316 chapter 7
of the state; due to the peculiarities of that stage, the campaign and the con-
sequent 1683 siege of Vienna were doomed to fail. More and more campaigns
followed, all to no avail, and more and more money and manpower were ex-
pended for no reason. What Na’ima wishes to stress here once more is the
need, in such conditions, for an interval of peace, a
time for ease and security, during which good measures would re-impose
order and prosperity ... the peasants would be at rest by the lightening of
their tax burden, the treasury would be filled again as a result of dimin-
ishing expenses, and the army would be re-organized.Finally, under the vizierate of Amcazade Köprülü Hüseyin Pasha, peace was
restored—and here Na’ima praises at length and somewhat immoderately (to
use Lewis Thomas’ words) his mentor, as well as the reisülküttab Rami Mehmed
Pasha, who conducted the negotiations at Karlowitz. Thus, somewhat abrupt-
ly, Na’ima brings his preface to an end, expressing his hope that this peace will
give the Ottoman state the opportunity to restore its order and prosperity.
4.2 Optimism Revisited: the Ulema as Destroyers of Peace
The optimism of the first preface, composed between 1699 (when the Karlowitz
treaty was signed) and 1702 (the year of Amcazade’s deposition), gives way to
a grimmer image in the second, written soon after the “Edirne event” of 1703.71
Most of the second preface is dedicated to a narrative of the revolt, one aimed
at praising the course of action followed by Ahmed III and his grand vizier (and
Na’ima’s new patron) Moralı Hasan Pasha. Na’ima describes the şeyhülislam
Feyzullah Efendi’s meteoric career and nepotistic practices and maintains
that such appointments are acceptable when granted by the sultan’s favor, but
declares this must be done moderately and with regard to dignity and merit.
Famous ulema dynasties did exist before, but they behaved with self-restraint
and frugality; the Feyzullah family, on the other hand, sought to control every
single appointment.72 Another objection, adds Na’ima, is that the şeyhülislam
has indeed
the general superintendence of the affairs of both religion and state, of
things general and particular ... and since the sultan himself trusts him in
good faith, he enjoys the trust of the dynasty.71 Na ’ima 1864–1866, 6:Appendix, 2–58; Na ’ima – İpşirli 2007, 4:1858–1892; partial transla-
tions in Thomas 1972, 42–48 and 83–89.
72 One should not forget here that it was the conflict with Feyzullah that had led Na ’ima’s
first patron, Amcazade Hüseyin Paşa, losing his position.