360 chapter 8
also have been written much earlier, with the exception of its criticism of the
ayan and notables, which are never seen in earlier treatises.
What is really striking is Penah Efendi’s case: his preoccupation with econ-
omy and commerce, his general vision for Ottoman lands, and his bold recom-
mendation of European tactics all constitute an impressive introduction to the
political discourse that was to dominate the final decades of the eighteenth
and the whole of the nineteenth century. On the other hand, his emphasis on
everyday issues at “street level”, such as town-planning with regard to measures
against fires and various issues pertaining to poor peasants, bring to mind a
slightly earlier chronicler, Mehmed Hâkim Efendi (d. 1770), who has been de-
scribed as a “mahalle historian” with a “street-level line of vision”.56 Even more
characteristic is Penah Efendi’s stress on the benefits of culture and education.
Like Müteferrika before him (as will be seen in the next chapter), Penah Efendi
also speaks extensively of the benefits of geographical knowledge: a cheap
edition of a printed universal geography, he says, should be made available to
all subjects, rich and poor; more generally, there will only be benefit from the
founding of more printing houses (B473–474). In addition, short notices at the
end of Penah’s treatise advocate the detailed popularization of imperial orders
and the creation of medreses, libraries, and mosques in the provincial towns
rather than in Istanbul (B479). As for his proposals for the Albanians’ cultural
assimilation, they are one of the most original ideas to be found in Ottoman
political literature, as is his inspiration from the Spanish model for the exploi-
tation of the Americas.
A comparison with the “Westernizing” tracts to be studied in the following
chapter would show the gap between them and Penah Efendi: he never advo-
cates the wholesale adaptation of the European military model, and in many
ways his treatise can be considered a continuation of the paths opened by
Kâtib Çelebi and Na’ima. Yet his reference to Western military tactics, his look-
ing to Spain for policy models, and his dismissal of the classical timar and land-
holding systems show that this gap is not as radical as it may seem. After all, the
reference to the organization of Christian armies with “regiments” (regmend)
must have come (as seen in the next chapter) from İbrahim Müteferrika’s own
treatise, which is a clear example of the “Westernizing” trend.57
Unfortunately, current knowledge of the dynamics inside the imperial
elites of the eighteenth century is not adequate to permit the location of these
56 Zilfi 1999.
57 On the other hand, Penah’s reference to fuyte (feuilleton) or booklets containing the army
rules is not found in Müteferrika’s work and thus must be attributed either to his own
experience or another source.