Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Shī‘itisation of the Futuwwa Tradition in the Fifteenth Century

2013; Routledge; Volume: 40; Issue: 1 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1080/13530194.2012.734958

1469-3542

Rıza Yıldırım,

Families in Therapy and Culture

Abstract This study examines the Shī'itisation of the futuwwa tradition from the eleventh century to the early sixteenth century, with a special reference to fifteenth-century events. Available scholarship has a rather generalised view on the sectarian orientation of the futuwwa, locating it within the Sunni fold, though having a slightly Shī'ite tinge. This view has a tendency to underestimate changes in the religious stand of the futuwwa through the ages. Likewise, it devalues the evident Shī'ite content of the fifteenth- and sixteenth-century futuwwat-nāmas, regarding them as a temporary divergence due to Safavid propaganda. This article challenges two premises of this established view, arguing that the religious history of futuwwa was by no means static and linear but shows a rupture, i.e. Shī'itisation, in the fifteenth century; and, in contrast to the consensus of the available scholarship, this Shī'itisation was not a result of Safavid propaganda, but of a greater 'universal' transition taking place in fifteenth-century Islamdom. Notes 1 Hermann Thorning, Beiträge zur Kenntnis des islamischen Vereinswesens auf Grund von Bast Madad et-Taufīq (Berlin: Mayer und Müller, 1913). 2 Clauda Cahen, 'Futuwwa', EI (2nd edn), Vol. II, p. 962; idem, 'Le Problème du Shi'isme dans l'Asie Mineure turque préottomane', in Le Shi'isme Imâmite: Colloque de Strasbourg (6–9 mai 1968) (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1970), pp, 120–123; idem, The Formation of Turkey: The Seljukid Sultanate of Rūm, Eleventh to Fourteenth Century, trans. and ed. P.M. Holt (London: Longman, 2001), p. 120; Franz Taeschner, 'İslam Ortaçağında Futuvva (Fütüvvet Teşkilatı)', İktisat Fakültesi Mecmuası, 15(1–4) (1953–1954), p. 23; idem, 'Akhī', EI (2nd edn), Vol. I, p. 323; Lloyd Ridgeon, Morals and Mysticism in Persian Sufism: A History of Sufi-futuwwat in Iran (London & New York: Routledge, 2010), pp. 61–91. It should be noted that Abdülbaki Gölpınarlı's view fundamentally differs from the above-summarised mainstream view in that he regards the futuwwa in the entirety of its history as Shī'ite or Shī'ite-leaning (mutashayyī). However, as will be discussed, this claim lacks textual evidence, especially for the earlier periods. See Abdülbaki Gölpınarlı, 'İslam ve Türk İllerinde Fütüvvet Teşkilatı', İstanbul Üniversitesi İktisat Fakültesi Mecmuası, 11 (1949–1950), pp. 62–63. 3 This work will be examined below. 4 This idea, seemingly borrowed from John K. Birge, needs careful treatment since our knowledge about the Bektashis of the early sixteenth century, especially about their link with the Qizilbash movement and their Shī'ite affiliation, is still meagre. 5 Taeschner, 'İslam Ortaçağında Futuvva', p. 23. 6 Gölpınarlı, 'İslam ve Türk İllerinde', pp. 57, 62. 7 To be discussed below. 8 Ridgeon, Morals and Mysticism, p. 98. 9 Cahen, The Formation of Turkey, p. 117. 10 Erik S. Ohlander, Sufism in an Age of Transition: 'Umar al-Suhrawardī and the Rise of the Islamic Mystical Brotherhoods (Leiden & Boston: Brill, 2008), p. 272. 11 Paul Kahle, 'Ein Futuwwa-Erlass des Kalifen Nāsir aus dem Jahre 604 (1207)', in Aus fünf Jahrtausenden morgenländischer Kultur, Festschrift für Max Freiherrn von Oppenheim zum 70. Geburtstage, gewidmet von Freunden und Mitarbeitern (Berlin: Ernst F. Weidner, 1933), pp. 52–58; Franz Taeschner, Zünfte und Buruderschaften im Islam, Texte zur Geschichte der Futuwwa (Zurich & Munich: Artemis Verlag, 1979), pp. 74–75. 12 Cited and quoted in Muammad Ja'far Mahjub, 'Chivalry and Early Persian Sufism', in Leonard Lewisohn (ed.), Classical Persian Sufism: From Its Origins to Rumi (London & New York: Khaniqahi Nimatullahi Publications, 1993), p. 554. 13 Mahjub, 'Chivalry and Early Persian Sufism', p. 556. 14 For 'Alid elements in pre-Nāirian futuwwa, also see Lloyd Ridgeon, Jawanmardi: A Sufi Code of Honour (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2011), p. 37. 15 Mahjub, 'Chivalry and Early Persian Sufism', pp. 578–579; Mohsen Zakeri, 'The futuwwa-"Houses" at the Time of Caliph al-Nāir', in Erlesenes: Sonderheft der Halleschen Beiträge zur Orientwissenschaft anlässlich des 19. Kongress der Union Européenne d'Arabisants et Islamisants (Halle [Saale]: Walter Beltz und Sebastian Günther, 1998), pp. 235–236. 16 al-Sulamī's (d. 1021) famous futuwwat-nāma, which is known as the earliest futuwwa treatise, for example mentions 'Alī only once while reciting two traditions from Mu'awiya bin Abi Sufyān. See Ebu Abdi'r-Rahman Muhammed İbn el-Hüseyn es-Sülemi, Tasavvufta Fütüvvet, ed. Süleyman Ateş (Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi Basımevi, 1977). al-Qushayrī (d. 1072) follows his master, al-Sulamī. See Abdülkerim Kuşeyrî, Kuşeyrî Risâlesi, ed. Süleyman Uludağ (İstanbul: Dergâh Yayınları, 2003), pp. 305–311. On the other hand, al-Suhrawardī's two treatises on the futuwwa put special stress on the pre-eminence of 'Alī in the futuwwa tradition. For an analysis of al-Suhrawardī's position regarding 'Alī, see Ridgeon, Morals and Mysticism, pp. 66–69, 94–95; idem, Jawanmardi, pp. 37–38. 17 Zakeri, 'The futuwwa-"Houses"', pp. 231–232. 18 Angelika Hartmann, 'al-Nāir li-Dīn Allāh', EI (2nd edn), Vol. VII, pp. 996–1003; idem, 'La conception governementale du calife an-Nāsir li-Dīn Allāh', Orientalia Suecana, 22 (1973), pp. 52–61; idem, 'al-Suhrawardī, Shihāb al-Dīn Abū Hafs 'Umar', EI (2nd edn), Vol. IX, pp. 778–782; Franz Taeschner, 'Nâsir', İslam Ansiklopedisi, 9 (1997), pp. 92–94. 19 According to Mahjub, during the Seljukid period, the practitioners of the futuwwa tradition were fiercely oppressed by the political authority. Consequently, they went underground. More importantly, Seljukid pressure made the futuwwa tradition rather receptive to Fatimid propaganda. It was for this reason, argues Mahjub, that once he seized the leadership of futuwwa, the Abbasid caliph al-Nāir dissolved all futuwwa branches except those that pledged their allegiance to him as the supreme head of the new state-sponsored futuwwa organisation. Mahjub, 'Chivalry and Early Persian Sufism', pp. 579–580. 20 Taeschner, 'Nâsir', p. 93. Gölpınarlı goes further, arguing that he pursued Twelver Shī'ite confession. See Gölpınarlı, 'İslam ve Türk İllerinde', p. 58. Ahmet Y. Ocak shares this argument. See Ocak, 'Fütüvvet, Tarih', Diyânet İslâm Ansiklopedisi, Vol. XIII, p. 262. 21 This chain of authority is recorded in al-Hartburtī's Tu fat al-va āyā and Ibn al-Mi'mār's Kitāb al-futuwwa, though with some differences. See Taeschner, Zünfte und Buruderschaften, p. 100; Gölpınarlı, 'İslam ve Türk İllerinde', p. 230. 22 Lack of Shī'ite leaning in this period is well attested by two fatwas of Ibn Taymīyah (d. 1328) and his pupil Safī al-Dīn Idrīs ibn Bīdqīn. Despite his extreme orthodoxy, Ibn Taymīyah does not criticise the people of futuwwa because of Shī'ite leaning. Rather he condemns some of their rituals and practices deemed as innovation (bid'a). Safī al-Dīn's critics are of the same kind. See Deodaat Anne Breebaart, 'The Development and Structure of the Turkish Futūwah Guilds' (PhD dissertation, Princeton University, 1961), pp. 102–108. 23 Taeschner, 'İslam Ortaçağında Futuvva', p. 17. 24 Taeschner, 'Akhī', p. 322. Ridgeon argues that under the Mongol rule, which suspended the Sunni oppression of Shī'ism, 'Alī's pre-eminence in the futuwwa tradition was further augmented (Ridgeon, Morals and Mysticism, pp. 75–76). 25 Until the beginning of the reign of Murad II, akhīs are mentioned among influential actors. They then gradually disappear from our sources. Taeschner, 'İslam Ortaçağında Futuvva', p. 21; George G. Arnakis, 'Futuwwa Traditions in the Ottoman Empire: Akhis, Bektashi Traditions, and Craftsmen', Journal of Near Eastern Studies, 12(4) (1953), pp. 234–235. 26 The Persian text is published by Franz Taeschner while a Turkish translation is published by Abdülbaki Gölpınarlı. See Franz Taeschner, Der anatolische Dichter Nāsirī (um 1300) und sein Futuvvetnāme (Leipzig: Komissionverlag F.A. Brockhaus, 1944); Gölpınarlı, 'İslam Ortaçağında Futuvva', pp. 311–352. 27 Taeschner describes al-Burgāzī's futuwwat-nāma as a 'Regelbuch' of Anatolian akhīs. He believes that it was written in the fourteenth century. Franz Taeschner, 'Das Futuvvetnāme des Jahjā b. Halīl', Orientalistiche Literaturzeitung, 31 (1928), p. 1065. Abdülbaki Gölpınarlı published this futuwwat-nāma with an introduction. See Abdülbaki Gölpınarlı, 'Burgâzî ve "Fütüvvet-Nâme'si"', İstanbul Üniversitesi İktisat Fakültesi Mecmuası, 15(1–4) (Ekim 1953–Temmuz 1954), pp. 76–151 (henceforth al-Burgāzī). 28 Taeschner, 'Akhī', pp. 322–323; idem, 'İslam Ortaçağında Futuvva', p. 19. Some other futuwwat-nāmas written in the late thirteenth and early fourteenth centuries, such as that of Najmi Zarkūb (mid-fourteenth century), al-Kashānī (early fourteenth century), al-Samnānī (early fourteenth century) and an anonymous futuwwat-nāma (written before 1290), are also consulted for this study. All these futuwwat-nāmas are published by Gölpınarlı with Turkish translations. See Gölpınarlı, 'İslam Ortaçağında Futuvva', pp. 115–352. 29 Taeschner, 'Akhī', p. 323. 30 See Etan Kohlberg, 'The Term "Rāfida" in Imāmī Shī'ī Usage', Journal of the American Oriental Society, 99 (1979), pp. 677–679. 31 Ibn Ba ūa's frequently cited account relates that during his visit to Sinop, people suspected him of being Rāfiī because of his different style of praying. Realising this, he ate rabbit meat, which is forbidden in Rāfiī-Shī'ism, to prove his Sunnī affiliation. See Ibn Ba ūa, Rihlet Ibn Battūta (Beyrut: Dār al-Nafā'is, 2004), pp. 383–384. 32 Franz Taeschner, Gülschehrīs Mesnevi auf Akhī Evran, den Heiligen von Kırschehir und Patron der türkischen Zünfte (Wiesbaden: Kommissionsverlag Franz Steiner Gmbh, 1955), pp. 12–36, 52–58. 33 See Ahmed Eflâkî, Ariflerin Menkıbeleri, trans. Tahsin Yazıcı (Istanbul: Kabalcı Yayınları, 2006), pp. 182, 218, 252, 326–327, 463–465, 565–567, 609–610, 631–632, 635, 653, 657, 693–694. 34 Taeschner, Der anatolische Dichter Nāsirī, pp. 312–313. 35 Taeschner, Der anatolische Dichter Nāsirī, p. 337. 36 Taeschner, Der anatolische Dichter Nāsirī, p. 329. 37 Taeschner, Der anatolische Dichter Nāsirī, pp. 327, 351. 38 This futuwwat-nāma deserves a special consideration as the first Turkish futuwwat-nāma. The author explains the reason he wrote this work as follows: 'I saw that akhīs who sit at the gate of futuwwa do not have a book of futuwwa in their possession so that they learn its rule and pursue as far as they can effort. … I … wished to write a book which explicates futuwwa. … It is expected that every Friday night [in modern parlance Thursday night] akhīs will read futuwwa [from this book] under candle light and follow its rules…' (al-Burgāzī, pp. 112–113). Given that the language of Anatolian akhīs was Turkish, one may easily recognise from the above-quoted passage that al-Burgāzī's principal audience was the akhīs of Anatolia. Hence there is good reason, as Taeschner argues, to deem this text a genuine source for Anatolian akhīsm. 39 al-Burgāzī, pp. 114–119. 40 al-Burgāzī, p. 114. 41 al-Burgāzī, p. 144. 42 For al-Hartburtī's account, for example, see Gölpınarlı, 'İslam ve Türk İllerinde', pp. 229–230. 43 al-Burgāzī, p. 147. Similarly al-Burgāzī takes a story of 'Āysha in his futuwwat-nāma, which is also quite unusual in this tradition. Needless to say, he mentions 'Umar and 'Uthmān with reverence. See al-Burgāzī, pp. 134, 144. 44 al-Burgāzī, p. 143. 45 Gölpınarlı, 'İslâm ve Türk İllerinde', pp. 233–234, 249–250. 46 Taeschner, Zünfte und Buruderschaften, pp. 106, 169. 47 There is no sign of a special emphasis on the Twelve Imams (or the cult of Twelve Imams) in Nāirian futuwwa. In the futuwwa lineage, neither Ibn al-Mi'mār nor al-Hartburtī includes any of 'Alī's descendants. Suhrawardī too makes no reference to the Twelve Imams, though mentioning Hasan and Husayn with great respect. Indeed, the formulaic phrase 'Twelve Imams' does not exist in our sources for Nāirian futuwwa, let alone their names or subsistence in doctrine. See, for example, Morteza Sarraf, Traités des compagnons-chevaliers, Rasa'il-e Javanmardan: Recueil de sept 'Fotowwat-Nâmeh' (Tehran: Département d'Iranologie de l'Institut Franco-Iranien de Recherche, 1973), pp. 100–101; Ridgeon, Jawanmardi, pp. 37–38. 48 Akhī Sharaf al-Dīn was representative of a powerful akhī family of Ankara in the fourteenth century. See Ahmed Tevhīd, 'Ankara'da Ahîler Hükümeti', Tarihi Osmânî Encümeni Mecmu'ası, 19 (1331), pp. 1200–1204; Halil Edhem, 'Ankara Ahilerine Aid İki Kitābe', Tarihi Osmânî Encümeni Mecmu'ası, 41 (1332), pp. 312–315. 49 This shajara is first used by Ahmed Tevhīd, who published the genealogy Akhī Sharaf al-Dīn as recorded in the document. Later, Irène Mélikoff studied this document more extensively. See Tevhīd, 'Ankara'da Ahîler Hükümeti', pp. 1202–1203; Mélikoff, 'Bir XIII. Yüzyıl Ahi Belgesi', in Destandan Masala Türkoloji Yolculuklarım, trans. Turan Alptekin (İstanbul: Demos Yayınları, 2008), pp. 169–184. 50 Mélikoff, 'Bir XIII. Yüzyıl Ahi Belgesi', pp. 172–174. 51 Mélikoff, 'Bir XIII. Yüzyıl Ahi Belgesi', p. 177. 52 It is interesting to note that this would become a standard practice in the Qizilbash/Alevī tradition by the sixteenth century. See Rıza Yıldırım, 'Bektaşi Kime Derler?: 'Bektaşi' Kavramının Kapsamı ve Sınırları Üzerine Tarihsel bir Analiz Denemesi', Türk Kültürü ve Hacı Bektaş Veli Araştırma Dergisi, 55 (2010), pp. 23–58. 53 This document is first used by Cevat Hakkı Tarım, who underlined its 'Alid leaning. See Tarım, Tarihte Kırşehri-Gülşehri ve Babailer-Ahiler-Bektaşiler (İstanbul: Yeniçağ Matbaası, 1948), p. 63. The whole text with a facsimile copy of the document is published by Seyfi Yıldırım. See Yıldırım, 'Bazı Ahi Şecere-nāmelerinin Muhtevaları ve Tarihi Değerleri' (unpublished MA thesis, Selçuk Üniversitesi, Konya, 1994), pp. 56–92. 54 Yıldırım, 'Bazı Ahi Şecere-nāmelerinin Muhtevaları', pp. 56–92. 55 Abū Muslim already existed in the Nāirian futuwwa lineage, as recorded in al-Khartburtī's and Ibn al Mi'mār's futuwwat-nāmas. Nonetheless, none of these works mentions Abū Muslim except in regard to lineage. Hence it may be regarded as a sign of newly added lore to the traditional body of futuwwa knowledge. 56 al-Burgāzi, p. 147. 57 Fuat Köprülü, 'Türkler, Edebiyat', İslam Ansiklopedisi, Vol. XII(2), p. 536. 58 This work was written by a certain Shādī the Maddāh in 1362 in Kastamonu. See Irène Mélikoff, 'Le drame de Kerbela dans la littérature épique turque', Revue des études islamiques, 34 (1966), pp. 133–148. 59 A closer scrutiny of this literature reveals that these different epic traditions, with their shared elements, cross-references and close links, draw upon a shared collective memory. Considering that the texts in our possession have been shaped by an accumulation of oral performances over time, and may have indeed been written with performance in mind rather than passive reading, they may be seen as constituting various layers of a collective memory reflecting widespread religious perceptions. For a preliminary study of these popular epics as a mirror of the collective memory, see Rıza Yıldırım, 'Beylikler Dünyasında Kerbela Kültürü ve Ehl-i Beyt Sevgisi: 1362 Yılında Kastamonu'da Yazılan bir Maktel'in Düşündürdükleri', Kuzey Anadolu'da Beylikler Dönemi Sempozyumu Bildirileri. Cobanogˇullari, Candarogˇullari, Pervaneogˇullari, 3–8 Ekim 2011 Katamonu-Sinop-C¸ankiri, ed. Halil C¸etin (C¸ankiri: C¸ankiri Karatekin U¨niversitesi Yayinlari, 2012), pp. 344–372. 60 For a thorough analysis of Maqtāl al-Husayn in this perspective, see Yıldırım, 'Beylikler Dünyasında Kerbela Kültürü', pp. 358–372. Mélikoff notices the same kind of grouping in Abū Muslim-nāma. See Irène Mélikoff, Abū Muslim: Le 'Porte-Hache' du Khorassan dans la tradition épique turco-iranienne (Paris: A. Maisonneuve, 1962), pp. 62–63. 61 This idea is shared by Taeschner. See Taeschner, 'Futuwwa: Post-Mongol Period', Encyclopedia of Islam, Second edition, vol. II, p. 966. 62 Mélikoff, Abū Muslim, pp. 68–69. Mélikoff does not historically situate the link between futuwwa and Abū Muslim tradition, and thus neglects to differentiate between the Nāirian and akhī-futuwwa traditions. As discussed above, however, this approach needs to be corrected since before al-Burghāzi we have no mention of Abū Muslim in this manner. Another point in need of critical assessment is her synonymous use of akhī and guild. 63 Mélikoff, Abū Muslim, pp. 91–102. 64 Mélikoff, 'Le drame', pp. 134–135. 65 The oral character of these Turkish epics has yet to be studied thoroughly. For some preliminary discussions, see Yorgos Dedes, 'Introduction', in his Battalname: Giriş, İngilizce Tercüme, Türkçe Metin, Yorum ve Tıpkıbasım (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1996), pp. 1–25. 66 There is good reason to assume that this sermon was principally, if not exclusively, drawn from the maqtāl literature. As Mélikoff notes, the Maqtāl is organised according to 10 chapters, apparently to be read during the first 10 days of Muharram. In the beginning of some chapters (bāb) the author or compiler addresses his audience as 'akhī', which may very well indicate, as Mélikoff claims, its being read in akhī lodges. See Mélikoff, 'Le drame', pp. 134–136. For a thorough analysis of the Maqtāl's oral characteristics, see Yıldırım, 'Beylikler Dünyasında Kerbela Kültürü'. 67 Ibn Ba ūa, Rihlet Ibn Battūta, pp. 307–308. 68 Ohlander puts special stress on al-Suhrawardī's role in this process. See Ohlander, Sufism in an Age of Transition, pp. 271–291. 69 Early akhī ijāzatnāmas and waqfiyyās, documents which stipulate the basic rules by which a lodge was to operate, show that akhī lodges were subjected to regulations similar to those of Sufi lodges, and thus they too reflect the overwhelming arīqa character of the akhī-futuwwa. See, for example, Mehmet Akkuş, 'Farklı bir Ahîlik İcâzetnâmesi', Türk Kültürü ve Hacı Bektaş Veli Araştırma Dergisi, 21 (2002), pp. 95–100; Halime Doğru, XVI. Yüzyılda Sultanönü Sancağında Ahiler ve Ahi Zaviyeleri (Ankara: Kültür Bakanlığı Yayınları, 1991). 70 There is no solid evidence showing that akhīs were organised along occupational lines. Hence they cannot be regarded as a guild organisation (Cahen, The Formation of Turkey, p. 120). Indeed, there are good reasons to believe that akhīsm was not an exclusively craftsmen phenomenon. Although al-Burgazī's futuwwat-nāma states that those who do not have an occupation or craft should not be accepted on the akhī path (al-Burgazī, p. 125), the meaning of occupation and craft here should be taken broadly since Ibn Battutā mentions akhīs who were qā īs, and, as Taeschner already showed, Ottoman Sultan Murad I himself was an akhī. See Franz Taeschner, 'War Murad I. Grossmeister oder Mitglied des Akhī bundes?', Oriens, 6(1) (1953), pp. 23–31. 71 Taeschner, 'Futuwwa: Post-Mongol Period', p. 967. Breebaart, 'The Development', pp. 145–224. 72 For the second half of the fifteenth century, one may perhaps talk about nascent corporeal bodies composed of artisans, craftsmen and traders, but not about guilds in its proper sense, that is 'professional craftsmen organisation'. See Gabriel Baer, 'Guilds in Middle Eastern History', in M.A. Cook (ed.), Studies in the Economic History of the Middle East from the Rise of Islam to the Present Day (London, New York & Toronto: Oxford University Press, 1970), pp. 27–28; Suraiya Faroqhi, Artisans of Empire: Crafts and Craftspeople under the Ottomans (London & New York: I.B. Tauris, 2009), pp. 25–34. 73 The first of these three important futuwwat-nāmas was written in Turkish by Husayn Ibn Gaybī in the Ottoman realm, some time between 1451 and 1481; the text is published by Abdülbaki Gölpınarlı ('Seyyid Gaybî oğlu Seyyid Hüseyin'in Fütüvvetnâmesi', İstanbul Üniversitesi İktisat Fakültesi Mecmuası, 17[1–4] [1955–1956], pp. 27–126; henceforth Ibn Gaybī). The second one was written in Persian by usayn Wā'īz al-Kāshifī in Herat shortly before 1504. The Persian text is published by Muammad Ja'far Majūb, and an English translation is published by Jay R. Crook. See usayn Wā'īz-i Kāshifī, Futuwwat-nāmah-i Sultānī, ed. Muammad Ja'far Majūb (Tehran: Bunya¯d-i Farhang-i īra¯n, 1350/1971); usayn Wā'īz-i Kāshifī Sabzawārī, The Royal Book of Spiritual Chivalry (Futūwat nāmah-yi sultānī), trans. Jay R. Crook (Chicago, IL: Great Books of Islamic World, 2000) (henceforth Kāshifī). And the last one was written in Turkish by Muammad bin Huayn al-Rażavī in Bursa in 1524. This futuwwat-nāma has not yet been published. Rahşan Gürel's dissertation includes a text of the work ('Razavî'nin Fütüvvet-nâmesi' [PhD dissertation, Marmara Üniversitesi, 1992]). Also see Breebaart, 'The Development', pp. 145–224; idem, 'The Fütüvvet-nāme-i kebīr: A Manual on Turkish Guilds', Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient, 15(1–2) (1972), pp. 203–215. 74 Little is known about the author who gives his name in the text as Shaykh Husayn ibn Shaykh Sayyid Gaybī. One may ascertain that he wrote this futuwwat-nāma during the reign of Mehmed II (1451–1481) since he invokes the names of Mehmed II in the introduction. Furthermore, he says his master Shaykh 'Alī received the futuwwa through the approval of Sultan Murad. Evidently this must be Sultan Murad II (1421–1444, 1446–1451). See Ibn Gaybī, pp. 74, 87. Another work of the author, the Şerh-i Hutbetü'l-Beyân, also reflects Ibn Gaybī's Twelver Shī'ite leanings. See Seyyid Hüseyin İbn Seyyid Gaybî, Şerhu Hutbeti'l-beyân, ed. Saffet Sarıkaya (Isparta: Fakülte Kitabevi, 2004). 75 Some fundamental subjects that were common to futuwwa literature survive in this work, such as the stories regarding the Prophets who received futuwwa, the tree of futuwwa, code of conducts or etiquette of futuwwa, those people who cannot acquire futuwwa, and those 19 acts which annul one's futuwwa. 76 One should remember that no earlier futuwwat-nāma makes an allusion to Ghadīr Khum, let alone mentions it as a referential event. 77 Although in the Nāirian futuwwa the garment that symbolises one's initiation into the futuwwa was the trousers, by the fourteenth century the sash gained prominence as a symbol of investment. Concomitant to the rise of Sufi influence on futuwwa, the cloak (khirqa) became the most central symbol of spiritual investment while the sash gained a more professional connotation. 78 Ibn Gaybī, pp. 75–79. 79 For a summary of Ghadīr Khum according to Islamic sources, see L. Veccia Vaglieri, 'Ghadīr Khumm', EI (2nd edn), Vol. II, pp. 993–994. 80 Compare Vaglieri, p. 993. 81 It is interesting to note that this chain of succession does not include Abū Muslim. 82 Ibn Gaybī explains tawallā and tabarrā according to three layers: for the people of word (qawl), it is 'encouraging the religious truth and discouraging bad acts'; for the people of act (fi'l), it is 'attaching oneself to the skirt of Muammad-'Ali through their love, and being the enemy of their enemies'; for the people of state ( āl), it is 'to desire only the consent of God, and to abstain from worldly doings'. See Ibn Gaybī, pp. 116–117. 83 Ibn Gaybī, p. 99. 84 Ibn Gaybī, pp. 95–103. 85 Ibn Gaybī, p. 97. Elsewhere he mentions 'Umar with reverence. See Ibn Gaybī, p. 115. 86 See, for example, al-Rażavī, Fütüvvetnāme-i Kebīr, manuscript, Süleymaniye Kütüphanesi, İzmir Kitaplığı, no. 337, fol. 16a (henceforth al-Rażavī). This manuscript was copied in 1068/1658 by Muammad Yusuf bin el-Selanikī. 87 al-Rażavī, fols. 16b–17a, 25b–36a, 38b–39a, 40b. 88 al-Rażavī, fols. 42a–65a. 89 However, al-Rażavī makes references to some more written sources and includes additional Qur'anic verses and prophetic traditions in his narrative of events. 90 Sometimes, Kāshifī attempts to conciliate traditional—and for the most part mythological—futuwwa stories with established Islamic history. For example, his account of the Ghadīr Khum event is close to that of Ibn Gaybī. However, he sticks strictly to the version found in well-known literary sources, clipping some details of Ibn Gaybī, which were seemingly derived from oral tradition. He contextualises the event by adding 'Alī's expedition to Yemen just before the Farewell Pilgrimage, which is well known from early Islamic sources but totally absent in Ibn Gaybī's treatise. See Kāshifī, pp. 116–120. 91 For a brief discussion of Kāshifī's sources, see Abdülbaki Gölpınarlı, 'Fütüvvet-Nâme-i Sultânî' ve Fütüvvet Hakkında Bâzı Notlar', İstanbul Üniversitesi İktisat Fakültesi Mecmuası, 17(1–4) (1955–1956), pp. 129–130. 92 Kāshifī, pp. 116–120. 93 Ridgeon's conclusion regarding the Shī'ite orientation of Kāshifī's futuwwat-nāma as demonstrating 'the continuity of the futuwwat tradition from the eleventh to the twelfth centuries down to Kāshifī's era' (Ridgeon, Morals and Mysticism, p. 98) is not attested by the present study. 94 Ridgeon, Morals and Mysticism, pp. 36, 84, 126, 137. 95 Ridgeon, Morals and Mysticism, p. 66. 96 Ridgeon, Morals and Mysticism, p. 83. 97 Ridgeon, Morals and Mysticism, pp. 167–168. 98 Ridgeon, Morals and Mysticism, p. 281. 99 Kāshifī dedicates this work to the servants of the shrine of Imam Riżā in Mashād. See Kāshifī, pp. 1–2. 100 Kāshifī, pp. 7–10. 101 Kāshifī, p. 130. 102 Kāshifī, pp. 25–26. 103 Kāshifī, pp. 53–54. 104 Kāshifī, p. 59. 105 Kāshifī, p. 89. 106 Kāshifī, pp. 111–114, 147, 245. For 'the Light of Muammad' see Uri Rubin, 'Pre-Existence and Light: Aspects of the Concept of Nur Muammad', Israel Oriental Studies, 5 (1975), pp. 62–119. 107 Kāshifī, p. 279. 108 Kāshifī, pp. 170, 290–291. 109 This work, completed in 908/1502–1503, stands for one of the best examples of Maqtāl literature. For an analysis of its Shī'ite content, see Adam Jacobs, 'Sunnî and Shî'î Perceptions, Boundaries, and Affiliations in Late Timurid and Early Safawid Persia: An Examination of Historical and Quasi-historical Narratives' (PhD dissertation, The School of Oriental and African Studies, 1999), pp. 55–80. 110 An anti-futuwwa treatise written in the early seventeenth century shows the continuance of the Shī'ite character. Ni ābu'l-inti āb ve Ādābu'l-ikti āb of Münīr-i Belgradī (d. 1620?) staunchly criticises Shī'ite elements of futuwwa (especially on the example of al-Rażavī's futuwwat-nāma) accusing them of being Rāfiī agents. See İstanbul Üniversitesi, Türkçe Yazmalar, A6803, f. 33b–34a, 47b–49b. 111 Taeschner, 'İslam Ortaçağında Fütüvva', p. 21; Gölpınarlı, 'İslam ve Türk İllerinde', pp. 57–58; Breebaart, 'The Fütüvvet-nāme-i kebīr', p. 205. 112 Michel M. Mazzaoui, 'The Ghāzī Backgrounds of the Safavid State', Iqbāl Review, 12(3) (Karachi, 1971), p. 83. For a detailed evaluation of Shaykh Junayd's legacy in the Order according to Safavid and Ottoman sources, see Rıza Yıldırım, 'Turkomans between Two Empires: The Origins of the Qizilbash Identity in Anatolia (1447–1514)' (PhD dissertation, Bilkent University, 2008), pp. 167–217. 113 See Viladimir Minorsky, Persia in A.D. 1478–1490: An Abridged Translation of Fa lullāh b. Rūzbihān Khunjī's Tārīkh-i 'ālam-ārā-yi amīnī (London: Luzac and Co., Ltd., 1957), pp. 61–82. 114 Faruk Sümer, Safevî Devletinin Kuruluşu ve Gelişmesinde Anadolu Türklerinin Rolü (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 1999); Yıldırım, 'Turkomans between Two Empires', pp. 187–217. 115 G. Hosein Yousofi, 'Kāshifī', EI (2nd edn), Vol. IV, pp. 704–705. 116 Ghulām Sarwar, History of Shāh Ismā'īl Safawī (Aligarh: Muslim University, 1939), p. 64. 117 Kāshifī's intellectual and confessional stance is somewhat ambiguous. Having grown up in Sabzawar, a traditional Shī'ite stronghold, he was disparaged for his Shī'ite leanings as well as accused by Shī'ites of being Sunni-oriented. His affiliation to the Naqshbandī order makes his position more ambiguous. According to Arley Loewen, his futuwwat-nāma bears clear traits of a Naqshbandī influence, an idea criticised by Ridgeon (Morals and Mysticism, pp. 96–98) and not shared by the present author. For Kāshifī's intellectual environment and religious position with special reference to Sunni-Shī'ite confrontation, see Ridgeon, Morals and Mysticism, pp. 92–99; Arley Loewen, 'Proper Conduct (Adab) is Everything: The Futuwwat-nāmah-i Sultānī of Husayn Va'iz-i Kāshifī', Iranian Studies, 36(4) (2003), pp. 543–570; Jacobs, 'Sunnî and Shî'î Perceptions', pp. 50–80. 118 Kāshifī, pp. 177–178. Similarly, in another section where he gives long explanations about the cloak (khirqa) of spiritual poverty, black and green are especially cherished as colours of the cloak, again with no mention of red (pp. 161–162). 119 Cahen, 'Le Problème du Shi'isme', p. 127; B.S. Amoretti, 'Religion in the Timurid and Safavid Period', in Peter Jackson (ed.), Cambridge History of Iran (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1993), Vol. VI, pp. 614–622; Marijan Molé, 'Les Kubrawiya entre sunnisme et shiisme au huitième et neuvième siècles de l'hégire', Revue des Études Islamiques, 29 (1961), pp. 61–142. 120 Albert Bausani, 'Religion under the Mongols', in Peter Jackson, Cambridge History of Iran, Vol. 6, pp. 538–549. 121 Molé, 'Les Kubrawiya entre sunnisme et shiisme', p. 65; Amoretti, 'Religion in the Timurid and Safavid Period', p. 634; Bausani, 'Religion under the Mongols', p. 546. 122 It should be underlined that the fifteenth century saw only the earlier signals of this great change, which would culminate in the next century in the examples of the Ottoman and the Safavid Empires. For earlier attempts to incorporate Islamic law more into the statecraft in the Timurid realm, see Maria E. Subtelny and Anas B. Khalidov, 'The Curriculum of Islamic Higher Learning in Timurid Iran in the Light of the Sunni Revival under Shāh-Rukh', Journal of the American Oriental Society, 115(2) (1995), pp. 210–214; Maria E. Subtelny, 'Centralizing Reform and Its Opponents in the Late Timurid Period', Iranian Studies, 21(1–2) (1988), pp. 126–130. For an analysis of the Mongolian political legacy in Iran and eastern Anatolia up to the late fifteenth century, see Sara Nur Yıldız, 'Post-Mongol Pastoral Polities in Eastern Anatolia during the Late Middle Ages', in Deniz Beyazıt (ed.), At the Crossroads of Empires: 14 th –15 th Century Eastern Anatolia: Proceedings of the International Symposium Held in Istanbul, 4 th –6 th May 2007 (Paris: Institut Français d'études anatoliennes Georges-Dumezil CNRS USR 3131, 2012), pp. 27–48. 123 If we were to speak of an interaction between these two traditions, leaving aside the phenomenon of Shī'itisation, it would rather be meaningful to assume a futuwwa influence on the Safavid/Qizilbash movement, which is immense, as discussed elsewhere. See Rıza Yıldırım, 'Inventing a Sufi Tradition: The Use of the Futuwwa Ritual Gathering as a Model for the Qizilbash Djem', in John Curry and Erik S. Ohlander (eds), Sufism and Society: Arrangements of the Mystical in the Muslim World, 1200–1800 (New York: Routledge, 2011), pp. 164–182.