Hutt

The Hutts, as a rule, were addressed to the great vizier (sadrazam) or, in his absence, his deputy ( kaymakamu ) or another high-ranking official - for example, senior admiral (kapudan pasha) or governor ( beylerbey ) in relation to Rumelia . In total, there were three types of Hutts ^[2] :

• a hutt addressed to an official;
• hutt "on white";
• Hutt "per document."

Hutts in the name of an official

Everyday firmans or decrees on empowerment (berats) were usually written by scribes, however, addressed to certain officials and of particular importance were written personally by the hand of the Sultan and sealed with his seal ( Tugra ). Tugra and the introductory part of the hutt could be surrounded by a decorative frame ^[3] . The purpose of the introduction was to emphasize the specific part of his decree, convincing or ordering to follow it exactly, without any errors. Such firms were called “Hatt-ı Hümayunla Müveşşeh Ferman” (“hutt-decorated firman”) or “Unvanına Hatt-ı Hümayun” ("hutt addressed to the official") ^[4] . Any cliched phrase could be used in the introduction - for example, “it should be done as prescribed” (“mûcebince amel oluna”) or “my order should be executed in accordance with the requirements, and no one should interfere in the course of its execution” (“ emrim mûcebince amel oluna, kimseye müdahale etmeyeler "). The entry of certain orders to officials could begin with praise from the sultan of the person (or persons) to whom the order was addressed to encourage or honor him (them). In rare cases, the entry could contain a threat - for example, “if you want to keep your head on your shoulders, you must follow this order in accordance with the requirements” (“Başın gerek ise mûcebiyle amel oluna”) ^[3] .

Hutts "on White"

The Hutts "on white" ("beyaz üzerine hatt-ı hümâyun") were documents written directly by the Sultan as ruler, in contrast to the introductions to already written documents. They were called "Hutts" on white "" for the reason that they were written on a blank (that is, white) page. Such documents could be orders, decrees, letters of appointment or letters to the rulers of foreign states.

There were also Hutts containing an expression of the opinion of the Sultan or even his feelings on any specific issues. For example, after Mosul successfully defended Nadir Shah from the Persian forces in 1743, Sultan Mahmoud I sent a hut to the governor Haj Hussein Pasha, in which he praised the heroic deed of the governor and soldiers of Mosul ^[6] .

Hutts "for documents"

The bureaucratic procedure usual for the Ottoman Empire stipulated that the great vizier or the kaimakam acting as him send a document to the sultan in which he summarizes information on a specific situation and asks the sultan to make a decision on this issue. Until 19th century, such documents were called “telhis” (“resume”), later they became known as “takrir” (“proposal”) ^[8] . The handwritten response of the Sultan to such a document (his order or decision) was called “hutt on a resume” or “hutt on a proposal”. Other types of documents provided to the Sultan were petitions (“arzuhâl”), certified transcriptions of oral petitions (“mahzar”), documents from higher authorities to lower ones (“şukka”), religious messages from judges to the higher authorities (“ilâm” ) and accounting books ("tahrirat"). Depending on the type of document, such hutts were called “hutt for a petition”, “hutt for a certified oral petition” and so on ^[8] . The sultan gave answers not only to documents submitted to him for consideration by the viziers, but also to requests ("arzuhâl") presented to him directly by his subjects after Friday prayers ^[2] .

When the Sultan addressed the public during Friday prayers or other social events, people presented petitions addressed to him. Later they were discussed by the council of viziers who made decisions on them. After that, they (the viziers) prepared a summary of all the requests received and the decisions taken on them. The Sultan, when they brought him a sheet with this summary, wrote on it the words “I was informed” (“manzurum olmuştur”) several times, accompanying each such record with the number of the decision that she referred to. When, after the Tanzimat reforms, the palace bureaucratic system underwent changes, the decision of the sultan was recorded by the chief scribe at the bottom of the final document for all decisions, and this only record applied to all decisions ^[3] .

When a petition or memorandum required the sultan to make a decision on the basis of what was stated in them, the great vizier, as a rule, prepared a summary (“telhis”) as an annex to such a document. In some cases, a separate consolidated document was prepared instead, the grand vizier or his deputy had to write their resume and views on the information presented there diagonally at the upper or lower edges of the documents coming from lower-ranking officials (see the example in the first figure above ) Such records on the written document were called “derkenar” ^[8] . Sometimes the great vizier could add a separate “cover” page, where a proposal for this petition was posted from a lower-level official, such as, for example, the treasurer (defterdar) or the minister of war ( seraskir ), entitled, for example, “this is a proposal from the deferdar ". In such cases, the sultan wrote his hutt on the cover page. In other cases, the great vizier could directly summarize the opinion on the matter presented by a lower-level official directly on the margins of the document, and the sultan then also wrote his decision on the same page. Sometimes the sultan wrote his decision on a blank sheet of paper attached to the submitted document ^[8] .

In most cases, the Hutts were written by the Sultan himself, although there were those written by the chief scribe or another official. Important Hutts "on white" were sometimes written by the head of diplomatic correspondence (Reis al-Kuttab) or the Minister of the Navy (Kapudan Pasha). In some cases, there were indications as to who should prepare the document, which after that corresponded with the Sultan ^[3] .

The Hutts, as a rule, were not dated, although some concerning the withdrawal of money from the treasury contain dates. Most of the Hutts and Irades of the later period already had dates. Abdul Hamid I was particularly inclined to date his Hutts. His great vizier, Koja Yusuf Pasha, later suggested continuing the practice of dating the Hutts to the successor of Abdul-Hamid Selim III so that he could keep track of when the orders were executed. However, this proposal was not accepted ^[3] . Abdul Hamid II used dating at the end of his reign ^[3] .

The Hutt language “on documents” was, as a rule, “understandable”, the colloquial form of the Turkish language that has been preserved to this day, has not changed much over the centuries, and, therefore, is easily transcribed in Latin ^{[4] [7]} . Many documents or introductory notes were short comments, such as “I gave” (“verdim”), “yes, it will be given” (“verilsin”), “will not be” (“olmaz”), “write this” ( “Yazılsın”), “this is understandable / clear to me” (“Malum oldu / malûmum olmuştur”), “provide it” (tedârik edesin), “it was examined by me” (“manzûrum oldu / manzûrum olmuştur”), “reply to this ”(“ cevap verile ”),“ to write it down ”(“ mukayyet olasın ”),“ to support it ”(“ tedârik görülsün ”),“ may they be without need ”(“ berhûrdâr olsunlar ”) ^[3] .

Some sultans wrote long comments, which began with the words “It became known to me” (“Malûmum oldu”) and continued with an introduction to the topic, and then stated the personal opinion of the crown bearer, for example, “the look and meaning of this report / petition / record / other became my imperial knowledge ”(“ ... işbu takrîrin / telhîsin / şukkanın / kaimenin Manzur ve me'azi ma'lûm-ı hümayûnum olmuşdur ”). Among the traditional phrases in hutts, the following are often found: “according to this message ...” (“işbu telhisin mûcebince”), “clear business” (“cümlesi malumdur”), “I resolve” (“izin verdim”), “I give, in according to the facts provided ”(“ vech-i meşruh üzere verdim ”) ^[2] .

Hutts with appeals to officials often contained cliché expressions such as “to be done in accordance with requirements” (“Mûcebince amel oluna”) or “to be done in accordance with requirements and not be violated” (“Mûcebince amel ve hilâfından hazer oluna ") ^[3] .

Hutts "on white" were more complex in terms of their language, and some may have been constructed by a scribe before being recorded by the sultan. They often begin with an appeal to the recipient. The Sultan could address them to his great vizier as “my vizier,” or, if his great vizier was at war, he would refer to his deputy as “kaymakam pasha”. Hutts addressed to other officials could often begin with an expression like “You who are my vizier of Rumelia, Mehmed Pasha” (“Sen ki Rumili vezîrim Mehmed Paşa'sın”). An appeal to a senior religious official ( Sheikh al-Islam ) or a personal mentor was usually simple and respectful. In cases where the hutt was delivered in a ceremonial setting, with an imperial sword and cloak, such as when appointing someone to a higher position, the hutt could contain a colorful greeting, such as “after I gave you honors with my glorious greeting , you should know that ... "(" seni selâm-ı şâhanemle teşrif eylediğimden sonra malumun ola ki ... "). Letters to the army commanders could contain a long and ornate greeting or just an appeal to such a person according to his position ^[3] . The Hutt "on white" without any appeal was intended for the great vizier or his deputy ^[8] .

The earliest known hutt is the hutt sent by Sultan Murad I Evrenos- Beyu in 1386 ^[2] , evaluating his leadership during his conquests and giving him advice on how to control people ^[9] . Prior to the reign of Murad III, the viziers presented the essence of the cases to the sultans orally, after which they gave them their consent or refusal regarding these cases - also orally. Until that time, the Hutts were very rare, but after they spread quite widely, especially during the reign of such sultans, such as Abdul-Hamid I, Selim III and Mahmud II, who wanted to increase his control over the empire and keep abreast of all matters ^{[2 ]} .

The content of the Hutts, as a rule, reflects the power struggle that existed between the sultan and his council of viziers (sofa). The use of the Hutts allowing the great viziers to take specific actions began during the reign of Murad III. This led to the loss of authority and independence of the great vizier, while other courtiers, such as the main eunuch of the harem (Harem Agashi) or concubines (brown), who had more free access to the Sultan, increased their influence. By giving detailed instructions or advice, the sultans reduced the role of the great viziers, making them simply leaders in the process of executing their orders. This situation seems to have provoked a kind of backlash when, for most of the 17th century, there were attempts to regain the prestige of the great viziers and the power of their “higher powers” ​​(“vekil-i mutlak”), but over time the Hutts returned to their former simplicity. Nevertheless, in the 18th century, Selim III became concerned about the excessive centralization of the bureaucratic apparatus and its general inefficiency. He created a consultative council (“meclis-i meşveret”) to share his power and the great vizier with several authoritative people. He gave detailed answers to the Hutts to questions he was asked, and made inquiries as to whether his decision was followed. The Hutts became tools for Selim III to ensure the quick and clear implementation of his decisions ^[4] .

During the reign of Mahmud II, in the early 1830s, the practice of writing memoranda addressed to the great vizier was replaced by the post of chief scribe of the imperial court ("Mâbeyn-i Hümâyun Başkatibi"), recording the decisions of the Sultan ^[3] . After the start of the Tanzimat period, the government bureaucratic apparatus was streamlined. For most regular petitions, the imperial scribe (“Serkâtib-i şehriyârî”) began to record the verbally expressed will of the Sultan (Irade) and eventually Irade (also called “irâde-i seniyye”, that is, “higher will”, and “irâde-i şâhâne ", That is, the" glorious will ") replaced the Hutts. The use of the Hutts "on white" in correspondence between the Sultan and the Grand Vizier continued on matters of great importance, such as summits or promotions. In some cases, the great vizier and sultan also wrote directly to each other ^[3] .

A large number of documents that required the decision of the Sultan through including the Hutts or Irades are considered a reflection of how strong centralization was in the Ottoman government ^[2] . Abdul-Hamid I wrote to himself in one of his Hutts: “I don’t have time for my pen to leave my hand, with God's determination that this will not happen” ^[10] .

The early Hutts were written in various calligraphic styles of handwriting, such as nastalik , talik kirmasi (a kind of nastalik), naskh and rikya. After Mahmud II, they were recorded only with the help of ryk ^[11] . Ахмед III и Махмуд II были искусными писцами, и их хатты отличаются длинными и сложными записями на государственных документах ^[2] . В отличие от них, султаны, которые взошли на престол в раннем возрасте, например, Мурад V и Мехмед IV , были известны своей плохой орфографией и каллиграфией ^[3] .

The Hutts sent to the Grand Vizier were processed and documented by Yameli Kalemi, the secretary of the Grand Vizier. Yamedi Kalemi sorted and documented all correspondence between the great vizier and the sultan, as well as any correspondence with the rulers of foreign states and with the ambassadors of the Ottoman Empire. Other Hutts, not addressed to the great vizier, were stored in other archives of documents (the so-called “backgrounds” (“fon”) in the terminology of modern Turkish archivists) ^[4] .

Separated Hutts

When a state archive was created in the Ottoman Empire in the 19th century, documents were organized for storage in it in accordance with their importance. The Hutts "on white" were considered the most important - along with those related to international relations, border actions and internal rules. Documents of secondary importance were placed for permanent storage in boxes and stored in basements in need of repair. Presumably as a mark of respect for the Sultan ^{[2], the} Hutts “on documents” (petitions, reports, etc.) were separated from their documents and stored together with the Hutts “on white,” while the rest of the documents were stored elsewhere ^{[12 ]} . These “separated” Hutts did not intersect in any way with the documents to which they belonged, and were only comments of the court, using general terms and approximately dated. Because the sultans did not have the habit of dating their Hutts to the late period of the Ottoman Empire, in most cases the documents associated with them are unknown. Conversely, decisions on many memoranda, petitions, or requests sent to the sultans are also unknown. Separating the Hutts from their documents is considered a great information loss for researchers ^{[13] [14]} . In the Ottoman archives in Istanbul there is a special department of such “separated Hutts” ^[2] .

Directories

Today, all known Hutts are listed in the computer database in the Ottoman archives of the Turkish Prime Minister ("Başbakanlık Osmanlı Arşivleri", or BOA) in Istanbul, where there are 95,134 pieces ^[15] . Most of the Hutts are kept in the BOA and in the archives of the Topkapi Palace Museum . BOA contains 58,000 hutts ^[16] .

Since the Hutts were not originally systematically organized, historians of the 19th and early 20th centuries created several Hutt catalogs based on various organizational principles. The following historical catalogs are still used by historians at the BOA ^[17] :

Hatt-ı Hümâyûn Tasnifi - a directory of Hutts related to Yamedi Kalemi. It consists of 31 volumes containing 62312 documents with their brief descriptions. This catalog includes documents from 1730 to 1839, but primarily covers the documentation within this period, which was conducted on the boards of Selim III and Mahmud II.

Ali Emiri Tasnifi is a chronological catalog of 181239 documents organized in accordance with the periods of the reign of the Sultans: from the creation of the Ottoman state of the Ottoman to the period of Abdul Majid. In addition to the Hutts, this directory includes documents on international relations.

İbnülemin Tasnifi is a catalog created by a committee led by historian Ibnulemin Mahmoud Kemal. It covers the period 1290-1873. In addition to 329 Hutts, it lists documents of various other types related to palace correspondence, personal correspondence, meetings, land grants ( timaras and zeametes ) and charitable donations ( waqf ).

Muallim Cevdet Tasnifi - a catalog of 216572 documents in 34 volumes organized by topic, which includes issues of local government, regional administration, waqf and internal security.

Although thousands of Hutts were formally preserved, the imperial decree on reforms of 1856 is well known for the fact that most historical texts, according to him, were simply declared “Hutts”. This decree of Sultan Abdul-Majid I guaranteed equality in education, government appointments and the administration of justice for all, regardless of religion. In Dustur, the Ottoman code of laws, the text of this firman is designated as “a copy of the highest firman, written by the great vizier, improved by making it in the upper part with a hutt” ^[18] . Thus, "technically" this decree was elevated to rag the hutt.

The Decree on Reforms of 1856 is sometimes called in a different way - the “Rescript on Reforms” ^{[19] [20]} . Here, the word “rescript” is used in the meaning of “decree, decree”, and not “response to a request or other document” ^[21] .

The Hutt-i Humayyun of 1856 was an extended version of yet another important reform decree, the Hatta Gyulhana of 1839, and part of Tanzimat's reforms. This document is also commonly referred to as the “hut-sharif”, although there are many other hut-sharifs — the term is synonymous with the term “hatt-i humayyun”.

The term “hutt-i humayyun” was sometimes used to mean just something written by the hand of the sultan ^[4] . For example, the court poet Neifi wrote a Masnavi poem of 22 verses describing the calligraphy of Sultan Murad IV, entitled Der-Vasf-ı Hatt-ı Humayun-ı Sultan Murad Han . The whole poem is a praise of the works of the Sultan ^[22] .

Irade - a decree promulgated through the vizier.