HARVARD UNIVERSITY Graduate School of Arts and Sciences

mm.

DISSERTATION ACCEPTANCE CERTIFICATE

The undersigned, appointed by the

Committee on Middle Eastern Studies have examined a dissertation entitled

"Subjects of the Sultan, Disciples of the Shah: Formation and Transformation of the Kizilbash/Alevi Communities in Ottoman Anatolia" presented by Ayfer Karakaya Stump candidate for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy and hereby certify that it is worthy of acceptance.

Signature Typed name: Prof. Cemal Kafadar

Signature Typed name: Prof. Carter V. Findley

Signature Typed name: Prof. Roy Mottahedeh

Signature.-Vs-jJtfL - Typed name: Prof. Wheeler M. Thackston, Jr.

Date:

Subjects of the Sultan, Disciples of the Shah: Formation and Transformation of the Kizilbash/Alevi Communities in Ottoman Anatolia

A dissertation presented

by

Ayfer Karakaya Stump

to

The Committee on Middle Eastern Studies

in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the subject of History and Middle Eastern Studies

Harvard University Cambridge, Massachusetts

September 2008 UMI Number: 3334802

Copyright 2008 by Stump, Ayfer Karakaya

All rights reserved.

INFORMATION TO USERS

The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleed-through, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.

® UMI UMI Microform 3334802 Copyright 2008 by ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.

ProQuest LLC 789 E. Eisenhower Parkway PO Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 ©2008 -Ayfer Karakaya Stump All rights reserved Advisor: Prof. Cemal Kafadar Author: Ayfer Karakaya Stump

Subjects of the Sultan, Disciples of the Shah: Formation and Transformation of the Kizilbash/Alevi Communities in Ottoman Anatolia

ABSTRACT

This dissertation deals with the history of the Alevi communities historically known as the Kizilbash in Ottoman Anatolia. Scholars have typically treated Alevism as an undifferentiated strain within the hazy category of "heterodox folk Islam" and mostly in terms of the role these communities played in the sixteenth-century

Ottoman-Safavid conflict. There has thus been little effort to explore Alevi history in its own right. This dissertation proposes to fill this gap by examining the development of the Alevis' socio-religious organization, which is centered around a number of charismatic family lines called ocaks. Drawing upon a group of newly available documents and manuscripts emanating from within the Alevi milieu itself, this dissertation traces the origins of the ocak system to the cosmopolitan Sufi milieu of late medieval Anatolia and accounts for the system's evolution up to the nineteenth century.

Chapter one reveals the historical affinity of a number of prominent Alevi ocaks in eastern Anatolia with the WafaT order and shows how from the second half of the fifteenth century onwards the various branches of the Wafa'iyya came to merge with the Safavid-led Kizilbash movement, gradually evolving into distinct components of the

Alevi ocak system. Chapters two and three deal with the trajectory of the Alevi-Bektashi symbiosis. Highlighting Alevis' historical ties to the Abdal/Bektashi convent in Karbala,

iii these chapters propose looking beyond the central Bektashi convent in Kir§ehir for a fuller grasp of the issue. Chapter four, devoted to Alevi-Safavid relations, argues that the Alevis conceived of their bond with the Safavids primarily in Sufi terms and that they continued in their spiritual attachment to the shahs even after the revolutionary phase of the Kizilbash movement. Relations between the shahs and their Anatolian followers were maintained through the mediation of the Abdal/Bektashi convent in

Karbala. Until the late seventeenth century, the Safavids also continued to bestow hildfetndm.es on members of Alevi ocaks and to dispatch religious treatises to Anatolia.

The Safavid memory among the Alevis began to fade away following the demise of the dynasty around the mid-eighteenth century and the subsequent increase in influence of the £elebi Bektashis among them.

IV TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT iii TABLE OF CONTENTS v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS vii NOTE ON TRANSLITERATION xii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS xiv

INTRODUCTION 1

i. Literature to Date . 7 ii. Conceptual Considerations 19 iii. Scope of the Study 22 iv. Sources 27 v. Organization of the Dissertation 33

CHAPTER ONE: The Forgotten Forefathers: The Wafaiyya Order and its Kizilbash Offshoots in Anatolia

I-Introduction 36 II- Abu'1-Wafa' Taj al-'Arifin and the Wafa'iyya Order 38 i. Biography of Abu'1-Wafa 38 ii. Abu'1-Wafa and his Order 51 iii. Disciples and Successors of Abu'1-Wafa' 55 III- Wafaiyya in Anatolia 58 i. Wafa I Dervishes and Early Ottomans 58 ii. Early WafaT Presence in Eastern Anatolia 62 IV- WafaT cum Kizilbash Ocaks in Ottoman Anatolia 68 i. Major Sub-branches and their Geographical Distribution 68 ii.The silsila of WafaT cum Kizilbash ocaks according to Alevi documents. 77 V-Conclusion 82

CHAPTER TWO: The Contested Legacy of Had Bektas/. The Abdals of Rum, the Bektashi Order, and the Kizilbash Movement

I-Introduction 84 II- The Historical Had Bektas 90 III- The Abdals of Rum and the early (or proto-)Bektashis 103 IV- The Ottoman State and the Bektashi Order 116 V- The Safavids, the Abdals of Rum, and the Legacy of HacT Bektas. 123 VI-Conclusion 128

v CHAPTER THREE: An Intricate Web of Relations: The Bektashi Convents in Iraq and their Kizilbash Visitors

I-Introduction 130 II- Bektashi Presence in Iraq: Overview of the Sources 133 i. Literary Sources 133 ii. Archival Documents 136 iii. Alevi Documents 137 III- Bektashi Convents in Iraq 142 i. Convents Linked to Imams' Shrines 142 ii. Convents Independent from Shi'I Sanctuaries 154 iii. Convents of Imprecisely Known Location 160 IV- Assessing the Nature of Relations between the Kizilbash/Alevi Communities in Anatolia and the Bektashi Convents in Iraq 161 V-Conclusion 170

CHAPTER FOUR: Mysticism and Imperial Politics: The Safavids and the Kizilbash of Anatolia

I-Introduction 171 II- The Making of the Safavids' Kizilbash Constituency in Anatolia 172 III- The Safavid Shahs and Their Anatolian Followers in the Post-Revolutionary Phase 181 i. Appointment of Safavi Khalifas/ Hallfes 184 ii. Dispatch of Religious Treatises: The Buyruk Manuscripts 194 IV-Conclusion 205

CONCLUSION 207

BIBLIOGRAPHY 213

vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

It is a pleasure to thank the many individuals whose help this dissertation benefited from. Most of all I am grateful to my advisor, Professor Cemal Kafadar, who

supervised my work at every step from its conception to its completion. His inspiring guidance, trust in my work and cheering words whenever I needed reassurance have been crucial in bringing this dissertation to its fruition. Professor Kafadar has

profoundly shaped my thinking about history with his well-rounded erudition, inter­ disciplinary approach and nuanced understanding of the Ottoman world. I feel fortunate for having had the privilege of working with him. I am equally indebted to

Professor Carter Findley, who was my first mentor in the field of Ottoman history. He patiently guided me during my initial years of graduate education at the Ohio State

University, and continued to provide unwavering scholarly and friendly support from afar during my studies at Harvard. In his usual manner, he carefully read the entire dissertation, and provided valuable comments and suggestions. Professor Findley will always serve as a model of assiduousness and meticulous scholarship. A heartfelt thanks also goes to the late Professor SJnasi Tekin. The individualized Ottoman language classes that I took with him during the early stages of my research proved to be a lifesaver as I was entering the uncharted, polyglot territory of Alevi documents and manuscripts. He not only helped me decode and make sense of some of the most challenging documents, but as a philologist also instilled in me the important lesson of accounting fully for every word in the text of a document before proceeding with interpretation. I am also indebted to Professor Roy Mottahedeh and to Professor

Wheeler Thackston, both of whom kindly agreed to be on my dissertation committee. I

vii have greatly benefited from Professor Mottahedeh's teachings on early Islamic history,

and from Professor Thackston's Persian classes at Harvard and at the Cunda summer

school.

This thesis would not have been possible in its current form were it not for the

many Alevi dedes and ocakzades who opened to me their private archives, and imparted

information and traditions concerning their family histories. I am eternally grateful to

them, and to all other members of the Alevi community who hosted and guided my

husband and me during my field trips, helped me acquire copies of documents and

manuscripts, and generously shared with me their knowledge regarding various

aspects of Alevi ocaks. Among them I should particularly note the late Hasan Cevik

Dede, Bektas. Keskin Dede, Mehmet Ekber Cevik, Hiiseyin Keskin and Hiiseyin Cahit

Kargmer from Antep; Hiiseyin Dogan Dede, Hayri Dogan Dede, Abuzer Giizel Dede,

Mustafa Alkan (A§ik Ozeni), Kazim Acar from Adiyaman; the late (Kiiciik) Tacim Bakir

Dede, Mehmet Yiiksel Dede, Abuzer Erdogan Dede, Veyis Erdogan Dede, Asaf Kocdag and Mehmet Ocakfrom Mara§; Ali Riza Kargm Dede and E§ref Dogan from Malatya;

Ahmet Mutluay Dede and Hayrettin Kaya from Elazig; Hamza Ozyildinm Dede and Ali

Ozgoz Dede from Erzincan; Halil Oztiirk, Demir Durgun and Mustafa iyidogan from

Sivas; Mustafa Aygiin Dede, Celebi Eken Dede, Haydar Altun Dede, Mustafa Oksel and

Hiiseyin Kar§u from Amasya; the late Muharrem Yanar and Abdulkadir Sel Dede from

Tokat; Galip Dedekarginoglu, Izzettin Dogan, Muharrem Naci Orhan, Nurcemal Mola,

Ibrahim Sinemillioglu, Muharrem Ercan Dede and Kamil Oksel who currently reside in

Istanbul; Hiiseyin Dedekarginoglu Dede, Hamdi and Hayriye Karginer who currently reside in Ankara; and Ismail and Aysel Dogan who currently reside in Izmir; and many

viii others whose names I cannot mention due to economy of space. A special thanks also goes to my friend and colleague Ali Yaman and to Mehmet Yaman Dede who early on during my research process generously shared with me documents and manuscripts in their own libraries which they have collected from their family members and from members of other Alevi ocaks; and to my dear friends Mark and Dilek Soileau who joined me and my husband, and provided joyful company, during some of our field trips. Although I could use in this dissertation only a fraction of the information and written sources that I have collected during these field trips, the experience overall deepened my understanding of the larger Alevi world, and left an unfathomable imprint on the thought processes that lead to many of my conclusions. I have no doubt that I will continue benefiting from the experience and from the accumulated sources in my future work.

Numerous other colleagues and friends also contributed to this dissertation with their time and labor. Among them I should gratefully acknowledge Himmet

Ta§komur and Abdullatif al-Khaiat who many times over the years provided assistance to me in deciphering documents in Ottoman Turkish and Arabic. I also received help from Nima Shafaieh and Shantia Yarahmadian with some Persian documents and passages. Aimee Dobbs and Shahin Mustafayev helped me acquire a copy of a book from the library of the Academy of Sciences in Baku. Afet Dadashova transcribed some pages for me from the Cyrillic into Latin alphabet. Mark Soileau meticulously read every chapter of the dissertation and provided insightful comments and many useful suggestions. Donny Smith was kind enough to go over the entire dissertation, editing its language. I would like to extend my heartfelt gratitude to all of them. I am also

ix indebted to the following teachers, colleagues and friends who in different ways and to

varying extents contributed to this dissertation: Helga Anetshofer, Hakan Karateke,

Wolfhart Heinrichs, Kathryn Babayan, Ozer Ergenc, Zeynep Ertug, ilhan Ba§goz, Andras

Riedlmayer, David Zmijewski, Edouard Metenier, Irene Markoff, HiilyaTa§, Riiya Kilic,

Hiilya Canbakal, Amelia Gallagher, Suzanne Smith, Erdal Gezik, Ismail Kaygusuz, Ali

Akin, Tuba Gokcek and Perin Arkun. I apologize to anyone whom I may have

inadvertently omitted.

My dissertation research was funded by a generous grant from the American

Research Institute in Turkey and by the Kirkland fellowship from the Harvard

University. A Dissertation Writing Grant from the Institute of Turkish Studies and a

Whiting Dissertation Fellowship from Harvard University subsequently supported me during part of the writing stage of my dissertation. I also received financial help from the Center for Middle Eastern Studies and Harvard University Graduate Student Council for summer research in Turkey several years. Staff of the Vakiflar Genel Mudiirlugu

Arsjvi (Archives of the General Directorate of Endowments) in Ankara, among them especially Burhan Toy, and of the Ba§bakanlik Osmanli Arsjvleri (Archives of the Prime

Ministry) in Istanbul greatly facilitated my research in those archives. I am grateful to all these institutions and their staff for their support.

Finally, a very special thanks to members of my family. No words can express my gratitude to my husband, Laine Stump, who unswervingly stood by me during the very long journey of my graduate studies. I relied on him in more ways than I can count. Among other things, he took time from work to accompany me as my chauffeur, photographer and technical assistant during my many field trips in Turkey over the

x years. His unparalleled patience with my hours-long conversations with the dedes on issues of little personal interest to him, and with many other technical hurdles relating to my research, has prompted one of the dedes to give him the nickname dervish; a well deserved nickname indeed! Neither he, nor my daughter, Ezgi, ever complained about spending most of our family vacation time and money during the last several summers on visits and trips related to my research rather than in a nice resort in the

Mediterranean. Ezgi, canim ktzim, soon to be joined by the (still unnamed) little sister that she so fervently wanted, provided a great balance during this process, and brought much cheer and love. My brothers Abbas Karakaya and Mehmet Ali Karakaya, my sister

Aysel Karakaya-Akkuyu, my nieces Elif and Zeynep Akkuyu, and my aunt Makbule

(Dolar) Koc supported me emotionally with their presence, and helped me in practical matters whenever they could. Last, but not least, I want to express my gratitude to my parents, Melek (Dolar) Karakaya and Delil Karakaya, who have always been the greatest source of emotional support and motivation for me in my education pursuits. They were the ones who indirectly inspired my interest in the subject matter, and supplied me with the first-round of data on several issues of relevance to the dissertation, and provided me the initial contacts for my field research. I am dedicating this dissertation to them, with the full knowledge that it is too small a compensation for all that they have given me.

xi NOTE ON TRANSLITERATION

Given the polyglot nature of the sources, a certain level of inconsistency proved inevitable in the transliteration of non-English words. I have generally deferred to their linguistic and historical context in transliterating proper names, less known technical terms and direct quotations, while choosing a simplified form for more commonly used proper names and words. More specifically:

i. I have employed a slightly modified version of the transliteration system

used in the islam Ansiklopedisi in direct quotations from Turkish written in

Arabic letters, and the names of historical figures, Sufi orders and religious

movements belonging chiefly to a Turcophone context. But note the

following exceptions for the frequently occurring group names: Alevi,

rather than 'AlevT, Bektashi, rather than BektasJ, Kizilbash, rather than

Kizilba§.

ii. For Arabic, I have employed the system recommended by the International

Journal of Middle East Studies. I did not assimilate the Arabic definite article al­

to the noun preceding it, with the exception of proper names followed by -

allah, which becomes -ullah.

iii. Unless they are directly quoted from a written source, regardless of their

origin, I have used modern Turkish orthography for specialized Alevi

terminology, and the proper names of Alevi saintly lineages, considering

their primarily oral mode of transmission (for example semah, rather than

sema ; and the ocak of Imam Zeynel Abidin, rather than the ocak of Imam

xii Zayn al-'Abidin; but note the exceptions m\ir§id and talib, instead of miir§it and talip).

Unless they are part of a direct quotation, names of dynasties and well- known place names are written in their common form without diacritical marks (for example Karbala, and not Karbala). Names of less known places in Turkey are in principle rendered according to modern Turkish spelling, except in cases of some obsolete village names.

Less known technical terms are rendered in Arabic or Turkish transliteration depending on context (for example zawiya or zdviye), although in ambiguous cases both were provided at initial appearance.

Words that are found in an unabridged English dictionary are, however, not transliterated (including Sunni, Shi'i, Sufi, shaykh, dervish, sultan, shah, imam, sayyid, ulema, kadi, shari'a).

First the Hijri date and then the Common Era date (the two separated by a slash) are provided when referring to a specific document. For the sake of simplicity, I have chosen to provide only the first Common Era year in which the Hijri year falls, for example 1299/1881, rather than 1299/1881-82. When not referring to a specific document, only the Common Era date is used.

xiii ABBREVIATIONS

Apz 'A§ikpa§azade Ahmed. 'A§ikpasazade Tarihi. Istanbul: Matba'a-i 'Amire, 1332 [1914].

Apz-Atsiz 'A§ikpa§azade[DervTs, Ahmed]. Menakib u tevarih-i al-i 'Osman. In Osmanli Tarihleri I: Osmanh Tarihinin Anakaynaklan Olan Eserlerin, Miitehassishr Tarafindan Hazirlanan Metin, Tertiime veya Sadelestirilmis §ekilleri Kiilliyati, edited by N. Atsiz Qiftf ioglu, 79- 329. Istanbul: Tiirkiye Yayinevi, 1949.

b. born

BOA Ba§bakanhk Osmanli Arsjvi (Prime Ministry Archives)

Evliya-SN Evliya £elebi b. Dervis. Muhammed Zilli. Evliyd Qelebi Seyahatnamesi: Topkapi Sarayi Bagdat 305 Yazmasinin Transkripsiyonu-Dizini. 10 vols. Edited by Yxicel Dagli et al. Istanbul: Yapi Kredi Yayinlan, 1996-

EI-2 The Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd edition. Leiden: Brill, I960-.

FD Family Documents

DIA Tiirkiye Diyanet Vakfi islam Ansiklopedisi. Istanbul: Tiirkiye DiyanetVakfi, 1988-

Manakib al-'ArifTn al-Aflaki al-'ArifT, Shams al-DIn Ahmad. Manakib al-'Arifin. Edited by Tahsin Yazici. Rev. 2nd ed. 2. vols. Ankara: Turk Tarih Kurumu, 1976-80.

MD Miihimme Defteri

Menakib-Arabic al-ShabnsT al-WasitT, Shihab al-DTn Abu'1-Huda Ahmad b. 'Abd al- Mun'im. Tadhkirat al-muqtafin aihar uli al-safa'wa tabsirat al- muqtadin bi-tariq Taj al-'ArifinAbil-Wafa. MS. Bibliotheque Nationale in Paris, 2036.

Menakib-Turkish Mendhb-i Seyyid Ebiil-Vefa. MS. Siileymaniye Library, Murad Buhari 257.

MNK-Kudsiyye Elvan £elebi. Mendhbu'l-kudsiyye fimenasibil-iinsiyye. In Tarihi Metin $ali$malannda Usui: Mendhbul-Kudsiyye Uzerinde Bir Deneme, edited by Mertol Tulum, 175-651. Istanbul: Deniz Kitabevi, 2000.

xiv Noyan-Bektasjlik Noyan, Bedri. Butiin Y6nleriyleBekta$iUkveAlevilik. 7+ vols. Ankara: Ardig Yayinlan, 1998-

Tabaqat-Wasiti al-Wasitl, TaqT al-DIn 'Abd al-Rahman ibn 'Abd al-Muhsin. Tirydq al-muhibbtnfitabaqat khirqat at- mashayikh al- 'arifin Cairo: Matba'at al-Misr, 1305[1887].

Tabaqat- Sha'ranT al-Sha'ranl, 'Abd al-Wahhab. al-Tabaqat al-kubra (or Lawaqih al- anwar ft tabaqat al-akhyar). 2 vols. Cairo: al-Matba'a al-'amira al- 'uthmamyya, 1316 [1898]: vol.1.

TD TahrTr Defteri

Velayetname Vilayet-name: Manahb-i Hiinkdr Haci Bektd§-i Veil. Edited by Abdiilbakt Golpinarh. Istanbul: inkilap Kitapevi, 1990.

xv INTRODUCTION

On October 5, 2002, a concert called Binyihn Turkiisti—"The Saga of the Millennium,"

as its organizers translated it—took place in one of the largest indoor stadiums in

Istanbul. It was organized by the European Federation of Alevi Associations, bringing

together fifteen hundred baglama players ranging in age from seven to seventy, several

hundred semah performers, and dozens of soloists, most from different parts of Turkey

and Europe, but also several from Australia and North America. Every effort was made to publicize the event, which was partially broadcast live on a few national television

channels in Turkey.

The concert was set up as a stylized Alevi religious ceremony known as cem, in which the ritual dance of semah is performed and hymns, deyi§, are recited to music on the sacred instrument called baglama. However, with its sheer size and grandeur and its performance in a non-Alevi venue in cosmopolitan Istanbul, as well as its organizers' concerted effort to reach as wide an audience as possible, the show was a stark contrast to traditional Alevi cems in the village setting with close-knit congregations, strictly closed to the non-initiated. In the past, Alevis would hold their cems at night with the utmost secrecy to avoid hostile outsiders, including the state authorities and their

Sunni neighbors, who viewed them with suspicion because of their non-conformity to the rules of orthodox Islam. Referencing itself to such a historical framework, The Saga

1 of the Millennium was meant as a celebration of Alevis' cultural resistance and resilience against all odds.1

The forefathers of the modern-day Alevis were the Kizilbash, who first emerge in the historical record as zealous followers of the messianic figure Shah Isma'Tl (1487-

1524), the hereditary shaykh of the SafavT order and the founder of the Safavid dynasty that ruled over Iran for nearly two and a half centuries. Sixteenth-century Ottoman sources frequently mention the Kizilbash because of their uprisings against the

Ottomans and their pro-Safavid activities and because of the resulting reprisals they endured. The Ottomans defeated Shah Isma'Tl at the Battle of £aldiran in 1514 and suppressed the Kizilbash revolts before the close of the century. A distinct Kizilbash identity and creed, however, were maintained in Ottoman Anatolia despite a hostile political environment and the Sunni-controlled religious establishment. Today the

Alevis are estimated to constitute somewhere between ten and thirty percent of the population of Turkey, with smaller pockets of related groups in adjacent countries, especially in the Balkans.2

Traditionally, Alevis concur with the larger Shi'i world in tracing the onset of their story to early Islamic history, particularly to the tragedy of Karbala and the martyrdom of Imam Husayn in 61/680. Mainstream Twelver Shi'is and Alevis are also alike in their attachment to 'All, the cousin and son-in-law of the Prophet Muhammad, and to his eleven successors descending in the same line, who are recognized as the

1 Mirroring this sentiment was a giant banner decorating the concert hall which read "We will keep performing semah and reciting deyi§" [Semah Donmeye Deyi§ Soylemeye Devam Edecegiz].

2 No official statistics are kept regarding the size of different sectarian groups in Turkey; the percentages given here simply reflect the wide range of the estimates by different groups and individuals.

2 sole legitimate imams of the Islamic community. Nevertheless, the Alevis are clearly set

apart from mainstream Shi'is by the heavy doses of mysticism that mark their

teachings, by their antinomianism with regard to formal aspects of normative Islam,

and by their distinct liturgy, the cem, attended by both men and women, where hymns

by mystical poets including HataT (pen name of Shah Isma'Tl) are recited. The orthodox

establishment, both Sunni and Shi'i, traditionally count the Alevis among the so-called

ghuldt sects, a category created originally by medieval Muslim heresiographers,3 but

also adopted by modern scholars through a tenuous translation as "extremist Shiites."4

The ghuldt have been placed beyond the pale of Islam for their "excesses" arising from

their abrogation of Shari'a, their alleged polytheism due to their "deification" of'All,

and their rejection of an afterlife as depicted within mainstream Islam.

Groups relegated to the realm of "heresy" by the proponents of official

orthodoxy have typically received scant attention from modern historians or have been approached as marginal to larger Islamic history,5 and Alevis are no exception.

3 On Islamic heresiography and the term ghuldt, see Wadad al-Qadl, "The Development of the Term Ghuldt in Muslim Literature with Special Reference to Kaysaniyya," in Akten des VII. Kongresses fur Arabistikund Islamwissenschaft Gottingen, ed. Albert Dietrich (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprect, 1976), 295-319; Herbert Eisenstein, "Sunnite Accounts of the Subdivisions of the Shf a," in ShTa Islam, Sects and Sufism: Historical Dimensions, Religious Practice and Methdological Considerations, ed. Frederick De Jong (Utrecht: M. Th. Houtsma Stichting, 1992), 1-9; G.S. Hodgson, "Ghulat,'' EI-2.

4 See, for instance, Matti Moosa, Extremist Shiites: The Ghulat Sects (Syracuse, New York: Syracuse University Press, 1987). The singular of ghuldt is ghd% which is derived from the Arabic root gh- l-w, literally meaning "to exceed the proper boundaries."

5 On "heresy" in Islam, see Alexander Knysh, "'Orthodoxy' and 'Heresy' in Medieval Islam: An Essay in Reassessment," Muslim World 83, no. 1 (Jan. 1993): 43-67; Bernard Lewis, "Some Observations on the Significance of Heresy in the History of Islam," Studia Islamica 1 (1953): 43- 63; Marshall G.S. Hodgson, "How the Early Shfa Became Sectarian," Journal of the American Oriental Society 75 (1955): 1-13.

3 Historians have treated Alevism in general as an undifferentiated strain within

"heterodox folk Islam," a hazy category conceived as a conglomerate of beliefs and practices lingering under an Islamic veneer among illiterate nomads and peasants. The limited number of studies that deal with Alevi history in more specific terms do so solely with reference to the role these communities played in the context of the rivalry between the Sunni Ottomans and the Shi'i Safavids of Iran. There has thus been little effort so far to examine Alevi history in its own right, particularly in the post- revolutionary era following the establishment of the Safavid Empire, when the

Kizilbash were transformed from a proselytizing politico-religious movement that espoused an ideology of rebellion to a secretive religious order of closed communities.

The present study aspires to begin filling this gap by tracing this transformation at the level of Alevi socio-religious structures.

Until relatively recently, very little was known about the inner workings of the traditional5 Kizilbash/Alevi communities. However, the so-called Alevi Revival of the late 1980s and the 1990s brought an unprecedented visibility to the once isolated and timid Alevis, leaving us today in a much better position to unravel aspects of their internal history that have long remained shrouded in obscurity. The process of revival got underway with a flurry of popular publications, mainly by individuals of Alevi

6 No sense of a timeless or unchanging set of beliefs or structures is implied with the term "traditional." I use it simply as a heuristic tool to refer to Alevism as it was experienced in the village setting before large-scale urbanization of the communities in question since the mid- twentieth century. Accounts of "traditional Alevism" as such are based primarily on oral and written reports from contemporary Alevis and in-field observations in Alevi villages.

4 background,7 followed by dozens of Alevi cultural and religious associations mushrooming in cities in Turkey and also in Europe, where Alevis had begun migrating en masse from the 1950s onwards. What drove the Revival was an effort on the part of the first- and second-generation urban Alevis to recover and capture in written form a traditional Alevi culture, which had in the past been transmitted mainly through oral means. This effort was accompanied by a strong desire felt by many contemporary

Alevis to express their identities and culture openly (as reflected in the open grandeur of the Saga of the Millennium concert), something they were previously reluctant to do for fear of stigmatization and retaliation.8

One thing revealed in this process of opening-up was the traditional Alevi communities' relatively complex socio-religious structures, centered around a number of charismatic family lines called ocaks ("hearths"). Each Alevi community, whether defined on the basis of a village or a tribe or of a subsection of either of the two, is attached to a particular ocak. Members of these ocaks, the ocakzades, are commonly referred to with the title dede or pir ("elder"). As religious leaders of their respective

7 This initial flurry included, for example, Cemal Sener, Alevilik Olayi: Bir Baskaldinnin Kisa Tarihgesi (Istanbul: Yon Yayincilik, 1989); Fuat Bozkurt, Aleviligin Toplumsal Boyutlan (Istanbul: Yon Yayincilik, 1990); Riza Zelyut, 6z Kaynaklarina Gore Alevilik (Istanbul: Anadolu Kultiiru Yayinlan, 1990); Liitfii Kaleli, Kimligini Hayhran Alevilik Arastirma, Derleme (Istanbul: Habora Kitabevi, 1990); Nejat Birdogan, Anadolu'nun Gizli Kiiltiirii: Alevilik (Hamburg: Hamburg Alevi Kultur Merkezi, 1990).

8 On the Alevi Revival, see Krisztina Kehl-Bodrogi, "Die 'Wiederfindung' des Alevitums in der Tiirkei: Geschichtsmythos und kollektive identitat," Orient 34, no. 2 (1993): 267-281; Reha (Jamuroglu, "Alevi Revivalism in Turkey," in Alevi Identity: Cultural Religious and Social Perspectives, ed. T. Olsson et al., (Istanbul: ISIS, 1998), 79-84; Sehriban Sahin, "Bir Kamusal Din Olarak Turkiye'de ve Ulus Otesi Sosyal Alanlarda insa Edilen Alevilik," Alevilik Ozel Sayisi 1, Folklor/Edebiyat no. 29 (March 2002): 123-162; Karin Vorhoff, "The Past in the Future: Discourses on the Alevis in Contemporary Turkey," in Turkey's Alevi Enigma: A Comprehensive Overview, ed. Paul J. White andjoost Jongerden (Leiden: Brill, 2003), 93-108; Burak Gumus, Die Wiederkehr des Alevitentums in der Tiirkei und in Deutschland, Konstanzer Schriften zur Sozialwissenschaft 73 (Konstanz: Hartung-Gorre Verlag, 2007).

5 disciple communities, the dedes fulfill functions of liturgical, judicial, and educational

natures. Their status as ocakzades is linked to their sayyid ancestry, traced to the

Prophet Muhammad through his daughter Fatima and her husband 'All. In addition to the basic talib-ocakzade division, there is also some indication of a hierarchy among the

ocaks, with certain ocaks recognized as miir§id lines to whom other dede families pledge

allegiance, although such categorical designations are not always uncontested or consistent across regions.9

Notwithstanding the evident centrality of the ocak institution in Alevi religious organization and practice, we know very little about its historical origins and evolution. How did the different ocaks first emerge and further branch out? What is the historical background of the current ocak hierarchies, and what are the conflicting attitudes about the hierarchies? To what extent should we give credence to dedes' genealogical claims when dealing with these issues? How were the ocaks situated within the larger Kizilbash movement, and what was the nature of their historical relationship with the Safaviyya? How did this relationship evolve after the establishment of the

Safavid Empire? And how do we account for the Alevi-Bektashi symbiosis from the perspective of the ocak institution? Guided by these questions, this dissertation aims to shed light on the historical processes involved in the formation and transformation of this decentralized and yet semi-hierarchical network of Alevi ocaks, which deserve

9 The Ahl-i Haqq of Iran, a religious community in many ways akin to the Alevis, are similarly organized around a number of saintly lineages known as vgaqs. See W. Ivanow, The Truth- Worshippers of Kurdistan: Ahl-i Haqq Texts, The Ismaili Society Series A, no. 7 (Leiden: Brill, 1953), esp. the introduction. Sayyids also fulfill similar functions in other tribal communities; for the case of the Berbers of North Africa, see Ernest Gellner, Saints of the Atlas (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1969); for the case of Central Asia, see V.N. Basilov, "Honour Groups in Traditional Turkmenian Society," in Islam in Tribal Societies: From the Atlas to the Indus, ed. Akbar S. Ahmed and David M. Hart (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1984), 220-243.

6 credit for successfully sustaining the relative autonomy and coherence of individual

Alevi communities over the centuries.

In addition to oral histories and conventional archival and literary sources, the

sources upon which this study is based consist of a previously almost unknown group

of documents and manuscripts emanating from within the Alevi milieu itself. These

new sources, which surfaced relatively recently following the Revival, have been kept

for centuries in the private archives of Alevi dede families. They are of capital

importance for studying Alevi history from an internal perspective and for studying it

on much more solid ground than was hitherto possible. Through systematic

exploration of a collection of such documents and manuscripts originating from a

group of dede families in Eastern Anatolia—the region with the heaviest Alevi

concentration both historically and today—I trace the origins of the ocak system to the

cosmopolitan Sufi milieu of late medieval Anatolia, establishing the past affinity of a

significant segment of Alevi ocaks with the Wafal order, one of the oldest but least known Sufi orders. I identify the major junctures in the trajectory of Alevi socio- religious structures from the revolutionary phase of the Kizilbash movement in the late fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries, up to the nineteenth century, taking into consideration the ocaks' organic links to the Safavids and the kindred Bektashi order.

i. Literature to Date

There is a sizeable body of literature concerned with the Kizilbash/Alevi communities' origins, both in ethnic/racial and in religious terms. A large portion of this literature is derivative and popular in nature and is the product of ongoing intense

7 polemics on the subject prompted by the Alevi Revival.10 While these polemics are

novel insofar as they are intrinsically related to the bourgeoning identity politics in

post-1980 Turkey that witnessed rising Kurdish separatism and the Islamist movement

and insofar as Alevis themselves are directly involved, they are largely built upon earlier antecedents which were unearthed and rehashed in the aftermath of the

Revival.

In modern times, the first to raise questions concerning the Alevis' ethnic and religious roots as such were Protestant missionaries from the United States, who initially "discovered" the Kizilbash around the mid-nineteenth century. Fascinated by their idiosyncratic beliefs and practices, the missionaries presumed that the Kizilbash were most likely descendants of an ancient Christian stock, made Muslim through the force of the sword. They depicted the Kizilbash sect as pseudo-Islamic and syncretistic, marked by heavy doses of Christian and pagan elements. While the missionaries' interest in these communities soon diminished in tandem with their dwindling hopes for a possible Kizilbash conversion, their ideas were picked up by a number of Western travelers and scholars, who further theorized on the pre-Islamic ethnic and religious origins of the Kizilbash well into the early twentieth century. Most widely known among these was the Austrian anthropologist F. von Luschan, who used bodily measurements he collected among the Tahtaci Alevis in Southwestern Anatolia to posit that the "heterodox tribes of Asia Minor" were the purest representatives of the oldest

10 A brief critical overview of these publications is provided in Karin Vorhoff, "Academic and Journalistic Publications on the Alevi and Bektashi of Turkey,"Alevi Identity, ed. T. Olsson, 23-50.

8 racial groups in the region.11 Early Western scholars working on the kindred Bektashi order treated questions of origin similarly in their studies, variously speculating about the Bektashiyye's Christian, Gnostic, Pagan, and Shi'i roots.12

The early twentieth century also witnessed a renewed awareness of the

Kizilbash—by now increasingly referred to by the more tactful term Alevi and treated simply as lay followers of the Bektashi order—among a group of Ottoman intellectuals affiliated with the Turkist cadre of the 1908 Constitutionalist Revolution. This renewed interest was at least partially elicited by apprehension arising from Westerners' efforts to link the communities in question to Anatolia's ancient populations. A few well- known figures of this early Turkish nationalist milieu, such as Baha Said, Yusuf Ziya

Yoriikan, and Hilmi Ziya Ulken, rejected the missionaries' and von Luschan's claims and highlighted the Alevis' Turkish ethnicity in their writings. They explained peculiar

Alevi beliefs and practices as remnants of ancient religions of the Turks, in particular of shamanism, and celebrated Alevi culture as a reservoir of genuine Turkish national character, which they believed had disappeared almost entirely among the cosmopolitan Ottoman elite and Sunni Turks. Although this new nationalist perspective did not reach wide public circulation until after the Revival, it freed the subject of Alevi origins from the confines of the strictly religious discourse of the earlier Ottoman era

11 Ayfer Karakaya-Stump, "The Emergence of the Kizilba§ in Western Thought: Missionary Accounts and Their Aftermath," in Archaeology, Anthropology and Heritage in the Balkans and Anatolia: The Life and Times ofF.W. Hasluck 1878-1920, 2 vols., ed. David Shankland (Istanbul: ISIS Press, 2004), 1: 329-353.

12 Georg Jacob, Beitrage zur Kenntnis des Derwisch-Ordens der Bektaschis (Berlin: Mayer & Miiller, 1908); idem, Die Bektaschijje in ihrem Verhdltnis zu verwandten Erscheinungen (Munich: Verlag der Koniglich-bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1909); John K. Birge, The Bektasi Order of Dervishes (1937; reprint, London: Luzac Oriental, 1994), 215-218.

9 which rendered the Alevis as subversive heretics, hence elevating the issue to a

position of national concern.13

Conjectures about primordial links between Alevism and pre-Islamic Turkish

culture and beliefs found their most influential formulation in the works of the early twentieth-century Turkish historian Fuad Kopriilu, whose views on the subject have become paradigmatic among Turkish and Western scholars alike. Within his grand narrative of the religious history of Anatolia after the Turkish invasion, Kopriilu dealt with the Alevis mostly indirectly and simply as village Bektashis. The key element of

Kopriilii's analysis was an implied rigid dichotomy between high and low Islam. The latter, called folk Islam, was associated in the Anatolian context with Central Asian shamanism as preserved and transmitted under the cover of popular Sufism, in particular that of the Central Asian Yeseviyye order and its Anatolian heirs, the

Bektashiyye. According to Kopriilu, nomadic Turkmen tribes persisted in their attachment to their ancient shamanistic beliefs and practices even as they nominally converted to Islam and later migrated to Anatolia. They remained oblivious to the orthodox version of Islam and its high culture which took root among their settled compatriots and were therefore open to influences from various popular Shi'i and esoteric (batint) currents. Such deviant movements found fertile ground among the nomadic Tiirkmens because of the movements' doctrinal simplicity and because of the

13 For complete collections of the relevant articles by Baha Said, Yusuf Ziya Yorukan, and Hilmi Ziya Olken that appeared in various periodicals in the 1920s, see Baha Said Bey, Tiirkiye'de Alevi- Bekta§i Ahive NusayriZiimreleri, ed. Ismail Gorkem (Ankara: T.C. Kiiltur Bakanhgi Yaymlan, 2000); Yusuf Ziya Yorukan, Anadolu'daAlevilerve Tahtaalar, ed. Turhan Yorukan (Ankara: T.C. Kiiltur Bakanhgi Yayinlan, 2002); Hilmi Ziya Olken, Anadolu'nun Dini Sosyal Tarihi Oncixleri: Barak Baha, Geyikli Baha, Haa Bekta§, ed. Ahmet Tasgin (Ankara: Kalan Yaymlan, 2003).

10 Turkmens' inherent syncretistic disposition which allowed the survival of pre-Islamic elements under an Islamic facade.

Leading actors in this scenario were the heterodox Turkmen religious leaders, called babas and dedes, who were conceived by Kopriilii as successors to the pre-Islamic shaman/bards (kam-ozan), now appearing under a Sufi garment. The thirteenth- century mystic Had Bekta§, eponymous founder of the Bektashiyye, was one such religious figure. Kopriilii attributed a key role to him in the transfer of the YesevT tradition from its Central Asian homeland to Anatolia. Indeed, according to Had

Bektas/s late fifteenth-century hagiography, the Velayetname, it was Ahmed YesevT who dispatched Had Bektas. to the land of Rum, giving him a spiritual mandate over the region. Earlier non-Bektashi sources do not support this claim, however, portraying

Had Bektas as a disciple of Baba ilyas, a WafaT shaykh and leader of the great mid- thirteenth-century BabaT revolt in Anatolia. Nor is there sufficient factual evidence of a sizeable YesevT presence in late medieval Anatolia, as Kdpriilu presumed. Kopriilii made this assumption mainly on the authority of Evliya £elebi, the seventeenth-century

Ottoman traveler, whose assimilation of various Bektashi saints to the Yeseviyye was likely nothing but a reflection of related Bektashi claims which must have been well- established at the time. There are thus reasons to question the historicity of the

Bektashi tradition claiming a YesevT ancestry for their patron saint, as suggested by

Kopriilii himself in earlier publications.14

14 Koprulii's first major work, in which he established a direct connection between Central Asian and Anatolian literary and religious traditions on the basis of a study of the seminal figures of Ahmed YesevT and Yunus Emre, was TurkEdebiyatinda tlk Mutasawiflar (1919; reprint, Ankara: Turk Tarih Kurumu Basimevi, 1993). Translated into English by Gary Leiser and Robert Dankoff under the title Early Mystics in Turkish Literature with a foreword by Devin DeWeese

11 The two major current representatives of the Kdpriilu paradigm are Irene

Melikoff5 and Ahmet Ya§ar Ocak,16 who follow Koprulii's example treating Alevism in

conjunction with Bektashism as the main expression of Turkish folk Islam. These two

prolific scholars have further elaborated on Kopriilii's basic thesis, discerning

additional evidence in Alevi-Bektashi hagiography and lore in the shape of nature cults

and miracle motifs associated with shamans in pre-Islamic times. Melikoff and Ocak

differ from Koprulii only on a few relatively minor points. More importantly, both

downplay the Shi'i elements in the make-up of popular Islam in medieval Anatolia,

attributing the later palpable Shi'i manifestation to Safavid influence. Ocak, in addition,

sees Anatolian folk Islam as incorporating elements from sources other than

shamanism, in particular the various Iranian and Indian religious traditions.

(London: Routledge, 2006). In this book Kopriilii questioned the historicity of Bektashi claims to YesevT ancestory, but later he changed his opinion, treating the Bektashiyye as the primary heir of the YesevT legacy in Anatolia; see idem, "Ahmed YesevT," in islam Ansiklopedisi. islam Alemi Tarih, Cografya, Etnografya ve Bibliyografya Lugati (Istanbul: Milli Egitim Basimevi, 1965). For Kopriilii's basic narrative on the development of Islam and Turkish Sufism in Anatolia, see "Anadolu'da islamiyet,"(l922; reprint, Istanbul: insan Yayinlan, 1996). Translated into English by Gary Leiser under the title Islam in Anatolia after the Turkish Invasion (Prolegomena) (Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1993). Specifically for his views on shamanistic influences in YesevT and Bektashi origins, see "Bektasiligin Menseleri," Turk Yurdu, 16-2, no. 169-8 (May 1925); reprint, Ankara, 2001, 9:68-76; and Influence du chamanisme Turco-Mongol sur les ordres mystiques musulmans (Istanbul, 1929).

15 Of Melikoff s numerous articles related to the subject, see, for example, "Le probleme kizilba§," Turcica 6 (1975): 49-67; "Recherches sur les composantes du syncretisme Bektachi- Alevi," Studia Turcologica Memoriae Alexii Bombaci dicata (Napoli, Roma: Instituto Universitario Orientale, 1982): 379-395. For her most recent summation of her findings and arguments, see Hadji Bektach: Un mythe et ses avatars: Genese et evolution du soufisme populate en Turquie (Leiden: Brill, 1998), published in the same year in Turkish as Haci Bektas: Efsaneden Gercege, trans. Turan Alptekin (Istanbul: Cumhuriyet Kitaplan, 1998).

16 See, most importantly, his Bekta§iMendkibndmelerinde islam Oncesi inane Motifleri (Istanbul: Enderun Kitabevi, 1983); BabaUer Isyanu AlevUigin Tarihsel Altyapisi Yahut Anadolu'da islam-Turk Heterodoksisinin Tesekkiilix, rev. 2nd ed. (Istanbul: Dergah Yayinlan, 1996); Osmanh imparatorlugunda Marjinal Sufilik Kalenderiler: XIV-XVII. Yihyillar (Ankara: Turk Tarih Kurumu, 1992); and his collection of essays, Turk Sufiligine Bahslar (Istanbul: Hetisjm Yayinlan, 1996).

12 The works of Melikoff and Ocak are also significant because they attained a wide

circulation, especially among Alevi-Bektashi circles in the aftermath of the Alevi

Revival.17 The subsequent extensive dissemination of the notion of Alevi-Bektashi

culture as essentially a natural extension of the Central Asian YesevT tradition, a

tradition which in turn is linked to remnants of shamanism, has had a major impact on

the related communities' self-perception and understanding of their own histories. A

flood of popular publications by amateur researchers of Alevi background have over

and over again detected shamanistic imprints in their religious and cultural traditions, thereby confirming Alevis' and Alevism's authentic Turkish origins. These researchers

have upheld the notion of "syncretism" as a defining feature of their ancestral belief-

system, conceiving it as a positive synthesis between national culture and religion and as such a distinctly Turkish understanding of Islam deemed to be inherently more tolerant and amicable to modern secularism.

However, the increasing popularity of the Turkish nationalist perspective on the subject simultaneously prompted a radical challenge against that perspective in

Kurdish nationalist circles. In many ways mirroring their Turkish nationalist counterparts, the ideologues of Kurdish nationalism postulated a direct connection between Alevism and pre-Islamic Kurdish/Iranian religions on the basis of surviving traces of ancient religions such as Zoroastrianism in contemporary Alevi beliefs and rituals. In doing so, these ideologues associated themselves with the sizeable

17 The publication in Turkish of Melikoff s collected articles on Alevi-Bektashi in 1993 played a particularly crucial role in bringing about the wide circulation of the idea of Alevism as Islamized Shamanism within Turkey; idem, Uyuridik Uyarddar: Alevilik-Bekta§ilik Arc^tirmalan, trans. Turan Alptekin (Istanbul: Cem Yayinevi, 1993).

13 populations of Kurdish- and Zaza-speaking Alevis, who are often portrayed as

assimilated Turks within the framework of the Turkish nationalist perspective.18 With the partial and noteworthy exception of a work by Kathryn Babayan,19 there is

presently no scholarly work exploring the larger Mesopotamian/lranian context of

Kizilbash/Alevi religiosity in concrete historical terms.

Overall, in both popular and scholarly literature the treatment of Alevi religious history remains largely essentialist, often taking the shape of a study of survivals and influences based on an uncritical and ahistorical application of the concept of syncretism. Recently scholars such as Cemal Kafadar, Ahmet Karamustafa, Devin

DeWeese, E. Sara Wolper, and Zeynep Yiirekli Gorkay have rightly noted the lack of sufficient historical contextualization of the diverse movements and modes of piety commonly subsumed under the catchall category of folk Islam. Dealing with distinct periods and aspects of Turkish/Islamic history, these scholars have variously taken issue with the application of a two-tiered model of religion based on an assumed impermeable boundary between high and low Islam; have questioned externalistic explanations of deviant religious movements based on survival theories and the idea of

"insufficient Islamization" and lacking adequate accounting for immediate Islamic context; and have challenged the tendency since Kopriilu to link various aspects of

Anatolian religious history directly to that of Central Asia.20 Confirming this recent

18 See, for example, Cemsid Bender, Kiirt Uygarhginda Alevilik (Istanbul: Kaynak Yayinlan, 1991).

19 Kathryn Babayan, Mystics, Monarchs, and Messiahs: Cultural Landscapes of Early Modern Iran (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2002).

20 Cemal Kafadar, Between Two Worlds: The Construction of the Ottoman State (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1995), esp. 53-54; Ahmet T. Karamustafa, God's Unruly

14 revisionist scholarship, the present dissertation offers concrete evidence to

substantiate and elaborate its implications for Kizilbash/Alevi history.

In addition to the literature focusing on their pre-Safavid ethnic and religious origins, the Kizilbash/Alevis have also received varying degrees of scholarly attention from historians of the Safavid and Ottoman Empires. But this attention has been tangential to other issues, with interest given only to the role these communities played in the Ottoman-Safavid conflict.21 For historians of the Safavid Empire, the

Kizilbash acquire further significance within the framework of the Safavids' rise to power.22 Their military support is commonly attributed a key role in the successful transformation of the Safaviyya from a conventional Sufi order into an imperial dynasty, but how this support came about remains a question. The standard narrative

Friends: Dervish Groups in the Islamic Later Middle Period 1200-1550 (Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1994), 4-11; Devin DeWeese, Islamization and Native Religion in the Golden Horde: Baba Tiikles and Conversion to Islam in Historical and Epic Tradition (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1994), esp. 17-39; idem, foreword to Kopriilu, Early Mystics; Ethel Sara Wolper, Cities and Saints: Sufism and the Transformation of Urban Space in Medieval Anatolia ((University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2003), 4-7; E. Zeynep Yurekli Gorkay, "Legend and Architecture in the Ottoman Empire: the Shrines of Sayyid Gazi and Haci Bektas" (Ph.D. diss., Harvard University, 2005), esp. Introduction.

21 Adel Allouche, The Origins and Development of the Ottoman-Safavid Conflict (906-962/1500-1555) (Berlin: Klaus Schwarz Verlag, 1983); Jean-Louis Bacque-Grammont, Les Ottomans, les Safavides et lews voisins (1514-1524) (Istanbul: Nederlands Historisch-Archaeologisch Instituut, 1987); Faruk Sumer, Safevi Devletinin Kurulusu ve Gelismesinde Anadolu Turklerinin Rolii (Ankara: Turk Tarih Kurumu Basimevi, 1992).

22 For a conventional account of Safavid history, see Roger Savory, Iran under the Safavids (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980). Regarding the specific issue of Safavid origins, see Michel M. Mazzaoui, The Origins of the Safawids: ST'ism, Sufism, and the Guldt (Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag, 1972); Jean Aubin, "L'Avenement des Safavides reconsidere (Etudes Safavides III)," Moyen Orient et Ocean Indien 5 (1988): 1-130; Said Amir Arjomand, The Shadow of God and the Hidden Imam: Religion, Political Order, and Societal Change in Shi'ite Iran from the Beginning to 1890 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984), esp. 66-82; Hans R. Roemer, "The Qizilbash Turcomans: Founder and Victim of the Safavid Theocracy," in Intellectual Studies on Islam Essays Written in Honor of Martin B. Dickson, ed. Michel M. Mazzaoui and Vera B. Moreen (Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1990), 27-39.

15 of the formative phase of the Kizilbash movement, based mostly on hostile Sunni accounts and Western travelers' reports, goes as follows: Junayd, the first shaykh of the order to display political ambitions, sowed the seeds of the initial Kizilbash network during his years of exile in Anatolia, when he traveled among the Turkmen tribes, recruiting supporters for his militant cause. As simple people whose conversion to

Islam was mostly superficial and whose religiosity was shaped by a mixture of elements from the Sufi form of popular Shi'ism and from pre-Islamic shamanistic cults, these uncouth and credulous tribesmen were innately susceptible to Junayd's messianic claims and propaganda, and later to those of his son and successor Haydar. Building upon this foundation, Junayd's grandson Isma'Tl successfully exploited the godlike worship he received from his followers on the battlefield, eliminating the power of the

Akkoyunlus and various petty rulers in Iran and declaring himself shah in Tabriz in

1501. In the absence of a better alternative, Safavid historians tend to fall back on this account of Turkmen tribesmen's religious gullibility and inherent militant temper as explanation for the widespread popularity of the Safavid cause in Anatolia, a picture reminiscent of the Koprulii paradigm.

After the establishment of the Safavid Empire, starting as early as Shah Isma'Tl himself, the Safavids are believed to have gone through a major ideological shift, opting for orthodox Twelver Shi'ism with its more normative praxis at the expense of the inherently unruly Kizilbash who brought them to power. Jean Aubin's suggestion that

Shah Isma'Tl's coronation in 1501 marked the end rather than the beginning of the

Kizilbash state alludes to the presumed rapid and decisive nature of the Safavids' ideological move from heterodoxy toward orthodoxy. On the socio-political front, this

16 move is conceived to have played itself out as an inborn and prolonged conflict

between the Kizilbash of Anatolian origin and the indigenous Persian-speaking

bureaucratic elite of Iran.23 In contrast, recent scholarship by Babayan, Abisaab, and

Newman depicts this process of conversion as rather prolonged and syncretic,

involving pragmatic alliances across various socio-political and ethnic groups, and

stresses the enduring relevance of Sufi discourse to the Safavid project even during its

post-revolutionary phase.24 Nevertheless, the Safavids' continuing links with the

Anatolian Kizilbash have remained beyond the purview of earlier and more recent

studies alike, a gap reflecting the remarkable silence of the Safavid sources on the

subject.

Historians of the Ottoman Empire, on the other hand, consider the Anatolian

Kizilbash primarily within the framework of the Ottomans' policy on the eastern front

and Ottomans' military and ideological encounters with the Safavids.25 These historians

similarly stress the primacy of the political dimension over the religious in the

Ottoman-Safavid rivalry, linking the growing Kizilbash influence in Anatolia to the nomadic Turkmen tribes' discontent with the centralizing drive of the Ottoman administration, which sought to control the tribes closely and subject them to regular

23 Jean Aubin, "La Politique religieuse des Safavides," in Le Shi'isme Imamite, Colloque de Strasbourg, 6-9 mai 1968, ed. T. Fahd (Paris: Presses Universitaires, 1970), 235-244.

24 Andrew J. Newman, Safavid Iran: Rebirth of a Persian Empire (London: LB. Tauris, 2006); Rula Jurdi Abisaab, Converting Persia: Religion and Power in the Safavid Empire (London: LB. Tauris, 2004); Kathryn Babayan, Mystics, Monarchs, and Messiahs.

25 For a basic outline reflecting the current state of Ottoman history of the classical period, see Halil inalcik, The Ottoman Empire: The Classical Age 1300-1600, trans. Norman Itzkowitz and Colin Imber (New Rochelle, N.Y.: Aristide D. Caratzas, 1989).

17 taxation. This essentially social and political tension is believed to have expressed itself

in a religious guise, unifying the religiously heterodox Turkmen tribes under the

Kizilbash banner against the Sunni Ottomans. Many such Turkmen tribes migrated en

masse to Iran, forming the military backbone of the Safavid enterprise, while those left behind initiated the first of a series of Kizilbash uprisings in Anatolia in 1511. The

Ottoman sultan, SelTm I (r. 1512-20), perceiving the gravity of this new challenge, is reported to have executed some forty thousand Kizilbash in Anatolia before marching against Shah Isma'Tl and inflicting a major defeat upon him at the 1514 Battle of

£aldiran.

SelTm I's policy against the Safavids and his forceful suppression of the Kizilbash as reflected in the contemporary Ottoman literary sources have received much coverage by Ottomanists.26 There are also a number of studies on the subsequent

Kizilbash persecutions that continued on and off throughout the sixteenth century, studies mostly based on Ottoman miihimme defterleri (registers of important affairs) or

Ottoman narrative sources.27 But the Kizilbash as such mostly vanished from official

Ottoman documents with the diminishment of the military threat they posed to the

Ottoman state and consequently fall out of the range of vision of Ottoman historians in

26 See, for example, M.C. §ehabettin Tekindag, "Yeni Kaynak ve Vesikalarm Isigi altmda Yavuz Sultan Selim'in Iran Seferi," Tarih Dergisi 17 (1967): 49-86; t^agatay Ulucay, "Yavuz Sultan Selim Nasil Padi?ah Oldu?" Istanbul Universitesi Edebiyat Fakiiltesi Tarih Dergisi no.9 (1953): 53-90; no.10 (1954): 117-142; no.11-12 (1955): 185-200.

27 Hanna Sohrweide, "Der Sieg der Safaviden in Persien und seine Riickwirkungen auf die Schiiten Anatoliens im 16. Jahrhundert," Der Islam 41 (1965): 95-201; C. H. Imber, "The Persecution of the Ottoman Shfites according to the muhimme defterleri, 1565-1585," Der Islam 56, no. 2 (July 1979): 245-273; Saim Savas, XVI Asirda Anadolu'da Alevilik (Ankara: Vadi Yayinlan, 2002).

18 the period after the sixteenth century. There is thus a major lacuna in the Ottomanist literature regarding Kizilbash communities in Anatolia in the following centuries, as well as regarding changing Ottoman policies towards them.

By and large, the markedly underdeveloped state of scholarship on Alevi history reflects the dearth of primary sources and the preconceived notions of outsiders often unsympathetic or hostile to the communities in question. The existing literature is furthermore often distorted by contemporary nationalist concerns and various conceptual shortcomings. At present, there exists no detailed historical examination of the Alevis as a distinct social and religious collectivity. Specifically regarding their socio-religious structures and the institution of ocak which lies at their core, we have at our disposal a few anthropological works dealing with the ethnographic present, but no historical studies of any significance.28 The often-repeated conception of dede as transmuted shaman has so far not been historically demonstrated on the basis of sufficient factual evidence and rests upon a problematic assumption of a primordial link between Alevism and shamanism.

it Conceptual Considerations

The espousal of syncretism as the single most important characteristic of

Alevism, combined with an essentializing approach to Islam, has grossly restricted both

28 For instance, see Ali Yaman, Kmlbas Alevi Ocaldan (Istanbul: Sahkulu Sultan Kiilliyesi, 1998); Erdal Gezik, Dinsel, Etnik ve Politik Sorunlar Baglaminda: Alevi Kiirtler (Ankara: Kalan Yayinlan, 2000), esp. part IV; Markuss Dressier, "The Modern Dede: Changing Parameters for Religious Authority in Contemporary Turkish Alevism," in Speaking for Islam: Religious Authorities in Muslim Societies, ed. Gudrun Kramer and Sabine Schmidtke (Leiden: Brill, 2006): 269-294; Peter J. Bumke, "The Kurdish Alevis—Boundaries and Perceptions," in Ethnic Groups in the Republic of Turkey, ed. Peter A. Andrews (Wiesbaden: L. Reichert, 1989): 510-519.

19 the analytical and empirical focus of Alevi studies. The concept of syncretism can be

historically meaningful and useful if utilized to describe specific historical processes

involved in exchanges and adaptations among distinct religious traditions and the

construction of varying modes of piety within each tradition. The concept obscures

more than it explains, however, when applied as a taxonomical tool to distinguish

between "pure" and "contaminated" belief-systems. The categorization of certain

traditions as syncretistic, when in reality all religions have composite historical roots,

often reflects the scholars' absorption and unreflective reproduction of an authorized

clerical perspective.29 Since medieval times, Muslim heresiographers have

conventionally attributed the genesis of "heretical" movements to a plot masterminded by an insincere convert in order to subvert Islam from within and to subsequent

infiltrations of corruptive innovations (bid'a) into religion.30 Modern scholars have

often accounted for the same groups by reference to survival theories. While differing on the question of agency, in both cases, explanations remained conspicuously externalistic and aloof from the internal perspectives of the groups in question.

The common preoccupation with Alevism's constituting components and primordial origins has detracted attention from what provided Alevism with coherence and lucidity as experienced by its proponents. There is, therefore, little understanding of what held the communities in question together and what defined their communal boundaries, both in terms of elements of cosmology and belief and at the more tangible

29 For an insightful discussion of the pitfalls and potentials of "syncretism" as a conceptual tool, see introduction to Syncretism/Anti-Syncretism: The Politics of Religious Synthesis, ed. Rosalind Shaw and Charles Stewart (London: Routledge, 1994).

30 Bernard Lewis, "Some Observations on the Significance of Heresy," 43-44.

20 level of socio-religious structures. The present study deals with the latter aspect of the

issue and does so in a manner that takes seriously the traditional indigenous

perspective and sources, oral and textual alike. "Traditional," of course, does not imply

perpetuality from time immemorial. Nor is tradition a seamless whole. Different layers

and internal tensions within a tradition may, in fact, facilitate our understanding of

past ruptures and discontinuities that the construct of "traditional" conceals. It is this

critical understanding of tradition as dynamic and multilayered that informs the

present study's treatment of Alevi oral and textual lore and the interface between the two.

Familiar models have proved inadequate for a comprehension of Alevi socio-

religious structures. The Kizilbash ancestors of the modern-day Alevis are, therefore, typically misconstrued in the historiography as an amorphous amalgam of tribes bound by kinship, without much regard to their religious ties. While tribal identities and kinship relations are not irrelevant to Alevi internal organization, their relevance, I will argue, is mediated through a phenomenon that appears to have been of considerable importance in certain parts of the Islamic world in the post-Mongol era. This often- ignored phenomenon is communal Sufi affiliations, defined by Devin DeWeese, who has observed the same organizational practice among the Yeseviyye order in Central Asia, as "the establishment of formal relations, often described in terms of actual discipleship and initiatory bonds, between Sufi shaykhs and entire communities, both nomadic and sedentary."31 Establishment of Sufi affiliations at the communal level

31 Idem, "YasavT Sayhs in the Timurid Era: Notes on the Social and Political Role of Communal Sufi Affiliations in the 14th and 15th Centuries," Oriente Moderno 76, no. 2 (1996), 173.

21 appears historically connected with the principle of hereditary succession for leadership of an order. Both of these organizational practices contrast with what is commonly assumed to be the norms of medieval Sufi orders, in principle based on selective, individual discipleship and the notion of silsila succession. Modern scholarship has typically viewed the popularization of Sufism as just a degeneration of classical ideals and has therefore paid little attention to the long-term implications of this process.32 Nevertheless, as a result of the confluence of this internal transformation of Sufism with the changing political dynamics of late medieval and early modern

Islamic history, a number of religious movements that initially emerged within the framework of mystical orders came to develop sectarian tendencies. Sufism as such was able to provide a basis for social order, giving rise to distinct religious communities, as was the case with the Alevis.

Hi. Scope of the Study

Since Koprulu, scholars have often envisioned the essential difference between the Bektashis and the Kizilbash/Alevis as a social one. Alevism is accordingly associated with the nomadic and rural milieu of Anatolia in contrast to the more formal Bektashi order of the urban centers. But this view is far from sufficient to account for the actual complexity of relations between the two affiliations, either historically or today.

Among other things, this view does not address the division between the Babagan and the £elebi branches of the Bektashi order and ignores the fact that a differentiation between the Bektashis—specifically those connected to the £elebi branch—and the

32 For a classical conception of the popularization of Sufism in the post-Mongol era, see J. Spencer Trimingham, The Sufi Orders in Islam (London: Oxford University Press, 1971), part III.

22 Kizilbash/Alevis also exists in rural areas. On the basis of organizational structures,

there are currently three distinct groups that are often conflated under the category of

"the Alevi-Bektashi community," groups attached respectively to l) the Bektashiyye's

Babagan branch, who believe that Had Bektas. had no biological offspring and that they

themselves are his spiritual descendants; 2) the £elebi Bektashis, who claim to be the

biological descendants of HacTBekta§; and 3) the ocakzade dedes whose authority is based on charismatic lineage traced back to the Twelve Imams.

Of these, it is the last group that is the main focus of this dissertation. In this

study, unless stated otherwise, the terms Kizilbash and Alevi will be used

interchangeably (depending on historical period) to refer to those communities in

Anatolia who have been linked to various dede ocaks and who have historically recognized the Safavl convent in Ardabil as their supreme spiritual center. It is true, however, that since the nineteenth century, there has been a growing integration, both structurally and in terms of self-identification, between the Alevis affiliated with the ocakzade dedes and the £elebi Bektashis. This dissertation, among other things, aims to unravel the complex historical processes involved in this development, as a result of which the Bektashi convent in Kir§ehir has come to occupy an elevated status among contemporary Alevi communities.

In-field observations reveal Alevism as a belief system that finds one of its most fundamental expressions in a set of morally-sanctioned and hierarchically-structured relationships which can be schematized as follows:

23 talib (and his musahib) -> rehber -> dede (pir) -> miirsid (pir-ipiran)33

At the center of Alevi socio-religious organization lies the talib-dede connection, which is not subject to personal choice but is predetermined. An Alevi becomes a talib of the same dede lineage as his father and forefathers and cannot typically shift his affiliation from one lineage to another. Dedes are responsible for officiating at their talibs' initiation ceremony (ikrar cemi), as well as at their annual gorgii cemi (ritual of

"good manners"), where any conflicts between community members are resolved and any wrong-doings punished. In order to be eligible for initiation, however, a talib is required to pick for himself someone among his peers with whom he will form a bond of musahiblik ("companionship")— an artificial kinship established between two married couples. He also has to have a rehber (guide), who will symbolically deliver him and his musahib to the dede. The same set of relationships is replicated at the level of dede. Just like a lay follower, a dede too has to have a musahib and a rehber, pledge allegiance to a fellow ocakzade, and pass through gorgii once a year. The dede (pir) officiating at the rites of ikrar and gorgii of an ocakzade is in turn regarded from the perspective of the talibs as the miir§id (pir-ipiran). In matters superseding the authority of their dedes, talibs may have recourse to the mediation of their miirsids. Alevis often depict the resulting matrix of relations with the maxim "hand to hand, hand to

God/Truth" [El ele, el Hakk'a].

This relatively straightforward picture of Alevi socio-religious structures at the level of individual disciple communities acquires new twists and turns when viewed on

33 The notion of the four gates of religion, which the Sufis often associate with shana, tariqa, ma'rifa, and haqiqa, is often taken to signify these four sets of relations by the Alevis.

24 a larger scale. To begin with, we currently have no comprehensive list of all Alevi ocaks,

let alone an all-inclusive map of their geographical distribution. Attempting this would

be a taxing job beyond the capacity of individual researchers because of the sheer

number of presently-existing ocaks and their widely scattered nature both in terms of

sub-branches and disciple communities. Although ocaks generally concentrate in

particular regions and have one or a few central villages that may contain a pilgrimage

site (ziyaret) associated with that ocak, ocaks have no headquarters as such. Historically,

dede families have tended to move from one village to another in the same vicinity or,

conversely, to a relatively far-away district, often following their migrating disciple

communities. Such mobility partially explains the historical proliferation of Alevi ocaks,

because a dede family moving to a new place may potentially emerge as an independent

ocak under a new name.

For the most part, various dede lineages tend to function independently from

each other within the network of their local hierarchies, and especially in the past, with

limited awareness of Alevi communities in other regions. Even relatively

knowledgeable members of the community typically tend to be acquainted with just a

handful of ocaks in their own district and a few of the neighboring ones. When asked about the multiplicity of ocaks, most dedes would claim that of all the dozens of dede lineages that exist today, only a fraction of them are from the original group. The lists they provide of the "authentic" ocaks are inconsistent, however, as are their views of the spiritual hierarchy, or lack thereof, among them. Some assert the spiritual equality of the different ocaks on account of their shared sayyid descent and regard the offices ofrehber, dede, and miir§id simply as functional designations. In these cases, the miirsid

25 may come from the same ocak as the dede or members of two ocaks may officiate at each other's ritual of initiation and annual gorgii. Many others, on the other hand, make a categorical differentiation between ocaks that respectively represent the three positions, although specific ocaks associated with each of these positions, and especially with that of mur^i'd-hood, vary from region to region.

A notion commonly held by dedes across different ocaks and regions is of a principal convent (dergah) that serves as the ultimate spiritual center for Alevi communities in general and thus in a sense occupies the apex of the entire ocak hierarchy. Although lack of written documentation by no means disqualifies a dede in practice, a legitimate dede is typically expected to have documentation from this convent attesting to his ocakzade status. Today many dedes attribute that authority to the Haci Bektas. Convent located in the district of Haci Bektas, in Kir§ehir (currently part of the province of Nev§ehir). They believe that it was the vicars (halife) dispatched by

Haci Bektas. to different parts of Anatolia who formed the initial nucleus of individual ocaks. But other ocakzades see themselves as historically attached to the Karbala

Convent (Kerbela Dergahi), which they view as having maintained the tradition of the

(Safavl) Convent in Ardabil (Erdebil siiregi), as distinct from the tradition of the

Bektashis (Bektasi siiregi).34 Tracing their ocaks' origins to ancient times predating the lifetime of HacTBekta§, they see the "Bektashi-zation" of Alevi ocaks' as a novelty without a basis of legitimacy in history.

34 One of the first scholars to make a note of this cleavage was AbdulbaktGolpinarh, "Kizil-bas," islam Ansildopedisi. islam Alemi Tarih, Cografya, Etnografya ve Biyografya Lugati (Istanbul: Milli Egitim Basimevi, 1967).

26 From the multifaceted picture we gain from infield observations, this study works backwards to unravel the history behind the Alevi ocak system, using family documents from a group of ocaks historically centered in the upper Euphrates basin and its environs, stretching from Malatya to Erzincan and from Sivas to Elazig. A detailed reconstruction of individual stories of related families or their ocaks is, however, beyond the scope of this study. This study, rather, represents an attempt to identify common patterns in the course of the development of Alevi socio-religious structures at large, as such patterns emerge from a collective treatment of family archives and oral traditions.

iv. Sources

The Alevi documents, as I will call them collectively, make up the principal source material of this study. They have been passed down from generation to generation within Alevi dede families as a type of sacred trust and as proof of the families' ocakzade status and sayyid descent. In the past, they were carefully protected from outsiders' gaze, including often that of lay followers, and still continue to be treated thus in some cases. It was only after the Alevi Revival that some dede families began making their documents available for research purposes, and individual examples have been utilized or published in a number of popular publications.35 Few of

35 For instance, see Ismail Kaygusuz, OnarDede Mezarligi veAdi Bilinmeyen Bir Turk Kolonizatorii Seyh Hasan Oner (Istanbul: Arkeoloji ve Sanat Yayinlan, 1983); Mehmet §imsek, HidirAbdal Sultan Ocagi (Istanbul, 1991); Nejat Birdogan, Anadolu ve Balkanlar'da Alevi Yerlesimleri: OcaUar-Dedeler- Soy Agaglan (Istanbul: Alev Yayinlan, 1992); Kuresanh Seyit Kekil, Peygamberler ile Seyitlerin Secereleri ve Asiretlerin Tarihi (Koln, n.d.). A number of documents coming from Alevi dede families have also been published in recent years in various issues of the journal HaciBektas Veil Arastirma Dergisi published by Gazi Universitesi Turk Kulturii ve Haci Bektas Velf Arastirma Merkezi, but these publications should be used very cautiously since they include many reading

27 these measure up to scholarly standards, however, and many use the documents

primarily as evidence for basic genealogical information. There has so far been no

systematic examination of this new body of sources in its entirety, addressing issues of

historical context, mechanisms of production and renewal, as well as content.

The bulk of the documents explored here come from families affiliated with the ocaks of Dede Kargin, Aguicen, and Imam Zeynel Abidin (also known as the dedes of

Mineyik), whose private archives were the most comprehensive of all the available ones both in terms of number of documents and time period spanned. These three ocaks are among the most prominent in Eastern Anatolia, with the last two also having a claim to mur^i'd-hood. Their family documents reveal them as sharing a past affinity with the WafaT order. The written genealogies of the Aguicens and the ocak of Imam

Zeynel Abidin, furthermore, connect the two lineages to one of the adopted sons of the eponymous founder of the WafaT order, Abu'l-WafaJ, a finding that is in accordance with the oral tradition attributing to them a common origin (an oral tradition which is, nonetheless, contested). The remaining Alevi sources utilized in this dissertation comprise assorted or individual documents that belong to the ocaks of Sinemilli, §eyh

Siileyman, Kara Pir Bad, Kurey§an, Kizil Deli, and §ah Ibrahim Veli. The first four of these ocaks intersect with the previously mentioned three ocaks on grounds of their historical linkage to the Wafa'iyya; disciples of the ocaks of Sinemilli and Kurey§an, in and translation mistakes. Also see the following works of mine for examples of these documents: "Sinemilliler: Bir Alevi Ocagi ve Asireti,"Kirkbudak2, no. 6 (spring 2006): 19-59; "Kizilbas, Bektasi, Safevi iliskilerine Dair 17. Yuzyildan Yeni Bir Beige (Yazi Cevirimli Metin- Gunumuz Tiirkcesine Ceviri-Tipkibasim)," in Festschrift in Honor of Orhan Okay, special issue of the Journal of Turkish Studies/Turkliik Bilgisi Arastirmalan 30/II (2006): 117-130; "16. Yiizyildan Bir Ziyaretname (Yazi Cevirimli Metin-Gunumuz Tiirkcesine Ceviri-Tipkibasim)," in In Memoriam §inasi Tekin, special issue of the Journal of Turkish Studies/Turkliik Bilgisi Arastirmalan 31/II (2007): 67-79.

28 addition, recognize the Aguicens as their miir§id. Of this second group, the ocak of Kizil

Deli is associated with the well-known Bektashi saint Sayyid 'All Sultan, also known as

Kizil Deli, even though the Malatya branch of the Kizil Deli ocak historically recognizes

the dedes of Mineyik as the miir§id line. The ocak of §ah Ibrahim Veli, on the other hand,

is another very prominent ocak with a claim to mursi'd-hood similar to the Aguicens and the ocak Imam Zeynel Abidin; it is, however, unique in having a pedigree tracing to the

house of the Safavids.

Compared to their archival counterparts, Alevi documents pose an array of additional challenges to the researcher. First, Alevi documents as a whole are dispersed among hundreds of dede families in different corners of Anatolia and the Balkans. Even in the case of a single ocak, they are often scattered unevenly among several dede families inhabiting different localities. In general, one or two families possess all or the majority of documents related to their ocaks, with the rest of the affiliated families owning just a single specimen or none at all. Identifying the locations of the different branches and off-shoots of an ocak, seeking out those individuals and families who own one or more of the documents relating to that ocak, and acquiring their consent for studying these documents is a task that can be difficult and time-consuming and virtually impossible to accomplish with perfection due to the chance factor involved.

Second, especially with regard to older Alevi documents, only few have reached us in their original states. The rest are copies made at later dates, evidently to ensure the preservation of the physically deteriorated originals or to produce additional copies of the document for the individual archives of affiliated dede families. During the copying process, multiple documents were occasionally integrated into a single scroll,

29 most likely because it was physically easier to keep a single long sheet rather than multiple shorter ones. The dedes would also have their documents periodically copied as part of a procedure for renewing their legitimacy as ocakzades and for updating their family trees.

This practice of recurrent copying and re-copying, undertaken at times by individuals with inadequate competence, explains the extremely degenerated state of some of the documents, particularly those originally composed in Arabic. Some documents display copying errors, misspellings, and major lapses in the flow of the text. In addition to such unintended mistakes, these later copies also frequently include what appear to be intended omissions and revisions of the originals, reflecting changing religious sensibilities as well as altered significance and usage of the documents in question. It is thus an extremely tedious job to sort the initial configurations of individual Alevi documents from later, altered copies, especially since the documents frequently fail to supply original composition dates, instead providing only copying or renewal dates or no dates at all. Further adding to the challenge are the polyglot character of the documents, which variously use Turkish (at times nonstandard or archaic forms), Arabic, and Persian, sometimes within the same document; their chronological scatteredness from the late fourteenth to the mid- twentieth centuries; and their various and at times eclectic genres that have been little studied.

Notwithstanding all these limitations and ambiguities, a number of relatively consistent models in terms of both form and content can be discerned in the set of documents examined for this research. Excluding about a dozen fragments and illegible

30 documents, I had at my disposal approximately one hundred twenty Alevi documents

(several of which were rough replicas of one another), written on separate sheets or scrolls of paper. Of these, about forty concerned commercial transactions, criminal court cases, and other such mundane issues, or were from the twentieth century. The rest of the dated documents had dates between the second half of the sixteenth and the end of nineteenth centuries, with four exceptions that bore earlier dates. These documents largely consist of l) Sufi diplomas (ijazas) of the WafaT order; 2) documents issued or renewed at the Karbala Convent in Iraq or by the local chief of the descendants of the Prophet, the naqib al-ashraf, in Karbala; 3) Bektashi icazetnam.es

(Turk, for ijaza) conferred by the £elebis at the Had Bektas. Convent in Kir§ehir; and 4) various documents issued by the Ottoman authorities and the kadi courts confirming the holders' status as sayyids and dervishes.

Putting aside the one unique Akhl (Turk. Ahl) ijaza dated 775/1374, the oldest layer of dated Alevi documents consisted of ijazas of the WafaT order, all in Arabic.

These were also the most disappointing in terms of the quality of extant copies. Of the dozen or so WafaT ijazas, the oldest two were copied in 855/1451 and 905/1499, while another eight date to the sixteenth century. A final one, framed as a shajara, was copied in 1265/1848, although its original was clearly composed sometime in the sixteenth century or earlier. An additional group of documents revealing a WafaT affinity includes sayyid genealogies reaching back to Abu'1-Wafa', issued or renewed by the naqib al-ashraf 'in Karbala through the course of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. In many cases, these shajaras were given on the authority of older documents, some of which may also have been composed initially as ijazas, although

31 such a transition in genre is not always clearly observed as in the case of the

aforementioned document dated 1265/1848.

Over two dozen documents originating from Iraq constitute the second-oldest

category among the Alevi documents. As a whole, they reveal that the dedes undertook

periodic trips to this region from the mid-sixteenth century on. That such trips were

undertaken up until the middle of the twentieth century for obtaining updated genealogies is also confirmed by accounts in Alevi oral history. During these trips the dedes visited various Shi'i/Alevi pilgrimage sites and a number of Sufi convents, which

over time, if not originally, came to be associated with the Bektashi order. Of these

convents, the so-known Karbala Convent, in addition to the local naqib al-ashraf, appear to be the source of many Alevi documents. Notwithstanding the fact that distinctions between different genres seem to be blurred in many cases, Alevi documents originating from Iraq are basically of three types: shajaras in Arabic; ziyaretnames

(sometimes also referred as §efkatnames) in Turkish; and hilafetnames in Turkish, respectively confirming dedes' sayyid descent, their visits to the Shi'i/Alevi sacred sites in Iraq, and their paying homage to the convent in Karbala.

Of the remaining documents, twenty-six were issued by the Ottoman authorities or the kadi courts verifying their holders' status as dervishes and sayyids. All of these fall between the seventeenth and nineteenth centuries, with the exception of a copy of an imperial edict (fermari) dated 930/1524, and with the further exception often icdzetndmes granted or letters sent by the Celebi Bektashis in Kir§ehir dating from the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. We come across surprisingly few Alevi documents, only two in fact, that can be directly traced to the Safavids. The first, the

32 original of which is extant, is dated 1089/1678. The second, though copied in 1242/1826,

must have been initially composed sometime in the early sixteenth century, during the

reign of Shah Tahmasp. In assessing the nature of enduring relations between the shahs and the Alevi communities in Anatolia, these two documents will be complemented by a group of manuscripts known as Buyruks, which include religious treatises apparently dispatched to Anatolia by the Safavids. The oldest Buyruk manuscript to surface so far was copied in 1021/1612.

In addition to these Alevi sources, this dissertation will utilize other published or unpublished primary source material. Among the most important of these are records related to the convent in Karbala found in the archives of the General

Directorate of Endowments in Ankara, the Ottoman tax registers (tahnr defterleri) from the sixteenth century for the provinces of Malatya and Diyarbakir, and the sixteenth- century miihimme defterleri. Supplementing these documentary sources are narrative sources, primarily hagiographies of HacTBekta§, Otman Baba, and Abu'1-Wafa; some traveler accounts, including among others the seventeenth-century travelogue

(Seyahatname) of Evliya Celebi; and Sufi biographical dictionaries, most importantly that of the mid-fourteenth century, Tirydq al-muhibbvn by al-Wasitl.

v. Organization of the Dissertation

This dissertation is organized around three themes brought to the forefront by the Alevi documents. The first chapter addresses the issue of the historical affinity of some of the most prominent ocaks in Eastern Anatolia with the WafaT order, a little known Sufi order, the widespread presence of which in Anatolia has been previously

33 unrecognized. I show in this chapter how, from the second half of the fifteenth century

onwards, the various branches of the WafaT order in Eastern Anatolia came to be

assimilated under the common flag of Kizilbashism, gradually losing their independent

order structures and evolving into distinct components of the Alevi ocak system. These

findings do not support the common assumption in the literature regarding the

primary role of the Yeseviyye, a Sufi order of Central Asian/Turkic origin, in the

genesis of proto-Alevism. Rather, these findings highlight the prominent position in

this regard of the Wafat order that originated in Iraq.

The second major theme that emerges from the Alevi documents concerns the

development of symbiotic relations between the Kizilbash/Alevi communities and the

Bektashi order. I address this issue in chapters two and three. The second chapter traces the roots of the complex relation between the two affiliations to their shared links to the Abdals of Rum (Rum Abdallan), a dervish group that existed in Anatolia from late medieval times, following its progression up to, and following, the rise of the

Safavl-led Kizilbash movement. The third chapter takes up the question of connections between the Alevi dedes, the group of (quasi-)Bektashi convents in Iraq, and the

Safavids. I argue that the convents in question functioned as liaisons between the shahs and their followers in Anatolia. These convents, and more so their interactions with the dede lineages, have so far been virtually unknown in the literature.

The final chapter provides a larger overview of the genesis and evolution of the

Kizilbash milieu in Anatolia and the changing contours of its relations with the

Safavids. It argues that the Kizilbash movement should be conceived as a union of various mystical formations and antinomian dervish groups which flourished in

34 Anatolia from the late medieval period, rather than essentially as a coalition of

Turkmen tribes. While the independent religious identities of the different groups such

as the WafaTs diminished with their incorporation into the larger Kizilbash milieu, the

established local hierarchies of their various branches persisted under a new,

superimposed pecking order, with the Safavids at the top as the supreme spiritual

guides. This chapter also shows how, contrary to assumptions otherwise, the Kizilbash

communities in Anatolia persisted in their attachment to their distant spiritual

masters, the Safavid shahs, who in turn appear to have never entirely abandoned their

claims over these communities. Contacts between them were maintained, not only

indirectly through the mediation of the group of Sufi convents in Iraq, but also through

other mechanisms. Of the latter, I identify three: the dispatching of religious treatises, the granting of the position of halife (Persian khalifa) to selected Alevi ocaks, and the mediation of a branch of the SafavT house in Eastern Anatolia.

35 CHAPTER ONE

The Forgotten Forefathers: The Wafa iyya Order and Its Kizilbash Offshoots in Anatolia

I-Introduction

Scholars have often been puzzled by the complex religious landscape of late

medieval and early Ottoman Anatolia. Specifically referring to its folk-Islam

component, one historian described the religious situation in Anatolia during this

period as "utterly confused" and characterized as futile "any attempt to find an

organized pattern for it."1 This chapter argues that the recovery of the multifaceted

trajectory of the WafaT order, which has long escaped historians' attention, will help us

assemble parts of this intricate puzzle and will challenge the assumption of a rigid

dichotomy between the so-called folk and high Islamic traditions in Anatolian religious

history.2

The story of the Wafa iyya began with its eponym, Abu'1-Wafa, in eleventh-

century Iraq, but the Iraqi branch of the order soon faded away, leaving behind no

visible imprints. However, various offshoots thrived in Anatolia from the late twelfth or

early thirteenth centuries until around the mid-sixteenth century and during this

period played a major role in the political and religious history of the region. The WafaT

presence in Anatolia was pervasive, cutting across social, political, and even sectarian

1 Michel M. Mazzaoui, The Origins of the Safawids: Stism, Sufism, and the Guldt (Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag, 1972), 58.

2 A good case for this point was earlier made by Ahmet T. Karamustafa, God's Unruly Friends: Dervish Groups in the Islamic Later Middle Period, 1200-1550 (Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1994), 175-198; and Cemal Kafadar, Between Two Worlds: The Construction of the Ottoman State (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1995), esp. 53-55, 73-76.

36 divisions. It was linked to the mid-thirteenth-century BabaT revolt that arose within

the tribal milieu of central and southeastern Anatolia. A number of notable families of

the pre- and early-Ottoman eras, who produced major religious and literary figures

such as Ede Bali and 'A§ikpa§azade, possessed a WafaT heritage. And as will be shown in

this chapter with the support of the Alevi documents, a relatively extensive WafaT

network in medieval eastern Anatolia came to constitute one of the major building

blocks of the Kizilbash movement through the course of the late fifteenth and early

sixteenth centuries. No deliberate memories of this WafaT past seem to have been

preserved in the Alevi oral tradition, except some faint traces, such as the consistently

highlighted fact that Alevi miir§id ocaks were descended from Imam Zayn al-'Abidtn, as was Abu'1-Wafa himself.3 The erosion of WafaT memory, although to some extent a

natural corollary of the fusion of the Wafa iyya with the larger Kizilbash milieu, also

involved the conflation of the WafaT legacy with that of the Bektashi tradition as it was configured within a YesevT framework from around the late fifteenth century. This conflation, among other things, contributed to the failure of modern scholarship to discern the important place of the WafaT order in the religious history of Anatolia.4

Considering this gap in scholarship concerning WafaT history, I will first give a selective overview of the biography of Abu'1-Wafa' and the early history of the

Wafa iyya, based on available narrative sources. The information these contain will be

3 The emphasis in Alevi oral tradition on the mixr§id ocaks descent from Imam Zayn al-'Abidih is paralleled by a similar emphasis on the descent of Abu'1-Wafa' from the same imam in the hagiography to be discussed below.

4 Regarding the common failure of historians to recognize the importance of the Wafa'iyya in the origins of eastern Anatolian Sufism, see Ahmet T. Karamustafa, "Early Sufism in Eastern Anatolia," in Classical Persian Sufism from its Origins to Rami, ed. Leonard Lewisohn (New York and London: Khaniqahi Nimatullahi Publications, 1993), 175-198.

37 juxtaposed with documents and oral reports emanating from within the Wafal cum

Kizilbash ocaks. In addition to providing a background for the story of the Wafa'iyya in

Anatolia, my goal in doing this is to establish the historicity of the link between these ocaks and Abu'1-Wafa' Taj al-'Arifih and his legacy.5 In the second part of this chapter, I will highlight the traces of the order dispersed in the larger politico-religious history of

Anatolia, and using newly discovered archival evidence, I will track the initial appearance of Wafal dervishes in Anatolia back to the late twelfth and early thirteenth centuries. I will then turn my focus to Alevi ocaks of Wafal origin, examining their geographical distribution and evolution into distinct components of the Kizilbash/Alevi ocak system in the post-Safavid era.

II- Abu'1-Wafa' Taj al-'Ariftn and the Wafa'iyya Order i. Biography ofAbul-Wafa'

Despite his relative fame as a Sufi, Abu'1-Wafa' Taj al-'Ariftn and his order are rarely encountered in general histories of Islamic mysticism. Nor does one find much information in more specialized literature, with the single important exception of the work done by Alya Krupp.6 Krupp's work is primarily a study of the hagiographic vita of

Abu'1-Wafa as a historical source. The Arabic original of the vita of Abu'1-Wafa was

5 Some researchers have expressed doubts concerning the identity of the Abu'1-Wafa' encountered in the Alevi documents, suggesting that he may be some other mystic with the same epithet, such as the fifteenth-century Abu'1-Wafa' H(v)arezml; see, for example, Alemdar Yalcin and Haci Yilmaz, "Kargm Ocakh Boyu ile ilgili Yeni Belgeler," Haci Bektas Veil Arastirma Dergisi 21 (Spring 2002): 24. However, discussion below will reveal the unwarranted nature of such primarily ideologically driven claims.

6 Alya Krupp, Studien zum Mena.qybna.me des Abu l-Wafa Tag al-'Ariftn: Das historische Leben des Abu l-Wafa Tag al-'Arifin (Munchen: Dr. Rudolf Trofenik, 1976).

38 entitled Tadhkirat al-muqtafin athar uli al-safa wa tabsirat al-muqtadin bi-tariq Taj al-'Arifin

Abi'l-Wafa (hereafter Menakib-Arabic).7 It was authored by Shihab al-DIn Abu'1-Huda

Ahmad b. 'Abd al-Mun'im al-ShabrlsT al-Wasitl, who completed it in 777/1376. The only extant manuscript, copied in 878/1473, is in the Bibliotheque nationale in Paris, and so far, Krupp seems to be the only researcher to have utilized it.8 Around the late fifteenth century, Menakib-Arabic was translated into Turkish as Menakib-i Seyyid Ebu'l-Vefa

(hereafter Menakib-Turkish), with a relatively long introduction underscoring the close association between the eponymous founder of the Ottoman Empire, 'Osman Beg, and the famous WafaT shaykh, Ede Bali. Current research, however, does not clarify the extent to which the content of the Turkish translation differs from the Arabic original.

Krupp, although utilizing both, did not systematically compare the two versions; nevertheless, her work suggests some significant discrepancies, as will be demonstrated below. The vita of Abu'1-Wafa', although strictly speaking belonging to the genre of hagiography, seems to be strongly rooted in factual history, and as such shows itself as the most informative source on Abu'1-Wafa' and the early history of the

Wafa'iyya order. Aside from the hagiography, the most important source on Abu'l-

Wafa is Tiryaq al-muhibbvn fitabaqat khirqat al-mashayikh al-'arifin by TaqI al-DIn 'Abd al-

Rahman b. 'Abd al-Muhsin al-WasiiJ (d. 1343). Among other things, this work is notable

7 M. le Baron de Slane, Bibliotheque nationale, Departement des manuscrits: Catalogue des manuscrits arabes (Paris: Imprimerie nationale, 1883-1895), no.2036; also recorded in C. Brockelmann, Geschichte der Arabischen Litteratur, 2nd supplementband (Leiden: Brill, 1938), no. 999. The same title appears with slight variations in Bagdath Ismail Pasa, Ketf-el-mnun zeyli: izah al-maknunfial- zayli 'aid ka§fal-zunun an asamial-kutubivalfanun, 2 vols, (istanbul: Milli Egitim Basimevi, 1945), 1: 277.

8 This unique copy of the Arabic original of the hagiography of Abu'1-Wafa' was not available to me; the few specific references to Menakib-Arabic are therefore taken from Krupp.

39 because it is an earlier source than the hagiography and because it provides a slightly

different account of the early life of Abu'1-Wafa'. There are other narrative sources

mentioning Abu'1-Wafa', most importantly Sufi biographical dictionaries, but aside

from a few details, these make no significant additions to the information contained in the two sources mentioned above.9

According to these sources, Taj al-'Arifln Abu'1-Wafa' al-BaghdadT was an Iraqi by birth. With the exception of a sojourn in Bukhara,10 where he went to further his studies, Abu'1-Wafa' spent his entire life in Iraq, mainly in and around Baghdad, hence his nisba al-Baghdadl. His real name was Muhammad, but he was also known by the nickname Kakis.11 According to Tabaqat-WasitT, he was born on 12 Rajab 417/1026 and died on 20 Rafrf al-awwal 501/1107.12 His father, also named Muhammad, was a descendant of Imam Zayn al-'AbidTn. Escaping persecution of sayyids, the father of

Abu'1-Wafa' settled among tribal Kurds known as Bam Narjis and married a Kurdish woman named Fatima Umm Kulthum. He died while his wife was still pregnant with their son. Following a tribal custom, Fatima with a group of relatives then left the land

9 See, for example, Tabaqat-Sha rani, 107-108; and Eyiib Sabn, Mir'atiil-Harameyn (Istanbul: Bahriyye Matba'asi, 1306 [1890]), 3:134-136.

10 Mendkib-Turkish, fol. 15a.

11 Menahb-Turkish, fol. 6b; Tabaqat-WasitT, 6.

12 Tabaqat-WasitT, 41; Menahb-Turkish confirms these dates except the month of his death, fol. 6b. For the alternative birth date of 411/1020 and death date of 495/1101 for Abu'1-Wafa" as given in Menakib-Arabic, see Krupp, Studienzum Menaqybndme, 26.

40 where her husband died and settled in Qusan, a region between Nu'maniyya and Wasit

south of Baghdad. It was in QalmTniyya in Qusan that Abu'1-Wafa' was born.13

Abu'1-Wafa', known also by the nisba al-Kurdl, was thus partially of Kurdish

origin, grew up among Kurds, and spoke only Kurdish until one day when the Prophet

appeared to him in a dream and miraculously taught him Arabic.14 His Kurdish background is a major theme throughout his hagiography. The Kurds gave him the

nickname Kakis as a sign of their affection.15 This affection was clearly mutual, as

mirrored in a number of anecdotes in which Abu'1-Wafa' appears reluctant to condemn

Kurds' laxity with regard to religious observances.16 His Kurdishness was used against

Abu'1-Wafa' at times. People questioned his sayyid-hood because of it, and some of the

Baghdad ulema looked down upon him for his accented and flawed Arabic, at least until after he proved his erudition in religious matters. Even in Sufi circles, there were some who shared this demeaning attitude. In one anecdote, a dervish from the circle of

Shaykh Ahmad al-Rifa I criticized his fellow dervishes for engaging in the soma ritual, on the grounds that this practice belonged to the "sons of the Kurd(s)" (Kurd oglanlari).

"Tabaqdt-Wasiti, 41; Menahb-Turkish, fols. 6b, 12a-14b; Krupp, Studien zum Mendqybname, 26-29.

^Menahb-Turkish, fols. 14b-15a.

15 "ve Kiirdler ortasinda Kakis dimekle ma'rufidi, ma'nasi erenler atasi dimekdiir," Menahb-Turkish, fol. 6b. InTabaqat-Wasiti, 43, the name is spelled Kakis and no specific Kurdish connection is emphasized.

16 In one anecdote, Abu'1-Wafa' is reported to have built with his own hands a bridge over a river in Qusan to help a group of Kurds who were trying to cross. When one of his disciples questioned the appropriateness of this act of benevolence on account of the Kurds' failure to perform the daily prayers and their lack of conformity with Shari'a (ziraekseri bTnemazlardan[dur] ve umur-i seri'iyyeye ri'ayet itmezler), Abu'1-Wafa' assured him that there were no sinners among them (buKiirdlerdefasikyokdur), Menahb-Turkish, fol. 49a.

41 What is interesting is that a disciple of Abu'1-Wafa' present at the time construed this

comment specifically as mockery of his shaykh.17

Abu'1-Wafa' was brought to the Sufi path by Abu Muhammad Talha al-ShunbukT.

Tabaqat-WasitI describes Abu'1-Wafa' as a highway robber before he became a Sufi. His

conversion came about following an episode in which some people he had robbed

complained about him to al-Shunbukl. Al-ShunbukT then sent one of his men to Abu'l-

Wafa' inviting him to his presence, and Abu'1-Wafa' accepted. After this first meeting,

he joined al-Shunbukf s circle of murfds and soon became his star disciple.18 The

hagiography of Abu'1-Wafa does not mention that in his early life Abu'1-Wafa' was a

highway robber, but instead portrays him in an idealized fashion even before his

conversion. According to the hagiography, al-ShunbukT's first encounter with Abu'l-

Wafa took place when al-ShunbukT visited QalmTniyya. Hearing of the extraordinary

qualities of then ten-year-old Muhammad, al-ShunbukT went to see him as he prayed

alone in a remote corner of a forest as was his habit. Al-ShunbukT was so impressed

with young Muhammad's wise responses to his questions that he invited him to join his

circle, which Muhammad promised to do. Soon after this encounter and after receiving

his mother's blessing, Muhammad left his hometown for HaddadTya where al-ShunbukT lived. Seeing that he had kept his promise, al-ShunbukT gave his new disciple the

nickname Abu'1-Wafa' (father of fidelity).19 Abu'1-Wafa' also became the first Sufi to

'Mendhb-Turkish, fols. 82b-83a.

! Tabaqdt-Wdsiti, 6-7.

' Mendhb-Turkish, fols. 6b-8b.

42 carry the title Taj al-'Arifin (crown of the gnostics).20 Although he married a woman

named Husniyya, also known as Sitt al-Fuqara', Abu'1-Wafa' remained celibate

throughout his entire life and had no biological offspring.

Most of the basic facts concerning the early life of Abu'1-Wafa' as given in our

literary sources are corroborated by the Alevi documents. In all the shajaras and ijazas

his name is given as Muhammad and his title as Taj al-'Arifin. His father's name is

similarly recorded as Muhammad, with a genealogy traced back to Imam Zayn al-

' Abidin through his son Zayd, following more or less the same line of names as noted in the hagiography of Abu'1-Wafa' and the Tabaqat-Wasitl.21 The Alevi documents also

concur with the narrative sources in identifying Abu Muhammad Talha al-Shunbukl as the spiritual master of Abu'1-Wafa'Taj al-'ArifTn, albeit with variations in his silsila,

initiatic lineage, as I will discuss below.

The Alevi documents in general do not include any further details concerning the life story of Abu'1-Wafa, with the exception of one example from the ocak of Imam

Zeynel Abidin, dated Rabt al-awwal 984/15 76.22 The content of this interesting

20 Tabaqat-Sha ram, 107.

21 Tabaqat-Wasitl, 41 and Menahb-Turkish, fol. 10b, trace the geneology of Abu'-Wafa' back to Imam Zayn al-'Abidln as follows: Abu'l-Wafa'<- Muhammad-*- Muhammad*- Muhammad Zayd<- Hasan al-Murtada al-Akbar al-'Arldl <- Zayd<-Imam Zayn al- 'Abidin. The Alevi documents give the same basic genealogy, albeit with certain variations in the names and with occasional extra names interpolated into the chain; for example, in the oldest Alevi document that includes the family tree of Abu'1-Wafa', dated 855/1452 (FD Muharrem Naci Orhan, b. in the village of Mineyik, Arguvan-Malatya), a certain 'All appears between Muhammad Zayd and Hasan al- Murtada al-Akbar al-'Arldl.

22 FD of Muharrem Naci Orhan. Translations into modern Turkish (with some signficant omissions) of most of these documents by Ahmed Akgundiiz were published in Kureysanh Seyyid Kekil, Peygamberler He Seyyidlerin §ecerelerive A§iretlerin Tarihi (Koln, n.d.), 175-208.

43 document was apparently copied from an older WafaT ijaza by Ibrahim b. Sultan b. Idns

al-Husayni, the naqib al-nuqaba", syndic of the descendants of the Prophet, at the shrine

of Imam Husayn in Karbala.23 The truthfulness of the information included in the

document was also ratified by Muhammad b. Husayn Kammuna(?) al-Husaynl, the naqib

al-nuqaba in Baghdad. A certain Sayyid Ghanim b. Sayyid Qalandar b. Sayyid

Muhammad brought the original document to the local naqib in Karbala as proof of his

descent from Sayyid Ghanim, brother of Abu'1-Wafa', hence as written testimony for his

sayyid-hood. It records a meeting of khulafa, vicars, and relatives of Abu'1-Wafa' in the

presence of four kadis representing the four Sunni schools (madhahib, pi. of madhhab) in the Madrasat al-MustansTriyya. In this meeting, the document claims, one of the ancestors of the aforementioned Sayyid Ghanim b. Sayyid Qalandar was recognized as a blood relative of Abu'1-Wafa' and as his spiritual heir. He was thereby sanctioned as the head of the order (tanqa) of Abu'1-Wafa, and anyone claiming affiliation with this order was required to have his authorization and ijaza.24 At the end of the scroll, a detailed summary of the content of the Arabic document is also provided in Turkish.

Although it was a common practice among the Alevi dedes to have their sayyid genealogies updated and approved in Karbala based on the authority of older documents, various anachronisms in the content of the document at hand raise doubts about its authenticity. The date given, 408/1017, is anachronistic, considering that

23 At the end of the document, this fact is reiterated succinctly as follows: "nuqila mafihadhihi al-wathiqa min al-wathiqa al-qadima al-asliya bild ziydda," ibid.

24 "jamTa al-d'ldm al-ddyira fisdyir aqtdr al-ard al-mahbusa bi-hadrat sayyidind al-sayyid Abil-Wafa' qaddasa'lldhu ruhahuyata'allaqu amtv.hu fial-dfdq bi-ijdzat hddha al-faqirwa idhnihiwa ishdratihiwa 'aldmatihT" ibid.

44 Abu'1-Wafa' probably had not even been born yet by this date. Nor did the Madrasat al-

Mustanslriyya exist at this time, not being built until the thirteenth century. One

explanation for this anachronism may of course be careless copying. In fact, there are

indications that certain parts of the original document, which is explicitly described as

worn-out (wathiqa qadimafaniya baliya), may have been torn or impossible to read. For

instance, the name of the original document's recipient, which we can see from the

context was one of the ancestors of Sayyid Ghanim b. Sayyid Qalandar, is not spelled

out anywhere; instead he is consistently referred to as "the above-mentioned" (mushar

ilayh).

Nonetheless, an indirect indication of the relative antiquity and perhaps

authenticity of the original document is found in its content. At the top of the existing

copy is the seal (muhr) of the shrine of Imam Husayn, the names of the Twelve Imams

and the prayer ndd-i All,25 all of which are characteristic of Alevi documents copied or

composed in Karbala during and after the sixteenth century; together they are obvious

clues of a Shici-Alevi affiliation. But the meeting described in the text of the original

document, as mentioned above, was attended by kadis belonging to the four Sunni

schools. We can thus surmise that the original text was produced at a date prior to the

full blending of the Wafa'iyya into the Kizilbash/Alevi milieu, hence prior to the early

sixteenth century.

The part of the document that interests us most at this point is the information

it includes concerning the biography of Abu'1-Wafa'. This information appears in the last passage of the Arabic text as well as in its Turkish summary, with only slight

25 For the ndd-i All prayer, see Mehmet Yaman, Alevilik inang-Edeb-Erkan (Istanbul, 1994), 204- 206.

45 variations, and content-wise does not form an integral part of the rest of the document.

The year 408/1017, previously given as the date of original composition, recurs here as

the death date for Abu'1-Wafa. It is possible that this date, which would be reasonable

as the birth date of Abu'1-Wafa', may have been mistakenly written or copied as his

death date instead. One might even conjecture that as a result of a misguided inference

based on this mistake, the copyist wrote the same date as the year when the original

document was put into writing, perhaps assuming that the appointment of a spiritual

heir to Abu'1-Wafa must have happened in the immediate aftermath of his death.

A few other anachronistic details in this account of the biography of Abu'1-Wafa*

suggest the possibility that the entire account may have been derived from oral

reports. For example, Abu'1-Wafa' is presented as a contemporary of the Umayyads,

whose oppressive policies towards the descendants of the Prophet caused Abu'1-Wafa'

to move to the mountainous land of the Kurds. Aside from its chronological

unfeasibility (since the Umayyads were replaced by the Abbasids in 750, i.e., long before the lifetime of Abu'1-Wafa), what we are facing here is an apparent conflation of the biographies of Abu'1-Wafa' and his father. It is interesting to note that even today one consistently hears this same story line as explanation for how the Alevi sayyids ended up in Anatolia. Most of these stories, which often lack any historical specificity, noticeably take as their starting point the tyranny of the Umayyads against the descendants of the Prophet.

We also come across other specific facts in this passage that conflict with the corresponding data in our literary sources. First, the document furnishes us with a very different name, al-Sitt Maymuna al-Barkhiyya, for Abu'l-Wafa"s mother. There is no

46 indication concerning what the nisba al-Barkhiyya refers to; neither is it clear whether

here we are faced yet again with a fusion of two separate figures, namely the mother

and the wife of Abu'1-Wafa', especially considering that his wife was known as Sitt al-

Fuqara' according to Abu'l-Wafa"s hagiography. Another case of conflicting facts

involves Kakis, the nickname of Abu'1-Wafa'. While both Tabaqat-WasitT and Menakib-

Turkish mention this as a term of affection, the latter specifically emphasizes its

Kurdish context and provides a Turkish translation as "father of saints" (erenleratasi).

The Alevi document, on the other hand, spells the term "Bakls" and translates it as

"shepherd" (Arabic al-ra.% Turkish goban), claiming that it was given to Abu'1-Wafa by

his mother. The latter claim has more of a ring of authenticity to it, although Kurdish

dictionaries do not include a word with this meaning under either spelling.

Nonetheless, the Menakib-Turkish's suggestion may be a more plausible translation in

view of the fact that the root kak or kak carries the meaning of "older brother" in the

Kurdish language and is also used as a term of address for men in general. Among

Kurdish-speaking Alevis in Anatolia, we also see the use of derivatives of this same root

as a term of respectful address for men and in at least one recorded case for an Alevi dede.

All of our sources explicitly or implicitly agree that Abu'1-Wafa' had no biological offspring and that his spiritual legacy was passed down through his adopted son(s). However, significant differences exist between the sources in terms of the

26 Michael C. Chyet, Kurdish-English Dictionary /Ferhenge Kurmanci-Inglm(blew Haven: Yale University Press, c.2003), and personal correspondence with Erdal Gezik. For the use of the term in the Alevi context, see the example in my "The Emergence of the Kizilbas in Western Thought: Missionary Accounts and Their Aftermath," in Archaeology, Anthropology and Heritage in the Balkans and Anatolia: The Life and Times ofF.W. Hasluck 1878-1920, 2 vols, ed. David Shankland (Istanbul: ISIS Press, 2004), 2: 329-353.

47 identities, number, and primacy of the spiritual successors of Abu'1-Wafa'. Alevi

documents identify Sayyid Khamis (or in a few cases Sayyid 'Uthman), son of Sayyid

Ghanim, brother of Abu'1-Wafa', as the biological ancestor of Alevi miir§id ocaks. Sayyid

Khamis is purported to be the primary heir of the spiritual legacy of his uncle Abu'l-

Wafa\ In keeping with the principle of hereditary succession, his progeny therefore

claim a hereditary right to the universal headship of the WafaT order, as clearly

revealed by the wording of the Alevi document cited above.27 The names of both Sayyid

Ghanim (Turk. Ganim) and Sayyid Khamis (Turk. Hamis) are also mentioned in

Menakib-Turkish. But according to Menakib-Turkish, Sayyid Ghanim was one of the

seven adopted sons of Abu'1-Wafa', most if not all of whom were apparently also his

close relatives.28 The language used in the Menakib-Turkish for describing the familial

relationship between Sayyid Ghanim and Abu'1-Wafa is rather convoluted, but appears

to suggest that Sayyid Ganim was a nephew rather than a brother of Abu'1-Wafa'.29

Sayyid Khamis, on the other hand, appears in the Menakib-Turkish as the father of

27 See n. 24.

28 Menakib-Turkish, fols. 19b-21a.

29 The seven adopted sons of Abu'1-Wafa' are listed as follows: "ve olyedi 'aziziin birisi Seyyid Matar'dur ki Seyyid Salim oghdur ki Seyyid Ebiil-Vefa'nun kardasidvr ve birisi Seyyid Ganim diir ki Erba'in'de Ebii'l-'Abbds diyii zikr ohnur ki Seyyid Miincih(?) oghdur. Seyyid Miincih [bin?] Muhammed bin Seyyid Zeyd'diir ki Ebiil-Vefa'nun dedesidiir ve birisi Seyyid Muhammed bin Seyyid Kemal Hayat ibni Seyyid Muhammed bin Seyyid Zeyd'diir ve birisi Seyyid 'Alibin Seyyid HamTs'diir ki Seyyid Zeyd oghdur, Erba'in'de 'Alibin Ustad diyii zikr ohnur. Hamis diyii anun igiin didiler Seyyid Zeyd'iin be§inci oghdur ve birisi'Abdu'r-rahman TefsuncTdiirve birisi Seyh. 'Alibin Heyetfdiirve birisi Seyh 'Asker-i Sulfdiirkinesebi imam Hasan 'Asketfye gikar." Menakib-Turkish, fol. 21a. Elsewhere, Seyyid Ganim is more clearly described as a nephew of Abu'l-WafaY'w birisi seyyid serif Ebul-Ma'alTAhmed bin Seyh Riikne'd-dm ki Seyyid Ganim oglanlanndandur ki Hazret-i Seyyid'iin kardasi oghdur." Menakib- Turkish, fol.l5lb.

48 Sayyid 'All, another of Abu'l-Wafa's adopted sons.30 Menakib-Turkish, in other words, does not fully support the accuracy of the WafaTsiMa provided in the Alevi documents. A similar incongruency exists regarding the ancestry of Sayyid Velayet, the son-in-law of the famous Ottoman chronicler 'A§ikpa§azade who commissioned the translation of hagiography of Abu'1-Wafa' (see below for details). According to the introduction added to the Turkish translation, Sayyid Velayet was the progeny of

Sayyid PIr Hayat al-DIn, a nephew and adopted son of Abu'l-Wafa'.31 Yet oddly, this name is not included in the list of the adopted sons of Abu'1-Wafa' provided in the main text of Menakib-Turkish, the closest name mentioned being Muhammad b. Sayyid

Kemal Hayat.32

As for Menakib-Arabic, it does not mention any of the seven adopted sons listed in its Turkish translation except Sayyid Matar, who is encountered in Sufi biographical dictionaries as Sayyid Matar al-BadaraT.33 Both Menakib-Arabic and Menakib-Turkish describe Sayyid Matar as the son of Sayyid Salim, brother of Abu'1-Wafa', and depict him as the primary spiritual heir of Abu'1-Wafa. They furthermore report that Sayyid

Matar's descendants acted as mutawalli, administrators, of the zawiya of Abu'1-Wafa' in

Kalamar for at least the next few generations.34 Menakib-Arabic stresses that Sayyid

30 See n. 29.

31 Menakib-Turkish, fol. 5a-5b.

32 See n. 29.

33 Tabaqat-Sha rani, 117.

34 Menakib-Turkish, fols. 19b-21a, 34b, 63b, 71b. wMeTabaqat-Wasitldoes not mention the adopted sons of Abu'1-Wafa', it lists Sayyid Matar among the leading shaykhs, p. 42.

49 Matar's father Sayyid Salim was the only brother of Abu'1-Wafa, albeit a half-brother,

sharing the same father with Abu'1-Wafa, but having a different mother. Menakib-

Arabic also brings up and subsequently rejects claims about a sister of Abu'1-Wafa'

named Zaynab.35 All these can be taken as a conscious effort by the author to establish

Sayyid Matar's line's exclusive successorship to the legacy of Abu'1-Wafa'. The Arabic

hagiography of Abu'1-Wafa' as such contradicts not only its Turkish translation but also

the Alevi documents, unless we assume that Ghanim was a nickname of Salim's and that

Sayyid Khamis was the other son of Salim's who is briefly mentioned in Menakib-Arabic without name or any further details.

In view of these discrepancies, it is possible to hypothesize that the Turkish translation of the hagiography of Abu'1-Wafa' was made from a copy of the Arabic original other than the one found in Bibliotheque nationale; or conversely, it is possible to hypothesize that the Arabic original of the text, which apparently promotes the perspective of those descending from the line of Sayyid Matar, was altered during the translation process, with exclusions and interpolations reflecting oral traditions widespread in the Anatolian WafaT milieu. In either case and regardless of the accurateness of the differing claims, such inconsistencies in the sources suggest a rivalry between different claimants to the spiritual legacy of Abu'1-Wafa', a rivalry that may have been especially strong between the Iraqi branch of the order descending from the line of Sayyid Matar and those branches flourishing in Anatolia.

Krupp, StudienzumMendqybname, 12-13, 28.

50 u. Abul-Wafa and his Order

Multiple anecdotes in his hagiography illustrate that Abu'1-Wafa' and his

followers were engaged in ritual practices, which were suspect in the eyes of the

orthodox ulema, such as soma and religious ceremonies attended by both men and women.36 Yet Abu'1-Wafa' is also emphatically described in his hagiography as a Sunni

keenly opposed to the Shi'is.37 Considering the period in which Abu'1-Wafa lived, his

portrayal as a Sunni comes as less of a surprise, since Sufism in this era was mainly a

Sunni phenomenon.38 The lifetime of Abu'1-Wafa' also coincided with the formative

period of the major tariqa lines. Though none are counted among the main orders, in the literature we come across multiple orders with the name Wafa'iyya. Of these, the only one linked to Abu'1-Wafa' al-Baghdadl is called ShunbukTyya-Wafa'iyya, a double name derived from Abu'1-Wafa' and his shaykh, al-ShunbukT. Tabaqat-WasitT, and following him Trimingham, regard the Shunbuklyya-Wafa'iyya as associated with the

36 For communal rituals attended by both men and women, see the anecdote recounted in Menahb-Turkish, fols. 101a-102a, according to which the caliph, as a sign of his distrust of the orthodoxy of Abu'1-Wafa', sends large amounts of wine to be consumed during communal rituals. However, Abu'1-Wafa' miracoulously transforms the wine into butter and honey and subsequently counters the caliph's move by sending a him a cup containing a piece of fire (representing men's lust) and some cotton (representing women's sensuality) with a piece of ice between. The ice (representing the shaykh's spiritual power) prevents the cotton from catching fire.

37 In various anecdotes, Abu'1-Wafa' is shown as actively opposing Shi's, called RafizTs, and upholding the legitimacy of the first three Sunni caliphs; see, for example Menahb-Turkish, fols. 59a-60a. According toTabaqdt-Wasiti, Abu'1-Wafa' belonged to the Shafimadhhab (school), while Menahb-Turkish claims that he did not adhere to any madhhab exclusively, instead choosing to follow one of the four Sunni schools on different issues, fol. 10a.

38 Nevertheless, the possibility of a distortion in the available sources regarding the sectarian affinity of Abu'1-Wafa', or his having practiced taqiyya (simulation) like many other Shi'is, cannot be entirely dismissed, although at this point we have no concrete evidence pointing to either of these possibilities.

51 Rifa'iyya order, despite the fact that Ahmad al-Rifa'i (1106-1182) lived after Abu'l-

Wafa .39 According to Krupp, the explanation for this must be related to the fact that

Ahmad al-Rifa T was the appointed spiritual heir of his maternal uncle Mansur al-

Bata'ihl, who was also a disciple of al-Shunbukl and thus shared a common spiritual

silsila with Abu'l-Wafa'. There also seems to have been some level of contact between

Abu'1-Wafa and 'Abd al-Qadir al-Jilanl, the eponymous founder of the Qadiriyya order.

Al-JIlanI apparently attended the gatherings of Abu'l-Wafa" in his youth, although he

never became a formal disciple.40

His hagiography offers two different spiritual silsilas for Abu'l-Wafa: one overt

(zahir), the other inner (batiri). His zahir silsila is as follows:

Abu'l-Wafa' Taj al-'ArifTn <- Abu Muhammad Talha al-ShunbukT <- Abu Bakr b.

al-Hawwarl <- Sahl al-Tustarf <- Muhammad al-Sawwar <- Dhu'n-Nun al-Misrl

<- Abu 'Abdullah Muhammad b. Hayya <- Jabir al-Ansan <- 'All b. AbT Talib.

His batin silsila similarly proceeds through al-Hawwan. According to Tabaqat-WasitI, al-

HawwarT was a highway robber before entering the Sufi path (as were al-Shunbuld and

Abu'l-Wafa') and received his first khirqa and cap in a dream from Abu Bakr al-Siddlq.

He passed these on to al-Shunbukl, who then transmitted them to Abu'l-Wafa'. The khirqa and cap were next passed to a disciple of Abu'l-Wafa', 'Allb. al-Haytl, and finally to 'All b. Idrls al-Ba'qubl, after which they were lost. Following his dream initiation by

39Tabaqat-WasitT, 7; J. Spencer Trimingham, The Sufi Orders in Islam (London: Oxford University Press, 1973), 281.

40 Mendhb-Turkish, fols. 138b-141a.

52 Abu Bakr al-Siddiq, al-Hawwan also became a disciple of Sahl al-Tustan, hence the

double silsila.41

The overt silsila of Abu'1-Wafa as given in WasitI is the same as that in his

hagiography up to and including Sahl al-Tustan, after whom it continues differently as

follows:

Dhu'n-Nun al-Misrl <- Israftl al-Maghribi <- Abu 'Abdullah M. Hubaisha al-Tabi'I

4- JabTr al-Ansarl al-SahhabT <- 'Alib. AbTTalib.

This same silsila is also one of the initiatic lineages given for Ahmad al-Rifa'T, as well as

the one used by Tabaqat-Wasiti to connect the Shunbuklyya-Wafa'iyya line to the

RifaTyya order.42

Examining the Alevi documents, more specifically the WafaT ijdzas, we see that

they provide two only slightly different silsilas for Abu'1-Wafa'. Both of them connect

him via his shaykh Abu Muhammad Talha al-Shunbuklto Abu Bakr b. al-Hawwan, as do

the hagiography of Abu'1-Wafa' and Tabaqat-WasitI, but differ from the latter, as well as

from one another, extending backwards from al-Hawwan. These two silsilas come from

four separate WafaT ijdzas. The oldest of these ijdzas (hereafter ij-ZA-c.l) belongs to the

ocak of Imam Zeynel Abidin and is dated Dhu'l-hijja 855/1451.43 Another copy of the

same ijdza (hereafter ij-ZA-c. 2), virtually identical except for some editing reflecting later Shi'i/Alevi sensibilities, is found among the documents of the Tunceli/Malatya

"Mendhb-Turkish, fol.lla-llb.

42 Tabaqat-Wdsitl, 44.

43 FD of Muharrem Naci Orhan.

53 branch of the Aguicens. The latter copy was made in Karbala in Dhu'l-hijja 990/1582.44

The second ijaza belongs to the Malatya branch of Dede Kargins and is similarly extant

in two copies, both found in scrolls comprising multiple documents. The first copy

(hereafter ij- DK-c.l) is dated 10 Muharram 905/1499, while the second (hereafter ij.DK-

c.2) bears the date Jumad al-awwal 952/1545.45 The date on the first copy may be the

actual composition date. The third ijaza comes from the ocak of Kara Pir Bad, which

some oral traditions identify as an offshoot of the ocak of Imam Zeynel Abidin. The

original was not available to me, but a translation of it was produced as part of a scroll

including multiple documents with different dates. It appears that the date that for this

ijaza (hereafter ij.KP) is Safar 916/1520, which may or may not be the date it was first

put in writing.46 Finally, the fourth ijaza comes from the ocak of Kurey§an centered in

Tunceli. A translation of it was similarly produced. The date of this ijaza (hereafter

ij.Kur) is for all practical purposes unknown, because only the last two digits of the year

are given in the document.47

44 FD of Izzettin Dogan, b. in the village of Kirlangic, Hekimhan-Malatya.

45 FD of Ahmet Riza Kargm, b. in the village of Dedekargin, Yazihan-Malatya. Most of these documents were translated into modern Turkish by Naci Kum in his unpublished Dedekargin- Karkinogullan-£epniler,1951; later published in appendix to Dede Kargm: §iirler, edited by Rahime Kislah and Ali Yesjlyurt (Mersin: Can Matbaacihk ve Yayincihk, 1999). Translations of these documents into Turkish also appeared in Yalcm, "Kargm Ocakh Boyu," 13-87. But neither of these translations are entirely reliable.

46 Nejat Birdogan, Anadolu ve Bcdkanlar'da Alevi Yerle§mesi (Istanbul: Mozaik Yayinlan, 1995), 223- 235. What is provided in this book under "Kara Pir Bad'm Soyagaci" is apparently a poor and undifferentiated translation of several documents included in a single scroll from the ocak of Kara Pir Bad centered in Divrigi-Karageban in the province of Sivas. The scroll's original was not available to me.

47 Alemdar Yalgin and Haci Yilmaz, "Kurey$an Ocagi Hakkmda Bazi Bilgiler," Haci Bekta§ Veil Ara§tirmaDergisi 23 (Fall 2002): 9-24. The document comes from Ziilfikar Kureys. Dedeoglu,

54 We have already noted that the two silsilas given for Abu'1-Wafa' in Alevi

documents overlap each another and those in the narrative sources, but only as far as

al-Hawwari. After that, the first silsila found in ij.DK and ij.Kur are traced to Muhammad

al-Nahrawam, and then to al-Tustarl,48 finally reaching through Hasan al-Basnto 'All b.

AbTTalib. The second silisila found in ij.Ag and ij.KP, on the other hand, additionally

insert Muhammad KanjawT into the chain following Muhammad al-Nahrawam.49 All the other differences between the silsilas given in these Alevi documents can reasonably be

attributed to spelling mistakes,50 with one significant exception. This exception involves the first name of Abu Bakr b. al-Hawwan, which appears as Taj al-DIn in ij.Ag, an obvious later tinkering that reflects heightened Shi'i/Alevi sensitivities. Al-

HawwarT's bdtin silsila, which connects him to Abu Bakr al-Siddlq, is not encountered in any of the Alevi documents.

Hi Disciples and Successors ofAbul-Wafa"

According to his hagiography, Abu'1-Wafa' had hundreds of thousands of followers coming from different regional, ethnic, and social backgrounds—so much so that the contemporary Abbasid caliph, intimidated by the vast number of his devotees,

affiliated with the Adiyaman branch of the ocak of Kureysan. The date in the document reads Shawwal35.

48 But spelled in both as al-Taskarl.

49 Misread and Turkified as "Nahrulu" in "Kara Pir Bad'in Soyagaci," Birdogan, Anadolu ve Balkanlar'da, 226.

50 In two of the ijazas, al-Hawwarfs nisba is also misspelled as al-HarrawT, an obvious copying mistake caused by ah inadvertent change of the order of the letters.

55 summoned him to Baghdad to have his orthodoxy tested in the presence of forty

leading members of the ulema.51 Iraq, and in particular the region south of Baghdad

where Abu'1-Wafa' spent most of his life, was naturally the prime focus of his influence.

He seems to have had many disciples from the city of Wasit, for instance. Aside from

those of his disciples who carry the nisba WasitT,52 the mere fact that the two most

important sources on Abu'1-Wafa', namely his hagiography and Tabaqat-Wasiti, were

authored by individuals from this town are clear indications of this. But already during his lifetime, Abu'l-Wafa"s network of followers appears to have expanded beyond Iraq, into regions as far apart as Lebanon and Bukhara, where we know he spent some years studying.53 Later WafaT presence is also attested in the literature in Egypt and Aleppo as well as in Anatolia, although it is not clear when the seeds of this order were first planted in these localities.54 Looking at the various regions where Abu'1-Wafa' exerted influence and at the nisbas of some of his close disciples, such as Kurd! and Turkman!, it becomes clear that his followers had diverse ethnic backgrounds.55

51 Menahb-Turkish, fols. 27b-29b.

52 For instance, Shaikh Rajab b. 'Imran WasitT, ibid., fol. 55a, for two lists of his leading disciples, see ibid., fols. 118a-119b, 120a-12lb.

53 Ibid., fols. 90b, 15a.

54 A zawiya affiliated with the Shunbukiyya-Wafa'iyya, founded in Cairo in 1526 is mentioned in Trimingham, J. Spencer, The Sufi Orders in Islam (London: Oxford University Press, 1973), 281; and at least one of the close disciples of Abu'1-Wafa', a Muhammad MisrT, appear to be of Egyptian origin, Menahb-Turkish, fol. 41a. For a sixteenth-century dervish in Aleppo affiliated with the Wafa'iyya, see Heghnar Zeitlian Watenpaugh, "Deviant Dervishes: Space, Gender, and the Construction of Antinomian Piety in Ottoman Aleppo," International Journal of Middle East Studies 37(2005): 535-565.

55 Menahb-Turkish fols. 118a-119b, 120a-12lb.

56 In addition to their regional and ethnic diversity, the disciples of Abu'1-Wafa were also socially varied. His hagiography reports that Abu'1-Wafa' had seventeen great rulers (padishah) under his banner, among them the ruler of Bukhara known as

Muhammad Turkman!, who left his throne to join the circle of Abu'1-Wafa .56 Caliph al-

Mustazhir Bi'llah was similarly one of his devotees.57 But probably the largest group among the followers of Abu'1-Wafa' consisted of people from rural and tribal backgrounds. The question here concerns not only individual disciples but rather the communal affiliations established between Abu'1-Wafa' and entire communities in such milieus.58 This notion of communal affiliations, noted before as a characteristic of the

YesevT tradition, was more typical of the post-Mongol religious landscape.59 It is significant that the same notion also turns up as the basic organizational principle among the Kizilbash/Alevi ocaks in Anatolia.

As discussed above, the hagiography of Abu'1-Wafa' presents Sayyid Matar as his primary spiritual heir and the one whose progeny acted as mutavalli of the zawiya of

Abu'1-Wafa' in Kalamar.60 However, we do not come across any historical records indicating the presence of the WafaT order in Iraq in later periods. The Wafa iyya thus

56 Mendhb-Turkish, fol. 15 a.

57 Mirroring his devotion, the caliph desists from confiscating a group of endowments upon the request of Abu'1-Wafa", ibid., fol. 93a-95b.

58 For an anecdote in which an entire population of a village becomes disciples of Abu'1-Wafa' after the saint's cures the illness of one of the notables of the community, see ibid., fols. 51a-52b (although at one point they revert back to their old practices).

59 Dewin DeWeese, "YasavT Sayhs in the Timurid Era: Notes on the Social and Political Role of Communal Sufi Affiliations in the 14th and 15th Centuries," Oriente Moderno 76:2 (1996): 173.

60 See. n. 34.

57 appears to have maintained its vibrancy not in the homeland of Abu'1-Wafa', but in

regions beyond it, especially in Anatolia.

III-Wafaiyya in Anatolia

i. WajuT Dervishes and Early Ottomans

Historians have long been aware of a few prominent figures affiliated with the

Wafaiyya in the circles of early Ottoman rulers.61 Ede Bali, for instance, readily comes to mind as the Sufi shaykh who interpreted 'O&man Beg's famous dream foretelling the grandeur of the Ottoman Empire. Following this episode, Ede Bali allegedly gave his daughter Malhun Hatun's hand in marriage to the aspiring empire-builder.62 Another

WafaT dervish, Geyikli Baba, accompanied 'Osman's son and successor Orhan during his siege of the city of Bursa and planted a tree in Orhan's palace as a sign of his blessing on the nascent Ottoman polity. Both of these dervishes received royal favors in return for their support of the house of'Osman.63

Ede Bali and Geyikli Baba appear in some of the earliest Ottoman sources, among them the well-known Ottoman chronicle Mendkib u tevdrih-i dl-I 'Osman

61 Regarding individual Wafa'T dervishes in pre- and early-Ottoman Anatolia, see Abdiilbaki Golpinarh,Yunus Emreve Tasawuf (1961; rev. ed., Istanbul: inkilap Kitabevi, 1992), 17-50; Halil inalcik, "How to Read 'Ashik Pasha-zade's History," Essays in Ottoman History (Istanbul: Eren, 1998), 31-50; Kafadar, Between Two Worlds, 74,128-129; Ahmet Ya?ar Ocak, Babailer Isyanv Aleviligin Tarihsel Altyapm Yakut Anadolu'da islam-Turk Heterodoksisinin Tesekkulu (1980; rev. ed., Istanbul: Dergah Yayinlan, 1996), 74-76; Elvan Qelebi, Menakibu'l-KudsiyyefiMenasibi'l-iJnsiyye: Babailyas-i Horasanive Siilalesinin MenkabeviTarihi, ed. Ismail E. Eriinsal and Ahmet Yasar Ocak (Ankara: Turk Tarih Kurumu, 1995), xxvi-xxx.

62 Apz, 6; Mendkib-Turkish, fol. 2b.

63 For Ede Bali, see Kamil §ahin, "Edebali," DIA; and inalcik, "How to Read 'Ashik Pasha-zade," esp. 39-46; for Geyikli Baba, see Apz, 196-199; Ahmet Ya§ar Ocak "Geyikli Baba," DIA; and Abdiilbaki Golpinarh, YunusEmreve Tasawuf, 11-13.

58 composed in the late fifteenth century by 'Asjkpa§azade. 'A§ikpa§azade, aside from

being a chronicler, was a respected Sufi from an illustrious family with close ties to the

Wafal order. He traced his family origins to Baba ilyas, the leader of the Baba'T Revolt

which took place during the reign of Sultan Giyase'd-dTn Keyhusrev II (r. 1237-45) of the

Anatolian Seljuks. Those of his followers who survived the revolt's bloody suppression

were called BabaTs; nonetheless, Baba ilyas, according to 'A§ikpa§azade, was a halife,

vicar, of Abu'1-Wafa'.64 Other well-known figures could be found among 'A§ikpa§azade's

ancestors. His grandfather's brother, Elvan £elebi, was similarly an esteemed Sufi who

had a zaviye in Mecidozii near £orum that later became a popular pilgrimage site. Elvan

£elebi was also the author of the mid-fourteenth-century Mendhbu'l-kudsiyye ft

menasibi'l-unsiyye, currently our main source of information about the Baba'T Revolt and

its aftermath. Moreover, 'A§ikpa§azade's great-grandfather (Elvan ^elebi's father) 'A§ik

Pa§a was the author of the first major Sufi work in Anatolian Turkish, the Garibname.65

Members of the eminent progeny of Baba ilyas appear to have cherished the family's Wafal past at least up until the time of 'A§ikpa§azade. 'A§ikpa§azade started writing his history in 1476 and died in 1481, the year BayezTd II (r. 1481-1512) ascended to the throne. A close examination of his chronicle reveals that 'A§ikpa§azade was not only writing from an insider's perspective concerning the gazf-dervish milieu of early

Ottoman society, but also as one who wanted to set the record straight in terms of the

64 "Ben ki fakir Dervis Ahmed 'Asilayem ibni §eyh Yahya ibni§eyh Siileyman ve ibni Bali sultanul-'ali 'A§ik Pa§ayam ve ibni murfidul-afixk Muhlis Pa§ayam ve ibni kutbii'd-devrdn Baba ilyas, halTfetii's- SeyyidEbiil-Vefa Tacii'l-'arifin,"Apz, 1.

65 For Elvan £elebi, see Ahmet Ya§ar Ocak, "Elvan £elebi," DIA; and for his zaviye, see Ethel Sara Wolper, "Khidr, Elwan £elebi and the Conversion of Sacred Sanctuaries in Anatolia," Muslim World 90:3-4 (Fall 2000): 309-322.

59 role the Wafat dervishes played in the ascendance of the house of'Osman. His

attribution of a legendary role to Ede Bali in the formation of the Ottoman Empire and

his apparently exaggerated claims concerning the favors bestowed on him by 'Osman

testify to such an effort on his part.66 During the reign of Bayezld II, 'A§ikpa§azade's

disciple and son-in-law Sayyid Velayet commissioned one of his own disciples to

translate into Turkish the Menahb-i Seyyid Ebul-Vefd', the hagiographic vita of the

founder of the Wafat order. Sayyid Velayet, like his father-in-law, was among the most

revered religious figures in the Ottoman capital at the time.67 According to the

introduction added to the Turkish translation of the Menakib-Turkish, Sayyid Velayet

descended from one of the nephews and adopted sons of Abu'1-Wafa Taj al-'Arifln.68

This introduction, reiterating the information in 'A§ikpa§azade's chronicle concerning

Ede Bali's close ties with 'Osman Beg, additionally highlights Ede Bali's Wafat identity.69

It is plausible that the labors of 'Asikpa§azade and Sayyid Velayet to create a

written record of the contributions of the Wafat dervishes to the state-building

enterprise of'Osman and his descendants coincided with or were perhaps a response to

their fading from the Ottoman polity's historical consciousness. It is possible to read

'A§ikpa§azade's polemical remarks concerning Had Bekta§, around whose cult the

Bektashi order took shape, within this same framework. He portrays Had Bektas, as an

66 Inalcik, "How to Read 'Ashik Pasha-zade's," 31-50.

67 Ibid., 31-35.

68 "Hazret-i Seyyid Velayet'iin babasi Seyyid Ahmed [bin] Seyyid tshak bin Seyyid 'Allame'd-din bin Seyyid HalTl bin Seyyid CihangTr ibn Seyyid PTr Hayate'd-dTn. Hazret-i Taciil-'arifin am ogul edinmisdiir ve hem iki karda§ 'iyalleridiir,"Menakib-Turkish, fol. 5a.

69 Menakib-Turkish, fols. 2a-3b.

60 ecstatic dervish, incapable of establishing an order and dismisses entirely the

possibility that he met any of the Ottoman begs or was involved in the creation of the

Janissary corps. 'A§ikpa§azade also claims that, upon arriving in Anatolia, HacTBektas. went straight to Sivas to see Baba ilyas, thus implicitly acknowledging the latter's seniority and eminence.70

'A§ikpa§azade, in his attempt to substantiate that the leading Sufi role in the drama of early Ottoman history was played by Wafat dervishes, may have simultaneously been trying to deny a similar role to possible rival claimants. He probably had good reason to target in particular the cult figure of the Bektashis, since he must have seen the rising fortunes of the Bektashi order and its future as the sole claimant of the Ottoman gaza ethos, thanks to its association with the Janissaries. We know that in the process of its full-fledged establishment during the course of the sixteenth century, the Bektashi order incorporated various orders and dervish groups of the early Ottoman era under its banner.71 It seems that one of these orders was the

Wafa'iyya, of which we rarely hear as such in the later Ottoman sources. It is remarkable in this regard that in Evliya £elebi's famous seventeenth-century travelogue, even the prominent Wafa I figure Geyikli Baba appears as a YesevI dervish and the convent known by his name as a Bektashi convent.72

70 Apz, 237-38.

71 Ahmet T. Karamustafa, "Kalenders, Abdals, Hoydens,: The Formation of the Bektasiye in the Sixteenth Century," in Siileyman the Second and his Time, ed. Halil inalcik and Cemal Kafadar (Istanbul: ISIS Press, 1993): 121-129; however, Karamustafa does not include the Wafat order in his discussion.

72 Evliya-SN, 2:14, 31.

61 But whatever the magnitude of the role played by WafaT dervishes associated

with early Ottoman rulers during the rise of the empire, it appears that these dervishes

were only the tip of the iceberg as far as the story of the Wafa iyya in the Anatolian

landscape is concerned. New archival evidence together with the Alevi documents

suggests a widespread Wafa'T presence particularly in eastern Anatolia from pre-

Ottoman times. But the course of development followed by the Wafa iyya in this region

was apparently very different from that represented by figures situated at the center of

the Empire such as 'A§ikpa§azade. While the latter, despite their historical ties to the

BabaTs, are considered to have remained within mainstream Sufism of a moderate

Sunni character and thus in good standing vis-a-vis the Ottoman administration, we

come across their cousins in eastern Anatolia as cult figures and founders of ocaks

among the Kizilbash/Alevi communities.

ii. Early Wafa'T Presence in Eastern Anatolia

No known narrative source from before the late fifteenth century alludes to any

Wafa'T presence in Anatolia. Ottoman sources that speak of the Wafa'T connections of

Baba Ilyas, Ede Bali, and Geyikli Baba all date from the late fifteenth and sixteenth centuries.73 But despite the silence of contemporary literary sources, newly discovered archival evidence places us on much firmer ground today when discussing the existence of the Wafa'T order in late medieval Anatolia, in general, and eastern Anatolia, in particular.

See references cited in n. 61.

62 Among the new evidence are two thirteenth-century Arabic waqfiyyas (Turk, vakfiyye),

deeds of trust for a pious foundation, belonging to two different WafaT convents. One of

the waqfiyyas records the endowment established by Sultan Giyase'd-dfn Keyhusrev III

(1266-1284) in §a'ban 672/1274 for the zawiya (Turk, zaviye) of a certain Shaykh

Marzuban located in Zara, a district of the province of Sivas. This waqfiyya was later

ratified multiple times over the course of the following two and a half centuries, the last time being by the kadi of Sivas in Muharram 920/1514, the year in which the copy we have today was made. In the text of the original wakfiyya, Shaykh Marzuban's full name is given as "Shaykh Mahmud b. Sayyid 'All al-Husaynl al-Bagdadl," his nisbas indicating his descent from Imam Husayn and his Baghdadian origins. But we see two more nisbas, "al-WafaT al-Hanaff," added to his name in a second wakfiyya established for his zawiya in Muharram 943/1536.74 It is noteworthy that this zawiya is included as

"Merziban Veil Ahioglu Zaviyesi" in the list of Bektashi convents compiled by Bedri

Noyan. Noyan notes that Shaykh Marzuban is known in Alevi lore as a descendant of

Imam Zayn al-'Abidfn and provides a poem by the twentieth-century Alevi poet A§ik Ali izzet Ozkan praising the shaykh. In this poem, Ozkan refers to Shaykh Marzuban as

"miir§id" and "pir," and recounts a miracle in which he turns wine sent by the ruler of the time into honey and butter.75 In his Menakib, the same miracle is attributed to Abu'l-

Wafa.76

74 Hasan Yiiksel, "Selcuklular Doneminden Kalma BirVefat Zaviyesi (§eyh Marzuban Zaviyesi)," VahflarDergisi 25 (1995): 235-250.

75 Noyan-Bektasilik, 5:331-32. The first strophe of the poem is as follows: "Giizel Sivas Zara Tekke Koyiinde / Seyh Merziban Veli gibi eryatar/Hamdolsun yiiz siirdiim ocak ayinda / Bu tekkede mixrsid yatar,piryatar."

63 The second waqfiyya, of which we have only a nineteenth-century copy, belongs

to the zawiya of Shaykh Bahlul Baba located in the Su§ehri district of the province of

Sivas. In addition to the geographical proximity of the two zawiyas, we may note that

the same sultan who established the endowment for Shaykh Marzuban's zawiya also

endowed Shaykh BahluFs zawiya. The two waqfiyyas, moreover, bear the same date.77

Without citing his source, Huseyin Hiisameddin claims that Bahlul Baba was the son of

Baba Ilyas Khorasanfs brother and halife, who was later exiled to Su§ehri.78 The waqfiyya

does not include any data confirming this assertion, although Shaykh Bahlul Baba's full name is given as "Shaykh Bahlul Dana b. Husayn al-Khorasanl," his nisba clearly pointing to a Khorasanian origin like that of Baba ilyas. Evliya' Celebi mentions a

Bektashi convent located between §ebinkarahisar and Erzincan affiliated with a certain

Behliil-i Semerkandi; this may possibly be the same convent.79 According to its waqfiyya,

Bahlul Baba's zawiya was built by Sultan Riikne'd-dln Kihgarslan (r. 1261-1266), father of

Giyase'd-dln Keyhusrev III. The two waqfiyyas also make it clear that by the time

Giyase'd-dln Keyhusrev III established these endowments, both Shaykh Marzuban and

Shaykh Bahlul Baba had already died; this suggests that they must have been in

Anatolia since at least the late twelfth or early thirteenth centuries.

76 Seen. 36.

77 Hasan Yiiksel, "Bir Babaf (Vefat) Seyhi Zaviyesi (Seyh Behlul Baba)," Osmanh Ara§tirmalan 21 (2001): 97-107.

78 Huseyin Hiisameddin, Amasya Tarihi, 2 vols., (Istanbul, 1327-30 [1911-1914]), I: 235-36, II: 395- 96; cited in Hasan Yiiksel, "Bir Babai (Vefai) Seyhi," 97.

79Evliya-SN, 2:199.

64 According to Ottoman archival documents, a WafaT convent also existed in the

Malatya province. In this case, we have neither the endowment deed for the convent nor other documentation to help us determine the date of its establishment, although its origins too can most likely be traced to pre-Ottoman times. The two documents mentioning it are dated 5 Jumad al-awwal 1102/1691 and Rabf al-awwal 1117/1705.80

They record a zaviye of Sayyid Shaykh Abu'1-Wafa' Kutb al-'ArlfTn in the Mu§ar district of Malatya, on which was endowed the income of a few villages. Included among these villages was the village of §eyh Hasanli. Sixteenth-century Ottoman land registers as well as the aforementioned Ottoman documents confirm that the tomb of §ih Ahmed-i

Tavil, the founder and cult figure of the Alevi ocak known by the same name, was located in this village.81 According to local tradition, the village received its name from

§ih Ahmed-i Tavil's brother, §ih Hasan, known as the common ancestor of a large group of Alevi tribes in the Dersim region. While the archival documents do not speak of a connection between §ih Ahmed and the convent of Abu'1-Wafa', the WafaT origin of the ocak of §ih Ahmed is confirmed by the ocak's own family documents.82 Interestingly, however, local tradition equates §ih Ahmed-i Tavil with the eponymous founder of the

80 BOA, ibnu'1-Emin Evkaf, 2725: "Kazd-i mezbure (i.e. Malatya) tabi'Mu§ar nahiyesinde asude olan KutbWl-'Arifin Seyyid Seyh Ebiil-Vefa kuddise sirrvhul-'azwin zaviye tekiyesinde.."; and BOA, Cevdet Evkaf, 6210: "Malatiya muzdfatindan Musar nahiyesinde vaki' asude olan Kutbiil-'Arifin Seyyid Seyh Ebii'l-Vefa zaviyesinde..; also cited in Ahmet Yasar Ocak, "Tiirkiye Se^uklulan Doneminde ve Sonrasinda VefaT TarTkati (Vefaiyye): Tiirkiye Popiiler Tasawuf Tarihine Farkh Bir Yaklasim," Belleten 70: 257 (2006): 138.

81 Yinanc Refet and Mesut Elibiiyuk, KanuniDevri Malatya Tahrir Defteri (1560) (Ankara: Gazi Universitesi Yayini, 1983), 103.

82 M. Besir Asan, "Firat Kenannda Bir Horasan Ereni §eyh Ahmed Dede," I. Uluslararasi Tiirk Diinyasi Eren ve Evliyalar Kongresi Bildirileri (Ankara, 1998), 60.

65 Yesevi order, Ahmed-i Yesevi, who is said to have come from Khorasan and settled in

this region of Anatolia.83 This obviously anachronistic belief, undoubtedly bolstered by

the common name of the two personages, is another example of the fusion of the WafaT legacy in Anatolia with Bektashi lore. Following the building of the Karakaya dam over the Euphrates River, the tomb of §ih Ahmed was relocated to a nearby place to avoid its inundation. While §ih Ahmed's own tombstone does not bear a date, two other tombs in its proximity, which have been likewise moved, are inscribed with the dates

740/1340 and 817/1414. if we are to believe the relevant oral traditions according to which these two tombs belong to §ih Ahmed's wife and son, then §ih Ahmed must have lived sometime during the late thirteenth and early fourteenth centuries.

In light of the evidence presented so far, we can trace with relative confidence the presence of WafaT dervishes and convents in central and southeastern Anatolia back to the late twelfth or early thirteenth centuries. But WafaT influence may have penetrated Anatolia even before that, possibly during the lifetime of Abu'1-Wafa'. His link to 'AdI b. Musafir, the main cult figure of the Yazidis, is particularly noteworthy in this regard. While the nature of the relationship between the two is not fully clear, according to the hagiography of Abu'1-Wafa, it appears to have been a very close one.

'AdTb. Musafir spent seven years under Abu'1-Wafa' going through a process of punishment because of unfair treatment to which he had subjected his followers in

Iraq. At the end of the seven years, Abu'1-Wafa' assigned 'Adib. Musafir the region of

Hakkari as his area of influence. Moreover, just before his death, Abu'1-Wafa

83 This oral tradition was recorded in writing in Mehmet Ozdogan, A§agi Firat Havzasi 1977 Yiizey Ara§tvrmdan, Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi Asagi Firat Projesi Yaymlan, no. 2 (Istanbul, 1977), 64-65.

66 bequeathed his garment (libas) to 'Adi b. Musafir and willed that 'Adi b. Musafir wash his corpse before burial.84 Regardless of whether or not we regard these accounts as entirely true, they are significant in showing that eastern Anatolia was not outside the purview of Abu'1-Wafa' or his immediate followers. Another piece of data that may indicate the presence of the Wafa iyye in the most eastern parts of Anatolia is a ziyaret in Siirt known by the name §eyh Ebtilvefa, which apparently still exists today.85

The different nisbas, al-Bagdadl and al-Khorasani, borne by two of the earliest known Wafa I shaykhs in Anatolia suggest that the WafaT order probably entered the peninsula via multiple avenues. Shaykh Marzuban may have been the representative of a wider Wafa T circle that arrived in eastern Anatolia directly from Iraq, the cradle of the order. The other line of WafaT dervishes who made their way to Anatolia may have had Khorasanian origins, as in the case of Shaykh Bahlul. This is not entirely surprising, considering that Abu'1-Wafa' spent some years in Bukhara and had disciples in that region already during his lifetime. As will be discussed below, the WafaT cum Kizilbash ocaks similarly seem to have had two sub-branches, one hailing directly from Iraq, the other from Khorasan.

4Menahb-Turkish, fols. 34b, 88b-89b.

85 Abdiilkadir Sezgin, "Eren ve Evliya Kavraminin Dini Tarihi Folklorik izahi ve Eren inanci Uzerine Du§iinceler," I. Uluslararasi Turk Diinyasi Eren ve Evliyalar Kongresi Bildirileri (Ankara, 1998): 502.

67 IV-WafaT cum Kizilbash Ocaks in Ottoman Anatolia

i. Major Sub-branches and their Geographical Distribution

The historic stronghold of WafaTcum Kizilbash ocaks was the upper Euphrates basin and its environs stretching from Malatya to Erzincan and from Sivas to Elazig.

Among these ocaks were the Dede Kargins, whose area of influence extended southward from the western side of the Euphrates basin; also among them were the miirsid ocaks descending from the progeny of Sayyid Ganim, most importantly the Aguicens and the ocak of Imam Zeynel Abidin and the affiliates of these, who mainly inhabited the region stretching northward and eastward from the opposite side of the Euphrates River.

Of the founding cult figures of the Alevi ocaks, Dede GarkTn, eponym of the ocak of Dede Kargin, is the only one encountered in the narrative sources. The earliest source to mention him is the fourteenth-century MNK-Kudsiyye by Elvan Celebi.

According to MNK-Kudsiyye, Dede Garkln was not an ordinary dervish; he was an eminent Sufi shaykh with thousands of followers and hundreds of halifes. He was also highly regarded by a contemporary sultan, who endowed him with seventeen villages.86

Elvan Celebi portrays Dede GarkTn as closely associated with the leader of the BabaT revolt, Baba ilyas.87 The two held a prolonged meeting in a cave prior to the revolt, and

Dede GarkTn subsequently instructed a group of his leading halifes to join Baba ilyas and

86 MNK-Kudsiyye, 203.

87 Based on his reading of a particular couplet in MNK-Kudsiyye, Ahmet Yasar Ocak suggests that Dede GarkTn must have been the shaykh of Baba ilyas, although this conclusion seems too hasty in the absence of any corroborating evidence; idem, introduction to Elvan Celebi, Mendhbu'l- Kudsiyye, XLI. The relevant couplet (#680, p. 61) is as follows: "Dede GarkTn ki cedd-i a'lddur, Zikri anun kamudan evladur" [Dede Garkin is the first ancestor; recollecting his name is better than recollecting anybody else's].

68 remain loyal to him, even if that meant risking death.88 There is no indication in MNK-

Kudsiyye regarding the WafaT affinity of Dede GarkTn, or for that matter of Baba ilyas

(this, however, may have been mentioned in one of the missing pages of the single

extant copy). But Ahmet Ya§ar Ocak has inferred such an affinity for Dede Garkln on

the basis of his association with Baba ilyas, whom 'A§ikpa§azade described as one of the

halifes of Abu'1-Wafa'. Documents preserved by members of the ocak of Dede Kargin

provide ample confirmation for Ocak's conjecture.

Dede Garkln's affinity with Baba ilyas al-Khorasanl suggests the possibility that the Dede Kargins too may have Khorasanian origins. A direct link between this ocak and the Khorasan region is confirmed by a document from the ocak's Malatya branch. This document has survived only as fragments included in a scroll, of which we have two copies, dated Ramadan 963/1556 and Rajab 9717/1564. Although the extremely deteriorated state of the text prevents full comprehension, one can surmise that it is a combination of a Sufi ijaza and a sayyid genealogy. However, despite an allusion to

Abu'1-Wafa' at one point, it does not appear to be a WafaT document as such. It rather speaks of "the noble dervish cloak of the Garkiniyya (order)" (al-khirka al-shanfa al-

Garkiniyya); furthermore, the individuals mentioned in the genealogy all bear the nisba

GarkinT. This indicates that the fragment is part of a document (or two documents) associated with the GarkinT order. That such an independent order existed is, however, not supported by any other sources.89 Considering other family documents connecting

83 MNK-Kudsiyye, 217-227.

89 Irene Melikoff, and following her Ahmet Ya$ar Ocak, indeed suspect that a separate GarkinT order existed based on relevant accounts in MNK-Kudsiyye; Ahmet Yasar Ocak, XIII. Yiizydda Anadolu'daBabailerisyani (Istanbul: Dergah Yayinlan, 1980), 94, n.32.

69 the ocak of Dede Kargm to the Wafa iyya, it is conceivable that the GarkinT order was an

offshoot of the WafaT order or that the two orders coalesced at some point in the past.

What is most important for our current purposes is the identity of those who

appear as ratifiers of the document. Of the four sayyids who served as witnesses to its

truthfulness, one was a resident of Balh (sakin-i Devlet[a]bad-i Balh-est) and two bore the

nisba Tirmidhl.90 Tirmidh and Balh are two important towns historically considered

part of Khorasan. Of further significance is the title khan-zade attached to the names of

all four witnesses, a title known to have been borne by members of the house of'Ala' al-

Mulk, who belonged to the well-known Sayyids of Tirmidh.91 The Dede Kargins'

historical links to Khorasan suggested in this document also tally with Alevi lore that

identifies Khorasan as the ancestral land of the ocak, as well as of all dede families in

general.

Already before the establishment of Ottoman rule in the region, a major branch

of the Dede Kargins settled in the village of Bimare (Bimare), located according to the

Ottoman land survey register of Malatya from 967/1560 in the district of Keder Beyt

(today part of the district of Akcadag).92 In addition to Bimare,93 dedes affiliated with the

90 FD of Ahmet Riza Kargin.

91 For the Tirmidh! sayyids and 'Ala' al-Mulk, see W. Barthold, "Tirmidh," £7-2.

92 Refet and Elibuyiik, KanuntDevri Malatya, 140. While there was another village by the same name in the district of Arguvan (Argdvun), the fact that a synopsis of the ferman dated 930/1524, a deteriorated copy of which is found among the Dede Kargin documents, is included under the entry of the village of Bimare located in Keder Beyt suggests that the latter is the one that concerns us here. The ferman talks of three individuals with titles dervish, sayyid and shaykh, who were most likely ancestors of the Dede Kargins; the ferman was issued to confirm their tax privileges, which they had had since Mamluk times: "haliyaol vilayet (Malatya) miiceddeden yazilxxp defter oldukda karye-i BTmari'de Baba(?) Garkin(?) [...] hiimayunuma geliip DervT§ 'Alive Seyyid Nu'man ve §eyh 'isa nam-i giizineler salih ve miitedeyyin Mmesneler olup 'arak-i cebineleri He zindeganx

70 <\ ocak of Dede Kargin seem to have inhabited several other villages in the same province

at various times, the central one in the twentieth century being the village of Dede

Kargin in the modern district of Yazihan. In the above-mentioned scrolls dated

Ramadan 963/1556 and Rajab 971/1564, there is also a list of over one hundred twenty-

five villages and of several tribes affiliated with the Dede Kargins.94 The overwhelming

majority of villages listed are included in the Ottoman land surveys from the sixteenth

century. When mapped, the locations of these villages indicate that the neighboring

districts of Akcadag, Keder Beyt, Subadra, Arguvan, Kasaba, Pagnik, Mu§ar, and Cubas.

made up a relatively well-defined region within the province of Malatya where the

idiip dyendeye ve revendeye hizmet idiip eyyam-i Qerdkiseden feth-i hdkaniye gelinceyek "orfler olan yirler ve eger 'o§r-i §er'ive 'orfiyi edd idiip resm-i giftden ve 'ddet-i dgndmdan ve niizuldan ve [..] 'avanz-i divdniyye(?) ve tekalTf-i pddi§dhiyyeden ve miisellemlerine(?) olageldiikleri sebebden sdbikd defter-i cedid mu'dfve mixsellemlerin kayd olundilar," FD of Ahmet Riza Kargin.

931 was not able to identify the exact site of this village, which does not exist anymore. But I was able to locate a ziydret in the village of Bahri in modern Akcadag where ancestral tombs of this ocak are found; this area, or its environs, may have been the site of the village of Bimare. No members of the ocak of Dede Kargin currently live in this village, which is today inhabited by an entirely Sunni population. But the Alevi inhabitants of the neighboring village of Bektaslar confirmed to me the association of the ziydret with the Dede Kargins. The tomb located at the center of this ziydret belongs to a certain "YusufDede bin Veil Dede," who must be the same individual identified by Naci Kum as Sultan Yusuf, the great ancestor of the Dede Kargins of Malatya. But Naci Kum, writing in the mid-twentieth century, suggested the village of Zeyve as the site of Sultan Yusuf s tomb; Dede Kargin-Karhnogullan in Dede Kargin: §iirler, 127,166. There is, however, currently no village by that name, although during my fieldwork individuals I consulted identified another village in the same vicinity as the old Zeyve.

94 The list is followed by a note in Turkish to the effect that these disciple communities were obliged to provide ocak members three okes of butter and three sheep annually: "Cumle-i mezkurunlarun iigerya§ar kurbdn ve nezr-i zekdt evldd-i evlad ve dahi her kim bunun dix§elgesine tama eyleye la'net ibni la'netdiir. Kdnun-i Dede GarkMgirdk ve kurban [..] her ev ba§inayilda iig niigiyag ve iigya§ar kurbdn kadimul-eyyamdan ildyevmina hdzdya dekmezkmDede Garkxn'e 'aiddiir ve rdci'diir, kimesne mdni' olmaya," FD of Ahmet Riza Kargin.

71 Dede Kargins were influential by the sixteenth century.95 All of these districts, with the exception of Mu§ar, are situated to the west of the Euphrates River.

In the second half of the nineteenth century, a group of Dede Kargin dedes migrated from Malatya to £orum-Alaca, forming the £orum branch of the ocak. A third branch of the order is found in the Antep province, residing there since at least the end of the eighteenth century, although the exact historical connection of this branch with the one in Malatya is not known.95 According to Ottoman tax registers carried out in

914/1518, in the district of Berriyecik of the province of Mardin there was a relatively sizeable village by the name Dede Kargin, which had a zdviye.97 The late fifteenth- century hagiography of HacTBektas. furthermore reports an anecdote involving some disciples or descendants of Dede Kargin (Dede Garkxn ogullan) in Zu'1-kadirli, historically comprising the provinces of Malatya, Mara§, and surrounding areas.98 This evidence, in addition to Dede Kargm's links to the mid-thirteenth-century Baba'I Revolt that began in the same region, point to a continuous association of the Dede Kargins with southeastern Anatolia since late medieval times. Hence, it may be surmised that the

Dede Kargins, or perhaps WafaT circles of Khorasanian origin in general, entered the

95 See Naci Kum, Dede Kargin-Karhnogullan in Dede Kargin: §iirler, 137-138 for a list of the villages and communities given in the document.

96 Carsten Niebuhr, Reisebeschreibung nach Arabien wad andern umliegenden Landern, vol. 2,1778; reprint, The Islamic World in Foreign Travel Accounts, ser. ed. Fuad Sezgin, vol.12, bk. 2 (Frankfurt: Institut fur Geschichte der Arabisch-Islamischen Wissenschaften, 1994), 416. Niebuhr reported the presence around the environs of Antep in 1766 of a sizeable group of "Dede Karkin" tribesmen inhabiting one thousand tents.

97 BOA, TD, #64, 924/1518, 363, also cited in Zekeriya BQlbul, XVI. Ytizyilda Diyarbekir Beylerbeyligi'ndeki Yerisimleri (Ph.D. Dissertation, Selcuk Universitesi, Konya, 1999), 121,142.

98 Velayetname, 21-22.

72 Anatolian peninsula from the south, possibly via Aleppo, a region historically known for its large Turkmen population, as well as for having a WafaT presence until at least the mid-sixteenth century."

Observations in the field do not point to active links in modern times between the Dede Kargins and the two other prominent WafaT cum Kizilbash ocaks, namely the

Aguicens and ocak of Imam Zeynel Abidin, despite the latter's widely-recognized mursxd status. Ocaks in this second group typically shore up their authority as mur§id on the basis of their descent from the fifth imam, Zayn al-'Abidin. Their family documents consistently confirm this assertion and as mentioned above also reveal an additional genealogical link binding them together: that they all descend from the line of Sayyid

Khamis (or 'Uthman), a nephew of Abu'1-Wafa' Taj al-'Arifln. Unlike the case of the ocak

Dede Kargin, the available narrative sources are silent concerning the founding ancestors of the different branches of the miir§id ocaks and those of their affiliates.

Some oral traditions link the mythical founder of the ocak of Aguicen ("the poison- drinker") to the figure of Karadonlu Can Baba in Had Bektas/s hagiographic vita, the

Velayetname. Karadonlu Can Baba was a hallfe of HacTBektas. who miraculously stopped the Mongol armies in the environs of the province of Erzincan and subsequently converted them to Islam. Like Aguicen, Karadonlu Can Baba worked a miracle by drinking poison without being harmed, and it is on this basis that the equivalence of the two personages is assumed. Various other eponyms of eastern Anatolian ocaks of

WafaT origin have likewise been conflated with various figures in the Velayetname on

Watenpaugh, "Deviant Dervishes."

73 the basis of ostensible similarities in miracles or names.100 But these oral traditions, as

in the case of §ih Ahmed-i Tavil, most likely had their origins in a relatively recent past,

coinciding with the growing influence of the £elebi Bektashis in the region beginning

in the early nineteenth century.

The oldest known centers of the Aguicens and their affiliates like the Sinemillis

spread northward and eastward from the eastern side of the Euphrates River. One of the major branches of the ocak of Aguicen is centered in the village of Sun in the sub- province of Harput (modern province of Elazig), the location of the tomb of Koca

Seyyid, the presumed ancestor of the branch in question.101 Based on family documents, we can track the presence in that village ofdedes affiliated with the Aguicens as far back as the early seventeenth century.102 The Sinemillis, who pay homage to the Koca

Seyyid branch of the Aguicens, similarly originated in the nearby Piran district of the

Elazig province before migrating into Maras. and Erzincan around the turn of the eighteenth century.103 Two other major branches of the ocak of Aguicens are found in

100 For other such cases, see Erdal Gezik, Dinsel, Etnik ve Politik Sorunlar Baglaminda Alevi Kiirtler (Ankara: Kalan Yaymlan, 2000), 153-155.

101 In the sixteenth century, there were two villages in Harput called Sun-tiirk and Sun-kfird, BOA, TD 64, 924/1518, 657-58; TD 998, 928-29/1523,186; Tapu ve Kadastro Genel Mudurliigu Kuyud-i Kadime Arsivi, TD 106, 974/1566,157b, 165a, cited in Zekeriya Biilbul, XVI. Yikyilda Diyarbekir, 387, 388. For sixteenth-century Harput, also see Mehmet Ali Unal, XVI Yihyilda Harput Sancagi (1518-1566) (Ankara: Turk Tarih Kurumu, 1989), a list of villages is provided between pp. 232-39.

102 The earliest document locating dedes affiliated with the Aguicens in Harput (Harburt) is a court document dated 1034/1624, and the document that specifically refers to the village of Sun is another court document dated 1062/1651. The documents deal with cases involving inheritance and sale of property, respectively; FD of Huseyin and Hayri Dogan, b. in the village of Boregenek, Adiyaman.

74 the modern province of Tunceli, in the village of Ulukale in the £emisgezek district and

the village of Bargini (BdrginT, modern-day Karabakir) in the Hozat district, although it

is not clear when they first came there.104 Nevertheless, the facts that in Bargini there is

a tomb associated with the eponym of the ocak, Aguicen, and that the miir§id status of

the Aguicens is acknowledged almost universally in and around the Tunceli province

suggest that the Aguicens have a chronologically-extended link with the region. There

are various smaller branches of this ocak in other parts of Anatolia, but most of them

seem to have migrated into those areas from Elazig or Tunceli through the course of the nineteenth century. For example, the Adiyaman branch of the Aguicens, centered

in the village of Borgenek and in the district of Bulam, consists of dedes who moved out of Sim. Similarly, there are dedes of Sun origin who currently reside as mur^ids among the disciples of the ocak of Sinemilli in Mara§. The Aguicen dedes in Gdyniicek-Amasya, on the other hand, are historically linked to one of the Tunceli branches of the ocak.

The same is true for the Aguicens in Malatya (known as the family of Dogan Dede), who migrated to the village of Kirlangic in Yesjlyurt district as recently as the early twentieth century.105 Dede families affiliated with the ocak of Imam Zeynel Abidin, on the other hand, are predominantly associated with the village of Mineyik (modern-day

103 For the Sinemillis and their family documents, see my "Sinemilliler: Bir Alevi Ocagi ve Asireti," Kirkbudak2, no.6 (Spring 2006): 19-59.

104 There are records of both of these villages in the sixteenth-century Ottoman tax registers; see for example, BOA, TD 64, 924/1518, 795, 802; cited in Zekeriya Bulbiil, XV7. Yiizyilda Diyarbekir, 451, 469, 470. For sixteenth-century Cemi§gezek, see Mehmet All Unal, XVI. Yiizyilda £emi§gezek (Ankara: Turk Tarih Kurumu, 1999), a list of villages is provided between pp. 277-97.

105 Hamza Aksiit, AnadoluAleviliginin Sosyal ve Cografi Kbkenleri (Ankara: Art Basin Yayin, 2002), 156-157.

75 Kuyudere), today administratively part of the Arguvan district of Malatya, although it is

not clear when they first settled there.106

It is most likely that the WafaT cum Kizilbash ocaks descending from the nephew

of Abu'1-Wafa, Sayyid Khamis, migrated into eastern Anatolia directly from Iraq. It is

significant in this regard that one of the two earliest documented WafaT shaykhs in

Anatolia, Shaykh Marzuban al-Baghdadl, was also a Husaynl sayyid. In view of this and of his depiction in the Alevi oral lore as a descendant of Imam Zayn al-'Abidln and a mur§id, a historical association between him and the Alevi mur^id ocaks appears plausible. There may have been, of course, multiple waves of WafaT dervishes coming from this direction at different dates, especially considering the claim in the introduction of the Mendhb-Turkish that Sayyid Velayet's father migrated from Iraq to

Anatolia in 841/1437-1438, thus obviously at a much later date than Shaykh

Marzuban.107

Overall, the network of Wafa I cum Kizilbash ocaks seems to have covered virtually the entire upper Euphrates basin during the Ottoman period and to have consisted of two distinct subgroups with relatively well-defined areas of concentration.

The meeting point for these areas was Malatya, the Euphrates River appearing roughly as the (possibly mutually agreed-upon) border demarcating the respective areas of influence of the Dede Kargins and those ocaks claiming miir§id status. As suggested earlier, these two subgroups appear to have their origins in two distinct WafaT streams, one hailing directly from Iraq into eastern Anatolia, the other originating in Khorasan

106 Mineyik was in the past administratively part of the Arapgir district, Zekeriya Bulbiil, XVI. Yiizyilda Diyarbekir, 420.

107 Menahb-Turhsh, fol. 5b.

76 and entering Anatolia from the south. This might also explain in-field observations indicating that the Dede Kargins function relatively independently from the rest of the

Kizilbash ocaks of WafaT origin.

ii The silsila ofWaju'Tcum Kizilbash ocaks according to Alevi documents

Even if historically there were indeed two relatively independent subgroups of

WafaT cum Kizilbash ocaks, the WafaT ijazas found among the Alevi documents indicate that the authority of the silsila descending from Sayyid Khamis was recognized at some point in the past by all dede lineages with a WafaT connection, including the Dede

Kargins. These documents, furthermore, reveal that a certain Sayyid Muhammad b.

Sayyid Ibrahim was still actively issuing WafaT ijazas in eastern Anatolia well into the first half of the sixteenth century. But lack of any new WafaT ijazas after him among the extant Alevi document suggests that by the end of his tenure as the head of the order, the merger of the Wafa iyya with the Kizilbash milieu was more or less completed.

Sayyid Muhammad b. Sayyid Ibrahim was one of the ancestors of the ocak Zeynel

Abidin, a finding which explains the claims of this ocak and the related Aguicens to universal mursi'd-hood within the Alevi ocak hierarchy.

I have previously mentioned four different WafaT ijazas emanating from the family archives of the WafaT cum Kizilbash ocaks under consideration. There are three additional documents of the same type at our disposal. The first comes from the ocak of

Sinemilli (hereafter ij.SIN). It has survived in a copy dated 28 Muharram 1265/1848, although its original was most likely composed sometime in the sixteenth century or

77 earlier.108 The second (hereafter ij-Ag-Am) comes from the Amasya branch of the

Aguicens. The copy we have today was made in Muharram 993/1585, although its original was probably composed at an earlier date.109 Finally, there is a fragment of a third WafaT ijaza (hereafter ij-§S), found embedded in aziyaretname dated Muharram

995/1548. It comes from the ocak of §eyh Siileyman, centered in the village of Giirge in the Arguvan district of the Malatya province.110

Notwithstanding some noteworthy discrepancies arising from subsequent editings that mirrored growing Shi'i/Alevi sensibilities and notwithstanding the documents' changing use as mere written proof for sayyid-hood, all these WafaT ijazas follow roughly the same format and wording, a confirmation of their origin in the same scribal tradition. Some systematic variations in wording among them depend on the rank of the recipient, such as whether he is a regular khalifa or a khalifa with authority over others or sometimes also a khalifa over all the related sadat (pi. of sayyid). The ijazas all espouse essentially the same WafaTsilsila, reaching Abu'1-Wafa' via his nephew

Sayyid Khamis. Depending on their dates, the different ijazas naturally bring the chain of initiation only up to the time of their composition; there are some additional discrepancies between them in terms of individual names. But accounting for all these differences, a composite silsila for the WafaT cum Kizilbash ocaks can be constructed as follows:

108 FD of Muharrem Ercan, b. village of Bayindir in Keban-Elazig.

109 FD of Mustafa Aygiin, b. village of §ahlu-Yenimahalle in Goynucek-Amasya.

110 FD of Hasan Hfiseyin Giilbahar, b. village of Giirge, Arguvan-Malatya. This document was published in my, "16. Yfizyildan Bir Ziyaretname (Yazi Cevirimli Metin-Guniimuz Tiirkcesine Ceviri-Tipkibasim)," in In Memoriam §inasi Tekin, special issue of the Journal of Turkish Studies/TiirklukBilgisiArastirmalan 31/11 (2007): 67-79.

78 Sayyid Muhammad 4- Sayyid Ibrahim, known as Taj al-DTn 4- Sayyid Ahmad,

known as Sayyid al-Hashim <- Sayyid Jamal al-DTn Yusuf <- Sayyid Sharaf al-DTn

Ishaq <- Sayyid Nizam al-DTn Ways 4- Sayyid Sharaf al-DTn Husayn 4- Sayyid

Mina' al-DTn 'Uthman 4- Sayyid 'Izz al-DTn <- Sayyid Salih <- Sayyid Khamis <-

(his uncle) Sayyid Abu'1-Wafa Taj al-'Arifln.

Establishing the exact compilation dates for these ijazas is a perennial problem.

But ij-§S, ij.DK-c.l, and ij-ZA-c.l used in conjunction give us a relatively good starting point in this regard. All three of these ijazas come from ocaks centered in Malatya: §eyh

Siileyman, Dede Kargin, and Imam Zeynel Abidin, respectively. The first two, ij-§S and ij.DK-c.l, were both issued by a Sayyid Muhammad b. Sayyid Ibrahim, most likely the same person considering the geographical proximity of the two ocaks as well as the reasonably close dates of the two ijazas. Of these, ij.DK-c.l bears the date 10 Muharram

905/1499 and was given to Shaykh Muhammad b. Shaykh Hasan al-Garklnl. While we do not have a date for ij-§S as such, according to the text of the ziyaretname, its recipient,

Dervish Hasan b. Dervish 'A§ik, visited Karbala in Muharram 995/1548. Since the ijdza was given to Dervish Hasan b. Dervish 'A§ik before his trip to Karbala, it must have been composed sometime during the first half of the sixteenth century. These two ijazas together, then, indicate that a WafaT shaykh by the name Sayyid Muhammad b. Sayyid

Ibrahim was still actively issuing ijazas in and around Malatya until at least the early sixteenth century.

Sayyid Muhammad b. Sayyid Ibrahim was most likely one of the ancestors of the ocak of Imam Zeynel Abidin, since a certain Sayyid Ibrahim, probably Sayyid

Muhammad's father, was the recipient of ij-ZA-c.l. The date of Sayyid Ibrahim's ijaza,

79 Dhu'l-hijja 855/1451, also fits well with the period during which his son Sayyid

Muhammad is surmised to have been an active WafaT shaykh. Sayyid Muhammad,

nicknamed Taj al-DIn, was appointed as his successor by Sayyid Shahab al-DTn Ahmad,

nicknamed Sayyid Hashim. But while the recipients of ij-§S and ij.DK-c.l were

appointed simply as khalifas (qad tawalldhu 'aid mansibi khildfatihi), Sayyid Ibrahim was

appointed as khalifa over all the sayyids, as well as over other khalifas and shaykhs (qad

tawalldhu fimansibi khildfatihi'aidjam? al-sdddti al-ashrafi wa al-khulafai wa al-mashd'ikhi

al-kibdr al-abrdri). It is thus clear that Sayyid Ibrahim was selected as head of the entire

tanqa, a position that must have been the exclusive privilege of the progeny of Sayyid

Khamis, the lineage that later evolved into miirsid ocaks within the framework of Alevi ocak system. Sayyid Ibrahim also had authority over other sayyids, which considering the context, probably referred to all the descendants of Sayyid Khamis. It is noteworthy in this regard that neither of the recipients of ij-§S and ij.DK-c.l, that is Dervish Hasan b. Dervish 'A§ik and Shaykh Muhammad b. Shakh Hasan al-Garklnl, appear as sayyids in these documents.

Some evident incongruities between the ijdzas in terms of their Sunni and Shi'i features suggest an evolving Wafat legacy in the Anatolian context. Earlier it was noted that Abu'1-Wafa' lived at a time when Sufism typically functioned within a Sunni framework. In the post-Mongol age, however, mystical orders in general came to incorporate strong Shi'i/'Alid influences. The resulting sectarian fluidity among Sufi groups was markedly visible in Anatolia, especially prior to the rise of the Ottoman-

Safavid conflict, a condition which Cemal Kafadar conceptualized using the term

80 "metadoxy." mTraces of this sectarian metadoxy are manifested in those copies of the

ijazas that reflect the pre-Safavid phase of the story of the Anatolian Wafa'iyya. One

such example is ij.DK; in the prologue of this Wafal ijaza, tribute is paid—in addition to

God, the Prophet Mohammed, his family and companions, and 'All—to the first three

Sunni caliphs, Abu Bakr, 'Omar, and 'Uthman, as well as to a few major Shi'i/Alevi

figures, including Imam Husayn, Imam Hasan, and the two uncles of the Prophet

Muhammad, Hamza and 'Abbas. From this perspective, comparison between different

copies of the ijazas also reveals efforts at erasing traces of this past metadoxy. For

example, the two otherwise nearly identical copies of ij-ZA dated Dhu'l-hijja 855/1451

and Dhu'l-hijja 990/1582 are differentiated from one another in terms of their

prologues; while the older ij-ZA-c.2 mentions the names of the first three Sunni khalifas,

the later ij-ZA-c.2 omits them, instead paying tribute to the Twelve Imams. Similarly in

ij-ZA-c.2, we see that the name of Sayyid Mina' al-DTn 'Uthman is modified to Sayyid

Qasim.

Nevertheless, most extant copies of the ijazas are products of the period following the coalescence of the Wafa'iyya with the Kizilbash milieu. While we cannot pinpoint an exact beginning and end for this process, it was most likely completed around the middle of the sixteenth century. The ziyaretname dated Muharram 995/1548 which includes ij-§S is a relatively good sign of that. This ziyaretname shows that its

111 Kafadar, Between Two Worlds, 76. Kafadar questions the adequacy of a strict Sunni/Shi'i dichotomy, as well as the formulation of notions of orthodoxy and heterodoxy along sectarian lines when dealing with the religious history of late medieval Anatolia. He instead proposes the term "metadoxy" as a more appropriate description of the complex religious picture, especially in the frontier regions of Anatolia and the Balkans between the eleventh and fifteenth centuries. He defines metadoxy as "a state of being beyond doxies, a combination of being doxy- naive and not being doxy-minded, as well as the absence of a state that was interested in rigorously defining and strictly enforcing an orthodoxy."

81 recipient Dervish Hasan b. Dervish 'A§ik, a WafaT dervish, went to Iraq and visited the

sites sacred to the Shi'i/Alevi communities; we see in his itinerary none of the sites

sacred to Sunnis that are likewise located in Iraq. This ziyaretname as such is a testimony of its holder's unequivocal Shi'i/Alevi affinity. Dervish Hasan b. Dervish 'A§ik was initiated into the WafaT order by Sayyid Muhammad b. Sayyid Ibrahim, whose name is the last link in the composite silsila above. It is thus reasonable to assume that after the death of Sayyid Muhammad b. Sayyid Ibrahim, the Wafa'iyya completed its merger with the Kizilbash milieu and ceased its existence as a separate order. The existing WafaT ijazas were subsequently rendered obsolete relics of past history, valued from then on solely as documentation of the related dede families' sayyid descent and/or ocakzade status.

V- Conclusion

The WafaT ijazas, as a group constituting the oldest layer of Alevi documents, link the ancestors of many Alevi ocaks to the WafaT order. This finding coincides with a growing body of archival evidence that indicates a previously unrecognized and extensive WafaT presence in eastern Anatolia since late medieval times. Multiple waves of WafaT dervishes seem to have entered Anatolia from Iraq and Khorasan, evolving in different directions in their new home in terms of social, political, and religious orientations. A distinct WafaT network formed around the spiritual lineage descending from Sayyid Khamis, presumably a nephew and adopted son of Abu'1-Wafa', and maintained its vitality in and around the upper Euphrates basin as late as the first half of the sixteenth century before fully coalescing with the Kizilbash milieu. Although an

82 independent WafaT identity subsequently diminished, the established local hierarchies of the order's various branches persisted within the new framework of the

Kizilbash/Alevi ocak system. This evolving trajectory of the WafaT legacy is reflected in the way later copies of extant WafaT ijazas were edited to bring them in line with growing Shi'i/Alevi sensibilities and in their changing treatment from Sufi diplomas to simple genealogical pedigrees of ocakzade families.

The foregoing discussion suggests that the WafaT component of Anatolian religious history was obfuscated partly because the order's legacy was later absorbed into the Bektashi tradition as configured around the turn of the sixteenth century in the Bektashi hagiographic literature. Further light will be shed on this issue in the following two chapters, where I scrutinize the dynamics of the historical symbiosis between the Bektashi order and the WafaT cum Kizilbash communities.

83 CHAPTER TWO

The Contested Legacy of Haci Bekta§: The Abdals of Rum, the Bektashi Order, and the Kizilbash Movement

I-Introduction

The second major theme emerging from the Alevi documents is relations between the Alevi communities and the Bektashi order. One feature of this complicated

issue was foreshadowed in the previous chapter during discussion of the incorporation of the WafaT legacy into Bektashi lore. In the following two chapters, I will treat the issue from a more comprehensive perspective, using evidence from Alevi documents and in-field observations as a starting point. The new evidence defies any linear and uni-dimensional depictions of the course followed by Alevi-Bektashi relations and invites a fresh engagement with larger Bektashi history.

Present-day Kizilbash/Alevi communities are known to be adherents of the cult of HacTBektaf, as are members of the Bektashi order. Kizilbash/Alevi beliefs and ritual practices similarly bear a distinct resemblance to those of the Bektashiyye. This evident affinity between the two groups is often assumed to be connected to their common origins in the "folk Islam" of the Turkmen tribes who migrated to Anatolia from the eleventh-century onwards and is conceptualized on the basis of the notion that the

Kizilbash are essentially the "lay followers" of the Bektashi order—or to use slightly different terminology, that they are "village Bektashis."1 This idea of a primordial

1 See Fuad Koprulii; for instance, "Bektasiligin Menseleri: Kticiik Asya'da islam Batimliginin Tekamul-iTarihisi Hakkinda BirTecrube," TiirkYurdu, 16-2, no. 169-8 (May 1925), reprint, Ankara, 2001, 9: 68-76. Also see works by Irene Melikoff, including "Bektasiler Tarikati ve Haci Bektas'a Bagh Ziimreler: Probleme Toplu Bakis," in Uyurldik Uyardilar: Alevilik-Bekta§ilik

84 affinity between the Bektashiyye and Kizilbash communities overlaps with the way the

Celebis visualize their relations with these communities. The Celebis as descendants of

Had Bektas. have historically headed the central Bektashi convent in Kir§ehir, and they

maintain that Haci Bektas, during his lifetime dispatched a number of his vicars to

distant parts of Anatolia and that these in turn became the seeds of the later Alevi

ocaks. Over time relations between these distant ocaks and the Had Bekta§ Convent in

Kirjehir weakened or in many cases were completely severed, to be revived once again from the nineteenth century onwards thanks to the efforts of the convent's Celeb i postni§Tns.2

However, in-field observations reveal the inadequacy of this view in accounting for the complexity of Bektashi-Alevi relations. To begin with, Alevi communities attached to dede lineages, although typically recognizing Had Bekta§ as a saint, do not traditionally apply the appellation "Bektashi" to themselves, using it instead strictly for those who are directly attached to the Celebis. Moreover, the boundaries between the two groups seem to have been relatively well-defined until the nineteenth century, when the Celebis steadily began to expand their sphere of influence to include a growing number of Kizilbash/Alevi ocaks. As a result, a significant number of dede families—included among which are those belonging to ocaks of WafaT origin—came to recognize the spiritual authority of the Celebis, to whom they now turned to receive

Arastirmalart (Istanbul: Cem Yayinevi, 1993), 21-27. Among the first to use the term "village Bektashis" (koy Bektasileri) were Besim Atalay, BektasilikveEdebiyati (1922; reprint, Istanbul: Ant Yayinlan, 1991), 34; and John Kingsley Birge, The Bektasi Order of Dervishes (1937; reprint, London: Luzac Oriental, 1994), 211.

2 For the £elebi perspective on this issue, see A. Celalettin Ulusoy, HunkarHaa Bektas Velive Alevi-BektasiYolu, 2nd ed. (Hacibektas, Kir§ehir: 1986), 194-98. The author himself is a member of the £elebi family.

85 icdzetnames as confirmation of their ocakzade status.3 But oral histories testify to the fact that the incorporation of the dede ocaks into the formal network of £elebi Bektashis has been neither a seamless nor a fully completed process, because many dede families have

strongly resisted it.4 Rather than viewing this incorporation as a recovery of ancient ties, dedes in this second group have deemed the Celebis' efforts an illegitimate imposition without any basis in history. These dedes consider themselves historically attached to the Karbala convent and link their families' ocak status not to an initial authorization by Had Bekta§, as claimed by the £elebis, but to their own sayyid descent. They maintain that the arrival of their ancestors in Anatolia as bearers of a spiritual mission predated the arrival of HacIBektas. in this region, a claim that has a demonstrable historical foundation in the case of WafaT cum Kizilbash ocaks.

Documentary evidence also confirms the relatively recent origin of Eastern Anatolian ocaks' integration into the Kir§ehir-centered Bektashi network, since none of the £elebi icazetnames among the Alevi documents that have surfaced at this point date back further than the early nineteenth century.

3 The division between the Kizilbash attached to the dede ocaks and the Bektashis was earlier noted by Abdiilbak? Golpinarh, "Kizilbas," tsldm Ansiklopedisi. Islam Alemi Tarih, Cografya, EtnografyaveBiyografyaLugati (Istanbul: Milli Egitim Basimevi, 1967). Golpinarh writes that the Kizilbash in Anatolia identify themselves as affiliates of the "§ah Safisiiregi" (lit. "drove of §ah SafT); in a similar vein, the Bektashis call the Kizilbash affiliates of the "Sofusiirekleri" (lit. "Sufi droves"). Golpinarh furthermore remarks that those Kizilbash communities who had recently attached themselves to the Celebis are referred to as "doniik" (lit. "the ones who turned"), while the ones who have persisted in their exclusive loyalty to the dede ocaks are called "purut."

4 The earliest recorded relevant anecdotes are found in Nuri Dersimi, Kiirdistan Tarihinde Dersim (1952; reprint, Diyarbakir: Dilan Yayinlan, 1992), 92-96. Some indirect evidence of this conflictual process also exists in American missionary records from the second half of the nineteenth century; see my "The Emergence of the Kizilbas in Western Thought: Missionary Accounts and their Aftermath," in Archaeology, Anthropology and Heritage in the Balkans and Anatolia: the Life and Times of FM. Hasluck 1878-1920, ed. D. Shankland (Istanbul: ISIS Press, 2004), 344-46.

86 What complicates the picture even further is the body of Alevi documents

originating from Iraq. These reveal relatively institutionalized relations between the

Alevi ocaks and a group of Sufi convents in Iraq. These convents, but more so their links with the Alevi dede lineages, have heretofore remained virtually unknown in the scholarly literature. It appears that members of dede families during their periodic trips to Shi'i/Alevi pilgrimage sites in Iraq also visited these convents on a regular basis and obtained a variety of documents which were issued or ratified by dervishes affiliated with the convents in question. The hub of this web of Sufi convents in Iraq appears to have been the Karbala convent, as it is popularly known among the Alevis, located in the courtyard of the shrine complex of Imam Husayn in Karbala. Although it later came to be affiliated with the Bektashi order, the Karbala convent was earlier the domain of the Abdals of Rum (Rum Abdallan), an itinerant dervish group that existed in Anatolia from late medieval times. The Abdals shared with the WafaT cum Kizilbash ocaks a common Wafal/BabaT heritage. Although not Bektashis as such, they did recognize

Had Bektas. as one of their saints. The Abdals were among those who joined the

Kizilbash movement, faced persecution in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries on account of their support of the Safavids, and subsequently sought refuge under the

Bektashi umbrella. The other two convents that were part of the same web of relations are similarly known in the modern literature as Bektashi convents, although they too seem to have been earlier associated with other orders and dervish groups. Interactions between these little-known Bektashi convents in Iraq and the Kizilbash dede families bring to light a new front to take into account while tracking the historical trajectory of

87 Bektashi-Kizilbash relations and indicate the importance of going beyond the convent

in Kir§ehir for a broader perspective on the subject.

Reconstructing a more comprehensive picture of Alevi-Bektashi relations also

calls for an engagement with the question of how the Safavids may have figured in all

of this. Astoundingly little attention has been paid to this question, despite the central

role of the Safavids in the crystallization of Kizilbash/Alevi identity. In the existing

literature, Kizilbash communities' relations with the Bektashiyye have typically been

treated independently from their ties to the Safavids. With regard to the Bektashis, it is

generally assumed that the order as a whole maintained a pro-Ottoman, or at least a

quietist, political stance, in contrast to their "rebellious" cousins who sided with the

Safavids. This political conformism, together with the prestige arising from the

Janissaries' allegiance to their spiritual master Had Bekta§, are in turn believed to have affected the Ottoman state's lenience towards the Bektashiyye, despite its evident

Shi'ism and unorthodoxy. Congruently, other similarly "deviant" dervish groups of the early Ottoman era, who lacked similar dynamics working in their favor, eventually either ceased to exist or sought refuge under the Bektashi umbrella, as in the case of the Abdals of Rum.5

5 A general overview of the relevant literature is provided in Suraiya Faroqhi, "The Bektashis: A Report on Current Research," in Bektachiyycc Etudessur Vordre mystique des Bektachis et les groupes relevant de Hadji Bektach, ed. Alexandre Popovic and Gilles Veinstein (Istanbul: ISIS Press, 1995), 9-28. Regarding relations between the Ottoman state and the Bektashi order, see Irene Melikoff, "Le probleme kizilbas," Turcica 6(1975): 49-67; and Suraiya Faroqhi, "Conflict, Accommodation and Long-Term Survival: The Bektashi Order and the Ottoman State," in Bektachiyya: Etudes sur Vordre mystique des Bektachis, 171-184. Concerning various dervish groups that coalesced under the Bektashi umbrella, see Ahmet T. Karamustafa, "Kalender s, Abdals, Haydens: The Formation of the Bektasiye in the Sixteenth Century," in Siileyman the Second and His Time, ed. Halil inalcik and Cemal Kafadar (Istanbul: ISIS Press, 1993), 121-129.

88 Notwithstanding its many merits, this picture of Bektashi-Kizilbash relations is flawed for its Ottoman-centeredness; as such it does not leave much space for a serious consideration of possible Safavid agency in the shaping of these relations. But there is evidence—some new and some previously underestimated—suggesting that the

Safavids actively tried to partake in the legacy of HacT Bekta§. Such an effort on the part of the Safavids would only be natural, at least to the extent that the saint's legacy was part of the heritage of the Abdals, among whom the Kizilbash movement appears to have found a significant basis of support.

Guided by these preliminary considerations, the present chapter will search for the roots of the historical Alevi-Bektashi symbiosis in their joint affinity with the

Abdals of Rum and will further pursue its development in the post-Safavid era. I shall argue that HacTBekta§'s legacy constituted a point of contestation between the proto-

Bektashis and the Abdals of Rum and I shall suggest that the origins of the cult of HacT

Bektas. among the WafaT cum Kizilbash ocaks may be linked to an alternative memory of the saint inherited via the Abdals. Also considered in this chapter are Ottoman attempts following the rise of the SafavT challenge to tame and control the saint's legacy by promoting the officially-recognized Bektashi order as the sole representative of this legacy, as well as Safavid efforts to patronize the Abdal/Bektashi circles within their own sphere of influence. The latter issue will be elaborated further in the third chapter within the specific framework of relations between the Alevi ocaks and the

(quasi-)Bektashi convents in Iraq, which, I will contend, functioned as clandestine liaisons between the Safavid shahs and their followers in Anatolia.

89 II- The Historical Had Bekta§

Although the Bektashi order has always been a subject of major interest for

students of Turkish and Ottoman history, some fundamental aspects of its history

remain obscure. To begin with, large gaps exist in our knowledge of the biography of

the order's thirteenth-century eponym, as well as in our knowledge of the period

between his lifetime and the full-fledged emergence of the Bektashiyye as an order in

the sixteenth century. Several aspects of this early history of the Bektashiyye,

moreover, remain controversial, with differing views on a variety of issues ranging

from the nature of Had Bektas/s original teachings to the genesis of the split between the two main branches of the order, the Babas (Babagan) and the £elebis (Qelebiyan), who disagree on the issue of whether or not the saint fathered any children.

A key part of the problem is the paucity of related sources. Leaving aside a few works which are less than conclusively attributed to Had Bekta§, among them most importantly the Makaldt,6 there are no sources contemporary with the life of this thirteenth-century Anatolian mystic. And with the exception of a few waqfiyyas from the late thirteenth century that mention his name in connection with the district near

Kirsehir where his convent still stands,7 the relevant sources are all literary in nature

6 Makalat, ed. Esad Cosan (Ankara: T.C. Kiiltur Bakanhgi, 1996). For a challenge of these books' alleged attribution to Had Bektas, see Abdulbaki Golpmarh, 100 Soruda Tiirkiye'de Mezheplerve Tarikatler (Istanbul: Gercek Yaymevi, 1969), 272-7'4; and Ahmed Yasar Ocak, "Anadolu Heterodoks Turk Sufiliginin Temel Tasi: Haci Bektas-i Veil el-Horasani (?-127l)," in Turk Sufiligine Bahslar (Istanbul: iletisim Yayinlan, 1996), 173-74.

7 Three such waqfiyyas, dated 691/1291-92, 695/1295-96, and 697/1297-98, are cited in Birge, The Bektashi Order, 41.

90 and consist of a relatively small group of Sufi biographical dictionaries, hagiographies,

and Ottoman chronicles.

There are two such sources dating from the first half of the fourteenth century

which provide brief but significant material concerning the subject: MNK-Kudsiyye by

Elvan £elebi (d. 760/1358), which as mentioned in the previous chapter, is a legendary

history of Baba ilyas HorasanI and his progeny in verse form; and the hagiography of

the famous Mevlana CelaleddTn-i Rumi, Manakib al-'Arifm. Slightly predating these two

well-known sources is the Tabaqdt Khirqat by al-WasitT (1275-1343), which was

mentioned previously as one of the main sources for Abu'l-Wafa's biography and which

also includes a long entry on HacTBekta§.8 Surprisingly, WasitT's entry on HacTBekta§,

first cited briefly in Trimingham's classical work on Sufi orders, seems to have gone

virtually unnoticed by earlier and later scholars working on the subject.9 Recently,

however, Devin DeWeese apparently has taken notice of this source in connection with

his work on Ahmed YesevI and has shown that this entry, which is found in the

nineteenth century published version of the work, is missing in the one and only

known manuscript copy of it.10 It is, in other words, possible that the entry on Had

8 Tabaqat-Wasiti, 47-49.

9 J. Spencer Trimingham, The Sufi Orders in Islam (London: Oxford University Press, 1971), 81. Based on the fact that WasitT mentions Had Bektas without adding rddl Allah 'anhu after his name, Trimingham concludes that the saint was still alive around 1320, but the waqfiyyas mentioned above do not support this conclusion. WasitT's work has been "re-discovered" recently by Mikail Bayram, "Haci Bekta§-i Horasani Hakkmda Yeni Kaynak Arastirmasi," in 1. Uluslararasi Haci Bektas Veli Sempozyumu Bildirileri: 27-28-29 Nisan 2000/Ankara (Ankara: Haci Bektas Anadolu Kultur Vakfi, 2000), 41.

10 Ahmet T. Karamustafa, "YesevTlik, Melametilik, Kalender flik, Vefatlik ve Anadolu Tasawufunun Kokenleri Sorunu," in Osmanh Toplumunda Tasawufve Sufiler: Kaynaklar-Doktrin- Ayin ve Erkan-Tarikatlar-Edebiyat-Mimari-ikonografi-Modernizm, ed. Ahmed Yasar Ocak (Ankara:

91 Bekta§ was a later addition not found in the original work as composed by WasitT.

Despite this caveat, however, this source will also be taken into account at certain

points in our subsequent discussion.

There is a gap of nearly one and a half centuries between these few early works

and the main cluster of relevant sources which began appearing toward the close of the

fifteenth century. Among these are all the major Bektashi hagiographies, including

most importantly the hagiographic vita of Haci Bektas. known as the Velayetname.11 The

Velayetname is the primary repository of Bektashi tradition concerning their spiritual

master and is our main source for some of the most important details of the saint's life,

despite its largely legendary nature. The earliest available copy is dated 1103/1624,

nevertheless, it seems to have been composed originally sometime between 1481 and

1501, because it refers to Bayezld II as the reigning sultan, but does not say anything

concerning Balim Sultan, the pir-i sanl, second grand-master, of the Bektashi order, who was appointed by Bayezld II as head of the Had Bektas. Convent in 1501.n The earliest

Turk Tarih Kurumu, 2005), n. 29. Here Karamustafa is citing Devin DeWeese's work in progress about Ahmed YesevT and the Yeseviyye order.

11 Velayetn&me-Gdlpinarli. For its verse form, see Bedri Noyan (ed.), Haci Bektas-i VeliManzum Vilayetnamesi (Istanbul: Can Yayinlan, 1996). Although 'Velayetname'' is a common tag for all BektasT hagiographies, when one talks about the Velayetname, it is commonly understood to be the mendhb of Had Bektas. Other major Bektashi hagiographies include the mendhbs of Haclm Sultan, Otman Baba, Seyyid 'All Sultan, Abdal Musa, and Suca'eddln Veil; for their modern editions, see Rudolf Tschudi (ed.), Das Vilajet-name desHadschim Sultan (Berlin, 1914); Go'cek Abdal, Odman Baba Vildyetnmesi: Vildyetname-i Sdhi, edited by Sevki Koca (Bektasi Kultfir Dernegi, 2002); Bedri Noyan (ed.), Seyyid Ali Sultan (Kmldeli Sultan) Vilayetnamesi (Ankara: Ayyildiz Yaymlan, n.d.); Abdurrahman Giizel (ed.), Abdal Musa Velayetnamesi (Ankara: Turk Tarih Kurumu, 1999); Nejat Birdogan, Alevi KaynaUan-1 (Istanbul: Kaynak Yaymlan, 1996), 128-72. For a general introduction to the hagiographic literature in Turkish, including the Bektashi veldyetnames, see Ahmet Yasar Ocak, KiUtiirTarihiKaynagi OlarakMenahbnameler(MetodolojikBir Yaldasim) (Ankara: Turk Tarih Kurumu, 1992).

12 Introduction to Velayetndme-Golpinarli, xxm-xxix.

92 Ottoman chronicles to include information on Had Bektas. date from around the same period, the most significant among them being the previously cited Mendhb u tevarih-i al-i 'Osman of 'A§ikpa§azade .13 Later Ottoman sources mentioning Had Bektas. contribute little overall to the factual details of HacTBekta§'s biography and are notable mostly for their authors' conscious efforts, in line with official Ottoman discourse, to assert the orthodoxy of Had Bektas. and thereby to disassociate the saint from the

"tainted" reputation of his heterodox followers.14

Based on these sources, what we can claim as certain about HacTBektas/s biography is limited. Judging by the expression al-merhum, which is appropriate for a deceased person and which accompanies his name in the earliest of the aforementioned waqfiyyas, HacTBektas. must have died sometime before 691/1291, when the document in question was composed.15 This important piece of documentary evidence accords with the dates recorded in two manuscripts found in the library of the HacTBektas. Convent, according to which the saint was born in 606/1209 and died in

669/1270.16 There is thus little doubt that Had Bektas. lived in the thirteenth century

13 Apz., 204-206; Apz-Ats\z\ 237-38.

14 See, for example, 'Abdurrahman Caml(d. 1492), Nefehatiil-iins min hadardtil-kuds, trans. Lamit gelebi (d. 1532) (Istanbul: Marifet Yayinlan, 1980), 791-92; Hoca Sadettin Efendi (d. 1599), Tacii't- Tevarih, ed. ismet Parmaksizoglu, 5 vols. (Ankara: Kiiltur Bakanhgi, c.1992), 5:18; Taskoprizade Ebulhayr isamuddln Ahmed Efendi (d.l56l), §aWik-i Nu'maniyye ve Zeyilleri: Hadaiku'^akd'ik, trans. MecdTMehmed Efendi, ed. Abdiikadir Ozcan, 5 vols. (Istanbul: Qagn, 1989), 1:44; and Mustafa 'AlT(d.l599), Kunhul-Ahbdr, 5 vols. (Istanbul: TakvTmhane-i 'Amire, 1277 [1870]): 5: 55- 58.

15 Birge, The Bektashi Order, 41. Birge cites this waqfiyya on account of Hilmi Ziya (Olken) "Anadolu'da Dini Ruhiyat Miisahedeleri," Mihrab Mecmuasi no.15/16 ([1340]1924), but Olken does not identify his source.

16 Introduction to Velayetname-Golpinarli, xxiii-xxiv.

93 and that he was a contemporary of Mevlana Celaleddin-i Rumi (1207-1273), a fact also corroborated by stories included in the Manaldb al-'Arifin and the Velayetname involving indirect exchanges between the two figures.17

The thirteenth century was in many respects a highly eventful and formative period of Anatolian history. Demographically, the period was shaped by the second major wave of Turkmen migrations from the east, triggered by Mongol invasions in

Central Asia. The Anatolian Seljuks, severely weakened by the Babat revolt of a few years before, experienced a crushing defeat at the hands of the advancing Mongol armies in the Battle of Kosedag in 1243, as a result of which they had to submit to vassalage. The political vacuum created by the decline and subsequent collapse in 1308 of the Anatolian Seljuks would be filled by various independent Turkmen principalities mushrooming throughout the region, one of which was the Ottoman beglik founded in

1299. Many of these Turkmen principalities, such as that of the Ottomans, championed the gam ideology, which provided religious legitimacy for the expansion of the Islamic realm through warfare. Rather than orthodox ulema, it was primarily Sufi dervishes who were partisans of the gam ethos—among them some apparently from within surviving WafaT/BabaT circles. Characterized by relative lenience and inclusiveness, this dervish mode of piety is believed to have contributed to the complex cultural and religious symbiosis that accompanied perpetual warfare on the Christian-Muslim frontiers in this century. This century, thus typified by high levels of mobility and

Manakib al-'Arifin, 1: 381-383 and 497-498; and Velayetname-Gdlpinarh, 48-49.

94 fluidity, produced a distinct group of mystics who were to have a seminal impact on the future religious and cultural topography of the Turkish/islamic milieu in Anatolia.18

Had Bektas. was one such mystic, who by all accounts migrated to Anatolia from the east, most likely from the region of Khorasan, based on his nisba "al-Horasanl." On his way to Anatolia, he made brief stops in Kurdistan, Najaf, Mecca, Medina, Jerusalem,

Aleppo, and the region of Zu'1-kadirli (the environs of modern-day Maras, province), finally settling in the village of Sulucakarahoyiik near the central Anatolian town of

Kir§ehir.19 Kir§ehir was at the time one of the leading urban centers of the region, a place where many of the luminaries of the pre-Ottoman Turkish-Islamic milieu lived, among them, Ahl Evren, the traditional master of the Ahl organizations and according to the Velayetname, apparently a close friend of Haci Bekta§. The plains around the town of Kir§ehir are known to be among the first regions settled by Mongol and Turkic tribes hailing from Central Asia. According to the Velayetname, the village of Sulucakarahoyiik was inhabited by the Turkmen tribe of Cepni at the time of HacTBektas/s arrival there.

After a period of rule by a Mongol viceroy, Kir§ehir and its environs came to be contested by various Turkmen principalities, among them the Karamanids and the

Dulkadriyya, until it was decisively absorbed by the Ottomans sometime in the early sixteenth century.20

18 The most recent and sophisticated treatment of the frontier milieu in medieval Anatolia is provided in Cemal Kafadar, Between Two Worlds: The Construction of the Ottoman State (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1995).

19 Velayetname-Golpinarli, 16-18.

20 ilhan §ahin, "Kirsehir", DIA.

95 The Velayetname presents HacIBektas. as a sayyid through the line of the seventh

Twelver Shi'i imam, Musa al-Kazim (745-799), and identifies his father as a certain

Ibrahim Sam, allegedly the Sultan of Khorasan. Had Bektas. is said to have received his

education in religious sciences from Lokman Perende, a miracle-working disciple of the

founder of the YesevT order, Ahmed Yesevl. Ahmed YesevT is said to have presented

Had Bektas. with his spiritual accoutrements (emanetler) and dispatched him to the land

of Rum, that is, Anatolia, with the specific mission that he take charge of the Abdals of

Rum. Although Had Bektas/s initial reception by the Abdals was less than friendly, it

apparently did not take long for the saint to demonstrate his spiritual superiority

through a series of miracles, as a result of which all of the Abdals are said to have paid

homage to him. TheVelayetname links the source of Had Bektas/s spiritual pre­

eminence and thus his status as serge§me (lit. fountainhead) to his being the bearer of

Imam 'All's secret mystery, si'rr, as indicated by his two characteristic green moles, one

on the palm of one of his hands and the other on his forehead. HacTBekta§, in other words, is portrayed in the Velayetname as Imam 'All reincarnated.21

Notwithstanding the Velayetname's claim that this inborn spiritual authority of

Had Bektas/s was eventually acknowledged by all the saint's contemporaries, including even the prominent Mevlana Celaleddln, it is difficult to gauge the actual extent of Had

Bektas/s fame and influence during his lifetime. Scholars tend to treat the Velayetname's assertions in this regard, including its claim of Had Bektas/s sayyi'd-hood, as later fabrications typical of Sufi hagiographies. Starting with Kdpriilu, HacTBekta§ has commonly been assumed to be a dervish of Turkmen stock who most likely migrated to

21 Velayetname-Golpinarli, 1-7.

96 Anatolia as part of the same demographic wave that followed the Mongol conquests in

Central Asia. As an archetypal Turkmen baba, he is believed to have propagated a heterodox version of Islam among the illiterate and less than fully Islamized Turkmen tribes.22 In line with this image as a tribal religious figure, Ahmet Ya§ar Ocak portrayed

Had Bektas. as a local dervish whose influence and fame did not reach beyond the boundaries of the tribal milieu within which he functioned.23 But contrary to Ocak's claims, we have evidence suggesting that Had Bektas. was a religious leader of some weight and fame already during his lifetime. This is shown by the fact that the district around the village of Sulucakarahoyuk came to be named after him already in the late thirteenth century, as shown by the aforementioned waqfiyyas from this period.24 The two anecdotes about him included by Aflaklin his Manakib al-'Anfm, moreover, suggest that he was at least indirectly known by Mevlana CelaleddTn, who lived in the nearby

Seljuk capital of Konya, and that Mevlana CelaleddTn even regarded him as a rival, albeit not necessarily a formidable one.25 Finally, the entry on HacTBekta§ found in the published version of Wasitfs Tabaqat Khirqat potentially illustrates that the saint's fame

22 In addition to his various other works, see Fuad Kopriilu, "Bektas: Haci Bektas Veli," in islam AnsMopedisi: islam Alemi Tarih, Cografya, Etnografya ve Bibliyografya Lugati (Istanbul: Milli Egitim Basimevi, 1965).

23 Ahmed Yasar Ocak, "Haci Bektas-i Veil," DIA.

24 Birge, The Bektashi Order, 41.

25 In the first anecdote, Had Bektaf, jealous of Mevlana's fame and large following, upbraids Mevlana for causing an unnecessary commotion (ghavgha) in the world, but later comes to acknowledge his failure to comprehend Mevlana's greatness; Manakib al-Arifin, 1: 381-383. In the second anecdote, Had Bektas, upon being warned of the necessity of performing the daily prayers {namaz) by one of Mevlana's disciples, works a miracle by turning the ablution water into blood. Hearing of this, Mevlana dismisses Had Bektas's miracle, saying that a real miracle would be changing blood into water, rather than making clean water unclean, ibid, 1:497-498.

97 in fact reached beyond the boundaries of Anatolia and that he was known and regarded as a sayyid not only among his followers in Anatolia but also in some Sufis circles in

Iraq.26 But whether HacTBektas. was simply one of many obscure Turkmen babas or alternately was a religious figure of some standing and reputation already during his lifetime, there is not sufficient indication that his future eminence was easily predictable while he was alive—barring the Velayetndme's most likely exaggerated claims.

The view of Had Bektas. as a "heterodox" Turkmen baba as first formulated by

Fuad Koprulu was largely based on the accounts of AflakT and 'A§ikpa§azade. In Aflakl's

Manakib al-'Ariftn, HacTBektas, is described as a mystic who, although having an enlightened heart, did not conform to the Shari'a, not even performing the daily prayers.27 'A§ikpa§azade, somewhat similarly, writes of HacTBektas. as an ecstatic dervish, not interested in being a shaykh or in having disciples.28 Following a reassessment of the Makalat, whose attribution to HacTBektas. he earlier rejected but later considered as almost certain, Koprulu came to question the reliability especially of

A§ikpa§azade's portrayal of the saint. The Makalat, Koprulu believed, indicated Had

Bektas/s sobriety and competence in religious sciences. Yet, according to Koprulu, because a work like the Makalat was intended to show only the external aspects of the

26 Tabaqat-WasitT, 47-49. WasitT refers to the saint as "Sayyid Bektash al-Khorasdni," places him in the land of Rum, and traces his spiritual chain of initiation to Ahmed YesevT.

27"HqjTBektashmardibud 'arif-dilurushan-darvinammadarmutdba'atna-bud,"Manakibal-'Arifin, 1: 381; "uasladarri'ayat-i suratna-budvamutaba'atna-dashtvanamfcnamTkerd,''ibid. 1:498.

28 "HacTBekta§ Hatun Anaya ismarhdi nesi varsa, kendii bir mecmb budala 'azizdi, $eyhlikden ve murTdlikdenfarigdi." Apz, 205.

98 path to new recruits, one could not expect the work to reflect its author's esoteric teachings. Thus Koprulii's view of HacTBektas. as propagating a "heterodox" Islam, more specifically a Shii/batiniversion, was unshaken.29 In the literature after Kopriilu, two fundamentally opposing views concerning the issue have emerged. On the one hand, two leading contemporary historians of the subject, Ahmed Ya§ar Ocak, and following him, Irene Melikoff, unequivocally reject the possibility that HacIBekta§— who as a typical Turkmen baba, presumably lacked any formal education and had only deficient understanding of the "high" Sufi tradition—ever wrote any of the works attributed to him. On the other side are those revisionist researchers who, like Kopriilu, see Had Bekta§'s authorship of the Makalat as beyond doubt. Nonetheless, Kopriilu did not particularly value the Makalat for shedding light on the true nature of Haci Bektas/s teachings, and contrary to Kopriilu, this group of revisionist scholars (who incidentally all have theological training) has used the work in question to substantiate the opinion that the saint remained fully within the boundaries of Islamic orthodoxy—in sharp contrast to those who later claimed to be his followers.30 But even allowing for the possibility that HacTBektas. was indeed the author of the Makalat, it remains problematic whether a reading of it as proposed by the advocates of the second

29 Fuad Kopriilu, "Bektasiligin Menseleri," 75; and "Anadolu'da islamiyet" (1922; reprint, Istanbul: insan Yaymlan, 1996), 47-52.

30 See n. 6 above. Also see Mikail Bayram, "Haci Bektas-i Horasan'i Hakkinda Yeni Kaynak," and Ahmet Yasar Ocak's response to him, "Alevi-Bektasi Dusiincesi Hakkinda Genel Bilgiler," in 1. Uluslararasi Haci Bekta§ Veli Sempozyumu Bildirilerv 27-28-29 Nisan 2000/'Ankara (Ankara: Haci Bektas Anadolu Kultur Vakfi, 2000): 47-55.

99 position can stand the test of a close textual and contextual analysis.31 Thus, at this point there is no justifiable reason to dismiss the early historical accounts which in one way or another show Had Bektas. as sharing with his later followers a reputation for antinomianism.

As we have seen, theVelayetname, like other Bektashi hagiographies and like the numerous Qelebi icazetnames granted to the Alevi dedes from the nineteenth century onwards, connects Had Bektas, to the YesevT tradition. The various chains of initiation given for Had Bektas. in these and in non-Bektashi sources almost without exception trace back to Ahmed YesevT, although some do so not directly, but through Lokman

Perende (a variation that seems to correlate with the ambiguity one observes in this regard in the Velayetname)—despite the significant differences among them concerning names beyond Ahmed YesevT and despite additional names inserted in some of them between Lokman Perende and Ahmed YesevT.32

Koprulii was the first modern historian to express caution about the historical authenticity of this well-established Bektashi tradition. Although he did not dismiss the possibility altogether, he suggested that the silsilas linking Had Bektas. to Ahmed YesevT may well have been later forgeries intended to draw on the popularity of this famous

31 Golpinarli, 100 Soruda Tiirkiye'de Mezhepler, 272-73. For a recent discussion of this issue within its larger ideological context, see Mark Soileau, Humanist Mystics: Nationalism and the Commemoration of Saints in Turkey (PhD diss., University of California, Santa Barbara, 2006), 372- 373, 393-398.

32 In the nineteenth-century Celebi icazetnames, the spiritual silsila of Had Bektas. is directly traced to Ahmed YesevT, son of Muhammad HanafT, son of Imam 'AlT; for a published example of one such icazetname, see Mehmet Akkus, "19. Asirda Bir Bektasi icazetnamesi," Tasawuf, 1:1 (August, 1999): 26-37. For alternative silsilas of HacTBekta?, see for example, Fuad Koprulii, Turk Edebiyatinda Ilk Mutasawiflar (1919; reprint, Ankara: TiirkTarih Kurumu Basimevi, 1993), 53, n. 60,110, n. 42; and M. Tevfik Oytan, Bektasiligin icyuzii (1945; reprint, Istanbul: Demos Yayinlan, 2007), 344-45.

100 Central Asian mystic whose fame, Koprulii believed, was carried into Anatolia by YesevI

dervishes migrating into this region in large numbers during and after the Mongol

invasions. At a more tangible level casting further doubt on a master-disciple relationship between the two figures was, according to Kopriilu, the chronological impossibility of such a relationship, this based on the assumption that HacTBektas. had not yet been born when Ahmed YesevI died in 562/1166. More importantly, however,

Kopriilu observed that Had Bektas/s connection to the Yeseviyye is not mentioned in the earliest non-Bektashi sources, which rather associate him with the Babat milieu.33

In AflakT's Manakib al-'Arifin, he appears as one of the leading vicars of the leader of the

Babat revolt.34 While 'A§ikpa§azade falls short of corroborating AflakT's claim fully, he does propose that upon arriving in Anatolia HacTBektas. and his brother Mente? first went to see Baba Ilyas.35 Elvan Celebi's Menahbu'l-hidsiyye, which was not available to

Koprulii, is regarded as yet another source confirming the existence of an affinity between Had Bekta§ and the BabaT circles, since the saint's name is mentioned respectfully in two couplets by Elvan Celebi, once together with the name of Shaykh

Bali, one of the halvfes of 'A§ik Pa§a, grandchild of the revolt's leader.36

33 Kopriilu, TiirkEdebiyatindallkMutasawiflar, 48-59,110-118. Nonetheless, Koprulii seems to have changed his mind later, describing the Bektashi order as an offshoot of the Yeseviyye; see, "Ahmed Yesevi," in islam Ansiklopedisi. Islam Alemi Tarih, Cografya, Etnografya ve Bibliyografya Lugati (Istanbul: Milli Egitim Basimevi, 1965).

34 "HajTBektdsh KhorasanTke khalifah-i khas BabaRasul bud," Manakib al-'Arifin, 1: 381.

35 Apz., 204; Apz-Atsiz; 237.

36 Mertol Tulum (ed.), TarihiMetin Qalismalannda Usui: Mendkibul-Kudsiyye Uzerinde BirDeneme (Istanbul: Deniz Kitabevi, 2000), 632-635, couplets 1994,1995, and 2003.

101 We see that Kopriilu's prominent student AbdiilbakT Golpmarli in his works

likewise foregrounded HacTBekta§'s relationship with the BabaT movement at the

expense of his alleged links to the YesevT order.37 But while Koprulii depicted the leader

of the BabaT revolt, Baba ilyas, as a typical Turkmen baba of QalandarT affiliation,38

Golpmarli was the first to identify the order of the BabaTs as WafaTyya—thus his

portrayal of Had Bektas, as a member of the WafaT order.39 Ahmet Ya§ar Ocak, on the

other hand, was more reluctant to fully dismiss the YesevT link and tried to resolve the

issue by suggesting that Had Bektas, was in fact a HaydarT dervish. Ocak, following

Koprulii, defined Haydarlyya as a fusion between Qalandariyya and Yeseviyye, with the

former being the main ingredient. He did, however, also suggest that subsequent to his

arrival in Anatolia, Had Bekta§ joined the BabaT/WafaT path, which in Ocak's

estimation was yet another offshoot of the larger QalandarT movement.40

More recently, Ahmet Karamustafa as part of a larger critique of Koprulii and

Ocak has argued that Had Bekta§ may have indeed been a YesevT dervish, although

Karamustafa simultaneously rejects Kopriilu's commonly accepted thesis that large

numbers of YesevT dervishes migrated to medieval Anatolia. In doing this, Karamustafa

does not put forth any new evidence aside from Devin DeWeese's recent finding that

Ahmed YesevT probably died about a quarter of a century later than the hitherto

37 Golpmarli, 100 Soruda Tiirkiye'de Mezhepler, 269-72.

38 Fuad Koprulii, "Bektasjligin Men§eleri," 74.

39 See, for example, his "Bektasilik," TurkAnsMopedisi (Ankara: Milli Egitim Basimevi, 1953).

40 Osmanh imparatorlugu'nda Marjinal Suftlik Kalendenler (Ankara: Turk Tarih Kurumu, 1992); see esp. 205-215.

102 accepted date of 1166 and that, therefore, a master-disciple relationship between

YesevT and HacTBektas, may in fact have been chronologically reasonable.41

Karamustafa also cites in a footnote the account found in the published version of

WasitVs work which directly traces HacTBektas/s chain of initiation to Ahmed YesevT,

but he cites it only as an unverified source, due to the previously mentioned research

by Devin DeWeese.42

As the foregoing overview of sources and literature illustrates, many aspects of

Had Bektas/s biography remain either obscure or controversial. What is relatively

certain about the saint is that he lived in the thirteenth century and that following his

arrival in Anatolia he settled in a village near Kir§ehir, where he had already

established himself as a fairly important religious figure, and that he had a reputation

for not fully conforming to the Sharia. Whatever his formal order affiliation(s), it also

seems clear that in his new home he came to associate with WafaT/BabaT circles.

Ill- The Abdals of Rum and the early (or proto-)Bektashis

Art historians suggest that the tomb of Had Bektas. was built sometime in the late thirteenth to early fourteenth century, most likely under the patronage of the

Mongol Eratnid dynasty, who are known to have engaged in similar forms of architectural patronage for a number of other tombs and convents in their realms.

41 Karamustafa, "Yesevtlik, Melametilik," 61-88, 70. Also see Devin DeWeese, "The YasavT Order and Persian Hagiography in Seventeenth-Century Central Asia: 'Alim Sheikh of'AlTyabad and his Lamahat min nafahat al-quds," in The Heritage ofSufism, vol. 3 of Late Classical Persianate Su/tsm (1501-1750): The Safavid & Mughal Period, ed. L. Lewisohn and D. Morgan (Oxford: Oneworld, 1999), 390.

42 Karamustafa, "Yesevtlik, Melametilik," 74, n. 29

103 Later additions to the shrine were made in the second half of the fourteenth century when the area around Kir§ehir was controlled by the Karamanid principality.43 George of Hungary, who was in Anatolia between 1436 and 1458, counted HacTBekta§'s shrine as one of the two most popular pilgrimage sites in Anatolia at the time—the other one being the shrine of Seyyid Battal Gazl.44

Notwithstanding its earlier popularity, for about a century from the late fifteenth century onwards, the cult of HacTBektas. acquired its ultimate shape and significance. It was during this period that the legends and traditions concerning Had

Bekta§ and other members of the later Bektashi pantheon were first put into writing.

This textualization of hitherto orally transmitted Bektashi lore was closely followed by the remodeling and expansion in size of the shrine complex of HacTBekta§ due to further additions in the first half of the sixteenth century. At the beginning of this century the complex had consisted of only tombs and a small convent. The first decade of the sixteenth century, moreover, witnessed Bahm Sultan's thorough reorganization of the Bektashi order with its two distinct branches, namely the Babagans and the

Celebis.45

43 E. Zeynep Yurekli Gorkay, "Legend and Architecture in the Ottoman Empire: The Shrines of Seyyid Gazi and Haa Bektas" (PhD diss., Harvard University, 2005), esp. chapter II; and M. Baha Tanman, "Haci Bektas-i Veil Kulliyesi," DIA.

44 Georgius de Ungaria, Tractatus de moribus condictionibus et nequicia Turcorum, ed. and trans, into German by Reinhard Klockow, Schriften zur Landeskunde Siebenburgens, vol. 15; cited in Yurekli Gorkay, Legend and Architecture, 12.

45 For an insightful discussion of these converging developments and their interrelatedness, see Yurekli Gorkay, Legend and Architecture, esp. chapter IV. Although the Bektasi tradition asserts that the order took its final shape as we know it today under Bahm Sultan, Ahmet T. Karamustafa argues that "classical" Bektashi institutions emerged only by the seventeenth- century with the fusion of various "renunciatory" dervish groups, among them the Abdals, the

104 Before its institutionalization as such under the rubric of the Bektashi order, the memory of Had Bektas. seems to have survived and been perpetuated primarily among the Abdals of Rum. According to Fuad Koprulii, the Abdals—whose appearance in

Anatolia is traced as far back as the fourteenth century—constituted the main link between the BabaTs and the Bektashis within the larger historical trajectory of heterodox folk Islam in Anatolia. The Abdals, in other words, were the main inheritors of the legacy of the BabaT movement, which Koprulii believed, was the seminal event in the development of Anatolian heterodoxies. Hence, what accounted for the preservation of Had Bekta§'s memory among the heterodox circles in Anatolia in general and the Abdals of Rum in particular was connected to his being a leading hdlTfa, vicar, of the leader of the BabaT revolt.46

Despite Kopriilu's problematic conception of an insular heterodox tradition in

Anatolia inherited by successive heterodox circles within a linear and seamless evolutionary scheme, the picture he provides is significant for its recognition of some close historical connections between and fluidity among the various groups in question. Although the Veldtyetname connects HacIBektas/s spiritual silsila to Ahmed

YesevT and says nothing of his link to the leader of the BabaT revolt, it does indeed put forth the Abdals of Rum as the consciously targeted milieu of his spiritual mission.47

Congruently, many members of the later Bektashi pantheon were affiliated with this

Haydarls and the Kalender, under the Bektashi umbrella, "Kalender s, Abdals, Hayderis," 121- 29.

46 Koprulii, "Bektasjligin Men?eleri," 75; and "Anadolu'da islamiyet," 47-52.

47Velayetname-Gdlpinarli, 14-16.

105 Abdal milieu, including the famous Abdal Musa, who is often credited with further

disseminating the cult of HacTBekta§, particularly among the gazfs.48

A detailed description of the Abdals is provided in Mendkib-i Hvoca-i Cihdn ve

NetTce-i Can composed in 929/1522 by Vahidi, an Ottoman Sufi who like most mainstream Sufis was critical of these dervishes. According to Vahidfs portrayal, which is corroborated by assorted European travel accounts and Ottoman sources,49 the

Abdals, with their mostly naked bodies and shaved facial hair and heads, in addition to further antinomian practices, had much in common with the other contemporary itinerant dervishes, especially the Qalandans and the HaydarTs. But they were also distinguished from these other deviant dervish groups by their unique attire and paraphernalia, as well as by the tattoos and self-inflicted wounds on their bodies. Many elements in their appearance were symbolic of among other things their Shi'i inclinations, such as the pictures of'All's sword engraved on their chests and the Ebu

Muslim! hatchet they carried to indicate that they were the enemies of Imam 'All's enemies. Abdals are said to have believed in divine manifestation in humans (hulul) as well as in metempsychosis (tenastih) and in the cycle of existence (devir). They considered themselves aloof from prescribed religious observances and prohibitions, practicing instead the ritual ofsema and consuming ecstasy-inducing substances like hashish. The leading center of the Abdals of Rum was the Seyyid Battal GazT convent in

48 We owe this information to 'Asikpasazade, Apz., 205-206; Apz-Atsiz, 237-238. On Abdal Musa, see also Orhan F. Kopriilu, "Abdal Musa," DIA; for his hagiographic vita, see Guzel, Abdal Musa Velayetnamesi.

49 For a detailed account of the Abdals of Rum based on VahidI and Western travelers' reports, see Ahmet T. Karamustafa, God's Unruly Friend: Dervish Groups in the Islamic Later Middle Period, 1200-1500 (Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1994), 46-49 and 70-78.

106 Eski§ehir, and they deemed Sultan §uca'of the fourteenth century and Otman Baba of the fifteenth century to be the important masters of their path.50

Ahmet Yajar Ocak, bringing Koprulii's thesis concerning the larger historical trajectory of heterodox folk Islam in Anatolia to its logical conclusion, suggested that the Abdals, like their BabaT predecessors, should be regarded as an amalgamation of dervishes affiliated with different, albeit essentially similar, orders, including primarily the Qalandariyya, the Haydarlyya and the WafaTyya. What drew these different dervish circles together, aside from their shared origins in the larger Qalandarl movement, was their adherence to the cult of HacTBekta§—thus Ocak's portrayal of the Abdals as the

"first Bektashis," even though they were not yet called such.51

It is indeed beyond doubt that there was a close affinity and probably even a significant overlap between the Abdal and Bektashi milieux from the start of Had

Bektas/s spiritual career in Anatolia and that the two eventually blended with one another. Nonetheless, Ocak's thesis, to the extent that it implies an inevitable and seamless evolution of the Abdal milieu into that of the Bektashiyye, seems to be overly simplified; for the Abdals' assimilation into the Bektashiyye was in fact a gradual, and in all appearances a contested, process. Vahidfs treatment of the Abdals of Rum as a separate group in his Menakib-i Hvoca-i Cihan, distinct not only from the Qalandarls and the Haydarls but also from the Bektashis, suggests that a distinct Abdal circle survived

50 Ahmet T. Karamustafa (ed.), Vahidfs Menahb-i Hvoca-i Cihan ve NetTce-i Can, Sources of Oriental Languages and Literatures 17, ser. ed. SJnasi Tekin and Goniil Alpay Tekin (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University, 1993), fols. 41a- 47a; see also pp. 7-8 for a summary of the relevant entry in English.

51 "Haci Bekta§-i Veil," DM; Babailer isyani: Aleviligin Tarihsel Altyapisi Yahut Anadolu'da islam-Tiirk Heterodoksisinin Tesekkiilii, rev. 2nd ed. (Istanbul: Dergah Yayinlan, 1996), 174-177.

107 the formal institutionalization of the Bektashiyye as a collective entity under Bahm

Sultan.52 What, then, differentiated the Abdals from their (proto-)Bektashi cousins with whom they were unified in their adherence to the cult of HacTBekta§?

Unfortunately, the sources we have that would shed light on the internal dynamics of the Abdal-Bektashi symbiosis are very limited. Potentially most illuminating in this regard are the Velayetname and the Menahb of Otman Baba composed in 888/1484.53 The Velayetname portrays HacIBektas. as a relative late-comer to the Abdal milieu of the land of Rum. Many episodes thematizing the saint's initial poor reception by the Abdals of Rum assume a pre-existing Abdal structure and lore upon which the cult of HadBekta§ was later superimposed. The first such episode in the Velayetname took place the moment Had Bekta§ appeared at the border of the land of Rum. When he spiritually saluted the Abdals, all of whom were gathered together at the time, only a saintly woman named Fatima Baci, who was then preparing food for the Abdals, stood up in respect and returned his greetings. Being thus informed of the coming of Had Bekta§, the fifty-seven thousand Abdals decided to prevent him from entering their territory by blocking the road, but to no avail; Had Bektas. immediately transformed into a dove and flew over the barrier formed by the Abdals' "wings of sainthood" (veldyet kanadlan), landing in this form on a rock in Sulucakarahoyiik. After this, an Abdal by the name of Haci Dogrul transformed into a hawk and flew to

Sulucakarahoyiik to pounce upon the saint. But before Had Dogrul had a chance to

52 Karamustafa, Vahidfs, 5-14.

53 Go'cek Abdal, Odman Baba. For an insightful analysis of it, see Halil inalcik, "Dervish and Sultan: An Analysis of the Otman Baba Velayetnamesi," in The Middle East and the Balkans under the Ottoman Empire: Essays on Economy and Society (Bloomington: Indiana University, 1993), 19-36.

108 overpower him, HacTBekta§ returned to human form, grabbed the hawk by his neck, and squeezed until he lost consciousness. When Had Dogrul came back to his senses,

HacTBektas. reproached him, saying he himself had come in the form of the mildest

(mazlum) creature he could find, but the Abdals in their turn confronted him in the form of a cruel (zalim) creature. Following this dramatic episode and beginning with

Had Dogrul, according to the Velayetndme the Abdals came to recognize HacIBektas/s spiritual superiority and began paying homage to him.54 But theVelayetname also makes it clear that it took some members of the Abdal community longer than others to come to terms with HacIBektas/s uninvited entrance into their realm. For example, in a subsequent episode, when the Abdals were going as a group to the presence of the saint to pledge their allegiance to him, one of them, Tapduk Emre, refused to go along because he had not seen anyone named Had Bekta§ in the initial assembly (dost dwani) where all the saints' received their rightful share (nasib). Only after the two met on a different occasion and after Had Bektas. proved to Tapduk Emre by showing him the green mole on his hand that he was in fact the one who made the distribution of the saints' nasibs in the initial assembly did Tapduk also acknowledge HadBekta§'s authority. This is in fact how Tapduk is said to have received his name, which literally means "we have bowed down/submitted."55

Otman Baba's Menahb from the late fifteenth century confirms that Had Bektas, eventually came to be revered as a true saint (sahib-i veldyet) and as the kutb (chief saint

Velayetname-Golpinarli, 17-20

Ibid., 21.

109 of the age) by the Abdals.56 But while HadBekta§ as Imam 'All reincarnate was elevated to the position ofserge§me, fountainhead, by the Bektashis, there is no sign that he occupied a comparable position in the Abdal pantheon. It is noteworthy in this regard that Otman Baba himself is depicted in his Menakib in terms no less glamorous than

Had Bektas. is depicted in this work or for that matter in the Velayetname. Otman Baba is variously portrayed in his vita as the kutb of his own time57; as the embodiment of

Divine Truth (Hakk); as the bearer of the secret mystery, sirr, of the four major

Prophets, Adam, Moses, Jesus and Muhammad58; as well as the embodiment of various earlier saints, including Sari Saltuk and Had Bekta§.59 The salient lack of any references to Had Bektas. in the entry on the Abdals by VahidI, especially when contrasted with the case of Bektashis who were described by the same author as (allegedly) modeling themselves strictly according to the example of HacTBekta§, similarly corroborates the idea that the saint's legacy was appraised differently by the two groups.60

VahidI reports that the Abdals' kabe was the "Seyyid Battal GazI Ocagi" and that the lamps they carried were symbolic of this attachment.61 Sayyid Battal GazT, who thus seems to have occupied the pinnacle of the Abdal pantheon, was an eighth-century

56 Go'cek Abdal, OdmanBaba, 53.

51 Ibid., 65,185.

58fbfd.,134,159.

59 Ibid., Ill, 239.

50 Karamustafa, Vahidts, 7-8,10.

61 Ibid., 8.

110 Arab warrior of sayyid descent known for his struggle against the infidels on the Arab-

Byzantine frontier in southeastern Anatolia.62 His once long-lost grave is believed to have been miraculously re-discovered by means of a dream by Sultan 'Ala'eddin's mother at the beginning of the thirteenth century. At this site Sayyid BattaTs convent was subsequently built, which before its eventual absorption into the Bektashi milieu, served as the central Abdal institution.63 As the Velayetndme relates it, Had Bektas/s visit to the site cleared up any remaining suspicions regarding its genuineness. When he arrived there, Had Bektas. is said to have greeted Sayyid Battal by saying "Peace be upon you, 0 my fountain head," to which Sayyid Battal replied, "And peace be upon you, 0 my city of knowledge." Following this exchange, Had Bektas. became a limitless ocean and Sayyid BattaTs grave became a boat floating on that ocean. But just as they reverted back to their original forms, Sayyid BattaTs grave turned into a boundless ocean wherein Had Bektas, floated like a boat.64 This legendary anecdote is noteworthy, not only for suggesting a special affinity between the two saints beyond the confines of temporality, but also for its attribution to Sayyid Battal of a spiritual position on par with HacTBekta§. This can be read simultaneously as an attempt to legitimize retrospectively the superimposition of the cult of HacTBekta§ onto the pre-existing

62 The legend of Sayyid Battal GazT is preserved in the Turkish-language Battalname, the earliest extant copy of which dates to the fifteenth century; see Yorgos Dedes (ed.), Battalname: Introduction, English Translation, Turkish Transcription, Commentary and Facsimile, 2 vols., Sources of Oriental Languages and Literatures 34, ser. ed. Sinasi Tekin and Gomil Alpay Tekin, (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University, 1996).

63 For the architectural history of Sayyid BattaTs shrine complex, see Yiirekli Gorkay, Legend and Architecture, 45-52 and 95-111.

"Velayetname-Golpinarli, 70-71.

Ill Abdal lore and as an indication of the persisting clout of earlier Abdal icons among the

Velayetname's intended audience.

Thus it seems clear that the Bektashi-zation of the earlier Abdal pantheon

involved a reordering of its internal structure, with the cult of HacTBekta§

institutionalized as its pinnacle. We may therefore surmise that the persistent Abdal

identity at least at one level represented a stance of resistance to such a hierarchical

reconfiguration. A close reading of the Menakib of Otman Baba, furthermore, brings to

light other aspects of the cult of Had Bekta§ that may have been subject to contestation

between the Abdals and the early, or proto-, Bektashis. Otman Baba's Menakib verifies

that the two groups circulated within the same environment, but that their relations

were more tension-ridden than harmonious. While the various Bektashi babas with whom Otman Baba came into contact consistently failed to appreciate fully the

spiritual pre-eminence of Otman Baba as the kutb of his time,65 Otman Baba in turn

regarded the babas in question as his spiritual inferiors, if not as essential charlatans.

But even more striking than his strained relations with the Bektashi babas is Otman

Baba's starkly critical posture vis-a-vis the shaykh of the Had Bektas. convent, Mahmud

£elebi. In one episode, for instance, when Mahmud £elebi comes to visit him with his dervishes, Otman Baba bars his Abdals from showing respect to the uninvited guest whom he also insults through sarcastic comments about his turban and robe.66

Underlining Otman Baba's disfavor for Mahmud Celebi and the various other babas

65 Go'cek Abdal, Odman Baba; see, for example, 85 and 105; a Bektashi baba named Mii'min Dervls, in fact, tries to win over the Otman Baba's abdals into his own circle if disciples, p. 140.

66 Ibid., 239-240.

112 appears to be his larger aversion to institutionalized Sufism, an aversion which was in fact a common characteristic of the entire antinomian dervish movement in medieval

Islam.67 It is meaningful that Otman Baba's particular target in this regard was the

Bektashis, a likely sign of the Abdals' discontent with the co-optation of one of their main icons, namely HacTBekta§, into institutionalized Sufism.

There may yet be a further layer to Otman Baba's disapproval of Mahmud

£elebi, with two points to consider: a) the possible ramifications of Koprulu's suggestion that the Abdals, when they eventually were assimilated, were assimilated specifically into the celibate Babagan branch of the Bektashi order; and b) the likelihood that Mahmud £elebi was one of the ancestors of the £elebi line.68 Ktipriilu connected the institutionalization of the celibate branch of the Bektashiyye, which up to this day maintains its structural and hierarchical independence from the £elebis, directly to the Abdals' influence.69 The apparent point of contention between the

Babagans and £elebis is the question of whether or not Had Bektas. fathered any children. While the Babagans emphatically reject the idea that Had Bektas. ever had any children, the £elebis claim to be the saint's biological descendants through his

67 Karamustafa, God's Unruly Friends, 25-31.

68 Aside from his epithet "celebi," the fact that he was the shaykh of the convent of Had Bektas—a position officially occupied by the Celebis during the Ottoman era—indicates that Mahmud Celebi was indeed one of the ancestors of the Celebi line. Otman Baba's condemnation in the Mendhb of those who gather people around themselves as the "son of so and so Celebi" (futon oglufulan Qelebi) is further indirect evidence supporting this inference; Go'cek Abdal, Odman Baba, 52. 'Asikpasazade also mentions a descendant of Had Bektash named Mahmud Celebi, son of Resul Celebi (bu HacTBekta§-ogh Mahmud Qelebi \dm ol Resul Qelebi'niin oghdur), who may be the same individual, Apz., 206; Apz-Atsiz; 238.

69 M. Fuad Koprulii, "Abdal," in Edebiyat Arastirmalan, vol. 2, 3rd ed. (Istanbul: Otiiken Yayinlan, 1989), 384.

113 marriage to Kadincik Ana, who they say was the daughter of idris, in whose house Had

Bektas. stayed after arriving in Sulucakarahoyuk. In contrast, the Babagans maintain that Kadincik Ana was the wedded wife of idris and that the relationship between her and the saint was purely spiritual. The Velayetname, corroborating the Babagans' position, shows Kadincik Ana as idris's wife. She is said to have become pregnant following a miraculous incident in which she drank the water with which the saint had made his ablutions and into which had fallen drops of blood from the saint's nose.70

The larger issue underlining the question of whether Had Bektas. had children was whether the saint lived a married or celibate life. Noteworthy in this regard is an anecdote in the Velayetname involving HadBekta§ and idris's brother, Saru ismall, who suspected Had Bekta§ of having an eye for Kadincik Ana. According to the account,

HacTBekta§ invited Saru Ismail one day to go apple picking together; when the saint climbed up the apple tree, Saru isma Tlsaw that the saint had two roses in place of his genitals, upon which he repented and apologized to the saint for having earlier questioned his true intentions.71 This anecdote clearly suggests that the saint had completely mortified his animal soul and was thus committed to celibacy. Such a picture of HadBekta§, which must have resonated with the ideals of the antinomian

Abdals, stands in sharp contrast to the image of the saint implied by his alleged paternity of the Qelebis, according to which the saint must have lived a life that accorded with the mainstream Islamic norms of marriage and reproduction. For Otman

70 For the £elebi position on the issue, see Ulusoy, Hixnhxr Haci Bekta§, 29-39; and for the Babagan perspective, see Noyan-Bekta§ilik, 1: 24-27.

71 Velayetname-Gdlpinark 32-33.

114 Baba, in other words, the idea that a true Abdal like Haci Bekta§—and Haci Bektas. is indeed referred to as an Abdal multiple times in the Velayetname72—had biological offspring must have been anathema, thus his aversion to Mahmud £elebi. The condemnation in the Menalqb of Otman Baba of those "who come out as the 'son of so and so £elebi,' and gather people around themselves" as well as Otman Baba's censure of one of the Bektashi babas on account of his having a wife can be read as lending further support to such an interpretation.73 Needless to say, Otman Baba himself is shown in his mendkib as a committed celibate, who like Had Bektas. had roses in place of genitals.74

Overall then, we have evidence suggesting that the adherents of the cult of Had

Bekta§ were not unified in how they interpreted it and that the shifting boundaries between Abdal and Bektashi circles were to some extent defined and re-defined by a complex process of internal negotiations regarding the saint's legacy. Seen from this perspective, the dual structure of the Bektashiyye, rather than being an innovation of

Balim Sultan as is commonly assumed, was most likely a way to accommodate two alternative conceptions of the cult of HadBekta§ under the same banner and perhaps thereby a way to facilitate the integration of the Abdals of Rum into the institutional network of the order.

Ibid., see. for eg., 10.

Go'^ek Abdal, OdmanBaba, 52,141.

Ibid., 38.

115 IV) The Ottoman State and the Bektashi Order

The Ottomans' gradual transformation from a small Turkmen principality into a

centralized empire was accompanied by far-reaching shifts in policy and religious

ideology. These policies in turn brought about the marginalization of various groups,

some of whom were active participants in the early Ottoman project but were deemed

undesirable elements under the new imperial order. Among these were the frontier

warriors, the gazis, who represented centrifugal forces against political centralization;

the itinerant dervishes, whose antinomianism conflicted with the new orthodox vision

of the empire; and the nomads, who resisted a sedentary lifestyle.75

Of the dervish groups in question, the Abdals of Rum are the first to come to

mind. 'A§ikpa§azade counts the "Abdalan-i Rum" as one of the three mobile groups

(ta'ife) active during the early Ottoman era, the others being the Gaziyan-i Rum and the

Baciyan-i Rum. Dervishes who appeared in the Ottoman chronicles as having accompanied the early Ottoman Sultan s during their gaza expeditions and who bore titles such as Abdal, haha, and dede are believed to have belonged to this group. These itinerant dervishes, aside from providing spiritual legitimacy for the early Ottoman project, were engaged in Islamizing local Christian populations as well as the pagan nomads. This is why, despite their antinomianism and despite their ever-strained relations with the orthodox ulema, they were for the most part tolerated and even occasionally patronized by the central authorities. We see this precarious position of the dervishes in question most dramatically in the mendhb of Otman Baba, where he is

75 For the different elements of the frontier milieu and their gradual marginalization under the classical Ottoman order, see Kafadar, Between Two Worlds, 138-50.

116 shown on the one hand being offered financial favors by the Ottoman central

authorities and on the other hand being investigated on multiple occasions for his

"heretical" beliefs and practices.

Nevertheless, relations between the Ottoman authorities and the antinomian

dervish circles in general and the Abdals of Rum in particular seem to have taken a turn

for the worse with the emergence of the Safavid-led Kizilbash movement, which

culminated in the formation of the Shi'i-Safavid dynasty in Iran in 1501 under Shah

Ismail. The Kizilbash movement, which constituted the most radical and formidable challenge to the classical Ottoman order, found a strong base among the groups who were pushed to the margins of the Ottoman imperial order.

The Ottoman state responded to the formidable military and ideological challenge coming from the Safavids within the framework of a two-tiered policy, which combined active persecution76 with efforts to tame "heterodox" circles under the

Bektashi umbrella as cast, or re-cast, by Balim Sultan. The latter policy is attributed originally to BayezTd II, who appointed Balim Sultan as the shaykh of the central

Bektashi convent in 1501.77 Probably not coincidentally, it was also during Bayezld's

76 This aspect of Ottoman policy has been comprehensively treated by scholars thanks to the relatively substantial number of relevant miihimme records in the Ottoman archives; see, for example, Ahmet Refik, Onaltina Asirda Rafizilik ve Bekta§ilik (Istanbul: Muallim Ahmet Halit Kitaphanesi, 1932); Hanna Sohrweide, "Der Sieg der Safaviden in Persien und seine Ruckwirkung auf die Schiiten Anatoliens im 16. Jahrhundert," Der Islam 41 (1965): 95-223; Colin Imber, "The Persecution of the Ottoman Shi'ites According to the Miihimme Defterleri, 1565- 1585," Der Islam 56, no. 2 (1979): 245-73; Saim Sava?, XVI. Asirda Anadolu'da Alevilik (Ankara: Vadi, 2002); Ahmet Hezarfen and Cemal §ener, Osmanh Arsivi'nde Miihimme ve trade Defterleri'nde Aleviler-Bektasiler (Istanbul: Karacaahmet Sultan Dernegi Yayinlan, n.d.).

77 Enver Behnan §apolyo, Mezheplerve Tarikatlar Tarihi (Istanbul: Tiirkiye Basimevi, 1964), 320; Irene Melikoff, Haci Bektas: Efsaneden Gergege (Istanbul: Cumhuriyet Kitaplan, 1998), 208-209; Faroqhi, "Conflict, Accomodation," 177.

117 reign that the textualization of the Bektashi hagiographies, notable for their emphasis

on the affinity of their protagonists with the gari milieu of the early Ottomans, and the

architectural activity in the HacIBekta§ convent, largely under the patronage of

leading qazx families, reached their peak. HacIBektas. was commonly venerated as a

saint by many segments of the frontier environment, but his cult appears to have taken

on a new meaning with the marginalization of this milieu under the new imperial order. The Bektashiyye, organized around his legacy, provided a relatively protected space within the reconfigured Ottoman polity for those peripheralized elements who were willing to reconcile with the new imperial order.

Ottoman central authorities were, of course, keenly aware of the continuing susceptibility to Safavid influence of the dervishes and communities affiliated with the cult of HacIBektas. and of their correlating propensity toward anti-Ottoman activities.

That even the central convent in Kir§ehir was not fully beyond the reach of the

Safavids' sway is proved by the famous Kalender £elebi uprising of thel520s. Kalender

£elebi claimed to be a descendant o(HdcTBekta§, who replaced Balim Sultan as the postni§Tn of the Had Bekta§ convent and whose grave is said to be located in the courtyard of the convent.78 According to Bektashi tradition, the Had Bekta§ convent

78 A. Haydar Avci, Alevi Tarihinde Bir Kesit: Kalender Qelebi AyaHanmasi (Ankara: AAA Yaymlan, 1998). The £elebis believe that Kalender £elebi was a descendant of Had Bektas and a brother of Balim Sultan, Ulusoy, HiinharHaci Bekta§, 78, but the Babagans reject Kalender Qelebi's, as well as Balim Sultan's, descent from the saint, Noyan-Bekta§ilik, 1:123-125. Ottoman sources also talk of Kalender Qelebi as a descendant of Had Bektas; for example, see, PecevT Ibrahim Efendi, Tarfh-i Pegevi, ed. Fahri Q. Derin and Vahit £abuk (Istanbul: Enderun, 1980) 1:120. PecevI introduces Kalender £elebi as such: "HdcIBekta§-i Veilevlddindan ya'niKadincikAna'dan burnt kam tamlasiyla nefes ogh olan Habtb Efendi evlddindan ol td'ifeniin i'tikddi mucebince Kalender ibni Iskender ibni Balim Sultan ibni Resdl Qelebi ibni Habib Efendi'diir."

118 was closed down after the Kalender £elebi uprising,79 to be re-opened a couple of decades later under the leadership of Sersem Ali Baba, previously an Ottoman vizier.80

Although Kalender £elebi was the only anti-Ottoman uprising that involved the upper echelons of the Bektashi order, it was not the last one that implicated the central convent in Kir§ehir. The so-calledDiizmece Shah Ismail uprising, which took place in

1577 under the leadership of a messianic figure claiming to be Safavid Shah Ismail, was initiated with a ritual sacrifice performed at the shrine of Had Bekta§. A muhimme entry from the same year suggests that the Bektashis in Kir§ehir were investigated in connection with the revolt, as the entry reports "the absence of any Kizilbash united with Iran in the environs of Kir§ehir."81 That such an investigation took place implies that the environs of the Had Bektas shrine were not entirely cleared of suspicion of pro-Safavid activities even at this later date. But assuming that what was reported was accurate, the same muhimme entry can also be read as a sign of the Ottomans' success in keeping the central Bektashi convent free of anti-Ottoman activities.

Absence of any signs of official repression targeting the convent in Kir§ehir or any other major Bektashi convent in the muhimme records from the period between

1560-1585, which witnessed the second wave of Kizilbash persecutions after the first one under Sultan Sellm I, corroborates the supposition that overall the Bektashi order

79 Remzi Giirses, Haabektas Rehberi, (Ankara: Sanat Matbaasi, 1964), 44, cited in Suraiya Faroqhi, "The Tekke of Haci Bektas: Social position and Economic Activities," International Journal of Middle East Studies 7 (1976), 185.

80 Ahmed Rif at, Mirdtiil-Makasid fiDefi'l-Mefdsid (Istanbul: ibrahlm Efendi Matba'asi, 1293[l876]), 189.

81MD 31: 218 (12 Cemaziyu'1-ewel 985/1577), cited in Bekir Kutukoglu, Osmanh-iran Siydsi Miindsebetleri (1578-1612) (Istanbul: Istanbul Fetih Cemiyeti, 1993), 11.

119 remained on relatively good terms with the Ottoman authorities.82 But the same was

not true for the communities of some other convents, among them that of Sayyid GazI,

the central gathering place of the Abdals of Rum. Although Sayyid Gazl's shrine

continued to be visited by the Ottoman sultans on their war campaigns as a sign of their reverence to the saint's legacy and was occasionally granted financial favors for

its upkeep,83 the Abdals residing at the convent came under a sweeping investigation following Kanunfs third and last campaign against the Safavids (1553-55). As a result, the convent was taken away from the Abdals and subsequently governed by a

NaqshbandT shaykh for a period; a madrasa was also built next to it.84 A mxihimme record from 1572 shows that the Abdals were later allowed to come back to the convent but on the condition that they abandoned their antinomian practices.85 It seems that the

Ottoman authorities' persistent efforts to ensure the "orthodoxy" of the Abdals at the

Seyyid GazI convent was still far from successful as late as 1591, when the local judge appealed to the sultan on behalf of his orthodox constituency to ban the annual festival at the convent, known as mayhd, where numerous forms of mischief allegedly took place.86

82 Faroqhi, "Conflict, Accomodation," 173-174.

83 Nasuhii's-Silahl (Matrakci), Beyan-i Menazil-i Sefer-i 'Irakeyn-i Sultan Siileyman Han, ed. Huseyin G. Yurdaydm (Ankara: Turk Tarih Kurumu, 1976), 63.

84 Kopriilu, "Abdal," 376-378; also see Suraiya Faroqhi, "Seyyid Gazi Revisited: The Foundation as Seen through Sixteenth and Seventeenth-Century Documents," Turcica 13 (1981): 91-96.

85Ahmet Refik, Onaltinci AsirdaRafizilik, 32, doc. no. 42.

86 MD, 73: 302: 681 (19 ZTl-ka'de 999/ 1591), cited in Faroqhi, "Seyyid Gazi Revisited," 96, n. 21; and quoted in Yurekli Gorkay, Legend and Architecture, 158-159, n. 314.

120 Evliya' Celebi, who visited Sayyid Gazi in the mid-seventeenth century, described it as a Bektashi convent and the dervishes in it as fully within Sunni orthodoxy (ehl-i stinnet vel-cemaat).87 Evliya"s latter claim should, of course, be taken with a grain of salt, considering that he portrayed in similar terms the dervishes inhabiting the various other Bektashi convents within Ottoman realms he visited. To the extent it was aimed at assimilating into the fold of Sunni Islam the Bektashi order and through their mediation the larger "heterodox" milieu within their realms,

Ottoman policy seems for the most part to have been a failure. Indeed, reflecting the tension between Sunni orthodox sensibilities and the ostensible heterodoxy of the

Bektashiyye, the Ottoman official discourse insistently tried to disassociate the patron saint of the order from the tainted reputation of his "heretical" followers by depicting him as a Sufi fully within the bounds of Sunni Islam.88 There is, however, no sign that such an orthodox image of HacIBektas, ever took root among his followers, notwithstanding occasional cases of Bektashis outwardly adopting a Sunni identity as a form of taqiyya to avoid official censorship, which may well have been the case during their encounters with Evliya'.

However, Evliya"s classification of Sayyid GazT as a Bektashi convent does in fact concur with the larger historical trend of gradual absorption of the Abdal milieu into the Bektashi order. As mentioned before, many Abdals appear to have adopted a

87 Evliya'-SN, 3:12.

88 For example, sixteenth-century Ottoman historian Hoca SadeddTn writes, "Keramet sahibi velilerden biri idi.. Kimi sapkinlar yalan yoldan ana kendilerini baglamak cabasi gosterirler. Ama, onun temiz eteginin bu pislerin baglanif camurlanndan an oldugu buyiikler katinda bilinmektedir." Hoca Sadettin Efendi, Tacix't-Tevarih, ed. ismet Parmaksizoglu, 5:18. See n. 14 above for other related Ottoman sources.

121 Bektashi identity, even if only superficially at first, to elude the persecution to which

they were subjected due to their connections with the Safavids. The contemporary

Ottoman sultans, invigorating BayezTd If s earlier policy, seem to have encouraged this

move, especially from around the turn of the seventeenth century onwards. S. Faroqhi

has tried to explicate the lack of any large-scale campaigns to persecute heterodox

circles actively after around 1600 in terms of such a conscious policy choice. The policy

involved the establishment of a mechanism that would facilitate central control over the larger Bektashi milieu by granting to the £elebi shaykhs in Kir§ehir the prerogative of recommending the choice of leaders for all related convents—according to Faroqhi, for the first time in 1019/1610. Documents from the first half of the eighteenth century confirming this prerogative state that the leaders of "those convents referred to in the common speech of the people with the title of baba, dede, abdal, dervish, sultan" were to be appointed upon the recommendation of the current shaykh of the Had Bektas, convent.89 The rather vague and inclusive classification of the convents in question is quite noteworthy and suggests that the Ottomans were trying to expand the scope of the institutional network of the Kir§ehir-centered Bektashi order by bringing under its umbrella all those communities and convents affiliated with the cult of Had Bekta§.

Abdals of Rum were undoubtedly among those targeted under this classification, as the first three appellations, namely baba, dede, and abdal, were most typical of this milieu.

89 "memalik-i mahmse-i sahdnemde vak'i baba ve abdal ve dervis ve sultan namiyle ebine-i nasda mezkur nazargah ve tekye ve hankah ve zaviyelerde..," quoted from a document dated ZT'1-hicce 1143/1731, in appendix to Celalettin Ulusoy, Winter Haci Bektas, doc. no. 1. The original of the document is in the private archives of the £elebi family.

122 The Ottomans' policy of promoting the Bektashi order as the sole representative of the communities affiliated with the cult of Had Bekta§, although not ineffective, does not appear to have been an immediate success in every case. Full assimilation of the

Abdals into the Bektashi milieu was indeed the result of a prolonged process, which according to Koprulii was completed only through the course of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Yet even then, some Abdal circles remained outside the sphere of influence of the official Bektashi order, instead coalescing with the rural Kizilbash milieu.

V) The Safavids, the Abdals of Rum, and the Legacy of Haci Bektas.

Shah Ismail's poems, written under the penname KhataT, include plentiful evidence suggesting his self-conscious allure among those associated with the religious and military ethos of the gazrmilieu in general and with the Abdals in particular. A couplet from the divan of Shah Ismail best illustrates this fact:

Those who avowed attachment to the sons of the Shah

Were the Ahis, the Gazls and the Abdals.90

With regard to the Abdals of Rum specifically, we see Shah Ismail paying homage to them in a number of other poems, as in the case of his well-known

Nasftiatname, a long poem in the genre of mesnevT in which he implores God to forgive

90 "Sahun evladma lkrar idenler / AhTler, Gaziler, Abdallar oldu" cited in Melikoff, Haa Bektas, 178, fromIICanzonierediSahIsmailHata'T, ed.TourkhanGandjeT(Naples, 1959), 15, poem 13. In another version of this couplet, the ahis are replaced by the Sufis: "Sahun oladina ikrar edenler/ SufTler, gazller, abdallar oldi," Sah Ismail Hata'iKulliyati, ed. Babek Cavansir and Ekber N. Necef (Istanbul: Kakniis Yayinlan, 2006), 225. But even if this latter version is the authentic one, there are other poems by Shah Ismail where he connects his mission to the gazi ethos, hence the point that is made remains valid. For the gazi background of the Safavids, see also Mazzaoui, M. "The GhazT background of the Safavid State," IqbalReview 12, no.3 (1971): 79-90.

123 his sins for the sake of "Urum Abdallari" in addition to various other icons of the

Kizilbash circles and of Shi'i Islam in general.91

Interestingly enough, there are no references to HacTBektas. in Shah Ismail's poems, except in those of suspected authenticity.92 As I will discuss in detail in chapter four, the earliest copies of Buyruk manuscripts similarly do not mention the saint, despite occasional allusions to the Abdals. But the absence of HacTBekta§ as such in the earlier Kizilbash/Alevi texts cannot be taken as sign of Safavid indifference to the saint's legacy. It is only reasonable to assume that the Safavids must have been associated with the legacy of the saint at least to the extent that it was part of the Abdal heritage. Many lines of evidence, albeit scattered, lead to this conclusion. It has already been mentioned that two of the most important Kizilbash uprisings of the sixteenth century, namely the Kalender £elebi and Diizmece Shah Ismail uprisings, both implicated the central Bektashi convent in Kir§ehir in different ways. On another front, what appears to be a note of ownership found in the oldest extant Buyruk copy dated

1021/ 1612 records the name of an individual who was apparently a (biological or spiritual) descendant of Had Bekta§,93 an indication of the fact that Buyruk manuscripts

91 "Urum Abdallari sidki hakiciin/ Horasan pirleri liitfi hakiciin... Kebul et bu du'ani ya ilahl / Ki sensen cumleniin pust (i penahi," §ah Ismail Hata'i Kiilliyah, 661-662.

92 This observation was made earlier by Irene Melikoff, "Hatayi," Ulushrarasi FoMor ve Hoik Edebiyati SemineriBildirileri (Konya: Konya Turizm Dernegi Yayinlan, 1976), 315. The question of the authenticity of poems referring to Had Bektas attributed to Shah Ismail is also dealt with in Ibrahim Arslanoglu, $ah Ismail Hatayi:veAnadoluHatay fieri (Istanbul: Der Yayinlan, 1992), 248; Arslanoglu argued here against Sadeddin Nfizhet Ergun, who earlier treated such poems that he found in Alevi manuscripts as authentic, HatayiDivani: $ah tsmail-i Safevi, Hayati ve Nefesleri (Istanbul: Maarif Kitaphanesi, 1956), 24-25.

93 "PasaAgazade Mehmed 'an evlad-i HadBektas Veil, kaddesallahusirrahu'l-celTve'l-hafi,

124 circulated among certain "Bektashi" groups. There is also evidence pointing to the presence of dervish circles affiliated with the cult of HacTBektas. within Safavid realms.

That such groups indeed existed within the Safavid territories is supported by the findings of an Azerbaijani scholar, M. Nemet, who reported some epigraphic evidence that shows the region of Shirvan as an area where "Bektashi" dervishes were active during the Safavid era.94 Of these pieces of evidence, the most important one is the inscription found on the mausoleum of a certain Baba Samit in the village of §ihlar located in the region of Sabirabad of modern Azerbaijan. In the text of the inscription as read by Nemet, Baba Samit is identified as a sayyid from the line of Imam 'All and as a son of HacTBektas. (Hazret-i Sultan 'All oglu Hazret-i Had Bekta§oglu... Hazret-i Baba Samit).

The same inscription states that the mausoleum over Baba Samit's tomb was built in the month of Dhu'l-Qa'da of the year 993/1585 by 'Abdulla Khan, the Safavid governor of Shirvan, during the reign of Shah Tahmasp. The date given in the inscription is problematic, however, considering that Shah Tahmasp died in 1576.95 This inconsistency, unless the result of a misreading of the inscription, may cast some doubt on the authenticity of the inscription, in which case we would have to assume it to be a later addition to the mausoleum. The author also refers to aferman dated 1704-1705 from the Safavid shah Husayn that discusses the appointment of khalifas over various

2 Te$rin-i sanlsene 20," Bisati, $eyh SafiBuyrugu, ed. Ahmet Tasgin (Ankara: Rheda-Wiedenbriick Cevresi Alevi Kiiltur Dernegi, 2003), fol. 27b; a shorter version of the same note without the date is also foundo n fol. 17b.

94 Meshedikhanim Ne'met, Azerbaycan'daPirler (Sosyal-ideolojik iktisadi-Siyasi Merkezler) [in Cyrillic alphabet] (Baku: Azerbaycan Dovlet Nesriyyati Polikrafiya Birliyi, 1992), 57-63.

95 Jbid., 58.

125 dervish groups in Shirvan, among which are those of Baba Samit (Baba Samit derv^leri).^

It is impossible to verify the relevant information, because the source of this ferman is

not provided; but if such a. ferman really exists, it would confirm that a certain Baba

Samit lived around Shirvan sometime before this date and that there was a community

of dervishes formed around his memory.

Further evidence pointing to a notable Bektashi presence within Safavid realms

is provided by the famous Ottoman traveler Evliya' £elebi. Evliya £elebi recorded the

existence of Bektashi convents and dervishes particularly in Iranian Azerbaijan and in

Iraq-i Ajam when he visited the region in 1065/1655. For instance, he writes of a major

Bektashi convent (tekye-i Bekta§iydri) attached to a maqdm of Imam Rida located

somewhere between Urmiya and Tabriz. According to Evliya', this was quite a sizeable

convent, because it housed three hundred "barefoot, bare-headed" dervishes of various

and sometimes little known orders (Zirtil ve Cevellakive Kalender Tve VahidTve Yesevive

FahrTve Bozdogarift. In the kitchen of the convent was a cauldron donated by Shah

Tahmasp; the cauldron, Evliya' claims, was so huge that one would need a five-step ladder to reach its bottom. The eighty cooks of the convent would cook the meat of thirty large-sized animals at once in this cauldron on the day of 'A§ure and serve it to the poor. In the larger shrine complex, moreover, there were thousands of chandeliers bestowed by the Safavid shahs and the local governors (her biri birer §ahin ve hanin yadigandir).97

Ibid., 63.

Evliya-SN, 4:193.

126 Even leaving room for exaggeration on the part of Evliya' in describing its grandeur, it is significant that there was a Bektashi convent attached to such a shrine complex apparently patronized by the Safavids. Evliya" s description of the convent as a

Bektashi convent is, of course, interesting considering the array of orders to which the dervishes residing in it belonged; this might indicate that while the convent was primarily the domain of the Bektashi dervishes, it also facilitated temporary or prolonged lodging for dervishes of other, albeit probably like-minded, orders, as well as housing visitors to the shrine in general. Evliya made a point in emphasizing that the dervishes residing in the convent were not, however, of the Sunni fold (amma Ehl-i

Sxinnet degillerdir); this is quite noteworthy consideringEvliya" s consistency in alleging the fully Sunni character of the Bektashi convents in the Ottoman territories.

According to Evliya', in addition, there were in Hamedan eleven Bektashi convents, of which he gives the names of three (tekye-i Geng Yar, tekye-i Imam lakx, tekye-i 'Arab

Cebbarive... §ahruh tekyesi).9* Without giving any details, Evliya' also notes the existence of multiple Bektashi convents in the city of Nahavand, along with convents belonging to the Haydarls, KalandarTs, and Vahidls (ve alti tekye-i dervi§an-i HayderTve Bekta§T tekyeleriveKalenderTtekyelerive VahidTtekyelerivardir)?9 Evliya' also makes an incomplete note about another Bektashi convent in Qazwin (Abadan-i tekye-i Bekta$iyan).10°

Although we are in complete darkness as to the nature of the formal relations, or the lack thereof, between the Bektashis in the Ottoman Empire and those in Safavid

98 Ibid., 209.

99 Ibid., 205.

100 Ibid., 218.

127 territories, the latter clearly must have been beyond the formal institutional network

of the Had Bekta§ convent in Kirsehir. The "Bektashis" in question were, in fact, most

likely successors of those Abdal circles who according to Kopnilu joined the Kizilbash

milieu. That in the mid-seventeenth century Evliya already spoke of them simply as

Bektashis does not exclude this possibility, considering that he speaks in similar terms

of the Abdal convent of Sayyid GazI, for example.

Vl-Conclusion

The historically multifaceted and dynamic nature of relations between the

Abdals of Rum, the two the branches of the Bektashi order, and the Alevi communities indicates the fluidity of boundaries between various groups associated with the cult of

HacTBekta§. Yet the different conceptions of the saint's legacy also became a marker for the competing institutional and political frameworks within which these distinct groups took shape and functioned. The itinerant Abdals appear to have adhered to a memory of Haci Bektas, that aligned with their ideal of non-conformity to societal norms and to have resisted the co-optation of the saint's legacy into the institutional framework of tariqa Sufism by the (proto-)Bektashis. The tension between the two camps seems to have crystallized around the question of whether Had Bektas, lived a married or a celibate life; to this date the dispute underlines the divide between the

Babagan and Celebi branches within the Bektashi order. Thus, Bahm Sultan's reforms around the turn of the sixteenth century, rather than causing the bifurcation of the

Bektashiyye, were more likely an attempt to contain the two alternative notions of the cult of the saint under a common rubric.

128 That the timing of Balim Sultan's reforms overlapped with the rising Safavid challenge was most likely not a coincidence, as these reforms were probably part and parcel of the Ottoman policy to promote the Bektashi order as the one and only legitimate representative of the legacy of Haci Bektash. As such, the Ottoman authorities sought to tame and establish a certain level of official control over various communities affiliated with the saint's cult, whose susceptibility to Safavid influence had been proven time and again. But the Ottomans achieved only partial success with these policies, since many Abdal/Bektashi circles remained within Safavid sphere of influence. In fact, Alevi documents originating from Iraq provide strong evidence suggesting that such dervish groups inhabiting various convents in Iraq intermediated relations between the Safavid shahs and their Kizilbash followers under Ottoman rule.

A more detailed reconstruction of this intricate web of relations will be attempted in the next chapter.

129 CHAPTER THREE

An Intricate Web of Relations: Bektashi Convents in Iraq and their Kizilbash Visitors

I- Introduction

In his pioneering study Geographical Distribution of the Bektashi published in 1929,

F. W. Hasluck included a short entry on the Bektashi convents (tekkesf in

Mesopotamia.2 He mentioned under this entry the existence of Bektashi convents in places such as Baghdad, Kazimiyya, Karbala, Najaf, and Samarra and suggested that these convents functioned primarily as rest houses for those visiting the Shi'i pilgrimage sites in these locations.3 More recently, Bedri Noyan provided some more specific, albeit fragmented, information concerning a number of Bektashi convents in

Iraq in his multivolume work Biittin Yonleriyle Bekta§ilik ve Alevilik, posthumous publication of which began in 1998.4 Aside from these two authors, virtually no other researcher so far has paid attention to these convents, resulting in a general ignorance in the field of the historical Bektashi presence in Iraq. By the same token, no one so far

1 Throughout this chapter, I have translated as "convent" such words as tekke, dergah, and zaviye, all of which mean "dervish lodge," although of varying size and importance.

2 Christianity and Islam under the Sultans, ed. Margaret M. Hasluck, 2 vols. (1929; reprint, Istanbul: Isis Press, 2000), 2:415.

3 About Sufi convents in general fulfilling similar extra functions, see Omer Liitfi Barkan/'Osmanh imparatorlugu'nda Bir iskan ve Kolonizator Metodu Olarak Vakiflar ve Temlikler: I. istila Devirlerinin Kolonizator Dervisleri ve Zaviyeler," Vakiflar Dergisi 2 (1942): 279- 386.

4 Noyan-Bektasilik, vol. 5 ofDergahlar. The author, Bedri Noyan, was the dedebaba, head, of the Babagan Bektashis from 1960 until his death in 1997.

130 has recognized the importance of these convents in achieving a more complete grasp of

the nature and evolution of the Alevi-Bektashi symbiosis.

By the nineteenth century, there were a dozen or more Bektashi convents in

Iraq. These convents can be categorized into two groups based on their locations. The

first group included the convents situated in the courtyards of the shrines of Shi'i

Imams. We know that there were Bektashi convents in the shrine complexes of Imam

Husayn in Karbala, of Imam 'All in Najaf, of Imam Miisa al-Kazim in Kazimiyya, and of

Imam Hasan al-'Askan in Samarra. The second group of convents, on the other hand,

included those that were structurally independent of any such major Shi'i sanctuary.

The convents of Gurgiir Baba and Hizir ilyas, both located in Baghdad, belong to this

group, in addition to a number of Bektashi convents in and around the region of

Kirkuk. I could not ascertain, however, the exact location of another Bektashi convent

called §ahln Baba; this may be another name for the Hizir ilyas Convent or it may be an

entirely different convent also located in Baghdad or in the Baghdad suburb of

Kazimiyya. Sources point to the presence of Bektashis in Iraq from the early

seventeenth century onwards, although they are not always clear on the origins and histories of the individual convents. There is evidence suggesting that the foundations of some of these convents pre-dated the Ottoman conquest of the region and that some of them were earlier affiliated with other dervish groups, as in the case of the Karbala convent, which was initially the domain of the Abdals of Rum.

It is known from oral reports that as late as the mid-twentieth century Alevi dedes relatively regularly visited Iraq, in particular Karbala, to have their genealogies renewed. Although the oral reports include very little concerning the exact itineraries

131 of these trips, this gap can be filled with information provided by Alevi documents

originating from Iraq, which as a group constitute the largest and second oldest layer of

documents found in the private archives oidede families. Alevi documents originating

from Iraq reveal that the dedes paid visits, among other places, especially to three

convents in that region: the convent in Karbala, that in Najaf, and the §ahln Baba

Convent. Of these, the Abdal/Bektashi convent in Karbala seems to have been of central

importance, since all the Alevi documents originating from Iraq were obtained or renewed at this convent—with the exception of the ones granted by the local naqtb al- ashraf (Turk. nakibu'l-e§raf) in Karbala. Both types of documents were then also ratified by dervishes from the other two Bektashi convents. Thus, the documents as a whole suggest a rather institutionalized relationship between these three convents and the

Alevi dedes in Anatolia. This finding, when considered in conjunction with the Alevi communities' primordial affinity with the Safavids, raises many interesting questions involving a matrix of connections between the Alevi communities, a group of Sufi convents in Iraq, and the Safavids: Who were the dervishes residing in these convents which the Alevi dedes visited on a relatively regular basis? When did they acquire a clear Bektashi identity and what kind of Bektashis were they? How did they relate to one another or to other Bektashi convents in Iraq as well as to the Bektashis in Anatolia and the Balkans? This chapter will tackle these questions in an effort to shed light on a previously unrecognized dimension of Alevi-Bektashi relations in the context of Iraq. I will argue that a historically informed treatment of these questions will have to take into account the critical position of this region in the military and ideological

132 contestation between the Ottomans and the Safavids, of which the Bektashi convents in

Iraq were most likely an integral part.

But before directly engaging with the questions raised above, first, I will provide an overview of sources concerning the little-known history of the Bektashiyye in Iraq, including in particular the relevant Alevi documents and second, I will reconstruct the individual stories of the related convents in the region.

II- Bektashi Presence in Iraq: Overview of the Sources i. Literary Sources

The Seyahatname of the famous seventeenth-century Ottoman traveler Evliya'

Celebi is the oldest literary source I could identify which refers to the Bektashi dervishes and convents in Iraq. In one place, Evliya' makes a brief and apparently incomplete note—to which he likely intended to make additions later, but never did—of the Bektashi convent "Hazret-i Hizir ilyas" on the shores of the Tigris River in

Baghdad.5 In another place, he mentions Bektashi dervishes in Samarra around the tomb of Imam MahdI. These dervishes, according to Evliya', lived off the donations of visitors to the area.6

A little over a century after Evliya', in the second half of the eighteenth century, the famous German traveler and scientist Carsten Niebuhr visited the region. His travelogue is the source of Hasluck's previously cited general remarks on the Bektashi convents in Iraq. Niebuhr also recorded the inscriptions of the Hizir ilyas Convent, the

5 Evliya-SN, 4:256.

6 Evliya-SN, 4: 359.

133 one mentioned earlier by Evliya', an inscription which is now submerged under water.7

This convent was built in the twelfth century as a ribat (military station on a frontier)

and later converted into a dervish lodge. Finally, Niebuhr provided interesting

information indicating a possible Kirkuk origin for Giirgiir Baba, the namesake of one of

the Bektashi convents in Baghdad.8

Another important source on the subject and one based on first-hand

information is a letter sent to A. Rifkl, author of the well-known book Bekta§i Sim.9 The

letter was sent to Rifkfby a certain "MuftT-zade Hazim Agah," who spent a number of years in Iraq in the 1880s and 90s as an Ottoman bureaucrat. His letter divulges a

sympathetic attitude on his part toward the Babagan branch of the Bektashiyye. Hazim

Agah connects the foundation of at least two of the Bektashi convents in Iraq to the

Ottoman sultans. Describing the convent in Karbala as belonging to the "Abdals of Rum, meaning the Bektashis" (Rum Ab(Mlanna,ya'nTBekta§ilere mahsvis), he claims that he saw with his own eyes its endowment deed {vakifname) composed during the reign of Sultan

Suleyman I, better known as Kanum (r. 1520-66).10 As I will discuss later in detail, there

7 Carsten Niebuhrs, Reisebeschreibung nach Arabien und andern umliegenden Ldndern, vol. 2., 1778; reprint, The Islamic World in Foreign Travel Accounts, ser. ed. Fuad Sezgin. vol.12, bk. 2 (Frankfurt: Institut fur Geschichte der Arabisch-Islamischen Wissenschaften, 1994), 2: 299-300 and table XLIII.

8 Niebuhr, Reisebeschreibung, 2: 339.

9 A. Rifkl, BektasTSim (Istanbul, 1325-1328 [1907-1910]). This book, in fact, includes four separate works: The first two are the two volumes of the original work with the same title and by the same author, the third one is a response to it written by Ahmed Cemaleddln Efendi, and the fourth volume is a rejoinder by Rifkl. Hazim Agah's letter is at the end of the second volume of Rifkf s original work, between pp. 150-160.

10 Rifkl, BektasiSvm, 159-160.

134 is indeed a copy of an endowment deed dated Safar 962/1554 in the archives mentioning the Abdals of Rum, but it is not clear whether this is the same waqfiyya that

Hazim Agah saw. Hazim Agah's letter also furnishes us with many details concerning the fate of these convents following the abolition of the Bektashi order in 1826. The

Bektashi convents in Iraq, like all the others in the rest of the Empire, were closed down after this date and their endowments were fully or partially confiscated by the state. Later, during the reign of Sultan 'Abdiilmecld (r.1839-61), Bektashis began reviving a number of these closed-down convents. According to Hazim Agah, during the time he was in the region there were four Bektashi convents still operational in

Iraq; these included the convents in Karbala, Najaf, Kazimiyya, and the Gurgiir Baba

Convent in Baghdad. Hazim Agah's letter was also among the sources used by Bedri

Noyan.

Another relevant source from the early twentieth century is 'All Su'ad's

Seyahatlerim.11 'All Su'ad visited Karbala in 1911, where he had long conversations with the shaykh of the Karbala convent, 'Abdiilhiiseyin Dede. Among other things,

'Abdiilhiiseyin Dede relayed some oral traditions to 'All Su'ad concerning the origins of the convent. Furthermore, he informed 'All Su'ad that the shaykhs of the Karbala convent had historically functioned as the geragas12 for the shrine of Imam Husayn. 'All

11 'All Su'ad, Seyahatlerim (Istanbul, 1332 [1916]), also published in the modern Turkish alphabet by N. Ahmet Ozalp (Istanbul: Kitabevi, 1996). Page citations are to this latter edition, hereafter "Su'ad-5zalp."

12 Qeraga is the person who lights the candles known as gerag during an Alevi or Bektashi communal ritual; see Esat Korkmaz, AnsiklopedikAlevilik-Bekta§ilik Terimleri Sdzliigii, 3rd ed. (Istanbul: Kaynak Yayinlan, 2003), "Cerag" and "geragci".

135 Su ad's travelogue shows us that the Bektashi convent in Karbala remained functional

until at least the early twentieth century.

The last group of works to provide us with data on the subject includes books

written by Iraqi authors on the history and historical sites of Iraq.13 They give us the

names and/or exact locations of a few Bektashi convents that other sources lack. They

also supplement our data concerning the nineteenth and twentieth century history of

these convents. In addition, they provide us with specific historical facts regarding the

establishment of the Giirgtir Baba Convent.

it Archival Documents

Some important records relating to the Bektashi convents in Iraq, in particular

to the convent in Karbala, are in the archives of the General Directorate of Endowments

in Ankara (Vakiflar Genel Mudurliigu Arsjvi, henceforth VGMA). The oldest and most

notable among these is the abovementioned waqfiyya dated Safar 962/1554. It mentions

a group of dervishes from among the Abdals of Rum residing in the Karbala convent,

but includes no explicit references to the Bektashis. The founder of the endowment was

13 'Abbas al-'AzzawT, Tdrtkh al- 'Iraq bayna ihtilalayn, vol. 5 (Baghdad: Matba'at Baghdad, 1935-49), hereafter '"Azzawl"; HamTd Muhammad Hasan al-DarrajT, al-Rubut via al-takaya al-Baghdadiyyafi al-'ahd al-'Uthmani(941-1336 h./1534-1917 m.): Takhtituhawa 'imdratuha (Baghdad: Dar al-Shu'un al- Thaqafiyya al-'Amma, 2001), hereafter "DarrajT"; 'Uthman bin Sanad al-Wa'ilT al-Basn, Matali'al- Suud:Tankh al- 'Iraq winsanat 1188 ilasanat 1242 h./l774-1826 m., ed. 'Imad 'Abd al-Salam Ra'uf and Suhayla 'Abd al-MajTd al-QaysT (Baghdad: al-Dar al-Wataniyya, 1991), hereafter "BasrT"; and Abdusselam Ulu^am, Irak'taki TiirkMimariEserleri (Ankara: Kixltur Bakanhgi, 1989).

136 endowment was someone by the name of Sadik Dede, himself apparently a member of the Abdals of Rum.14

In addition to this waqfiyya, in the archives are a number of nineteenth century records involving zdviyedar and miiderris appointments to the convent of Karbala, as well as a few similar records concerning other Bektashi convents in Iraq from the same period.

Hi. Alevi Documents

Ziyaretnames, or §efkatndmes as they are variously called in their own texts, are the oldest among the Alevi documents originating from Iraq. The few examples of this genre that have surfaced belong to the sixteenth century, with the earliest one dated

Muharrem 995/1548.15 They were all composed in Turkish at the shrine complex

(asitane) of Imam Husayn in Karbala. In addition to the seal of the local naqib al-ashraf, these documents often bear the seals of individuals with titles such as "sayyid" or

"dede," people who were most likely dervishes residing in the adjacent convent. The documents start out with an introduction highlighting the importance of visiting the tombs of the Twelve Imams and other saints and then continue by confirming that the

14 VGMA, defter no. 592 (Vakfiye-i Sadis), p. 39, translation in deftemo, 2114, p. 577, entry no. 67; what is found in the archives is not the original vakpyye, but a copy of it made in the nineteenth century.

15 For the transcribed text and a facsimile of this document, see my "16. Yiizyildan Bir Ziyaretname (Yazi Cevirimli Metin-Giinumuz Tiirkcesine Ceviri-Tipkibasim)," in In Memoriam §inasi Tekin, a special issue of the Journal of Turkish Studies/Tiirkluk Bilgisi Araftirmalan 31/II (2007): 67-79. For another example of this genre, referred to as a §efkatndme, dated Rebf ii'1-ewel 993/1585, see Kure§anh Seyit Kekil, Peygamberler He Seyiilerin §ecereleriveA§ireilerin Tarihi (Koln, n.d.), 184-18.

137 holder of the document fulfilled his obligations in this regard. A relatively detailed list

of sites visited by the individual in question is simultaneously provided.

Among the Alevi documents originating from Iraq, none dating from the

seventeenth century or the first half of the eighteenth century has so far surfaced. The only exception to this is a letter which as I conjectured in an earlier work16 must have been written in 1624 following the conquest of Baghdad by the Safavid shah, 'Abbas I. It was sent most probably from one of the Bektashi convents in Iraq to a certain Sayyid

Yusuf, who was a member of the Malatya branch of the ocak of Dede Kargm. The letter, in addition to relaying the good news of the conquest of Baghdad by the Safavids, states that a ritual of initiation was carried out in the name of Sayyid Yusuf and that a hxlafetname would subsequently be put together for him. The identity of its sender renders this letter particularly important for us because Sayyid BakT describes himself as a descendant of HacTBektas. (Bende-i§ah-i Velayet, SeyyidBaki, Evldd-iKutbul-'Arifin

Svltan HaaBekta§-i Veil).17 This letter, written in Turkish, is the oldest document at hand that alludes to a Bektashi presence in Iraq.18

16 Ayfer Karakaya-Stump, "Kizilba§, Bektasi, Safevi iliskilerine Dair 17. Yuzyildan Yeni Bir Beige (Yazi (Jevirimli Metin-Gunumuz Tiirkcesine Qeviri-Tipkibasim)," in Festschrift in Honor of Orhan Okay, a special issue of the Journal of Turkish Studies/Tiirkluk Bilgisi Arastirmalan 30/II (2006): 117-130.

171 have rendered the word evlad as "descendant," but it is not clear if what is meant is biological or spiritual descent, although my tendency is to understand it in the former sense. This is potentially a very significant difference for the BektasTs, because one of two branches of the order, the Babagans, believe that Had Bektas had only spiritual descendants (yd evladi) and so deny the Qelebis' claim to be his biological offspring {bel evladi).

18 For the transcribed text and a facsimile of this letter, see my Kmlbas, Bektasi, Safevi

138 The second group of Alevi documents consists of hilafetnames—a type of

icazetname, or Sufi diploma, given to those appointed to the post of halife (Arab.

khalifa)—granted to the Alevi dedes at the Karbala convent from the second half of the

eighteenth century onwards. The first part of each hildfetndme reads much like the

ziyaretndmes in both content and language, but differs from them on two points. First,

while the ziyaretndmes make only general references to the shrine complex {dsitdne}19 of

Imam Husayn, the hilafetnames specifically mention the convent (tekke or tekye) located

in that complex. The hilafetnames, moreover, include statements indicating the holder's

initiation into the path and his appointment as halife following the completion of the

necessary services and rituals in that convent. The oldest available example of this genre is dated 20 Cemaziyu'1-ahir 1170/1757 and is written half in Arabic, half in

Turkish. It was issued in the name of DervTs. 'All Dede, the cook (a§gi) at the Bektashi convent located in Karbala (Kerbeld'-yi mu'alldda vdkx olan HdcTBekta§-i Veli-kuddise sirruhul-'azTz- tekyesinde), as a record of his joining the path of the saints (tarik-i evliya) and the subsequent conferral on him, along with the document of the hildfetndme, of a number of objects signifying his order affiliation (yedine sofra ve gerdgi ve zeng [ve] tig ve

'alem ve icazet ve indyet virildi ve halifelik safd-nazar ve himmet olundi). The hildfetndme bears the seal of §eyh Mehmed Dede. In the main text §eyh Mehmed Dede is described as the

19 Asitdne, literally "threshold," can refer to the shrine of an important religious personality or to a major dervish convent located adjacent to the shrine of a prominent figure of the order in question; see Abdulbakt Golpinarh, Tasawuftan Dilimize Gegen Deyimler ve Atasozleri (Istanbul: inkilap ve Aka Kitabevleri, 1977), "Astan."

139 head of the convent in the shrine complex of Imam Husayn {tekyenisin-i imam Hiiseyin)20 and in his signature as the head cook of the Karbaia convent (aspibasi Kerbela-yi mualla).21 In addition to him, the document was ratified by a number of other dervishes from the same convent as well as by 'AlIDede from the convent in Najaf (tekyenisin-i

BektasTfTn-Necefii'l-esref) and by isma'Il Dede from the §ahln Baba Convent (tekyenisin-i

§dhin Baba). This hilafetname is the oldest document to be found so far in which the three convents in question appear with an explicitly Bektashi identity.22

It should be noted at this point that these hilafetnames issued at the Karbaia convent are different from the icazetndmes conferred on the Alevi dedes by the Celebi

Bektashis centered in Kir§ehir both in terms of content and in terms of the time period they cover. The icazetndmes granted by the Celebis include a genealogy connecting them to Had Bekta§, as well as a chain of initiation (silsile, Arab, silsila) tracing back to

Ahmed YesevT, the eponymous founder of the YesevT order. Neither the genealogy nor the silsila is found in the hilafetnames issued at the convent in Karbaia. Moreover, all the icazetndmes given by the Celebis that have so far surfaced date from the nineteenth and twentieth centuries and are thus of more recent date than the hilafetnames and other

20Tekkenisvn or tekyenisin, literally "one who dwells in a Sufi convent," can more specifically refer to a person in position of leadership in a particular convent; see Esat Korkmaz, Ansiklopedik Alevilik-Bekta§ilik,"Tekkem§m."

21 Dervishes serving in the asevi (kitchen) of the Bektashi convents are called asci (cook), and the head of all the c^cis is called a§ci baba, which is most likely the sense in which the word ascibasx was used here. Asevi is considered to be the most important among the twelve evs (lit. houses) that make up a major Bektashi convent, hence the prominence of the dervish in charge of it; see ibid, "Asci" and "Asevi."

22 FD, Mustafa iyidogan, member of the Sivas-Yildizeli branch of the ocak of Kizil Deli. For another, albeit much less elaborate, example of a hilafetname, see my "Sinemilliler: Bir Alevi Ocagi ve Asireti,"Kirkbudak2, no. 6 (Spring2006): 19-59, doc. no. 10.

140 documents issued at the Karbala convent.23 This shows that the Alevi ocaks relations

with the Karbala convent in Iraq predate their connections with the Celebis—a

conclusion that also tallies with the common belief among some of the Alevi ocaks in

central and eastern Anatolia that their affiliation with the £elebis is of relatively recent

origin as was discussed in chapter two of this dissertation.

The third group of Alevi documents includes those that were given to their

holders as proof of their sayyid-hood, their descent from the Prophet. They either come

in the form of short certificates (tadhkara, Turk, tezkere) issued by the naqib al-ashraf"in

Karbala or as longer pedigrees (shajara, Turk. secere) written in ornamented scrolls.

While both types of documents were always composed in Arabic, the shajaras were

ratified by dervishes from the nearby Bektashi convents in addition to the naqib al-

ashraf. For instance, when a certain Bektas, Dede from the ocak of Sinemilli which was

centered in the province of Maras, visited Iraq in the year 1207/1792, he first received a

tadhkara from the Karbala naqUo al-ashraf Murtada al-MusawT al-Husaynl. He

subsequently also obtained a long shajara ratified, in addition to the same naqib al- ashraf, by Haydar Dede from the convent in Karbala and by 'Abdiilgafur Dede from the convent in Najaf.24 We see that the tadhkaras granted by the naqib al-ashraf"in Karbala were also recognized by the kadi courts in Anatolia and were used as such by the Alevi dedes as official proof of their sayyid-hood.25

23 For a published example of icazetnames granted to the Alevi dedes by the £elebi Bektashis, see Mehmet Akkus, "19. Asirdan Bir Bektasi icazetnamesi," Tasawuf, no. 1 (August 1999), 27-39.

24 Karakaya-Stump, Sinemilliler, docs. no. 8, 9.

25 Ibid., docs no. 11, 12,13.

141 The fourth group of documents that bear the seal of dervishes from the Bektashi

convents in Iraq are duplicates of WafaTicazetndmes (Arab, ijaza), as discussed in the

previous chapter. This means that aside from granting and/or ratifying various original

documents, the dervishes residing in this convent also functioned as notaries

witnessing the duplication of these types of old documents coming from the Alevi ocaks

in Anatolia. Today, however, the Alevi dedes draw on these documents solely as

documentation of their genealogies and as proof of their sayyid-hood, referring to

them variously as shajaras or berats.26

Finally, among the Alevi documents originating from Iraq, we come across some

that may be described as amalgamations ofziyaretnam.es, hilafetnames, and shajaras.

These documents, mostly dating from the nineteenth century, must have been

compiled by combining parts of older documents belonging to these different genres.

Ill) Bektashi Convents in Iraq

i. Convents Linked to Imams' Shrines

The Convent in Karhala

The Karbala Convent, located in the courtyard of the tomb complex of Imam

Husayn in Karbala, was probably the most important Bektashi convent in Iraq. It was the source of many documents preserved in the family archives of the Alevi dedes. The

Babagan Bektashis, moreover, count it among the four major convents (dergahs) where

For an example of this duplication process, see my Sinemilliler, doc. "Erzincan-icazetname."

142 the initiation ritual for the celibate dervishes (miicerred erkani) could originally be

carried out27

According to Noyan it was known as the convent of the Abdals of Rum (Tekke-i

AbdaVm-i Rum) or as the Mii'min Dede Convent (Mu'mm Dede Dergahi). In the records of

the archives dating from the nineteenth century the name of this convent appears

similarly as the 'Abdulmu'min Baba Convent ('Abdu7-mu mm Baba Zaviyesi)2*; whereas in

its waqfiyya from the sixteenth century it is called the Husayniyya convent, obviously in

reference to the adjacent tomb of Imam Husayn. The waqfiyya, furthermore, notes that

it was also known as the Maydan (Turk. Meydan). In the Alevi documents the dervishes

residing in the shrine complex of Imam Husayn are simply identified as such

(tekkeni§Tn-i Imam Hiiseyin). Finally, 'AzzawT and a German work from the early twentieth

century refer to it as the convent of the dedes (dadawat).29

The Karbala convent appears to have fulfilled certain extra functions arising

from its specific location. Among other things, it operated as a guesthouse for the

visitors to Imam Husayn's tomb. Its shaykhs, moreover, served as the geragcis for the

27 Noyan: Bekta§ilik, 5: 266; later this ritual began to be carried out only in the dergah of Had Bektas in Kirsehir. Miicerred is the term used for celibate dervishes or babas of the Babagan branch of the Bektashiyye; see Esat Korkmaz, AnsiUopedikAlevilik-Bektasilik, "Miicerret" and "Mucerretlik."

28 VGMA, deftemo. 166 (Esas 3/l), entry no. 933. There are also records concerning this convent in defter no. 816 (Tafsil-i Arabistan), entry no. 287; defter no. 888 (Hiilasa Defteri), entry no. 1096; and defter no. 419 (Erzurum Asker), entry no. 1054.

29 'AzzawT, 152; and Arnold Noldeke, Das Heiligtum al-Husains zu Kerbela (Berlin: Mayer & Miiller, 1909), 11.

143 entire shrine complex.30 As reported to 'All Su'ad by 'Abdiilhiiseyin Dede, every day

before the evening prayers, the shaykh of the convent would go with the special gerag

in his hand to the tomb (makam) of Imam Husayn. The sayyids waiting for the shaykh at

the gate would light their candles from the flames of this gerag. Subsequently, with the

shaykh in front and the sayyids following him, all would enter the tomb of Imam

Husayn, place the candles on the candlesticks there, and pray. No lighting would be

allowed in the complex before the completion of this ritual.31 An Alevi document

largely confirms 'Abdulhiiseyin's testimony. This undated hilafetname, most likely

composed sometime towards the end of the eighteenth century, describes in some

detail the trip of an Alevi dede from Malatya to Iraq. According to the document, this

Alevi dede first traveled to Baghdad and upon visiting the sacred sites in and around that city was joined by HalTl Dede from the convent of §ahln Baba to go to Najaf and then to Karbala. While at the Bektashi convent in Karbala he carried out all the rituals expected from a halife, one of which involved the gerag ceremony almost exactly as described by 'Abdiilhuseyin Dede.32

30 'Abdiilhuseyin Dede uses the Persian compound "cerag-suz" instead of "ceraga"; for the meaning see n. 12 above.

31 Su'dd-Ozalp, 90.

32 "... Es-Seyyid Ibrahim Bagddd-i bihist-dbdd'a geliip anda vdki' olan §ahtn [Baba ve imam] Musd ve imam Muhammed el-Cevdd - raziya'llahu 'anhuma - Hazretleri'nin kabr-i seriflerin ziyaret ve [nezirlerin eda idiip] hakikatlii Haiti Dede He beraber imam 'All- raziya'llahu te'dla 'anhu ve kerremu'llahu vechehu - Hazretleri'nin miibarek seriflerin ziyaret idiip ve kurbanlann ve nezirlerin eda eyledikten soma §ah-i Kerbela imam Hiiseyin - raziya'llahu ['anhu] - Hazretleri'nin ziydretlerine mixserref olup ba'dehu tekye-i Haci Bektas-i VelT- kuddise sirruhul-'azizin- tekyesinde ayin-i tarfkat ve erkdn iizere kurbanlann bogazlayup ve halife kazamm ayxn-i dervi§an iizere kaynadup ciimle dervisana nezirlerin viriip ve Kirkbudak gerdgi rusen idiip ve Seyyidus-siiheda' ve imam 'Abbas Asitdneleri'nde bal mumlann yandurup ba'dehutarafimvzdankendinebiatveizinndmevir[ildi]..."FD, MuharremNaci Orhan, b. in the village of Mineyik, Arguvan-Malatya. The shrine complex of Imam 'Abbas mentioned in the document is in Karbala near the shrine of Imam Husayn. The document was ratified by Sayyid

144 'Abdulhiiseyin Dede also reported an oral tradition concerning the origins of his

convent. According to this tradition, the convent in Karbala was founded about five

hundred years ago by a Bektashi shaykh named 'Abdulmu'min Dede. The famous poet

FuzulT attached himself to this shaykh, serving under him in the post ofgeraga. Both

FuzulT and his shaykh are, moreover, said to be buried in the grounds of this convent.33

There is a common belief among the Babagan Bektashis that this ' Abdulmu'min

Dede met with the contemporary Ottoman sultan, who is often identified as KanunT

Sultan Siileyman. The most historically tenable version of this tradition was collected from among the Albanian Bektashis, who relate that 'Abdulmu'min Dede went to Iraq sometime around the mid-sixteenth century and began spreading the Bektashi order there while living in a tent near the tomb of Imam Husayn. During his encounter with

KanunT, 'Abdulmu'min Dede is supposed to have requested from the sultan the building of water canals for transfer of water from the Euphrates River into Karbala, a request which the sultan granted. Difficulties faced in the construction process were overcome thanks to 'Abdulmu'min Dede's prayers—a miracle which in turn added to his fame and

Mehmed Dede, the tekkeni§Tn of the convent in Karbala, and by HalTl Dede, the tekkeni§m of the §ahln Baba Convent; based on other Alevi documents sealed by the same individuals we can deduce that this document was composed sometime in the 1780s. The third ratifier of the document was the tekkeni§Tn of another convent in Baghdad {"hadimii'l-fukara §eyh lsmail(?) tekyeni§Tn-iBagddd-i bihi§t-dbad"), but it is not clear which convent is meant here. We do not come across this convent in other documents, which are almost always ratified by the tekkeni§m of the convent in Najaf in addition to the tekkeni§Tns of the Karbala and of the Sahln Baba convents.

33 Su'ad-Ozalp, 88-89. Some researchers question the truthfulness of claims which connect FuzulT to the convent in Karbala; for differing opinions on this, see Biilent Yorulmaz, "Kerbela ve Fuzuli'ye Dair," I. Uluslararasi Haa Bekta§ Veli Sempozyumu Bildirileri (Ankara: Haci Bektas Anadolu Kultur Vakfi, 2000), 371-401.

145 facilitated his spreading of the Bektashi order in the region.34 There is no historical

record indicating KanunI 's encounter with a Bektashi dervish in Karbala although it is

known that he visited the tomb of Imam Husayn during his military expeditions to the

region and had water canals dug to bring water into Karbala.35

Hazim Agah goes a step further and asserts that KanunI was the very founder of

the convent in Karbala. He claims that the waqfiyya he saw recorded the creation of a major endowment for its upkeep by this Ottoman sultan.36 As mentioned before, there is indeed a copy of a waqfiyya in the VGM archives belonging to the convent of

'Abdulmu min Dede composed in Safar 962/1554-55 during the reign of KanunI.

However, according to this waqfiyya, the convent's endower was Sadik Dede. According to the waqfiyya, Sadik Dede came to the region at an unspecified date with his belongings, his men, and his children, settling in a place near the Sulaymaniyya River with the knowledge and permission of the local authorities. Although there are no explicit statements in the document to this effect, it might be conjectured from the context that Sadik Dede was assigned a plot of a land in freehold (temlik) on the condition of developing it. According to the waqfiyya, Sadik Dede endowed his entire estate and everything on it, including two houses with all the items and animals in

34 Muhammed Movako, "Arnavutluk'ta BektasJ Edebiyati," trans. Mtirsel Oztiirk, Haci Bekta§ Veli Ara§tirmaDergisi 10 (summer 1999): 51-60; the name of the Bektashi dervish in question is given here as "Baba Abdii' 1-Miimin." For a slightly different version of the tradition, see Noyan- Bekta§ilik, 5:266.

35 E. Honigmann, "Karbala," EI-2, 638; Stephen Hemsley Longrigg, Four Centuries of Modern Iraq (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1925), 25; Nasuhii's Silahi (Matrakci), Beyan-i Menazil-i Sefer-i 'Irakeyn-i Sultan Siileyman Han, ed. Hiiseyin G. Yurdaydin (Ankara: Turk Tarih Kurumu Basimevi, 1976), 243-250.

36 Rifla, Bekta§TSirn, 159-60.

146 them, to his disciples and children and their children as well as to the married or

celibate Abdals of Rum and the other dervishes from Anatolia residing in the

Husayniyya convent. Interestingly enough, Abdals from Iran are explicitly excluded

from this group. The income deriving from the endowment was to be spent by the

trustee of the foundation, who was stipulated as the most mature of the children of

Sadik Dede, for the benefit of the aforementioned groups and the visitors to the tomb of

Imam Husayn.37

There is nothing in this waqfiyya suggesting that Kanuni was the founder of the

Karbala convent or that he created an endowment for it.38 In fact, when Ibn Battuta

visited Karbala in 1326-7 there was already a convent (zawiya) near the tomb of Imam

Husayn, the function of which was to serve the visitors to the site.39 Assuming this was

37 The relevant part of the original Arabic-language waqfiyya, which includes a number of grammatically unclear parts and some spelling mistakes, reads as follows: "... lammdjaa mafkhar al-fuqara wa al-masdldn Sddiq Dada li-shu'batihi al-sharqiyya al-md'khudha min noihr al-sharif al-Sulaymdnlbi-mdlihi wa rijdlihi wa awlddihi wa dhalika bi-ma'rifat Muhammad Bek NabT-zdda wa bi- mujib tadhkiratja'far Bek wa bi-mujib amr 'AliBdshd —yassara'lldh mdyasha'u —wa-hum Husayn Quli wa 'Abbas Quliwa Pir Ahmad Dada wa Wall Dada wa Husayn Dada wa Muhammad Dada wa Darwxsh 'All wa Husayn Abddl wa ghayruhum... waqafa wa habasa wa tasaddaqa bi-jamT al-shu'batihi al-madhkura al-mahduda bi-hudud arba'... bi-jamT hududihd wa sdyir [sic] huquqihd wa ahwdrihd wa arddihd wa mazdri'iha wa shu'abiha wa sawdqlhd wa masdqihd wajami al-baytayn... 'aid awlddihi al-mansubin ilayhi bi-al-mundiyya wa awlddihi wa 'aid awlddi awlddihi wa hakddha al-Wininfitakiyatihi al-hadrat al-shanfa al-Husayniyya —'aid musharrifihd al-tahiyya— al-musammdt bi-al-Mayddn min 'abddil [sic](l) al-Rum al-mujaraddxn wa al-mutd'ahhilin wa la min 'abddil [sic](2) al-'Ajam [...](3) 'aid dardwish al-Rum al-sunuf'al-mujarradm wa al-mutd'ahhilin wayunfiqu al-mutawallTli'l-waqfmahsul dhalika 'aid awlad al-mawquf'alayhim wa 'aid al-mutaraddidtn min zuwwdr al-hadrat al-shanfa..." 1- 2) The word '"abadll," misspelled with the letter ayn, is clearly used here as the plural of the word "abdal." 3) We see a two-letter word or suffix here that appears as "bin" or "In," but in either case it does not make any sense. It is possible, however, that "al-'AjamTn" was used as the plural of "al-'Ajam," although such a plural does not exist in Arabic.

38 It is, of course, possible that the waqfiyya seen by Hazim Agah was a different one and that KanunT indeed made an endowment to the shrine of Imam Husayn and/or to the convent in it.

39 Honigmann, "Karbala," EI-2, 637.

147 the same convent, the construction of the Karbala convent must have well pre-dated the Ottomans' conquest of Iraq. We have also seen that the creator of the convent's endowment was Sadik Dede, who was apparently a member of the Abdals of Rum. It was a common practice during the early Ottoman era to assign landed estates in newly conquered territories to the Abdals of Rum and the Ahls.40 The example of Sadik Dede can be seen as a sign of the continuation of this practice in the sixteenth century.

It is quite possible that Sadik Dede and 'Abdulmu min Dede are one and the same person. It is also likely that it was during his time when the Abdals of Rum first settled in the Karbala convent. But we cannot assume that Rum Abddllan was used simply as another name for the Bektashis in this period, as our discussion in the previous chapter demonstrates. According to Fuad Koprulii, who authored the most comprehensive work on the subject, the Abdals of Rum traced the origins of their order to Imam Husayn, gave particular importance to visiting Karbala, lived celibate lives, called their new members kogek (or kugek), and called their senior members dede.41 The term kugek is indeed used at one point in the text of the waqfiyya,42 and we furthermore see that of the eight dervishes of Sadik Dede mentioned by name one of them bore the title abdal

40 Ahmet Yasar Ocak, "Din ve Diisunce," in Osmanh Devleti ve Medeniyeti Tarihi, vol. 2, ed. Ekmeleddin ihsanoglu (Istanbul: IRCICA, 1994), 127.

41M. Fuad Kopriilu, "Abdal," Edebiyat Ara§tirmalan, vol. 2, 3rd ed. (Istanbul: Otiiken Yayinlan, 1989), 362-417. According to Ahmet Yasar Ocak, on the other hand, the Abdals of Rum, rather than being an independent order, were an extension of the Babat movement that included elements of various orders, and which, as such, should be considered as an intermediary group connecting the BabaT movement to the Bektashiyye, "Kalenderiler ve Bektasilik," Dogumunun 100. YilmdaAtaturk'eArmagan (Istanbul: I.U. Edebiyat Fakultesi, 1981), 298-299.

42 "... wa la'ana'llah man yatasarraf ghayr al-'abadtl al-Rumiyya al-kugakiyya al-ka'inm fi al-takiya al- madhkura al-mujarradin wa al-mutaahhilTn..."

148 and four of them bore the title dede.43 It thus appears that following the establishment

of Ottoman rule in the region the Karbala convent came to be dominated by the Abdals

of Rum, but with their incorporation under the Bektashi umbrella, the convent itself

also acquired a Bektashi identity.

Apparently, the Karbala convent was not destroyed after 1826 because of

concerns about peoples' adverse reactions, as it was structurally part of the shrine of

Imam Husayn. However, it was taken away from the Bektashis and its endowment was

partially confiscated. Hazim Agah informs us that later, during the reign of

'Abdiilmecld, the convent was revived by a certain Takl Baba.44 In the archives there is a

record corroborating this; according to this record, on 22 Cemaziyii'1-ahir 1265/1859,

Sayyid Mehmed Takl Dede was officially appointed as zaviyedar (keeper) of the

'Abdulmii'min Baba Convent.45 Mehmed Takl Dede also appears in the Alevi documents

dating roughly from the same period and is given the title postni§Tn.46 In one such

document, dated 28 Muharrem 1265/1848, Mehmed Takl Dede is furthermore identified

as the son of Sayyid Ahmed Dede.47 According to Alevi documents from the 1840s, this

43 Seen. 37 above.

44 Rifkl, Bekta§TSim, 159-160.

45 VGMA, defter no. 166 (Esas 3/l), entry no. 933.

46 Postni§Tn, literally "one sitting on the [sheepjskin," specifically means the head of a convent; it thus appears to be in this context a synonym of tekkeni§Tn.

47 See n. 26 above for the reference; among the ratifiers of this document, dated 28 Muharrem 1265/1848, is "Mehmed Takib. es-Seyyid Ahmed Dede, postni§Tn-i imam Hiiseyin."

149 Sayyid Ahmed Dede was the previous postman of the convent in Karbala.48 All this

suggests that at least in the period under consideration, the position of the postni§Tn at the Karbala convent was inherited within the same family and that even before his

official appointment as zaviyedar, Mehmed Takl Dede was already serving in that capacity. The same practice seems to have been continued after Takl Dede because,

subsequent to his passing away on 26 Muharrem 1316/1898, his son Sayyid 'Abbas was officially installed in his position. A mere two years later Sayyid "Abbas also passed away, leaving behind four young children, Ca'fer, Musa, Mehmed, and Huseyin, who were living in the convent at the time. On 3 RebFu'l-ewel 1318/1900 a certain Sellm

Dede was officially installed to serve until Sayyid Huseyin, son of Sayyid 'Abbas, came of

49 age.9

It is possible that this Sayyid Huseyin was the same person as 'Abdulhiiseyin

Dede, with whom 'All Su'ad had long conversations in the 1910s. Mentioned simply as

Huseyin Dede by 'AzzawT, he appears to have remained as postnisin of the Karbala convent until his death in Mashhad in 1948.50 'All Su'ad, although acknowledging that the Karbala convent actually belonged to the Bektashis, identifies 'Abdulhiiseyin Dede as a Naqshbandl shaykh. This is because, like the other Bektashi convents, the convent in Karbala was officially handed over to the Naqshbandl order after 1826. Indeed,

48 For example, a hilafetndme dated Zi' 1-hicce 1258/1843 bears the seal of "Es-§eyh el-Had Ahmed Dede, sakin-i Kerbela-i Mu'allaHazret-ilmdm Huseyin"; in an undated copy of the same document, "Seyyid Ahmed Baba" is this time cited with his title "postni§Tn." FD, izzettin Dogan, b. in the village of Kirlangic, Hekimhan-Malatya.

49 VGMA, defter no. 166 (Esas 3/l), entry no. 993.

50 'AzzawT, 152.

150 archival records reveal that Sayyid 'Abbas was appointed as zaviyedar on the condition

that he would practice the rites of the Naqshbandiyya in the convent (mezkur

zdviyedarhk cihetini ayin-i Nak§bendiyye icra... olmak iizere). Similarly, TakT Dede appears

in the official records as a member of the Naqshbandiyya order {tankat-i 'aliyye-i

Nak§bendiyyeden es-Sayyid Mehmed TakTDede).51 Needless to say, this official requirement

seems to have been ineffective in practice.

The Convent in Nqjaf

On account of its location in the courtyard of the shrine of Imam 'All in Najaf,

dervishes connected to the Najaf convent are referred to in the Alevi documents with

phrases such as "tekkenisjn-i Necefu'l-E§ref" or "tekkenisjn-i imam 'All." According to

Noyan, the Najaf convent was also known as the VTranTBaba Convent (VirdniBaba

Dergdhi)52 after the famous HurufT/Bektashi poet of the late sixteenth and early

seventeenth centuries. VTranTBaba is believed to have been closely associated with the

convent in Najaf and served for a period as its postni§Tn.53 Furthermore, 'Azzawl informs

us that the turban of VTranT Baba was preserved in this convent and treated with much

respect until at least the early twentieth century.54 The HurufT identity of VTranI Baba

raises the question of whether the convent in Najaf had any special links to the HurufT

51 See n. 45 above.

52 Noyan-Bekta$ilik, 5: 298.

53 For more information on VTranT Baba, see A§ik Virani Divam, ed. M. Halid Bayn (Istanbul: Maarif Kitaphanesi, 1959).

54 'Azzdwi, 153; VTranT Baba's name is given here as "al-Haj al-Sayyid Ahmad VTranT Sultan."

151 order. If that was indeed the case, then once again we may be facing a situation

whereby a convent that was earlier affiliated with a different group of dervishes later

acquired a Bektashi identity with the integration of this group into the Bektashi

milieu.55

Hazim Agah alleges at one point that the convent in Najaf was assigned to the

celibate Bektashi dervishes by the Ottoman sultan Selim I, better known as Yavuz

(r.1512-20), who is even described at another point as the founder of the convent56

Even though an Ottoman military expedition was carried out in the region during the

reign of Yavuz, it was under KanunT that Iraq really became a part of the Empire; thus it

is very difficult to substantiate Hazim Agah's claims on this issue. Hazim Agah also

states that the Persian verses inscribed above the door of the convent praised the

Bektashiyye and affirmed that the convent belonged to the Bektashis.57

The convent in Najaf, just like the one in Karbala, was structurally attached to

the adjacent tomb and because of this was not physically destroyed after 1826. Its

endowments, however, were partially confiscated. During the reign of'AbdiilmecTd,

SiikutT Baba revived it and served as its postni§Tn. But following the death of SukutT

Baba, Namik Pa§a, governor of Baghdad, took the convent from the hands of the

55 'Azzawi seems to be of the opinion that such a special connection between the Hurufiyya and the convent in Najaf indeed existed in the past, ibid., 153.

56 Rifkl, Bekta$TSim, 159,154.

57 Ibid., 158.

152 Bektashis and appointed an individual of Indian origin.58 We do not know for what purpose the convent building was used after this date.

The Convent in Kazimiyya

Kazimiyya is a suburb of Baghdad where the tombs of Imam Musa al-Kazim and

Imam Muhammad al-Jawad are located. According to Hazim Agah, a convent was built in the courtyard of the shrine complex of Imam Musa al-Kazim in 1299/1881 by MTrza

Farhad, the uncle of the Iranian shah, Nasr al-DTn, in the name of Haci Hiiseyin Mazlum

Baba, who had earlier revived the Giirgtir Baba Convent. MTrza Farhad is also supposed to have affixed a marble stone over the gate of the convent with inscriptions stating that it belonged to the Bektashis. Hiiseyin Mazlum Baba subsequently appointed a celibate Bektashi dervish by the name Sayyid Veil to head this convent, in which capacity he served until he died in 1313/1895. Hazim Agah claims that after this date the convent was taken over by some Iranians and by some Arabs who served in the tomb complex and that all of the items in it were looted.59 But according to Noyan, a well-known celibate Bektashi dervish of Albanian origin, Selman CemalTBaba, who apparently was still alive in the early twentieth century, served as postni§vn of the convent in Kazimiyya.60 If this is true, then the convent must have remained operational for sometime after Sayyid Veil.

58 Ibid., 157.

59 RifkT, Bekta§i Sim, 155-157. MTrza Farhad, a maker of tiles, also replaced the tiles in the rest of the shrine complex of Imam Musa al-Kazim with the permission of the Ottoman authorities; see Ulucam, Irak'tak Turk, 37, n. 5.

60 Noyan-Bekta§ilik, 5: 54.

153 The Convent in Samarra

Seeing that Noyan discusses this convent in connection with the shrine complex

of Imam Hasan al-'Askari (imam Hasan-ul-Askeri Astanesi), its building must have been

adjacent to the mausoleum in question.61 Evliya' Celebi, without explicitly mentioning

the existence of a Bektashi convent, talks about Bektashi dervishes residing around the

sanctuary (makam) of Imam MahdTwho lived off the donations of visitors.62 The

sanctuary of Imam Mahdl is located in Samarra, near the tombs of Imam al-'Askari and

Imam al-Nakl.

According to Noyan, 'Askerifrom Edirne (Edimeli Askeri), the sixteenth century

Bektashi poet whose poems are often encountered in manuscript collections of poems

(conk), served for a while at this convent as postni^Tn.63 If this is true, then this convent must have been founded before or soon after the establishment of Ottoman rule in the region. Considering the silence of the rest of our sources on the subject, it is very likely that this convent was already closed down before the nineteenth century.

ii- Convents Independent from Shi'i Sanctuaries

Convents in Baghdad

Ibid., 54.

Evliya-SN, 4: 359.

Noyan: Bekta§ilik, 5: 54.

154 The Giirgiir Baba ConventM

The Giirgiir Baba Convent took its name from a dervish who is believed to have worked miracles in connection with the oil reserves in Kirkuk, which are in some places apparently so close to the surface that they can spontaneously break into flames. One such spot in Kirkuk was known by the name of this otherwise unknown dervish, suggesting that he was either originally from Kirkuk or that he at least spent some time in that region.65 According to 'AzzawT, Giirgiir meant "the shining one" (Arab, nurdni), a nickname that must have its origins in Giirgiir Baba's miracles involving these oil reserves.66

The Giirgiir Baba Convent and the adjacent tomb of its namesake were located in the May dan district of central Baghdad. The tomb of Giirgiir Baba was built in 1670 by al-Haj Muhammad al-Daftarib. "Abdullah, who also created an endowment for its upkeep. The Daftaris were a leading Baghdadian family whose members served in the higher echelons of the local Ottoman bureaucracy.67 Our sources give slightly differing accounts concerning the founding date of the convent and of the mosque next to it known by the same name. Abdusselam Ulucam suggests that the convent was built by the same individual at the same time as the tomb and that following the abolition of

64 This is the only Bektashi convent in Iraq that Hasluck mentions by name, but mistakenly as "Gulgul Baba"; Noyan, most likely copying Hasluck, makes the same mistake. In all the other sources the name of this convent appears as "Giirgiir Baba."

65 Niebuhr, Reisebeschreibung, 2: 339.

66 'AzzawT, 103-104.

67 Ibrahim 'Abd al-GhanT al-Durubl, al-Baghdadiyun: Akhbaruhum waMajalisuhum (Baghdad: Dar al-Shu'fin al-Thaqafiyya al-'Amma 2001), 100-103.

155 the Bektashiyye in 1826 it was later converted into a mosque.68 On the other hand, according to Iraqi historians, al-Haj Muhammad al-Daftarl was the patron of both the tomb and the mosque, and it was after him that the site was turned into a Bektashi convent. We also learn from them that, in line with the conditions established in the waqftyya, the trusteeship (tawliyya) of the endowment was later handed over to the kadi of Baghdad when all of the biological heirs of al-Haj Muhammad al-Daftarl died out.69

The Gurgiir Baba Convent was closed down after 1826 and later revived by Had

Huseyin Mazlum Baba, who had been encouraged to go to Iraq by the contemporary

Bektashi postni§Tn Tiirabl Dedebaba.70 DarrajT informs us that Dede Hiiseyin b. Ahmed b.

Mustafa was appointed as the trustee (mutawaUi) of the Gurgiir Baba convent on 19 Zi'l- hicce 1297/1880 by the mufti and deputy kadi of Baghdad.71 Huseyin Mazlum Baba was a member of the Babagan branch of the Bektashiyye, and considering that Noyan referred to him as "Laz Huseyin Baba," was most likely originally from the Black Sea region.72 Before settling at the Gurgiir Baba Convent he had served for seven years as the kahveci (server of coffee) in the Najaf convent under postni§m SukutT Baba. He died

68 Ulucam, Irak'taki Turk, 210.

69 'Azzawi, 104; and DarrajT, 94-95. DarrajT, furthermore, gives detailed information on the architecture of the convent and the adjacent mosque and provides pictures of their inscriptions, 94-98, 426, 452.

70 RifkT, Bekta^i Sim, 151.

71 DarrajT, 94-95.

72 Noyan-Bekta§ilik, 5: 54.

156 in 1302/ 1884 and was buried in the courtyard of the tomb complex of Imam Musa al-

Kazim.73

Shortly before his death in 1300/1882, Hiiseyin Mazlum Baba was removed by the kadi of Baghdad from his post as miitevellT, and after his death all the Bektashi dervishes were forced out of the Giirgur Baba Convent. In his place was appointed a

Naqshbandl shaykh named 'Abdurrahman Efendi from Karadag74 as miitevelliand miiderris following which the building of the convent was used as a religious school.75 It appears that personal efforts of the governor of Baghdad, Takiyeddm Pa§a, had a major effect in the removal of this convent from the control of the Bektashis.76

The ruins of the Giirgiir Baba convent and mosque, today surrounded with shops, were still standing until recently.77

The Hizir ilyas Convent

This convent in western Baghdad on the shores of the Tigris River appears in

Evliya' Celebi's Seyahatname as "tekye-i Hazret-i Hizir ilyas." Other sources similarly call it the Hizir ilyas Convent,78 while one source also refers to it as the convent ofdedes in

73 Rifkl, BekasiSirn, 151,154.

74 lbid.156; Karadag was a subprovince of the district of Sulaymaniyya in Iraq.

75 Darrdji, 95.

76RifkT,Belrta?i'Sirn,156.

77 DarrajT, 97.

78 'Azzccwi, 153; Ulucam, Irak'taM Turk, 225.

157 Baghdad.79 Constructed originally as a ribat in the twelfth century, it had been known as the ribat of SelcukI Hatun in reference to the nearby tomb of the wife of the 'Abbasid caliph al-Nasir and daughter of the Seljuk sultan, Kihcarslan I. It was later used as a convent and was finally converted into a Bektashi convent sometime after the establishment of Ottoman rule in the region. While the exact date of this transformation is not known, in view of the reference in Evliya' £elebi, it must have taken place sometime before the mid-seventeenth century.80 One of our sources informs us that according to some local beliefs, Had Bektas. is the person buried at the site.81

After the convent's closure in 1826, its building was used as a religious school.82

The records in the archives show that Davud Pa§a, who was at the time the governor of

Baghdad, also built a mosque nearby known by the same name.83 The site was later submerged under water during a flood of the Tigris River. According to Ulucam this major flood in 1831 ruined the building of the convent.84 However, considering that on

7 Muharrem 1304/1886 a certain Ahmed Efendi was assigned here as miiderris to give religious instruction according to the teachings of the HanefT school of jurisprudence

79 Basri, 367.

80 'AzzawT, 153-154; BasrT, 367, n. 313; Niebuhr, Reisebeschreibung, 299-300 and table XLIII; Ulugam, Irak'taki Turk, 222, 225.

81 Basri, 367, n. 313.

82 'AzzawT, 153-154; Basri, 367, n. 313; Ulucam, Irak'taki Turk, 225.

83 VGMA, defter no. 166 (Esas 3/l), entry no. 597.

84 See n. 80 above; a date for the flood is given only by Ulugam.

158 (madhhab), the building must have continued to be used as a school even after the flood.85

Convents in and around Kirkuk

Without giving any specifics, Noyan writes that in the past there were fifteen

Bektashi convents in the region of Kirkuk. 'AzzawT mentions one Bektashi convent in

Kirkuk named Merdan 'All and another in the nearby region of Daquq named Ca'fer

Dede, this latter was apparently operational until at least the mid-twentieth century.

The Bektashi poet Rasjd 'All Muhtar from Daquq, whom Noyan says he knew personally, must have been connected to this convent.85

'AzzawT follows up the information on the convent of Merdan 'All in Kirkuk by stating that in the regions of Talafar and Sinjar there were also people similarly from the group of babas (Arab, babawdt) but does not provide further details on the subject.

We can deduce from this statement that the Bektashis in Kirkuk were also known as the babas. This becomes more meaningful in view of the same author's description of the convent in Karbala and of another author's referral to the Hizir ilyas Convent as the convent of the dedes (Arab. dadawai)—a noteworthy contrast in terminology that might possibly suggest the existence of two distinct Bektashi groups in Iraq.87

85 See n. 83 above; according to a corrective note later added to the record, the name of this mixderris was recorded as Ahmed by mistake; his real name was 'Abdurrahman.

85 Noyan-Beka$ilik, 5: 267; and 'AzzawT, 154.

87 Cf. 'Azzdwi 152 and 154.

159 iii. Convents of Imprecisely Known Location

The §ahin Baba Convent

The §ahTn Baba Convent was one of the three Bektashi convents in Iraq regularly visited by the Alevi dedes—the other two, as mentioned before, being the convents in Karbala and Najaf. Based on Hazim Agah's description of its location, it seems that this convent, which otherwise appears only in Alevi documents, was the same convent our other sources identify as Hizir ilyas.88 One of the Alevi documents similarly places the §ahTn Baba Convent in Baghdad but does not provide any specifics concerning its exact location.89 However, in another Alevi document dated Muharrem

1259/1843, Zeynal Dede, the tiirbedar (keeper) of the §ahln Baba Convent and a resident of Baghdad, is at the same time described in his signature as the emin (custodian) of the tomb of Imam al-Kazim (§ahvn Baba Dergahinda tiirbedar Dede Zeynal, sakin-i medvne-i

Bagdad ve emvn-i imam Kazim).90 Considering the double duty fulfilled by Zeynal Dede, it would be reasonable to suppose that the §ahln Baba Convent was located not inside the city of Baghdad but rather in the vicinity of the tomb of Imam Musa al-Kazim in

Kazimiyya. Moreover, we have no evidence suggesting that the Hizir ilyas Convent was re-opened after its closure in 1826. The above-mentioned second document was composed many years after this date, casting further doubt on the supposition that

83 Hazim Agah, who does not mention the Hizir ilyas Convent as such, describes the location of Sahih Baba as follows: "Elyevmyeriyurdu belirsiz bir halde olup, Bagdad'in kar§iyakasinda, Dicle nehri kenannda gayet dilgix§d bir mevki'de vaktiyle bu/unmus olan §dhin Baba dergahiyla Giirgiir Baba dergahi dyle 'atebdt-i sa'ddetden sahn-i §enfderununda olmadiklarindan 1241 vuku'atinda tahrib edilmi§lerse de. ..", RifkT, Bekta§i Sim, 155.

89 See n. 32 above.

90 FD of Abuzer Giizel Dede, born in the village of Kuyudere, Bulam-Adiyaman. Zeynal Dede appears in this document as one of its ratifiers.

160 Hizir ilyas and §ahin Baba were one and the same convent. All in all, it is impossible at this point to ascertain beyond doubt the exact location of the convent of §ahm Baba.

Ill) Assessing the Nature of Relations between the Kizilbash/ Alevi Communities in Anatolia and the Bektashi Convents in Iraq

As the foregoing discussion indicates, the earliest written references to the

Bektashi dervishes and convents in Iraq—consisting of a letter from among the Alevi documents and the accounts of Evliya' £elebi—date from the first half of the seventeenth century. But only some of these convents appear to have been Bektashi already at the time of their establishment. Among these is the Gurgiir Baba Convent, which was founded in the second half of the seventeenth century by an Ottoman bureaucrat. The convent in Kazimiyya falls into this category, as probably do the ones in and around Kirkuk and maybe the one in Samarra.

Much less straightforward, however, is the case of other convents. We see that the convents in Karbala and Najaf and the Hizir ilyas Convent in Baghdad were set up before the Ottomans and were inhabited earlier by dervishes affiliated with orders distinct from, albeit possibly historically related to, the Bektashiyye. Of all the convents in this category, the case of the convent in Karbala is particularly interesting since it seems to have been the focal point for the Alevi dedes visiting Iraq. Its endowment deed reveals the presence there of dervishes from Anatolia already in the mid-sixteenth century, specifically a group belonging to the Abdals of Rum. The existence of Alevi documents from around the same period composed in Turkish is a further verification of this fact. Noticeably, these earlier documents make only general references to the dervishes residing in the shrine complex of Imam Husayn without specifying a

161 particular order affiliation for them. The earliest unambiguous identification of this convent as Bektashi is in the hilafetnames granted to the Alevi dedes from the mid- eighteenth century onwards. All these observations make sense in light of Kopriilu's proposition that the Abdals of Rum, once an independent group harboring "extreme"

Alevi beliefs, coalesced with the Bektashiyye during the course of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. That the convent in Karbala over time acquired a Bektashi identity is both a reflection and a confirmation of this process.

Equally noteworthy is Kopriilu's explanation of what drove this process. He suggested that the Abdals of Rum sought refuge under the Bektashi umbrella in response to the persecutions they had endured during the sixteenth century and first half of the seventeenth century on account of their relations with the Safavids. The question then is whether or not these dervishes who adopted a Bektashi identity persisted in their loyalty to the Safavids in later periods? And if they did, what did this loyalty entail? Were they simply tacit Safavid sympathizers or active agents of the

Safavid cause? These questions acquire greater significance when combined with one of the main findings of this chapter, namely that from the second half of the sixteenth century onwards, the Kizilbash/Alevi communities of Anatolia maintained a close and in all appearances rather institutionalized relationship with a distinct network of

Bektashi convents in Iraq, the hub of which was the convent in Karbala.

In tackling these questions, it is important to take into consideration the particular position of Iraq in the Ottoman-Safavid conflict. First and foremost, we have to remember that this region was a zone militarily and ideologically contested by the

Sunni Ottoman and the Shi'i Safavid dynasties from the early sixteenth century

162 onwards. Iraq was mostly under Ottoman rule during this period, with the exception of two rather long intervals between 1508 and 1534 and again between 1624 and 1638, when it was dominated by the Safavids.91 Yet there are many records in the mxihimme defterleri found in the Ottoman archives that expose this region as one of the main targets in the Kizilbash persecutions of the late sixteenth century, thus suggesting an extensive presence of pro-Safavid elements in Iraq even while formally under Ottoman control.92 It appears that the Safavids not only had followers of tribal origin in the area but also a number of active agents from among the local notables and even some members of the local Ottoman bureaucracy. Such was the case, for instance, of a certain

Hoca Selman who is described as a large fief holder (zu'emddan) and of a certain

Suleyman who worked as a translator in the council of the local governor in Baghdad

(Bagdad dwamnda tercuman).93 We also see from the records that the Ottomans at times suspected specifically the Imams' shrines as possible retreats of such pro-Safavid

91 For a history of Iraq under Ottoman rule, see Longrigg, Four Centuries of Modern Iraq; for different aspects of Ottoman-Safavid competition in the region, see Rudi Matthee, "The Safavid-Ottoman Frontier: Iraq-i Arab as Seen by the Safavids," Ottoman Borderlands: Issues, Personalities and Political Changes, ed. Kemal H. Karpat and Robert W. Zens (Madison: Center of Turkish Studies, Univ. of Wisconsin, 2003), 157-173.

92 C. H. Imber, "The persecution of the Ottoman Shf ites according to the muhimme defterleri, 1565-1585," Der Islam, 56: no. 2 (July 1979): 245-273; and Bekir Kutukoglu, Osmanh-iran Siyast Munasebetleri (1578-1612) (Istanbul: Istanbul Fetih Cemiyeti, 1993), in particular the Introduction.

93 MD 31:142: 52 (4 Cemaziyu'1-ewel 985/ 1577) andMD 31:696:313 (15 Receb 985/ 1577), respectively; both cited in Kutukoglu, Osmanh-iran, 11, n. 35, the former also cited by Imber, The persecution, 248; for further examples and a relatively detailed discussion of the subject, see Imber, 246-250.

163 groups.94 Admittedly we do not have similar official documentation for the post- sixteenth century era showing the continued presence of pro-Safavid elements in Iraq, but this by itself cannot be taken as proof of their total eradication. In fact, considering a report by the beylerbeyi of Baghdad from 1577 that there was "no end to the heretics and misbelievers" (bed mezheb ve rafizvnin nihayeti olmayup) in his region,95 it is more likely that Iraq remained home to a significant number of groups and individuals who were either affiliated with the Safavid order and/or actively promoting the Safavid cause.

Looking at the subject from the perspective of the Safavids, it should be noted that Iraq never lost its importance for them even after the establishment of Ottoman rule in this region, because of its large Shi'i population and the important Shi'i sanctuaries located there.96 We see that the Imams' shrines especially continued to be key sites where the ideological competition between the Ottomans and the Safavids was played out, with both sides honoring and patronizing these sites.97 More

94 Imber makes this observation using evidence from MD records; according to one such record a report submitted to the imperial divan in 1573 informed the authorities of people in these shrines suspected for receiving stipends from the Persians; for this and other examples, see Imber, The persecution, 246-247. For another MD record involving suspicious individuals coming from Iran and residing in the shrine complex of Imam Musa al-Kazim, see Cemal Sener, Osmanh Belgelerinde Aleviler-Bektasiler (Istanbul: Karacaahmet Sultan Dernegi Yayinlan, 2002), 73.

95 MD 31:142: 52 (4 Cemaziyu'1-ewel 985/ 1577), cited in Imber, The persecution, 246; also cited in Kutiikoglu, Osmanh-iran, 11, n. 35.

96 For details, see Matthee, The Safavid-Ottoman Frontier.

97 For an interesting instance of this rivalry involving the replacement of the Persian carpets in the shrines of Imam 'All and Imam Husayn with carpets from Anatolia in 1571, see Imber, The persecution, 246, and Sener, Osmanh Belgeleri, 64-65. Imber suggests that Shah Tahmasp's patronage of the Imams' shrines raised concerns in this period among the Ottoman authorities that the Persians might have been using these sites to foment popular discontent against the

164 interestingly, there is some admittedly limited data suggesting that Iraq may have also been important for the Safavid shahs as a bridging zone between them and their

Kizilbash/Alevi followers in Anatolia. We know that at least two of the Safavid governors of Bagdad concurrently carried the title of "khalifat al-khulafa'." A khalifat al- khulafa was a representative of the Safavid shahs in matters of tanqa and served in that capacity as the head of all the Safavid khalifas (Turk, halffe) residing among various

Kizilbash communities.98

Drawing on this assumption, could it be that the Safavid shahs continued to view Iraq as such a bridging zone, using the pro-Safavid groups in the area as liaisons for this purpose even when they were not politically in charge? If this was really the case, the Bektashi convents in this region, especially the ones located in the shrine- complexes of the Imams, would arguably provide feasible institutional backing for these liaisons. At least compared to Baghdad, the seat of the Ottoman power and of the

Sunni-Hanafi establishment in Iraq, the shrine cities appear to have remained semi- ottomans. However, with the diminishing Kizilbash threat, the Ottomans seem to have adopted a more lenient attitude on the issue, since in the early 1700s they permitted one of the last Safavid shahs, Shah Husayn, to spend large amounts of money for renovations in the Imams' shrines; see Matthee, The Safavid-Ottoman Frontier, 171-172. The Qajars, the dynasty that replaced the Safavids, seem to have followed similar policies, for as previously mentioned, MTrza Farhad, the uncle of Shah Nasr al-DTn, replaced the tiles of the entire shrine complex of Imam Musa al-Kazim and built the Bektashi convent in Kazimiyya; see n. 59 above.

98 Following his conquest of Baghdad in 1508, Shah Ismail appointed Khadim Beg Talish, who bore the title khalifat al-khulafa, as governor (hakim) of Baghdad; see James J. Reid, Tribalism and Society in Islamic Iran 1500-1629 (Malibu: Undena Publications, 1983), 85-87 and 155; and Roger M. Savory, "The Consolidation of Safawid Power in Persia," Der Islam, no. 41 (1965): 77. The next Safavid governor of Baghdad, Zu'1-Faqar Khan, also known for sending the city's keys to the Ottoman Sultan KanunT, carried the same title; Joseph v. Hammer-Purgstall, Geschichte Des Osmanischen Reiches, 10 vols. (1828; reprint, Graz, 1963), 3:142 and footnote f on the same page. For general information on the Safavid institution of khalifat al-khulafa, see. Roger M. Savory, "The Office of Khalifat al-Khulafa under the Safawids" Journal of American Oriental Society, no. 85 (1965): 497-502; and H.R. Roemer, "The Safavid Period," The Cambridge History of Iran, vol. 6, eds. Peter Jackson and Laurence Lockhart (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986), 334.

165 autonomous until roughly the mid-nineteenth century, when the Ottomans reasserted their rule in the region. According to Meir Litvak, who has studied the ulema of Najaf and Karbala, the real power in these shrine cities was in the hands of the local sayyid families who as a group formed a religious elite distinct from both the Sunni and the

Shi'i ulema in Iraq. These families not only controlled the shrines, but their members also held the post of the local naqib al-ashraf. As local notables, they moreover served as local governors, fief-holders and tax-farmers." The Ottoman authorities, however, suspected them of pro-Safavid sentiments and activities and on account of such accusations punished a number of "sayyids, nakibs and miitevellT" in the shrine cities of

Iraq during the Kizilbash persecutions of the sixteenth century.100 Nineteenth century centralization policies in the region significantly undermined the power base of these local sayyid families, as the Ottoman government tried to replace them with members of the Sunni and Shi'i ulema as keepers of the shrines and as local naqib al-ashraf.Wl

Considering the location of the convent in Karbala, it becomes clear that the dervishes affiliated with it must have had close relations with the local sayyid families of that town. It is significant in this regard that the shaykhs of the convent in Karbala served as the geragas for the entire shrine complex of Imam Husayn. We have also seen

"Meir Litvak, Shi'i Scholars of Nineteenth-Century Iraq: The 'ulema of Najaf and Karbala (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), especially chapter 6; also see 122-125, fora n account of the MilalT family as an example. This family served as keepers of the shrine of Imam 'All, and some members also served as governors of Najaf and as tax-farmers.

100 Imber, The persecution, 246-248.

101 Litvak, Shi'i Scholars, esp. chapter 6 and 7; it is thus not surprising that it was these local seyyid families, rather than the local Shi'i ulema, who reacted most strongly against the reassertion of Ottoman central authority in Iraq, see ibid., 139.

166 that dervishes of the Bektashi convents in Iraq could sometimes also function as

caretakers of the nearby shrines, such as in the case of Zeynal Dede, who appears in a document mentioned earlier as the tiirbedaro f §ahTn Baba and as the emin of the shrine of Imam Musa al-Kazim.102

Such a close relation between the two groups also explains the large number of

Alevi documents bearing the seal of the naqib al-ashraf in Karbala along with those of the dervishes affiliated with the convent there. It appears that among the key actors in this regard were members of the Darraj family, whose names come up at various times as keepers of the shrine of Imam Husayn and as local naqib al-ashraf—the first time being in the early seventeenth century.103 We can confirm that members of this family also granted sayyid-genealogies to the Alevi dede families thanks to two such documents, one dated Muharram 1196/1781-82 and the other Safar 1263/1847, in which the family epithet of the issuing naqib al-ashraf 'is clearly identified. It is noteworthy that the two individuals witnessing to the truthfulness of the first genealogy are identified as Mehmed Dede from the Bektashi convent (the reference here most likely being to the convent in Karbala) and Halll Dede from the Bektashi convent in Baghdad

102 See n. 90 above.

103 A certain Sayyid Darraj, who at the time of the conquest of Baghdad by Shah 'Abbas in 1624 was serving both as the keeper of the shrine of Imam Husayn and as the local naqib al-ashraf in Karbala, is known to have saved the lives of many Sunnis by registering them as Shi'is, Hammer-Purgstall, Geschichte, 5:15; the name of this individual is transcribed here as "Seid Diirradsch." Also see Litvak, Shi'i Scholar, 125-126, for the role a member of this family played in the local history of Karbala in the nineteenth century.

167 (most likely referring to the §ahin Baba Convent).104 Similarly, the second document, which is in fact a combination of the ziyaretname, genealogy, and hilafetname genres, bears the seals of the postni§Tns of the Karbala and §ahln Baba convents in addition to that of the naqib al-ashrdf.105

Pulling all these threads together, we can with relative confidence suggest that some of the Bektashi convents in Iraq were the domain of dervishes who were proponents of the Kizilbash movement and who acted in addition as mediators between the Safavid shahs and their followers in Anatolia. One of the mechanisms of this process involved the issuing as well as the renovation and ratification of various documents belonging to the Alevi dede families—documents which all together served as confirmation of the ocak status of these families among their respective communities.

We may, however, be able to explain within this framework the consistent obscurity in these documents concerning the order affiliation of the dervishes in question up until the mid-eighteenth century. It is only after this date, when the Safavids had already become a thing of the past, that we see the identification of these dervishes and their convents as explicitly Bektashi.105 The fact that relations between the Alevi dedes and these convents survived the demise of the Safavids and continued to be maintained until at least the late nineteenth century is, however, quite interesting; this continuity

104 FD of Muharrem Naci Orhan. Apparently the same naqib al-ashrdf also issued the genealogy cited in n. 26, but his family epithet is not included here as is usually the case with these documents.

105 FD of Ahmet Mutluay, born in the village of Sim, Elazig. The actual name of the naqib al-ashraf who signed this document was illegible except the part including his family epithet "Darraj."

106 The last Safavid shah, Shah 'Abbas III, reigned until 1736 and was killed in 1740 by Nadir Shah along with a number of other members of his dynasty.

168 might be explicated either as the inertia of an established system or perhaps more likely as connected to deeper roots pre-dating the Safavids. If the latter, the roots would reach back all the way to the Abdals of Rum and perhaps to a number of other related dervish groups including, most importantly, the Wafa'iyya. Whatever the case may be, already in the early years of the nineteenth century we see the gradual rise of the Haci Bektas, Convent in Kir§ehir as the sole institutional focal point for the Alevi communities in Anatolia, to which the Alevi dedes began to appeal from this date onwards for accreditation. Congruently, all the icazetnames granted to the Alevi dedes by the £elebis to surface so far date from the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.

The existence of pro-Safavid Bektashi dervishes in Iraq does not mean that all the Bektashi groups in Iraq were historically part of the Kizilbash movement. It is, in fact, significant in this regard that only certain Bektashi convents appear in the Alevi documents. If not simply coincidental, this may indicate a self-conscious selectiveness on the part of the Alevi dedes in their association with the Bektashis in Iraq. Assuming such was the case, it would then be reasonable to take this as a sign of the presence of two distinctive groups affiliated with the legacy of Had Bektas. in Iraq. These groups would have appealed to different clienteles, possibly to one known as the "babas" and to another known as the "dedes," a division possibly linked to the earlier Abdal versus

Bektashi differentiation and further reinforced and reconfigured in the post-Safavid era as a result of the dissimilar political inclinations of the two respective groups.

169 IV-Conclusion

The specific aim of this chapter was to reconstruct and make sense of what the

Alevi documents revealed in terms of previously unknown connections between the

Alevi ocaks in Anatolia and the web of Bektashi convents in Iraq. It has been suggested that these convents, located in a region engulfed by the Ottoman-Safavid conflict, were among the sites where this contestation was played out. Of these convents, the one located in the courtyard of the shrine of Imam Husayn in Karbala was the institutional focal point for the Alevi communities in Anatolia until the nineteenth century. Initially affiliated with the Abdals of Rum, the Karbala convent appears to have functioned as a covert intermediary between the Kizilbash/Alevi communities in Anatolia and the

Safavid shahs. Following the complete demise of the Safavids by the middle of the eighteenth-century, however, the convent came to acquire an explicit Bektashi identity.

The origins of the cult of HacIBektas, among the Wafal cum Kizilbash ocaks may be linked to an alternative memory of the saint inherited via this Abdal/Bektashi convent in Karbala. This preexisting common affinity with HacTBekta§ also facilitated the later integration of the Alevi ocaks into the network of the £elebi Bektashis through the course of the nineteenth century. The implications of these findings for the broader issue of how relations between the Safavids and the different constituencies of the

Anatolian Kizilbash milieu were initially established and later maintained will be explored in the fourth chapter, following.

170 CHAPTER 4

Mysticism and Imperial Politics: The Safavids and the Kizilbash of Anatolia

I-Introduction

In a typical account of the early modern history of the Middle East, the Kizilbash

would be cited within the context of the Safavids' rise to power. Indeed,

notwithstanding the pre-Safavid roots of some of its components, a distinct

Kizilbash/Alevi identity as we know it today crystallized within the framework of the

Safaviyya's metamorphosis from a conventional Sufi order into a religio-political

project, which culminated in the establishment of the Safavid dynasty under the

leadership of Shah Ismail (r. 1501-1524). But despite its formative stature, the Safavid

connection with the Anatolian Kizilbash milieu has not been adequately explicated in

the literature. The Safavid-related Alevi documents and manuscripts which form the

focus of this chapter shed light on various aspects of this little-understood issue,

allowing us to sketch a more accurate picture of the nature and trajectory of relations between the Safavid shahs and their Anatolian followers.

Among other things, these new sources reveal that the Alevi communities in

Anatolia conceived of their bond with the Safavid family primarily in Sufi terms and that they lasted in their spiritual attachment to the Safavid shahs even after the revolutionary phase of the Kizilbash movement. In the post-revolutionary period, contacts between the Alevi ocaks and the Safavids were sustained through different mechanisms, one of which, as I argued in chapter three, involved a network of pro-

Safavid Abdal/Bektashi convents serving as intermediaries. In the present chapter, I

171 discuss other mechanisms through which Safavid shahs continued to exert spiritual authority over the Anatolian Kizilbash. These included the conferral ofhilafetnam.es to selected Alevi ocaks; mediation by one of the off-shoots of the larger Safavid family, the ocak of §ah Ibrahim Veli; and the dispatch of religious treatises preserved in the Buyruk manuscripts. These findings suggest that despite their growing sponsorship of Shi'i orthodoxy within the realm of their own empire in this post-revolutionary phase, Sufi discourse remained relevant for the Safavid shahs in their continuing rapport with the

Anatolian Kizilbash/Alevi communities.

II- The Making of the Safavids' Kizilbash Constituency in Anatolia

Among the great Islamic dynasties, the Safavids are distinguished by the unusual path they followed in their ascent to power.1 They emerged on the historical scene as a Sufi order under the eponymous founder, Shaykh Safl al-DIn Ishaq (650-

735/1252-1334) in the town of ArdabTl in Iranian Azerbaijan at the height of

Mongol/llkhanid power in the area. For the first four generations, the heads of the order were by all accounts engaged strictly in contemplative Sufism with no ostensible signs of Shi'ism. This orthodox demeanor combined with their widespread popularity

1 The following short summary of the origins and the early history of the Safavids draws on several well-known works on the subject including Michel M. Mazzaoui, The Origins of the Safawids: ST'ism, Sufism, and the Gulat (Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag, 1972); Jean Aubin, "L'avenement des Safavides reconsidere (Etudes Safavides III)," Moyen Orient et Ocean Indien 5 (1988): 1-130; the relevant parts in Roger Savory, Iran under the Safavids (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980); H. R. Roemer, "The Safavid Period," The Cambridge History of Iran: The Timurid and Safavid Periods, vol. 6, ed. Peter Jackson (Cambridge: University Press, 1993): 189-350; Said Amir Arjomand, The Shadow of God and the Hidden Imam: Religion, Political Order, and Societal Change in Shi'ite Iran from the Beginning to 1890 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984), 66-82; and Adel Allouche, The Origins and Development of the Ottoman-Safavid Conflict (906-962/1500-1555) (Berlin: Klaus Schwarz Verlag, 1983), 30-64.

172 in regions as far-flung as Azerbaijan, Anatolia, and Transoxiana gained them the respect of the contemporary ruling dynasties, including the early Ottomans. However, by the middle of the fifteenth century a process of metamorphosis began, which transformed the Safaviyya from a conventional Sufi order into a radical religio-political movement espousing features of what orthodox Muslims would call Shi'i ghvduww.2

This transformation is believed to have started under Shaykh SafI al-DIn's fifteenth century descendants, Junayd and Haydar. Junayd had sown the seeds of the initial Kizilbash network during several years of exile in Anatolia following his banishment from Ardabll on orders from the Karakoyunlu ruler Jihan Shah. It was during this time period that Junayd built an organized force of ghazis recruited primarily from among his Turkmen disciples, with whose participation he then carried out ghaza expeditions against the Christian enclave of Trebizond and the Georgians along the Caucasus frontier. Junayd became the first shaykh of the order to assume the additional title sultan, a reflection of his ambition to combine in his person both religious and secular authority.

When Junayd died during an expedition in the Caucasus, his son Haydar, who was born from Junayd's marriage with the sister of the Akkoyunlu ruler, Uzun Hasan, succeeded him as the head of the Safaviyya order. Haydar reinforced the marriage alliance between the Safavids and the Akkoyunlu dynasty by marrying Uzun Hasan's daughter. He further promoted his father's policies by engaging in gam activities in the

2 On ghvduww (pi. ghulat), see Wadad al-Qadl, "The Development of the Term Ghulat in Muslim Literature with Special Reference to Kaysaniyya," in Akten des VII. Kongresses fur Arabistikund Islamwissenschaft Gbttingen, ed. Albert Dietrich (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprect, 1976), 295- 319; and M. G. S. Hodgson, "Ghulat," EI-2.

173 Caucasus and like his father died on the battlefield. To Haydar is traced the origin of the red headgear with twelve folds worn by the followers of the Safaviyya known as the taj- iHaydari, from which the name Kmlba§, literally meaning "red-head", was derived.

The Kizilbash movement reached its climax and fulfilled its political aspirations with Junayd's grandson, Ismail, who was crowned shah of Iran in 1501. Barely fourteen years old at the time of his coronation, Shah Ismail was able to mobilize a following of such magnitude that he eradicated the power of the Akkoyunlus and the various petty rulers of Iran and later posed a formidable challenge to the mighty Ottomans who had conquered Constantinople. Historians attribute a key role in Shah Ismail's ascent to power to his staunch disciples from Anatolia. Many groups of Kizilbash migrated to Iran to join his armies and to live in the Utopia he promised, while those left behind continued to support their distant spiritual master through devotional offerings in the form of money or gifts. Shah Ismail's great popular appeal derived among from other things his personal charisma. In addition to being a successful military commander, he was a skillful poet, whose Turkish poems were marked by a messianic idealism and were widely circulated among his Turcophone followers. Modern-day Alevis, despite the corrosion of the Safavids memory among them otherwise, continue to honor Shah

Ismail—commonly known under his penname Hata'I—as one of the greatest Alevi poets, reciting his mystical poems during their communal rituals.3

3 During my interviews with various members of the Alevi community in rural Anatolia, I discovered that they generally did not recognize the name Shah Ismail; only after mentioning his pseudonym Hatal would they identify him as a great Alevi poet. While there was a relatively more widespread recognition of Ardabll, it was typically identified as an important Alevi dergdh comparable to the Had Bektas convent in Kirsehir. However, this situation is rapidly changing as more and more Alevis learn their histories from books, with a greater recognition of the Safavids.

174 Primary accounts of early Safavid history, including official chronicles of rival

Sunni dynasties and European travelers' accounts, depict the Kizilbash as zealous fanatics and their mode of religiosity as naive and crude.4 A scandalized tone is often used in these accounts when describing the strong devotion of the Kizilbash armies to the Safavid shahs. For example, one of the best known chronicles of the period isTankh- i 'Alam-dra-iAmxnihy Fazl-Allahb.Ruzbihan KhunjT, the official Akkoyunluchronicler and an indignant enemy of the Safavids, who had to flee to Transoxiana following the advent of Shah Ismail. Like the many Ottoman chronicles after him, KhunjT pays tribute to the early shaykhs of the Safavid order as true mystics aloof from politics but condemns Junayd and Haydar for their worldly ambitions and claims to divinity, referring to them with terms such as "despicable devil" (shaytdn-i zalil), and "bandits"

(ashqiyd) and to their Anatolian followers as "the ignorant ones of Rum" (cuhhdl-i Rum).5

KhunjT reports that upon Junayd's death his followers called him "God" (ilah) and his son Haydar "the son of God" (ibn-Allah). His followers praised Junayd, saying, "he is the

Living One, there is no God but he" (huwa al-hayy la ilah ilia huwa),6 and immediately murdered anybody who spoke of him as dead.7 Some European observers of the early

Safavid court reported observations similar to those of KhunjT. For example, according

4 For an overview of these sources on the early Safavid history, see Mazzaoui, The Origins of the Safawids, 15-21.

5 Ibid., 255, 272-73.

6 This is an exact phrase from the Quran (40:65). KhunjT thus charges the Kizilbash with deforming a Quranic phrase by applying the "huwa," which refers to God, to Junayd.

7 Fadlullah b. Ruzbihan KhunjT-IsfahanT, Tarikh-i 'Alam-ard-yi Amini, ed. by John E. Woods, with abridged English translation by Vladimir Minorsky (London: Royal Asiatic Society, 1992), 272.

175 to an often-quoted anonymous Venetian merchant who was in Tabriz around 1518, the

Kizilbash soldiers would go into battle without armor, believing that their master Shah

Ismail, whom they regarded as God, would protect them.8

Mainstream scholarship's view of the nature of Safavid-Kizilbash relations, with

its frequent recourse to the trope of early Safavid shahs' deification by their credulous

followers, bears the imprint of such hostile or superficial outsiders' accounts. It tends

to explain away the popularity of the Safavid cause among the Anatolian Turkmen

(presumably the primary constituencies of the Kizilbash armies) in terms of these

tribes' long-standing tradition of religious heterodoxy and inherent militant temper, two qualities that supposedly rendered them particularly gullible with regard to the

early Safavid shahs' claims to divinity. Such depictions are too simplified to do justice to this much more complex process and also involve a number of misconceptions which stem from a lack of adequate contextualization.

To begin with, recent scholarship has shown that messianic/millenarian movements were a common feature of the intellectual and political life of a large part of Eurasia from the late fifteenth through the end of the sixteenth centuries, when apocalyptic expectations were on the rise. Although typically associated with resistance movements of the poor and downtrodden against state authority, millenarian ideologies were also employed by states in this period to support imperial aspirations. The Safavids, in other words, were hardly the only empire-builders in the

8 "This Sophy is loved and reverenced by his people as a God and especially by his soldiers, many of whom enter into battle without armour expecting their master Ishmael to watch over them in the fight"; quoted in introduction to Tadhkirat al-Muluk A Manual of Safavid Administration, trans, and ed. V. Minorsky (1943; reprint, Cambridge, England: E.J. W. Gibb Memorial Series, 1980), 13.

176 early-modern Islamic world and the larger Mediterranean region to foster a messianic image of themselves as part of their legitimacy strategies. Even the rival Sunni

Ottomans were apparently not immune to the influence of millenarian currents, as revealed among other things by pompous designations such as sahib-hran (master of the conjunction) and mxiceddid (renewer of religion) used by Sultan SelTm I (r. 1512-

1520) and Sultan Suleyman (r. 1520-1560) in the contemporary Ottoman sources. Thus from a political and cultural point of view, the Safavids' messianic pretensions appear more typical than exceptional within the context of the times.9

Moreover, Safavid messianism was most likely conceived of in a less absolute and more nuanced fashion than is often assumed by modern historians. 10It is noteworthy in this regard that the Safavids are not overtly given messianic attributions in any of the extant Alevi documents and manuscripts, to be treated in more detail

9 For a general assessment of sixteenth-century millenarianism in Eurasia, see Sanjay Subrahmanyam, "Turning the Stones Over: Sixteenth-Century Millenarianism from the Tagus to the Ganges," The Indian Economic and Social History Review, 40:2 (April-June 2003): 129-161; concerning the Ottoman case specifically, see Cornell H. Fleischer, "The Lawgiver as Messiah: The Making of the Imperial Image in the Reign of Suleyman," in Soliman le Magnifique etson temps: Actes du colloque de Paris, Galeries nationales du Grand palais, 7-10 mars 1990, ed. Gilles Veinstein (Paris: La Documentation francaise, n.d.).

10 According to V. Minorsky, one of the pioneers of Safavid history, the divan of Shah Ismail itself provides irrefutable evidence that he considered himself God incarnate and that his immediate ancestors similarly regarded themselves as "hereditary and living emanations (mazhar) of the godhead," ibid., 12; also see Minorsky, "The poetry of Shah Ismail I," Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, 10:4 (1942): 1006-1053. However, Minorsky's reading of Shah Ismail's poetry is too literal and too sketchy, drawing on individual lines or couplets in isolation from their larger poetic context, and therefore does not do justice to the more nuanced view held by Shah Ismail regarding his own spiritual position; for a brief assessment of Minorsky's analysis along these lines, see S. Subrahmanyam, "Turning the Stones Over," 140- 141. In addition, Minorsky, and many historians arguing the same point on his authority, do not adequately take into account the literary conventions of mystical poetry, most importantly the genre of devriye (Arab, dawriya), which treats Creation as a circular process and within which some of Shah Ismail's poems may be evaluated. On the genre of devriye, see Abdiilbakt Golpmarh, Tasawuftan Dilimize Gegen Deyimlerve Atasozleri (Istanbul: inkilap ve Aka Kitabevleri, 1977), 93-95.

177 below.11 The Safavid shahs appear in these sources not as Mahdi or God incarnate but in their capacities as Sufi shaykhs and sayyids. These two components of the Safavids' spiritual authority were historically closely linked with one another, especially considering the high prestige of sayyids in the Islamic world in general and among the

Sufis in particular and the sayyidhood, real or imagined, of most of the renowned Sufi shaykhs in Islamic history. In Alevi discourse especially, the historical designation used for the Safavid shahs, miir§id-i kamil (perfect spiritual guide), subsumes both qualities, since sayyid-hood, more specifically descent from the house of the Prophet (Ehl-i beyt;

Arab. Ahl al-bayt), is consistently stressed both in the Buyruk manuscripts and Alevi oral culture as an essential quality of any rightful miir§id.

Lack of any obvious traces of Safavid messianism in the Alevi sources does not of course refute the evidence that especially during its revolutionary phase its supporters associated the Safavid project with the establishment of an earthly paradise where ultimate justice would reign.12 This expectation most likely played a major role in binding many of the Kizilbash to the Safavid cause, especially at a time when the

Ottoman centralizing policies put pressure on various elements of the Anatolian population, as noted in Chapter II. Early Safavid discourse, to the extent it is reflected

111 am not taking into account here the many Alevi religious poems with allusions to the notion of Mahdi-hood since none of these poems overtly associate this belief with the Safavids. For samples of Alevi/Bektashi poetry, see Sadeddin Niizhet Ergun, Bekta§i Edebiyati Antolojisi: Bekta§i §airleri ve Nefesleri (Istanbul: Maarif Kitaphanesi, 1944); and Abdulbaki Golpinarh, AleviBekta§i Nefesleri (Istanbul: inkilap Kitabevi, 1992).

12 Erika Glassen, "Schah Ismail, ein Mahdi der anatolischen Turkmenen?" Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenlandischen Gesellschaft 121:1 (1971): 61-69. Glassen quotes from an anonymous history in Persian, which she conjectures records Turkmen oral traditions concerning early Safavi history, a long passage filled with many images of an earthly paradise; Shah Ismail is depicted in this passage as the forerunner of the Mahdi.

178 in Shah Isma'il's poetry, clearly drew on various aspects of the belief in the Mahdi, a belief which is particularly strong in the Shi'i world.13 Even the sayyid genealogy of the

Safavids may have been a later fabrication, as forcefully argued by two separate historians,14 to enhance their association with Mahdi-hood, especially in light of the common belief that the Mahdi would be a descendant of the Prophet. Yet, as we shall discuss in detail below, the persisting loyalty of the Anatolian Kizilbash to the Safavid shahs as their "perfect spiritual guides" even after Shah Isma Tl's crushing defeat at the

Battle of £aldiran in 1514 indicates that messianism was only one of the dimensions of the Safavids' multi-layered spiritual discourse, a discourse which ultimately operated within a Sufi framework.15

The Sufi framework of Safavi-Kizilbash relations is also in accord with this dissertation's findings concerning the pre-Safavid socio-religious background of the various Kizilbash communities. In the existing literature, Kizilbashism is almost exclusively associated with the Turkmen tribal milieu. This view for the most part took

13 The divan of Shah Ismail has been published multiple times based on different manuscript copies; most importantly see Sadeddin Nfizhet Ergun, HatayiDivanv Sah tsmail-i Safevv Hayati ve Nefesleri(Istanbul: Maarif Kitaphanesi, 1946);IICanzonierediSahIsmailHata% ed.Tourkhan Gandjei (Naples, 1959); and Sah Ismail Hata'iKiilliyati, ed. Babek Cavansir and Ekber N. Necef (Istanbul: Kakniis Yayinlan, 2006). For examples of his poems in English translation, see Minorsky, "The Poetry of Shah Ismail I."

14 Ahmad KasravT, "Sheikh SafT va Tabarash," in Karvand-i KasravT, ed. Yahya Zaka (1926-27; reprint, Tehran: Shirkat-i ShihamT-i Kitabha-i JibT, 1974); Zeki Velidi Togan, "Sur l'origine des Safavides," in Melanges Louis Massignon, vol. 3 (Damascus: Institut Francais de Damas, 1957): 347- 357; both cited and summarized in Appendix B to Adel Allouche, The Origins and Development of the Ottoman-Safavid Conflict. Both KasravT and Togan independently reached the conclusion that the Safavids were descended from Iranized Kurds and that their sayyid-genealogy was a later fabrication.

15 The heterogeneous character of the Safavid spiritual discourse in general and that of Shah Ismail in particular is emphasized in a recent work by Andrew J. Newman, Safavid Iran: Rebirth of a Persian Empire (London: I. B. Tauris, 2006), esp. 13-15.

179 shape on the basis of a number of Turkmen tribes' prominent place in the early Safavid political and military establishment.16 But the larger Kizilbash milieu in Anatolia and neighboring regions comprised ethnically and socially diverse elements, including

Kurdish and Zaza speakers along with those who spoke Turkish, tribal as well as non- tribal rural communities, and even individuals from within the Ottoman military and bureaucracy.17 Moreover, evidence presented in the previous chapters demonstrates the WafaT origins of an extensive web of Alevi ocaks in eastern Anatolia, as well as their affinity with Abdal/Bektashi circles since pre-Safavid times. The case of the WafaT cum

Kizilbash ocaks as such suggests that the building blocks of the Anatolian Kizilbash milieu were not individual tribes as such, but rather various Sufi circles and itinerant dervish groups who joined together under the spiritual and political leadership of the

Safavid shahs. Junayd and Haydar, in other words, established the foundation of the

Kizilbash network in Anatolia, not by directly enlisting individual tribesmen or groups

16 For a list of these tribes and their role in the establishment and socio-political order of the early Safavid Empire, see Faruk Siimer, SafeviDevletinin Kurulusu ve Gelismesinde Anadolu Turklerinin Rolii (Ankara: Turk Tarih Kurumu, 1992); and James J. Reid, Tribalism and Society in Islamic Iran, 1500-1629 (Malibu, California: Undena Publications, 1983). Reid, although focusing on the Kizilbash tribal organization within the context of Safavid Iran, notes that "the term 'qizilbash' did not initially refer to a certain grouping of tribes but to a distinct class of initiates belonging to the mystical order headed by the Safavid family." According to Reid, the term "qizilbash" came to be associated with a specific network of tribes as Safavid conquests after 1500 brought many tribal chieftains into the Safavid fold and as Shah Ismail and his successor Tahmasp developed a hierarchical tribal system to maintain their authority, p. 2.

17 On Kurdish- and Zaza-speaking Alevis, see Erdal Gezik, Dinsel Etnik ve Politik Sorunlar Baglammda Alevi Kiirtler (Ankara: Kalan Yayinlari, 2000), esp. Part I. The point about the social diversity of the Kizilbash was previously made here in Chapter III within the context of Iraq; for evidence from the miihimme defterleri, see n. 93. Evidence for the same point in the Anatolian context can similarly be found in the various miihimme records cited in C. H. Imber, "The Persecution of the Ottoman Shntes according to the Miihimme Defterleri, 1565-1585," Der Islam, 56:2 (July 1979): 245-273; Bekir Kutukoglu, Osmanh-iran SiyasiMiinasebetleri (1578-1612) (Istanbul: Istanbul Fetih Cemiyeti, 1993), esp. 8-18; and Saim Sava$, XV7. Asirda Anadolu'da Alevilik (Ankara: Vadi Yayinlari, 2002), esp. 36-39.

180 of them to their cause, but by recruiting for the Safavid project a number of already

well-established mystics and shaykh families with widespread (tribal or non-tribal)

folio wings of their own. As we shall see below, with this new perspective on the subject

we can more easily account not only for the surprisingly rapid expansion of the

historical Kizilbash milieu, but also for its often little recognized resilience.

Ill- The Safavid Shahs and Their Anatolian Followers in the Post-Revolutionary Phase

It is commonly believed that Shah Ismail's coronation in 1501 ironically also

marked the beginning of decline for the Kizilbash who brought him to power. Policies that gradually undermined the clout of the Kizilbash in Iran had two key components: the consolidation of Shari'a -based Twelver Shi'ism as the official religion of the empire at the expense of Kizilbash norms of religiosity and culture, and the replacement by

Shah 'Abbas I (1587-1629) of tribally organized Kizilbash military units with units of slave soldiers recruited from among Christian prisoners of war. As a result of these policies, the Kizilbash milieu within the realms of the Safavid Empire was largely assimilated into the orthodox Shi'i fold by the end of the seventeenth century.

There is much in the standard literature about the role the Kizilbash political and military elite played in early Safavid Iran and their subsequent decline from prominence.18 The main body of the Kizilbash population who continued their

18 On the decline of the Kizilbash in Iran, in addition to general works on Safavid history cited in n. 1 above, see Hans R. Roemer, "The Qizilbash Turcomans: Founder and Victim of the Safavid Theocracy," in Intellectual Studies on Islam: Essays Written in Honor of Martin B. Dickson, ed. Michel M. Mazzaoui and Vera B. Moreen (Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1990): 27-39; Jean Aubin, "La Politique religieuse des Safavides," in he Shi'isme Imamite, Colloque de Strasbourg, 6-9 mail968, ed. T. Fahd (Paris: Presses Universitaires, 1970), 240. For a more recent and nuanced treatment of the subject, see Kathryn Babayan, Mystics, Monarchs, and Messiahs: Cultural Landscapes of Early Modem Iran (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2002).

181 existence in areas under Ottoman dominion are, however, seldom encountered in

Safavid historiography after the post-revolutionary phase that followed Shah Ismail's coronation. The virtual silence of the contemporary Safavid chronicles on the subject has given rise to the notion that Sufism had simply outgrown its political expediency for the Safavids once they had achieved their imperial ambitions. Although Safavid historian A.J. Newman has recently challenged this view, arguing for the continuing relevance of Sufism with regard to the legitimacy claims of the Safavid shahs, he does so mainly within the framework of Iranian internal politics, without much regard for the assertion's implications vis-a-vis the Alevi/Kizilbash communities in Anatolia.19

The Ottoman sources, on the other hand, make it amply clear that relations between the Safavid shahs and their Anatolian followers were maintained unabated even after the Ottoman victory at £aldiran in 1514. Most important in this regard are the dozens of records from the muhimme defterleri of the second half of the sixteenth- century, which include summary entries of imperial orders for the punishment of the

Kizilbash due to their pro-Safavid activities. In these entries are found references to

Safavi halifes active in Anatolia; the transfer of religious books, letters, and hildfetndmes from Iran into Anatolia; and the collection of alms and other devotional offerings among the Anatolian Kizilbash to be sent to the Iranian shahs.20 Although no other muhimme records mentioning the Kizilbash are available after the sixteenth century,

19 The enduring importance for the Safavid shahs of their Sufi credentials is most explicitly argued in A. J. Newman, Safavid Iran: Rebirth of a Persian Empire.

20 Fariba Zarinebaf-Shahr, "Qizilbash 'Heresy' and Rebellion in Ottoman Anatolia during the Sixteenth Century," Anatolia Moderna/Yeni Anadolu 7 (1977): 1-15; and S. Sava§, XVIAsirda Anadolu'da Alevilik, 62-66.

182 the persistence of spiritual ties between the Safavids and their Anatolian followers as

late as the beginning of the seventeenth century is confirmed by a report from 1619

concerning the Kizilbash communities (td'Tfe-i melahid) in Anatolia and the Balkans. This

report, prepared by £esmi Efendi, a leading member of the Ottoman ulema, for 'Osman

II, the contemporary Ottoman sultan,21 among other things makes the point that the

Kizilbash communities recognized the reigning Iranian shah 'Abbas I as their "miirsid."22

Notwithstanding their significance, however, the Ottoman sources undoubtedly

embody a top-down perspective and are far from impartial in what they report and

how they report it in matters concerning the Kizilbash. Their chronological coverage is

also too limited to provide a long-term view of Safavid-Kizilbash relations. This

chronological limitation is connected to the fact that Ottoman officials avoided

identifying an individual or group as Kizilbash in their documentation, except strictly

for purposes of incarceration and persecution.23 The Kizilbash/Alevis were treated

officially as regular Muslims, at least on paper, as long as they refrained from public

21A copy of this report is published in M. A. Danon, "Un interrogatoire d'heretiques Musulmans (1619)," Journal Asiatique (April-June 1921): 281-293. The report was prepared by the Ottoman kadi Cesmi Efendi, who supervised a comprehensive investigation of the Kizilbash as result of which several individuals were persecuted, Andreas Tietze, "A Document on the Persecution of Sectarians in Early Seventeenth-Century Istanbul," in Bektachiyya: Etudes sur I'ordre mystique des Bektachis et les groupes relevant de Hadji Bektach, ed. Alexandre Popovic and Gilles Veinstein (Istanbul: Les Editions Isis, 1995): 165-170.

22 A letter from among the Alevi documents, which was presumably written in the aftermath of the Safavid conquest of Baghdad in 1624, similarly talks of Shah 'Abbas I as "miirsid-i kamil," Ayfer Karakaya-Stump, "Kizilbas, Bektasi, Safevi iliskilerine Dair 17. Yiizyildan Yeni Bir Beige (Yazi Cevirimli Metin-Gunumiiz Turkcesine Ceviri-Tipkibasim)," in Festschrift in Honor of Orhan Okay, special issue of the Journal of Turkish Studies/TurklukBilgisi Arastirmalan 30/II (2006): 117- 130.

23 In Ottoman official terminology the word kizilbash was used in the sense of "rebel heretic," Zarinebaf-Shahr, "Qizilbash 'Heresy' and Rebellion," 2.

183 articulation of their divergent religious identities and unorthodox views. Thus from

around 1600 onwards, with the fading away of the Kizilbash military threat and the

related shift in Ottoman policy from persecution to containment and assimilation, the

Kizilbash/Alevi communities became virtually invisible in Ottoman archival

documents.

Despite the vanishing of the Kizilbash from imperial records by the early

sixteenth century, it is possible to acquire some insights into the long-term trajectory

of Safavid-Kizilbash relations from Safavid-related Alevi documents and manuscripts.

These sources, albeit few in number, allow us to trace direct contacts between the

Safavids and their Anatolian followers all the way to the end of the seventeenth

century and furnish us with important details concerning the inner-workings of these

relationships.

i. Appointment of Safari Khalifas/ Hallfes

It is well known that the Safavids appointed khalifas/halifes to serve as their emissaries among the Kizilbash communities in Anatolia. The special office of the khalifat al-khulafa, acting on behalf of the shah in matters involving Sufi affairs, was responsible for supervising the khalifa appointments. It was primarily through the agency of these khalifas and under the direction of the khalifat al-khulafa that contacts between the Safavids and the Anatolian Kizilbash were maintained.24 In the Ottoman miihimme registers, the Kizilbash khalifas frequently appear collecting alms for the

Safavids, conveying hilafetnames and other types of letters and "heretical books" from

24 Roger M. Savory, "The Office of Khalifat al-Khulafa under the Safawids," Journal of American Oriental Society, no. 85 (1965): 497-502.

184 Iran, and fomenting rebellion against the Ottomans.25 Although no exact data is available, the number of Safavid khalifas in Anatolia must have been quite substantial.

For example, Ma'sum Beg SafavT, a Kizilbash who served for sixteen years as the vizier of Shah Tahmasp I (1533-1576), is said to have at one time issued one hundred imperial orders for the appointment of khalifas in Anatolia.26 Despite its apparent extensiveness, however, very few documentary traces of this khalifa network seem to have survived into the present. Those that do survive include a small number of Safavid documents concerning khalifa appointments, which are called shajaras in Safavid diplomatics. But the examples of this genre known in the literature are all in Persian and do not pertain to the Kizilbash khalifas in Anatolia.27 The two Safavid documents to be found among recently appearing Alevi sources are thus noteworthy for being composed in Turkish and for being directly related to the Anatolian Kizilbash. Of these two documents, to be further discussed below, one is dated 1089/1678 (henceforth, "Hilafetname-1"), while the other, though dated 1842, appears to be at least partially a copy of an early sixteenth-century document (henceforth, "Hilafetname-2").

25 S. Sava§, XVI Asirda Anadolu'da Alevilik, 39-42.

26 Zarinebaf-Shahr, "Qizilbash 'Heresy' and Rebellion," 20.

27 For a discussion of the genre of shajara and a published example from the reign of Shah 'Abbas I, seeJahangTr Qa'im-maqamT, Muqaddama-ibarshinakht-iamad-itMkhi (Tehran, [1350] 1971), 90-95; for three shajaras promulgated by Shah Sultan Husayn, see T. M. MusavT, Orta-asr Azerbaycan TarikhinaDair Fars-dilli Sanadlar (XVI-XVIII Asrlar) [in Cyrillic alphabet] (Baku, 1977), docs. no. 18,19, and 20; and for a shajara by Shah Tahmasp, see H. MTr-Ja'farT and M. HashamT ArdkanT, "Farman-i Shah Tahmasp SafavT ba Mavlana RazTal-DIn Muhammad," Barrasiha-i tdrikhl9 ([l352]l973): 95-110.

185 Hilafetname-1

This document, which I describe with the term hildfetndme due to its content

and in accordance with usage in the Ottoman miihimme registers, is fully congruent

with the genre of shajara. In Safavid diplomatics, shajara is considered to be a special

farman category associated with the office of khalifat al-khulafa. Shajaras are formally

differentiated from other types of Safavi farmdns by a stylized genealogical tree of the

current ruler written in gold and red colors which is placed on the distinctively wide

right margin. These genealogies extend from the Prophet to Imam Musa al-Kazim,

Shaykh SafT, and the subsequent heads of the Safaviyya order, ending with the issuing

shah. Hilafetname-l, which fortunately has reached us in its original state, displays all

external characteristics of Safavid shajaras.2*

According to its date of §ewal 1089/1678 and the genealogy it contains,

Hilafetname-1 was promulgated by Shah Sulayman, also known as SafT II (r. 1666-1694). It

concerns the appointment of Sayyid Muhammad Tahir son of Mahmud Halife to the

position of halife of the Kavl community residing in the Akcadag district of the province

of Malatya. The basic structural arrangement of its text bears similarities to the other

known example of shajaras. It begins with the invocation of God and praises to the

Prophet Muhammad and Imam 'All, followed by a statement concerning the necessity

of appointing halxfes to different parts of the world for the guidance of the common

people onto the right path. The specific purpose of the document at hand is

subsequently explained. The document states that Sayyid Muhammad Tahir, who is

28 For the historical development and formal characteristics of the shajara genre, see Qa'im- maqaml, Muqaddama-ibar shindkht-iasndd, 90-93;and Bert G. Fragner, "Farman,"Encyclopaedia Iranica (New York: Bibliotheca Persica Press, 1999).

186 referred to as "one of our disciples in the land of Rum" (Rum vilayetinde olan

tdliblerimizden), was upon his own request raised to the position of halife of the KavT

community, a position heretofore occupied by his late father. The document also makes

clear that Sayyid Muhammad Tahir acquired the Mafetname during his visit to the

Safavid's "world-sheltering dergah" (dergah-i tihan-penahima geliip), which in this

context must mean the ancestral Safavid convent in ArdabTl.29

In the document's concluding section, Sayyid Muhammad Tahir's own disciples

(halife-i mezbur talibleri) and all the Sufis in the land of Rum attached to the Safavi family

(ve ol vilayetde olan bu haneddn-i velayet-ni§an sufileri) are urged to recognize his status as

a halife and to obey his authority without expecting an annual renewal of the

document.30 Preceding these concluding remarks is a long section describing Sayyid

Muhammad Tahir's duties as halife. According to the detailed list given there, Sayyid

Muhammad Tahir is among other things expected to command good morals and

refined manners in his disciples (mekdrim-i ahlak ve mehasin-i etvar) and to enjoin them,

in addition to the more typically Sufi religious service of zikr (devdm-i ezkar), all the

ritual observances associated with orthodox Shi'sm, including the five daily prayers

(salavat-i hams), payment of alms (edd'-izekevatuhums), fasting during the month of

Ramadan (savm-i sehr-i Ramazdn), and pilgrimage to the Kaaba (hacc-i beyttilldhi'l-haram).

29 "Li-hazd i§bu meal-i hikcete evanda Rum vilayetinde olan tdliblerimizden Mahmud Halife ogh siyadet- penah Seyyid Mehmed Tahir Halife dergah-i cihdn-penahima geliip 'alad ii Mas uzerinden kirpas gerdun- i hiimayunumayuz siiriip Maldtiyya vilayetinde Aggaddg kdsabasi ndhiyesinde merhum validiyle olan Kdvicemaatiniin hildfetin kendiisi-gun istid'a idicek 'atabe-i 'aliyyemizden hildfet-i mezbure miisdriin- ileyhe tefviz olunup, " Hilafetname-1, FD. of Muharrem Naci Orhan, b. in the village of Mineyik, Arguvan-Malatya.

30 uhalTfe-i mezbur talibleri ve ol vilayetde olan bu hdneddn-i veldyet-ni§an sufileri mumd-ileyhi cdnib-i serifmiiden mansib-i hildfete mansub ve ri'dyet ve murakabesin hdtir-i hidivdnemize mergub biliip evamir ve nevdhT-i mesruasina muti' ve miinkdd olalar ve her 'dmsecere-i miiceddede Idzim bilmeyiip 'aldmet-isen)ce 'itimdd kilalar," ibid.

187 He is also expected to prohibit his disciples from doing things forbidden by religion, including the drinking of wine (§urb-i humur). The manifestly orthodox viewpoint promoted in the document is by itself not surprising considering the Safavids' long- established espousal of orthodox Shi'ism by the time the hildfetndme was issued. It is, however, interesting for what it might suggest in terms of the Safavid shahs' attempts to reconfigure the Anatolian Kizilbash within the same orthodox framework also.

Hildfetndme-1 is found among the documents of the ocak of Imam Zeynel Abidin, which, as noted before, is one of the Alevi murshid ocaks of WafaT origin. It reveals an inherited master-disciple relationship between the Safavids and the ocak's ancestors and as such testifies to the fact that the various hereditary WafaT lineages in eastern

Anatolia had come to recognize the Safavid shahs' supreme spiritual authority.

Conversely, it also shows that the spiritual influence of the Safavid shahs over the

Anatolian Kizilbash was mediated through some deeply rooted Sufi structures whose origins pre-dated the Safavids. This process of mediation may also explain the apparent immunity of the Anatolian Kizilbash to Safavids' possible efforts (as indicated by the orthodox content of the document) to bring them into the fold of Shari'a-based

Twelver Shi'ism.

Hilafetname-1 also shows that the Safavid shahs formally continued to appoint emissaries among the Anatolian Kizilbash as late as the last quarter of the seventeenth century. Significant in this regard as well is the piece of information that Sayyid

Muhammad Tahir paid a visit in person to Ardabll to acquire his hildfetndme. In the absence of comparable documents, it is difficult to gauge the frequency of Alevi dedes' visits to Ardabll or the incidence of such formal halife appointments among the

188 Anatolian Kizilbash in this period. Notwithstanding this caveat, however, in view of

Hildfetndme-1 it is beyond doubt that a certain level of direct contact between the

Safavids and at least some of the Kizilbash/Alevi ocaks in Anatolia was maintained until nearly the end of the dynasty, a conclusion also confirmed by some of the Buyruk manuscripts to be considered below.

Hildfetndme-2

Hilafetndme-2 exhibits some major differences from Hildfetndme-1 and poses additional challenges to the researcher as a document In terms of its external features, the most obvious variation in Hilafetndme-2 is the placement of the Safavi genealogy within the main text, rather than in the right margin in the particular stylized design that is regarded as an earmark of the shajara genre. Hilafetndme-2 is further noted for its distinct Sufi discourse and for certain archaic aspects of its content and language, which appear chronologically out of place in view of the date recorded on it,

CemadiyeY&anl 1242/1826.

Hildfetndme-2 commences with a short introduction that contains the invocation of God and praises to the Prophet, his family, and the saints (evliya). The main body of the text that follows opens with a passage thematizing some key concepts of Sufism including the four levels of religious experience {§enat, tarikat, ma'rifet, and halakat); the explanation of the purpose of Creation with reference to a well-known hadith much favored by the Sufis, according to which God created the world because he desired to be known; and the role of the prophets and the saints in leading the people to the right

189 path.31 Next comes a statement concerning the prominent place of the descendants of

the prophet as saints and spiritual guides, among which, it is said, the Safavid family

occupies an eminent place. At this point, the document provides a detailed Safavid

genealogy that extends from Imam 'Ali up to Shah Ismail I.32

HUdfetndme-2 was granted to a certain Sayyid Siileyman, whom the document

describes as a descendant of Sultan Shah Ibrahim, father of Shahjunayd.33 This is

consistent with the fact that Hildfetndme-2 was found among the documents of the ocak

known by the name "§ah Ibrahim Veli," the only Alevi ocak that maintains an oral

tradition of having a consanguineous relationship with the Safavid family. It is well

attested in Safavid historiography that Shah Ibrahim's descendants (born to a mother

different than that ofJunayd's) , called the Shaykhavand, were one of the two renowned

side branches of the royal Safavid family, the other one being the PIrzade (kin of

31 "Ammd ba'd serf at ashdbinun mir'dt-i kalbine ve tarikat erbdbinun miskdt-i zamvrine bu beyzdziyali olan ma'rifet kelimdti hakikat makdmina zahir ve bdhirdiir kim ki garaz-i asliicdd-i 'dlemdin ve 'illet-i gd'ltekvin-i beniAdemdin ma'rifet-i ilahlve ru'yet-i hakd'ikiil-esyd' kemd-hiyedur ki kiintii kenzen mahfiyyenfe-ahbebtii en 'urafe fe-halaktul-halka likey 'urafe. Pes Hazret-i Rabb-ivedud mahz-i cud Hen 'dlemi hicdb-i 'ademdin mevcut bulup ve ol ciimledin Hazret-i insam mir'at (..) envdr-i cemdl-i cemil kilup ve min beynihim enbiyd-i 'izdmi kulub-i sdfiyye sahib hlmis ve evliyd-i kirami enfds-i kudsiyye He musdhib itmiszalikafazlu'lldhiyu'tihirnenyasdu' ta ki hakk bendelerine cddde-i §erfat nisdn viriip ve tdlibin-i rdh-i hiiddti tarikat menzilinde haklkat ma'arifetinun bade ve §arabin igiiriip makdm-i kurba vusul bulsunlar rahik-i tahkiki sdki-i hakk elindin husul kibunlar," Hildfetndme -2, FD of the Sivas branch of the ocak of §ah Ibrahim Veli.

32 "kicendb-iseyyidii'n-nebiyinvehatemWl-enbiyd'vel-miirsellnHazret-iMuhammed...olHazretiin evlad-i emcddi ildyevmii'l-kiyama evliya'-i rdsidm ve hiidat-i dm-i miibin abddl-i hakk ve aktab-i halk ve evtdd-i 'diem ve erkdn-i benlAdem oluplar hususen silsile-i 'aliyye-i safiyye-i 'aleviyye ve siildle-i sdfiyye-i haliyye-i Safaviyye bu riizgdrda bdde-i kurb-i hakkdin seyrdb ve nes'e-i(?) visdl-i rahmet-i ilahidin kdmydb ohms ol silsile-i 'aliyyenun ensdb-i tdhirin bu tertib ilendur: Ebul-muzaffer Sultan Sdh isma'll bin Sultan Haydar bin Sultan Ciineyd bin Sultan Sdh Ibrahim bin Sultan H(v)dce 'All bin Seyh Sadre'd-dm bin kidvetul-evliyd'fri-dfdkseyh Safiye'd-din Ishak... " ibid.

33 "es-Seyyid Siileyman ki hazret-i suitanWl-evliya ve burhdnul-asfiyd, el-'asxkes-safi es-selim Sultan Sdh Ibrahim nesebinde mensubdur," ibid.

190 Shaykh Safi" s shaykh, ZahTd GilanT).34 Both of these clans were affluent landowners in

and around Ardabll, and their members filled important positions in the Safavid

bureaucracy.35 Hilafetname-2 thus suggests that a branch of the Shaykhavand clan,

previously unknown in the literature, migrated to Anatolia and evolved into one of the

major Kizilbash/Alevi ocaks.

According to Hilafetname-2, Sayyid Suleyman traveled from Anatolia (memleket-i

Rum) to Ardabll and while in Ardabll visited several tombs belonging to his Safavid

ancestors, praying and offering sacrifices at each site. Just as in the case of Sayyid

Muhammad Tahir, Sayyid Suleyman apparently received the document concerning his appointment as halife when he was in Ardabll. However, there is a stark contrast between Hilafetname-2 and Hilafetname-1 in terms of the list each one gives concerning the duties expected from a Safavi halife. The list in Hilafetname-2 is much shorter compared to Hilafetname-1 and includes only tasks pertaining to the spiritual guidance of disciples and the performance of communal religious rituals (halka-izikr). Strikingly,

Hilafetname-2 does not mention any of the ritual observances or prohibitions associated with orthodox Islam that are so emphasized in Hilafetname-1.36

Hilafetname-2 records the year of Sayyid Suleyman's trip to Ardabll, hence the

34 Husayn ibn Abdal Zahidl, Silsildt al-nasab-i SafavTyah (Berlin: Chapkhanah-i Iranshahr, [1343J1924), 65, cited in Kishwar Rizvi, Transformations in Early Safavid Architecture: The Shrine of Sheikh Safi al-Din Ishaq ArdahTli in Iran (1501-1629) (PhD diss., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2000), 138,141.

35 Kishwar Rizvi, Transformations in Early Safavid Architecture, 141.

36 "ve bu iki dergah-i haldyik-penahdin izin buldi ve murahhas oldi ki Rum memleketinde tdlib ve muhibb ve mii'min ve sdfiolan eshdsa irsad kilsun ve bzini onlara halife bulsun, hakikat ve tarikat 'akd u nikdhi mii'minlere ve mix'mindta icrd itsiin ve halka-i zikr kuranda mecmu'-i ehl-i zikr ser-halka ve miir§id olsun, miiridlere murdd olsun ve sdlikine irsad kilsun," Hildfetndme-2.

191 date of the document, as 1242/1826. While it is possible that Alevi dedes may have

continued visiting the Safavi convent in ArdabTl long after the downfall of the dynasty,

some of its archaic textual details and linguistic qualities suggest that Hilafetname-2 was

fully or partially copied from an earlier document. To begin with, the Safavi genealogy

it contains does not go any further than Shah Isma'Tl I. Hilafetname-2 also has a

remarkable concluding passage, where sultans and emperors of Anatolia (selatm u

kayasire-iRum), i.e. the Ottomans, are urged to honor Sayyid Suleyman on account of his

eminent descent and to provide him the appropriate relief from taxes, as showing

proper respect to the saints, the sayyids, and the dervishes would ensure the

permanence of their state.37 Such an appeal to the Ottoman sultans, obviously

anachronistic for the early nineteenth century, would not be politically viable at the

time of the Safavids except during the first decade of the sixteenth century when both

Bayezid II and Shah Isma'Tl were trying to maintain relatively congenial relations

between the two empires. The curious admixture of elements from Eastern Turkish

(Chaghatay) and Azeri Turkish in the language of the document is also congruent with

what is known about the Turkish used in the Safavid royal milieu in this early period.38

All this lends support to the idea that the extant copy of Hilafetname-2 was at least

37 "ve selatm u kaydsire-i Ruma ve iimerd-i ol men u buma lazim ve evlddir kim ecdddi hiirmetine oni muhterem bulup mecmu'-isadirdtvesdlgundt-isultdnive tekelliifdtve teklifdt-i divdnidin mu'dfve miisellem hlup belki muvazzafbulsunlar ki evliyd ve sdddt ve fukardya miird'dt itmek bekd-i devlet-i ebed-miiddet-i sultdniye sebeb-i nur-i hiidd-i Hazret-i Hakka ba'is. olacakdur," ibid.

38 For example, V. Minorsky characterized the language of Shah Ismail's divan as a "Southern Turkish (Turcoman) dialect associated with the so-called 'Azarbayjan Turkish," while also noting the various Chaghatay elements in it, "The poetry of Shah Isma'Tl I," 1010. James Reid suggests that Chaghatay Turkish gradually became the lingua franca of the polyglot Kizilbash ruling elite in Iran, Tribalism and Society in Islamic Iran, 22. For two other early Safavid documents in Turkish, see L. Fekete, "ilk Sefevt Sahlannin Tiirkce Cikartilmis iki Senedi," Philologia Orientalis III (1973): 290-293.

192 partially copied from an older document, one most likely composed in the early sixteenth century, and that the date recorded on it is the date of the copying rather than that of the original document.

But this assumption, as suggested before, does not rule out the possibility that

Sayyid Siileyman actually paid a visit to Ardabil in the year 1242/1826. Indeed, the signature at the end of Hilafetname-2 belongs to a sayyid from Ardabil (el-'Abd el-hadim el-fakxr Seyyid Mir Nizam ErdebTli), who also stamped with his seal various parts of the document. Sayyid Mir Nizam ErdebTli may have been a dervish affiliated with the Sufi circles that remained at the old Safavi convent in Ardabil long after the Safavids disappeared from the historical scene. He may have put together Hilafetname-2 for

Sayyid Siileyman drawing on an older document that presumably belonged to the latter's ocak, both as a record of Sayyid Siileyman's visit to Ardabil and as a way of renewing his status as ocakzade. We have earlier seen that the full or partial duplication of older documents that belonged to Alevi ocaks for the benefit of affiliated dedes was also something frequently done at the convent in Karbala.

The ocak of §ah Ibrahim Veli is one of the most influential Alevi ocaks historically in eastern and central Anatolia and one whose members make a claim to murst'd-hood on account of their familial ties to the Safavids. They appear to have played an important role in maintaining the vitality of links between the Safavid shahs and their Anatolian followers, as well as in perpetuating the memory of the Safavids after the collapse of the dynasty. Sayyid Siileyman's visit to Ardabil as late as in

1242/1826 is an indication of this fact. It is also significant in this regard that dedes affiliated with this ocak have been the loci of resistance against the expanding influence

193 of the Celeb i Bektashis among the Kizilbash/Alevi communities and against the Celebi

Bektashis' contention that Had Bektas. is the sergesme (lit. "fountain-head") of the

entire Alevi-Bektashi milieu in Anatolia, a claim which seems to demote the role of the

Safavids in Kizilbash/Alevi history.39

H. Dispatch of Religious Treatises: The Buyruk Manuscripts

According to tradition, an authoritative account of the basic Alevi beliefs and

rituals is contained in a book called Buyruk (lit. "Command"). Typically only dede

families would own a copy of this sacred text, which in the past was carefully protected

from the gaze of outsiders. The earliest written reference to Buyruk is found in a

missionary report from 1857,40 and a Buyruk text was published for the first time in

Turkey in 1958.41 Since then, multiple other Buyruk manuscripts in private collections

39 For the view of a contemporary member of the ocak of Sah Ibrahim Veli concerning the issue, see the online article "Sah Ibrahim Veli'nin Kimligine Dair 1" by Ali Akin on the Web site devoted to the perpetuation of the memory of the ocak's founder: httpV/-WMw.5-ahib.rahimv.elLc.o.m.

40 "But they [ie. the Kizilbash] have a large book, called the Bouyouruk, which, as nearly as I can learn, is an eclecticism from the Old Testament scriptures interpersed with their own traditions," "Letter from Mr. Dunmore, January 22,1857," Missionary Herald 53 (1857): 220. Dunmore was a Protestant missionary from the Unites States who was engaged in proselytizing efforts among the Kurdish Kizilbash in the Dersim region. His conjecture about the content of the Buyruk tallies with his idea of the pre-Islamic, Christian origins of the Kizilbash religion. Concerning Dunmore and his missionary activities among the Kizilbash in eastern Anatolia, see my "The Emergence of the Kizilbaf in Western Thought: Missionary Accounts and Their Aftermath," in Archaeology, Anthropology and Heritage in the Balkans and Anatolia: The Life and Times ofF.W. Hasluck 1878-1920, 2 vols., ed. David Shankland (Istanbul: ISIS Press, 2004), 1: 329-353.

41 Buyruk, ed. Sefer Aytekin (Ankara: Emek Basim-Yayinevi, 1958). Aytekin, however, refrained from commenting on Buyruk's place in Alevi culture, describing it in the brief introduction simply as a book about "our peoples' beliefs and traditions," p. 3. Aytekin used an undated manuscript entitled Menahb-i Imam Ca'fer he collected in izmir, but also added at the end of his book excerpts from other similarly undated copies of Buyruk he collected from Maras, Alaca, Gumushacikoy, Malatya, and Hacibektas. Although Aytekin neither revealed the exact source of

194 and in libraries have become known, and a few of these have fully or partially appeared

in print.42 However, none of these publications provides sufficient textual or contextual

analysis of the manuscripts in question. Moreover, there are great variations between

the different copies of Buyruk, which have not so far been systematically compared with

one another. Considering the state of the field and the likelihood that the known

manuscripts constitute only a fraction of all the extant copies (many of which are still

kept in private archives), only some preliminary observations can be made about the

Alevi Buyruks at large.

To begin with, the title Buyruk is not encountered as such in the manuscripts. A differentiation is made between two types of Buyruks according to whether they claim to be the teachings of Shaykh SafI or of Imam Ja'far. The Buyruks are thus titled the

Menakib or the Risdle of the religious personage to which it is attributed. But virtually all published and unpublished Buyruk manuscripts considered for this dissertation contain other, often shorter, treatises in addition to the Menakibs, as well as long sections of poetry typically at the end. Furthermore, the Menakib texts themselves seem to draw on diverse sources43 and are not always easily distinguishable from the rest of the these manuscripts nor provided facsimiles, his work is commonly believed to be reliable and has served as the source for many other popular publications of Buyruk. Aytekin's work will also form the primary basis for my assessments concerning the Imam Ja'far Buyruks in this dissertation. Four years earlier than Aytekin's, another Buyruk manuscript appeared in print in Iraq, Ahmad Hamid al-Sarraf, al-Shabak (Baghdad: Matba'at al-Ma'arif, 1954). The manuscript for this came from among the Shabak communities in northern Iraq.

42 Among the most important and reliable of such publications include Buyruk' Alevi Inang-lbadet veAhlakilkeleri, ed. Mehmet Yaman (Mannheim: Alevi Kultiir Merkezi Dedeler Kurulu Yayinlan, 2000); and Bisati, §eyh SaftBuyrugu, ed. Ahmet Ta§gin (Rheda-Wiedenbriick: Alevi Kultiir Dernegi Yayinlan, 2003).

43 No systematic studies on the sources of the Buyruk manuscripts in general or of the Menahbs in particular have been carried out until today. It should be noted, however, that Golpinarh

195 manuscripts they are included in either by structure or content. Even if the beginning of the text is clearly marked, the ending is sometimes not, and a treatise which appears as an independent text in one copy may be chopped up and integrated into the main text of the Menakib in another copy. A large number of these variations seem to be the result of constant editing by individual copyists who had no qualms about mixing and matching different treatises and re-working them via selective omissions and interpolations of new material. At one level, then, Buyruk may be understood as a generic name for evolving collections of some core Alevi religious texts, while at a more strict level, only the Menahbs may be considered as proper Buyruks.44

In terms of issues covered, there are noticeable overlaps between the different

Buyruk types. Despite the word Menakib in their titles, neither type typically has much in the way of hagiographic stories about the two religious personages. Instead, on the authority of these and other prominent Alevi figures, the versions provide the basics of the path, such as the principles that should govern relations between a disciple and his spiritual master and between a disciple and his musahib, as well as standards of good morals and appropriate social behaviors. They also describe the various stages of

identified major overlaps between the fiitiiwetnameliteratur e and the Buyruks in terms of common rituals and stories, "islam ve Turk illerinde Futiiwet Teskilati ve Kaynaklan," Istanbul Universitesi iktisat Fakiiltesi Mecmuasi, 11:1-4 (October 1949-July 1950), see esp. no. 1, 58-60, 66-69. A link between the Buyruks and the sixteenth-century recension of Safwat as-Safci, a hagiographic account of the life of Shaykh Safi", was also proposed in Z.V. Togan, "Londra ve Tahrandaki islami yazmalardan bazilanna dair," Islam Tetkikleri Enstitiisii Dergisi 3, parts 1-2 (1959-60): 152.

44 The name Buyruk was presumably inspired by the texts' frequent use of the Turkish verb buyurmak meaning "to order, to command" to express the idea of a direct quotation from a prominent Alevi religious figure.

196 communal cem rituals and related aspects of Alevi beliefs and cosmology.45 No

systematic in-field observations have been carried out concerning the distribution of the two Buyruk versions among the different Alevi communities, but it appears that in cases where both versions are known, they are held at the same level of high esteem.46

Notwithstanding these similarities in content and reception, it is plausible that

Buyruks attributed to Shaykh SafT represent an older layer of the genre than those attributed to Imam Ja'far. It is noteworthy in this regard that of all the extant Imam

Ja'far Buyruks of which I am aware, none of the copies dates back any further than the nineteenth century,47 while there are two dated copies of Shaykh SafT Buyruks from the early seventeenth century,48 in addition to a few others which are undated but can be traced back to the reign of Shah Tahmasp based on the Safavid genealogies they

45 For example, compare the contents of the various copies of Imam Ja'far Buyruks published in Buyruk, ed. Sefer Aytekin, with the Shaykh SafT Buyruks published in Buyruk: AleviInang-ibddet ve Ahlakllkeleri, ed. Mehmet Yaman, and Bisatt, Seyh SaftBuyrugu, ed. Ahmet Tasgin.

461 have observed this attitude with many Alevi dedes in eastern Anatolia where I did field work.

47 The three dated copies of Imam Ja'far Buyruks that I know of are Risale-i Tarikat-i Imam Ca'fer-i Sadik, ms. dated 19 Muharrem 1292/1875 in the private library of Yesari Gokce; Menakib-i Imam Ca'ferii's-Scidik, ms. dated 1308/1890 in the private library of Yesari Gokce; both cited in Dogan Kaplan, "Aleviligin Yazili Kaynaklarmdan Buyruklar ve Muhtevalan Ozerine," paper presented at the I. International Symposium on Bektashism and Alevism, September 28-30, 2005, Isparta; and Menahb-i Imam Ca'ferii's-Sadik, ms. dated Sewal 1323/1905 in the private library of Mehmet Yaman. All other Imam Ja'far Buyruks that I am aware of, including the copies used by Aytekin, are undated and include no obvious textual or linguistic indications to a date earlier than the nineteenth century. This picture may change, however, with further research.

48 Macmua, ms. dated 1017/1608, Mevlana Miizesi Abdulbakt Kutiiphanesi, no. 181; Mendhbul- Esrar Behcetiil-Ahrar, ms. dated 1021/1612, Mevlana Miizesi Ferid Ugur Kitaphgi, no. 1172, transcription and facsimile published in Bisatt, Seyh SaftBuyrugu, ed. Ahmet Tasgin.

197 include.49 Furthermore, one of the most salient differences between the two types of

Buyruk involves the extent to which the Safavids and HacIBekta§ figure in each. With the exception of the HataT poems they include, the Imam Ja'far Buy ruks overall show few explicit signs of a Safavid connection. On the other hand, the Shaykh SafTBuyruks abound in direct references to the Safavids, beginning with the title itself. These

Buyruks typically include genealogies of Safavid shahs. In addition, long sections are organized in a question-answer format with the second shakyh of the Safaviyya,

Shaykh Sadr al-DTn, asking the questions, and the eponym of the order, Shaykh SafT, giving the answers. In contrast, while HacTBektas, makes little or no appearance in

Shaykh SafTBuyruks, the saint and his convent in Kir§ehir do turn up in Buyruks attributed to Imam Ja'far, albeit more frequently in some copies than in others. In other words, the declining presence of the Safavids and growing prominence of Haci Bektas. seems to be one of the most significant lines of disparity between the two Buyruk types.

Assuming that the overall chronology of the two Buyruk versions suggested above is true, this disparity may be a reflection of the eroding Safavid memory and the increasing Bektashi influence among Alevi communities in the post-Safavid era.

Thus, the Shaykh SafTBuyruks carry a greater value for an assessment of the nature and trajectory of Safavid-Kizilbash relations. A detailed description of the content of one such manuscript in its entirety would be in order here in order to illustrate some

49 Part of ms. no. 181 in Mevlana Mfizesi Abdiilbaki Kiitiiphanesi cited in n. 48 and the undated ms. no. 198 located in the same collection (the content of which is similar to that of ms. no. 181) may both be traced to the reign of Shah Tahmasp; see the relevant entries in Abdiilbaki Golpmarh, Mevlana Miizesi AbdiilbdldKiitiiphanesi Yazma Kitaplar Katalogu (Ankara: Turk Tarih Kurumu, 2003). Other examples oiBuymk manuscripts partially compiled during the reign of Shah Tahmasp will be discussed below.

198 related points. The manuscript under consideration comes from the province of

Erzincan (hereafter, Buyruk-Erzincan).50 It was copied in 1825, although textual evidence suggests that different portions of it must have been composed originally during the reigns of Shah Tahmasp and Shah 'Abbas. The existence of other Buyruk manuscripts which overlap almost fully or partially with Buyruk-Erzincan suggests that the latter is a relatively common copy.51 Buyruk-Erzincan is, according to its original pagination, 237 pages long and includes the following works/treatises:

A) The first seventeen pages of the manuscript include the treatise entitled "Ham

Kitab-i Hutbe-i Duvaz[deh]Imam radiya'llahu 'anhu," which comprises a prayer in

Arabic thematizing the Twelve Imams and an introduction in Turkish about its

uses and benefits.

B) Pages 17-139 include "Kitdb-i Makam-i Menakib-i §ervf-i Kutb'ul-'Arifin Hazret-i $eyh

Seyyid Saft," or Buyruk proper. It provides the fundamentals of the path (tank) on

the authority of Shaykh Safi (often portrayed responding to questions posed by

his son Shaykh Sadr al-dtn) and occasionally on the authority of Imam Ja'far and

Imam 'All. It also includes a Safavid genealogy that goes as far as Shah Tahmasp,

50 Buyruk-Erzincan, ms. dated 1241/1825-26, private library of Mehmet Yaman.

51 For example: i) Buyruk-Erzincan-2, ms. dated 1261/1845, private library of Hamza Ozyildinm is identical to Buyruk-Erzincan, except that the first three folioso f Buyruk-Erzincan-2 include the opening sura of the Koran, al-Fatiha, and a section entitled "Haza Salavat-i Sofiyan." ii) The Shabak Buyruk published by al-Sarraf is an almost identical copy of the first thirty-six pages of Buyruk-Erzincan, the sole difference being that the prayer "Hutbe-i Duvazde Imam" is placed at the end rather than at the beginning as in the Buyruk-Erzincan. iii) Ms. no. 181 in Mevlana Miizesi Abdiilbakf Kutiiphanesi cited in n. 48 is virtually identical with the first 147 pages of Buyruk-Erzincan; the most significant difference between these two manuscripts is that the part titled "Kitab-i Makam-i Menahb-i Serif'Kutb'ul-'Arifin Hazret-i Seyh Seyyid Saft" in Buyruk-Erzincan is titled "Menakibiil-Esrar Behcetiil-Ahrdr Hazret-i imam Natik Cafer-i Sdidik aleyhi's-selam, telifEs- Seyyid HatdT' in the other.

199 who is referred to as "§ah Dehman ibni Seyyid §ah ismal 1"; this is followed on

pages 58-59 by a poem praising him (Medh-i Sdh Dehman). Dehman is a corrupted

form of the name Tahmasp that is sometimes used in Buyruk manuscripts as well

as in Alevi poetry.52

C) Pages 139-142 include the text of what is identified in the relevant subheading

as a letter (mektub) sent by a certain Seyyid 'Abdiilbaki (Dergdh-i 'dlide Seyyid

'Abdiilbaki Efendi'nin Evliyd'ya muhibb olan mumin-i pdk-itikddlara gonderdugi

mektubdur), which covers some of the same issues in the preceding section,

albeit in a different format.53 The following two sections, that is, D and E, may or

may not be appendices to the letter.

D) Pages 142-147 are an untitled section that includes sayings of religious

personages, beginning with a saying by Imam 'All about good and moral

behavior; the same treatise is given in another Buyruk manuscript (ms. no. 181

in Mevlana Miizesi Abdiilbaki Kutiiphanesi, cited in n. 48) under the heading

"Der Beyan-i Qehdr Kelam."

E) Pages 147-180 include an untitled text that appears both in terms of its content

and format to be a continuation or a different version of "Kitdb-i Makam-i

Menakib-i Serif Kutb'iil-'Arifin Hairet-i Seyh Seyyid Soft.11

52 Fuad Kopriilu, "Abbas (Abbas i)," in TiirkHalkEdebiyatiAnsildopedisi: Ortagagve Yenigag Tiirklerinin Halk Kiiltiirix Uzerine Cografya, Etnografya, Etmoloji, Tarih ve Edebiyat Lugati, fasc. 1 (Istanbul, 1935), 14.

53 Abdiilbaki Golpinarh calls this text the KiigikBuyruk, the Short Buyruk, based on its content, which bears similarities to that of the Menakib text; however, there is nothing in the manuscript or in Alevi oral culture to warrant such an identification; idem., Tarih Boyunca Islam Mezhepleri ve #flik (Istanbul: Der Yayinlan, 1987), 178.

200 F) Pages 180-182 include a short piece recounting when each of the Twelve Imams

died and where each is buried; it is entitled "Bu Beyan-i Dvivazdeh imam'i Bildirir."

G) Beginning on page 182 is HataTs Nasihatname, a long poem in the genre of

mesnevi, followed in pages 189-195 by a group of poems by various other well-

known Alevi poets.

H) Pages 195-224 include a work entitled "Ham Kitab-i Fiitiiwetname."

I) The manuscript ends with a second group of poetry and a long prayer to be

recited at funerals (Dor Qekmek Du'dsi).

Considering their content and the traditional secrecy surrounding them, there is little doubt that the Buyruks had their origins in the religious books and letters that were according to the Ottoman miihimme registers clandestinely transferred from Iran to Anatolia by the Kizilbash halifes.54 In a paragraph in Buyruk-Erzincan, it is clearly stated that Menahb-i §enf is intended exclusively for the disciples of the path of the saints {muhibb-i evliya olan talibler) and that it should not be recited in the presence of others or given and even shown to just anybody (degme ki§ilere).55

The Kitab-i Makam-i Mendhb-i §enfKutb'ul-'Arifin Hazret-i §eyh Seyyid Safttn section B specifies in a relatively systematic way the rules of conduct for the disciples of the path of "Muhammed 'All." The compilation date of all or part of it can be traced to the reign

54 For example, concerning an accusation involving thirty-four heretical books (rdfizikitablar) brought from Iran by Kizilbash halifes, see MD 28:349:883 (19 Ramazan 984/1576); full text provided in S. Savas, XVI. Asirda Anadolu'da Alevtlik, 206.

55 "imdi evliydnun edebin ve erkanin biz bu Utah igindeyazdikkim muhibb-i evliya. olan talibler ohxyup 'amel ideler... amma erkan erenleri bu Kitab-i Menahb-i $erifi her kimiin oniinde gerekse okumayalar ve degme ki§ilerevirmeyelervegostermeyeler," Buyruk-Erzincan, p. 142.

201 of Shah Tahmasp (r.1524-1576). This is indicated by the Safavid genealogy it includes that reaches to Shah Tahmasp and by other references to him in the text, such as in a prayer to be recited during the initiation ceremony of the disciples, where he is referred to as the reigning shah (padi§dh-i cihdn) and the current miirsid {mxirsid-i zamdnii't-tarik-i haiiran vel-gaibdn).56 In another rather unusually theatrical passage,

Shah Tahmasp appears as the miirsid in action. This passage describes what appears to be a real-life exchange between the shah and three of his halifes concerning an issue that apparently came up during an earlier ritual gathering. Upon hearing the issue of conflict, Shah Tahmasp explains that if forty apples are brought to a ritual gathering attended by forty individuals (apparently as lokma, or sacred morsel), they should be distributed equally among the attendees so that each gets one apple regardless of rank, since among the disciples of the path no hierarchy based on rank is acceptable.57

On the other hand, the next section of the manuscript, which includes "Dergdh-i

'alide Seyyid 'AbdulbdkTEfendi'nin Evliyd'ya muhibb dan mu'min-i pak-i'tikadlara gonderdugi mektubdur," can be traced back to the reign of Shah 'Abbas I. This is suggested by the

56 The relevant section of the prayer, which includes a supplication to God on behalf of the Prophet, the Twelve Imams, the Fourteen Innocent Ones, and all believers in addition to Shah Tahmasb, reads as follows: "Sirr-i Ahmed §ah ve dhirii'z-zamdn ve sdhibu'z-zamdn ve Duvazdeh Imam ve Qihardeh Ma'sum-i Pdk huccetii%kayyumii'r-rahmdn ve delil-i hadfl-burhan kutb-i me§d'ih-i zamdn ibnii's-svdtdn §dh Dehmdn cdn pddi§dh-i cihdn ve miirsid-i zamdnii't-tank-i hdzirdn ve'l-gd'ibdn ve li- Mlli'l-mumimnecma'Tn bi-rahmetikeyderhame'r-rdhimm.''Buyruk-Erzincan, pp. 62-63.

57 "Ustdd-i nefes i'mdn-i tankat erkdn-i me§dyih §dh Dehmdn-i Hiiseynibuyumr kim tdliblere ve muhiblere malum olsunkim $dh-i 'Alem-pendh e§iginde gdziler halka-i sohbet kurup tevhld iderlerdi. Ndgdh bir mu§\dl zdhir oldi. AliHalife ve Ibrahim Hallfe ve Ebul-gdr HalTfe ol sohbetde ham idi. Bunlar ayak uzere peymdnceyirine gegiip nazara turdilar. §dh-i 'Alem-pendh hazretine ol mii§kili dgah itdiler. Hazret-i $dh buyurdukim bir sohbetde kirk ki§i cem olsa ve ol sohbete kirk done elmd gelse vdcib oldur ki ciimlesine bir bir viriip kismet ideler eger ma'sdm olsun ve eger kdmil olsun diigeli beraber goreler bah§ idelerzird kimyol icinde buyiik kUciikolmaz. Her kardasin nzdsi hdsildur. Hakkin tanimi§ kardas niydzmend olur." Buyruk-Erzincan, p. 84.

202 striking overlaps in terms of both content and individual sentences between the first

part of the letter by Seyyid 'Abdulbakl included in section C of Buy ruk-Era'ncan and

another letter sent to a member of the ocak of Dede Kargin in the immediate aftermath

of the conquest of Baghdad by Shah 'Abbas I in 1624.58 That the name of the sender of

this other letter was also Seyyid Bakl provides further support to this conclusion. In both, Shah 'Abbas is referred to as the long-awaited military commander ready to

emerge to avenge the blood of the descendants of the Prophet.59 It is possible that

letters similar in content were simultaneously sent out to the leaders of the Anatolian

Kizilbash to garner support for Shah 'Abbas's military campaigns in the early

seventeenth century to regain territories earlier lost to the Ottomans and that a copy of it eventually found its way into the Buyruk manuscripts. It is interesting that in these letters a Mahdi-like image is invoked for Shah 'Abbas, an image that diverges from the overall picture of the Safavid shahs in the Buyruks, where they appear primarily as serene Sufi masters.

There is also a copy ofShaykh SafiBuyruk proper which can be traced to the reign of Shah 'Abbas (r. 1587-1629). This contemporaneous copy, entitled Riscde-i Seyh

Safi, was made in 1021/1612 by a certain Mehemmed b. Hablb in liva-i Sarvkan (modern

58 For this letter, see my, "Kizilbas, Bektasi, Safevi iliskilerine Dair 17. Yiizyildan Yeni Bir Beige."

59 Cf. the two following passages: "siz erenler munca zamdndan beri va'de viriip intizdnn gekdiginiz §dhsiivdr-i merd-i meyddn hdld meyddnda hdzir olup muhibb-i hdneddnm murddin viriip ve du§[mendn- i][hd]neddn-i dl-i Muhammed'in [neseb] ii zurriydtm. rvy-i zeminden mahv itmege zahirolmu§dur," ibid., 119; and "gonli gbzi bu dergdh-i 'dlide olup mix§tdk-i dxddr olanlar... miijdegdn ve be§dretler olsun kim bir nige zamdn va'de viriip geliir diyii intizdnn gekdiikleri §dhsiivdr-i meyddn-i fesdhat ve gevher-i kimyd-yi kelam-i beldgat tig-i ml-fekdr-x §ecd'at gekiip evldd-i Muhammed 'AlTdii$manlanna mahdbet ve saldbet gosteriip devlet ve (?) feih u nusret hlicin galup ehl-i beyt-i resQl hizmetine ddmen dermeydn kdup cevldniizerediir," Buynik-Erzincan, pp. 139-140.

203 province of Manisa in western Anatolia).60 In some ways it is the most coherent and well-organized Buyruk manuscript and includes a Safavid genealogy that begins with

"Haza Sultan §ah 'Abbas ibni Sultan §ah Tahmasb." The name of Shah 'Abbas also appears in the wording of the vow the disciple is expected to take during the initiation ritual in which he promises to abide by the rules of the path.61 This is clearly comparable to the mention of the name of Shah Tahmasp in Buymk-Erzincan in a prayer to be recited during the initiation of disciples, although the phrasing in the two cases is dissimilar. Overall, while there are significant commonalities between Buyruk-Erzincan and the Buyruk copy dated 1021/1612, there are sufficient differences between them, especially in terms of language and organization, to suggest that the Buyruk copy is most likely a thoroughly re-worked version of the former. No messianic undertones similar to those in the above-mentioned letters are, however, detected in the text.

Finally mention should be made of another Buyruk copy, entitled Kitdb-i Makdm-i

Menakib-i Kutbul-'Ariftn Hairet-i Seyh Seyyid Sa.fi, in which Shah Sulayman (r. 1666-1694) appears as the reigning shah.62 This manuscript was not available to me, but it was described in detail by Abdulbaki Golpinarh. Golpinarh in particular noted the prayer

(gulbdng) concluding the work, in which all the Safavid shaykhs/shahs as a group are praised and honored on account of the spiritual path they have promoted, but with

60 See n. 48 above for the reference.

61 "Tevbekildimcerru-imenahidenhaza.§ah 'Abbasibni§ahTahmaselindentevbeitdim, buhazir erenler tanikligiyle eger donersem mahm telem ve can ve basxm ciimle erenler meydamndadir," Bisatt, §eyh SaftBuyrugu, ed. Ahmet Tasjin, p. 25/ fol. 17b.

62 Macmua, ms, Mevlana Miizesi Abdulbaki Kutuphanesi, no. 199.

204 only Shaykh Safi, Shah Isma'il (under his penname HataT), and Shah Sulayman as the current shah and mur^x'd being mentioned by name.63

IV-Conclusion

By and large, unexpectedly few Safavi-related documents have been found among the Alevi sources to surface so far. Unless entirely coincidental, this situation may be connected to the gradually shrinking intensity of contact between the Safavids and the Anatolian Kizilbash or simply to the high risk associated with preserving such documents—or perhaps to both. However, even these few documents, when combined with the Buyruk manuscripts and Ottoman archival sources, provide at least a partial answer to the long-open question of how long after the £aldiran defeat the Safavid shahs were seen as masters of the order by the Kizilbash or laid a claim to that role. The documents and manuscripts reveal lasting relations between the Anatolian Kizilbash and the Safavid shahs up until the end of the reign of Shah Sulayman, albeit of probably limited intensity and only through the intermediary of the office of khalifat al-khxlafa.

Even after the demise of the dynasty, Alevi/Kizilbash communities, especially those affiliated with the ocak of §ah Ibrahim, continued to look to Ardabil as their distant spiritual center and to cherish the spiritual memory of the Safavids.

Appointment of khalifas/halifes and the dispatching of religious texts were among the main avenues of contact between the Safavids and the Anatolian Kizilbash.

As has been noted multiple times throughout this chapter, the hilafetnames and the

63 "veErdebil'deyatanSeyhSeyyidSafiveSultanHataipadi§ahinvesiirdiikleriyollannveerkanlann tevhidlerin ve u/u 'azim cem'iyyetlerinin zevki ve safasmin ve ciimle tahta gegen evladlanmn ve miir§id-i kamil Siileyman-i zaman §ahvmizxn dem-i devleti ve dem-i devrani hiirmeti hakhcixn qerceqe hu." Cited in Mevlana Miizesi AbdulbakiKiitiiphanesi Yazma KitaplarKatalogu, 203-204.

205 Buyruk texts depict Safavid-Kizilbash relations primarily within a Sufi framework. This tallies well with the historical socio-religious context of the Kizilbash movement which, it has been argued, united various Sufi and dervish circles under the spiritual and political leadership of the Safavids. What ultimately bolstered the Safavids' political and messianic claims among those who joined the Kizilbash milieu was their spiritual clout which was derived from their status as hereditary Sufi shaykhs and sayyids. It is primarily on these bases that the various WafaT lineages in eastern Anatolia continued to honor the Safavid shahs' spiritual authority. The messianic component of the early

Safavid discourse, on the other hand, appears to have remained as a latent motif to be invoked during times of military encounters with the Ottomans such as during the reign of Shah 'Abbas I.

206 CONCLUSION

Scholars often approach so-called heterodox communities in the Islamic world with an attitude of mystery. There is typically an inadequate understanding of their belief-systems and internal structures and little more than intriguing but poorly substantiated speculations concerning their historical origins. The shortage of reliable studies on the past and the present of these communities is the result of a host of different factors, among the most important of which is the paucity of written sources that convey an emic perspective on the inner workings of the communities in question, for whom orality rather than the written word has been the chief mode of cultural transmission. Newly available Alevi documents and manuscripts which have been kept for centuries in the private archives oidede families provide some remedy for this situation in the case of Alevi studies.

The present dissertation was conceived as the first systematic investigation of these Alevi sources. Compared to their counterparts in more systematic archives, this new body of sources poses a number of unique challenges to the researcher because of their fragmented nature and the frequently degenerated state of extant copies. In this dissertation, a group of documents associated with the Alevi ocak network in eastern

Anatolia has been used in combination with oral histories collected from the related dede families. These sources have been scrutinized specifically for what they reveal concerning the little-known historical trajectory of the Alevi socio-religious structures centered around charismatic ocak lineages. Three distinct themes emerging from the

207 Alevi sources regarding the subject at hand have been treated in the four chapters of the dissertation. The major findings can be summarized as follows.

The first chapter, drawing on the WafaT ijazas that constitute the oldest layer among the Alevi documents, established the WafaT affinity of a wide network of Alevi ocaks in eastern Anatolia, including the ocaks of Dede Kargin, Imam Zeynel Abidin, and

Aguicen, and their affiliates. Originating in eleventh-century Iraq, the WafaT order established a widespread presence in Anatolia starting in the late medieval period. The various eastern Anatolian branches of the order sustained their vitality until the early sixteenth century, after which they merged into the larger Kizilbash milieu. The hereditary Wafa I lineages that joined the Kizilbash movement preserved their spiritual prerogatives over their own circles of followers even as they came to recognize the spiritual authority of the Safavid shahs and evolved into distinct components of the

Alevi ocak system. The permanence of these deeply rooted Sufi structures which pre­ dated the Safavids explains the fascinating survival capacity of the Kizilbash/Alevi communities in the politically hostile environment of Ottoman Anatolia. From a broader perspective, this chapter's findings regarding WafaT cum Kizilbash ocaks contest the long-standing paradigm that links Anatolian "heterodoxies" to the Central

Asian Yeseviyye order which purportedly preserved pre-Islamic shamanistic cults under the guise of popular Sufism. This chapter's findings rather highlight the important role of the Wafa'iyya in Alevi history as well as in Anatolian religious history at large, a role obscured by the co-optation of the order's legacy into the classical

Bektashi tradition.

208 Chapters two and three confronted two distinct but related aspects of the complicated issue of Alevi-Bektashi relations. One of the most notable revelations of the Alevi sources in this regard is the relatively institutionalized relations between the

WafaT cum Kizilbash ocaks and the Abdal/Bektashi convent located in the courtyard of the shrine of Imam Husayn in Iraq known as the Karbala convent. Beginning with this finding and related in-field observations, chapter two discussed the historical background of the Abdal-Bektashi symbiosis within the framework of the two groups' common association with the cult of HacTBektas. and underscored the contested nature of the saint's legacy as the primary marker of the historically fluid boundaries between them. The Abdals of Rum often adopted a Bektashi identity to evade the persecution to which they were subjected on account of their support to the Safavids and eventually were fully assimilated into the Bektashi order following the demise of the Safavid dynasty. This process was duly mirrored in the Bektashization of the Abdal convent in

Karbala. This chapter also proposed that the Ottoman policy to promote the officially- sanctioned Bektashi order as the one and only legitimate representative of the legacy of HacTBektas. was a response to the popularity of the Safavid cause among communities affiliated with the saint's cult, but that this policy achieved only partial success since many Abdal/Bektashi circles remained within the Safavid sphere of influence.

Chapter three focused further on relations between the Karbala convent and

WafaT cum Kizilbash ocaks, drawing on Alevi documents issued or ratified at this convent. The case was made that the Abdal/Bektashi circles in the Karbala convent— who presumably shared with these ocaks a joint WafaT /BabaT past reaching back to

209 pre-Safavid times—intermediated relations between the Safavid shahs and their

Anatolian followers. This chapter accordingly linked the origins of the cult of Had

Bekta§ among the Wafat cum Kizilbash ocaks to an alternative memory of the saint

inherited through the venue of this Abdal/Bektashi convent in Karbala. It suggested

that this preexisting affinity with the cult of HacTBektas. facilitated the later

integration of the Alevi ocaks into the network of the £elebi Bektashis from the early

nineteenth century on. The findings of chapter three confirm oral traditions

concerning the relatively recent origin of the expansion of £elebi Bektashis' influence

into eastern Anatolia and indicate a need to go beyond the Had Bekta§ convent in

Kir§ehir for a fuller grasp of the multifaceted Alevi-Bektashi relations.

The final chapter was devoted to the Safavid connection with the Anatolian

Kizilbash. Teasing out the larger implication of the findings presented in previous

chapters, this chapter disputed depictions of the Kizilbash movement as essentially a

coalition of Turkmen tribes and instead portrayed the Anatolian Kizilbash milieu as a

union of various concurring mystical formations and antinomian dervish groups which

through the course of the late fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries coalesced under

the Safavid banner. The Safavid-related Alevi-documents and manuscripts studied in

this chapter were congruent with indications that Safavid spiritual discourse vis-a-vis

their followers in Anatolia, notwithstanding its strong messianic overtones in the

revolutionary phase, operated ultimately within a Sufi framework. The findings reveal that the Safavid shahs were viewed as mw§id-i kamih by the Anatolian Kizilbash and

continued to lay a claim to that role at least until the late seventeenth century as they

continued bestowing hilafetndmes on members of selected Alevi ocaks and dispatching

210 religious treatises to Anatolia. Although the Safavid memory began to fade away with the demise of the dynasty and the growing influence of the £elebi Bektashis in eastern

Anatolia, it continued to be cherished nevertheless especially among the communities affiliated with the ocak of §ah Ibrahim Veli, presumably the only Alevi ocak with a consanguineous link to the house of the Safavids.

With its focus limited to the family archives of a group of prominent dede families in eastern Anatolia, the present dissertation primarily spotlighted the case of

Alevi ocaks of WafaT origin. Its findings may be further elaborated or revised with the discovery of new Alevi documents and manuscripts. A particularly fruitful direction for future research may be to study from a comparative perspective the documents of other Alevi ocaks in this and other parts of Anatolia and in the Balkans. Such an endeavor would likely highlight the place in Kizilbash history of additional religious orders and groups such as the BedreddTnTs, who were the followers of the famous early fifteenth-century mystic-rebel Shaykh Bedreddln, and such as the mystically oriented guild organizations of medieval Anatolia known as the Akhls (Turk. Ahl).1 For Alevi

1 There are suggestions in the literature concerning both of these groups' close affinity with the historical Kizilbash movement. Concerning the possible BedreddTnT origin of some Kizilbash communities in the Balkans, see for example, Mehmet Beytullah, Alevilik Kesmekesligi ve Bulgaristan Kmlbashgi (Sofia, 1999), 48-50; and Michel Balivet, §eyh Bedreddirv Tasawufve Isyan (Istanbul: Tarih Vakfi Yurt Yayinlan, 2000), originally published under the title Islam mystique et revolution armee dans les Balkans Ottomans vie du Cheikh, Bedreddin le "Hallaj des Turcs" (1358/59-1416) (Istanbul: ISIS, 1995), 104-108. The AkhT connection of the Anatolian Kizilbash is, on the other hand, indicated by AkhT ijazas found among the Alevi documents, one of which was mentioned in the Introduction of this dissertation, p. 31; the AkhT connection is further indicated by the striking overlaps between the Buyruks and the futiivvetname literature of the AkhTs in terms of common rituals and stories, as identified by Abdiilbaki Golpinarli, "islam ve Turk illerinde Futiiwet Teskilati ve Kaynaklan," Istanbul OniversitesiiktisatFakiiltesiMecmuasi, 11:1-4 (October 1949-July 1950), no. 1:58-60 and 66-69. Kathryn Babayan has also pointed out AkhT circles as one of the spheres from which the Safavids recruited followers, Mystics, Monarchs, and Messiahs: Cultural Landscapes of Early Modern Iran (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2002), 173- 174.

211 ocaks centered in central and western Anatolia, new Alevi documents may also reveal variations in terms of the historical trajectory of the ocaks' relations with the Bektashi order, since in-field observations suggest that the ocaks in these parts of Anatolia were integrated into the network of the £elebi Bektashis at a much earlier date and much more seamlessly than their counterparts in eastern Anatolia.

Overall, future comparative studies of Alevi documents and manuscripts concerning individual ocaks or groups of them in the larger Ottoman geography will allow us to paint a much more historically accurate and nuanced picture of

Kizilbash/Alevi history. Our findings in Alevi history may also open new avenues of research in the study of other "heterodox" communities in the Islamic world by, among other things, alerting historians to the previously underappreciated potential of Sufism to provide a basis for social order and thereby to give rise to and sustain distinct religious communities.

212 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Published and Unpublished Primary Sources

Family Documents

Abuzer Giizel Dede, born in Kurudere, Bulam-Adiyaman, member of the ocak of Aguicen.

Ahmet Riza Kargin, born in the village of Dedekargm, Yazihan-Malatya, member of the ocak of Dede Kargin. [Originals currently in the Archives of Turk Kiilturii ve Haci Bektas. Veli Arastirma Merkezi in Ankara].

Ahmet Mutluay, born in the village of Sim, Elazig, member of the ocak of Aguicen.

Hasan Hiiseyin Giilbahar and Nurcemal Mola, born in the village of Giirge, Arguvan- Malatya, members of the ocak of §eyh Siileyman.

Hilafetname dated Cemadiye's-sanT 1242/1826, Sivas branch of the ocak of §ah Ibrahim Veli. A photocopy of the document in the private library of Mehmet Yaman. Location of the original unknown.

Hiiseyin and Hayri Dogan, born in the village of Boregenek, Adiyaman, member of the ocak of Aguicen. izzettin Dogan, born in the village of Kirlangic, Hekimhan-Malatya, member of the ocak of Aguicen.

Muharrem Naci Orhan, born in the village of Mineyik(Kuyudere), Arguvan-Malatya, member of the ocak of Imam Zeynel Abidin.

Muharrem Ercan, born in the village of Baymdir, Keban-Elazig, member of the ocak of Sinemilli.

Mustafa Ay gun, born in the village of §ahlu-Yenimahalle in Goyniicek-Amasya, member of the ocak of Aguicen.

Mustafa iyidogan, member of the Sivas-Yildizeli branch of the ocak of Kizil Deli.

Tacim Bakir, born in the village of Kantarma, Elbistan-Kahramanmara§, member of the ocak of Sinemilli.

Myruk Copies

Buyruk. Edited by Sefer Aytekin. Ankara: Emek Basim-Yayinevi, 1958.

213 Buyruk Alevi inang-ibadet ve Ahldk ilkeleri. Edited by Mehmet Yaman. Mannheim: Alevi Kiiltiir Merkezi Dedeler Kurulu Yayinlan, 2000.

Bisati (?). Mendhbu'l-EsrdrBehcetu'l-Ah.rar. MS, dated 1021/1612. Mevlana Miizesi Ferid Ugur Kitaphgi, no. 1172. Transcription and facsimile published in Seyh SafiBuyrugu, edited by Ahmet Tafgin. Rheda-Wiedenbruck: Alevi Kiiltiir Dernegi Yayinlan, 2003.

Kitabul-Menakib. Text published in appendix to Ahmad Hamid al-Sarraf, al-Shabak. Baghdad: Matba'at al-Ma'arif, 1954.

Macmua (Seyh SafiBuyrugu). MS, dated 1017/1608-9. Mevlana Miizesi Abdiilbaki Kiitiiphanesi, no. 181.

Macmua (Seyh SafiBuyrugu). MS. Mevlana Miizesi Abdiilbaki Kiitiiphanesi, no. 198.

Macmua (Seyh SafiBuyrugu). MS. Mevlana Miizesi Abdiilbaki Kiitiiphanesi, no. 199.

(Seyh SafiBuyrugu). MS, dated 1241/1825. Private library of Mehmet Yaman, member of the ocak of Hidir Abdal, village of Ocak in Kemaliye-Erzincan.

(Seyh SafiBuyrugu). MS, dated 1261/1845. Private library of Hamza Ozyildinm, member of the ocak of Elabas/Celal Abbas, village of Kayaba§i in Kemah-Erzincan.

Archival Sources

Ankara, Vakiflar Genel Mudiirliigu Arsjvi (General Directorate of Endowments): Defter no. 592 (Vakfiye-i Sadis) Defter no. 2114 Defter no. 166 (Esas 3/l) Defterno. 816 (Tafsil-i Arabistan) Defter no. 888 (Hiilasa Defteri) Defter no. 419 (Erzurum Asker)

Istanbul, Ba§bakanlik Osmanli Arsjvi (Prime Ministry Archives): TT64 ibnu'1-Emin Evkaf, 2725 Cevdet Evkaf, 6210

Published Documents and Archival Sources

Ahmet Refik. Onaltina Asirda Rafidlik ve Bekta§ilik. Istanbul: Muallim Ahmet Halit Kitabhanesi, 1932.

Akku§, Mehmet. "19. Asirda Bir Bekta§i icazetnamesi." Tasawuf 1:1 (August, 1999): 26- 37.

214 A§an, Muhammet Be§ir. "Firat Havzasinda Tespit Edilen Vefai Silsile-namesi ve Bazi Diif iinceler." In XIV. Turk Tarih Kongresi, Ankara: 9-13 Eyltil 2002: Kongreye Sunulan Bildiriler. Vol. 2, part 2,1517-1524. Ankara: Turk Tarih Kurumu, 2005.

Mr. Dunmore. "Letter from Mr. Dunmore, January 22,1857." Missionary Herald 53 (1857): 218-220.

Fekete, L. "ilk Safevi §ahlanmn Tiirkce Qikartilmis. iki Senedi." Phibhgia Orientalis 3 (1973): 290-293.

Hezarfen, Ahmet and Cemal §ener. Osmanli Arsivi'nde Muhimme ve trade Vefterleri'nde Aleviler-Bektasiler. Istanbul: Karacaahmet Sultan Dernegi Yayinlan, n.d.

"Kara Pir Bad'in Soyagaci.'ln Nejat Birdogan, Anadolu ve Balkanlar'da Alevi Yerlesmesi, 223-235. Istanbul: Mozaik Yaymlan, 1995.

MIr-Jafarl, H. andM. HashamTArdkanT. "Farman-i ShahTahmasp SafavTbaMavlana RazI al-DTn Muhammad." Barrasiha-i tartkhT9 ([l352]l973): 95-110.

Musavl, T. M. Orta-asr Azerbaycan Tarikhina Vair Fars-dilli Sanadlar (XVI-XVIII Asrlar). [in Cyrillic alphabet]. Baku, 1977.

Yinanc, Refet and Mesut Elibiiyiik. Kanuni Devri Malatya Tahrir Defteri (1560). Ankara: Gazi Universitesi Yayini, 1983.

. Maras. Tahrir Defteri (1563). 2 Vols. Ankara: Ankara Universitesi Basimevi, 1988.

§ener, Cemal. Osmanli Belgelerinde Aleviler-Bektasiler. Istanbul: Karacaahmet Sultan Dernegi Yayinlan, 2002.

Yalcin, Alemdar and Haci Yilmaz. "Kurey§an Ocagi Hakkinda Bazi Bilgiler." Haa Bekta§ VeliArastirma Dergisi 23 (Fall 2002): 9-24.

Chronicles and Literary Sources

Abdal Musd Veldyetndmesi. Edited by Abdurrahman Giizel. Ankara: Turk Tarih Kurumu, 1999.

Abdi-zade, Hiiseyin Hiisameddin. Amasya Tarihi I (Mukaddime). Edited by Ali Yilmaz and Mehmet Akku§. Ankara: Amasya Belediyesi Kultiir Yayinlan, 1986.

'Abdurrahman Caml. Nefehatiirl-uns min hadaratil-kuds. Translated by Lami'T Celebi. Istanbul: Marifet Yayinlan, 1980.

215 al-Aflaki al-'Ariff, Shams al-Din Ahmad. Manakib al-'Arifin. Edited by Tahsin Yazici. Rev. 2nd ed., 2. vols. Ankara: Turk Tarih Kurumu, 1976-80.

. [ Ahmed Efiaki]. Ariflerin Menkbeleri (Mevlana ve EtrafmdakUer). Translated by Tahsin Yazici. Rev. 4th ed., 2 vols. Istanbul: Remzi Kitabevi, 1986.

Ahmed Rif at. Mirdtftl-Makdsxdfi'DefVl-Mefdsid. Istanbul: Ibrahim Efendi Matba'asi, [1293] 1876.

A. RifkT. BektasfSirri Istanbul, 1325-1328 [1907-1910].

"All Su'ad. Seyahatkrim. Istanbul: Kana'at Matba'asi, 1332 [1916].

. Seyahatlerim. Edited by N. Ahmet Ozalp. Istanbul: Kitabevi, 1996.

A§ik ViraniDivanu Edited by M. HalidBayn. Istanbul: Maarif Kitaphanesi, 1959.

'A§ikpa§azade Ahmed. 'A§ikpa§azdde Tarihi. Istanbul: Matba'a-i 'Amire, 1332 [1914].

. Mendhb ix tevdnh-i dl-i 'Osman. In Osmanh Tarihleri I: Osmanh Tarihinin Anakaynaklan Olan Eserlerin, Mutehassishr Tarafmdan Hazirlanan Metin, Tercume veya Sadele§tirilmi§ §ekilleri Kiilliyatx, edited by N. Atsiz £ift<;ioglu, 79-329. Istanbul: Tiirkiye Yaymevi, 1949.

Bagdath Ismail Pa§a. Ke§f-el-zanun zeyli: izah al-maknunfial- zayli add kcurfal- zunun an asdmial-kutubivalfunun. Vol 1. Istanbul: Milli Egitim Basimevi, 1945. al-Basn, 'Uthman bin Sanad al-Wa'ilT. Matali' al-Su'ud: Tdnkh oil- 'Iraq min sanat 1188 ila sanat 1242 k /1774-1826 m. Edited by 'Imad 'Abd al-Salam Rauf and Suhayla 'Abd al-MajTd al-Qaysi. Baghdad: al-Dar al-Wataniyya, 1991.

Battalname: Introduction, English Translation, Turkish Transcription, Commentary and Facsimile. Edited by Yorgos Dedes. 2 Vols. Sources of Oriental Languages and Literatures 34, ser. ed. SJnasi Tekin and Gonul Alpay Tekin. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University, 1996. al-DurubT, Ibrahim 'Abd al-Ghanl. al-Baghdddiyun: Akhbdruhum wa Majdlisuhum. Baghdad: Dar al-Shu'un al-Thaqafiyya al-'Amma, 2001.

Elvan Celebi. MendkibuTl-kudsiyyefimendsibirl-unsiyye. In TarihiMetin Calismalannda Usui: Mendhbul-Kudsiyye Uzerinde Bir Deneme, edited by MertolTulum, 175-651. Istanbul: Deniz Kitabevi, 2000.

. Mendkibul-Kudsiyye FtMendsibil-Unsiyye: Baba ilyas-i Horasdnive Sulalesinin Menkabevi Tarihi. Edited by Ismail E. Eriinsal and Ahmet Ya§ar Ocak. Ankara: Turk Tarih Kurumu,1995.

216 Eskandar Beg Monshi, History of Shah 'Abbas the Great (Tdrik-e 'Alamara-ye 'Abbasi). 2 Vols. Edite by Roger Savory. Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press, 1978.

Evliya Celebi b. Dervis. Muhammed Zilli. Evliya Celebi Seyahatnamesi: Topkapi SarayiBagdat 305 Yazmasinin Transkripsiyonu-Dizini. 10 vols. Edited by Yiicel Dagh et al. Istanbul: Yapi Kredi Yayinlan, 1996-

Eyiib Sabri. Mir'atiil-Harameyn. Istanbul: Bahriyye Matba'asi, 1306 [1890].

Go'cek Abdal. Odman Baba Vildyetnmesi: Vilayetname-i S&hi Edited by §evki Koca. Bekta§i Kiiltur Dernegi, 2002.

Haa Bekta§-i Veli Manzam Vilayetnamesi. Edited by Bedri Noyan. Istanbul: Can Yayinlan, 1996.

Hoca Sadettin Efendi. Tadi't-Tevarih. Edited by ismet Parmaksizoglu. Vol. 5. Ankara: Kultxir Bakanligi, c.1992.

KhunjI-Isfaham, Fadlullah b. Ruzbihan. Tankh-i 'Alam-ara-yi AmM. Edited by John E. Woods. Abridged English translation by Vladimir Minorsky. London: Royal Asiatic Society, 1992.

Makaldt Edited by Esad Co§an. Ankara: T.C. Kiiltiir Bakanligi, 1996.

Menahb-i Seyyid Ebu'l-Vefa'. MS. Siileymaniye Library, Murad Buhari 257.

Mustafa 'All. Kxinhu'l-Ahbar. Vol. 5. Istanbul: TakvTmhane-i 'Amire, 1277 [1870].

Nasuhii's-SilahT (Matrakcl). Beyan-x Menazil-i Sefer-i 'Irakeyn-i Sultan Suleyman Han. Edited by Hiiseyin G. Yurdaydin. Ankara, TiirkTarih Kurumu, 1976.

Niebuhr, Carsten. Reisebeschreibung nach Arabien und andern umliegenden Ldndern. Vol. 2. 1778. Reprint, The Islamic World in Foreign Travel Accounts, ser. ed. Fuad Sezgin. Vol.12, bk. 2. Frankfurt: Institut fur Geschichte der Arabisch-Islamischen Wissenschaften, 1994.

PecevI Ibrahim Efendi. Tanh-i PegevT. Edited by Fahri C. Derin and Vahit Cabuk. Vol.1. Istanbul: Enderun, 1980. al-Sha'ranl, 'Abd al-Wahhab. al-Tabaqat al-kubra (or Lawaqih al-anwarfitabaqat al-akhydr). Vol.1. Cairo: al-Matba'a al-'amira al-'uthmaniyya, 1316 [1898].

Sah Ismail Hatd'iKulliyaU. Edited by Babek Cavansjr and Ekber N. Necef. Istanbul: Kakniis Yayinlan, 2006.

217 Taciil-ariftn Es-Seyyid Ebul Vefa Menahbndmesi: Yasamx ve Tasaynm.fi Gbrixsleri. Edited by Dursun Gumii§oglu. Istanbul: Can Yayinlan, 2006.

Tadhkirat al-Muluk A Manual of Safavid Administration. Translated by V. Minorsky. 1943. Reprint, Cambridge: University Press, 1980.

Ta§koprizade Ebulhayr isamiiddln Ahmed Efendi. Saka'ik-i Nu'maniyye ve Zeyilleri: Hadaiku'§-Sakaik. Translated by Mecdl Mehmed Efendi. Edited by Abdiikadir Ozcan. Vol. 1. Istanbul: Cagri, 1989.

Vahidi's Menahb-i Hvoca-i Cihdn ve Netice-i Can. Edited by Ahmet T. Karamustafa. Sources of Oriental Languages and Literatures 17, ser. ed. SJnasi Tekin and Goniil Alpay Tekin. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University, 1993.

Vilayet-name: Manahb-i Hiinkar Haa. Bektds-i Veil Edited by Abdiilbaki Gdlpmarli. Istanbul: inkilap Kitapevi, 1990.

Das Vilajet-name des Hadschim Sultan. Edited by Rudolf Tschudi. Berlin, 1914. al-Wasitl, TaqI al-DIn 'Abd al-Rahman ibn 'Abd al-Muhsin. Tiryaq al-muhibbmfttabaqat khirqat al- mashayikh al- 'arifin. Cairo: Matba'at al-Misr, 1305 [1887].

Zirke, Heidi (ed.). Ein hagiographisch.es Zeugnis zur persischen Geschichte aus der Mitte des 14. Jahrhunderts: Das achte Kapitel des Safwat as-safa in kritischer Bearbeitung. Berlin: Klaus Schwarz Verlag, 1987.

Secondary Sources

Abisaab, Rula Jurdi. Converting Persia: Religion and Power in the Safavid Empire. London: LB. Tauris, 2004.

Aksiit, Hamza. Anadolu Aleviliginin Sosyal ve Cografi Kokenleri. Ankara: Art Basin Yaym, 2002.

Algar, Hamid. Review of Hadji Bektach: un mythe et ses avatars. Genese et evolution du soufisme populate en Turquie, by Irene Melikoff. International Journal of Middle East Studies 36, no. 4 (November 2004): 687-89.

. "Naqshbandls and Safavids: A Contribution to the Religious History of Iran and Her Neigbors." In Safavid Iran and her Neighbors, edited by Michel Mazzasoui, 7-48. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 2003.

Allouche, Adel. The Origins and Development of the Ottoman-Safavid Conflict (906-962/1500- 1555). Berlin: Klaus Schwarz Verlag, 1983.

218 Arjomand, Said Amir. The Shadow of God and the Hidden Imam: Religion, Political Order, and Societal Change in Shi'ite Iran from the Beginning to 1890. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984.

. "Religious Extremism (Ghuluww), Sufism and Sunnism in Safavid Iran: 1501- 1722." Journal of Asian History 15, no. 1(1981): 1-35.

Arslanoglu, Ibrahim. §ah Ismail Hatayi ve Anadolu Hataytleri. Istanbul: Der Yayinlan, 1992.

A§an, M. Be§ir. "Firat Kenannda Bir Horasan Ereni §eyh Ahmed Dede." In I. Uluslararasi Turk Diinyasi Eren ve Evliyalar Kongresi Bildirileri. Ankara, 1998.

Atalay, Besim. Bektasilik ve Edebiyati. 1922. Reprint, Istanbul: Ant Yayinlan, 1991.

Aubin, Jean. "L'Avenement des Safavides reconsidere (Etudes Safavides III)." May en Orient et Ocian Indien 5 (1988): 1-130.

. "La Politique religieuse des Safavides." In he Shi'isme Imamite, Colloque de Strasbourg, 6-9 mai 1968, edited by T. Fahd, 235-244. Paris: Presses Universitaires, 1970.

Avci, A. Haydar. Alevi Tarihinden Bir Kesit: Kalender Celebi Ayaklanmasi. Ankara: AAA Yayinlan, 1998. al-'AzzawT, 'Abbas.Tarfkh al- 'Iraq bayna ihtilalayn. 5 Vols. Baghdad: Matba'at Baghdad, 1935-49.

Babayan, Kathryn. Mystics, Monarchs, and Messiahs: Cultural Landscapes of Early Modern Iran. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2002.

. "The Safavid Synthesis: From Qizilbash Islam to Imamite Shi'ism." Iranian Studies 27, no. 1-4 (1994): 135-161.

Bacque-Grammont, Jean-Louis. Les Ottomans, les Safavides et leurs voisins (1514-1524). Istanbul: Nederlands Historisch-Archaeologisch Instituut, 1987.

Baha Said Bey. Txirkiye'de Alevi-Bektasi, Ahi ve NusayriZiimreleri. Edited by ismais. Gorkem. Ankara: Kiiltur Bakanligi, 2002.

Balivet, Michel. 5eyh Bedreddin: Tasawufve isyan. Istanbul: Tarih Vakfi Yurt Yayinlan, 2000. Originally published under the title Islam mystique et revolution armee dans les Balkans Ottomans vie du cheikh Bedreddin le "Halldj des Turcs" (1358/59-1416). Istanbul: ISIS Press, 1995.

219 Barkan, Omer Liitfi/'Osmanli imparatorlugu'nda Bir iskan ve Kolonizator Metodu Olarak Vakiflar ve Temlikler: I. istila Devirlerinin Kolonizator Dervi§leri ve Zaviyeler." VahflarDergisi 2 (1942): 279-386.

Basilov, V.N. "Honour Groups in Traditional Turkmenian Society." In Islam in Tribal Societies: From the Atlas to the Indus, edited by Akbar S. Ahmed and David M. Hart, 220- 243. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1984.

Bayat, Fuzuli. "Bektasjyye Tarikatinin §ekillenmesinde Yeseviyye ve Safeviyyenin Yeri." In Alevilik, edited by Ismail Engin and Hawa Engin. Istanbul: Kitap Yayinevi, 2004.

Bayrak, Mehmet. ictoroslar'da Alevi-Kxirt Asiretler. Ankara: Oz-Ge Yayinlan, 2006.

Bayram, Mikail. "Haci Bekta§-i Horasan'i Hakkinda Yeni Kaynak Ara§tirmasi." In 1. Ulushrarasi Haa Bektas Veli Sempozyumu Bildirileri: 27-28-29 Nisan 2000/Ankara, 38-46. Ankara: Haci Bektas. Anadolu Kiiltur Vakfi, 2000.

Bender, Cemsjd. Kurt Uygarhginda Alevilik Istanbul: Kaynak Yayinlan, 1991.

Beytullah, Mehmet. Alevilik KesmekesligiveBulgaristanKmlbasligi. Sofia, 1999.

Birdogan, Nejat. Anadolu ve Balkanlar'da Alevi Yerlesimleri: Ocaklar-Dedeler-Soy Agaglan Istanbul: Alev Yayinlan, 1992.

. Anadolu'nun Gizli Kultiiru: Alevilik. Hamburg: Hamburg Alevi Kiiltiir Merkezi,

1990.

Birge, John K. TheBektasi Order of Dervishes. 1937. Reprint, London: Luzac Oriental, 1994.

Bozkurt, Fuat. Aleviligin Toplumsal Boyutlan. Istanbul: Yon Yayincihk, 1990. Brockelmann, C. Geschichte der Arabischen Litteratur. 2nd Supplementband. Leiden: Brill, 1938.

Browne, Edward G. A Literary History of Persia. Vol 4 of Modern Times (1500-1924). 1900. Reprint, Cambridge: University Press, 1930.

Bruinessen, Martin van. "Kurds, Turks and the Alevi Revival in Turkey." Middle East Report Ouly-September 1996): 6-9.

. Agha, Shaikh and State: The Social and Political Structures of Kurdistan. London and New Jersey: Zed Books Ltd., 1978.

Bumke, Peter J. "The Kurdish Alevis—Boundaries and Perceptions." In Ethnic Groups in the Republic of Turkey, edited by Peter A. Andrews, 510-519. Wiesbaden: L. Reichert, 1989.

220 Biilbiil, Zekeriya. XVI. YuzyildaDiyarbekirBeylerbeyligi'ndeki Yerisimleri. 2 Vols. Ph.D. dissertation, Selcuk University, Konya, 1999.

Canbakal, Hiilya. "An Exercise in Denominational Geography in Search of Ottoman Alevis." Turkish Studies 6, no. 2 (June 2005): 253-271.

Chyet, Michael C. Kurdish-English Dictionary / Ferhenge Kurmanci-InglM. New Haven: Yale University Press, c.2003.

Clarke, Gloria L. The World of the Alevis: Issues of Culture and Identity. New York and Istanbul: AVS Publications, 1999.

Connell, Michael Paul. The Nimatullahi Sayyids ofTaft: A Study of the Evolution of a Late Medieval Iranian Sufi Tariqah. Ph.D. diss., Harvard University, 2004.

Camuroglu, Reha. "Alevi Revivalism in Turkey." In Alevi Identity: Cultural, Religious and Social Perspectives, ed. T. Olsson et al, 79-84. Istanbul: ISIS Press, 1998.

Danon, M. A. "Un interrogatoire d'heretiques Musulmans (1619)." Journal Asiatique (April-June 1921): 281-293. al-Darraji, HamTd Muhammad Hasan. aZ-Rubut wa al-takaya. al-Baghdadiyyafial-'ahd al- 'UthmanT (941-1336 h./l534-1917 m.): Takhtituha wa 'imaratuha. Baghdad: Dar al-Shu'un al- Thaqafiyya al-'Amma, 2001.

Dersimi, Nuri. Kurdistan Tarihinde Dersim. 1952. Reprint, Diyarbakir: Dilan Yayinlan, 1992.

DeWeese, Devin. "The YasavT Order and Persian Hagiography in Seventeenth-Century Central Asia: 'Alim Sheikh of'Aliyabad and his Lamahat min nafahat al-quds." InThe Heritage ofSufism. Vol. 3 of late Classical Persianate Sufism (1501-1750): The Safavid& Mughal Period, eds. L. Lewisohn and D. Morgan, 389-414. Oxford: Oneworld, 1999.

. "YasavT Sayhs in the Timurid Era: Notes on the Social and Political Role of Communal Sufi Affiliations in the 14th and 15th Centuries." Oriente Moderno 76, no. 2 (1996): 173-188.

. Ishmization and Native Religion in the Golden Horde: Baba Tukles and Conversion to Islam in Historical and Epic Tradition. Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1994.

Dressier, Markuss. "The Modern Dede: Changing Parameters for Religious Authority in Contemporary Turkish Alevism." In Speaking for Islam: Religious Authorities in Muslim Societies, edited by Gudrun Kramer and Sabine Schmidtke, 269-294. Leiden: Brill, 2006.

221 Eberhard, Elke. Osmanische Polemik gegen die Safawiden im 16.Jahrhundert nach arabischen Handschriften. Freiburg: Klaus Schwarz Verlag, 1970.

Eisenstein, Herbert. "Sunnite Accounts of the Subdivisions of the Shfa." In Shia Islam, Sects and Sufism: Historical Dimensions, Religious Practice and Methdological Considerations, edited by Frederick De Jong, 1-9. Utrecht: M. Th. Houtsma Stichting, 1992.

Ergun, Sadeddin Niizhet. Bektasi Edebiyati Antolojisi: Bektasi Sairleri ve Nefesleri. Istanbul: Maarif Kitaphanesi, 1944.

Faroqhi, Suraiya. "The Bektashis: A Report on Current Research." In Bektachiyya: Etudes sur Vordre mystique des Bektachis et les groupes relevant de Hadji Bektach, edited by Alexandre Popovic and Gilles Veinstein, 9-28. Istanbul: ISIS Press, 1995.

. "Conflict, Accommodation and Long-Term Survival: The Bektashi Order and the Ottoman State." In Bektachiyya: Etudes sur Vordre mystique des Bektachis et les groupes relevant de Hadji Bektach, edited by Alexandre Popovic and Gilles Veinstein, 171-184. Istanbul: ISIS Press, 1995.

. "Sainthood as a Means of Self-Defense in Seventeenth-Century Ottoman Anatolia." In Coping with the State: Political Conflict and Crime in the Ottoman Empire 1550- 1720. Istanbul: ISIS Press, 1995.

. "Seyyid Gazi Revisited: The Foundation as Seen through Sixteenth and Seventeenth-Century Documents." Turcica 13 (1981): 90-122.

. "The Tekke of Haci Bektas: Social position and Economic Activities." International journal of Middle East Studies 7 (1976): 183-208.

. "XVI.-XVIII. Ytizyillarda Anadolu'da §eyh Aileleri," In Tiirkiye iktisat Tarihi Semineri: Metinler/Tartismalar, 9-10 Haziran 1973, edited by Osman Okyar, 197-229. Ankara: Hacettepe Universitesi Yayinlan, 1975.

Firat, M. §erif. Dogu Illeri ve Varto Tarihi (Etimoloji-Din-Etnografya-Dil ve Ermeni Mezalimi). 5th ed. Ankara: Turk Kulturunu Ara§tirma Enstitiisu, 1983.

Fleischer, Cornell H. "The Lawgiver as Messiah: The Making of the Imperial Image in the Reign of Suleyman." In Soliman le Magnifique et son temps: Actes du colloque de Paris, Galeries nationales du Grand palais, 7-10 mars 1990, edited by Gilles Veinstein. Paris: La Documentation francaise, n.d.

Fragner, Bert G. "Farman." Encyclopaedia Iranica. New York: Bibliotheca Persica Press, 1999.

Gellner, Ernest. Saints of the Atlas. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1969.

222 Gezik, Erdal. Dinsel Etnik ve Politik Sorunlar Baglaminda: Alevi Kiirtler. Ankara: Kalan Yayinlan, 2000.

Glassen, Erika. "Schah Ismail, ein MahdTder anatolischenTurkmenen?" Zeitschriftder Deutschen Morgenldndischen GeseUschaft 121, no.l (1971): 61-69.

Gogebakan, Goknur. XVI. Yuzyilda Malatya Kazasi (1516-1560). Malatya: Malatya Belediyesi Kiiltiir Yayinlan, 2002.

Gdlpinarh, Abdiilbaki and Pertev Naili Boratav. Pir Sultan Abdal. Ankara: Turk Tarih Kurumu, 1943.

Golpinarh, Abdiilbaki. Mevlana Mixzesi AbdiilbakiKiitiiphanesi Yazma Kitaplar Katalogu. Ankara: Turk Tarih Kurumu, 2003.

. Yunus Emre ve Tasawuf. 2nd ed. Istanbul: inkilap Kitabevi, 1992.

. AleviBektdsiNefesleri. Istanbul: inkilap Kitabevi, 1992.

. Tasawuf tan Dilimize Gegen Deyimler ve Atasozleri. Istanbul: inkilap ve Aka

Kitabevleri, 1977.

. 100 Soruda Tiirkiye'de Mezhepler ve Tarikatler. Istanbul: Ger^ek Yaymevi, 1969.

. "Kizilba§." islam Ansiklopedisi isldm Alemi Tarih, Cografya, Etnograjya ve

Biyografya Lugati. Istanbul: Milli Egitim Basimevi, 1967.

. "Bekta§ilik." Turk Ansiklopedisi. Ankara: Milli Egitim Basimevi, 1953.

. "islam ve Turk illerinde Fiituwet Te§kilati ve Kaynaklan." Istanbul Universitesi Iktisat Fakiiltesi Mecmuasi 11, no. 1-4 (October 1949-July 1950). Gdyiinc, Nejat. XVI. Yuzyilda Mar din Sancagi. Ankara: Turk Tarih Kurumu, 1991. Giimii§, Burak. Die Wiederkehr des Akvitentums in der Tixrkei und in Deutschland. Konstanzer Schriften zur Sozialwissenschaft 73. Konstanz: Hartung-Gorre Verlag, 2007.

Halacoglu, Yusuf. XVIII. Yiizyilda Osmanli imparatorlugu'nun iskdn Siyaseti ve A§iretlerin Yerlestirilmesi. Ankara: Turk Tarih Kurumu, 1988.

Hammer-Purgstall, Joseph von. Geschichte des Osmanischen Reiches. Vol. 3. (1828; reprint, Graz, 1963).

Hasluck, F.W. Christianity and Islam Under the Sultans. Edited by Margaret M. Hasluck, 2 Vols. 1929. Reprint, Istanbul: ISIS Press, 2000.

223 Hinz, Walther. Uzan Hasan ve Seyh Gineyd: XV. Yiizyilda iran'in MilliBir Devlet Haline Yukselisi. Ankara: TiirkTarih Kurumu, 1992. Originally published under the title Irons Aufstieg zum Nationalstaat imjunfzehntenjahrhundert. Berlin: Walter de Druyter&co., 1936.

Hodgson, Marshall G.S. "How the Early Shfa Became Sectarian." Journal of the American Oriental Society 75 (1955): 1-13.

. "Al-Darasi and Hamza in the Origin of the Druze Religion." Journal of American Oriental Society 82, no. 1 (jan.-March 1962): 5-21.

Imber, C. H. "The Persecution of the Ottoman Shfites according to the muhimme defterleri, 1565-1585." Der Islam 56, no. 2 (July 1979): 245-273. inalcik, Halil. "How to Read 'Ashik Pasha-zade's History." In Essays in Ottoman History, 31- 50. Istanbul: Eren, 1998.

. "Dervish and Sultan: An Analysis of the Otman Baba VeVxyetnamesi." In The Middle East and the Balkans under the Ottoman Empire: Essays on Economy and Society, 19-36. Bloomington: Indiana University, 1993.

. The Ottoman Empire: The Classical Age 1300-1600. Translated by Norman Itzkowitz and Colin Imber. New York: Orpheus Publishing Inc., 1989.

Ivanow, W. The Truth-Worshippers of Kurdistan: Ahl-i Haqq Texts. The Ismaili Society Series A, no. 7. Leiden: Brill, 1953.

Jacob, Georg. Die Bektaschijje in ihrem Verhdltnis zu verwandten Erscheinungen. Munich: Verlag der Koniglich-bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1909.

. Beitrdge zur Kenntnis des Derwisch-Ordens der Bektaschis. Berlin: Mayer & Muller, 1908.

Kafadar, Cemal. Between Two Worlds: The Construction of the Ottoman State. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1995.

Kaleli, Liitfu. Kimligini Hayhran Alevilih Arastxrma, Derleme. Istanbul: Habora Kitabevi, 1990.

Kaplan, Dogan. "Aleviligin Yazili Kaynaklanndan Buyruklar ve Muhtevalan Uzerine." Paper presented at the I. International Symposium on Bektashism and Alevism, September 28-30, 2005, Isparta.

Karakaya-Stump, Ayfer. "16. Yiizyildan Bir Ziyaretname (Yazi £evirimli Metin- Guniimuz Tiirkcesine Qeviri-Tipkibasim)." In InMemoriam S.inasi Tekin, special issue of the Journal of Turkish Studies/Ttirkluk Bilgisi Ara§tirmalan 31/II (2007): 67-79.

224 . "Irak'taki Bektasi Tekkeleri." Belleten 71, no.261 (August 2007): 689-720.

. "Kizilba§, Bekta§i, Safevi ili§kilerine Dair 17. Yiizyildan Yeni Bir Beige (Yazi Qevirimli Metin-Guniimuz Tiirkcesine Ceviri-Tipkibasim)." In Festschrift in Honor of Orhan Okay, special issue of the Journal of Turkish Studies/Turkluk Bilgisi Ara§tirmalan 30/11 (2006): 117-130.

. "Sinemilliler: Bir Alevi Ocagi ve Asjreti." Kirkbudak 2, no. 6 (spring 2006): 19- 59.

. "The Emergence of the Kizilbas. in Western Thought: Missionary Accounts and their Aftermath." In Archaeology, Anthropology and Heritage in the Balkans and Anatolia: The Life and Times ofF.W. Hasluck, 1878-1920, edited by David Shankland, 329-53. Istanbul: ISIS Press, 2004.

. "Alevilik Hakkinda 19. Ytizyil Misyoner Kayitlanna Ele§tirel Bir Bakis. ve Ali Gako'nun Oykiisu." Folk.hr/Edebiyat, Alevilik Ozel Sayisi 1, no. 29 (March 2002): 301-324.

Karamustafa, Ahmet T. "Yesevilik, Melametilik, Kalendenlik, Vefa'ilik ve Anadolu Tasawufunun Kdkenleri Sorunu." In Osmanh. Toplumunda Tasawufve Sufiler: Kaynaklar- Doktrin-Ayin ve Erkan-Tarikatlar-Edebiyat-Mimari-ikonografi-Modemizm, edited by Ahmed Ya§ar Ocak, 61-88. Ankara: TiirkTarih Kurumu, 2005.

. God's Unruly Friends: Dervish Groups in the Islamic Later Middle Period 1200-1550. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1994.

. "Early Sufism in Eastern Anatolia." In Classical Persian Sufism from its Origins to Rumi edited by Leonard Lewisohn, 175-198. New York and London: Khaniqahi Nimatullahi Publications, 1993.

. "Kaknders, Abddls, Haydens: The Formation of the Bektdsiye in the Sixteenth Century." In Suleyman the Second and his Time, edited by Halil inalcik and Cemal Kafadar, 121-129. Istanbul: Isis Press, 1993.

"Karkin." Turk Ansiklopedisi. Ankara: Milli Egitim Basimevi, 1974.

Kaygusuz, Ismail. Onar Dede Mezarhgi ve Adi Bilinmeyen Bir Turk Kolonizatoru Seyh Hasan Oner. Istanbul: Arkeoloji ve Sanat Yaymlan, 1983.

Kehl-Bodrogi, Krisztina. "Die 'Wiederfindung' des Alevitums in der Tiirkei: Geschichtsmythos und kollektive Identitat." Orient 34, no. 2 (1993): 267-281.

Kilic, Riiya. Osmanlida Seyyidler ve Serifler. Istanbul: Kitap Yayinevi, 2005.

225 Knysh, Alexander. "'Orthodoxy' and 'Heresy' in Medieval Islam: An Essay in Reassessment." Muslim World 83, no. 1 (Jan. 1993): 43-67.

Korkmaz, Esat. Ansiklopedik Alevilik-Bektasilik Terimleri Sozliigii. 3rd ed. Istanbul: Kaynak Yayinlan, 2003.

Koprulu, Fuad. "Ahmed YesevT." In islam Ansiklopedisi islam Alemi Tarih, Cografya, Etnografya ve Bibliyografya Lugati Istanbul: Milli Egitim Basimevi, 1965.

. "Bekta§: Haci Bektas. Veli." In islam Ansiklopedisi: islam Alemi Tarih, Cografya, Etnografya ve Bibliyografya Lugati. Istanbul: Milli Egitim Basimevi, 1965.

. "Abdal." In Edebiyat Arastirmalan. Vol. 2,362-417. Istanbul: Otiiken Yayinlan, 1989. First published in Turk Halk Edebiyatx Ansiklopedisi, Ortagag ve Yenigag Tiirklerinin Halk Kultiiru Uzerine Cografya, Etnografya, Etnoloji, Tarih ve Edebiyat Lugati, fasc. 1 (Istanbul, 1935), 21-56.

. "Abbas (Abbas I)." Turk Halk Edebiyati Ansiklopedisi: Ortagag ve Yenigag Tiirklerinin Halk Kultiiru Uzerine Cografya, Etnografya, Etmoloji, Tarih ve Edebiyat Lugati Fasc. 1. Istanbul, 1935.

. Influence du chamanisme Turco-Mongol sur les ordres mystiques musulmans. Istanbul, 1929.

. "Bektasjligin Men§eleri: Kuciik Asya'da islam Batiniliginin Tekamiil-i Tarihisi HakkmdaBirTecriibe," Turk Yurdu, 16-2, no. 169-8 (May 1925). Reprint, Ankara, 2001, 9: 68-76. Originally published under the title "Les origines du Bektachisme: Essai sur le developpement historique de l'heterodoxie musulmane en Asie Mineure, " in Actes du congres International d'histoire des religions. Paris, 1923.

. "Anadolu'da islamiyet." Istanbul: insan Yayinlan, 1996. First published in Darii'l-funun Edebiyat Mecmu'asi 2(1922): 281-311,385-420,457-86.

. Turk Edebiyatinda ilk Mutasawiflar. 1919. Reprint, Ankara: Turk Tarih Kurumu Basimevi, 1993. Translated by Gary Leiser and Robert Dankoff under the title EarZy Mystics in Turkish Literature. London: Routledge, 2006.

Kay Envanter Etiidlerine Gore: Malatya. Koy i§leri Bakanhgi, 1966.

Kby Envanter Etiidlerine Gore: Adxyaman. Koy i§leri Bakanhgi, 1967.

Koy Envanter Etiidlerine Gore: Elazig. Koy isjeri Bakanhgi, 1966.

Krupp, Alya. Studi'en zum Menaqybname des Abu l-Wafa 'Tag al-'Arifm: Das historische Leben des Abu l-Wafa Tag al-'Arifm. Munchen: Dr. Rudolf Trofenik, 1976.

226 Kum, Naci. Dedekargin-Karh.nogullan-Qepniler.1951. Published in appendix to Bede Kargin: §iirler, edited by Rahime Kisjah and Ali Ye§ilyurt. Mersin: Can Matbaacihk ve Yayincihk, 1999.

Kure§anh Seyit Kekil. Peygamberler He Seyitlerin Secereleri ve Asiretlerin Tarihi. Koln, n.d.

Kiiciikdag, Yusuf. Osmanh Devleti'nin, §ah ismail'in §ii Propagandacilanna Halvetiyye ile Kar§i Koyma Politikasi. In XIII Turk Tarih Kongresi: Ankara: 4-8 Ekim 1999. Vol. Ill, part I. Ankara: Turk Tarih Kurumu, 2002.

Kiitiikoglu, Bekir. Osmanlx-hran SiydsiMundsebetleri (1578-1612). Istanbul: Istanbul Fetih Cemiyeti, 1993.

Lewis, Bernard. "Some Observations on the Significance of Heresy in the History of Islam." Studia Islamica 1 (1953): 43-63.

Lindner, Rudi Paul. Nomads and Ottomans in Medieval Anatolia. Bloomington: Research Institute for Inner Asian Studies, Indiana University, 1983.

Litvak, Meir. Shi'i Scholars of Nineteenth-Century Iraq: The 'ulema ofNajafand Karbala'. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998.

Longrigg, Stephen Hemsley. Four Centuries of Modern Iraq. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1925.

Matthee, Rudi. "The Safavid-Ottoman Frontier: Iraq-i Arab as Seen by the Safavids." In Ottoman Borderlands: Issues, Personalities and Political Changes, edited by Kemal H. Karpat and Robert W. Zens, 157-173. Madison: Center of Turkish Studies, Univ. of Wisconsin, 2003.

Mazzaoui, Michel M.The Origins of the Safawids: Si'ism, Sufism, and the Gulat. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag, 1972.

. "The GhazT background of the Safavid State." IqhalReview 12, no. 3 (1971): 79- 90.

Melikoff, Irene. Haci Bektas: Efsaneden Gercege. Translated into Turkish by Turan Alptekin. Istanbul: Cumhuriyet Kitaplan, 1998. Originally published as Hadji Bektach: un mythe et ses avatars. Genese et evolution du soufisme populaire en Turquie. Leiden: Brill, 1998.

. Uyur idik Uyardilar: Alevtlik-Bektastlik Arastirmahn. Translated into Turkish by Turan Alptekin. Istanbul: Cem Yayinevi, 1993.

. "Hatayi." Uluslararasi Folklor ve Halk Edehiyati Semineri Bildirileri. Konya: Konya Turizm Dernegi Yayinlan, 1976.

. "Le probleme kizilba§." Turcica 6 (1975): 49-67.

227 Minorsky, Vladimir. "The Guran." In Medieval Iran and its Neighbours. London: Variorum Reprints, 1982.

. "Sheikh BalT-efendi on the Safavids." In Medieval Iran and its Neighbours.

London: Variorum Reprints, 1982.

. "The Ahl-i Hakk." In Iranica: Twenty Articles, 306-16. Tehran, 1964.

. "The Poetry of Shah Isma Tl I," Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 10(1942): 1006a-1053a. Mirjafari, Hiiseyin. "Sufism and Gradual Transformation in the Meaning of Sufi in Safavid Period." IU Edebiyat Fakultesi Tarih Dergisi, no. 32 (March 1979): 157-166.

Miroglu, ismet. Kemah Sancagi ve Erzincan Kazasi (1520-1566). Ankara: Turk Tarih Kurumu, 1990.

Momen, Moojan. An Introduction to Sh'i Islam: The History and Doctrines of Twelver Shi'sm. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1985.

Moosa, Matti. Extremist Shiites: The Ghulat Sects. Syracuse, New York: Syracuse University Press, 1987.

Morimoto, Kazuo, "The Formation and Development of the Science of Talibid Genealogies in the 10th & 11th Century Middle East." Oriente Moderno 18, no. 1(1999): 541-570.

Morton, Alexander H. "The Chub-i Tariq and Qizilbash Ritual in Safavid Persia." In Etudes Safavide, edited by Jean Calmard. Paris: Institut Francais de Recherche en Iran, 1993.

Movako, Muhammed. "Arnavutluk'ta BektasJ Edebiyati." Translated by Miirsel Oztiirk. Haci Bekta§ Veli Arastirma Dergisi 10 (Summer 1999): 51-60.

Niewohner-Eberhard, Elke. "Machtpolitische Aspekte des Osmanisch-Safawidischen Kampfes umBagdadim 16/17.Jahrhunderts." TurcicaVl (1975):104-127.

Noyan, Bedri. Butiin Yonleriyle Bektdsilik ve Alevxlik. 7+ Vols. Ankara: Ardic Yayinlan, 1998-

Ne'met, Meshedikhanim. Azerbaycan'da Pirler (Sosyal-ideolojik iktisadi-Siyasi Merkezler). [in Cyrillic alphabet] Baku: Azerbaycan Dovlet Ne§riyyati Polikrafiya Birliyi, 1992.

Newman, Andrew J. Safavid Iran: Rebirth of a Persian Empire. London: I.B. Tauris, 2006.

228 . "The Rome of the Sadat in Safavid Iran: Confrontation or Accomodation?" Oriente Moderno 18 (1999): 577-596.

Oguz, Mevliit. Malatya Tarihive Sosyoekonomik Durumu (M.6.5500-M.S. 1920). Istanbul, 2000.

Ocak, Ahmet Ya§ar. "Tiirkiye Selcuklulan Doneminde ve Sonrasinda VefaiTarikati (Vefaiyye): Tiirkiye Popiiler Tasawuf Tarihine Farkli Bir Yakla§im." Belleten 70:257 (2006): 119-154.

. Turk Sufiligine Bakislar. Istanbul: ileti§im Yayinlan, 1996.

. Babailer isyanv Aleviligin Tarihsel Altyapisi Yahut Anadolu'da Islam-Turk Heterodoksisinin Te§ekkulu. Revised 2nd ed. Istanbul: Dergah Yayinlan, 1996.

. "Din ve Du§iince." Osmanli Devleti ve Medeniyeti Tarihl Edited by Ekmeleddin ihsanoglu. Vol. 2. Istanbul: IRCICA, 1994.

. Osmanli imparatorlugunda Marjinal S&filik Kalenderiler: XIV-XVII. Yuzyillar. Ankara: Turk Tarih Kurumu, 1992.

. Kultiir Tarihi Kaynagi Olarak Menahbnameler (Metodolojik Bir Yaklasim). Ankara: Turk Tarih Kurumu, 1992.

. Bekta§iMenakibnamelerinde islam Oncesi inang Motifleri Istanbul: Enderun Kitabevi, 1983.

. "Kalenderiler ve Bekta§ilik." In Dogumunun 100. Yilinda Atatiirk'e Armagan, 297-308. Istanbul: 1.0. Edebiyat Fakiiltesi, 1981.

Orhonlu, Cengiz. Osmanli imparatorlugu'nda Asiretlerin iskani. Istanbul: Eren Yayincilik, 1987.

Oytan, M. Tevfik. Bektasiligin igyuzti. 1945. Reprint, Istanbul: Demos Yayinlan, 2007.

Ozdogan, Mehmet. Asagi Firat Havzasi 1977 Yuzey Arastirmalan. Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi A§agi Firat Projesi Yayinlan, no. 2. Istanbul, 1977. al-QadT, Wadad. "The Development of the Term Ghuldt in Muslim Literature with Special Reference to Kaysaniyya." In Akten des VII. Kongresses fur Arabistik und Islamwissenschaft Gottingen, edited by Albert Dietrich, 295-319. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprect, 1976.

Qa'im-maqaml, Jahanglr. Muqaddama-ibar shindkht-i asnddAtarikhi. Tehran, [1350] 1971.

229 Quinn, Sholeh A. "Rewriting Ni'matu'llahi History in Safavid Chronicles." InThe Heritage ofSufism. Volume 3 of Late Classical Persianate Sufism (1501-1750): The Safavid & Mughal Period, eds. L. Lewisohn and D. Morgan, 201-222. Oxford: Oneworld, 1999.

Reid, James J. Tribalism and Society in Islamic Iran 1500-1629. Malibu, California: 1983.

Rizvi, Kishwar. Transformations in Early Safavid Architecture: The Shrine ofShaykh Safi al-din IshaqArdabiliin Iran (1501-1629). PhD. diss., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2000.

Roemer, Hans R. "The Qizilbash Turcomans: Founder and Victim of the Safavid Theocracy." In Intellectual Studies on Islam: Essays Written in Honor of Martin B. Dickson, edited by Michel M. Mazzaoui and Vera B. Moreen, 27-39. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1990.

"The Safavid Period." In The Cambridge History of Iran. Edited by Peter Jackson and Laurence Lockhart. Vol. 6., 189-350. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986.

Ross, E. Denison. The Early Years of Shah Ismail: Founder of the SafavT Dynasty. London, 1896.

Sava§, Saim. XVI. Asirda Anadolu'da Alevilik. Ankara: Vadi Yayinlan, 2002.

Savory, Roger M. "The Office of Khalifat al-Khulafa under the Safawids." Journal of American Oriental Society, no. 85 (1965): 497-502.

. "A 15th-Century Safavid Propagandist at Harat." In Studies on the History of

Safawid Iran. London: Variorum Reprints, 1987.

. Iran under the Safavids. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980.

. "The Qizilbash, Education and the Arts." Turcica 6 (1975): 168-76.

. "The Consolidation of Safawid Power in Persia." Der Islam, no. 41 (1965): 71-94

Sezgin, Abdiilkadir. "Eren ve Evliya Kavraminin Dini Tarihi Folklorik izahi ve Eren inanci Uzerine Du§unceler." In J. Uluslararasi Turk Diinyasx Eren ve Evliyalar Kongresi BMrileri, 457-508. Ankara, 1998.

Shaw, Rosalind and Charles Stewart (eds.) Syncretism/Anti-Syncretism: The Politics of Religious Synthesis. London: Routledge, 1994.

Slane, M. le Baron de. Bibliotheque natxonale, Departement des manuscrits: Catalogue des manuscrits arabes. Paris: Imprimerie rationale, 1883-1895.

230 Sohrweide, Hanna. "Der Sieg der Safaviden in Persien und seine Riickwirkungen auf die Schiiten Anatoliens im 16. Jahrhundert." Der Islam 41 (1965): 95-201.

Soileau, Mark. Humanist Mystics: Nationalism and the Commemoration of Saints in Turkey. Ph.D. diss., University of California, Santa Barbara, 2006.

Solak, Ibrahim. XVI. Asirda Maras. Kazasi (1526-1563). Ankara: Akcag Yayinlan, 2004.

Subrahmanyam, Sanjay. "Turning the Stones Over: Sixteenth-Century Millenarianism from the Tagus to the Ganges." The Indian Economic and Social History Review 40, no. 2 (April-June 2003): 129-161.

Sumer, Faruk. Safevi Devletinin Kurulusu ve Gelismesinde Anadolu Tiirklerinin Rolii. Ankara: Turk Tarih Kurumu Basimevi, 1992.

. Cepniler: Anadolu'nun Bir Turk Yurdu Haline Gelmesinde Onemli Rol Oynayan Oguz Boyu. Istanbul: Turk Diinyasi Ara§tirmalan Vakfi, 1992.

—. Oguzlar (Tiirkmenler): Tarihleri, Boy Teskilato, Destanlarx. Rev. 3rd edition. Istanbul: Ana Yayinlan, 1980.

§ahin, §ehriban. "Bir Kamusal Din Olarak Tiirkiye'de ve Ulus Otesi Sosyal Alanlarda in§a Edilen Alevilik." Folklor/Edebiyat, Alevilik Ozel Sayisi 1, no. 29 (March 2002):: 123-162.

§apolyo, Enver Behnan. Mezhepler ve Tarikatlar Tarihi. Istanbul: Tiirkiye Basimevi, 1964.

§ener, Cemal. Alevilik Olayx: Bir Baskaldxnnin Kisa Tarihgesi. Istanbul: Yon Yayincilik, 1989.

§im§ek, Mehmet. HxdvrAhdal Sultan Ocagu Istanbul, 1991.

Ta§temir, Mehmet. XW. Yiizyilda Adiyaman (Behisni, Hisn-i Mansur, Gerger, Kdhta) Sosyal ve iktisadiTarihi. Ankara: TurkTaih Kurumu, 1999.

Tekindag, M.C. §ehabettin. "Yeni Kaynak ve Vesikalann I§igi altinda Yavuz Sultan Selim'in Iran Seferi." Tarih Dergisi 17 (1967): 49-86.

Tietze, Andreas. "A Document on the Persecution of Sectarians in Early Seventeenth- Century Istanbul." In Bektachiyya: Etudes sur Vordre mystique des Bektachis et les groupes relevant de Hadji Bektach, edited by Alexandre Popovic and Gilles Veinstein, 165-170. Istanbul: Les Editions Isis, 1995.

Togan, Z.V. "Londra ve Tahrandaki islami yazmalardan bazilanna dair," isldm Tetkikleri Enstitiisii Dergisi 3, parts 1-2 (1959-60): 132-160.

Trimingham, J. Spencer. The Sufi Orders in Islam. London: Oxford University Press, 1973.

231 Ulucam, Abdiisselam. Irak'taki Turk Mimari Eserleri. Ankara: Kultur Bakanhgi, 1989.

Ulucay, Cagatay. "Yavuz Sultan Selim Nasil Padi§ah Oldu?" Istanbul Universitesi Edebiyat Fakultesi Tarih Vergisi no.9 (1953): 53-90; no.10 (1954): 117-142; no.11-12 (1955): 185-200.

Ulusoy, A. Celalettin. Hunkar Haa Bektas Veli ve Alevi-BektasiYolu. 2nd ed. Hacibekta§- Kir§ehir, 1986.

Ulken, Hilmi Ziya. Anadolu'nun Dim Sosyal Tarihi Ondileri: Barak Baba, Geyikli Baba, Haa Bektas. Edited by Ahmet Ta§gin. Ankara: Kalan, 2003.

Unal, Mehmet Ali. XVI. Yuzyilda Cemisgezek. (Ankara: Turk Tarih Kurumu, 1999.

. XVI. Yuzyilda Harput Sancagi (1518-1566). Ankara: Turk Tarih Kurumu, 1989.

Vorhoff, Karin. "The Past in the Future: Discourses on the Alevis in Contemporary Turkey." In Turkey's Alevi Enigma: A Comprehensive Overview, ed. Paul J. White and Joost Jongerden, 93-108. Leiden: Brill, 2003.

. "Academic and Journalistic Publications on the Alevi and Bektashi of Turkey," In Alevi Identity: Cultural Religious and Social Perspectives, ed. T. Olsson et al., 23- 50. Istanbul: ISIS Press, 1998.

Watenpaugh, Heghnar Zeitlian. "Deviant Dervishes: Space, Gender, and the Construction of Antinomian Piety in Ottoman Aleppo." International Journal of Middle East Studies 37(2005): 535-565.

Wolper, Ethel Sara. Cities and Saints: Sufism and the Transformation of Urban Space in Medieval Anatolia. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2003.

. "Khidr, Elwan Celebi and the Conversion of Sacred Sanctuaries in Anatolia." Muslim World 90, no. 3-4 (Fall 2000): 309-322.

Yalcin, Alemdar and Haci Yilmaz. "Kargin Ocakli Boyu ile ilgili Yeni Belgeler." Haa Bektas VeliArastxrma Dergisi 21 (Spring 2002): 13-87.

Yaman, Ali. Kmlbas Alevi Ocaklan. Istanbul: § ahkulu Sultan Kiilliyesi, 1998.

. Alevilik-BektasilikBibliyografyasi. Mannheim: Alevi-Bektasj Kultur Enstitusii, 1998.

Yaman, Mehmet. Alevilih inang-Edeb-Erkan. Istanbul, 1994.

Yetkin, Cetin. Turk Halk Hareketleri ve Devrimler. Istanbul: Milliyet Yaymlan, 1980.

Yildinm, Abbas. Seyit Sah Ibrahim Veli Ocagi. Ankara, 2006.

232 Yinanc, Refet. Dulkadir Beyligi. Ankara: TiirkTarih Kurumu, 1989.

Yorulmaz, Biilent. "Kerbela ve Fuzuli'ye Dair." 1. Uluslararasi Haci Bekta§ Veli Sempozyumu Bildirileri, 371-401. Ankara: Haci Bektas, Anadolu Kultiir Vakfi, 2000.

Yoriikan, Yusuf Ziya. Anadolu'da Aleviler ve Tahtaalar. Edited by Turhan Yoriikan. Ankara: T.C. Kultiir Bakanligi Yayinlan, 2002.

Yiiksel, Hasan. "Selcuklular Doneminden Kalma Bir Vefai Zaviyesi (§eyh Marzuban Zaviyesi)." Vakiflar Dergisi 25 (1995): 235-250.

. "Bir Babai (Vefai) §eyhi Zaviyesi (§eyh Behliil Baba)." Osmanh Ara§tirmalan 21 (2001): 97-107.

Yiirekli Gorkay, E. Zeynep. "Legend and Architecture in the Ottoman Empire: the Shrines of Sayyid Gazi and Haci Bekta§." Ph.D. diss., Harvard University, 2005.

Zarinebaf-Shahr, Fariba. "Qizilbash 'Heresy' and Rebellion in Ottoman Anatolia during the Sixteenth Century." Anatolia Moderna/Yeni Anadolu 7 (1977): 1-15.

Zelyut, Riza. 6z Kaynaklanna Gore Alevilik Istanbul: Anadolu Kultiirii Yayinlan, 1990.

233