The Eighteenth Century: the Westernizers 391
more powerfully resonant) in Ratıb Efendi’s and “Koca Sekbanbaşı” (probably
Vasıf )’s works, composed in the 1790s and 1800s.27 In fact, it may be the first
case of the axiom of reciprocity or “meeting like-for-like” (mukabele bi’l-misl), a
major argument in the inventory of “Westernizers” that gained importance to-
wards the end of the eighteenth century.28 A manuscript dated 1719–20 proves
that the original text was indeed composed in 1718; we do not know why, but it
must have become more widely known toward the end of the century.29
Such “discussions” are a rather unusual form in Ottoman literature (al-
though the genre has a long history in medieval Arabic letters), but there are
parallels from the late seventeenth century. Interestingly, one of them, Risâla
feva ’idü’l-mülûk (“Treatise for the benefit of rulers”), is a dialogue between an
Ottoman functionary and an Egyptian janissary, Süleyman, who allegedly had
been a prisoner of the French and describes Paris and its hinterland, as well as
French morals, their political system, and social life.30 The manuscript is un-
dated, but based on internal evidence we can date it to the mid-1690s.31 After
an introduction, in which Süleyman is introduced by another ex-prisoner of
the Europeans, Mustafa Ağa, and having warned the interlocutors that he has
often been criticized for praising the infidels (1b–4a), Süleyman begins his nar-
rative in the form of questions (by Ahmed Ağa) and answers. He explains that
he was taken prisoner during the Ottoman-Habsburg War in 1683 and that he
27 This final idea is to be found in Es’ad Efendi as well: Esad Efendi – Yılmazer 2000, LXXXVIII,
456, 569–570.
28 On this concept see Heyd 1961, 74–77; Özel 2005; Şakul 2005, 118–121; Menchinger 2014a,
225–233 and 242–260; Menchinger 2017, 87.
29 The manuscript is Topkapı Sarayı Kütüphanesi H. 1634; I did not have the opportunity to
compare it in detail with Es’ad Efendi’s version, but the incipit and the final pages are the
same (I wish to thank Lejla Demiri for providing me with scans of these); cf. Hanioğlu
2008, 44, fn. 4. As Ethan Menchinger points out (Menchinger 2014a, 154), there are parts
of the text which can be found verbatim in Vasıf, meaning that it was known to him in the
early 1800s.
30 Risâla fevâ’idü’l-mülûk, Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, ms. turc suppl. 221; this was first
noted by Kafadar 1989, 132–133. Another apocryphal “discussion between the preacher
Vani Efendi and the Chief Interpreter Panayiotis Nikousios” on matters pertaining to reli-
gion, astronomy, and the occult was circulating in Greek from the mid-1690s. See La Croix
1695, 381–401; Zervos 1992, 312–315; Kermeli-Ünal 2013.
31 Based on the description of the dynastic structure of France (fol. 43b), we can deduce
1690 as a terminus post quem (the author records the death of Louis XIV’s daughter-in-law,
Marie-Anne de Bavière) and 1711 as a terminus ante quem (Louis de France, Louis XIV’s
son, is mentioned as still alive). In fol. 33a (cf. also 7b) the allusion to the present wars
(bu seferlerde) in which Spain, England, the Netherlands, and Austria are allied against
France must refer to the Nine Years’ War (The War of the Grand Alliance, 1688–97); if we
take literally the sentence “they have not been able to stop the French army for six years
now”, then we can date the manuscript with safety to c. 1694.