Introduction 27
every kind (or stage) of society needs different measures and thus that any
potential reformer should adopt a problem-oriented policy rather than revert
to some idealized constitution(s) from the past. After surveying Kâtib Çelebi’s
influence on authors such as Hemdemi and Hüseyin Hezarfen (studied in
part in chapter 5, too), this chapter will examine Mustafa Na’ima’s (d. 1716)
historiographical work, in the introduction to which Ibn Khaldun’s theory is
even more explicitly and faithfully presented: Na’ima retains the five stages
of a dynasty, instead of the simplified three stages used by Kâtib Çelebi, and
also introduces the nomadism vs. settled life distinction that was to become
increasingly important in the second half of the eighteenth century. On the
other hand, it will be shown that Na’ima’s call for peace was paralleled in other
early eighteenth-century works, such as those of the poet Nabi (d. 1712).
The final two chapters deal with the eighteenth-century authors and how
they may have paved the way for the major reforms of the late eighteenth and
nineteenth centuries. The eighth chapter first analyzes the “traditionalist”
views of Bakkalzade Defterdar Sarı Mehmed Pasha (d. 1717) and his contem-
porary Nahifi Süleyman Efendi (d. 1738), as well as later authors who contin-
ued the “mirror for princes” eclectic tradition while adding original ideas on
the reorganization of the army, the landholding system, or the economy. Such
authors include Dürri Mehmed Efendi (d. 1794), Süleyman Penah Efendi
(d. 1785), and Canikli Ali Pasha (d. 1785), all of whom had their political views
enriched by their experiences in provincial or central administration, while,
significantly, placing extraordinary emphasis on non-military matters, from
economy to town-planning, in sharp contrast to the “Westernizers” who pre-
ferred to focus on army reforms. All these writers preferred concrete and specific
advice rather than the theoretical musings of writers such as Kâtib Çelebi and
Na’ima; however, they differ from their late sixteenth and early seventeenth-
century predecessors insofar as they avoid any reference to “decline” or a
“Golden Age”. Furthermore, evidence from the late eighteenth- and nine-
teenth-century authors such as Ebubekir Ratıb Efendi, Ahmed Vasıf Efendi,
Behic Efendi, and Ömer Faik Efendi shows that the “traditionalist” views and
proposals were not in so sharp a conflict with the “Europeanist” ones as is gen-
erally believed. Some of these authors swiftly changed their attitude in accor-
dance with government policies, while others effectively stood by Selim III’s
Westernizing reforms using “traditionalist” arguments. This is nicely illustrated
in the traditionalist attitude of Şanizade, the copyist of Voltaire (1825).
Finally, the focus of the ninth chapter is on the second half of the eighteenth
century, when emphasis on European-style military reforms was com-
bined with a re-reading of Ibn Khaldun (whose work was translated into
Ottoman Turkish in 1730). This began with İbrahim Müteferrika (d. 1745), who