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

On the other hand, reliable sources clearly show that early Ottoman rulers bequeathed
quite a large amount of lands as mülk and waqf to these shaykhs in return for their
service. 190 Fuat Köprülü explains this co-operation between these groups and the
dynasty with cultural and mental resemblance. 191 According to Mélikoff and Ocak,
however, it was rather a result of the pragmatic policy of the early Ottoman begs, who
aimed to channel the energy of these groups for the good of the state and thus, both
saving the society from their disturbance and keeping them under control. 192
In any case, the religious atmosphere in the early Ottoman lands, and in other
frontier principalities as well, was not fully affected by so called orthodox-sunni Islam
or madrasa Islam; quite the contrary, it was largely dominated by a popular-sufi form of
Islam. 193 The testimony of Moroccan traveler Ibn Battuta, who visited most Anatolia
190 For a systematic analysis of this mutual-benefit cooperation between state and sufi milieu, see Ömer
Lütfi Barkan, “Osmanlı Đmparatorluğunda bir Đskan ve Kolonizasyon Metodu olarak Vakıflar ve
Temlikler; Đstila Devirlerinin Kolonizatör Türk Dervişleri ve Zaviyeler”, Vakıflar Dergisi, II, 1942, 279-
304. For a case study on Seyyid Ali Sultan, who not only worked for extending the legitimacy of Ottoman
rule but also personally fought in the conquest of Rumelia, see Rıza Yıldırım, Seyyid Ali Sultan (Kızıldeli)
ve Velâyetnâmesi, Ankara: TTK, 2007.
191 Köprülü, “Anadolu’da Đslâmiyet”, pp. 61-66.
192 Irène Mélikoff, “Un Ordre de derviches colonisateurs: les Bektaşis”, in her Sur les traces du soufisme
turc. Recherches sur l’Islam populaire en Anatolie, Istanbul: ISIS Press, 1992, pp. 115-8; “Le Problème
Kızılbaş”, in her Sur les traces du soufisme turc. Recherches sur l’Islam populaire en Anatolie, Istanbul:
ISIS Press, 1992, p. 32; “Le problème Bektaşi-Alevi: Quelaues dernières considérations”, in her Au
banquet des quarante. Exploration au coeur du Bektachisme-Alevisme, Istanbul: ISIS Press, 2001, p. 74;
Ocak, “Kalenderī Dervishes and Ottoman Administration from the Fourteenth to the Sixteenth Centuries”,
p. 246. Ocak supports his argument by the example of Orhan Beg’s continuous surveillance on Kalenderî
groups. See, in addition to the mentioned article, his Babaîler Đsyanı, p. 211; Osmanlı Đmparatorluğu’nda
Marjinal Sûfîlik: Kalenderîler (XIV-XVII. Yüzyıllar), Ankara: TTK, 1999, p. 119.
193 Compare Halil Đnalcık, ”The Emergence of Ottomans”, The Cambridge History of Islam, Vol. I, eds.,
P. M. Holt, Ann K. S. Lambton, and B. Lewis, Cambridge, 1970, p. 270. Two exemplary cases reflect
how nomadic Turkomans perceived and practiced Islam. One is about Famous Geyikli Baba, who
attended in the conquest of Bursa and some other places and received some waqfs from Orhan. It is
recorded in the short hagiography of Geyikli Baba that once Orkhān Beg sent to Geyikli Bābā ‘two loads
of arakı’ and ‘two loads of wine’ since he thought “Bābā was a mey-hor or wine lover.” Upon receiving
the sultan’s presents, Geyikli Baba displays a keramet, or extraordinary deed. He says, “The Sultan sent us
honey and oil!”. Then he orders his disciples to prepare a meal with this ‘honey’ and ‘oil’. The original
text reads, “...merhum Orhan Padişah ‘baba mey-hordur’ deyu iki yük arakı ve iki yük şarap gönderüb
Baba dahi yanındaki baba sultana cevab virüb padişah bize iki yük bal ve iki yük yağ göndermişler deyü.
Bir kazan getürüb ateş yakdurub kaynatdırur ve içine pirinç koyub âlâ zerde olub getüren adam nazarında
ve hem anın ile bu zerdeden padişaha gönderüb ve hem ateşte yanan ateşten biraz kor bir penbe içine
72