Between Two Worlds Kafadar.pdf

126. Anonymous, ed. Giese, 14. The episode is set in the context of Osman's
death. Orhan * offers the chieftainship to his brother `Ala'eddin * , who has no
such claims but a few useful administrative reforms to suggest.
127. It is even conceivable, as argued once by Wittek and seconded by Inalcik *
, that there may have been a fuller version of Apz than the redactions,
editions, and copies we now have; see Inalcik * , "The Rise of Ottoman
Historiography," 154.
128. Ed. Babinger, 6; ed. Atsiz, 22.
129. Ed. Atsiz, 394, in Osmanli Tarihleri, ed. Atsiz (Istanbul, 1947).
130. See Manzûm Haci Bektas * Veli Vilâyetnâmesi, ed. Bedri Noyan (Aydin, 1986).
In light of the information provided by Noyan (pp. 6-9), it seems that the
objections of both Gölpinarli and, for different reasons, Cosan * with respect
to the authorship of Musa * b. `Ali * of the version in prose are not warranted.
Gölpinarli's identification of Firdevsi * as the author of the versified version
is probably still accurate, however.
131. Such conflicts between the dictates of interstate relations (Byzantine,
Mongol, Seljuk) and local conditions of the frontiers were apparently common.
For an interesting case having to do with a neighbor of Osman, see E.
Zachariadou, "Pachymeres on the 'Amourioi' of Kastamonu."
132. Ibn * Kemal * , Tevarih-i * Al-i * `Osman * , 1:129: "ba`zi * ravi * eydür
`Osman * Beg `amusi Dündar'i, ki basinda * serdarlik * sevdasi * var idi, bu
seferde helak * itdi ... zarar-i * `ammdan * ise zarar-i * hass * yegdür ...
diyü urdi öldürdi."
133. Basbakanlik * Arsivi * , Tahrir Defteri 453, f. 258b. See Ö. L. Barkan and
E. Mericli * , eds., Hüdavendigâr Livasi Tahrir Defterleri (Ankara, 1988), 255.
Previously cited in I * . Uzuncarsili * , Osmanli Tarihi (Ankara, 1947), 1:104
n. 2, who rakes it as certain that this Dündar Beg is Osman's uncle.
134. The "realism" of this investigation, the primary purpose of which has been
to see whether these stories about Ertogril's * and Osman's generations may have
been partially based on real events even if they come from later sources, is not
meant to preclude a symbolic reading of those historical traditions. I have
already cited Sahlins's observation that the real and the symbolic are not
mutually exclusive. Just like the Romans once again, the Ottomans seem to have
historicized certain mythical structures to such an extent that these Romans of
the Muslim world appear almost free of myths: Ottoman histories are, upon a
straightforward reading, not legend-filled Shahnames * but much more realistic
accounts of historical incidents. Still, readers of Dumézil will possibly wonder
whether it is not the ancient motif of the tripartite ideology that both
Ertogril * and Osman, leaders of the two successive generations of state
builders, had two brothers in most of the family chronicles. The murder of an
uncle, moreover, may be just the kind of sinful act those readers have come to
expect of young warriors destined to become kings.
135. Lindner, Nomads and Ottomans, 6-7. In terms of the mistaken
characterization of gaza as an ideology with particular resonance among
"orthodox and sedentary audiences;' we should recall the invoking of the same
principle by the early Safavids to appeal to the increasingly unorthodox nomadic
population of Anatolia and Azerbaijan.
136. See archival sources published in Barkan and Meriçli, eds., Hüdavendigâr
Livasi Tahrir Defterleri. The relevant earlier publication by Barkan, "Osmanli
158