Navigation – Plan du site
Evliyâ Çelebi et l'Europe
Des corporations à la Sainte-Chaussette

İbrāhīm and the White Cow – Guild Patrons in Evliyâ Çelebi’s Seyahatnâme

Ibrahim et la Vache blanche, les chefs des corporations dans le Seyahatnâme d’Evliyâ Çelebi
Gisela Procházka-Eisl
p. 157-170

Résumés

Les plus splendides et fameuses parades de corporations à Istanbul ont eu lieu aux xvie et xviisiècles ; parmi elles, celle de 1638 fut, sans aucun doute, la plus spectaculaire et la plus grande en termes de participants. Cet événement est largement décrit dans le premier volume du Seyahatnâme d’Evliyâ Çelebi. Dans cet article je veux aborder brièvement un aspect jusque-là négligé : la discussion plus ou moins détaillée par Evliyâ des pīrs, les dirigeants des corporations. Je commencerai par un survol général de la façon dont Evliyâ introduit ces pīrs, ensuite je discuterai les légendes et récits – peu nombreux malheureusement – qu’Evliyâ nous raconte à leur sujet. Ensuite je mettrai en lumière les thèmes les plus significatifs de ces histoires pour montrer pourquoi des individus en particulier étaient choisis comme pīrs pour certaines corporations. Enfin je concluerai rapidement sur les similitudes et les différences entre ces pīrs et les patrons des corporations chrétiennes en Europe.

Haut de page

Texte intégral

  • 1 Public ceremonies which were famous for especially splendid guild parades include Murād III’s 1582 (...)

1Public ceremonies organized by the Ottoman court on such occasions as the weddings of the sultan’s daughters, the circumcisions of his sons, and the beginnings of campaigns, frequently included processions by the various guilds. The most splendid and famous guild parades were held in the 16th and 17th centuries.1 In the 18th century and later, these parades became less frequent and less lavish, because public taste changed and they were not so important a part of public entertainment any more. Of those guild parades which took place in the Ottoman capital Istanbul, the parade of 1638 definitely was the largest and most spectacular in terms of participants. It was held during preparations for Murād IV’s campaign in Persia. All the guilds of the town, divided into groups and sub-groups, processed through the streets of Istanbul. This event is elaborately described in the first volume of Evliyâ Çelebi’s Seyahatnâme, which deals with Evliyâ’s home-town, Istanbul.

  • 2 Hammer-Purgstall, J.v., 1822.
  • 3 Hammer-Purgstall, J.v., 1850.

2Evliyâ’s portrayal of this guild parade is one of the most famous and frequently discussed parts of the Seyahatnâme and is a valuable source on Ottoman cultural and economic history. As early as 1822 J. von Hammer-Purgstall published a shortened version of it in German.2 Ten years later, in his Narrative of travels in Europe, Asia and Africa in the seventeenth century, he provided an extended translation of it into English.3 No subsequent historian seriously dealing with guild or labor history in Ottoman Turkey has disregarded Evliyâ’s account.

  • 4 I must emphasize that this paper is not about guild patrons in general, only about their portrayal (...)

3In this paper I wish to briefly consider one previously neglected aspect of this text: Evliyâ’s more or less detailed discussion of the pīrs, the guild patrons. I will begin with a general overview about how Evliyâ introduces these pīrs: some he discusses in detail; others he mentions only marginally; and many he ignores completely. Next, I will discuss the longer stories or legends about these pīrs which Evliyâ narrates – though there are not many, unfortunately. Then I will highlight the most significant themes of these stories to show why particular individuals were chosen as pīrs for certain guilds.4 Finally, I will briefly summarize the similarities and differences between these pīrs and the patrons of the Christian guilds of Europe.

How Evliyâ introduces the pīrs

4There are two reasons for choosing the Seyahatnâme for such an investigation:

    • 5 Procházka-Eisl, 1995 : f. 55v.
    • 6 Sa‛d b. Vaqqāṣ (600?-678), one of the most important Companions of the Prophet, was famed for his (...)
    • 7 Procházka-Eisl, 1995 : f. 22v.

    Evliyâ’s descriptions of an Ottoman guild parade is the most detailed and informative we have. Other descriptions of guild parades can be found in the so-called sūrnāmeler, “books of feasts”, which especially report on public ceremonies. This genre of Ottoman literature has its roots in Ottoman chronicles. However, even though guild parades frequently have a prominent place in these sūrnāmeler, we only occasionally find allusions to the pīrs. For example, the Sūrnāme-i hümāyūn of 1582, which deals almost exclusively with the guild parade held in the course of a long and lavish circumcision ceremony, mentions only three or four pīrs – and only metaphorically at that. This text mainly incorporates its infrequent allusions to pīrs into melodious secʿ-passages. For example, when the butchers appear, the text tells us āmeden-i cemā‛at-i qaṣṣābān-i cömerd-‛unvān, Cömerd/Cuvānmerd being the parton-saint of the butchers.5 Upon the arrival of the arrow-makers, we read ḫayrü l-ḫalāṣ dėyü mānend-i Sa‛d Vaqqāṣ tīrine ter ḫalāṣ vėrüb.6 When the jugglers’ guild appears, an allusion is made to İbn Sīnā by describing them as Bū ‛Alī Sīnā-mānend, İbn Sīnā being the magician par excellence.7

    • 8 But this is only one aspect in which the Seyahatnâme can be regarded as an indicator: E. Prokosch (...)
    • 9 SN = Seyahatnâme. To avoid irritations between the first and the second revised edition I do not q (...)
    • 10 Busse/at-Taʿlabī 2006: 64: “Idrīs war der erste, [...]der Kleider nähte und genähte Kleidung trug. (...)

    Evliyâ can be regarded as the archetype of the educated, literate Istanbulite of his time. Moreover, he is famous for stories, legends, and tales: if he knows a story related to his subject, he will tell it. Thus Evliyâ can be taken as an indicator of the best-known and most frequently-narrated stories.8 But his eagerness to tell stories often leads him into disgressions, as his description of the guild parade demonstrates. So, for example, he writes that İdrīs, the patron of the tailors, is now in Paradise tailoring clothes for the celestials (SN I : 191b).9 The mention of Paradise prompts him to mention Jesus, who is in Paradise, too. Evliyâ then states that İdrīs and Jesus are the only prophets that entered Paradise without dying, and this leads him to the stories of their resurrection. Thus Evliyâ tells us all he knows about this pīr, except why İdrīs is the pīr of the tailors!10 And such is often the case in his account of the guild parade – especially as the parade draws to a close, and he presents more and more stories, frequently as a kind of intro when a group of related guilds enters the scene, such as those of the producers of boza (SN I : 212b f.) and the musicians (SN I: 206b f.).

  • 11 Taeschner, 1979 : 406.
  • 12 Its actual title is Miftāḥu d-daqā’iq fī bayāni l-futuwwa wa-l-ḥaqā’iq.
  • 13 This is the reason that ‛Alī commonly is seen in Islam as the founder of the guilds. Taeschner, 19 (...)
  • 14 Various guilds took parts of it and changed it according to their special needs. Taeschner, 1979 : (...)

5The conception and development of the fütüvvet movement and Ottoman guild patrons has been studied by F. Taeschner. Especially important is his monograph on the development of the Aḫi brotherhoods and the fütüvvet movement, one chapter of which concerns the position of the fütüvvet and its role vis-á-vis the Ottoman guilds. Not until Ottoman times, when the fütüvvet movement in the Arab world was already in decay, did it establish an alliance between the Anatolian Aḫis and the Bektaşiya on one hand and the Ottoman guilds on the other. According to Taeschner the fütüvvet began to play an increasingly important role within the Ottoman guilds,11and only in Ottoman times did guild patrons became “institutionalized”. The so-called fütüvvet-nāmeler were then written, the most important of which was the 1524 Fütüvvetnāme-i kebīr of Seyyid Meḥemmed b. Seyyid ‛Alā’eddīn el-Ḥüseynī el-Riżavī.12 Large parts of this were translated by Taeschner into German. Ibn ‛Alā’eddīn narrates the sequences in which the pīrs were appointed: First there were the four partriarchs, çahār pīr: Ādem, Şīt, İbrāhīm, and Muḥammed. Then Muḥammed, who had been girded by Cibrīl, girds ‛Alī b. Abī Ṭālib at the famous event of Ghadīr Khumm.13 By order of the Prophet, ‛Alī in turn girds 17 Companions, making them pīrs of certain guilds and giving them “license” to gird further persons. The first one girded by ʿAlī was Selmān al-Fārisī, who by order of ‛Alī then girded 55 more Companions. The Fütüvvetnāme-i kebīr was the main source for numerous later and shorter fütüvvetnāmes.14 As we shall see, the well-read Evliyâ knew such books and obviously consulted them to learn the pīrs.

6But the fütüvvetname of Ibn ‛Alā’eddīn has practically no stories about the pīrs, so Evliyâ’s information and narratives about them must have come from either other sources, such as various qıṣaṣü l-enbiyā’ or, more probably, from his own recollections of popular stories and legends.

  • 15 This number is suggested by Yi, 2004 : 42, n. 2. According to Yücel Dağlı’s index in the Seyahatnâm (...)
  • 16 Later on, Evliyâ states that Cemşīd is pīr for 366 guilds; see below. The source for the many narra (...)

7In his account of the guild parade, Evliyâ mentions some 500 to 550 groups,15 each of which he treats in various degree of detail. Some of the groups are described only in two lines; others receive more attention. Insofar as he knows them, he takes care to mention their pīrs, naming more than 250 individuals, many of them being pīr for more than one guild. The prophets Muḥammed, İbrāhīm, and Nūḥ, for example, are pīr for seven guilds each. The semi-historical Persian king Cemşīd, the central figure in a good many stories and myths, is pīr for eight guilds.16 Dāvūd is by far the most popular pīr, being patron for 18 guilds.

  • 17 Q 34 : 10 -11: “And We made pliable for him iron, [Commanding him], ‘Make full coats of mail and ca (...)

8Frequently individual pīrs are the patron for several thematically-related guilds. For example, the Qur’ān says Dāvūd invented forging17 when he produced his chain armor: thus we find him the patron of the many guilds dealing with metal or weapons. But there were also many guilds which, according to Evliyâ, had two or even three pīrs. In most of these cases one pīr is a pre-Islamic figure and the second one a girded Companion of the Prophet. Evliyâ frequently takes care to emphasis that the girded pīr is the “real” one.

Examples:

  • 18 “kadîm‑i evvelde pîrleri Hazret‑i Fisagores‑i Tevhîdî idi. {Ammâ} Hazret‑i Risâlet asrında pîr‑i ha (...)
  • 19 “Pîrleri Hazret‑i Nûh'dur. Ammâ Hazret‑i Resûl asrında Mekke deryâsı kim Süveys deryâsıdır, andan b (...)

9The paste producers: “In old times their pīr was Fisagores‑i Tevḥīdī, but in the age of the Prophet their real pīr is Ḥażret‑i ‛Ubeyd‑i ‛Aṭṭār.”18 The ancient patron of the ship-builders was of course Nūḥ, builder of the Ark; but later a certain Ebū l-maḥż‑ı ‛Ummānī became “officially” girded as their pīr.19 These two examples illustrate the fact that the proper names of the pīrs frequently had some concrete association with the profession or trade of which they were patron.

10The guild patrons fall into several categories:

  • Companions of the Prophet.

  • Prophets (Noah, Salomon, Adam, David, Abraham, and so on).

  • Figures from Persian mythology and history: Cemşīd, Hūşeng, and Afrasiyāb.

    • 20 Such as Salsāl Tatar for the boza-makers (SN I : 212b f.) and – before Ḥamza took over – Tohtamış B (...)

    Certain later individuals who had no connection with the Prophet.20

  • Several obscure figures, even one non-Muslim, whom Evliyâ himself states to be legendary.

  • 21 “fütüvvetnâme‑i kübrâda "Bağdâd Hillesi'nde arslan paralamışdır, kabri nâ-ma‘lûmdur" deyü yazmış. R (...)
  • 22 “pîrleri ma‘lûmum olmayup bir siğer ü fütüvvetde ve fütüvvetnâme‑i kebîrde görmeyüp seyâhat etdüğim (...)

11Evliyâ obviously did some research concerning the pīrs of some of the guilds: in about 85 instances we find the phrase “their patron is _ _ _” followed by a gap, which shows that Evliyâ planned to fill in a name later. These gaps become more frequent near the end of the guild description. The above-mentioned Fütüvvetnāme-i kebīr obviously was one of his sources, as he alludes to it several times. For example, concerning the pīr of the producers of suits of armor he says: “In the fütüvvetnāme‑i kübrā is written that he was mauled by lions at Hillah near Baghdad. His grave is unknown.”21 Sometimes Evliyâ admits that he could not determine a guild’s pīr, because there was no mention of it in the literature: “I do not know their pīr: I did not see him in any siyer, fütüvvet, and the fütüvvetnāme‑i kebīr; and I did not visit him (i.e. his grave) during my travels.” Or: “Their pīr is unknown: I have not seen the guild of suitcase-makers in any fütüvvet.”22

  • 23 “Selmân‑ı Pâk 'in kemer-beste etdüği üçüncü pîrdir”. SN I: 159a.
  • 24 For a comparison of the relevant parts in the Seyāhatnāme and the Fütüvvetnāme-i Kebīr see Eren, 1 (...)

12Frequently Evliyâ also mentions the “number” of a pīr – that is, what his rank was in the pīrs girded by a certain saint. For example, “He is the third pīr girded by Selmān-ı Pāk”23. When comparing these numbers with the Fütüvvetnāme-i Kebīr, as edited by Taeschner, we observe that they always are in accordance with that text.24

Guilds without a pīr:

  • 25 “...bunlar cümle Rûmeli'nde Serfice ve Filorunya ve Liçista ve Gölikesri şehirlerinde sâkin bir al (...)
  • 26 “pîrsizân-i Fir‛avniyān” SN I: 169a.
  • 27 “bu mel‘ûnlar müselmânın boğazladuğı lahmı yemeyüp başka pîrsiz mel’ûnlardır” SN I: 166b.

13Evliyâ states that there are guilds without a pīr. He calls 23 guilds pīrsiz, and gives several reasons why they are such. Some were pīrsiz because they were non-Muslim or gypsy groups. Two were the fur-traders from Rumeli, whom he calls “a group of Greeks without religion and without patron”,25 and the gypsies with dancing bears from the quarter of Sultān Balaṭ Şāh, whom he vilifies as “pharaonics without patrons”.26 Concerning the Jewish butchers he writes, “These cursed ones do not eat the meat that Muslims slaughter: they are one more of these damned groups without a patron.”27

  • 28 “hâşâ mine's-sâmi‘în pîrleri ola” for the pâzvengân, “hâşâ pîrleri ola” for the deyyūsān; both SN (...)
  • 29 “zu‘m-ı bâtıllarınca pîrleri Amr‑ı Ayyâr'dır ammâ hâşâ ve kellâ”. SN I: 154b.

14Another reason a guild might lack a patron is its low social status or its reputation for dubious dealings. Among such were the thieves, the pimps, and the panderers. More than once Evliyâ contemptuously writes of a guild “Heaven forfend that they have a patron”, or “Heaven forfend the audience that they have a patron.”28 Sometimes Evliyâ simply does not accept a guild’s claim that it has a certain patron. For instance, of the asesān, the night-watch, he writes, “According to their superstitious belief, their patron is Amr-i ‛Ayyār, but this is certainly not the case. Beware!”29 Evliyâ states that the actual patron of the silk mercers is ʿAbdullāh, son of Ca‛fer-i Ṭayyār, despite their claim that their patron is Imām Ġazzālī. Also the claim of the boza-makers that their pīr is Ṣarı Ṣaltıq, is commented on by Evliyâ only with hāşā (SN I : 212b).

  • 30 “Pîrleri Cemşîd'dir. Hazret asrında zurna çalınmayup pîr-i hakîkîleri yokdur.” SN I: 202b.

15But Evliyâ sometimes offers a very pragmatic explanation for a pīrsiz guild. He states, for example, that the horse-millers and the gun-makers have no patrons because their handicrafts were unknown in the Prophet’s time. However, he then contradicts himself by saying that Dāvūd is the patron of the gun-makers because he battled Goliath with a metal blowtube and small clay balls (SN I : 182a). Similarly, according to Evliyâ the bandmasters (mehterān) have only the pre-Islamic Cemşīd as a patron because no bands existed at the time of the Prophet.30

  • 31 The Fütüvvetnāme of Yaḥyā b. Ḫalīl al-Burġāzī also is translated into German in Taeschner, 1979: 3 (...)
  • 32 The Fütüvvetnāme-i Kebīr also gives the reasons why these guilds are not worthy of the fütüvvet.
  • 33 Evliyâ says the Jewish tavern-keepers are pīrsiz, though they have Çemşīd SN I: 215a.

16According to Taeschner (1979 : 455f.), who compared concerning this point Ibn ‛Alāeddīn’s Fütüvvetnāme-i Kebīr with al-Burġāzī,31 there are twelve groups which do not deserve the fütüvvet:32 the unbelievers (kāfir), the wine drinkers (ḫamr içenler),33 the hypocrets (münāfiq), and nine professional groups – specifically the fortune-tellers (remmāl and müneccim), the servers in the ḥammāms (dellāk), the agents (dellāl), the weavers (cullāḥ), the butchers (qaṣṣāb), the surgeons (cerrāḥ), the hunters (ṣayyād), the tax-tenants (ʿameldār), and the crop speculators (maṭrabāz). However, Evliyâ does not list any of these groups as pīrsiz: he does not mention the ʿameldār and maṭrabāz at all, and for each of the other ten professional groups he gives the name of a pīr. Only the Jewish butchers mentioned above have no pīr – not because they are butchers, but because they are non-Muslims.

Female pīrs:

  • 34 She cured Moses of an eye illness by rubbing some dust into his eyes which she had taken from bene (...)
  • 35 “kettân ekenlere ve eğirüp iplik edenlere Hadîce‑i Kübrâ pîre oldu.” SN I: 166a.
  • 36 “Ammâ sünnet edicilerin pîri Ebü'l-havâkîn Muhammed'in hâtûnu Râbi‘a binti Abdullâh ibn Mes‘ûd'{dur (...)

17Among the patrons are five women, one of them even designated by the feminine form pīre: The patron for the female Qur’ān recitators was Sitti Ḥafẓa, the daughter of ‛Umar bin Ḫattāb (SN I : 156a). The patron of the kehhālān was an un-named pre-islamic Jewish lady.34 The patron of the kettāncıyān, which included the farmers who grew linen as well as the producers of linen thread, was Ḫadīce‑i Kübrā, wife of Muḥammad and girded by the Prophet himself. As patron of those involved with linen production, she was the Islamic successor of the early Iranian hero-king Hūşeng Şāh.35 The patron of the napkin-embroiderers, yağlıkçı, was Belqīs, wife of Salomon, because she herself had embroidered a napkin (SN I : 192b). Particularly interesting is Evliyâ’s mention of a female pīr among the circumcisers (“esnâf‑ı berberân‑ı sünnetciyân”): After explaining that the Prophet was born circumcised, he introduces Rābi‘a bint ‛Abdullāh ibn Mes’ūd, wife of Ebū l-ḫavāqīn Muhammed, as the pīr for circumcising girls, as it was she who cut “the peace of redundant meat called little red tongue which is situated in the middle of the girls’ maṣdar (lit. ‘place of origin’)“. He claims this circumcision is very useful, as it facilitates delivery.36

  • 37 “Pîr oldur kim her muharremât [u] memnû‘âtden müberrâ ve ma‘sûm [u] pâk ola. Anın îmânı dürüstdür.” (...)

18What were the characteristic features of a guild patron? What must he or she have done? What virtues did they possess? In his chapter on girding – which is not part of the guild account – Evliyâ describes a typical pīr as “one who is innocent and clean and free of any sin and blemish: his belief is wholehearted”. He later adds that a pīr is “one who is girded in the presence of the Prophet by the belt of one of the Four, who are girded by Him”.37

Stories or legends about these pīrs

19Unfortunately, contrary to our expectations, Evliyâ does not provide us with an abundance of stories, legends, and sayings about the patrons. Because, as was stated at the beginning, we can take Evliyâ to be an indicator of what we might expect to find in the “mental furniture“ of the typical educated Ottoman, we must conclude that few legends concerning pīrs were actually in circulation. Usually Evliyâ states why someone is pīr only in a single sentence. Sometimes he mentions the location of the pīr’s grave and the pīr’s age at death – always far beyond a hundred years. Evliyâ also tells us if he himself has visited the person’s grave, describing its appearance or any special rites performed there.

20There were a variety of reasons why certain individuals became patrons of certain guilds. According to the legends, certain Companions of the Prophet became girded because:

  • The Prophet had decided that the Companion in question should work in that particular profession, or the Companion had done the Prophet a service characteristic of that profession. Thus Bilāl, the first müezzin, became patron of the müezzins; and Selmān, who shaved the Prophet, became patron of the barbers.

  • The Companion did something which somehow can be associated with the profession in question or provided the Prophet or the Prophet’s household with a certain product. Thus Ebū l-Kevser Şādü l-kürdī was patron of the water-carriers because he distributed water to the fighters during the Battle of Kerbela (SN I : 160b). Also, Reyyān‑i Hindī was the patron of the simitçi because he had presented simits to Ḥasan and Ḥüseyin (SN I : 159b f.), and eş-Şeyh Ḫālid‑i ‛Ummānī was the patron of the pearl-divers because he gave pearls to Muḥammed (SN I : 163a f.). Another Companion, ‛Iṭriddīn‑i Hindī, regularly provided the Prophet with rose-water, and therefore had been made the pīr of the gülābcı (SN I : 158b).

    • 38 The chapter “Evsâf‑ı sanâyi‘‑i meşâhîr‑i enbiyâ‑i izâm” contains a long list of the professions of (...)

    Another reason certain individuals were pīrs of particular professions was that they were believed to have invented or introduced things used in those professions.38 This was especially true concerning the pre-islamic prophet-patrons. An example is Yūsuf, pīr of the clockmakers, who invented the clock while sitting in a dark well because he needed to know the correct time to perform the prayers (SN I: 163a).

The Legends39

  • 39 The question of the sources for these stories definitely deserves further research and a much more (...)

21As was said before, no elaborate texts should be expected. In fact, only about 30 stories concerning the pīrs are longer than two or three sentences.

  • 40 For a Koranic story of Dāvūd see note 17. For a story in the Koran concerning Cain, see below.

22What is really striking and interesting about this material is that two-thirds of the stories deal with pre-Islamic figures. This implies that the stories of the “old ones”, and therefore the sources which included these stories, were widely known. Stories from various books on the miracles of the prophets (qıṣaṣü l-enbiyā’) obviously belonged to the common popular knowledge of the time, which – of course – was also true of the stories in the Koran.40 By contrast, stories concerning the Companions of the Prophet are significantly fewer and shorter. Often the pre-Islamic patron and his special relationship with a guild is described in detail whereas the name alone of the “real” pīr is provided by Evliyâ without further comment.

23The main features of the protagonists are the following:

  • 41 “Bi-emrillâhi Ta‘âlâ çölde ve çölistânda ve berr ü beyâbânda şebekesin ya‘nî ağın kum üzre atsa gû (...)

Miracles (muʿcizāt, kerāmāt) such as transformations and metamorphoses are rare. However, the miracles that are narrated are not restricted to the Prophet but include miracles performed by Companions of the Prophet and by other prophets. One miracle story is even about a non-Muslim woman, the Jewish kehhāl mentioned above, who healed the prophet Mūsā’s eyes. One set of miracle stories relate that the patron of the fishermen, Naṣrullāh Semmād, threw his net onto the sand of the desert and magically drew forth a multitude of fish. Evliyâ mentions that he himself, when on the hajj, ate of fish caught in the sand.41

  • 42 This legend is still well-known in Aleppo; for its origins see Tomkins 1897: 80.

24İbrāhīm, patron of several guilds involved with milk production (milk, ḥallūm cheese, cream/kaymak, yoghurt), had a miraculous cow in Aleppo which never dried up. He milked her every day and distributed the milk to the city’s poor. And the trough in which the cow’s milk had been kept provided milk to the people for hundreds of years afterwards, always remaining full (SN I : 167b).42

  • 43 “...ilâ hâze'l-ân cemî‘i mahlûk‑ı Hudâ, İbrâhîm Halîl tuzundan tenâvül ederler aceb hikmetdir.” SN(...)

25İbrāhīm was also the patron of the salt traders because of another miracle he had performed: After he had finished building the Kaaba, a small bowl of dust remained. When Ibrāhīm asked God for wages for his labour, God told him to cast the dust in the bowl in all directions. Ibrāhīm obeyed, and the dust was distributed across the whole world as salt: “And to this day all the creatures of God eat of the salt of Ibrāhīm”.43

Miraculous coincidents

26Stories of this type mainly relate the very unlikely chance through which a pīr invented, or learned how to do, something.

  • 44 Q 5 : 31: “Then Allah sent a crow searching in the ground to show him how to hide the disgrace of (...)

27For example, after Cain, patron of the gravediggers, killed his brother Abel, he did not know what to do with the body. But then he observed a raven digging up a coconut and got the idea of hiding the corpse in the earth (SN I : 154a). This – less the coconut – basically is how the story is told in the Quran.44

28Another example is the Iranian hero Cemşīd, patron of the soap makers as well as of several other guilds: He failed in his first efforts to produce soap from olive oil and was so disappointed that he started crying. When his tears dripped into the oil, it immediately coagulated, becoming soap. Çemşīd realized that the coagulation was caused by the salt in the tears and thus learned how to make soap. According to Evliyâ, Cemşīd invented 366 different crafts (SN I : 179b).

  • 45 Hūşeng is mentioned in the Şāhnāme as the inventor of various crafts: he “dug canals for irrigatio (...)

29The creation of flax was the result of another happy accident: Hūşeng, the mythical Iranian king, grew cotton and watered it with urine. God then turned Hūşeng’s cotton into flax. Evliyâ says that this is why flax has the aroma of urine. However he does not enlighten his readers about what had inspired Hūşeng to water his cotton with urine in the first place (SN I : 166a).45

Order by God

  • 46 “kaz göğsü kemigine göre” SN I : 162b.

30There are stories relating how God ordered certain arts and crafts to be taught to human beings. The agent of God’s will in these stories is Cibrīl. Thus Cibrīl showed Adam how to grow wheat and then how to grind the wheat and bake bread: Adam therefore became the patron of the bakers. Cibrīl also showed Noah, patron of the ship-wrights, how to build a ship “in the design of a goose’s breast-bone”.46

Pīrs and Christian patrons

31Finally, I will briefly compare Christian47 traditions about guild patrons with those of Evliyâ. As sources I used the Legenda Aurea, a 13th century collection of legends by Jacobus de Voragine, and the Ecumenical Online Lexicon of Saints by Joachim Schäfer.48 One striking parallel is that among the many legends about Christian saints there are disappointingly few concerning their role as guild patrons: I had in fact expected the works I consulted to be much more detailed on this subject than the Seyahatnâme. First the differences between Christian and Muslim guild patrons: In contrast to the Muslim pīrs, we find few biblical prophets as Christian guild patrons. The Apostles, like the prophet’s Companions, were guild patrons, but the overwhelming majority of Christian guild patrons were saints who lived in late Antiquity and during the Middle Ages. And – of course – we find many more female Christian than female Muslim guild patrons.

32But there are also several parallels between the two guild-patron traditions:

  • As with the Muslim pīrs, occasionally we find one individual as the patron for more than a single Christian guild. Indeed, some saints – for example St. Nicolaus and St. Catharina – served 25 to 30 guilds as a patron.

  • Like the Muslim guilds, some Christian guilds had more than one patron.

  • And unfortunately as with the Muslim pīrs, we find few explanations, or even hints, about why certain saints became patrons for certain guilds. Often it is far from clear from their biographies why these particular saints should have been the patrons of these particular guilds. However, there are some cases in which there is – as with Muslim pīrs – a clear connection between a saint’s life and his or her patronage of specific guilds:

    • Some of the saints had pursued the guild’s work. Thus the Apostle Andreas, who was a fisherman, is the patron of the fishermen. And Thomas, who drafted the plan of a palace for the King of India, is the patron not only for the architects but also for some other groups in the construction sector.

    • Some acts of certain saints have associations with the activities of certain guilds. Thus Christophorus, who carried the baby Jesus across a river, became the patron of ferrymen. And Caecilia, because her chorus of nuns sang so beautifully that they tamed the attackers of their convent, became the patroness of singers.

    • As in the case of the pīrs, one Christian patron is frequently responsible for a whole cluster of related professions. Consequently Ibrāhīm – remember the Cow of Aleppo – was pīr for many professions dealing with milk. And Catharina, who was martyred on the wheel, is the patron for numerous guilds connected with wheels, or whose working equipment is turned by wheels – such as the potters, the carriage-makers, the millers, and the scissor sharpeners.

33And, by the way, there was even a patron common to Muslim and Christian guild traditions: Dāvūd / David, the patron of the musicians. The only difference is his instrument: In the Judeo-Christian tradition he played the harp (for Salomon), whereas in Muslim tradition he played the zurna.

34The table below is a preliminary conclusion of the differences and similarities in the concepts and ideas, as embodied in the legends, between both Muslim Ottoman and Christian European guild patrons.

Pīrs and patrons – differences

Pīrs
many pre-Islamic prophets

Companions and contemporaries

of Muhammed
few figures from the time after

Muhammed
very few female pīrs

Christian patrons
few biblical prophets from the Old Testament
Apostles; but only a few other contemporaries
of Jesus
many figures from the time after Jesus

many female patrons

pīrs and patrons – common features

35 one pīr/patron for several guilds

36 frequently the same pīr/patron for related guilds

37 several pīrs/patrons for the same guild

38 David/Dāvūd pīr/patron of the musicians

Haut de page

Bibliographie

Arslan, Mehmet (ed.). (1999). Türk edebiyatında manzum surnâmeler (Osmanlı saray düğünleri ve şenlikleri). Ankara: Atatürk Kültür Merkezi Yayınlığı.

Atasoy, Nurhan, (1997), Surname-i Hümayun: dügün kitabı 1582, İstanbul : Koçbank.

Aynur, Hatice, (1995), Saliha Sultan’ın düğününü anlatan surnâmeler (1834): inceleme, tenkitli metin ve tıpkıbasım, Cambridge, Mass: Harvard Univ.

Boeschoten, Henrick, O’Kane John, Vandamme, M.,(1995), Al-Rabghūzī. The Stories of the Prophets. Qiṣaṣ al-Anbiyā An Eastern Turkish Version, Leiden, New York, Köln: Brill.

Busse, Heinrich, (2006). Islamische Erzählungen von Propheten und Gottesmännern. Qiṣaṣ al-anbiyā‘ oder ʿArā’is al-mağālis von Abū Isḥāq Aḥmad b. Muḥammad b. Ibrāhīm at-Taʿlabī, Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.

Dağlı, Y., Dankoff Robert, S. A. Kahraman. (2006). Evliyâ Çelebi b. Derviş Mehemmed Zıllî: Evliyâ Çelebi Seyahatnâmesi, 1. kitap: Topkapı Sarayı Kütüphanesi Bağdat 304 numaralı yazmanın transkripsiyonu-dizini. İstanbul: YKY.

Eren, Meşkure, (1960), Evliyâ Çelebi Seyahatnâmesi Birinci Cildinin Kaynakları Üzerine Bir Araştırma, İstanbul: Edebiyat Fakültesi Matbaası.

Hammer, Joseph von, (1834), Narrative of travels in Europe, Asia, and Africa, in the seventeenth Century by Evliyâ Efendi, Vol I, part II. London : Parbury, Allen & Co. Reprint, New York & London: Johnson Reprint Comp, 1968.

Hammer-Purgstall, Joseph von, (1822), Konstantinopolis und der Bosporus. Pesth : Harthleben. Reprint by Nabu: LaVergne 2011.

Nutku, Özdemir, (1972), IV. Mehmet’in Edirne şenliği: (1675) Ankara: TTK Basımevi.

Öztekin, Ali (ed.). (1996), Mustafa Âli: Câmiʿu’l-buhûr der mecâlis-i sûr. Ed. kritik ve tahlil, Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Basımevi.

Procházka-Eisl, Gisela, (1995), Das Sūrnāme-i Hümāyūn. Die Wiener Handschrift in Transkription, mit Kommentar und Indices versehen. İstanbul: İsis.

Prokosch, E. (2012), forthcoming “Osmanische Lexikographie. Erster Teil.” WZKM, 102.

Qur’ān: http://corpus.quran.com/ accessed 16-03-2012

Schäfer, J. Das ökumenische Heiligenlexikon, http://www.heiligenlexikon.de/

Taeschner, Franz, (2012), “Ak̲h̲ī Ewrān.” Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition, 2012. Reference. Universitaet Wien. 13 March 2012, http://referenceworks.brillonline.com/entries/encyclopaedia-of-islam-2/akhi-ewran-SIM_0467

Taeschner, Franz, (1979), Zünfte und Bruderschaften im Islam. Texte zur Geschichte der Futuwwa, Zürich – München: Artemis.

Taeschner, Franz, (1955), Gülschehrīs Mesnevi auf Achi Evran, den Heiligen von Kırschehir und Patron der türkischen Zünfte, Wiesbaden: Steiner.

Taeschner, Franz, (1941), Legendenbildung um Achi Evran, den Heiligen von Kirşehir WI, Sonderbd. Festschrift Fr. Giese (61-71, 90 f.).

Tomkins, Henry Georges, (1897), Abraham and His Age, London: Eyre and Spottiswoode.

Voragine, Jacques de, (1912), Die goldene Legende der Heiligen: nach schriftlichen Zeugnissen und mündlicher Überlieferung erzählt, Translated by Ernst Jaffé. Berlin: Bard.

Yarshater, Ehsan, (ed.). (1985), Encyclopaedia Iranica, Volume XIV. New York: Encyclopaedia Iranica Foundation.

Yi, Eunjeong, (2004), Guild dynamics in seventeenth-century Istanbul: fluidity and leverage, Leiden [et a.]: Brill.

Haut de page

Notes

1 Public ceremonies which were famous for especially splendid guild parades include Murād III’s 1582 celebration of the circumcision of his son Meḥmed, the 1638 festivities preceding Murād IV’s campaign against Persia, the 1675 celebrations of the circumcisions of two sons and the wedding of one daughter of Meḥmed IV, and that Sultan’s 1678 festivities prior to his campaign against Russia. For the details of all these celebrations see: Arslan, 1999; Atasoy, 1997; Aynur 1995; Nutku, 1972;. Öztekin, 1996; and Procházka-Eisl, 1995.

2 Hammer-Purgstall, J.v., 1822.

3 Hammer-Purgstall, J.v., 1850.

4 I must emphasize that this paper is not about guild patrons in general, only about their portrayal in the Seyahatnâme of Evliyâ Çelebi.

5 Procházka-Eisl, 1995 : f. 55v.

6 Sa‛d b. Vaqqāṣ (600?-678), one of the most important Companions of the Prophet, was famed for his skill in archery, which he demonstrated at the battle of Uḥud. Procházka-Eisl 1995, f. 54v.

7 Procházka-Eisl, 1995 : f. 22v.

8 But this is only one aspect in which the Seyahatnâme can be regarded as an indicator: E. Prokosch in his forthcoming article on Ottoman lexicography, states that the Seyahatnâme, together with Hammer-Purgstall’s History of the Ottoman Empire would suffice to write a lexicon on hadithes relevant in specific Ottoman contexts, which would be more useful for Ottomanists than Wensinck. Prokosch, 2012 : forthcoming.

9 SN = Seyahatnâme. To avoid irritations between the first and the second revised edition I do not quote the relevant page but the manuscript folio, which of course is the same in both editions.

10 Busse/at-Taʿlabī 2006: 64: “Idrīs war der erste, [...]der Kleider nähte und genähte Kleidung trug.”

11 Taeschner, 1979 : 406.

12 Its actual title is Miftāḥu d-daqā’iq fī bayāni l-futuwwa wa-l-ḥaqā’iq.

13 This is the reason that ‛Alī commonly is seen in Islam as the founder of the guilds. Taeschner, 1979 : 408.

14 Various guilds took parts of it and changed it according to their special needs. Taeschner, 1979 : 414.

15 This number is suggested by Yi, 2004 : 42, n. 2. According to Yücel Dağlı’s index in the Seyahatnâme, there are around 550 groups.

16 Later on, Evliyâ states that Cemşīd is pīr for 366 guilds; see below. The source for the many narratives concerning Cemşīd’s uncanny ability to invent and teach numerous skills is Ferdousī’s Şāhnāme. Cf. Yarshater, EIr 2008 : 505. The Şāhnāme obviously belonged to the books consulted by Evliyâ, as he refers to this book when introducing the painters: “...as it was written in the Şâhnâme“. SN I : 199b.

17 Q 34 : 10 -11: “And We made pliable for him iron, [Commanding him], ‘Make full coats of mail and calculate [precisely] the links, and work [all of you] righteousness.” www.corpus.quran.com, accessed 16-03-2012.

18 “kadîm‑i evvelde pîrleri Hazret‑i Fisagores‑i Tevhîdî idi. {Ammâ} Hazret‑i Risâlet asrında pîr‑i hakîkîleri Hazret‑i Ubeyd‑i Attâr'dır”. SN I : 158a.

19 “Pîrleri Hazret‑i Nûh'dur. Ammâ Hazret‑i Resûl asrında Mekke deryâsı kim Süveys deryâsıdır, andan bir re’îs Hazret huzûruna gelüp İslâm ile müşerref olan Ebü'l-mahz‑ı Ummânî'dir”. SN I : 162a.

20 Such as Salsāl Tatar for the boza-makers (SN I : 212b f.) and – before Ḥamza took over – Tohtamış Bay from the dynasty of the Cingizīds (SN I : 194b). I will not discuss the already thoroughly-researched Aḫi Evrān, for whom see Taeschner, 1941, 1955, and 2012.

21 “fütüvvetnâme‑i kübrâda "Bağdâd Hillesi'nde arslan paralamışdır, kabri nâ-ma‘lûmdur" deyü yazmış. Rahmetullâh.SN I: 190a.

22 “pîrleri ma‘lûmum olmayup bir siğer ü fütüvvetde ve fütüvvetnâme‑i kebîrde görmeyüp seyâhat etdüğimiz yerlerde ziyâret dahi etmedik”. (barber razor grinders) SN I: 189a; “pîrleri nâ-ma’lûmdur. Varulcu esnâfın bir fütüvvetde görmedik” (suitcase makers) SN I : 202a. Evliyâ states of the pīr of the tanners: “Ca‘fer‑i Sâdık'ın Fütüvvetnâme‑i Kebîr'inde mastûrdur” SN I : 193b.

23 “Selmân‑ı Pâk 'in kemer-beste etdüği üçüncü pîrdir”. SN I: 159a.

24 For a comparison of the relevant parts in the Seyāhatnāme and the Fütüvvetnāme-i Kebīr see Eren, 1960: 69-74.

25 “...bunlar cümle Rûmeli'nde Serfice ve Filorunya ve Liçista ve Gölikesri şehirlerinde sâkin bir alay bî-dîn ve bî-pîr Urumlardır” SN I: 193b.

26 “pîrsizân-i Fir‛avniyān” SN I: 169a.

27 “bu mel‘ûnlar müselmânın boğazladuğı lahmı yemeyüp başka pîrsiz mel’ûnlardır” SN I: 166b.

28 “hâşâ mine's-sâmi‘în pîrleri ola” for the pâzvengân, “hâşâ pîrleri ola” for the deyyūsān; both SN I: 154b.

29 “zu‘m-ı bâtıllarınca pîrleri Amr‑ı Ayyâr'dır ammâ hâşâ ve kellâ”. SN I: 154b.

30 “Pîrleri Cemşîd'dir. Hazret asrında zurna çalınmayup pîr-i hakîkîleri yokdur.” SN I: 202b.

31 The Fütüvvetnāme of Yaḥyā b. Ḫalīl al-Burġāzī also is translated into German in Taeschner, 1979: 318-402.

32 The Fütüvvetnāme-i Kebīr also gives the reasons why these guilds are not worthy of the fütüvvet.

33 Evliyâ says the Jewish tavern-keepers are pīrsiz, though they have Çemşīd SN I: 215a.

34 She cured Moses of an eye illness by rubbing some dust into his eyes which she had taken from beneath his feet. She was kehhāl for 200 years. Only in the time of the Prophet was she replaced by a new pīr (whose name is left blank in the SN). SN I: 158a.

35 “kettân ekenlere ve eğirüp iplik edenlere Hadîce‑i Kübrâ pîre oldu.” SN I: 166a.

36 “Ammâ sünnet edicilerin pîri Ebü'l-havâkîn Muhammed'in hâtûnu Râbi‘a binti Abdullâh ibn Mes‘ûd'{dur}, duhter‑i pâkîze-ahterlerin masdarı ortasındaki kırmızı dilçik nâm lahm‑ı zâ’idi kesüp sünnet ederdi. Hazret‑i İbrâhîm hâtûnu olan (‑‑‑) Ana Hâcer Ana'ya gazab edüp ol lahmı kesüp sünnet edüp ol asırdan berü bintânları sünnet etmek Arabistân'a mahsûsdur. Hâlâ Mısır'da Hazarî derler bir gûne kavm vardır, kız sünnetleri gecesinde azîm şâdumânlar ederler. Nisvân tâ’ifesine bu sünnetin fâ’idesi oldur kim vaz‘‑ı haml etdikde âsân vech ile doğururmuş.” SN I: 198a.

37 “Pîr oldur kim her muharremât [u] memnû‘âtden müberrâ ve ma‘sûm [u] pâk ola. Anın îmânı dürüstdür.” SN I, 150a and: “pîr oldur kim Hazret huzûrunda dörd miyân-bestenin şeddin kuşanmış ola.” SN I, 185a.

38 The chapter “Evsâf‑ı sanâyi‘‑i meşâhîr‑i enbiyâ‑i izâm” contains a long list of the professions of the prophets. SN I: 147a. Evliyâ said he used the Fütüvvetnāme-i Muḥammedī, which is another name for the Fütüvvetnāme-i kebīr mentioned above. Cf. Eren, 1960: 66-67.

39 The question of the sources for these stories definitely deserves further research and a much more in-depth investigation – an enterprise which would exceed the scope of the present paper. A good research was done Eren 1960, who identified an abundance of sources used by Evliyâ. Cf. for example the edition of the Qiṣaṣ al-anbiyā’ of Busse, 2006 and Boeschoten et al., 1995, in which are extracts of many of the narratives.

40 For a Koranic story of Dāvūd see note 17. For a story in the Koran concerning Cain, see below.

41 “Bi-emrillâhi Ta‘âlâ çölde ve çölistânda ve berr ü beyâbânda şebekesin ya‘nî ağın kum üzre atsa gûnâ-gûn mâhîler ile ağı mâl-â-mâl olurdu. Hattâ bu hakîr Şâm‑ı Şerîf'den Hacc‑ı şerîfe giderken Bi’r‑i Zümürrüd nâm mahalle vardığımızda cümle huccâc‑ı müslimîn peştemâl peştemâl kum içinden ufacık ve iri balıklar getirüp pişirüp tenâvül etdik.” SN I: 174a.

42 This legend is still well-known in Aleppo; for its origins see Tomkins 1897: 80.

43 “...ilâ hâze'l-ân cemî‘i mahlûk‑ı Hudâ, İbrâhîm Halîl tuzundan tenâvül ederler aceb hikmetdir.” SN I: 159b.

44 Q 5 : 31: “Then Allah sent a crow searching in the ground to show him how to hide the disgrace of his brother. He said, ‘O woe to me! Have I failed to be like this crow and hide the body of my brother?’ And he became of the regretful.” www.corpus.quran.com accessed 16-03-2012.

45 Hūşeng is mentioned in the Şāhnāme as the inventor of various crafts: he “dug canals for irrigation and promoted cultivation”. Cf. Yarshater, EIr 2004: 491.

46 “kaz göğsü kemigine göre” SN I : 162b.

47 Especially Roman Catholic.

48 De Voragine 1912 and Schäfer, www.heiligenlexikon.de accessed 14-03-2012.

Haut de page

Pour citer cet article

Référence papier

Gisela Procházka-Eisl, « İbrāhīm and the White Cow – Guild Patrons in Evliyâ Çelebi’s Seyahatnâme », Cahiers balkaniques, 41 | -1, 157-170.

Référence électronique

Gisela Procházka-Eisl, « İbrāhīm and the White Cow – Guild Patrons in Evliyâ Çelebi’s Seyahatnâme », Cahiers balkaniques [En ligne], 41 | 2013, mis en ligne le 19 juin 2013, consulté le 17 août 2017. URL : http://ceb.revues.org/3980 ; DOI : 10.4000/ceb.3980

Haut de page

Auteur

Gisela Procházka-Eisl

Professeur

Institut orientaliste, Université de Vienne, Autriche

Haut de page