372 chapter 8
and propagation of the religious fundamentals as it may seem at first glance.
This similarity is even more evident if we consider the two authors’ views on
the popularization of knowledge: Behic proposes printing cheap treatises on
logic and the Arabic language for the benefit of the ulema and students (not-
ing at the same time the potential profits for the state printing house; Ç10, 13),
but this idea is not restricted to religious literature. He also complains that
sultanly orders, as well as being issued over trivial matters, are written in such
a complex language that their addressees fail to understand them (Ç7), and
so he proposes recodifying laws in simple language (Ç49–50). Impressively,
Ömer Faik makes almost the same suggestions: he stresses that orders should
be short and written in plain language, as ignorant judges often read out them
in an incomprehensible manner and, furthermore, that sultanly orders should
not be issued for trivial matters. In more than one way, these ideas meet Penah
Efendi’s emphasis on the importance of printing and of the popularization
of knowledge. Moreover, Behic stresses the need for education in foreign lan-
guages. To this end, he proposes the foundation of a special school, making
an explicit appeal to the precept of reciprocity (mukabele bi’l-misl: the axiom
that a Muslim state should use the infidels’ military principles against them;
see below, chapter 9). He sees this as a way to create Muslim interpreters who
could translate European books and be competent in international diplomacy
(Ç38–39).
Another common element in these authors, which they also share with
Penah Efendi, is the emphasis they place on local production. Ömer Faik
urges statesmen to avoid ostentation and pomp; he celebrates local products
and laments the extensive use of furs, which has produced much income for
Russia. He criticizes the buying and presenting of gifts such as luxury goods
ornamented with gold and precious stones, stressing instead that local produc-
tion can very well meet the needs of the population. Much more analytically,
Behic Efendi describes the economic reforms of Peter the Great as an incen-
tive to reform the Ottoman economy: he claims that not only the civilized but
also the nomadic Muslim (medenisi şöyle dursun edna bedevisi) is much more
competent than the European; thus, the Ottomans could easily succeed where
the Russians have succeeded, since the latter are “the most disgraced of all the
European nations” (cem’i-i milel-i efrenciyyenin erzeli; Ç67–68).82 Behic Efendi
82 Cf. Hanioğlu 2008, 42–43. Behic Efendi’s argument is taken from İbrahim Müteferrika
(see below, chapter 9) who also stresses that the Russians were the most despicable
and useless country in Europe before they embarked on their modernization projects:
Müteferrika – Şen 1995, 189–190. On the contempt felt by the Ottomans for Russia until
the 1768–1774 war cf. Ortaylı 1994b, 221. For a comparative military history of Russia and
the Ottoman Empire see Ágoston 2011.