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

administration tolerated and even encouraged this move.” 2032 Likewise Faroqhi surmises
from archival evidence a connection between the tuning down of anti-Qizilbash
persecution in the late sixteenth century and the official grant of privileges to the
shaykhs of Hacı Bektaş. 2033 When Bektashis’ role of reintegrating the qizilbash into the
Ottoman polity is accepted, then it makes sense for the administration to be
comparatively generous towards those tekkes formerly accused of heterodoxy or
heresy. 2034
By the mid-seventeenth century, the shaykhs of the tekke in Hacı Bektaş attained
a certain degree of control over almost all the tekkes of ‘heterodox’ groups, who
gradually affiliated to Bektashism. 2035 They had significant power in determining the
shaykhs of these tekkes. Although the power of the shaykhs of Hacı Bektaş in this matter
was limited for the reason that these tekkes were usually run by hereditary families,
usually there were more than one heir to choose from and this provided the opportunity
for the assumed descendants of Hacı Bektaş to interfere with the domestic affairs of thte
provincial tekkes. 2036 In any case, in the sixteenth century, the shaykhs of Pir-evi
attained, on one hand, a recognizable control over other tekkes all over Anatolia, and on
2032 Faroqhi, “Conflict, Accommodation, and Long-Term Survival”, p. 177.
2033 Faroqhi, “Conflict, Accommodation, and Long-Term Survival”, p. 179.
2034 For some exemplary cases see Ahmet Refik, On Altıncı Asırda Rafızîlik ve Bektaşilik, pp. 32-3;
Suraiya Faroqhi, “Conflict, Accommodation, and Long-Term Survival”, pp. 180-1; “Seyyid Gazi
revisited. The foundations as seen through sixteenth- and seventeenth-century documents”, Turcica, XIII,
1981, 90-122.
2035 In spite of the introduction of many heterodox elements into the order, Evliya Chelebi, who visited
most of Bektashi tekkes in the middle of the seventeenth century, repeatedly assert that all the Bektashi
dervishes he encountered were impeccable (ehl-i sünnet ve’l-cemaat). Nevertheless, as Faroqhi has
already noted, not too much credit should be attached to his assertion. See Suraiya Faroqhi, Anadolu’da
Bektaşilik, translated from German to Turkish by Nasuh Barın, Đstanbul: 2003, p. 84; “Conflict,
Accommodation, and Long-Term Survival”, p. 174.
2036 Faroqhi, “Conflict, Accommodation, and Long-Term Survival”, pp. 178-8. For some exemplary cases
see Suraiya Faroqhi, Anadolu’da Bektaşilik, translated from German to Turkish by Nasuh Barın, Đstanbul:
2003, pp. 141-4.
618