in search of vanished ottoman monuments in the balkans - minnetoğlu mehmed bey’s complex in...

7/30/2019 In Search of Vanished Ottoman Monuments in the Balkans - Minnetolu Mehmed Beys Complex in Konu Hisar

1/26

IN SEARCH OF VANISHED OTTOMANMONUMENTS IN THE BALKANS:

MINNETOLU MEHMED BEGS COMPLEX INKONU HISARI

Grigor Boykov (Bilkent University, Ankara)

For years art historians have studied Ottoman architecture thanks to the many standingexamples of magnificent constructions scattered all around the lands of the former Empire.A long tradition of scholarship focused on the Ottoman architectural achievementsemphasizing the stages of development, diverse nature of original and borrowed elementsin construction techniques, decoration etc. Professor Machiel Kiels numerous outstandingcontributions to the field and his unique ability to combine in a single text observations onart and architecture together with the data from Ottoman administrative documents andvaluable notes from his field research, greatly enriched our understanding of early Ottomanrealities in Anatolia and the Balkans. Offering this short paper to Professor KielsFestschrift has a particular meaning to me, because in most of my research I have beensimply following his footsteps, trying to broaden topics that he has already touched upon.

Until recently most works dealing with Ottoman architecture tended to present theirsubject, a building or a group of buildings, almost exclusively from an artistic or technicalpoint of view, showing little appreciation for its wider social context. Thus, the buildingsthat are no longer extant were almost entirely neglected by historians of art andarchitecture, significantly limiting our knowledge of structures that had great importance inthe past.

This paper focuses on a number of buildings in the Balkans, which, despite theirgreat significance during the Ottoman period, have disappeared altogether, having left theirmark only in a few narrative and administrative sources. Tracing the history of Minnet Beg(d. end of 15th c.) and his descendents, my aim is to map out their vanished architecturallegacy. Designed as informative rather than analytical, this paper points to the importanceof studying and contextualizing buildings that fell victim either to the numerous wars in theBalkans or to the zealous desire of newly-born nations to erase almost every reminder ofthe Ottoman past. A study of this kind can add details to the interesting times of Ottomanconquest of the Balkans, the policy of revitalizing deprived areas and the significant


2/26

MONUMENTS,PATRONS,CONTEXTS:PAPERS ON OTTOMAN EUROPE PRESENTED TO MACHIEL KIEL48

importance of a number of greater or smaller dynasties of lords of the marches (uc begleri)in the process.

The transfer of Minnet Beg and his Tatars from skilip to Rumelia

Our account of Minnetoullars vanished buildings and especially these sponsored by themost active family member, Mehmed Beg bin Minnet Beg, should begin with thedeportation of their forefather from Anatolia to Rumelia in the early 15th century. Thetransfer of Minnet Begs Tatars from the area of skilip (orum region in Turkey) to theplain of Filibe (Plovdiv in modern Bulgarian Thrace) in 1418 is well known and has beenexploited as a textbook story, illustrating Ottoman policy of forced population deportations(srgn). 1 The story of this relocation can be found in both Akpaazade and theanonymous chronicles, thus pointing to a common source. 2 Both traditions present acommon narrative, according to which on his way back from Samsun Mehmed I (r. 1413-

1421) stopped by skilip and ordered that a Tatar tribe led by a certain Minnet Beg is to bedeported to Rumelia and settled in a place called Konu Hisar.3 The probable reason forthis punitive action, presented by Akpaazade as a dialog between Mehmed and his vizierBayezid Pasha, was the absence of Minnet Beg and his people at the campaign launched bythe Sultan. 4 The mistrust of Mehmed could be also felt from the emphasis of thechroniclers on the fact that Minnet Beg appeared in Anatolia as part of Timurs army some15 years earlier and that in fact he managed to build strong ties with the Samagarolus, theformer rulers of this province and the sultans natural competitors. Apparently for theOttomans it was easier to deal with the smaller and weaker clan of Minnet Beg, thereforethese Tatars, similarly to other Anatolian nomads, were transferred to the vast and rich butdepopulated plain of Thrace. The sources also point out that all of these Tatars settled in

the region of Filibe, in a place called Konu Hisar, where we lose trace of the leader of theclan, Minnet Beg. His son Mehmed Beg, however, who is mentioned by Akpaazade as

1 While discussing in his classical work the Ottoman methods of forceful population transfers to theBalkans,. L. Barkan was among the first ones to point to the deportation of Minnet Beg and his people.Barkan, mer Ltfi. Osmanl mparatorluunda bir iskn ve kolonizasyon metodu olarak srgnler, in:

stanbul niversitesi ktisat Fakltesi Mecmuas 15 (1953-4), pp. 209-11.2 In his genealogy of the texts nalck names it a supplemented Yakhshi Faqih. nalck, Halil. The rise ofOttoman historiography, in: idem.From Empire to Republic. Essays on Ottoman and Turkish social history.Istanbul: Isis Press, 1995, pp. 1-16.3 Cf. the editions of these chroniclers by Ali Bey. Akpaazade Tarihi. Tevrih-i l-i Osman. stanbul:Matbaa-i Amire, 1332/1916, p. 90; Giese, Friedrich.Die altosmanische Chronik des kpaazde. Leipzig:Otto Harrassowitz, 1929, pp. 80-81; Atsz, Nihal.kpaaolu Ahmed k. Tevrh-i l-i Osman. in: idem.Osmanl tarihleri I. stanbul: Trkiye Yaynevi, 1949, pp. 152-53; Giese, Friedrich. Die altosmanischenanonymen Chroniken. Teil I: Text und Variantenverzeichnis. Breslau, 1922, p. 53;Azamat, Nihat. AnonimTevrih-i l-i Osman. F. Giese neri. stanbul: Marmara niversitesi Edebiyat Fakltesi Basmevi, 1992, p.57; Franz Babinger.Die frhosmanischen Jahrbcher des Urudsch: nach den Handschriften zu Oxford undCambridge. Hannover: Orient-Buchhandlung Heinz Lafaire, 1925, p. 43 and 110; ztrk, Necdet. Oru Betarihi.stanbul: amlca, 2007, p. 50.4 This must have been the campaign against the sfendiyaroullar of late 1417 or early 1418. Ycel, Yaar.

Anadolu beylikleri hakknda aratrmalar I.Ankara: Trk Tarih Kurumu, 1988, pp. 92-4; Imber, Colin. TheOttoman Empire 1300-1481. Istanbul: Isis Press, 1990, p. 88.


3/26

MONUMENTS,PATRONS,CONTEXTS:PAPERS ON OTTOMAN EUROPE PRESENTED TO MACHIEL KIEL 49

becoming a warrior of the faith (gazi), according to the chronicler revived the environs ofKonu Hisar by constructing an imaretand a caravanserai.

Mehmed Begs military and administrative career

Indeed, unlike his father of whom we know very little, Minnetolu (Minnetzade) MehmedBeg is a relatively known figure in the history of the 15th-century Balkans. There is notmuch information about his early years, so we must guess whether he inherited the positionof a raider commander (aknc begi) from his father or made a name for himself, asAkpaazade claims. We could also speculate that the core of the detachment led byMehmed Beg could have been composed mainly by people from his own clan.Traditionally known as good horsemen, Tatars were likely to be excellent raiders and onemay surmise that Mehmed Beg had chosen his closest companions from among his kin.Although the early years of his career are obscure, it seems that Mehmed Beg proved to be

a talented commander in a series of raids and succeeded to build a name at the Ottomanfrontier during dramatic times when most of the important figures from the great raidercommanders dynasties were present there too. One of Mehmed Begs raids we knowabout took place during the first Ottoman campaign against Serbia in 1458.5 On order ofMahmud Pasha (r. 1453-66 and 1472-4), the grand vizier of Mehmed II (r. 1444-6 and1451-81), he led a large group of akncs who devastated the area enclosed between therivers Danube and Sava or maybe even deeper into Hungarian territory as claimed bySolakzade.6 Mehmed Beg divided his troops into seven separate detachments and had amajor success in the raid. Tursun Beg who supervised the collectors of the sultans share ofthe booty (penikis and armaancs) testifies for the rich spoils brought by the akncs.7

The authority acquired by Mehmed Beg in the border society could be felt not onlyfrom the fact that a figure like Mihalolu Ali Beg (d. before 1505), the then governor ofVidin, was placed under his command in the 1458 raid towards Srem (Ottoman Sirem),8but also because of his appointment as the first sancakbegi of Serbia and Smederevo in1459 when the important Danubian fortress of Smederevo (Ottoman Semendere) wasfinally taken by the Ottomans. In fact it seems that Mehmed Begs assignment as asancakbegi of the land of Laz9 happened a year earlier, when Mahmud Pasha subduedmost of Serbia, but Smederevo remained in the hands of the defenders until the followingyear. 10 He must have spent four to five years in administering the area, while

5 nalck, Halil and Rhoads Murphey. The history of Mehmed the Conqueror by Tursun Beg. Minneapolis andChicago: Bibliotheca Islamica, 1978, f. 82a; Turan, erafettin. bn Kemal. Tevrih-i l-i Osman. VII. defter.Ankara: Trk Tarih Kurumu, 19912, p. 152. nalck, Halil. Tursun Beg, Historian of Mehmed theConquerors time., in: Wiener Zeitschrift fr die Kunde des Morgenlandes, Vol. 69 (1977), pp. 55-71.6 abuk, Vahid. Solak-zde tarihi, Vol. 1. Ankara: Kltr Bakanl, 1989, p. 297.7 Tursun Beg (nalck-Murphey), f. 82a; entrk, M. Hdai. Gelibolulu Mustafa l. Knhl-ahbr: cilt II

Ftih Sultn Mehmed devri (1451-1481). Ankara: Trk Tarih Kurumu, 2003, pp. 112-114.8 Zirojevi, Olga. Smederevski sandjakbeg Ali-Beg Mihaloglu, in:Zbornik za istoriju Matica Srbska (NoviSad: Matica Srbska, 1971), p. 10.9 In contemporary Ottoman sources this referred to the territory under the Lazarevii rulers; roughly present-day Serbia excluding Vojvodina, Sandak, and Kosovo regions10 The appointment of Minnetolu Mehmed Beg as a governor of Smederevo is mentioned only in thechronicle of Uruc. The Cambridge MS presenting the events after the surrender of Smederevo reads: ve


4/26


simultaneously carrying the duties of a frontier commander in the vicinity of the strategicfortress of Belgrade.

Apparently Mehmed Beg was successful in his activities in the old Serbian lands,

because in 1463, soon after Mehmed IIs campaign against Bosnia, he was assignedgovernor of the newly conquered province.11 Although he is commonly referred as the firstBosniansancakbegi, Halil nalck argues that he took this post only after a very brief termof shakolu sa Beg (d. 1476?), who was deposed due to the flight of the Herezegovianruler Stjepan Vuki Kosaa (d. 1466).12 nalck did not develop his argument further, butindeed it seems that Mehmed Beg took sa Begs place, regardless whether the latter wasformally appointed as the new Bosnian sancakbegi or simply retained his ucbegiposition.13 Mehmed Begs actions after he took up the rulership of Bosnia may confirmthis assumption. Instead of heading towards Jajce, the last Bosnian capital, which shouldhave been the natural choice of the new governor because of the citys vulnerability toHungarian attack, the sources report that Mehmed Beg sent one of his subordinate

commanders there.14 The janissary Konstantin Mihailovi, an eyewitness of the events,states that at this time a certain voivode named Machomet Mumiatowicz held Bosnia, andin his place at Jajce was a servant of his named Usunharamibass15, stressing once morewhat should have been the proper place of the Bosnian governor. Instead, Mehmed Begmoved to the south and established himself in sa Begs recently created town of Sarajevo(Ottoman Saray Bosna).

Mehmed Begs man who was entrusted with the defense of Jajce failed in fulfillinghis duties and soon after surrendered to King Matthias of Hungary (r. 1458-90). In thefollowing year (1464), in an attempt to regain the lost fortresses, Mehmed II appeared withhis army in Bosnia and besieged Jajce again. However, fearing that the Hungarian forces

advancing toward Zvornik could cut his retreat route, he left Jajce, ordering Minnetolu

Laz-li sancan Minnetolu Mehmed Bee virdi, Urudsch (Babinber), p. 125. In ztrks recent edition,which follows Bibliothque Nationale, ancien fonds Turc 99, it reads: Lz-ilini, Semendreyi, Minnet-ogl Muhammed Bege Lz-ilini virdi, Uru Be (ztrk), p. 115. Tursun Beg, without mentioning a namestates that after Mahmud Pashas successful campaign (1458) a sancakbegi of Serbia was appointed. TursunBeg (nalck-Murphey), ff. 85a-85b. In Ibn Kemal (VII. defter), p. 162, Mehmed Begs name appears as aruler of Laz-ili. abanovi, Hazim. O organizaciji turske uprave u Srbiji u XV i XVI vijeku, in:Istoriski

glasnik, Vol. 3-4 (1955), p. 61.11 Ibn Kemal (VII. defter), p. 234; Unat, Faik Reit-Mehmed Kymen. Mehmed Neri. Kitb- cihan-nma.Ankara: Trk Tarih Kurumu, 1957, p. 767. Babinger, Franz. Mehmed the Conqueror and his time. Princeton,

N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1978, p. 224.12 See nalck, Halil. Mehmed the Conqueror (1432-1481) and his time, in: Speculum,Vol. 35 (1960), p.423.13 abanovi also maintains that the reason for the appointment of Mehmed Beg was the failure of shak Begin Herzegovina. abanovi, Hazim. Bosansko krajite, 1448-1463, in: Godinjak istoriskog drutva Bosnei Hercegovine, Vol. 9 (1957),pp. 212-13.14 Ycel, Yaar-Halil Erdoan Cengiz. Rh Tarhi Oxford nshas, in:Belgeler, Vol. 14, No. 18 (1989-1992), p. 548; Akpaazade (Atsz), p. 213.15 Mihailovi participated in the campaign of 1463 and after Sultans army withdrawal he was left in Zveajin command of fifty janissaries. Konstantin Mihailovi. Memoirs of a Janissary, translated by BenjaminStolz, historical commentary and notes by Svat Soucek. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1975, p.141.


5/26


Mehmed Beg to carry on the siege.16 It is uncertain how long the siege commanded byMehmed Beg continued, but it is known that it yielded no results, since Jajce remained inHungarian hands for more than half a century. In the same year Mehmed Beg was deposed

as Bosnian sancakbegi and his place was taken by shakolu sa Beg. Mehmed Beg wassent back to govern Smederevo, while Mihalolu Ali Beg, who occupied the post in themeantime, was reassigned as asancakbegi of Vidin.17

Sarajevo (Saray Bosna)

The city of Sarajevo, todays capital of Bosnia and Herzegovina, is one of the largest andcertainly the most successful urban projects ever undertaken by the Ottoman peripheryforces. A number of cities in the Balkans, like Yenice-i Vardar (modern Giannitsa inGreece), Ihtiman (modern Ihtiman in Bulgaria), Plevne (modern Pleven in Bulgaria), etc.,owe their creation and development to the energetic support and sponsorship of the great

dynasties of march lords in the Balkans, but none of them reached the extensive growthand cultural blossoming of Sarajevo.18 Sarajevo came into existence as a result of theefforts of a single person the lord of the so-called Bosnian march (uc) shakolu saBeg. A man of great charisma, one of the mightiest Balkan raider commanders, operatingwith enormous military and financial resources19, sa Beg began building Sarajevo fromscratch supposedly towards the mid-1450s.20 By 1462, the date in which the endowmentdeed (vakfiye) of his convent (zaviye)in Sarajevo was composed, sa Begs project seemsto have been largely accomplished.21 The town already had a Muslim nucleus around sa

16 Tursun Beg (nalck-Murphey), f. 118a; l (entrk), p. 139; Tansel, Selhattin. Osmanl kaynaklarna

gre Fatih Sultan Mehmedin siyas ve askeri faaliyeti. Ankara: Trk Tarih Kurumu, 1953, p. 180.17 abanovi, Turske uprave u Srbiji, p. 6118 In two recent publications H. Lowry traced the advance of the Evrenosolu family along the Via Egnatia

pointing to their utmost importance for the development of urban life in the area. Lowry, Heath. The shapingof the Ottoman Balkans, 1350-1550. The conquest, settlement & infrastructural development of NorthernGreece. Istanbul: Baheehir University, 2008; Lowry, Heath and smail Ernsal. The Evrenos dynasty ofYenice Vardar. Notes & Documents on Hac Evrenos & the Evrenosoullar: a newly discovered late-17thcentury ecere (genealogical tree), seven inscriptions on stone & family photographs in: The Journal ofOttoman Studies/Osmanl Aratrmalar, Vol. 32 (2008), pp. 9-171; Kiel, Machiel. Yenice-i Vadrar (VardarYenicesi-Giannitsa): a forgotten Turkish cultural centre in Macedonia of the 15th and 16th century, in: idem.Studies on the Ottoman architecture of the Balkans. London: Variorum, 1990, Ch. IV.19 According to an Ottoman document, in 1455 sa Beg had the astonishing income of more than 763 000ake, deriving from his domains (hasses). The document reads: cmle mahsult-i sa Beg, veled-i shak

Beg, gayri ez skb, yekn: 763 000 [sum of revenues of sa Beg, son of shak Beg, excluding skb, total:763 000], which suggests that he was also in possession of certain undetermined amount of revenues fromthe area of skb (Skopje). The document is published by abanovi, Hazim. Krajite Isa-Bega Ishakovia.

Zbirni katastarski popis iz 1455. godine.Sarajevo: Orijentalni Institut u Sarajevu, 1964, p. 3; f. 1v, facsimileI.20 abanovi, Hazim. Postanak i razvoj Sarajeva, in:Radovi naunog drutva Bosne i Hecegovine, Vol. 13

No. 5 (1960), pp. 71-89.21 The vakfiye was first published by Elezovi, Glia. Turski spomenici, Vol. 1, pt. 1 (Beograd: Izdanjezadubine Sofije i Ivana Stoiia, 1940), pp. 27-36 in translation from a copy kept by the administrator(mtevelli) of sa Begs foundation in Skopje. There is also an earlier, unavailable to me, publication of thesame document in Glasnik Skopskog naunog drutva, Vol. 1 No. 1 (1925), pp. 170-176 in which, Elezovisays, he included a Turkish copy of the document. The more popular publication, based on Sarajevo copies,


6/26


Begs sponsored mosque (later to become known as Careva damija/Hnkr camii),adjacent public bath (hamam), and a caravanserai, surrounded by numerous shops, alleasily accessible by the newly constructed bridge on the Miljacka River.22 Furthermore, the

vakfiye mentions plots of land, held as private property (mlk) in 1462 by sa Begs sonMehmed Beg/elebi, on which soon thereafter he would construct his own buildings. 23 Itmust be noted that although this important document was compiled only a year prior toMehmed IIs major campaign against Bosnia, its actual foundations were laid sometime inthe mid-1450s. This fact strongly suggests that following the long-lasting tradition of theBalkan march lords to rebuilt or establish new settlements along the line of the conquest,thus moving their seats closer to the border, the shakoullar, and more specifically theirleader at that time sa Beg, unaware of what was to happen in the early 1460s, werepreparing their new seat of power in the Western Balkans from where the conquest ofBosnia had to be accomplished.24

In this respect, Mehmed IIs decision to substitute the mighty lord, referred by the

Ragusans as the actual ruler of Bosnia,25 with Minnetolu Mehmed Beg appears quitesurprising. sa Begs failure in Herzegovina must have irritated Mehmed II and he installedin sa Begs own built centre a person of lesser importance. This fact might also explainthe (at a first glance illogical) decision of Mehmed Beg to head towards Sarajevo insteadof staying in Jajce, threatened by a Hungarian attack. Whatever happened in 1463, in thefollowing year the Sultan changed his mind and brought Sarajevo and Bosnia back to saBegs hands. One can only guess whether Mehmed Begs failure to protect Jajce or saBegs strong influence became a reason for the shift of the Sultans mood, but MehmedBeg left Sarajevo as suddenly as he appeared there.

What is relevant for the purposes of this paper is the fact that Mehmed Begs term

in Sarajevo, as short as it was, left behind an important legacy. Within only one year hesucceeded to give a boost to the young settlement by sponsoring the construction of a small

is that of abanovi, Hazim. Dvije najstarije vakufname u Bosni, in:Prilozi za orijentalnu filologiju,Vol. 2(1951), pp. 7-29.Thezaviye of sa Beg must have been a typical of that time T-shaped structure with three wings, includingalso a courtyard, stable etc. and had to provide services to the poor Muslims (fukarail-muslimin), theologystudents (talebetul-ilm), decedents of the Prophet (sadat), warriors of the faith (guzat) and the travelers(enbail-sebil), abanovi, Dvije najstarije vakufname, p. 9 and 17-8, which saw many later modifications.See Mujezinovi, Mehmed. Musafirhana i tekija Isa-Bega Ishakovia u Sarajevu in: Nae Starine, Vol. 3(1956), pp. 245-52. Demal ehaji in hisDerviki Redovi u Jugoslavenskim zemljama, Sarajevo: OrijentalniInstitut, 1986, pp. 28-31 claims that the zaviye/tekke belonged to the Mevlevi order of dervishes. A recentstudy questions this opinion and urges for more careful approach, especially when dealing with its early

period. Aeri, Ines. Neke napomene o problemima iz historije Isa-Begove tekije, in: Prilozi zaorijentalnu filologiju, Vol. 52/53 (2002-2003), pp. 339-50.22 abanovi, Postanak i razvoj Sarajeva, pp. 86-7.23 Zlatar, Behija. Vakuf Gazi Mehmed-Bega Isabegovia u Sarajevo, in: Prilozi za orijentalnu filologiju,Vol. 55 (2005), pp. 217-26.24 abanovi considers that there is a good chance that Sarajevo was attacked and some buildings destroyed

by the Bosnian king Toma during his 1459 raid on Hodidjed. Although unsupported by sources thisassumption seems very logical, since king Toma must have been aware of the emerging importance andthreat which the new settlement posed to his territories. abanovi, Postanak i razvoj Sarajeva, p. 85.25 Truhelka, iro. Tursko-slovjenski spomenici dubrovake arhive. Sarajevo: Zemaljska tamparija, 1911, p.338, quoted in Zlatar, Vakuf Gazi Mehmed-Bega, p. 218.


7/26


communal mosque (mescid) and thus established around it the second neighbourhood(mahalle) of Sarajevo. The new building and respectively the neighbourhood were locatedacross the river, facing the complex established a bit earlier by sa Beg. Mehmed Begs

enterprise turned to be viable and his mahalle-i Mehmed Beg, bin Minnet became thesecond oldest in Sarajevo, and while growing slowly over time, it remained on Sarajevosmap until the end of the Ottoman period. The emerging neighbourhood soon attracted morepublic attention and investments. Towards the end of the 15th century a certain sarraHasan, son of irmerd constructed a school (muallimhane) there and added a new stonebridge across the river, supporting his enterprise by a pious foundation (vakf).26

We know nothing of the shape or style of Mehmed Begs building, but it should nothave been an imposing structure since the administrative documents mention it as a mescid.A modest pious foundation, collecting incomes from the rent of shops built by MehmedBeg and their plots, was established to support the personnel and the maintenance of themosque.27 The building which was once situated to the south-west of todays Baarija

(Main market quarter) stood until 1697, when along with many others it was set on fireduring the Habsburg assault on the city.28 Later the mosque was rebuilt, but it remainedstanding for less than a century and disappeared after 1890 when it was destroyed again. 29This event put the final mark over Mehmed Begs long-lasting legacy in the modernBosnian capital. His brief term in governing of what was at the time sa Begs land leftbehind a small mosque and a number of shops, which are all vanished today. However,Mehmed Begs tiny architectural contribution brought significant changes on Sarajevosmap. He managed to establish and populate a second Muslim neighbourhood in the city,which stood for almost half a millennium.

Smederevo (Semendere/Semendire)Mehmed Beg must have first appeared in Smederevo in 1459 immediately after itsconquest. We know very little about his actions in the following years, but one mayassume that he was occupied in establishing Ottoman administration in the area andprobably, along with his fellow-aknc commanders, organized pillaging raids towardsBelgrade, Zvornik or across the Danube. In 1463 Mehmed Beg left Smederevo for Bosniaand was replaced by one of the most prominent figures in the border society, Mihalolu AliBeg. A year later he returned to Smederevo and retained the post ofsancakbegi for several

2691, 164, MAD 540 ve 173 numaral Hersek, Bosna ve zvornik livlar icml tahrr defterleri (926-939 /1520-1533). Vol. 2, Facsimiles. Ankara: T.C. Devlet Arivleri Genel Mdrl, 2006, p. 382.27 An Ottoman register from the 1530s shows that the pious foundation of Mehmed Begs mosque hadrevenues of 2380 ake. Hersek, Bosna ve zvornik livlar icml tahrr defterleri, p. 380. By 1565 theincomes have doubled 6562 ake. ar-Drnda, Hatida. Vakufski objekti u Bosanskom sandaku (sedmadecenija 16. stoljea) in:Prilozi za orijentalnu filologiju, Vol. 52-53 (2002-2003), p. 269.28 See Sarajevo city plan in the Appendices (Illustration 1).29 Mujezinovi, Mehmed.Islamska epigrafika u Bosni i Hercegovini. Kniga I Sarajevo . Sarajevo: VeselinMaslea, 1974, p. 65; abanovi, Postanak i razvoj Sarajeva, pp. 90-1. In the discussion following my

paper Prof. Zeynep Ahunbay pointed to recent excavations which discovered the foundations of MehmedBegs mosque. I express my gratitude to Prof. Ahunbay for sharing this information.


8/26


years, probably until 1467 when he was once again replaced by Mihalolu Ali Beg.30 Afterthis date we lose track of Mehmed Begs military and administrative career.

Similarly to Sarajevo, Mehmed Beg left behind several buildings in Smederevo of

which there is no trace today. Being the first sancakbegi of the city, it is highly probablethat Mehmed Beg was the man to erect the first Muslim buildings in the former Serbiandespots place of residence. There are several types of buildings that one imagines thenewly conquered town needed to obtain a certain Muslim look a mosque, bath andresidence for the new governor. Indeed it seems that Mehmed Beg managed to build allthree of them during his terms in Smederevo. Although we are unable to affirm when theactual construction began, it is very possible that it was immediately after theestablishment of Ottoman rule in the city. Mehmed Beg had several years at his disposal:twice he had four year-terms in Smederevo and thus we may presume that he eithercompleted his building project there before his assignment in Bosnia (1463), or simplybegan it during his first term (1459-1463) and completed it during his second (1464-1467).

As pointed above, Mehmed Begs actions in Sarajevo resulted in the emergence ofthe citys second Muslim neighbourhood. His role in promoting the development ofSmederevo appears to have been even greater: he was responsible for the appearance of thefirst Muslim community in the town. The oldest Muslim neighbourhood in Smederevo,therefore enlisted at the first place in the registers, is that of the mosque of Mehmed Beg,son of Minnet Beg.31 The mescidsponsored by Mehmed Beg was the earliest mosque inthe town, around which, like in Sarajevo, a neighbourhood arose. Once we established thepresence of a mosque in Smederevo, the next logical step would be to look for a hamamthat had to serve the needs of the Muslim community. Indeed, the archival documents pointto the existence of a public bath built by Mehmed Beg, whose incomes had to support the

maintenance of his mosque.

32

It is logical to assume that since the mosque was the first inthe town, Mehmed Begs hamam was constructed simultaneously with it and they weresituated in close proximity to one another. The document leaves little doubt about thebuildings location: both were erected within the walled part of Smederevo.

The revenues of Mehmed Begs endowment in Smederevo were derived fromseveral other structures also sponsored by him, like twelve shops, a bahane, rents fromlands, etc. The register also provides us with important clues suggesting that Mehmed Begalso built the residence of Smederevos sancakbegi. In the list of resources for themaintenance and personnels salaries of his mosque one finds the tax-farmed revenuesfrom the rent of the land on which the residence of the governor was built. 33 This fact

30 Zirojevi, Smederevski sandjakbeg Ali-Beg, p. 15.31 Mahalle-i mescid-i Mehmed Beg, veled-i Minnet Beg; Babakanlk Osmanl Arivi, stanbul (=BOA),Tapu Tahrir Defterleri (=TD) 1007, pp. 10-11. This register dates from 1516. The important study ofMiljkovi-Bojani, Ema. Smederevski sandak 1476-1560: zemlja, naselja, stanovnitvo. Beograd: Slubeniglasnik, 2004 was unavailable to me. Ayverdi, Ekrem Hakk. Avrupada Osmanl mimr eserleri Yugoslavya, Vol. 3. Istanbul: Fetih Cemiyeti, 1981, p. 218.32 BOA, TD 1007, p. 413. The document lists the revenues of Mehmed Begs endowment, which had to

provide for the upkeep of his mosque in Smederevo and its personnel. It reads: an kst-i hamam der varo-ikale-i Semendere, fi sene 12 000 [from a share of a bath in the varo of the fortress of Semendere,annually 12 000 (ake)].33 Mukataa-i zemin-i hane-i mir-i liva, fi sene 80 [ake], TD 1007, p. 413.


9/26


suggests that at the time when Mehmed Beg built his mosque, a bath, and a number ofother buildings, he must have also constructed a residence for himself. Most probably itwas also situated in the protected part of the town, possibly in the close vicinity of the

mosque, i.e., in the new Muslim neighbourhood. It is hard to say what was the fate of thisbuilding, but it seems that it saw some remodeling or probably was even rebuilt by latergovernors, because the vakfof Mehmed Begs mosque was deriving revenues only fromthe land on which the residence was standing, thus pointing to a drastic change. Regardlesshow odd it may sound, it appears that the 16th-centurysancakbegis of Smederevo had topay rent to Mehmed Begs pious foundation, because of residing on a land that previouslybelonged to him.

As with Mehmed Begs foundation in Sarajevo, up to our knowledge, there isneither information on when his Semederevos vakf was established nor an extantendowment deed. However, one may assume that this must have happened immediatelyafter the completion of his buildings in the 1460s. Mehmed Begs sponsorship turned a

new page in Smederevos history with which the transformation of the medieval Serbianfortress into an Ottoman town began. After him a number of prominent figures of theOttoman border society took turns in governing Smederevo, leaving their own imprint onthe towns topography. Due to its strategic location, the town attracted attention and, soonafter Mehmed Begs terms, experienced a considerable growth. The medieval Serbianfortress was redesigned to meet the needs of modern warfare techniques while a number ofnew buildings appeared in the town.34 While it is hard to say with any certainty whenMehmed Begs buildings disappeared, there is no doubt that his patronage left deep tracesand shaped the newly conquered Smederevo.

Ni (Ni)There is a good chance that the only standing building of Mehmed Beg is to be found inthe modern town of Ni (Eastern Serbia). Apart from the fact that the town of Ni was inthe domains of thesancakbegi of Smederevo, there is no other clue that links Mehmed Begto this place. It seems that the governors of Smederevo, or at least two of them, MinnetoluMehmed Beg and Mihalolu Ali Beg, have spent resources in promoting the town anderected a number of public buildings there. We could establish with certainty that MehmedBeg built a bath in Ni and endowed its incomes to the soup kitchen ( imaret) of hiscomplex in the village of Konu (Bulgarian Thrace).35 According to a register dating fromA.H. 903 (1497-1498) this hamambrought to Mehmed Begs imaretan annual income of3666 ake.36

It is unknown when exactly the bath was built, but its erection has to be assigned tothe 1460s, when Mehmed Beg held the post ofsancakbegi of Smederevo. Indeed there

34 See Ayverdis list of Ottoman buildings in Smederevo. Ayverdi, Avrupada Osmanl mimr eserleri, pp.218-21.35 Ayverdi claims that there were also a mosque and imaretbuilt by Mehmed Beg in Ni. I was unable tofind any evidence of their existence nor could I guess the source of Ayverdis claim. Ayverdi, AvrupadaOsmanl mimr eserleri, pp. 131-32.36 BOA, TD 27, p. 141 and BOA, TD 135 (A.H. 932/1525-1526), p. 126.


10/26


exists a surviving Ottoman bath within the borders of the old stronghold of todays Ni,which could be dated to the second half of the 15 th century. Thus, it is plausible to suggestthat this was the hamam, sponsored by Mehmed Beg and if this were the case, it would be

his only surviving building.However, there is an equal possibility that the present structurein Ni was in fact built by Mihalolu Ali Beg. He took the governorship of Smederevotwice after Mehmed Beg and it is known that he also sponsored public buildings in Ni. AliBeg erected azaviye in the town, as for the support of his charitable institution he endowedrevenues from his bath in Ni, watermill there, rice fields in the approximate vicinity andrevenues from other regions.37 Thus, the extant bath in the modern Serbian town, whichbears no dedicatory inscription (kitabe), could also have been built by Ali Beg atapproximately the same time as Mehmed Beg erected his own.

Although it is difficult to provide any further details on Mehmed Begs buildingactivity in Ni, it is clear that he had a significant input in the development of thisprovincial town too. Furthermore, while contributing to the well-being of the local Muslim

community, offering the much needed services of a public bath, Mehmed Beg aimed atproviding additional resources for the support and maintenance of his largest buildingproject the complex in his hometown of Konu.

Konu (Konu Hisar)

It is hard to establish with any degree of certainty when Mehmed Begs complex in Konu(todays village of Konush in the district of Plovdiv, Bulgaria) was built. The Ottomannarratives, relating the story of the deportation of Mehmed Begs father Minnet Beg to thisarea, add a note that Mehmed Beg erected a caravanserai and an imaret there, but it isdifficult to assert to what date exactly they refer. In any case, considering that MehmedBegs career seems to have reached its peak towards the 1460s, we may suppose that hisbuildings in Thrace were constructed around that time, or probably up to a decade earlier.The available sources also do not allow any decisive conclusions as to whether thecomplex was initially designed and built in its entity, or some of the buildings were addedin later times.

The source materials at our disposal suggest that Mehmed Beg created all neededconditions for the development of a small kasaba, situated on the main road linkingIstanbul and Belgrade, the ancient Via Militaris. He built a Friday mosque, bath, imaret,caravanserai, supposedly together with a number of smaller buildings for the servicepersonnel and a residence for himself and his family. A pious foundation providing the

salaries for the staff and the upkeep of the buildings was also created. Its first administratorwas most likely Mehmed Beg himself, because later documents attest that the post washeld by his descendents. Thus, one may presume that a settlement, which received suchmassive boost would develop rapidly and become a prosperous place that would attractmany new settlers. However, regardless of Mehmed Begs plans for the development ofKonu, they do not seem to have worked out.

37 BOA, TD 27, p. 141 and BOA, TD 135, p. 126. Ayverdi, Avrupada Osmanl mimr eserleri, pp. 131-32.


11/26


It appears that Mehmed Beg lost Mehmed IIs favour completely, because towardsthe late 1470s his recently established foundation that had to provide resources for hiscomplex in Konu was abrogated, returned to the control of the state treasury and

apportioned to timars.38

It is hard to say what the impact of this act was, but it certainlybrought difficulties to Mehmed Beg and his family, whose complex in Konu remainedwithout means of support. This state of affairs did not last very long, because soon after hisenthronement in 1481 Bayezid II (r. 1481-1512) restored Mehmed Begs endowment.39 Adocument dating from approximately the same time testifies that the management of thepious foundation supporting thezaviye of Mehmed Begs spouse Durpaa Hatun in Edirnewas transferred to the hands of their son Alihan, thus pointing to the reestablished positionof the family.40

Thanks to the Ottoman administrative documents one can trace the growth ofMehmed Begs pious foundation and respectively the development of Konu over time.The earliest available records of this foundation date to the first half of 16 th century.41

They report that by 1520s the actions of Mehmed Beg and his descendants resulted in thecreation of two new small settlements in the immediate vicinity of Konu, which wereinhabited by both Christians and Muslims.42 The big summary register, compiled in 1530

38 The confiscation of Mehmed Begs property was a part of larger process commonly referred as MehmedIIs land reform. nalck, Halil. Mehmed II,slm Ansiklopedisi, Vol. 7 (1957), pp. 532-33 and his recentcontribution in nalck, Halil. Autonomous enclaves in Islamic states: temlks,soyurgals,yurdluk-ocaklks,mlikne-muktaas and awqf in Pfeiffer, Judith and Sholeh A. Quinn (eds.),History and historiography of

Post-Mongol Central Asia and the Middle East. Studies in honor of John E. Woods. Wiesbaden:Harrassowitz Verlag, 2006, pp. 117-19.39 The big summary register of Rumelia compiled in 1530 reads: Vakf-i Mehmed Beg, bin Minnet Beg,

karye-i Konu. Merhum Sulta[n] Mehmed Han temlik edp, sonra timara virilmi. Bade merhum SultanBayazid Han ger mlkiyet ve vakfiyesin mukarrer dutup, mukarrername virilmi [Vakfof Mehmed Beg,son of Minnet Beg, village of Konu. The deceased Sultan Mehmed has given it as private property, later heallocated it to timars. Afterwards the late Sultan Bayazid Han reaffirmed its status of absolute proprietorshipand its endowment deed, he issued a document of confirmation]. 370 numaral muhsebe-i vilyet-i Rm-lidefteri (937/1530) I. Ankara: T. C. Babakanlk Devlet Arivleri Mdrl, 2001, p. 102 (=BOA, TD 370).40 Gkbilgin, M. Tayyib.XV-XVI. asrlarda Edirne ve Paa livs. Vakflar mlkler mukataalar. stanbul:stanbul niversitesi Yaynlar, 1952, pp. 241-42.Vakf-i Durpaa Hatun, zevce-i Mehmed Beg, bin Minnet, der Edirne, der mahalle-i Hisarlk. Evvel dervimutasarrf imi, imdiki halde mezkrn olu Alihan elindedir. Zaviye-i Durpaa Hatun: Yunus, gulm-i

Durpaa; Olivir, gulm-i Durpaa; Yusuf, gulm-i Durpaa. hasl an resm-i ift ve r-i hububat 391[Vakfof Durpaa Hatun, spouse of Mehmed Beg, son of Minnet, from Edirne, from the neighbourhood ofHisarlk. Previously held by dervish, now in the hands of Alihan, son of the above mentioned. Zaviye ofDurpaa Hatun: Yunus, slave of Durpaa; Olivir, slave of Durpaa; Yusuf, slave of Durpaa. Revenues fromresm-i ift and tithe of cereals 391 (ake)], BOA, TD 20 (A.H. 890/1485-1486), pp. 70-71. The slaves(gulm) of Mehmed Begs spouse must have been captives from his campaigns in the western Balkans. Twoof them apparently converted to Islam, but one remained Christian and his name Olivir clearly points to awestern origin.41 Although the detailed register of 1489 (BOA, TD 26) includes some pious foundations in the area of Filibeit lacks data on the vakfof Mehmed Beg. The following detailed register of this area (BOA, TD 77 from1516) has several dozen pages lost at its end, thus we lack information about most of the vakfs there,including this of Mehmed Beg.42 BOA, TD 73 (A.H. 925/1519-1520), p. 137, which reports an annual income of the foundation from itssurroundings of 11 648 ake; BOA, TD 138 (A.H. 934/1527-1528), p. 137, with a slight increase of the totalsup to 11 690 ake.


12/26


provides valuable details about the way in which the new settlements came into being. Forthe Christian village, situated about a kilometer to the south of Mehmed Begs complex inKonu, the register contains the following note:43

karye-i Bosna, haymaneden gelb, Konu sunurunda oturub, haraclarnhvandigra [sic!] ve ispeneleriyle rlerin vakfa virir. Yirmi bi yl varimi

village of Bosna, [the residents] gathered from unsettled ones, settled withinthe boundaries of Konu, they [pay] their poll-tax to the Sultan, theircustomary taxes and tithes give to the vakf. It has been twenty five years.

The very name of the village Bosna is a good indicator of the possible previous locationof its Christian residents. Given Mehmed Begs military career, during which he was often

involved in raids towards the western Balkans, it is arguable that these people had beengathered and brought to Konu after some of his raids. Thus while providing fresh settlersfor his emerging kasaba he should have aimed at increasing the revenues for his piousfoundation. The note in the register, however, at first glance seems to be somehowcontradictory to this assumption. It claims that the village was founded 25 years before thedefterwas compiled, thus around 1505, or a date when one would expect that MehmedBeg was no longer active. Unless we assume that Mehmed Beg lived for quite a long timeand had a very long-lasting career respectively, the information in the source seems to becontradictory.

The nature and the way in which the synoptic register of 1530 was compiled could

provide us with an alternative explanation. This document is a part of several other largesummary registers prepared in the early years of Sleyman Is rule (1521-1566), whichdefters had the task to provide the Ottoman administration with an up-to-date Empire-wideoverview of its provincial revenues. As such, the 1530 register of Rumelia is a compilationof the data contained in a number of various earlier detailed records and whenever theadministration requested the data was updated. Thus the large summary register of 1530contains data from 1516, 1525, or 1530. It is arguable therefore that the main body ofinformation concerning the pious foundation of Mehmed Beg, including the entry on thevillage, was derived from the detailed register of 1516, while the data regarding itsrevenues were updated. 44 In such case the remark in the document describing theestablishment of the village of Bosna, 25 years earlier, should be regarded as referring to

1516 and not to 1530 when the entry was simply copied by the Ottoman scribe from theprevious register. One should then consider an earlier date for the arrival of the Bosnian

43 BOA, TD 370, p. 102.44 In other instances, like the neighbouring town of stanimaka, it is clear that the data in the 1530 summaryregister was copied without changes from the detailed defterof 1516 (BOA, TD 77). As mentioned above therelated pages in the register of 1516 in which the revenues and tax-payers of Mehmed Begs pious foundationwere enlisted have been torn off and lost. The revenues of the foundation as recorded in 1530 register werecertainly up-to-date, because when compared to the data from the previous two defters (TD 73 and TD 138)one could notice an increase of the annual revenues 16 210 ake. BOA, TD 370, p. 102. See footnote no. 41above.


13/26


settlers in Konu, most probably the beginning of 1490s or the late 1480s.45 The fact thatMehmed Beg might have still been active at that time is also supported by the presence ofseveral captives in thezaviye of his spouse in Edirne.46

The data in the register concerning the creation of the Muslim village in MehmedBegs vakf,is very concise, stating only that the residents of the village of Kak settledwithin the boundaries of Konu and paid their tithes to the pious foundation. 47 The areaaround Konu is very suitable for rice-growing and since the imaret of Mehmed Begapparently needed considerable amounts of rice in order to maintain its functions, by 1530the first 26 rice-growers (eltk) working for Mehmed Begs foundation, appeared in theregister.48 In the following records both the number of rice-growers and the scale ofproduction would increase drastically.

There is no information about the date of Mehmed Begs death or his burial place.It could be supposed that if he had retired in his family residence in Konu towards the end

of his life, he should have been buried there, presumably in the courtyard of his mosque.

49

After his death the information on the family is very scarce. The only small bit ofinformation points to one of his sons or more likely grandsons a certain MinnetoluKazgan Beg who sided with Selim I (r. 1512-1521) in his struggle against Bayezid II.50The administration of the vakfin Konu seems to have been taken up by Mehmed Begsdescendents. Although we lack information about who succeeded Mehmed Begimmediately after his death, an imperial order of May 1550 reveals that one of hisdescendents, a certain Mehmed elebi was deprived from his post of administrator ofMehmed Begs pious foundation in Konu.51 The document does not explicitly refer to theperson in question as a descendent of Mehmed Beg, but a note in the detailed register of1570, provides the necessary evidence.52 In the section related to the personnel of Mehmed

Begs imaret the register enlists all individuals who received salaries from the pious

45 The detailed register TD 77 was compiled in 1516, but the actual registration should have been executed ayear or two earlier.46 BOA, TD 20, p. 70.47 BOA, TD 370, p. 102.48 BOA, TD 370, p. 102. Three of the rice-growers settled in the new village of Kak, which numberedaltogether twenty five households.49 In three separate sections of his travel accounts Evliya elebi insists that Sultan Mehmed I (1413-1421)

built in Konu a domed mausoleum for Mehmed Beg, together with the mosque and the imaret. His accountis somewhat confused and he certainly misplaces Mehmed Begs lifetime in a much earlier period.Kurun,Zekeriya-Seyit Ali Kahraman-Ycel Dal. Evliy elebi Seyahatnamesi (2. Kitap). stanbul: Yap KrediYaynlar, 1999, p. 28; Kahraman, Seyit Ali-Ycel Dal. Evliy elebi Seyahatnamesi (3. Kitap). stanbul:Yap Kredi Yaynlar, 1999, pp. 212-13; Kahraman, Seyit Ali-Ycel Dal.Evliy elebi Seyahatnamesi (6.

Kitap). stanbul: Yap Kredi Yaynlar, 2002, p. 69.50 There are two single-page documents enlisting the supporters of the then ehzade Selim along with theamount of money allocated to each of the commanders. It appears that Minnetolu Kazgan Beg joinedSelims forces at Akkirman and marched with them into Rumelia. These documents are presented intransliteration from the original and analyzed in detail in pa, Hakk Erdem. The centrality of the periphery:the rise to power of Selim I, 1487-1512. PhD Dissertation, Harvard University, 2007, pp. 258-261. I thank Dr.pa for providing me with his unpublished work.51 This order was copied in a court record (sicil) of Sofia. Galabov, Galab D. Die Protokollbcher des

Kadiamtes Sofia, herausgegeben von Herbert W. Duda. Mnchen: R. Oldenbourg, 1960, p. 9.52 BOA, TD 498, p. 639.


14/26


foundation. According to the document in 157053 the administrator of the pious foundationwas a certain Mustafa Beg, son of Mehmed elebi, who was from among the descendentsof the owner of the vakf.54 Thus, since the document points the administrator in 1570 as a

descendent of Mehmed Beg, that effectively establishes his father Mehmed elebi, thedeposed administrator of 1550, as a descendent of Mehmed Beg too. There is no reason todoubt that all of the unknown previous administrators were from the lineage of the founderof the pious foundation. Comparison with the pious foundations of the mightier akncdystasties such as Evrenosoular or Mihaloullar, which remained in the hands of thefamilies until the beginning of 20th century, gives more weight to such a proposition.55

It appears that the descendants of Mehmed Beg could not build excellent relationswith the central Ottoman administration. 20 years after Mehmed elebis deposition in1550, his son Mustafa Beg had to face a similar fate. An imperial decree of 5 May 1570reveals that Mustafa Beg was accused of malpractices and appropriation of significantamount of money as a result of which he was imprisoned in Filibe 56. Hearing these news,

his relatives, in charge of a group ofazabs, appeared in the city, broke into the prison andset all detainees free. However, it turned out that the local suba, whose house was alsoattacked, had in the meantime transferred Mustafa Beg to a safer place. The azabs left thecity empty-handed, but until the morning Mustafa Beg along with his watchmendisappeared without a trace. The Sultans order urged the local kad to investigate the caseand punish those involved.57 Mustafa Begs further fate is unknown, but he was mostprobably replaced as administrator of the vakfby his son Yusuf, who retained the positionat least until 1596, when a registration recorded him as the mtevelli of the foundation inKonu.58

The register of 1570 is the first to provide us with detailed information about

Mehmed Begs complex in Konu and its possessions.

59

According to the document therewere 15 people involved in the service of the complex, which formed the nucleus ofKonu.60 Around the main settlement, in its immediate surroundings, there were three othersmall villages the above mentioned Christian village called Bosna, which had grownconsiderably, attracting to its new neighbourhood settlers who previously did not have

53 Likewise although the defterwas compiled in 1570 its data refers to a year or two earlier.54Mustafa Beg, bin Mehmed elebi mtevelli-i vakf. An evld-i sahib-i vakf. BOA, TD 498, p. 639.55 Lowry and Ernsal provide a list of the known mtevellis of Gazi Evrenos vakf in Yenice-i Vardar.Lowry/Ernsal, The Evrenos dynasty of Yenice Vardar, pp. 9-171. The information concerning theMihalolu family I owe to Mariya Kiprovska.56 The reason for the accusation was most probably an earlier inspection of some of the pious foundations inthe area of Filibe, carried out by the local kad. The register of Imperial financial matters (Maliye Ahkm

Defteri) BOA, MAD 2775, f. 364 contains a decree dating from 6-15 October 1565, which ordered the kadof Filibe to inspect the accounting books of the vakfs of Karl Ali, Minnetolu Mehmed Beg and some others.The malpractices must have been discovered in the course of this inspection.5712 Numaral Mhimme Defteri (978-979 / 1570-1572). zet, Transkripsiyonu ve ndeks. Ankara: T. C.Babakanlk Devlet Arivleri Mdrl, 1996, mhimmeNo. 55.58 BOA, TD 470, p. 665.59 BOA, TD 498, pp. 639-43.60 Apart of the mtevelli of the vakf, the regiter lists also a hatib, imam and mezzin in service of the mosqueand a number of people occupied in the imaretsuch as its eyh, ktib, kilri, anbari, vekil-i harc, tabbah,habbaz etc.


15/26


permanent residence; the Muslim Kak, which also expanded with a new mahalle andthe completely new village of Turudlu, whose residents moved to the territory of the vakffrom another location.61 The rice production also expended considerably and by that date

there were 97 Muslim rice-growers permanently occupied with cultivation. The rice-fields,which in 1530 must have been immediately next to Konu, by 1570 spread out on the plainand reached the neighbouring villages, like Aziz Begl (modern Izbegli), where the vakfwas in possession of a rice-mill. The register also offers the first irrefutable evidence aboutthe existence of Mehmed Begs public bath in Konu, whose tax-farm brought to the piousfoundation 900 akes annually. The existence of a bath poses the question of how thecomplex was supplied with water. Although located next to a small river, Mehmed Begscomplex was probably in need of more running water in order to maintain its functions.Despite the lack of any documentary evidence, it is likely that fresh water was brought by asmall aqueduct from the nearby hills. The local people in todays entirely Christian Konugladly relate a story about certain Turk who had built in the past an aqueduct and point to

its former location. In this respect one may assume that the sponsor of the complex mighthave also built a small aqueduct to supply it with enough fresh water. However, it isequally possible that the aqueduct was built later on by some of Mehmed Begsdescendents when a need for more water in Konu appeared.

The most detailed physical description of Mehmed Begs complex we owe toStephan Gerlach, who passed through Konu in June 1578. According to Gerlach, Konuwas a small Turkish village, where above the small river, there was a lead-covered han,next to which was situated the mosque, the vast courtyard of which included a nicefountain with fresh cold water. Travelers and the poor were offered rice and bread in theimaret of the mosque.62 Gerlachs depiction of the main buildings of Mehmed Begscomplex leaves little doubt about its imposing character. A decade earlier Marcantonio

Pigafetta, who saw Konu as inhabited both by Bulgarians and Turks, described MehmedBegs mosque as built of stone and marble, very beautiful63, which also bespeaks of amassive, nice building. In the 1550s Catharin Zen and Gaspare Erizzo, who passed throughKonu, also testify of the mixed character of its inhabitants Turks and Christians,pointing to the presence of a mosque, imaretand good stables.64 In case one is willing to

61 In 1570 the village of Bosna had 58 Christian families in its two mahalles, in Kaks twoneighbourhoods there were 20 households and 4 unmarried young men, the new village of Turudlu hadaltogether 20 households.62 Gerlah, Stefan. Dnevnik na edno patuvane do osmanskata porta v Tzarigrad, translation and editingMariya Kiselincheva. Sofia: Izdatelstvo na Otechestvenia Front, 1976, pp. 257-58.63 Matkovi, Petar. Putovanja po Balkanskom poluotoku XVI. vjieka, X. Putopis Marka Antuna Pigafette, ilidrugo putovanje Antuna Vrania u Carigrad 1567. godine, in: Rad Jugoslavenske Akademije Znanosti iUmjetnosti, Vol. 100 (1890), p. 117.64 Matkovi, Petar. Dva talijanska putopisa po balkanskom poluotku iz XVI. vieka: Descrizione del viazodel Constantinopoli de ser Catharin Zen ambassador straordinario a Sultan Soliman e suo ritorno &Descrizione del viaggio per terra di Constantinopoli e dalle cose principali del paese, in: Starine, Vol. 10(1878), pp. 214 and 255. A bit earlier Schepper left the following short note on Konu: Estanz montez cheval, sommes venuz en ung bourg appell Comis, o y at une grande meschita, edifice de Menelogly-Corneille Duplicius de Schepper. Missions diplomatiques de Corneille Duplicius de Schepper, dit Scepperus,ambassadeur de Christiern II, de Charles V, de Ferdinand Ier et de Marie, reine de Hongrie, gouvernantedes Pays-Bas, de 1523 1555, d. par M. Le Bonde Saint-Genois. Bruxelles: M. Hayez, 1856, p. 191. For a


16/26


trust at least partially the information provided by Evliya elebi, to these buildings itshould be added the massive domed mausoleum of Mehmed Beg.65

In the period until the next official registration of 1596 a new Christian village

appeared within the boundaries of Mehmed Begs pious foundation. The entry in theregister provides its name, Novasel (new village) or Lalam66, and specifies that the villagewas formed from tax-payers who had previously resided in the lands of Mehmed Begsvakfand from newcomers who did not have permanent residence.67 The appearance of thenew settlement is illustrative of the policy of the administrators of the foundation. Theycontinued the trend of attracting wandering peasants, potential tax-payers who were willingto settle in the territory of the vakfand increased its revenues. Indeed, for a quarter of acentury between the two registrations, the Christian tax-payers in Konu doubled innumber, while the total revenues increased with more than one thousand ake.68

By the end of 16th century the possessions of Mehmed Begs pious foundation

comprised of the nucleus in Konu, where a caravanserai, a mosque with imaret, a publicbath, a residence for the administrators, along with other service buildings were placed69,and two Muslim and two Christian villages in its immediate surroundings. Situated veryclose to one another, the Christian villages of Bosna and Novasel/Lala Pnar united as asingle entity in the years to come, which became known as Bulgarian Konu. We areunaware of the fate of the two Muslim villages, but one may suppose that likewise theyjoined the main settlement, forming the so-called Turkish Konu.

In search of Turkish Konu

Both settlements, Bulgarian and Turkish Konu, separated by less than a kilometer,

survived until the 19th

century, when in 1877, fearing for their life, the Muslim inhabitantsof Turkish Konu fled before the arriving Russian army. After peace was established, someof the Muslims returned to Turkish Konu, but 12 years later, for an unknown reason, theyleft the place, abandoning their homeland for good.70 This act put an end of the existence

complete list of western travelers who visited Konu see Yerasimos, Stephane. Les Voyageurs dans lEmpireottoman (XIVe-XVIe sicles). Ankara: Imprimerie de la Socit Turque dHistoire, 1991.65Evliy elebi Seyahatnamesi (2. Kitap), p. 28;Evliy elebi Seyahatnamesi (3. Kitap), pp. 212-13Evliyelebi Seyahatnamesi (6. Kitap), 2002, p. 69.66 Later the village was known as Lala Pnar.67 BOA, TD 470, p. 669.68 The total revenues of the vakf in 1596 amount to 24 672. The defter also recorded a group of 24individuals serving the imaretin Konu, 88 Muslim rice-growers dispersed in the fields around, 13 Muslimhouseholds in the village of Turadlu, 57 Christian families in Bosnas two neighbourhoods, the Muslimvillage of Kak had 25 households and 5 unmarried tax-payers, the newly established Novasel/Lalam had39 Christian households and 13 unmarried young men. BOA, TD 470, pp. 665-69.69 In the 18th century there was also a functioning primary school (mekteb) there, but it is hard to state withany certainty whether it had a separate building or it was attached to the mosque. In 1779 certain MehmedEmin Halife received a daily salary of 4 ake for his duties ofmuallim in Konu. Telli, Hasan. Osmanldneminde baz Filibe vakflar. MA Thesis, Ankara University, 2002, pp. 123-24.70 Kostadinov, Kostadin. Mestnite imena v Asenovgradsko. Asenovgrad: Ekobelan, 1997, pp. 51-2. TrkerAcarolu.Bulgaristanda Trke yer adlar klavuzu. Ankara: Trk Tarih Kurumu, 2006, p. 617 claims thatin 1885 it was attacked and occupied by armed Bulgarians, but does not reveal his source. Although the


17/26


of a more than 400-years-old settlement and marked the eventual failure of Mehmed Begsproject. In 1911 the official list of towns and villages on the territory of Bulgaria marksonly one Konu, which means that the Turkish village ceased to exist.71

Refusing to admit that today there is not even a single stone left from the oncemagnificent complex of Mehmed Beg, I undertook two field trips hoping to discover itsremains. My first goal was to locate the exact site of the vanished Turkish Konu, in whichthe complex of Mehmed Beg once stood. Having the 1899 Ottoman map72 and the 1911Austrian military map73 at my disposal, this seemed a simple task. Both maps show that theTurkish Konu was situated about a kilometer to the north of the Bulgarian village, layingby the small river, as noted by Gerlach in the 16th century, at a place where the main roadconnecting stanimaka (modern Asenovgrad) with Papazl (modern Popovitsa) takes acurve to the west in order to avoid the hill on the northeast side (ills. 2 and 3). When I firstvisited the site in April 2007, to my surprise I saw that the Ottoman road was still in situand was pretty much unchanged. However, right at the curve, where I expected to see the

ruins of the complex of Mehmed Beg, there was a water reservoir completely covering theplace marked on the Ottoman and Austrian maps as Turkish Konu. The reservoir wasalmost entirely full, which prevented my further attempts to find the ruins of any ofMehmed Begs buildings. Encouraged by the locals who when asked about the location ofthe vanished Turkish village pointed straight to the water, I decided to return later when thewater level was lower. I had this opportunity in October 2008, but although the water levelwas critically low, I was still unable to find any sign of the ruins of Mehmed Begsmosque, caravanserai, imaret, or bath, all massive buildings which must have left visibletraces (ill. 4).

A note in a modest unpublished text, kept in the local library in Konu, contains

some possible hints about the fate of Mehmed Begs buildings. Written by an honesthistory enthusiast, the local teacher, the text includes a passage in which the authordescribes the Turkish village. He points that the village had two neighbourhoods: theMosque and Kabata, and was situated on the spot of todays reservoir. According to thisauthor, the village had about 100 mud-houses and beautiful gardens. At an unspecifieddate, but certainly after Bulgaria became independent, the Bulgarians attacked and pillagedthe Turkish village, razing it to the ground, thus forcing the Turks to leave. 74 In case thisstory is at least partially correct and not entirely a fictitious product of the creative locallore, it could provide us with a possible explanation for the extinction of Mehmed Begscomplex. If the Turkish village was really sacked by the Bulgarians and its buildings infact destroyed during the assault, then it is highly likely that, as it happened everywhere

reason for the departure of the Turks from Konu could be a local conflict, Acarolus claim that theBulgarians settled in the Turkish village seems doubtful, because the Bulgarian village never reached theterritory of Turkish Konu. In reverse, it grew in opposite direction towards the south.71Spisak na neselenite mesta v Bulgaria. Sofia: Darjavna pechatnitsa, 1911, p. 53.72 Rumeli ahane Haritas, Erkan-i Harbiye-i Umumiye Dairesi 1:210 000, Filibe. A.H. 1317/1899. I was

provided with a digital copy of this map by Prof. Heath Lowry, to whom I express my gratitude.73 Generalkarte von Mitteleuropa 1:200 000, 43-42 Stara Zagora (Eski Zagra). Herausgegeben vomMilitrgeographischen Institut in Wien, 1940. The 1940 reprint of this map is done after the original of 1911.74 Nikolov, Nikola. Selo Konush, okrag plovdivski, v minaloto i sega. Unpublished manuscript in themunicipal library in Konush.


18/26


else, the buildings of Mehmed Beg turned into excellent free building material which wasreused in the Bulgarian village. Although I was unable to find any physical evidence tosupport this hypothesis, the massive Orthodox church and a stone bridge next to it, both

situated in the centre of the Bulgarian village, appeal for such a conclusion75

(ill. 5).

Conclusion

The Ottoman conquest of the Balkans, along with the inevitable destruction accompanyingany military endeavor, brought a significant modification and revitalization of the subduedterritories. Apart from the central authority and bureaucrats related to it, the powerfulBalkan march lords, who ruled parts of the peninsula almost independently, had anoteworthy output in this process too. The might concentrated in uc begis handsmanifested itself not only in successful military campaigns, but also in the creation andpromotion of a number of settlements all over the Balkans. Many of these newly created

towns were fortunate enough to turn into some of the most prominent and admirableBalkan cities. Historiography up until very recently, when discussing the urbandevelopment of the Balkans under Ottoman rule, almost entirely neglected the crucial roleof the march lords and generally attributed the creation of many new settlements to theundetermined and flexible term the Ottomans. In contrast to this, quite a few moderntowns in the Balkans owe their existence to a complex of buildings erected by one of theaknc leaders which often attracted the attention of his relatives or fellows from otherdynasties who added more buildings and thus contributed to its development. Studying thearchitectural heritage of these raider commanders, regardless whether the patronizedbuildings are still extant or not, could greatly enrich our knowledge of the sophisticatedmixture of people and ideas, to which we often refer simply as the early Ottoman

society.The military and administrative career of Minnetolu Mehmed Beg and his

vanished architectural legacy, studied in this paper, can be a characteristic example of theideas, aims and efforts of the 15th-century Balkan march lords. He had a significant outputin the development of both Sarajevo and Smederevo, places which also attracted theattention and sponsorship of many other border commanders. Similarly to the begs of themightiest dynasties Mehmed Beg tried to create and promote an entirely new settlement.He has undertaken an ambitious task and spent vast resources in constructing his complexin Konu in the 1450s-60s. However, it seems that his initial plans of promoting his nativeplace and turning it into a vibrant town resulted in a complete failure. Despite MehmedBegs efforts, it seems that Konu never lost its rural appearance and finally, ironicallyenough, it was leveled to the ground by the descendents of the very same people whom hesettled there earlier and thus disappeared for good.

There are several reasons for the failure of Mehmed Begs project. The spot hechose to build his complex looked promising because of its location on the main Balkanhighway since Antiquity the Roman Via Militaris. However, only a few decades after thecomplex was established, the road shifted its path to the north and Konu remained isolated

75 A sign hanging on the Church of St. Athanasius in Konu states that it was built in 1853. That could becorrect, but it seems the building had some later modifications too.


19/26


on a secondary, rarely used, spare road which also explains the very few remarks left bywestern travelers.76 It seems that Mehmed Beg also missed the exact timing for suchenterprise. At the time when he launched his project, the area was no longer a border zone

and most of the energy and financial support of the periphery forces in the Ottoman societywas concentrated on the new frontier zone in Serbia and Bosnia. Thus the march lords ofthat time must have found Konu unattractive and whenever they sponsored publicbuildings in Upper Thrace, they chose spots with higher strategic importance, like the townof Tatar Pazar.77 Inability to attract the support of the powerful begs must have been ofvital importance for Konus further development, because Mehmed Beg did not descendfrom one of the powerful and rich dynasties, but made a name on his own. Furthermore,his descendents did not seem to follow their fathers steps turning into influential andstrong military leaders. On the contrary, they appear to have been in constant conflict withthe central Ottoman government, therefore Mehmed Begs project did not receive theadequate support even from his own heirs. It is imperative to note that nobody from among

the march lords, regardless of their military strength and financial power at any givenmoment, managed to create and promote a new settlement entirely alone. They eitherreceived the immediate support of the leaders of other families, which was the case forSarajevo and a number of other places or their descendents who had enough power andresources to continue the deeds of their forefathers in building family provincial centres. Inthis respect, the towns of Yenice-i Vardar, established and dominated by theEvrenosoullar until the 20th century, and Plevne, created by Mehmed Begs associateMihalolu Ali Beg, but later on vigorously supported and boosted by his sons andgrandsons, could be excellent illustrative examples.

Mehmed Begs aim to promote a town that he created from scratch appears to havebeen an overambitious task for a person of his magnitude. It never turned into one of the

many modern cities in the Balkans which owe their existence to the creative energy ofcertain elements of the Ottoman border society. However, his failed attempt, when studiedtogether with other successful or unsuccessful enterprises of its kind could provide us witha vivid demonstration of the problems, ideas and processes in the early Ottoman societyand certainly deserves scholarly attention.

76 On the Military road in Ottoman times, the classical work of Jireek, Constantin.Die Heerstrasse vonBelgrad nach Constantinopel und die Balkanpsse. Eine historisch-geographische Studie. Prag: Verlag von F.Tempsky, 1877, still remains the most comprehensive work.77 Boykov, Grigor. Tatar Pazardjik. Ot osnovavaneto na grada do kraya na XVII vek. Izsledvania idokumenti. Sofia: Amicitia, 2008, pp. 33-61.


20/26


Ill. 1. City plan of Sarajevo, showing the vanished mosque of Mehmed Beg. FromMujezinovi, Mehmed.Islamska Epigrafika u Bosni i Hercegovini, Vol. I. Sarajevo: Veselin

Maslea, 1974.

Ill. 2. Ottoman map, showing the location of the ruined Turkish Konu (1899). FromRumeli

ahane Haritas, Erkan-i Harbiye-i Umumiye Dairesi 1:210 000, Filibe. A.H. 1317/1899.


21/26


Ill. 3. Austrian map, showing the location of Turkish Konu (1911). From Generalkarte von

Mitteleuropa1:200 000, 43-42 Stara Zagora (Eski Zagra). Vienna, 1940.


22/26


Ill. 4. Water reservoir in Konu; photo by the author (2008)

Ill. 5. Orthodox Church St. Athanasius in Konu; hoto by the author (2007)

.

.


23/26

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Preface........................................................................................................................................ 3

Introduction: The man and his method

Maximilian Hartmuth (Sabanc University, Istanbul) ............................................................... 5

I.THE EARLY OTTOMAN BALKANS REVISITED

An unknown fourteenth century sultanic mosque in the Macedonian city of Drama: the

Yldrm Byezd CmiHeath W. Lowry (Princeton University) .................................................................................. 15

Legend and historicity: the Binbir Oklu Ahmed Baba Tekkesi and its founder

Mariya Kiprovska (Bilkent University, Ankara) ...................................................................... 29

In search of vanished Ottoman monuments in the Balkans: Minnetolu Mehmed Begs

complex in Konu Hisar

Grigor Boykov (Bilkent University, Ankara) ........................................................................... 47

II.VOICES AND PROCESSES IN PERIODS OF CHANGE

Towards a historical topography of the Ottoman and post-Ottoman Rhodopes: monuments,epigraphy, and a local stonecutters notepad

Aziz Nazmi Shakir-Tash (Sabanc University, Istanbul).......................................................... 69

An Edirne scholar on Ottoman architecture and politics: the pilgrimage account of

Abdurrahman Hibri

Suraiya Faroqhi (Bilgi University, Istanbul)........................................................................... 91

The vakfof Moral Beir Aa in Argos

Hedda Reindl-Kiel (University of Bonn)................................................................................ 107


24/26


Preliminary results from the survey of Rumelikava Fort

Kemal K. Eypgiller (Istanbul Technical University) ........................................................... 129

Ottoman construction materials and terminological change: remarks pertaining to bricks

and roof tiles as apparent in the sources

lknur Aktu Kolay (Istanbul Technical University).............................................................. 143

III.THE OTTOMAN ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE IN THE MODERN BALKANS

The Ottoman architectural patrimony of Bulgaria revisited: infrastructure, intentionality,and the genesis and survival of monuments

Stephen Lewis (New York/Sofia/Istanbul).............................................................................. 153

Insufficiently oriental? An early episode in the study and preservation of the Ottoman

architectural heritage in the Balkans

Maximilian Hartmuth (Sabanc University, Istanbul) ........................................................... 171

Recovering the remnants of the Alaca Cami in Foa

Zeynep Ahunbay (Istanbul Technical University).................................................................. 185

BIBLIOGRAPHY OF WORKS BY MACHIEL KIEL......................................................................... 193


25/26

MONUMENTS, PATRONS, CONTEXTS

Papers on Ottoman Europe

presented to Machiel Kiel

edited by

Maximilian Hartmuth and Aye Dilsiz

NEDERLANDS INSTITUUT VOOR HET NABIJE OOSTEN

2010


26/26

Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten

Leiden

PIHANS CXV

Monuments, Patrons, Contextspapers on ottoman europe presented to machiel kiel

edited by M. H A. Dz