198 chapter 5
was completed around 1630–31, probably in two versions.21 As for his second
treatise, which shall be examined below, it is a sort of short introduction to
the practicalities of palace and government, written for Ibrahim I just after his
enthronement.
The similarities of Koçi Bey’s views with those of the anonymous Kitab-ı
müstetâb are obvious; he takes up all the same issues tackled by the anony-
mous author and expands them, placing distinctive emphasis on the role of
the grand vizier and on the need for long-term appointments in every rank and
career line. As a matter of fact, it is highly probable that Koçi Bey’s treatise was
merely a compilation of several distinct memoranda submitted to Murad IV, ei-
ther by himself or by a circle of middle-ranking clerks from the scribal bureau-
cracy. In 1979, Rhoads Murphey published ten such telhis (“Memoranda”) from
a copybook (mecmua) found in the Veliyuddin library, which bear numerous
textual similarities to this treatise. Of the ten of them, three form part of Koçi
Bey’s treatise. According to Murphey, the form and style of the telhis, which in
all probability were submitted to Murad IV in 1632, i.e. at the beginning of the
reorganization efforts of the young sultan, show that, in all probability, they
can be attributed to Koçi Bey. However, Douglas Howard questioned this au-
thorship as “no more than speculative”, and argued that the author of the telhis
shows a more realistic attitude against timar-holders, accepting the possibil-
ity of granting fiefs to valiant peasants or officers at retirement.22 At any rate,
these texts are to be counted as part of a prolific production of memoranda
by middle-ranking clerks, some of which were indeed read by the sultan, and
which were to become verbatim imperial orders or otherwise contributed to
Murad’s actual policy. Apart from the three memoranda included in the final
version of Koçi Bey’s treatise, i.e. those tracing the beginnings of the decline
to the reign of Süleyman, there are seven telhis that touch on various issues of
the imperial administration, echoing and echoed by previous and subsequent
texts of this genre.
treatise, re-organizing its features in order to show its internal logic, i.e. the ideal picture
of the “Golden Era” versus the conditions prevailing in the author’s time (Abou-El-Haj
2005, 101–111). On Koçi Bey’s work see also Gökbilgin 1991, 209–211; Lewis 1962, 74–78;
Murphey 1981; Murphey 2009a; Fodor 1986, 231–233; Yılmaz 2003a, 310–311; İnan 2009,
118–119.
21 Almost twenty MSS are known, some containing both treatises; three chapters were
added to almost half of them, showing that the author wrote two versions: see Murphey
1981, 1096–97, and fn. 4.
22 Murphey 1981; Howard 1988, 65–68; İnan 2009, 119. The full text from the MS Istanbul,
Bayezid Devlet Ktp., Veliyyuddin 3205 was published in Murphey 2009a.