350 chapter 8
ahar oldukça esbabiyle hâkimâne hareket olunsa) may avoid decline and fall. A
state is like a man who has an income of 40 purses; if he is disciplined, he will
prosper right up until his death, but if is not, he will die in poverty and misery.
The contrast with the previous authors, from Defterdar’s circle, who hardly
put forth any vision of society, is evident. What they share is an indifference
to the kanun v. Sharia conflict, or even for the concept of the “old law” as a
binding constitution. It seems that such discussions had become irrelevant as
the claim for specific reforms was now universal (although, as will be seen in
chapter 9, the debate on “innovation” would gain a new visibility at the end of
the century). Dürri, more conservative among this group in several aspects, at-
tributes the glory of the Ottoman state to its having followed the Sharia (283a)
and claims that all revenues should be collected along Sharia lines (286a),
while he also stresses that measures concerning the janissaries should be taken
“according to the old law” and more particularly to Süleyman’s regulations (the
“old law” is mentioned in other places as well, usually in relation to matters
military). In the same vein, Canikli seeks to ensure that everybody acts accord-
ing to the law, holy or sultanly (gerek şer’i ve gerek kanuni; Ö143); similarly, he
praises Süleyman I, the “master of laws” (kanun sahibi), for he always acted
according to the Sharia and kanun (şer’an ve kanunen), and maintains that it is
advisable for the sultan to respect them (şer’e ve kanuna tatbik ideler; Ö151–152;
cf. Ö161). Nonetheless, and despite their general conservatism, neither Dürri
nor Canikli seem to be have preoccupied with such old debates, save for a sort
of stagnation in their political vocabulary. As for Penah Efendi, he does not
mention the “old law” or kanun at all.
Coming now to the central and provincial administration, the emphasis on
long terms of office continues: Canikli repeats almost verbatim Defterdar’s
advice that commanders should not be removed for minor matters (Ö146)
and even argues that officers such as defterdar and the kapudan pasha should
be appointed for life. Furthermore, the sultan must give the vizieral rank to
worthy people regardless of their previous situation, having checked their
background and behavior (especially their knowledge of the situation of the
peasants and their ability in war) when they come from “outside” (taşradan;
Ö154). In general, as far as the rank of vizier is concerned, people originating
in the palace (ocaklu) must be given preference to those coming from outside,
while people should be promoted along a single career line: for instance, an
agha of the janissaries should not become vizier (Ö156). The same distrust of
provincial backgrounds can be seen in Penah Efendi’s excursus on the scribal
bureaucracy (B400–474), on whose selection and training under the reisülküt-
tab he places great importance; because, he adds, no matter what position they