Page 116 - sfogliabile 49

382 Evrim Türkçelik

attack on Tunis and narrates it as a simple campaign of conquest.
Matrakçı Nasuh’s statements in terms of sultan’s authorization are not as
explicit as Bostan Çelebi’s. According to his account, Barbarossa
bombarded the castle of Tunis and conquered the city under the auspices
[sâye-i sa’âdetlerinde feth idüb zabt eyledi] of Sultan Süleyman. In return
for his bravery, Barbarossa was awarded a gilded sword and a robe of
honour and was ordered to «preserve and protect» those territories. He
stayed in Tunis to establish a «new order and fresh discipline» but its
previous ruler forged an alliance with the infidels and together they
attacked and reconquered the city . Although Matrakçı Nasuh’s use of the
25
phrase «sâye-i sa’âdetlerinde» and his description of Barbarossa’s further
endorsement by Istanbul implies the approval of the sultan, this does not
explicitly suggest that the sultan had determined that Tunis should be his
objective . However, since Matrakçı Nasuh participated in Süleyman’s
26
Iraq campaign in 1534, he must have personally witnessed in situ the
sultan’s positive reaction to Barbarossa’s conquest of Tunis.
The second approach is adopted by Seyyid Murad’s Gazavât-ı
Hayreddin Paşa, which does not mention an explicit order from the
sultan and denies totally any intentional responsibility of Barbarossa
for the conquest of Tunis. Seyyid Murad states that the main source
of his work is Barbarossa himself. The author is also known to have
participated in some of Barbarossa’s campaigns and therefore he
probably added his own observations as well as using the testimony
of Barbarossa’s captains. Gazavât-ı Hayreddin Paşa was written both
in prose and verse styles. There are several copies of its prose versions
reproduced in different centuries. The prose Gazavât manuscript in
the Escorial library was written before 1578 and is thought to be the
closest to the original composition written by Seyyid Murad . There is
27
only one copy of Gazavât’s verse version and it is probable that it was
completed before 1543 . With regards to the Tunis campaign, the
28
main argument of both prose and verse versions of Gazavât is that the
arrival of Barbarossa in Tunis was totally accidental. The Gazavât
maintains that, after having plundered the Italian coasts as far as
Sardinia, Barbarossa thought of sailing directly to Algiers. But an
adverse wind (rüzgâr muhalif olub) brought the whole fleet to the port

25 Ivi, pp. 186-189.
26 N. Vatin, Sur les objectifs cit., p. 182.
27 The Italian turcologist Aldo Gallotta carried out an analysis on several versions of
Gazavât and published a facsimile edition of the prose manuscript found in the Escorial
library. A. Gallotta, Il Gazavat di Hayreddin Pasa di Seyyid Murad: edito in facsimile secondo
il ms. 1663 dell’Escurial di Madrid con le varianti degli altri manoscritti, Centro di Studi
Magrebini, Napoli, 1983.
28 Ivi, pp. 23-24.

Mediterranea - ricerche storiche - Anno XVII - Agosto 2020
ISSN 1824-3010 (stampa) ISSN 1828-230X (online)