03.07.2013 Views

TURKOMANS BETWEEN TWO EMPIRES: THE ... - Bilkent University

TURKOMANS BETWEEN TWO EMPIRES: THE ... - Bilkent University

TURKOMANS BETWEEN TWO EMPIRES: THE ... - Bilkent University

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

According to ‘Āli, the qizilbashes moved toward the province of Rūm because<br />

they wanted to go to the realm of the Shah. 1343 Şahkulu arrived in Beyşehir on June<br />

17. 1344 Then he proceeded to Kayseri. 1345 Ali Pasha could learn only after two days that<br />

Şahkulu had fled from Kızılkaya. 1346 He was so enthusiastic to finish the rebellion as<br />

soon as possible and underestimated the power of Şahkulu that he left most of his<br />

Fenāyi ve Dellāk Đbrahim demekle ma’rūf mezhepsiz mülhidler ve müfsidler ve kafirūn-ı eşeddler şehzāde<br />

hazretlerini bilkülliye idlāl edüb tarīkden ve tabiatden çıkardılar. Hatta bir derecedir ki ankaribüz-zaman<br />

mahzulin ve mel’uneyn kızılbaş cemaatının hazelehumullahı taalā ve şehzadenin ittifakları bunun üzerine<br />

olmuşdur ki şehzāde anlara yahud anlar şehzadeye mülākat olalar. Zamīr-i münīr-i cihān-āranuza mestūr<br />

olmayub bir dürlü dahi mülāhaza buyurulmıya öyle olsa sultanım hazretlerine vācib ve lāzımdır ki bu<br />

maslahatı sāyir mühim mesāliha kıyas etmeyüb cemi’ mesālihden akdem ve ehemm bilüm ta’cil ale’t-ta’cil<br />

devlet-ü saadetle bu canibe gelüb her ne tarīk def-ü ref mümkün ise def etmeğe ikdām oluna. Billahil azīm<br />

memleket-i Karaman heman elden çıkmışdır. Bir an ve bir lahza tevakkuf cā’iz değildir. Şöylece mülāhaza<br />

buyurula: bāki garāyibin ve fesadın nihāyeti yokdur. Đnşaallah anlar dahī hāk-i pāy-ı şerefinize mahfī<br />

olmıya. Bāki sultanım hazretlerin hāk-i pāy-ı şeriflerine il’ām hācet değildir. Ömrü devlet bāki ba’d.<br />

Abdüküm el-muhlīs Haydar el-fakīr.” (TSA, document E. 5590. The back side of this<br />

document reads ‘Haydar Paşa’dan gelen mektup’, the letter came from Haydar Pasha. Most part of the<br />

document is published in ULCY1, p. 69.)<br />

On the other hand, the grand vizier Ali Pasha also wrote a letter reporting the situation of the prince when<br />

he was on the way to suppress the Şahkulu rebellion. Ali Pasha writes, the prince is yet in our side. But it<br />

seems that he feels discomfort because of Ahmed’s arrival in Eskisehir. It must be because of that, he<br />

called all of his kapı kulu soldiers, who was then with Haydar Pasha, and all of the Karaman troops to his<br />

retinue. Ali Pasha refers to the letter of Haydar Pasha quoted above and repeats the ‘evil-intentions’ of the<br />

prince. He also points out that the prince freed two captives, who were captured from the qizilbash army<br />

and sent o him. At the end of his letter, Ali Pasha informs the sultan that he sent Haydar Pasha to Konya in<br />

order to inspect the situation of the prince more closely and he asks to the sultan how to behave regarding<br />

Şehinşah. (TSA, document, 6352. The facsimile copy of this document is published in TNSB, p. 228.)<br />

Indeed, Şehinşah’s link with the qizilbash movement was already established before the Şahkulu rebellion.<br />

Three letters from the Mamluk governor of Aleppo, Hayır Bey, clearly reveals his cooperation with Shah<br />

Ismail. In his letters Hayır Bey informs the Porte on the correspondence of the prince with Ismail and<br />

Ustaçlıoğlu Muhammed, one of the leading generals of Ismail and the governor of Diyarbakır. Learning<br />

from his letters, in 1510, Mamay Bey, the governor of Divriği, detained three messengers, one carrying a<br />

letter of Sahah Ismail, second carrying a letter of Ustaçlıoğlu Muhammed, and third carrying a letter of<br />

Prince Şehinşah. These three messengers were sent to Hayır Bey with their letters. Hayır Bey dispatched<br />

the messenger of the prince and three letters to the Porte through Prince Ahmed. (TSA, document E 5594.<br />

The facsimile copies of these letters are published in TNSB, p 240. See also TNSB, p. 239.) But Şehinşah<br />

left the political arena soon after. He died on July 2, 1511, in the same day that Ali Pasha was killed. See<br />

ULCY2, p. 123; KPZ8b, p. 55; ANMB, pp. 230-31; HSE4, p. 69; SLZ, p. 457.<br />

1343<br />

“...Karaman cānibine doğrı inmişler ve çekilüb ‘Âsitān-ı Şāh-ı kerem’ diyū diyār-ı Rūm’a vusūl<br />

bulmuşlar.” ALI, p. 929.<br />

1344<br />

TSA, document E. 2667, partly published in ULCY1, pp. 71-2, footnote 24. According to Uluçay’s<br />

interpretation of this document, which is a letter of Ahmed, Ali Pasha arrived Kızılkaya on Rebī 18, 917.<br />

This interpretation seems, however, not reasonable for two days later Şahkulu was in Alaşehir.<br />

1345<br />

MNB, p. 431.<br />

1346<br />

HSE4, p. 61; TNSB, p. 255; MNB, p. 431.<br />

401

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!