“Mirrors for Princes”: The Decline Theorists^151
less coherence) than Lütfi Pasha, showing a deeper knowledge of the everyday
function of the state apparatus; in fact, one might even say that here we have a
“bottom-up” approach, with the text being the work of a lower official watch-
ing developments at his own level of government. This approach may also be
seen in the variety of issues the author raises: as well as the usual problems
of sultanly justice, the army, the ulema, and peasants’ lives, we read chapters
on every possible aspect of Ottoman life, from the provisioning of Istanbul
and the duties of the muhtesib (Y102–3, 114–17, 119, 125–26) to the kitchens of
the imperial palace (Y104, 119; in both cases with the note “although insolent
[to propose], it is a good act”, eğerçi küstahlıkdur lakin sevabdur), and from
inspectors sent to the provinces (Y121–22) to architectural methods of avoiding
fires in big cities (Y122; the author proposes the use of more stone masonry,
rather than wood) and ways of making a strong impression on foreign ambas-
sadors (Y127).
A further difference from Lütfi Pasha’s model is the main feature of this
group of texts, namely its emphasis on what is going wrong in the present,
rather than on the ideal functioning of the institutions. A good example is
Hırzü’l-mülûk (“Stronghold [or, Amulet] of the kings”), an anonymous essay
(all that is known is that its author held a fief [dirlik]), it must have been com-
posed around 1574, and it was dedicated to Murad III.19 The author states that
the work is divided into eight chapters, including sections on various palace
and government officials, as well as “on Istanbul, other great cities, and the
arsenal” and “on Venice and other infidel states” (Y173, A33). However, all manu-
scripts end with chapter four (most regrettably, since otherwise we would have
one of the most comprehensive political treatises of that era).20 In its current
form, Hırzü’l-mülûk begins with a note on the importance of the post of grand
vizier, and then speaks of the kingly virtues, the properties and qualities of the
viziers, the military commanders, and the army, and the various high-ranking
19 This text was published by Yücel 1988, 171–201 and then by Akgündüz 1990–1996, 8:31–63
(both with facsimiles). See also Yılmaz 2003a, 306–307; İnan 2009, 115–116; Sariyannis
2011a, 130–131. The dating is based on two verses mentioning Sultan Murad, although
a later note at the beginning of one manuscript states that the work was offered to
Murad IV. Its editor, Yaşar Yücel, remarks that a reference to the practice of sending princ-
es to govern provinces suggests that the sultan is Murad III (further evidence for this
dating is the mention of four viziers). It seems that the treatise was presented to him as
soon as (or maybe even before) he ascended to the throne, since a whole section of the
work is dedicated to the first acts a sultan should take (Y179ff, A40ff ).
20 Furthermore, the work is divided into chapters and parts ( fasl, cüz’) with a certain incon-
sistency that shows we are dealing with something approaching a first draft. It is possible
that the division into cüz’ comes from the copying of the work on paper prepared for
another manuscript; see esp. fols 38b, 48b in the manuscript published by Yücel 1988.