IMPRESSIONS AND IMAGES OF THE OTTOMANS IN THE EARLY MODERN PERIOD: OFFICIAL REPRESENTATION, CULTURAL TRANSFER AND ART

KATALIN RUMPLER (VIENNA)1

The stage for the dramatic events that reshaped early modern Europe was superficially set by competing visions of faith: the spread of Islam, a multifaceted Judaism and a divided Christianity. Closer examination, however, exposes the conflicting claims of different powers, frequently personified, and conquests for reasons such as territory or economy, together with multi-levelled changes in demographic structure, administrational competence, military affairs, technologies, infrastructure, and communication, all determined a period of transformation and development. It is remarkable that the regularly warring parties established fruitful relations with each other, shared interests and participated in manifold transfers and transactions, although the latter gradually declined between the sixteenth and the eighteenth century. “Melius de quibusdam acerbos inimicos mereri quam eos amicos qui dulces videantur; illos verum saepe dicere, hos numquam”2 could at first well have been their common motto.

Reading the Turkish Histories3 of German humanist Johannes Löwenklau (1541−1594), an alternative image of the Ottomans emerges, despite the author’s apocalyptic expectations and prophecies. That image relies upon neither the revived contra Turcos literature nor the false image of the demonic Ottoman created by religious publications. Strange and feared, Ottomans develop virtues and favourable traits of character. They are thinking and acting human beings of a different but equivalent cultural area. The demand for a better knowledge and understanding4 of the Ottomans and their religion paved the way to a more or less

unbiased interest.5 The focal point of Ottoman culture and education is the court in Constantinople.6

Contacts with the contemporary ‘republic of letters’ and freethinkers of the time enabled the Calvinist Löwenklau to deliver Ottoman history and pro Turcis arguments based on original manuscripts. Three main sources were used for his works: the Codex Verantianus, 7 the Annales Beccani8 and the Codex Hanivaldanus.9 For Hieronymus Beck von Leopoldsdorf (1525−1596), with whom he was in close contact, Löwenklau also created a series of watercolours, the Löwenklau Codex, 10 depicting everyday Ottoman life. What he shares with like-minded scholars and Ottoman translators is the clear view as mentioned by Cicero (106 BC–43 BC).11

This balanced analysis of the opposing side was not general, having been hindered by the more characteristic Ottoman attitude of exclusion as a ‘closed’ society – with some notable exceptions like Murad Bey (b.1509), 12 who had the title of tercümân, or other intellectuals, physicians or scientists, whether Muslim or converts to Islam.13 Perception of the Ottomans in Europe changed with their image as a latent, dangerous or low-level enemy, along with the concept of Islam as interpreted in contrast to Christian values and philosophical or political developments.14

What lies hidden is how alterity and identity15 are created in a discursive manner by lingual (literarily or textually) and/or figurative (visually or iconographically) contexts and allocation of meanings. Discourses are subject to constant changes and adapt to needs. In addition discourses structured by key words deliver long-lasting topoi and stereotypes.16

An array of interactions, such as diplomatic missions, economic relations and scientific exchange, in combination with mediators like cultural transfer, had a major impact on the images each obtained of the other.17 On the Ottoman side, translators with the official title18 dragoman or tercümân19 conveyed knowledge between the Ottomans, a people of the written language, and the European nations, a people of the image as portrayed in printed books. They apparently formed a kind of platform or even network to exchange information between entities20 such as the Imperial Divan or provincial administration and foreign diplomacy, as the means to achieve comparability or compatibility of information and interactive communication at different levels, with the benefits of cooperation extending to all the parties involved. Excellent education, language skills and loyalty must be mentioned as preconditions. By the mid-1660s until 1821, 21 Greek families, 22 Phanariots, held the posts of translators, after a period of nearly 200 years during which only converts to Islam were appointed. Their professional status was that of a high-ranking diplomat, official or intermediary, not a plain and simple representative without own competence and decision-making authority, and they played a crucial role in foreign affairs, diplomacy, negotiations and treaties including trade, tax collection, science, military affairs, and intelligence. Through them, Ottoman formal and informal rules of conduct, traditions, customs, arts and science were conveyed to foreign representatives, and European art, literature23 and science found their way into the Ottoman Empire. Objects of decorative art were very common as gifts; so was the exchange of manuscripts as previously mentioned and scientific publications as esteemed tokens of appreciation such as Joan Blaeu’s (1596–1673) Atlas Maior (1662), presented by Dutch ambassador Justinus Colyer (1624−1682) to Sultan Mehmed IV (1642−1687, r.1648−1687) in 1668.24

REPRESENTATION OF POWER AND FESTIVITIES − A COMPARISON

The imperial court in Constantinople was the authority that raised and trained the elite to control, administrate and defend the Ottoman Empire. Beyond legitimising power, the court was also a multi-levelled cultural and religious centre. The basis for exercising power was centred on the person of the sultan: a sovereign in his own right, whose authority originated from dynastic law. This traditional political heritage gave him discretion in absolute and indivisible legislative, judicial, and executive powers not explicitly within the jurisdiction of Islamic law. Therefore the sultan was also, but not only, a religious leader.25 Political framework rested on two pillars: (re)distribution and patrimonialism. The first provided the military and the administration with material goods, while the second determined the form and functions of the political system. In the sultan’s name the Great Divan exercised the highest legislative, executive, and judicial authority in the Ottoman Empire. During the next two centuries it gradually lost its functions and by the eighteenth century became the setting for ceremonies and formal diplomatic receptions. The sultan, the incorporate image of power, emphasised his sublimity by seclusion from his subjects and a changing concept of reigning based on patrimonialism, exemplified by his relationship with his grand vizier, an important mediator, or by his handling of the influence of the Harem26 in public affairs.27 There was a gradual general political and economic shift, especially in the seventeenth and the eighteenth century, which changed the distribution of wealth and power and shook the traditional Ottoman concept of the state, 28 transforming it according to the demands and needs of maintaining its stability.

In the Ottoman Empire art and in particular architecture were used to create images of power. Palace ateliers provided skilled artists, craftsmen and architects for the imperial court and the empire. Uniformity in style throughout the Ottoman Empire was the result of a centralised state run by educated officials. This distinct visual language or programme included a broad variety of elements from unique or specific to inconspicuous or hidden. Each period has its characteristic art form, motif, origin, and important cultural centres.29 Most commonly known are silk and cotton textiles and ceramics30 with floral motifs. Examples of the latter are those rooted in Chinese art with all their nuances of blue and white as well as tulips, 31 roses, rosebuds, carnations or hyacinths, all part of the famous palette of flowers depicted on different kinds of surfaces. Obvious objects of the images of power are elevated wooden thrones and baldachins, decorated all over with flowers that are complemented by precious gemstones such as emeralds or diamonds, or Tuğras (‘tughras’)32 with the space between the letters in the lower part filled with designs showing flowers or reflecting European baroque style. Book art and calligraphy, which commanded great prestige, provided illustrated manuscripts with both secular and religious content. These contemporary classical miniatures are important sources illustrating ceremonial practice and festivities – and the identity of the participants, portrayed in detail – and last but not least topography.