24 Introduction
attitudes against which subsequent authors reacted. First, the basis of the
Ottoman legal synthesis will be studied, with a focus on the work of the juris-
consult Ebussu’ud, who managed to reconcile the sultanly law with the sharia
by expressing the former (especially in matters deemed of high importance,
such as landholding) in terms of the latter. This endeavor was (somewhat
unexpectedly) facilitated by the Ottoman reception of Ibn Taymiyya’s work,
traditionally considered the root of all fundamentalism. After that, the chap-
ter will deal with what remained of the Iranian tradition, now in a more con-
crete and less theoretical form, often with strong religious and even messianic
overtones. Although Kınalızade also belongs to this period, the main model for
political writers at the time was Kâshifi’s (rather than Davvani’s) populariza-
tion of Tusi’s system, which gave more weight to adab (concrete ethical and
political advice) rather than ahlak (philosophical theory); this was expressed
primarily by Celalzade Mustafa (d. 1567), Süleyman’s chief counsellor. A special
section will also be devoted to Lütfi Pasha (d. 1563) and his Âsafnâme, which
marks the beginning of the Ottoman “mirror for princes” genre, with its stress
on concrete advice and institutions rather than personal qualities, as well as
being based on experience rather than authority. After a section highlighting
new methods of sultanly legitimacy, showing how the idea of the Ottoman
caliphate made its appearance after Selim I’s reign, the rest of the chapter stud-
ies the reactions to the imperial vision and especially the ulema’s opposition
to the “Süleymanic synthesis”. Following Şehzade Korkud (d. 1513), the unfortu-
nate son of Bayezid II, and his views on the incompatibility of political power
with true piety, we will study the fierce reaction to Ebussu’ud’s efforts to legiti-
mize “secular” law, primarily those of his predecessor Çivizade Efendi (d. 1542)
and, of course, Birgivi Mehmed Efendi (d. 1573), whose immensely influential
work was later conceived as the origin of seventeenth-century “fundamental-
ist” preaching.
The fourth chapter will examine the “decline” paradigm, i.e. the way in which
Ottoman authors perceived the great social, political, and military crisis of the
late sixteenth century. The recent discussion on the legitimacy of the term
“decline” notwithstanding, it is interesting that this paradigm was first initiated
by Ottoman thinkers themselves. Late sixteenth-century authors, however,
did not specifically speak of a decline, i.e. some irreversible process towards
disaster, nor did they give a central place to idealizing a glorious past (as their
successors would do in the century after). Instead, following Lütfi Pasha,
these authors gave concrete advice on and detailed complaints about vari-
ous Ottoman institutions, rather than the virtues of individuals. This chapter
first analyzes various anonymous works that stressed the departures from the
“ideal” institutions of the early period of Süleyman’s reign (e.g. Kitâbu mesâlih;