennies and coppers weighing ten a dram. God grant us blessings! What has happened to our zeal for Islam? We have to get our currency into good order!”

11Struck by the huge crowds gathered at Christmas time in Kaschau / Kosice (Slovakia) Evliyâ marvels at God’s ways, wondering why He fosters the infidels. On Chios in 1671 he says that he has described the flourishing condition of the churches only as an admonition to the Muslims; and he blames the ulema in particular for devouring the vakıf endowments. More than once, with a note of bitterness, he contrasts the care of Christians for their churches and other institutions with the neglect and ruin under the Ottomans. He complains about the neglect of books in the

  • 11 An Ottoman Mentality, 113-14. “We have to get our currency into good order!”: V 150a Sikke tas[h]îh (...)

Attarin mosque in Alexandria, which he visited in 1672, in contrast with the care of books in St. Stephen’s cathedral in Vienna, which he visited in 1665. In Bethlehem Evliyâ admires the jewels preserved by the Christians in the Prophet’s shrine, and again criticizes the Muslims for being so careless with their endowments. Of St. Catherine’s monastery at Mt. Sinai he remarks: “It has remained in the hands of the Christians. Were it in the possession of Islam, it would be in ruins”.11

Technological and scientific level

Military matters

  • 12 IV 288a: Hakkâ ki kal‘a beklemek Acem’e kalmışdır, kal‘a binâ etmek Fireng-i bed-renge kalmışdır.
  • 13 See An Ottoman Mentality, 95.
  • 14 VII 18a-22b; translation in An Ottoman Traveller, 222-30.

12 Evliyâ openly admires non-Ottoman fortifications, saying that the Europeans take the palm in construction, while the Persians are superior in defense;12 and he is at pains to absolve the Ottomans of blame for their perceived shortcomings in this area.13 Other than this, I do not recall any passage in which he considers the Ottomans inferior to the Europeans in any military capacity — artillery, siege warfare, etc. Such defeats as the Ottomans suffer — as at the battle on the Raab (battle of St. Gotthard)14 — he attributes to poor planning.

  • Clockwork mechanisms – Evliyâ has a long disquisition on these marvels as he perceived them in Vienna. It begins with an overview of the marketplace:

  • 15 VII 57b: Sâ‘atçiler ve kuyumcular ve kitâb basmacılar ve berberler ve derzilerin çârsûları eyle müz (...)

The watchmakers, goldsmiths, book-printers, barbers and tailors have shops that are decked out like Chinese picture galleries. And the shops are unequaled in the operation of wonderful objects and strange instruments. Alarm clocks, clocks marking prayer times, or the month and day, or the signs of the zodiac, clocks on a monthly or daily calendar, chiming wall clocks — all are functioning. And they make clocks in the form of various creatures, with moving eyes, hands, and feet, so the viewer thinks those animals are alive; whereas the master clockmakers made them move with wheel mechanisms. Whatever mills there are in the city, not a single one is turned by a horse or an ox or a man. The mills — and the kebab skewers, the buckets of water drawn from the wells, even the carriages traveling in the countryside — are all set in motion with devious and devilish clockwork mechanisms, not with a horse or an ox. They are marvelous contrivances.15

  • 16 VII 58b-59a; translation in An Ottoman Traveller, 234.

13And it culminates with the hilarious account of Evliyâ mistaking effigies of Turkish prisoners pounding medicaments for real people.16

    • 17 VII 61a-63b; partial translation in An Ottoman Traveller, 242-47.

    Medicine — Evliyâ greatly admires the hospitals of Vienna, and in particular the advanced surgical techniques that he witnessed.17 About Dubrovnik he states:

  • 18 VI 156a: Ve hukemâları meşhûrdur, ammâ Fireng uyuzuna aslâ dâ-i devâ bulamayup hemân kıllet üzre ta (...)

Their physicians are famous. They have not, however, found a cure for the French itch (i.e., syphilis). The only treatment they have found for it is diet and eating little. God save us, all the infidels of Frengistan suffer from the French itch, and that is why it is famous.18

    • 19 VI 151a; translation in An Ottoman Traveller, 205.

    Printing — Evliyâ is aware of the scholarly standards that were due to printing, remarking about the Latin chronicles that they “are the most reliable and authoritative. In fact, when a chronicler writes a history, it is first examined by an ecclesiastical board to make sure that it contains no errors or exaggerations. Only after it has been approved by the board, and the Twelve Bans have given their imprimatur, can it be printed.”19 And he admires the printed books in the Stephansdom in Vienna, contrasting their quality and condition with those in Ottoman libraries. He writes:

The walls of the cupboards have niches plastered with raw ambergris and housing copies of the Gospel, the Torah, the Psalms, and the Koran. Important books by various authors in every language of the world are found here. There are hundreds of thousands of bound books, with special priests appointed for their care. It is a great library that has to be seen. There is no such collection of books anywhere in the world, except in Cairo at the mosques of Sultan Barquq and Sultan Faraj, and in Istanbul at the mosque of Mehmed the Conqueror, the Süleymaniye, the mosque of Bayezid the Saint, and the New Mosque (mosque of Valide Sultan). God only knows the number of books in those mosques. But the number is greater in this Stephan monastery in Vienna, since there are numerous illustrated books in the infidel script of every language, including anatomical texts and cosmographies with the titles Atlas, Minor, Geography, and Mappa Mundi. Our libraries, on the other hand, have none of these illustrated books, since “Pictures are unlawful.” That is why there are so many books in the Stephan Monastery. When this humble one had a tour of it, with the permission of the head priest, I was lost in astonishment, and the fragrance of musk and pure ambergris suffused my brain.

  • 20 VII 59b; translation in An Ottoman Traveller, 236-37.

Now, my dear, the import of this long disquisition is the following: These infidels, in their own infidel manner, consider these books the word of God. They have seventy or eighty servants who sweep the library and dust off the books once a week. In our Alexandria, on the other hand, there is a great mosque known as the Perfumers’ mosque supported by many pious foundations including hundreds of shops, hans, baths and storerooms; but the mosque itself lies in ruin, and its library that houses thousands of important volumes — including priceless Korans calligraphed by Yaqut Musta‘sımi, Abdullah Kırımi, Şemsullah Gamravi and Sheikh Cuşi — is rotting because of the rain. Worshippers who come to this mosque once a week for Friday prayers can hear the moths and worms and mice gnawing at the Korans. No one from the Community of Muhammad stands up and says, “These Korans are being destroyed, let’s do something about it.” That won’t happen, because they do not love the word of God as much as the infidels do. I only wish that God make that mosque as prosperous as this church, and that its servants and governors regard that abandoned mosque with the eye of compassion.20

Moral

  • 21 Ayıp değil! (No Disgrace!). Journal of Turkish Literature 5 (2008), 77-90 [Turkish translation as “ (...)

14Evliyâ takes a dim view of Europeans’ morals. But he is careful not to condemn them outright. Here are some examples, drawn from my study of what he regarded as shameful behavior (ayıp) and what he excused on the grounds that those involved do not regard it as shameful (ayıp değil):21

  • 22 VII 71a25: Bu diyârda ve gayri kâfiristânda söz avretin olup Meryem Ana aşkına avrete ta‘zîm ü tekr (...)

… As to the attitude of European men toward the opposite sex, he was astounded that the Hapsburg emperor should stand aside to let a woman pass, or doff his hat if a woman addressed him. This high regard toward women he considered a marvel (garîb ü acîb). In this land, he writes, and throughout Christendom women are in charge; and he attributes this to the people’s reverence for the Virgin Mary.22

  • 23 V 162b18: cemî‘i dükkânlarında kızlar oturup her biri birer mâh-cibîn ve peri-peyker ve melek-manza (...)
  • 24 VII 51a22: erleri ve avretleri birbirlerinden kaçmayup bizim Osmânlı ile avretleri bir yerde oturup (...)

15… Evliyâ never ceased to be amazed at Europeans’ attitude toward women. In Ligradçık, also Dubrovnik and Gingösh and in Muscovy, girls sit in the marketplace and sell their wares with no stigma attached.23 In Peshpehil [Schwehat near Vienna] men and women do not flee from each other, he notes, and women may go outdoors without their husbands’ permission, and even sit and chat and drink “with us Ottomans,” and none of this is considered shameful. Here again he gives as the reason that throughout Christendom women are in charge, and they have behaved in this disreputable fashion ever since the time of the Virgin Mary.24

16… In yet another mission, Evliyâ is charged with ransoming an Ottoman officer being held captive by the Ban of Herzegovina. Before crossing the border, Evliyâ addresses the men in his retinue:

“See here, ghazis! The territory we are about to enter, under a truce, is the land of the infidels, where wine, women and boys are permitted. If I find any of you with a woman or a boy, or befuddled with wine or rakı, I will cook your goose and beat you black and blue. Is that understood?”

“God please you,” they replied, “none of us would do a thing like that.”

  • 25 V 161a16: “Bak a gâzîler, bu varacağımız sulh [u] salâh üzre kâfir diyârıdır ve şarâbı ve avratı ve (...)

“Well, we have all been suckled on raw milk. A father cannot really vouch for his son, or a son for his father. It’s the way of the world. We have come this far with so much money and goods. Let us just ransom that ghazi, according to our sultan’s command, and then take our leave. If you do something shameful, the infidel may take it as a pretext not to release the captain; if he is a gentleman he will drive us out, and if he is not he will kill us.25

17Here Evliyâ appeals to the norm in the Ottoman realm where wine, women and boys are shameful (ayıb), as opposed to Europe where they are permitted (mübâh). As Ottoman representatives his men have to behave like proper Ottomans and not be tempted by European vices just because they have crossed the border. The reason he gives, however, is not to safeguard their morality, but to safeguard the mission!

18… Evliyâ marvels at the strange customs in Ergirikasri (Gjirokastër, Albania), such as mourning for long-dead relatives; but he excuses them by saying that every country has its own rites and traditions. He goes on:

  • 26 VIII 355a14 – 355b5: elbette her diyâr halkının birer gûne âyîn‑i kadîmleri vardırDiğer âyîn‑i b (...)

19They have another bad habit. In weddings, on festival days of St George, Nevruz, St. Demetrius, and St. Nicholas, and on the two feasts of Bairam, they put on their finery and drink alcoholic beverages. Lovers go hand in hand with their pretty boys and embrace them and dance about in the manner of the Christians. This is a wicked practice, being a rite of the infidels; but it is their custom, so we cannot censure it.26

“We cannot censure it” is literally “we cannot say it is ayıb” — in other words, ayıb değil! No passage in the Seyahatnâme is more revealing of Evliyâ’s attitude toward such customs.

Aesthetic

  • 27 E.g., V 106a Jassi: Fireng-pesend hurde nakş‑ı sihr-âsârlar.
  • 28 Sometimes specified by Fireng-i Mânî, as VI 15a Kaschau: bu cennet ve cehnnem ve mîzân ve sırât tas (...)
  • 29 VII 4b-5a: Krokondar: bu havz‑ı azîmin etrâfında ... gûnâ-gûn Freng-pesend mukarnazlı maksûreler ve (...)
  • 30 VI 93b Esztergom: Ve bu kapudan içeri hınto arabalar girüp çıkarlar, zîrâ vâsi‘ yolları cümle Firen (...)
  • 31 X 267a Cairo: bir Freng-pesend bir kâr-ı bî-mânend musanna‘ cibinlik.

20The term freng-pesend designates fine artistry in a vaguely understood European style. It may designate architectural decoration,27 statuary, painting,28 pools and fountains and jets,29 roads, mills, etc.30 or a cenotaph cover.31

  • 32 Cf. VIII 252a Athens: sâfî halkârî Bursavî Fahrî Çelebi oyması gibi hayâl‑i Freng-pesend oymalı tav (...)
  • 33 VIII 337a Zarnata: “Evliyâ Efendi, bu kal‘anın fethi ve imâreti müjdesiyle seni der‑i devlete kal‘a (...)

21It is unclear whether freng-pesend has a specific meaning different from hayâl-pesend and ahsend-pesend.32 At one point Evliyâ claims that he made a multicolored drawing of a newly-conquered castle on four-fold Istanbul paper in European style, which was greatly admired.33

  • 34 Such as sade güzeli, studied in An Ottoman Mentality, 53-54.

22Freng-pesend has to be studied together with other terms in Evliyâ’s vocabulary of aesthetic judgments34 before we may conclude whether he “fell in love” with European artistic practices. My impression is that he appreciated them — even to the point of attributing divine inspiration in at least one case, as we saw above — but that he was no less appreciative of other, and in particular of Ottoman, styles.

23In conclusion, we may say that while Evliyâ had a genuine appreciation of many aspects of European civilization, and even had some European friends, he did not “fall in love” with them. Rather he treated the Europeans — as he did the Iranians — as a sounding board by which he could pass judgments on those he was in love with, namely the Ottomans

Haut de page

Notes

1 Robert Dankoff, An Ottoman Mentality: The World of Evliyâ Çelebi (Leiden: Brill, 2004; 2nd edition, 2006), 64-65. Operation: VII 62b-63a. “Very close friends”: VII 69b15. “Fallen in love with the infidels”: VII 187b2.
References to Volumes 1-8 of the
Seyahatnâme are to the autograph ms. as follows:
Ba
ğdat 304 Volumes 1 and 2
Ba
ğdat 305 Volumes 3 and 4
Ba
ğdat 307 Volume 5
Revan 1457 Volume 6
Ba
ğdat 308 Volumes 7 and 8
References to Volumes 9-10 are to:
Ba
ğdat 306 Volume 9
İÜTY 5973, Volume 10.These references can be traced in the YKY edition, ed. Yücel Dağlı et. al.

2 VII 60b; translation in An Ottoman Traveller: Selections from the Book of Travels of Evliyâ Çelebi (London: Eland, 2010), 240-41.

3 Ibid.

4 VI 151a; translation in An Ottoman Traveller, 205-06.

5 VI 152b-153a; translation in An Ottoman Traveller, 211-12.

6 See An Ottoman Mentality, 58, 101 (IV 303a: the Ottomans are plain and simple folk who know nothing of tricks and ruses [Âl-i Osmân oğuz tayfa ve mankaladır … hîle ve hud‘a nedir bilmez]).

7 Cf. VII 68b where Evliyâ insists that the Ottoman envoys to the Habsburgs must be open-handed and pious men who inspire respect; otherwise the Europeans, who are very wily and deceitful, will make them dance like monkeys: elçi paşalara cümleden elzem‑i levâzımından olan bu diyârda sahî ve sâhib‑i kerem ve halûk ve havsalalı olup ırz‑ı pâdişâhı ve gayret‑i dîn‑i mübîni gözedir âdem gerekdir. El-ıyâzan billâh eğer elçi bir hasîs ve le’îm ü denî ve lecûc ve fâsık u sefîh âdem olursa aslâ rağbet ü izzet etmeyüp aslâ sözüne amel ü i‘tibâr etmeyüp maymûn gibi oynadırlar, zîrâ bu diyârın küffârı eyle nakkâş ve fassâl ve zemmâm ü nemmâm ü dahhâldirler kim bir âdemin reviş‑i cünbüş [ü] harekât [u] sekenâtından ne mâhiyyet ve keyfiyyetde olduğın bilüp ana göre amel ederler.

8 VII 64a: Ve bu şehrin cümle şey’i memdûh [u] meşhûrdur, ammâ hezâr ahsend pesend cümle hukemâ ve cerrâh u fassâd u kehhâl u nakkâş ve sâ‘atçi ve tüfengci ve çıkrıkçı ve sokaklarının pâkliğine ve hâkimlerinin zabt u rabtlarına ve bey‘ [u] şirâlarında mîzân u terâzûda hılâf etmeyüp kizb söylemediklerine ve adl‑ı adâletlerine ve re‘âyâ vü berâyâlarının âsûde-hâl üzre olup zulm etmediklerine ... ve cümle halkının herkes ile hüsn‑i ülfet edüp garîb-dost olup dil-nüvâzlıklarına ve vilâyetleri cümle her şeyden emn ü emân olduğuna sad bârekallâh aşk olsun kim İslâm diyârında böyle emn ü emân ve adl‑i adâlet yokdur.

9 II 298b: Bu mezkûr ağavâtlar ile şehr‑i Tebrîz’i zabt u rabt edüp eyle adl [ü] adâletleri var kim gûyâ adl-i Enûşirvân‑ı Kisrâdır, bir ferd‑i âferîde bir merdin dâne‑i hardalına va‘z‑ı yed etmeğe kâdir değildir; 302a Ammâ adl-i adâlet ve emn [u] emânlarına ve re‘âyâ vü berâyâ perver olmalarına ve zabt u rabt ve çârsû-yı bâzârının pâklığına ve narh‑ı Şeyh Safî’lerinin nizâm [u] intizâmlarına aşk‑ı sad-lek aşk olsun (translation in An Ottoman Traveller, 63).

10 III 173b: Ammâ nitekim Anatolu’da İpşir Paşa ve Seydî Ahmed Paşa ve Tayyâroğlu Ahmed Paşa ve Mirzâ Paşa ve Kara Hasan Paşa ve sâ’ir aşkıyâ ve celâlî vü cemâlîler ve zorba zorba sekbân u sarıca haşerâtları köğden köğe tavuk kırup lokmacılık edüp niçe bin ibâdullâhı müte’ezzî edüp ehl [ü] ıyâl‑ı re‘âya vü berâyâ pâymâl‑i rimâl olup eli vilâyeti anlar harâb u yebâb ederlerken bir vezîrin mühre mâlik olup zabt u rabt edüp adl [u] adâlet edüp tahsîl‑i mâl edemez.

11 An Ottoman Mentality, 113-14. “We have to get our currency into good order!”: V 150a Sikke tas[h]îh olup zabt u rabt gerek idi. The other references are as follows: Kaschau: VI 14b28; Chios: IX 60b27; Vienna: VII 59b17; Bethlehem: IX 226b26; Mt. Sinai: IX 380b27.

12 IV 288a: Hakkâ ki kal‘a beklemek Acem’e kalmışdır, kal‘a binâ etmek Fireng-i bed-renge kalmışdır.

13 See An Ottoman Mentality, 95.

14 VII 18a-22b; translation in An Ottoman Traveller, 222-30.

15 VII 57b: Sâ‘atçiler ve kuyumcular ve kitâb basmacılar ve berberler ve derzilerin çârsûları eyle müzeyyendir kim gûyâ nakş‑ı nigârhâne‑i çîndir ve dahi sınâ‘ât‑ı acîbe ve âlât‑ı garîbe işlemede bî-nazîr esvâklardır. Ve münebbihli ve mîkât ve ay ve günlü ve ebrâclı ve mâhiyyeli ve rûznâmeli asma çalar sâ‘atler işlenir. Ve cemî‘i ecnâs‑ı mahlûkâtın tasvîrâtlarıyla gûnâ-gûn sâ‘at inşâ ederler kim gözleri ve elleri ve ayakları hareket edüp gören âdem ol hayvânları hayâtda zann edüp eyle hareket eder. Anı ise üstâd‑ı kâmiller çarhlar ile hareket etdirüp sâ‘at etmişdir. Ve cümle şehr içre ne kadar değirmenler var ise ne at ve ne sığır ve ne âdem çevirir değirmenleri ve kebâb şişlerin ve kuyulardan kovalar ile sular çekmeği ve sahrâlarında gezen arabaları atsız ve sığırsız cümle hıyel u şeytanat ve musanna‘ sâ‘at çarhlarıyla hareket eder değirmenler ve kebâb çarhları ve kuyuların dollâbları ibret-eser arabalardır (translation in An Ottoman Traveller, 232).

16 VII 58b-59a; translation in An Ottoman Traveller, 234.

17 VII 61a-63b; partial translation in An Ottoman Traveller, 242-47.

18 VI 156a: Ve hukemâları meşhûrdur, ammâ Fireng uyuzuna aslâ dâ-i devâ bulamayup hemân kıllet üzre ta‘âm yedirüp perhîzden gayri mu‘âlece bulamayup cümle Firengistân kefereleri Fireng uyuzuna mübtelâlardır. Allâhümme âfinâ. Anıniçün Fireng uyuzu meşhûrdur.

19 VI 151a; translation in An Ottoman Traveller, 205.

20 VII 59b; translation in An Ottoman Traveller, 236-37.

21 Ayıp değil! (No Disgrace!). Journal of Turkish Literature 5 (2008), 77-90 [Turkish translation as “Ayıp Değil!” in Nuran Tezcan, ed. Çağının Sıradışı Yazarı Evliyâ Çelebi (Istanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları, 2009), 109-22]

22 VII 71a25: Bu diyârda ve gayri kâfiristânda söz avretin olup Meryem Ana aşkına avrete ta‘zîm ü tekrîm ederler.

23 V 162b18: cemî‘i dükkânlarında kızlar oturup her biri birer mâh-cibîn ve peri-peyker ve melek-manzarlar metâ‘ların âşikâr fürûht ederler, anlarda metâ‘ satmak ayıb değildir; VI 152b19 bâzâr-ı hüsnde metâ‘ların satan avretler ve bâkire mahbûbe kızlar metâ‘ların âşikâre satarlar, bu kâfiristânda ayıb değildir; VII 40b3: pençe‑i âfitâb kızlar ve kâlîme avretler dükkânlarda oturup metâ‘ların âşikâre fürûht ederler, aslâ ayıb değildir; VII 174a23: dükkânlarında avretler oturup her ne metâ‘ları var ise fürûht ederler, ayıb değildir.

24 VII 51a22: erleri ve avretleri birbirlerinden kaçmayup bizim Osmânlı ile avretleri bir yerde oturup ayş [u] ışret etdükde kocası bir şey demeyüp kapudan taşra gider, ayıb değildir, zîrâ bu Kâfiristânın cümlesinde hüküm avretindir, tâ Meryem Anadan berü âyîn-i bedleri böyle olagelmişdir.

25 V 161a16: “Bak a gâzîler, bu varacağımız sulh [u] salâh üzre kâfir diyârıdır ve şarâbı ve avratı ve oğlanı mübâhdır. Eğer birinizi avrat oğlanda ve şarâb ve rakıda kızarmış bozarmış ammâ pişmemiş bulursam sizi döğe döğe bişiririm ve karnınızı şişiririm. Buna ka’il misiz?” Cümlesi, “Allâh senden râzî ola, bizde eyle âdem yok­dur” dediler. “Bire benî Âdem çiğ süd emmişdir. Baba oğulun, oğul babanın keyfiyyet‑i hâllerine muttali‘ olama[m]ışlar. Ahvâl‑i dünyâ böyledir. Şu kadar mâl‑ı hazîne ile geldik. Şu gâzî yiğidi pâdişâhımızın fer­mânı üzre halâs ede, sonra gidelim. Eğer bir ayıb ederseniz kâfir, kapudanı vermemeğe bahâne edüp mâlı da alıkor. Bizim cümlemizi mürüvvet ederse kovar, mürüvvet ve kerem etmezse cümlemizi kırar.” Cf. An Ottoman Mentality, 130.

26 VIII 355a14 – 355b5: elbette her diyâr halkının birer gûne âyîn‑i kadîmleri vardırDiğer âyîn‑i bed-kâr‑ı kavm‑i Ergiri: bunlar düğünlerde ve rûz‑ı Hızır’da ve nevrûz‑ı Hârezmşâ­hîde ve Kâsım günlerinde ve Sarı Saltık günlerinde ve ıydeynlerde cümle zer-ender-zere müstağrak olup la‘l-gûn bâdeleri nûş edüp cemî‘i pençe‑i âfitâb dilberânlar ile âşıkları el ele verüp âyîn‑i kâfir gibi kuç kucağ olup horos depüp kuşak kuşağa yapışup hora depme semâ‘ı ederler; bu dahi bir bed-sünnetdir kim âyîn-i ke[fe]redir, ammâ böyle göre gelmişler, bunı dahi ayıblamazız. Cf. An Ottoman Mentality, 72-73.

27 E.g., V 106a Jassi: Fireng-pesend hurde nakş‑ı sihr-âsârlar.

28 Sometimes specified by Fireng-i Mânî, as VI 15a Kaschau: bu cennet ve cehnnem ve mîzân ve sırât tasvîrlerin üstâd-ı nakkâş eyle tahrîr ve tasavvur etmiş kim gûyâ sihr-i i‘câz Fireng-pesend nakş-ı Fireng-i Mânî etmişler; VII 61a: Veyl deresi ve Sakar yokuşu ve Tamu deresi ve Siccîn deresi ve Sa‘îr beli ve gayri gûnâ-gûn cehennem derecelerin üstâd nakkaş‑ı Freng-pesend bir nakş‑ı Freng‑i Mânî etmiş kim....

29 VII 4b-5a: Krokondar: bu havz‑ı azîmin etrâfında ... gûnâ-gûn Freng-pesend mukarnazlı maksûreler ve selsebîl ve fıskiyye ve fevvâreli kâh‑ı müzehhebler ...; IX 54a Chios: Freng-pesend havz u fevvâreler.

30 VI 93b Esztergom: Ve bu kapudan içeri hınto arabalar girüp çıkarlar, zîrâ vâsi‘ yolları cümle Firengî-pesend kaldırım döşelidir; VIII 228b Salonika: musanna‘ Freng-pesend çarhlar.

31 X 267a Cairo: bir Freng-pesend bir kâr-ı bî-mânend musanna‘ cibinlik.

32 Cf. VIII 252a Athens: sâfî halkârî Bursavî Fahrî Çelebi oyması gibi hayâl‑i Freng-pesend oymalı tavan; 313a Candia: zıhlar ve girihler ve islimîler ve kat-ender-kat hurdegîr ve musanna‘ Freng-pesend hayâl‑fikr mermer-bürlük ma‘rifetle­ri.

33 VIII 337a Zarnata: “Evliyâ Efendi, bu kal‘anın fethi ve imâreti müjdesiyle seni der‑i devlete kal‘a miftâhlarıyla gönderirim. Tiz bu kal‘anın hey’et‑i eşkâli tasvîrin cümle der‑i dîvârları ve dervezeleri ve tabyaları ve içinde amâr olan hânedânlarından câmi ve mesâcid ve tekyeler ve hân ve medrese ve mektebleri ile dörd tabaka İslâmbo[l] kâğıdına kal‘anın sûretin tahrîr eyle” dedikde hakîr bir hafta içinde cümle minvâl‑i meşrûh üzre elvân boyalarla bir Freng-pesend kal‘a tahrîr etdiğim Hunkâr câmi‘ini gören ve sâ’ir hayâl-pesend amâristânların gören engüşt ber-dehen etdiler.

34 Such as sade güzeli, studied in An Ottoman Mentality, 53-54.

Haut de page

Pour citer cet article

Référence papier

Robert Dankoff, « Did Evliyâ Çelebi “fall in love” with the Europeans? », Cahiers balkaniques, 41 | -1, 15-26.

Référence électronique

Robert Dankoff, « Did Evliyâ Çelebi “fall in love” with the Europeans? », Cahiers balkaniques [En ligne], 41 | 2013, mis en ligne le 19 mai 2013, consulté le 18 décembre 2017. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/ceb/4002 ; DOI : 10.4000/ceb.4002

Haut de page

Auteur

Robert Dankoff

Professeur

Université de Chicago

Haut de page