Page 122 - sfogliabile 49

388 Evrim Türkçelik

differences from the earlier account might have arisen as a result of
Seyyid Lokmân’s intervention in the text. The same argument, that an
attack on Tunis was a natural continuation of the expedition against
Koron, after that objective proved redundant, is reproduced in Seyyid
Lokmân’s Zübdetü’t-tevârîh , which is in fact a summarized edition of
48
Tomâr-ı Hümâyun in a book format, and also partly in his Şehnâme-i
Âl-i Osman, a chronological account of the Ottoman dynasty composed
in verse, including the reign of Murad III .
49
The shortest account of the 1534 expedition is offered in the second
volume of Hünernâme, a chronological account of Süleyman’s reign
dedicated to the exaltation of his moral qualities and skills as a ruler.
This project was again inherited by Seyyid Lokmân from his
predecessors. Hünernâme’s account of the conquest of Tunis is rather
obscure and, in fact, never mentions Tunis. Barbarossa tears down
the enemy in Morea and then sets off for North Africa without Tunis
being specified. Five lines later the account mentions that the sultan
receives good news from Barbarossa, but it is not specified what this
«good news» involved. Interestingly, the subsequent loss of Tunis is
also totally omitted from the account, although it is an integral part of
Ârif Çelebi’s Süleymannâme and Seyyid Lokmân’s other works .
50
The narratives of Ârif Çelebi and Seyyid Lokmân demonstrate that
the palace was uneasy about the content of earlier Süleymannâmes
and opted either to rectify or to manipulate the official discourse on
Tunis. In fact, during the reign of Süleyman, there were authors who
preferred not to touch upon the episode of Barbarossa’s occupation of
Tunis. For example, Senâyî’s Süleymaniyye, which was completed in
1540 and written in verse, skips the conquest of Tunis in 1534 and
the victory of Charles V in 1535 entirely . Celâlzâde’s famous
51
Tabakâtü’l-memâlik ve derecâtü’l-mesâlik, which was probably com-
pleted in the 1560s, after Ârif Çelebi’s work, makes no mention of the
Tunis campaign even though Celâlzâde was in office as chancellor of

48 «Küffâr anın varacağın işitdükde bi’l-cümle Mora’dan kalkub müteferrik oldılar
badehu varub Mağrib zeminde Tunus nâm kal’ayı ‘Arab elinden alub». S. Lokmân, Zübdetü’t-
tevârîh [Quintessence of Histories], Dublin Chester Beatty Library, T414, f. 163v.
49 L. Akın, Seyyid Lokman’ın Şehnâme-i Âl-i Osman’ı, Akademi Titiz Yayınları, İstanbul,
2018, p. 169.
50 Hünernâme, Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H1524, 260a.
51 M.B. Düzenli, A. Akgül, Senâyî’nin Manzum Süleymaniyye’si [Senâyî’s Süleymaniyye
in Verse], Çizgi Kitabevi, Konya, 2018. Eyyubî’s Menakıb-i Sultan Süleyman (1550s) makes
no mention of Tunis and not even Barbarossa himself. Eyyûbî, Menâkıb-ı Sultan Süleyman:
Risâle-i Pâdişâhnâme [The Saga of Sultan Süleyman], ed. M. Akkuş, Kültür Bakanlığı,
Ankara, 1991, p. 90.

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