“Mirrors for Princes”: The Decline Theorists^179
(“since there is no campaign”). The result is a revolt by both the soldiers, who
wish to put the grand vizier on the throne, and the townspeople (şehirli), who
kill the vizier. Subsequently, the sultan reduces the number of servants allowed
to three for the common people, 25 for the viziers, and 50 for himself (S23b–
24a, V34a–b). If the dating we propose (late sixteenth century) is correct, and
if this description is viewed as a piece of indirect political advice, it would pre-
cede the first known reference to the need to inspect and reduce the num-
bers and salaries of the kapıkulları by more than two decades (the suggestion
was first articulated in the anonymous Kitâb-ı müstetâb, c. 1620; see below,
chapter 5). But then again, this specific description might be a later addition,
since all known manuscripts are dated after the mid-seventeenth century.
One might draw a line connecting all these texts, including Ali’s, with the
Islamic millennium (1591/2), something that was seen as either an object of
eschatological fear or marking the beginning of a new era. This is how Selaniki
describes this climate:62
As for the discussions prevailing among the people on the change of
times, they were expecting for disorder and malice, saying “undoubtedly
there will be great events in the year 1000”. [But] with God’s grace and
assistance, every corner remained safe and secure.This description may seem a bit too weak to be presented as the dominant
intellectual mood of the period; however, the gloomy assessments by Ali and
Selaniki seem to corroborate this view. In Cornell H. Fleischer’s words,63
The enthusiastic proposals for practical fiscal and administrative reform
propounded by Ali in the Counsel embodied a hope that change and
deterioration could be reversed by a return to Ottoman ideals and by
strict observance of kanun in letter and spirit. In the year AH 1000 these
hopes were replaced by a nostalgia for a past that could never come again,
a golden era ... Ali’s topical and practical outlook on Ottoman affairs gave
way to a larger, more abstract view of history, a view that judged a society
by its ideals and the extent to which it fulfilled them.62 Selaniki – İpşirli 1999, 257. Cf. Fleischer 1986a, 112, 133–42, 244.
63 Fleischer 1986a, 139. For a contrast with the much more optimistic view at the turn of the
previous Islamic century, during Bayezid II’s reign, see Şen 2017, esp. 601–606.