Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T07:30:31.643Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Some aspects of the Ottoman fetvā1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 December 2009

Uriel Heyd
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

No comprehensive study of the Ottoman fetvā has so far been carried out. Of the great many Ottoman fetvā selections in print and manuscript, very few have been published in a scholarly edition or translated into a Western language. The systematic inquiry into the application of Muslim law in the Ottoman Empire as reflected in the fetvās has hardly even begun. This article will not examine the decisions of Ottoman muftīs on specific questions of law but discuss some general aspects of the Ottoman fetvā—its form, the procedure of its composition and issuance, the subjects it deals with, the law it applies, and related matters.

Type
Articles
Information
Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies , Volume 32 , Issue 1 , February 1969 , pp. 35 - 56
Copyright
Copyright © School of Oriental and African Studies 1969

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

2 For the treatment of certain aspects of the Ottoman fetvā see D'Ohsson, M., Tableau géral de l' Empire Othoman, 2, paris, 1790, 260–7, 284Google Scholar; von Hammer, J., Des osmanischen Reichs Staatsverfassung und Staatsverwaltung, Wien, 1815, 2, 376–8, 390–1Google Scholar; Lybyer, A. H., The government of the Ottoman Empire in the time of Suleiman the Magnificent, Cambridge, Mass., 1913 (repr., New York, 1966), 207–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar; ‘Ilmīye Sālnāmesi, Istanbul, 1334ü1915–16 Fekete, L., Einführung in die osmanisch-türkische Diplomatik der türki-schen Botmāssigkeit in Ungarn, Budapest, 1926, pp. lxiii–lxviGoogle Scholar; Yörükân, Y. Z, ‘Bir fetva münasebetiyle’, Ankara Üniversitesi İâhiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, 1952, 137–50Google Scholar; M. Tayyib Okiç, ‘Bir tinkidin tenkidi’, ibid., 1953, 219–59; Gibb, H. A. R. and Bowen, H., Islamic society and the West, Vol. 1, Pt. 2, OUP, 1957, esp. pp. 85f., 133 ff.;Google ScholarUzunçarşili, I. H., Osmanli devletinin ilmiye teşkiláti, Ankara, 1956, esp. pp. 196 ffGoogle Scholar.; Encyclopaedia of Islām (first ed.), s.v. ‘Shaikh al-Islām’ (J. H. Kramers); (second ed.), s.v. ‘Fatwā, II. Ottoman Empire’ (J. R. Walsh); İslâm ansiklopedisi, s.v. ‘ Fetvā ’ (Ebūl'ulâ Mardin).

3 e.g. Horster, P., Zur Anwendung des Islamischen Rechts im 16. Jahrhundert, Stuttgart, 1935Google Scholar; Selle, F., Prozessrecht des 16. Jahrhunderts im Osmanischen Riech, Wiesbaden, 1962Google Scholar.

4 A recent study in this field is Grignaschi, M., ‘ La valeur du témoignage des sujets non-musulmans (dhimmî) dans ľEmpire Ottoman ’, Recueits de la Société Jean Bodin pour l'Histoire comparative des Institutions (Brussels), 18, 1963, 211–323Google Scholar.

5 For the establishment of the fetvā office in the former residence of the commander-in-chief of the Janissaries (Agha Kapusi) after the latter's dissolution in 1826 see Ta'rīkh-i LuṭFī, I, Istanbul, 1290, 161–2.

6 See Konyali, İ. H., Ankara abidelerinden: Karacabey mamuresi, Istanbul, 1943, 110; UzunçARşili, İlmiye teşkilâti, 209,. 2.Google Scholar

7 Nos. 44, 48–50, 62, 68, 69, 77, 87, 92.

8 Nos. 44, 47–9, 61, 67, 68, 76, 86, 91.

9 Osman Ergin, Muallim M. Cevdet'in hayati, eserleri ve kütüphanesi, Istanbul, 1937, 716–19.

10 MS K 576, Nos. 55, 79, 81 (cf. 'Ilmīye Sālnāmesi, Nos. 54, 78, 80).

11 Old number: Fatih K 2516.

12 Both of them were originally in the Halis Efendi Library.

13 Many of these fetvās had been requested by the same person (e.g. a certain Qādīzāde Meḥmed Čelebi in Istanbul) from different (in his case, at least eight) Shaykh al-Islāms in the seventeenth century.

14 E 10751, 12076, 12078, 12079, etc. Photographs of a few of them are given in Mumeu, A., Osmanli devletinde siyaseten katl, Ankara, 1963, Docs. 3, 4, 15, 18, 20, 22.Google Scholar

15 Acta Turcarum, C 10–11. This collection includes many fetvās of Abu ‚l-Su'ūd and other Shaykh al-Islāms as well as of provincial muftīs (at Mostar, Jajce, etc.).

16 In Ottoman usage, as in Arabic, the term fetvā does not merely mean the muftī's reply to a question posed to him but may refer to the whole document or, more rarely, to the question only (see I. Goldziher, ZDMG, LIII, 1899, 650–2; ‘ Aṭā, ẕeyl-i Shaqāyiq, Istanbul, 1268,187).

17 e.g. two fifteenth-century fetvās from Spain published by L. S. de Lucena Paredes in Miscelanea de Estudios Arabes y Hebraicos (Granada), v, 1956, 5–17.

18 See, for instance, the fetvā of Ibn Taymīya published by S. Guyard in J A, VIe Sér., XVIII, soût-sept. 1871, 162–78.

19 Very similar measurements are given by d'Ohsson, , Tableau général, 2, Paris, 1790, 262Google Scholar; four by nine ‘ pouces ’ (inches).

20 See 'Ilmīye Sālnāmesi, 523 (fetvā of the mid-eighteenth century).

21 See Istanbul University Library, MS T 4401, Nos. 102, 158, etc.

22 e.g. ibid., Nos. 143, 146, 152, 158, etc.

23 See, for instance, Plate I; 'Ilmīye Sālnāmesi, 324, 452, etc.

24 An incomplete list of (about 20) different da'vets of Ottoman shaykh al-Islāms is given in Fekete, Einführung, pp. lxiv-lxv. Several of his readings need correction (e.g. read al-su'āl for su'āl in the second, mujīb for muḥibb in the third formula); a few errors also occur in the translation.

25 See 'Ilmīye Sālnāmesi, 378 ff., 394 ff., 413 ff., 443 ff., 455, 457, 459–60, 470, 476–7, etc.

26 Not al-tawfīq minhu, as stated by Walsh (Encycl, of Islam, second ed., s.v. ‘ Fatwā ’). The correct word order can be inferred from certain graphic features and from similar da‘vets, such as wa-minhu al-hidāya wa ’l-tawfīq ('Ilmīye Sālnāmesi, 502, 505).

27 ibid., 556–641 and several earlier examples.

28 For an exception see Uzunçarşili, İlmiye teşkilâti, Plate XVI, left.

29 e.g. 'Ilmīye Sālnāmesi, 423–6, 428–31; ibid., 505 and Mumcu, Siyaseten katl, Doc. 15; 'Ilmīye Sālnāmesi, 500 and Mumcu, Doc. 22.

30 For instance, ḥasbī Allāh or huwa al-hādī [wa-]'alayhi i'timādī both in fetvās of Shaykh al-Islāms ('Ilmīye Sālnāmesi, 462, 464–5) and in those of provincial muftīs (Konyali, Karacabey mamuresi), 60, 790.

31 Babinger, F., ‘Die grossherrliche Tughra’, Jahrbuch der Asiatischen Kunst, 2, 1925, 196.Google Scholar

32 Mitteilungen zur osmanischen Geschichte, 2, Hannover, 1926, 267–8Google Scholar.

33 Einführung, p. lxiv, col. 1, n. 2.

34 e.g. Süleymaniye Library, MS Şehit Ali PaşA 2867, folios 6b, 7b (fetvās of Abu 'l-Su'ūd).

35 See Kraelitz, F., Osmanische Urkunden in türkischer Sprache, Wien, 1921, 12, 14–17.Google Scholar

36 See ‘Ilmīye Sālnāmesi, 341.

37 ibid., 345, 347; UzunçarŞili, Īlmiye teŞkilâtl, plate II, right.

38 Topkap1 SAray1 ARchives, E 12076 (UzunçarŞili, op. cit., plate I).

39 ‘Ilmīye Sālnāmesi, 363; KOnyali, 109. See also the formula in the copies of Arabic fetvās (Selle, 36, No. 38; 61, No. 3; Horster, 55, 1. 10; 59, 1. 12).

40 See the copy of Ibn Taymīya’s fetvā in JA, VIe Sér., XVIII, août-sept. 1871, 162.

41 Bayezit Library, MS Veliyyüddin 3216, fol. 73a; ‘Ilmīye Sāmesi, 382 (the two formulas, in different handwriting, in this fetvā of Abu ‘ I-Su‘ūd may be another indication of the use of fetvā ‘blanks’ discussed below). For another formula see ibid., 374.

42 Jerīde-i ‘Ilmīye, No. 4, 1332/1914, 169; No. 5, 1332/1914, 201–4; etc.

43 e.g. ‘Ilmīye Sālnāmesi, 341, 348 top, 350.

44 e.g. ibid., 484, 535, 546, etc.

45 Süleymaniye Library, MS Şehit Ali Paşa 2865, pp. 35, 86 (kemālpa shazāde), 12, 43 (Abu ‘I-Su‘ūd), 13 (Shaykh[i] ‘Abd al-Qādir).

46 See Heyd, U., Ottoman documents on Palestine, 1552–1615, Oxford, 1960, 18Google Scholar.

47 e.g. 'Ilmīye Sālnāmesi, 368, 384, 516 ff., 544–5, 585, etc.

48 Mumcu, Docs. 3, 14, 15, 20, 22.

49 'Itmīye Sālnāmesi, 363 foot; Sūleymaniye Library, MS Ṣehit Ali Paṣa 2865, p. 101; Konyali, 109. See also Selle, 36, No. 38; Horster, 55, 1. 12; 59, 1. 16.

50 'Ilmīye Sālnāmesi, 382 (Abu 'l-Su'ūd).

51 ZDMG, LIII, 1899, 645–52Google Scholar.

52 Süleymaniye Library, MS Fatih 2419, Nos. 103, 183, 183, 229, 280, 292; 'Ilmīye Sālnāmesi, 335 top, 439 foot; Grignaschi (see above, p. 35, n.4), 280.

53 See, for instance, 'Ilmīye Sālnāmesi, 378.

54 e.g. ibid., 378. Cf. the formula allāh al-hādī li'-sawāb at the beginning of the reply in an Arabic fetvā of the Mamlūk period (Hebrew University Library, Jerusalem, MS AP. AR. 8˚ 158, fol. I1b).

55 'Ilmīye Sālnāmesi, 335, 428 foot, 438 top, 439, etc.

56 ibid., 362–3, etc.

57 ibid., 369–70.

58 Mumcu, Doc. 18; Konyali, 109 (Arabic fetvā).

59 e.g. in some fetvās of Kemālpashazāde ('Ilmīye Sālnāmesi, 348–50).

60 In several early Ottoman fetvās the words al-jawāb [wa-]Allāh a'lam are written by the muftī himself: see Topkapi Sarayi Archives, E 12076 (Uzunçarşih, Ilmiye te’kilâti, plate I) and E 12078 (fetvās of YŨsuf b. Khiḁr B. Jalāl al-Dī, i.e. Sinān Pasha, and ‘Alā’ al-Dīn 'Alī al-'Arabī).

61 e.g. Mumcu, docs. 3, 14, 15, 20, 22. For a fetvā of a provincial muftī in which the question too is in his handwriting see Topkapi Sarayi Archives, E 4724, No. 4.

62 Walsh, in encycl. of Islam, second ed., s.v. ‘Fatwā’.

63 e.g. Mumcu, Doc. 18; Topkapi Sarayi Müzesi, Arșiv kilavuzu, II, Istanbul, 1940, Doc. 22.

64 e.g. 'Ilmīye Sālnāmesi, 370, 379, 394, etc. Cf. also Selle, 17, 30, 50, etc.

65 e.g. plate II; 'Ilmīye Sālnāmesi, 380, 381, 433–6, 459–60, 462, 476, 546–7, 576–7, 581, 585 (in the last-mentioned four doucuments the editor's printed addition, diğer, is to be ignored), 601–2; Uzunçarşili, Ilmiye teṣkilâti, plate XVI.

66 e.g. 'Ilmīye Sālnāmesi, 419–20, 640; Istanbul University Library, MS T 4401, No. 76.Google Scholar

67 Or, exceptionally, ve merqūm⃛(ve⃛-i merqūm), ‘And [if] the above-mentioned⃛’ (Süleymaniye Library, MS Ṣehit Ali Paşa 2867, fol. 11b: fetvā of Abu 'I-Su'ūd).

68 topkapi Sarayi Library, MS Hazine 1650, folios 9b–10a.

69 For an exception see Süleymaniye Library, MS Fatih 2419, No. 62.

70 e.g. Topkapi Sarayi Archives, E 12078, No. 5.

71 e.g. Istanbul University Library, MS T 2088, folios 4a and 81a.

72 e.g. Arṣiv kilavuzu, II, Doc. 22.

73 The short prayer is omitted in the signature on the oldest original Ottoman fctvās known, those of Shaykh al-Islām Meḥmed [Shams al-Dīn] a;-Femārī in the reign of Murād II (Istanbul University Library, MS T 2088, folios 79a–80b, 81b; 'Ilmīye Sālnāmesi, 323–6), as wee as in those of Kemālpashazāde and 'Abd al-Qādir Čelebi ('Ilmīye Sālnāmesi, 347–54, 365–6).

74 But see the signature of an early Shaykh al-Islām, 'Alī al-‘Arabī al-muftī’, ('Ilmīye Sālnāmesi, 340).

75 It was quite common for a müderris to perform the functions of a muftī.

76 see 'Ilmīye Sānāmesi, 504, 540, 543, 544–5, 549, 556–7, 558–9, 562, 564; Topkapi Sarayi Archives, E 12076 (fetvā of 'Ömer Khulūṣī, possibly issued in 1812).

77 Ilmiye teșkilÂti, 204.

78 A comparison of several such fetv0101;s ('Ilmiye Sālnāmesi, 544–5, 548–, 556–7), however, raises some doubt whether this is so.

79 Encycl. of Islam, second ed., s.v. ‘Fatw0101;’.

80 e.g. 'Ilmīye Sālnāmesi, 504 (Ergin, 717 foot); 'Ilmiye Sālnāmesi, 543 (Ergin, 719 top right) (where the reply and the signature may have been written by the person that wrote the question).

81 Tableau général, II 284Google Scholar.

82 Staatsverfassung, II, 391Google Scholar.

83 e.g. plate I; Konyali, 60, 79, 109.

84 Süleymaniye Library, MS Șehit Ali Pașa 2867, fol. 11a.

85 cf. 'Ilmīye Sālnāmesi, 386–92.

86 Istanbul University Library, MS T 2088, folios 7b, 57a. 79a.

87 For declarations of consent to a fetvā by other muftīs see also Hurgronje, C. Snouck, Verspreide Geschriften, II, Bonn and Leipzig, 1923, 429Google Scholar.

88 See also Ḥüseyn, Hezārfenn, Telkhīs al-beyān fī qavānīn-i Āl-i 'Osmān, Bibl. Nationale, Paris, MS Ancient fonds turc 40, fol. 138aGoogle Scholar.

89 e.g. Uzunçarşili, , Ilmiye teşkilâti, Plate XVIGoogle Scholar, left; Topkapi Sarayi Archives, E 12076 ('Ömer Khulūṣī Efendi on making peace with Russia).

90 e.g. 'Ilmīye Sālnāmesi, 340 top (quoting from Sūra XVII, v, 8).

91 cf. Horster, 20. Selle (18, No. 14; 19, No. 16; 26, No. 16; etc.) erroneously considers a number of such references as separate fetvās.

92 Archives, Topkapi Sarayi, Balikesir sicilli, vol. IIGoogle Scholar, fol. 71a.

93 Synonymous expressions used in the same fermān are naqi-i sher'i (or naql-i kitābi or manqūl 'anhi) yazmak.

94 Konyali, 60, 79; Istanbul University Library, MS T 2112 and Dubrovnik Archives, Acta Turcarum, C 10 (many examples).

95 The document is found in Süleymaniye Library, MS Ṣehit Ali Paşa 2867, fol. 84a.

96 See Sijill-i 'Osmānī, III, 351.

97 Mejdī, Terj00FC;me-i Shaqāyiq-i Nu'mānīye, Istanbul, 1269, 517.

98 e.g., 'Ilmīye Sālnāmesi, 363 foot, 382. See also the copies of Arabic fetvās in Horster, 55, 11. 10–15; 59, 11. 12–18; Selle, 61, No. 3; 66–7, No. 1; etc.

99 e.g. Konyali, 109.

100 e.g. ‘Aṭā’‛, 187 (text of a Persian fetvā in verse by Abu 'l-Su'ūd); Istanbul University Library, MS T 4401, No. 123; Yeňishehirli 'Abdullāh, , Bahjat al-fatāwā, Istanbul, 1266, 155–6Google Scholar.

101 D'Ohsson, II, 266; Hammer, , Staatsver fassung, II, 377Google Scholar.

102 Mejdī, 305; d'Ohsson, II, 266–7.

103 Hezārfenn, Paris MS, fol. 137b.

104 The original letter, addressed to the Governor of Kütahya (i.e. the province of Anadoll), is preserved in Süeymaniye Library, MS Șehit Ali Pașa 2865, pp. 93–4.

105 ‘Aṭā’ī, 185–6; Hezārfenn, Paris MS, fol. 138a.

106 For offical requests for fetvās see below.

107 Hezārfenn, Paris MS, fol. 137b. The relevant passage, which is somewhat faulty, has been published in Uzunçarșih, İlmiye teșkilâti, 196, n. 2. Its beginning should read (according to t h e Hezārfenn MS in S. Marco Library, Venice, MS Orientali 91, fol. 76a): Qānūn-i fetvā — Müsteftīler mesā'il müsevvidlere yazdirub mübeyyiżler. …For later periods see Berki, A. H., İslâm șeriatinde kaza…tarihi ve iftâ müessesesi, Ankara, 1962, 83–4Google Scholar.

108 On this section of the fetvākhāne see Pakalin, M. Z., Osmanli tarih deyimleri ve terimleri sīzlüǧüu, Istanbul, 1946–1956, II, 782Google Scholar.

109 Walsh (Encycl. of Islam, second ed., s.v. ‘Fatwā’) says instead that the mümeyyiz examined the draft ‘as to correctness of presentation’. This may be an error, possibly caused by Rycault (see below, p. 52, n. 146), who in lieu of mübeyyiż writes ‘Mumeiz, or he who copies or transcribes the question fair’.

110 i.e. the fair copy with the rough draft?

111 In the early twentieth century no muqābeleji is listed among the officials of the fetvā odasi ('Ilmīye Sālnāmesi, 140–2).

112 On the registration of fetvās issued by Shaykh al-Islāms see below.

113 For an oral fetvā of the Shaykh al-Islām himself by order of the Sultan see Hammer, , GOR, IV, 363Google Scholar.

114 'Ilmīye Sālnāmesi, 141; Pakalin, II, 782; Berki, 84.

115 Berki, 84.

116 Heidborn, A., Manuel de droit public et administratif de l'Empire Ottoman, I, Vienna and Leipzig, 1908, 269Google Scholar.

117 Mehmed Vâmik Șükrü Altinbaș, Fetvā eminleri, MS in the Diyanet İșteri Bașkanhǧi, Ankara, which has begun to publish this work in its journal, DlB Dergisi, II, 10, 1963Google Scholar.

118 Na–ImS, Ta–rikh, Istanbul, 1147, II, 424.

119 'Ilmīye Sālnāmesi, 140.

120 D'Ohsson, II, 260; Düstūr, iv, 76, § 1 (Niẓāmnāme for the fetvākhāne, of 13 Muḥarram 1292/19 February 1875).

121 'Ilmīye Sālnāmesi, 140–2. Qāḍīs were often appointed from their ranks (e.g. Jerīde-i 'Ilmīye, No. 6, end of 1332/1914, 427).

122 [Sir Porter, James], Observations on the religion…of the Turks, London, 1771, 144Google Scholar.

123 See also Hammer, , Staatsverfassung, II, 377Google Scholar for the early nineteenth century. Similarly, the muftīs in certain provinces delegated this function to their amīn al-futyā (Gibb and Bowen, I, Pt. II, 137).

124 Konyah, 109.

125 Whereas theoretically a muftī was expected to read the question carefully several times and to reply only after it had become perfectly clear to him (see al-Fatāwā al-'Ālamgīrīya, Cairo, 1323, III, 379Google Scholar).

126 Tableau général, V, 267Google Scholar.

127 op. cit. (above, p. 47, n. 107), 84.

128 Copies, with a number of variants, are found in Topkapi Sarayi Library, MS Hazine 1181, folios 95b–97a, and in Sϋlleymaniye Library, MS Esat Efendi 1017, folios 95b–96b and MS Haci Beşir Ağa 656, fol. 235a–b (previously fol. 246a-b), the last being the best version. For a much shortened version see Istanbul University Library, MS A 1496, fol. 142b.

129 Shāh Meḥmed b. Khurrem was the son-in-law of Abu '1-Su'ūd's son (see 'AṠā'ī, 137).

130 'Abd al-Qādir Shaykhī, a disciple of Abu '1-Su'ūd and, later, Shaykh al-Islām (ibid., 327).

131 Ma'lūlzāde Meḥmed, Abu '1-Su'ūd's son-in-law, who eventually became Shaykh al-Islām ('Ilmīye Sālnāmesi, 399–400).

132 Such as harār for ghirār[a] ‘haircloth sack’.

133 Such as dezgāh (modern tezgāh) for destgāh ‘work-bench’, ‘counter’.

134 cf. Shaw, S. J., Ottoman Egypt in the age of the French Revolution, Cambridge, Mass., 1964,176Google Scholar.

135 cf. Heyd, U., ‘Kānūn and shar'a in old Ottoman criminal justice’, Proceedings of the Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, III, 1, 1967, 11–12Google Scholar.

136 The two last-mentioned classes of officials are often accused by Ottoman ‘ulamā’ of oppressive and illegal acts (cf. Selle, 33, No. 5; 34, No. 10).

137 cf. Snouck Hurgronje (see above, p. 44, n. 87), II, 428.

138 Heidborn (see above, p. 47, n. 116), I, 268, n. 201.

139 Riḍā, Muḥammad Rashțd, Ta'nkh al-Ustādh … Muhammad 'Abduh, I, Cairo, 1350/1931, 646Google Scholar.

140 Jerīde-i 'Ilmīye, No. 4, Shawwāl 1332/1914, 155–7.

141 See the preface of the fetvā emini (later Shaykh al-Islām), Esīrī Meḥmed Efendi, to his selection of fetvās of Shaykh al-Islām Zekerīyāzāde Yaḥyā (Grignaschi, op. cit. above, p. 35, n. 4, 284).

142 Jerīde-i 'Ilmīye, No. 26, 1334/1916, 656.

143 cf. al-Jawzīya, Ibn Qayyim, I'ldm al-muwaqqi'īn, Delhi, 1314, II, 262Google Scholar; al-Fatāwā al- 'Ālamgīrīya, Cairo, 1323, III, 380Google Scholar.

144 See al-Fatāwā al-Bazzāzīya, in the margin of al-Fatāwā al-'Ălamgīrīya, v, Būlāq, 1310, 49.

145 Mejdī, 305.

146 Hezārfenn, Paris MS, folios 137b–138a (two akčes to the mϋsevvid and five to the mϋbeyyiŽ); Uzunçarşih, llmiye teşkilāti, 197 (according to an unpublished qānūnnāme, two akčes to the fetvā emīni and five to the mϋsevvid, mϋbeyyiŽ, muqābeleji, kātib, and mϋvezzi'); Rycault, P., The history of the present state of the Ottoman Empire, fourth ed., book n, ch. v, London, 1675, 197Google Scholar (five akčes to the mϋsevvid, two to the mϋbeyyiŽ (see above p. 47, n. 109) and one to the keeper of the Shaykh al-Islām's seal).

147 Česhmīzāde (see next note) calls them mϋsevvidīn but defines their duties as taḥrīr, tesvīd, tebyīŽ, and tevzī'.

148 Kϋtϋkoğlu, B. (ed.), Çeṣmī-zâde tarihi, Istanbul, 1959, 67–8Google Scholar; Sham'dānīzāde, Murī al-tawārīkh, Bayezit Library, MS Bayezit 5144, fol. 456b.

149 D'Ohsson, II, 267; Thornton, T., The present state of Turkey, London, 1809, I, 194Google Scholar.

150 Hammer, , Staatsverfassung, II, 377Google Scholar.

151 Ubicini, A., Lettres sur la Turquie, I, Paris, 1853, 83 (referring t o Ottoman muftīs in general)Google Scholar.

152 White, C., Three years in Constantinople, London, 1846, II, 166Google Scholar.

153 Porter (see above, p. 48, n. 122), 144.

154 D'Ohsson, II, 284; repeated in Hammer, , Staatsverfassung, II, 390Google Scholar.

155 Gibb and Bowen, I, Pt. II, 137.

156 Seyāḥatnāme, III, 429 (Edirne); IV, 175 (Van).

157 Russell, A., The natural history of Aleppo, London, 1794, I, 321Google Scholar.

158 Finn, J., Stirring times, London, 1878, I, 176Google Scholar.

159 Lane, E. W., The modern Egyptians, ch. iv (Everyman's Library, London and New York, 1936, 117–18)Google Scholar.

160 ibid., 116, n. 3.

161 ibid., 121. See also Kremer, A. von, Aegypten, Leipzig, 1863, II, 73Google Scholar.

162 cf. al-Fatāwā al-'Ālamgīrīya, Cairo, 1323, III, 379Google Scholar (wa-lā yajib al-iftā' fī-mā lam yaqa'); TashkÖprülüzāde, , Mawḍū'āt al-'ulūm, Istanbul, 1313, I, 90Google Scholar.

163 e.g. Kātib, Čelebi, Mīzān al-haqq fi ikhtiyār al-aḥaqq, Istanbul, 1280, 11–12, 136–7Google Scholar.

164 Bayezit Library, MS Veliyüddin 3216, fol. 73a–b.

165 Diyanet Işleri Başkanhği Library, MS 3553, fol. 332a.

166 'Ilmīye Sālnāmesi, 451, 531, 519; Istanbul University Library, MS T 4401, No. 44.

167 See Juynboll, T. W., Homdbuch des islāmischen Gesetzes, Leiden and Leipzig, 1910, 55Google Scholar.

168 White, II, 166.

169 Many Grand Muftīs of Egypt, on the other hand, are said to have refused to deliver fetvās to private persons (RiḈa, Rashīd, Ta'rīkh al-Ustādh, III, Cairo, 1324, 279)Google Scholar.

170 See Topkapi Sarayi Archives, E 12079. Copies of anonymous fetvās of this kind are preserved in beautifully written manuscripts, probably copied for the Sultan himself (e.g. Topkapi Sarayi Library, MSS Hazine 1650 and Bağdat 107).

171 D'Ohsson, II, 266; Hammer, , Staatsverfassung, II, 377.Google Scholar

172 e.g. Barkan, Ö. L., Osmanli imparatorluğunda ziraî ekonominin hulcuhî ve malî esaslari, I, hanunlar, Istanbul, 1943, p. 209, § 14Google Scholar; Topkapi Sarayi Archives, B 12079, No. 3.

173 D'Ohsson, II, 261; Uzunçarşih, , Ilmiye teşkilâti, 198, n. 1.Google Scholar

174 e.g. Fekete, Einführung, p. lxiii, col. 2.

175 e.g. Kemālpashazāde, Fetāvā, Belediye Library, MS M. Cevdet O 44 end; 'Alī Efendi, Fetāvā, Aya Sofya Library, MS 1572, folios 493b–496b; 'Abdullāh, Yerjishehirli, Bahjat al-fatāwā, Istanbul, 1266, 640–3Google Scholar. See also the selection of fetvās on agrarian matters called Qānūnnāme-i Üskübī (Atif Ef. Library, Istanbul, MS 1163, folios 12b ffGoogle Scholar.).

176 Mittī Tetebbu'lar Mejmū'asi, I, 516Google Scholar; Bayezit Library, MS Bayezit 4789, folios 18b, 21a, etc.

177 See Horster, op. eit. (above, p. 35, n. 3). For a discussion of t h i s work see my forthcoming Studies in old Ottoman criminal law.

178 ‘Aṭa’ī, 185; Hezārfenn, Paris MS, fol. 138a.

179 See the Niẓāmnāme of Sha'bān 1332/July 1914 in Jerīde-i 'Ilmīye, No. 4, Shawwāl 1332/1914, p. 156, § 4.

180 As well as local custom, provided, at least theoretically, that it is not contrary to the sharī'a (Tashköprülüzāde, , Matvḍū'āt, I, 91Google Scholar).

181 See Meḥmed, Pīr, Ẓahīr al-Quḍāt, Süleymaniye Library, MS Esat Efendi 852, fol. 3bGoogle Scholar.

182 e.g. Dubrovnik Archives, Ada Turcarum, C 10, Nos. 19 and 44.

183 cf. Heyd, ‘ḳānūn and sharū'a’ (above, p. 50, n. 135), 8–9, 12–14.

184 Jerīde-i 'Ilmīye, No. 4, Shawwāl 1332/1914, 156.

185 D'Ohsson, II, 284; Hammer, , Staatsverfassung, II, 391Google Scholar.

186 See al-'Ayntābī, Mehmed Fīqhī, Risāla fī Adab al-mufiī, Library of Dil ve Tarih-Coğrafya Fakültesi, Ankara, MS İsmail Saib 757, fol. 12a–b.Google Scholar

187 See, for instance, Selle, 63, No. 10 (for olan in the question read olana ?).

188 See Ubicini (above, p. 53, n. 151), I, 83.

189 Einführung, p. lxiii, col. 2.

190 Nuruosmaniye Library, Istanbul, MS 1967, folios 21b and 25a (fetvās of Kemālpashazāde); Istanbul University Library, MS T 2112, fol. 44b (fetvā of Shaykh Meḥmed). See also Selle, 17, No. 2; 63, No. 10.

191 Encycl. of Islam, second ed., s. v. ‘Fatwā’.

192 cf. d'Ohsson, II, 261; Jerīde-i 'Ilmīye, No. 4, Shawāl 1332/1914, pp. 155–6, § 3.