Sehrengiz, Urban Rituals and Deviant Sufi Mysticism in Ottoman Istanbul

B. Deniz Calis-Kural, B. Deniz Çalis-Kural

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2016
• Print ISBN: 9781472427090
• eBook ISBN: 9781317057727
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Architecture
• Subtopic: History of Art

?ehrengiz is an Ottoman genre of poetry written in honor of various cities and provincial towns of the Ottoman Empire from the early sixteenth century to the early eighteenth century. This book examines the urban culture of Ottoman Istanbul through ?ehrengiz, as the Ottoman space culture and traditions have been shaped by a constant struggle between conflicting groups practicing political and religious attitudes at odds. By examining real and imaginary gardens, landscapes and urban spaces and associated ritualized traditions, the book questions the formation of Ottoman space culture in relation to practices of orthodox and heterodox Islamic practices and imperial politics. The study proposes that Åžehrengiz was a subtext for secret rituals, performed in city spaces, carrying dissident ideals of Melami mysticism; following after the ideals of the thirteenth century Sufi philosopher Ibn al-'Arabi who proposed a theory of 'creative imagination' and a three-tiered definition of space, the ideal, the real and the intermediary (barzakh). In these rituals, marginal groups of guilds emphasized the autonomy of individual self, and suggested a novel proposition that the city shall become an intermediary space for reconciling the orthodox and heterodox worlds. In the early eighteenth century, liminal expressions of these marginal groups gave rise to new urban rituals, this time adopted by the Ottoman court society and by affluent city dwellers and expressed in the poetry of Nedîm. The author traces how a tradition that had its roots in the early sixteenth century as a marginal protest movement evolved until the early eighteenth century as a movement of urban space reform.

1

“Holy Paradise! Is it Under or Above the City of Istanbul?”

The Islamic garden is considered to be the representation of the paradise garden promised in the Koran and further elaborated in religious texts. According to the Islamic tradition, paradise garden is the highest level of cosmography bestowed on human kind in the afterlife. It is the beginning and end of all creation, the abode of the divine being and thus the source of all divine knowledge.

In Orthodox Ottoman tradition, both real and imaginary gardens were representations of the promised paradise garden. Gardens which were manifestations and displays of the supreme divine presence were also the setting where the Ottoman court asserted itself, since the two were integrated in the authority of the Ottoman Sultan as the leader of the Orthodox Muslim community since the early sixteenth century. Thus gardens were reminiscent of religious order and monarchy at the same time. Furthermore, rituals performed in the gardens were tools to control and sustain social order under the rule of the religion and the imperial authority.

Contrary to the Orthodox tradition where the gardens and garden rituals were displays of divine presence and courtly authority, some marginal groups in the Sufi tradition asserted the importance of gardens as a source of inquiry for divine knowledge. Instead of using gardens as a symbol of the religion or the monarchy, they challenged the use of gardens. Contrary to the imperial use of gardens as a tool of social control, these marginal Sufi groups practiced the use of gardens as a tool of individual enlightenment. While the court imposed social control over its subjects by means of gardens and garden rituals, these marginal Sufis practiced the use of gardens and other kinds of open spaces for the liberation of individuals.

Spaces developed, built, planted, and employed by the court represented paradise gardens on earth as the manifestation and display of imperial power. Imperial gardens, gardens of the elite, and all kinds of garden representations in Ottoman court art became displays of power. However, spaces in the city beyond the courtly gardens and their representations became alternative spaces proposing an adventurous journey for individuals to search and to experience new horizons. These spaces of the city were not built concrete spaces, nor were they walled gardens. But they were parts of city spaces brought together in the minds and rituals of marginal Sufi groups. These spaces can be defined as individual landscapes mapped, shared and experienced by marginal Sufi groups. Thus, while rituals in the gardens supported the solidity of the social order, rituals of marginal Sufi groups in the city challenged the social order and initiated an early modernization of the society by emphasizing individual experience in the perception and construction of space.

This study aims to map the changing rituals in gardens and city spaces of Istanbul from the sixteenth century to the early eighteenth century with respect to the ideals of a marginal Sufi group, whose development and continued existence corresponds to the same period of this 200 years, proposing to understand the changing symbolism of space and spatial practices with respect to the conflicting ideologies of the Orthodox Ottoman court and marginal groups in the heterodox Sufi society.

In 1730 a very significant period in Ottoman history came to an end. In early October 1730, a few days after the execution of the Grand Vizier, a poet died falling from the roof of his house in Beşiktaş, Istanbul. He was in a state of horror, and fearful of getting killed. He was running away from the rebels who had slaughtered almost all of his closest friends, including the Grand Vizier, and who, during this 50-day rebellion, demolished all the gardens where the poet and his beloved friends used to meet. The poet’s name was Nedîm. The rebellion that led to his death is known as the Patrona Halil Revolt, which terminated the 12 years of service of the Grand Vizier. Later in the next century, these 12 years came to be called the Tulip Period after the epoch’s passion for flowers and gardens. During this period, the craze for flowers and gardens reached such an extent that Nedîm depicted the city as a garden similar to paradise:¹

Holy Paradise! Is it under or above the city of Istanbul?

My Lord, how nice its atmosphere, its water and weather!

Each of its gardens is a pleasing meadow,

Each corner is fertile, a blossoming assembly of joy.

It is not proper to exchange this city for the whole world

…

Or to compare its rose gardens to Paradise!

Quality of these novel festivities

Only a book will be able to tell about!

Nedîm’s portrayal of the period as a book of novel festivities in a paradise-like city enjoyed in the gardens and meadows was due to the Grand Vizier’s reformative projects that instigated the launching of new urban pleasures by taking initiatives in restoring the various spaces of the city and the countryside. His reformative initiatives were not only effective in the domains of culture, but also in imperial self-representation, and international diplomacy.

During the Tulip Period, the Grand Vizier Nevşehirli Damad Ibrahim Pasha aimed at establishing a new imperial rule based on peace. Classical Ottoman rule had been geared towards warfare.² Ibrahim Pasha considered the situation, and employed it as a means to ensure peace and stability. Under his supervision, the imperial policy favored the pursuits of a settled life in peace and prosperity. As the frontier culture was replaced with a new culture of immobility, the capital city regained its importance as a space for engaging in cultural and intellectual life. The city was refurbished—its monuments restored, public waterways recovered and improved. The first fire department was initiated. Public use of urban space was emphasized with extensive building of over 200 fountains, each becoming a gathering place. In this period, the first press printing in Ottoman Turkish was established; the first public libraries founded; historical anthologies and philosophical works, originally in Arabic, Persian, and Greek, were translated into Ottoman Turkish; special discussion groups of scholars, intellectuals and poets were organized for exchanging ideas in the arts, philosophy, politics, and public problems.

While restoring Istanbul as the center of the empire, diplomacy was given more importance than before, with the purpose of confirming peace at the periphery. Diplomats were sent to Austria, France and Iran. In 1719, Ibrahim Pasha was sent to Vienna; in 1720, Yirmisekiz Mehmed Çelebi was sent to France, and in 1721, Ahmed Dürri Efendi was sent to Iran. These diplomats documented their journeys in chronicles, comparing the visited countries to the Ottoman land. The Austrian countryside was depicted as neat and very well kept, with all its villages enjoying prosperity. The French palaces and gardens were described as “the paradise of infidels,” allowing men and women to enjoy an extraordinary festive life. However, Persia was presented as poor and deprived.³ It was evident then, that the Ottoman observers found Western civilizations superior to Eastern ones.

As a consequence of these travels, the imperial library was provided with books illustrating European gardens and palaces.⁴ Shortly after the Ottoman envoy’s return from France, a new imperial palace was built in Kağıthane, accompanied by 40 neighboring mansions of the Ottoman elite, each with splendid gardens. Kağıthane and its gardens became symbols of the period.

The Sultan and his court traveled from one garden to another, from the gardens of Kağıthane to palaces on the Golden Horn and Bosphorus, enjoying themselves in the serene atmosphere of each garden, celebrating marriages, circumcisions, entertaining diplomatic envoys, intellectual assemblies, commemorating religious days, organizing feasts and parties during the daytime and at night. Among these gardens were the “Garden of the Vizier” and the “Promenade of Good Spirits” within the city; the “House of Eternal Happiness” and the “House of Eternal Beauty” at Kağıthane; imperial gardens of Tersane along the Golden Horn; on the banks of Bosphorus on the European side, the “House of Eternal Security” at Fındıklı; the “Palace of Light” and the gardens of the “Vizier’s Palace” at Beşiktaş, the “House of Eternal Gaiety” at Defterdar Burnu, the “Pavilion of Stars” at Kuruçeşme, the “House of Eternal Rule” at Bebek; and on the Anatolian side, the “House of Eternal Honor” at Üsküdar, the “Garden of Pleasure” at Beylerbeyi.⁵

A new elite class emerged engaging in garden activities similar to those of the Imperial court. They oversaw the construction of gardens and numerous public works and became the new patrons of urban space⁶ and for the general public, gardens and promenades became more favorable than before. Nedîm’s poems illustrated this festive life of the Tulip Period.

However different in architectural form, the gardens of Istanbul became used in a way that obviously resembled the festive life as observed in French gardens⁷ As well, representations of European gardens in books might have had an important effect in stimulating the circulation of garden models during this period. Thus, the Tulip Period initiated two major changes in the Ottoman garden tradition. First, private gardens, open to public view, gave way to conspicuous consumption, pomp and festivity in public spaces. Apart from the expenditure for hosting garden parties, consumption of common commodities had reached such an extent that the purchase of luxury materials like silk were forbidden to some social groups. As well, tulip bulbs were sold for a fortune. Second, it gave rise to a display of gardens, and encouraged the dissemination of garden models, similar to the circulation of printed books.

For the celebration of the 1720 circumcision festival, four sugar gardens were constructed. The miniatures in Levni’s Surnâme depict these four different gardens.⁸ These sugar gardens may have served as garden models displayed either of existing gardens, or of suggested types to be built, though it is evident that they also displayed the scope of the Ottoman imagination flourishing in gardens. Within a short period of time after the display of the sugar gardens, the former meadows of the Kağıthane were developed into a festive site favored by all groups of society by the building of numerous private gardens. An imperial palace and gardens were built accompanied by private gardens of the elite. Both the imperial and the private gardens were surrounded by a promenade open to all citizens of the city. Thus, the private gardens and the gardens of the sultan were displayed to the eyes of the common public.

An Orthodox group of conformists was deeply disturbed by the display of an emerging elite class enjoying a festive garden life under the gaze of the larger Muslim community. In 1730, this Orthodox group engaged in a successful revolution. They demolished most of the gardens and promenades which were the symbols of the epoch, terminated the Tulip Period and destroyed the lives of the prominent figures of its cultural renewal. Most of them were killed or sent into exile, including Nedîm, the poet and Nevşehirli Damad Ibrahim Pasha, the Grand Vizier.

Most scholars would date the efforts at modernizing Ottoman culture to the Tulip Period, and describe reforms of the military, educational and administrative spheres as attempts at Westernization. However, these attempts are known to have failed, resulting in the fall of the Ottoman Empire. This perspective sees Ottoman culture as unchanging, incapable of any transformation, innovation or internal dynamics. Of course there are exceptions, but any innovation in the arts or sciences is generally evaluated as an instance of individual talent, devoid of any cultural source. It attributes changes prior to the Tulip Period to the imitation of the Persian–Islamic traditions, and after them to Western civilizations.⁹

This view has been challenged by studies that aim to explore the internal dynamics of cultural transformations focusing on the urban practices of the Ottoman elite culture, on public arts and architecture of eighteenth-century Istanbul.¹⁰ These studies considered the entire century as a uniform period of innovation in order to stress the internal dynamics of the Ottoman culture and a certain continuity as well as demonstrating the establishment of new social, cultural and spatial models by studying Ottoman archival documents. Their methods stress the importance of studying Ottoman society from an internal point of view. However, these studies have ignored the significance of the Tulip Period that they took as a starting point. On the contrary, the Tulip Period of the early eighteenth century was the climax of more than two centuries of social and cultural changes. This study argues that modernization as observed in some urban practices of the period—the development of self-consciousness and individuality—can be traced as far back as to the early sixteenth century.

To make clear the cultural changes that the gardens of the Tulip Period revealed to the eyes of orthodox Muslim people, it is necessary to reassess the period by returning to Nedîm’s poem. Nedîm depicted the city as a garden similar to Paradise:

Holy Paradise! Is it under or above the city of Istanbul?

Comparing the city to Paradise may sound very bland and conventional. However, the paradisical qualities attributed to the city, and the delight individuals took in the constant and vivid appraisal of its numerous gardens and promenades were actually intolerable from an Orthodox point of view.

Allusions to paradise in Ottoman classical culture denote a confined space symbolizing the cosmological hierarchy. This cosmological hierarchy was extremely important since it located all aspects of society within a religious ordering, covering the domains of spiritual, ideological, social, cultural, and individual worlds. When in 1517 onwards, the Ottoman sultans became the religious leaders of the Orthodox Muslim community, the empire was reorganized as a centralized authority, as the center of the Orthodox Islamic world. The Ottoman cosmolo...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Dedication
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• List of Illustrations
• Preface
• Acknowledgements
• List of Abbreviations
• 1 “Holy Paradise! Is it Under or Above the City of Istanbul?”
• 2 Gardens, Creative Imagination and the Theory of Intermediary Space in Ibn al-‘Arabî’s Philosophy and its Reception in the Ottoman World
• 3 Gazel Poetry and Garden Rituals (1453–1730): Ideal and Real Gardens of Love
• 4 Şehrengiz Poetry and Urban Rituals (1512–1732): Ideal and Real City Spaces of Love, Reconciliation and Liberation
• 5 Nedîm’s Poetry and New Rituals of the Tulip Period (1718–1730): The Construction of Gardens at Kağıthane Commons
• 6 The “Storehouse” of Ottoman Landscape Tradition: Gardens and City Spaces as Barzakh
• Appendices
• 1 Life of Ibn al-‘Arabî
• 2 Disciples of Ibn al-‘Arabî in Bayrami and Melâmî-Bayrami Orders of Sufi Mysticism
• 3 Melâmî Poles
• 4 List of Şehrengiz Poems
• Bibliography
• Index