The Eighteenth Century: the Traditionalists 347
Morea. After initially describing in detail the events of this revolt, to which he
was an eyewitness, he continues his treatise on the “ordering of the countries”
(nizam-ı ekâlim, B157).
The originality of both the thematic axes and the views themselves in
Penah Efendi’s work is striking; his emphasis on the economy (rather than fi-
nances) and town-planning, particularly, is almost unique in Ottoman litera-
ture. Although his treatise, just like that of Canikli, is written in a somewhat
provincial style (his efforts to write in high-flown prose often renders his text
obscure), Penah had clearly done his reading and profited from it. The use of
books printed by Müteferrika’s press is especially noteworthy (and reflected
in Penah’s high opinion of this press): apart from Na’ima’s work, he must have
read Tarih-i Hind-i Garbî el-müsemmâ bi-hadîs-i nev (“History of the West Indias
as heard from new information”, also known as Kitâb-ı cedîd-i iklîm), whence
he must have drawn his knowledge of Spanish policies in the Americas.46
In contrast to his underestimation by modern scholarship, Penah Efendi’s
work was not as isolated as it may seem to have been. For one thing, many of
his views, such as the beginning of military reform in the provinces for fear
of the janissaries, were suggested by other late eighteenth-century reformers,
as will be seen in the following chapter. Penah Efendi’s son, incidentally, was
Yusuf Agâh Efendi (d. 1824), a close collaborator of Selim III and the first per-
manent Ottoman ambassador to London (1793–96). Furthermore, reflections
of some of Penah Efendi’s ideas, such as the encouragement of local manufac-
ture in the face of imports of European and Indian garments and the revival
of İbrahim Müteferrika’s printing press, can perhaps be seen in the reforms
implemented during the vizierate of Halil Hamid Pasha (1782–85), who, how-
ever, was executed in the same year that Penah Efendi’s treatise was completed
and the author himself died. As he was şehir emini of Istanbul in roughly the
same period during which Halil Hamid Pasha was kethüda to the grand vizier
(1781) and then grand vizier himself, we cannot exclude the possibility that the
two men knew each other and had, perhaps, discussed these measures.
3.1 Traditional Forms, Reformist Content
The first remark that may be made concerning this group of authors is that
Kâtib Çelebi’s and Na’ima’s Khaldunist ideas had, by then, become standard
reading for the Ottoman literati, mainly through the printing of their works
writer was aware of ) Penah’s report but which “is not that interested in advising the au-
thorities about saving the empire”.
46 This was one of the first books published by Müteferrika’s press (1730): Sabev 2006,
192–196.