Between Two Worlds Kafadar.pdf

should a fortiori reflect an earlier memory."[110]
― 99 ―
In this version, then, Ottoman historiography, if not all Ottoman cultural
history, is reduced to the evolution of "state ideology." The early Ottomans
adopted "tribalism," which possibly converged with shamanism parading as Islam.
Then came learned Muslims from the East, who convinced the rulers of the
suitability of orthodox Islam and of the gaza ideology, thus erasing the
memories of the "tribalist" past. By the end of the fifteenth century, court
histories were commissioned to glorify the founders of the state as gazis (who
they never were).[111] Due to accidents or sloppy editing, however, some
remnants of earlier and truer memories crept into these accounts. And those are
the only parts of late-fifteenth-century chronicles that can be assumed to
reflect early Ottoman realities.
The specific image Lindner chooses for Ottoman historiography is that of an
onion. The core of the onion in his account is Osman's "tribalism." Layer upon
layer has accumulated to conceal this core so that by the end of the fifteenth
century, we are faced with a fully ripened onion. Accidents, mistakes, and
crudities give us glimpses of the earlier, deeper layers, however. Such an
accident, for instance, was Apz's illness as a very young man that confined him
to the home of Yahsi Fakih , the son of Orhan's imam. Apz states that during
that sojourn at Yahsi Fakih's house, he saw some menakib written by the latter;
these tales he incorporated into his history.
For a long time, it was believed that the traditions Apz received from Yahsi
Fakih must be sought in those passages of his chronicle that are common to other
chronicles. V. L. Ménage, whose exemplary studies are the building blocks of all
discussion on early Ottoman historiography, has demonstrated, however, that
Yahsi Fakih's menakib must rather be traced to the sections that are unique to
Apz.[112] On this basis, Lindner argues that those unique passages in Apz
"represent a layer of the Ottoman historiographical onion considerably closer to
the core than the other versions."[113] Apz is believed to have had accidental
access to some information. When he later sat down to produce his chronicle for
the court, that information was included within his chronicle through his
simple-mindedness or oversight. "Not contaminated by Apz's preferences," those
passages are closer to truth because they are earlier.
It is not necessarily the case, however, that the closer in time a source is to
certain historical events, the more reliable it is, particularly if a policy of
ideological purification is believed to have started in between that source and
those events. If a significant ideological shift occurred during Orhan's reign
with the intention of sanitizing the reality about his ancestors, the
chieftain's imam would be the least trustworthy source for
― 100 ―
recovering that reality. If the attempt at ideological purification was so
successful as to obliterate all alternative accounts, later sources would not be
89