The Ottoman Dracula. Kazıklı voyvoda and the Construction of the Rebel and Evil in the Ottoman Empire

Abstract

The crafting of such narratives involves sophisticated literary strategies and techniques that can sometimes overshadow the historical content, or even sacrifice it for stylistic effect. It was common for copyists to alter their sources, not merely reproducing but editing and interpreting them according to their literary preferences or aesthetic judgment. This tendency becomes more pronounced in later authors and compilers, who take the historical fabric and the dramatic structure of their sources, yet rework them into a form reflecting their personal style. Often, they might even modify the text’s substance by rearranging, omitting, or adding specific scenes or details. These issues have led many Romanian historians to give little credit to the Ottoman chronicles. For methodologies prioritising positivism or factual history, these sources are deemed less reliable than Byzantine or Western European ones. However, modern historiographical approaches, employing refined methodologies, can effectively utilise Ottoman chronicles. We must acknowledge that historical sources are not universally applicable for all types of historiographical discourse and cannot answer every question. Often, the nature of our sources dictates the kind of history that can be written with their support. This paper attempts to pave the way for an alternative method and perspective of interpretation. The portrayal of political and military figures in official Ottoman writings can reveal insights into political thought, ideology, and propaganda. In our case, these narratives precisely illustrate how the Sultan justified his campaign against Vlad the Impaler. Such information cannot be provided by European chronicles, for instance. Moreover, Ottoman chronicles provide insights into diplomatic relations and the exchange of ideas. On another level, concerning mental and social history, they reflect the expectations, fears, prejudices, or ideals of their audience. The authors of these texts did not create their works in isolation from contemporary political or cultural environment. Thus, they are voices of their era, encapsulating and mirroring its expectations. Their writing was crafted for consumption and success. Without this recognition, they risked obscurity, much like the poet Maʿali, who lamented in his dedication to the Sultan within his versed chronicle literarily about his “starvation”.

Keywords

• Kazıklı voyvoda
• Vlad the Impaler
• Wallachia
• Ottomans
• historiography
• literary works

References

1. Annas, Gabriele and Christof Paulus (eds.) Geschichte und Geschichten. Studien zu den Deutschen Berichten über Vlad III. Drăculea. Wiesbaden, 2020.
2. Andreescu, Ştefan. Vlad Țepeş Dracula. Între legendă şi adevăr istoric. Bucureşti, 2015 (3rd edition).
3. Balata, Refet Yalçın (ed.). „Hunkâr-nâma (Tevârîh-i Âl-i ʿOsmân), Mîr Seyyid ʿAlî b. Muzaffer-i Maʿâlî”. Istanbul: İstanbul Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi, 1992 (unpublished Ph.D. thesis).
4. Beheim, Michel. „Von ainem wutrich der hies Trakle waida von der Walachei”, in Die Gedichte des Michael Beheim, vol. 1: Einleitung – Gedichte, nr. 1-147, Ed. by Hans Gille and Ingeborg Spriewald. Berlin 1968, nr. 99*, p. 285-316.
5. Cazacu, Matei. Dracula. Leiden–Boston, 2017.
6. Cîmpina, Barbu T. „Victoria oştii lui Ţepeş asupra Sultanului Mehmed al II-lea (cu prilejul împlinirii a 500 de ani)”, in Studii. Revista de istorie, 15, 3 (1962), p. 533-555.
7. Darling, Linda. „Mirrors for Princes in Europe and the Middle East. A Case of Historiographical Incommensurability”, in Albrecht Classen (ed.). East Meets West in the Middle Ages and Early Modern Times. Transcultural Experiences in the Premodern World. Berlin–Boston, 2013, p. 223-242.
8. Gheorghe, Adrian. „Understanding the Ottoman Campaign in Wallachia in the Summer of 1462. Numbers, Limits, Manoeuvres and Meanings”, in Thomas M. Bohn, Rayk Einax and Stefan Rohdewald (eds.). Vladder Pfähler – Dracula. Tyrann oder Volkstribun?. Wiesbaden, 2017, p. 159-188.

9. Gheorghe, Adrian. „Entertaining the Crowds. Early Ottoman Historiography Between Orality and Bestseller”, in Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungariae, 72, 1 (2019), p. 81-91.
10. Gheorghe, Adrian, Albert Weber, Alexandru Şt. Anca and Ginel Lazăr (eds.), Corpus Draculianum. Documentele şi cronicile privitoare la viața şi domnia lui Vlad Țepeş Drăculea (1437-1650), vol. 1: Documentele de cancelarie şi corespondența, tom 1: Documentele valahe. Bucureşti–Brăila, 2019.
11. Gheorghe, Adrian. „Mental Frames and Textual Strategies in Mid-14th Century Byzantine-Turkish Sources on the Beginnings of the Anatolian Turks in Europe”, in Südost-Forschungen, 80 (2021), p. 1-18.
12. Giese, Friedrich (ed.). Die altosmanischen anonymen Chroniken: Tevarih-i Ali ‘Osmān, 2 vol. Breslau, 1922 and 1925.
13. İnalcık, Halil. “The Rise of Ottoman Historiography,” in Bernard Lewis and P. M. Holt (eds.). Historians of the Middle East. London, 1962, p. 152-167.
14. İnalcık, Halil. „Tursun Beg, Historian of Mehmed the Conqueror’s Time”, in Wiener Zeitschrift zur Kunde des Morgenlandes, 69 (1977), p. 87-110.
15. İnalcık, Halil and Rhoads Murphey (eds.). The History of Mehmed the Conqueror by Tursun Beg, Minneapolis. Chicago, 1978.
16. İnalcık, Halil. „How to Read ʿĀshik Pasha-Zāde’s History”, in Colin Heywood and Colin Imber (eds.). Studies in Ottoman History in Honour of Professor V. L. Ménage. Istanbul, 1994, p. 139-156.
17. İnan, Kenan. „A summery and analysis of the Tarih-i Ebü’l-Feth (History of the Father of Conquest) of Tursun Bey”, University of Manchester, 1993 (unpublished Ph.D. thesis).
18. İnan, Kenan. „On the Sources of Tursun Bey’s Tarih-i Ebü’l Feth”, in Eugenia Kermeli and Oktay Özel (eds.). The Ottoman Empire. Myths, Realities and ‘Black Holes’. Contributions in honour of Colin Imber. Istanbul, 2006, p. 75-108.
19. İnan, Kenan. „The Effects of Ornamented Prose Style on Ottoman Historiography: The Tarih-i Ebü’l-feth [History of the Father of Conquest] by Tursun Bey”, in James S. Amelang and Siegfried Beer (eds.). Public Power in Europe: Studies in Historical Transformations. Pisa, 2006, p. 125-142.
20. Kastritsis, Dimitris J. (ed.). An Early Ottoman History. The Oxford Anonymous Chronicle (Bodleian Library, Ms Marsh 313). Liverpool, 2017.
21. Meier, Jan Niklas. Der Woiwode als Monster. Vlad III. bei Michel Beheim und in der „Geschicht dracole waide“. Baden-Baden, 2021.
22. Ménage, Victor Louis. „An Autograph of Kemalpashazade’s Tevarikh-i Âl-i Othman, Book VII”, in Bulletin of the School of Orientel and African Studies, 23 (1960), p. 250-264.
23. Ménage, Victor Louis. „A Survey of the Early Ottoman Histories, with Studies on Their Textual Problems and Their Sources”, 2 vol. London, 1961 (unpublished Ph.D. thesis).
24. Ménage, Victor Louis. “The Beginnings of Ottoman Historiography,” in Bernard Lewis and P. M. Holt (eds.). Historians of the Middle East. London, 1962, p. 168-179.
25. Ménage, Victor Louis. Neshrī’s History of the Ottomans. London, 1964.
26. Ménage, Victor Louis. „On the Recensions of Uruj's 'History of the Ottomans”, in Bulletin of the School of Orientel and African Studies, 39, 3 (1967), p. 314-322.
27. Ménage, Victor Louis. “The 'Annals of Murad II'”, in Bulletin of the School of Orientel and African Studies 39, 3 (1976), p. 570-584.
28. Mengüç, Murat Cem. „A Study of 15th-Century Ottoman Historiography”. University of Cambridge, 2008 (unpublished Ph.D. thesis).
29. Panaitescu, Petre P. (ed.). Viaţa lui Vlad Ţepeş: cronici slavo-romîne din sec. XV-XVI publicate de Ion Bogdan. Bucureşti, 1959.
30. Saraç, Yekta. Şeyhülislam Kemal Paşazade. Hayatı, Şahsiyeti, Eserleri ve Bazı Şiirleri. Istanbul, 1995.
31. Simon, Alexandru. In the World of Vlad. The Lives and Times of a Warlord. Berlin, 2021.
32. Schreiner, Peter. Die byzantinischen Kleinchroniken, 3 vol. Wien, 1975.
33. Schwarz, Klaus and Gerd Winkelhane. Ḫoǧa Saʿdeddīn, Staatsmann und Gelehrter (gest. 1599), und seine Stiftung aus dem Jahre 1614. Bamberg, 1986.
34. Serdar, Törehan M. Mevlana Hakimüddin İdiris-i Bitlisi. Istanbul, 2008.
35. Tveritinova, A. S. „The Turkish manuscript of Qoca Husejn’s Chronicle Bedāʾiʿ ül-weqāʾiʿ (Volume II) from the Collection of the Institute of Oriental Studies (Leningrad Branch)“, in Herbert Franke (ed.). Akten des 24. Orientalisten-Kongresses München. 28. August bis 4. September 1957. Wiesbaden, 1959, p. 399-402.
36. Tulum, Mertol (ed.). Târîh-i Ebü ‛l-Feth. Istanbul, 1977.
37. Turan, Osman (ed.). İstanbul’un Fethinden Önce Yazılmış Tarihî Takvimler. Ankara, 1954.
38. Turan, Şerafettin (ed.). Tevârih-i Âl-i Osman. VII. Defter (Tenkidli Transkripsiyon). Ankara, 1991.
39. Stoicescu, Nicolae. Vlad Țepeş. Bucureşti, 1976.
40. Weber, Albert, Adrian Gheorghe, Ştefan Marinca and lexandru Şt. Anca (eds.). Corpus Draculianum. Documentele şi cronicile privitoare la viața şi domnia lui Vlad Țepeş Drăculea (1437-1650), vol. 1: Scrisori şi documente de cancelarie, tom 2: Cancelarii externe, Bucureşti–Brăila, 2020.
41. Weber, Albert. Vlad der Pfähler Drăculea (1431–1476). Biographie und Legendenbildung im Spiegel der Wissensgeschichte, Wiesbaden, 2023 [in preparation] (Vlad der Pfähler Drăculea (1431-1476). Genese und Transformation herrschaftsbiographischer Episteme. Gießen, 2021 (Phd. thesis).
42. Wittek, Paul. „Zum Quellenproblem der ältesten osmanischen Chroniken (mit Auszügen aus Nesri).“ in Mitteilungen Osmanischer Geschichte, 1 (1922), p. 77-150.
43. Wolff, Sandra (ed.). Dacher 2008 - Gebhard Dacher, Die ››Konstanzer Chronik‹‹ Gebhart Dachers. ››By des Byschoffs zyten volgiengen disz nachgeschriben ding vund sachen...‹‹. Codex Sangallensis 646: Edition und Kommentar. Ostfildern, 2008.
44. Zimmermann, Harald (ed.). Thomas Ebendorfer, Chronica regum Romanorum. Teil 2. Hannover, 2003.