INTRODUCTION (4) (Mukaddime)

In Modern English

Şihâbeddin Ahmed bin Arabşâh-ı Rûmî says in his work Acâ'ibü'l-Makdûr fî Nevâ'ib-i Timûr (The Oddities of Fate in the Calamities of Timur): "Sultan Mehmed and Musa Çelebi, princes of Sultan Bayezid Han I, were in the Amasya fortress called 'Harşene'; this fortress is famous for its great height and is mentioned for its strength."

Âsım Efendi says in the Tercüme-i Kâmûs: Harşene is read with the letter dotted shın and on the pattern "hardele"; it is a town in the land of Rum. In the book written on words that passed into Arabic, Tırâzu'l-Müzehheb, it is recorded as the town of Amasya in Anatolia today. It took its name from its founder "Harşene son of Rûm son of Sâm son of Noah (peace be upon him)." Because "Seyfüddevle-i Hamdânî" campaigned against it in the past, "Mütenebbî" praised him with an ode. This couplet is from that ode:

(The Arabic couplet has this meaning: "At last he encamped in the outskirts of Harşene; the Rum, the crosses and the churches were thrown into disarray because of him.")

In the El-Aylemü'z-Zâhir Mustafa Cenâbî Efendi, in the Câmiü'd-Düvel Derviş Ahmed Efendi, and in the preface of the Tehyîcü'l-Gusûn el-Hâc Hızır Efendi say plainly that "Harşene" is the old name of Amasya and its fortress. In the Târîh-i Âl-i Dânişmend, however, "Harcene" is said in place of "Harşene" and it is written that this is the old name of Amasya.

According to the conclusion drawn from these historical proofs, "Harşene" was the name of the person who had the Amasya Fortress built and became the special name of the fortress. The city, the commercial port and source of happiness of this fortress, was called "Amasya"; since "Harşene" was the center and protector of the city, the two were called by each other's name. This city and fortress complete each other and are inseparable. In the books Târîhü'l-Ümem and Ikdü'l-Cümân both the names "Amasya" and "Harşene" occur; from following the events it is understood that the fortress was called "Harşene" and the city "Amasya."

The "Harşene" shown as founder of this fortress, in another pronunciation "Harcene," has not had his lineage left unclear as in the case of "Amas"; his father and grandfathers are also mentioned. But among the historians there is disagreement in recording them. This "Harşene" is recorded in the Mu'cemü'l-Buldân as "Rûm son of İlikan son of Sâm son of Noah (peace be upon him)," in the el-Kâmil as "Rûm son of Esved son of Sâm," and in the el-Kâmûs as "Rûm, son of Sâm's son." Although there is agreement on Harşene's father and disagreement on his grandfather, this genealogy is defective according to the genealogists.

For according to the historians' records the spreading of Noah's children over the earth was about 670 years after the Flood. Even supposing that "Harşene" came and built this fortress immediately after the spreading, it cannot be possible to link him to His Excellency Noah through only three or two generations within seven centuries. Since all the genealogists say that Sâm son of Noah had no sons named İlikan, Esved and Rûm, it is beyond doubt that there has been Arabicization, corruption and dropping of generations in the names of "Harşene's" fathers and grandfathers.

Although the names Harşene, Rûm, İlikan and Esved have been Arabicized and corrupted, to which people they belong is hardly known. But when examined and analyzed, the supposition that they are of the Turks, like "Amas," gains great strength.

For the method of Arabicization practiced in the Arabic language consists of transforming the letters and pronunciation of words passing into Arabic, without changing their essence, putting them into Arabic word patterns and fitting them to the Arab mouth. If these names are analyzed and their roots examined according to this method, it is understood that they consist of Turkish names. It is a known thing that in Arabicization the "deaf kefs" are turned into qaf, the cims and sins into shın, the shıns into sin, the qafs into ha, and the pes into fe. The originals of the names "Hocend, Cürcân, Cûcân, Kâşân, Kûmes, Hartenc, Fergana," that is, "Kûgend, Gürgân, Kûçân, Kâsân, Kûmeş, Karteng and Parkanc," are recorded in history. Based on this rule it is understood that the original of "Harşene" too was "Karasanc" and "Karasan."

Texier's writing "Karisini" in place of "Harşene" confirms this original.

Théodore Reinach, one of the scholars of antiquities, says in his work Pontus Hükûmeti (The Government of Pontus), relaying from the writings of the ancient historians Herodotus and Xenophon: "Before the government of Mithridates was established in the land of Pontus, the peoples 'Halib-Salib,' 'Tibar,' 'Mosnik-Bozok,' 'Makron' and 'San-Çan' lived there."

We wrote above, relaying from the Mir'âtü'l-İber, that these peoples were Turks. The "Sans" are Turks known in history as "Zans-Çans," and it is known that the city of "Zanit-Canik" is their work; that "Karasan," who built the "Amasya Fortress," was also their ancestor is a very strong possibility. The account "Harcene" strengthens still further that the name is "Karaçan."

On this basis, the name "Rûm" shown as Harşene's father, in view of the name "İlikan" shown as his father, is thought not to be among Greek names but to be a Turkish name. In that case "Rûm" is a name shortened by cutting off its beginning and must have come from the name "Barûm," "İlikan" from "İli Han" in its Arabicized form, and "Esved" from "Usvet." Since the ancestor of the Turks is "Japheth son of Noah," the name "Sâm" has been corrupted and its original is probably "Süli" or "Sülim." According to this probability, quite a few generations are dropped between "Sülim," counted as "Sâm," and His Excellency Noah.

If it is accepted that this genealogy recorded and arranged in the Arabic histories is not wholly false but wrong, and will to some extent determine the national identity of the peoples who lived in antiquity in the land of Pontus, the historical value of these genealogical records will be understood.

On the founder of this fortress there is a disagreement between East and West amounting almost to opposition. That the Arab historians speak with one tongue in saying that the founder of this fortress was "Harşene" has been understood from the historical records relayed above. The European historians, however, counting the first half of antiquity among unknown ages and regarding every kind of historical information belonging to that period as tales of the ancients, have in part attributed the old monuments in this country to the Pontic kings, while some researchers, hesitating, have looked to still earlier times.

Among researchers, Texier says in his work on Asia Minor: "This fortress was built by Mithridates, who reigned here, two and a half centuries before the birth of Jesus." Vital Cuinet (Könye) in his work Asya'da Türkiye (Turkey in Asia) also relays and confirms this view. Thus the view of East and West on this matter diverges. There is no doubt that this divergence will be resolved by the old monuments to be found as a result of the new studies being carried out today in Asia Minor on the old "Hittite-Hıtay" state.

This fortress is long from east to west; its north sides are level, its south sides low, and its surroundings are enclosed by a stone wall about fifteen meters high. Its east side is lower than the west, its west side higher; its top is generally flat and quadrangular. The height of the west sides exceeds the east by about twenty meters.

The fortress is counted as a quarter; it has two towers, two gates, a palace, a mosque, a madrasa, a lodge (zaviye), a soup kitchen (imaret), a well and two bathhouses. One of the towers faces east, the other north, and both are in high places. One of the gates faces the Şamlılar Quarter, that is, northeast, the other the Hızır Paşa Quarter, that is, west; these stand today. The gate facing north is very large, made of stone and ornamented; although there are inscriptions carved on its high arch, since they are in Latin letters no one could be found who could read them.

On the east side of the fortress, on a flat place near the gate, there is the ruin of a mosque; half of its mihrab and about one meter of the foundation of its minaret are seen. It has been seen in old records that the site of this mosque before the conquest was the "Endere Church." This church was built by the governor of Pontus "Andronikos Komnenos"; since the Christians living in the fortress at the time of the conquest were settled in the city of Amasya, it was converted into a mosque, and because it was damaged several times by earthquakes, the emir of the pilgrims (hacılar emiri) "Şemseddin Şâdgeldi Paşa" had a masonry mosque rebuilt around 774 [1372-73] and a bathhouse to its west.

It has been understood from old registers that near this bathhouse "Şeyh Bahâeddin Muhammed Halvetî" built a Halvetî lodge (zaviye) in 847 [1443-44], "Sultan Eretna Beyzâde Alâeddin Ali Paşa" a guesthouse, and the fortress warden (dizdar) "Kara Ahmed Ağa" in 890 [1485] a madrasa near the mosque called "Dizdâriye," and that his son "Mustafa Paşa" added a school in 917 [1511-12] and arranged their endowments.

From the line of the west-facing gate onward, the west side is a lofty palace; "Sultan Kılıç Arslan IV" resided there. Its regular arrangement is understood from its ruin. It has a large cellar and an elegant bathhouse; the bathhouse is buried in the earth up to the level of its dome. The fortress's dungeons are generally on the east side; the most fearsome is in the middle, in a hollow place at the level of the stream that descends to the Lower Palace.

The north side of this fortress leans on a higher mountain; this mountain is called "Kırklar Dağı" (Mount of the Forty). In the old documents obtained, written in 682 [1283-84], this mountain is seen recorded under the name "Cebel-i Erba'în" (Mount of the Forty). According to this record the name "Kırklar Dağı" is very old, and a widespread account among the people is thought to have given rise to this name. The widespread account is this: when Dânişmend Gazi besieged the Amasya fortress, since the defenders resisted greatly, forty of the Islamic braves stuck candles on the horns of several flocks of sheep they had gathered on this mountain and, toward dawn, drove them down from the mountain toward the fortress in military formation; the defenders, seeing this, thought a great relief force had arrived and opened the fortress gate, and the forty braves entered the fortress without losing any time, forced the defenders to surrender, and so conquered the fortress.

Vustâda Cilanbolu dahi hayreti câlib
Her bir tarafında görülür türlü garâ'ib
Mecrâ vü mesâbî de ne ma'lûm u ne gâ'ib
Âbı sayılır efdal-i âbâr-ı Amasya

(In the middle Cilanbolu too draws amazement; all kinds of oddities are seen on every side. The course of its water and the place where it pours out are neither known nor lost; its water is counted the best of the wells of Amasya.)

In the middle of this fortress, on a high place level with the great gate, there is a water well known today by the name "Cilanbolu." It runs from south to north. One descends by about a hundred and fifty steps. It is a deep and very fearsome well. Its mouth is a wide round hole about eight meters in diameter, and the same width continues down to where the water is.

The mouth side is earth and, although built up with masonry, as one descends it is seen to be carved from a single solid rock. Where the water is, it is in the form of a round chamber carved from stone; the bed of the water is earth, its surroundings stone. Its water is very bright and plentiful; it is light and of pleasant taste. Though it appears still and motionless, as one looks carefully a very slow turning movement is sensed.

Although its south side is at most an arshin deep, its north side, that is, the foot of the rock, is very deep. Though it is hardly known where it comes from and where it flows to, it is sensed that it wells up from the west side and flows toward the east side. The curiosity to learn its depth has drawn the curious to many deadly attempts.

Mustafa Vâzıh Efendi says in his Amasya Tarihi: "To learn the depth of this water, Caniklizâde Mikdâd Ahmed Paşa, mutasarrıf of Amasya, hired a man, also paying the sharia blood money (diyet) in advance, and lowered him there. The diver entered the water and disappeared at the foot of the rock. He is still going."

Charles Texier says in his work Küçük Asya (Asia Minor): "The famous traveler Hamilton, one of the English researchers, when he came to Amasya and toured and made researches in the places worth examining, hired men to understand this well, went down with torches, and first understood that it was a fortress passage, and then, coming upon a water source, understood that it was a well."

But judging by these accounts, one must accept the old account circulating among the people. It is said: "This was formerly made as a water well specific to the fortress; water flowing from the 'Karaman Dağı' side was brought here, its course was brought down to the river from the east side and skillfully hidden." It is said that the "Leğen Kaya" above the Kuş Köprüsü is the place where this water channel ends.

For according to Vâzıh Efendi's account, the body of the drowned diver, which should certainly have surfaced, did not surface; the large rocks and stones thrown there up to now have disappeared in the water. If they were gathered together they would fill the well to its mouth. Where so many stones went, and where they came from, is not known. But the water stands as it was before.

Since "Mehmed Kemâl Bey," mutasarrıf of Amasya, preferred this water to others and used it, all the officials and notables of Amasya at that time continued to drink from this water. This water is called "Cilanbolu Suyu," and the well "Cilanbolu."

No correct information could be found on the name "Cilanbolu" and how the well got this name. But as deduced from the name "Cilanbolu," it may be that a person named "Cilan" once repaired the fortress and gave it the name "Cilanbolis," that is, "City of Cilan," but this name did not become widespread and remained only as the special name of the well.

South of this "Cilanbolu," above the stream above the Lower Palace, on the left side there is another deep well. This well is carved from a single rock from east to west and is descended by ninety steps. At its bottom, from south to north, there is a way carved in the form of a water channel, eight feet wide and fifteen feet deep, going toward Cilanbolu. Its south side goes toward two large caves adjoining each other; since both sides are filled with stones, what it is could not be fully understood. But judging from the seepages seen on its north side, it is probable that there is a water channel flowing from the Cilanbolu well to the Lower Palace. Although the stone steps of the upper well are filled with earth and lost, the steps of this well stand as if made a year ago. Its construction and width are also similar to Cilanbolu.

Bir merkez-i mahfûz kralı idi evvel
Pon şâhları kâ'id-i taht oldu müselsel
Romalılara etdi yedi harb-i mükemmel
Bunlar ile ma'lûm olur etvâr-ı Amasya

(It was formerly a protected royal center; the shahs of Pontus sat on the throne one after another. It made seven great wars against the Romans; the states Amasya has passed through are known by these.)

This region, which was the ruling center of the lands of Cappadocia and Pontus, recalls with great eloquence, through its old monuments that amaze those who look at them, the period of rise it saw in ancient times and the calamities of decline it suffered in recent times. It is famous that the Pontic kings reigned in this fortress, which was the seat of their government; most of its remaining works are the traces of building left by this government.

The origin of the Pontic rulers, their government in Amasya, their relations with the Romans, Mithridates VII's fighting the Romans seven times and the end of these will be told in the "First Chapter." Since Amasya's fame in general history began from the time when they reigned, their historical situation has been recorded.

Bu şâhların dahmesi olmuşdu mağârât
Ecsâdını hep sonra duhûr eyledi târât
Bir vakt rehâbîne olup cây-ı riyâzât
Şimdi ise boş mahzen-i ekdâr-ı Amasya

(The caves had been the tombs of these shahs; times later plundered all their bodies. For a time it became a place of austerities for monks; now it is the empty storehouse of Amasya's sorrows.)

The caves seen at the foot of this fortress, that is, on its south side, are shown as the tombs of these rulers. In the Amasya valley these caves number twelve: five above the "Kızlar Sarayı," two above the Saray Quarter, one level with the "Meydan Köprüsü," two on the north face of the "Yassı Kaya," one at "Ahur Önü," and one on the "Ziyaret" road, known as "Aynalı Mağara."

Ahmed Midhat Efendi says in the Mufassal Kurûn-ı Cedîde: "That the artificial caves carved into the rocks near the city were made as tombs of the Pontic kings is found in the history books even today."

Field Marshal Moltke says in his work Şark Hâtırâtı, in which he visited, viewed and examined Amasya: "But the sight that arouses the most amazement is the stone chambers. Imagine a chamber forty feet long and wide and sixty feet deep. Inside this chamber there is a house. Imagine in this stone a hollow fifteen feet square and a window or a door. This granite house must surely have been made as a tomb. Five of these chambers are adjoining one another. Between them there are passages and staircases; all of them, down to their railings, are carved from a single stone. Without doubt these were the tombs of the kings of the Black Sea (Pontus).

The decorations of these tombs, which were probably made more than two thousand years ago, appear as clearly as if engraved yesterday. The style of the whole, with its pictures, is Egyptian work.

I think these stone chambers were once under a covering. But it is thought that this covering was later destroyed and the tombs removed. As for the stone chambers, they are in a condition to defy time and the ages for longer."

Texier says in his work Küçük Asya'nın Eski Eserleri, Tarihi ve Coğrafyası: "Among the histories of the place where Amasya stands, the most perfect is Strabo's history. Detailed information about the ruins recorded and existing today can be obtained thanks to this history. But these ruins are silent before the scholars of antiquities. To which periods these caves belong is not known. With Strabo we too say 'Tombs of the Kings.' But the tombs of which kings?

Are they the tombs of the Pontic kings, who ruled from 306 to 64 BCE? Which is the oldest? To whom does it belong? An inscription over the door of one shows that this is the tomb of a great seer, one of the great seers as powerful as kings. Who is this? Are these old monuments before the time of Alexander, or after? It is not possible to answer these on the basis of history."

Besides these twelve caves, there are also caves, large and small, outside the Amasya valley. Since the caves inside Amasya are more than the number of the Pontic kings, a part of these caves is thought to have been carved before the Pontic kings. It is widely told that before the exalted Islamic conquest their bodies were removed from the caves and the caves became a place of austerity (riyazet, discipline of the self) for Christian priests.

In the exalted Islamic period these caves remained empty. In 833 [1429-30] the "Kızıl Koca Oğulları," who engaged in banditry in Amasya and the Anatolian provinces, when caught and arrested by the governor of Amasya "Yörgüç Paşa," were imprisoned in these caves and killed with straw smoke. Again, when the men of "Karayazıcı Abdülhalim of Urfa," who rose in revolt in 1008 [1599-1600], burned Amasya in 1011 [1602-03], very many notables and eşraf took refuge in these caves and protected their wealth here.

Etdi ümerâ kal'ayı kerrât ile tecdîd
Selçûk-neseb Şâh Kubâd eyledi teşyîd
Lâkin bunu da kerr-i zamân eyledi tebdîd
Etmişdi vatan burcunu dizdâr-ı Amasya

(The emirs renewed the fortress time after time; Shah Kubad of Seljuk lineage strengthened it. But the turn of time scattered this too; the dizdar of Amasya had made the tower of the fortress his homeland.)

The fortress, just as it was repaired by the Roman government after the destruction by the famous Roman general Pompey, was destroyed during the events of "Mardus Fokas" (Bardas Phokas) in the Byzantine Empire period and then rebuilt. In the exalted Islamic period it was repeatedly repaired first by "Melik Dânişmend Ahmed Gazi," around 540 [1145-46] by "Seljuk Sultan Mesud," and around 618 [1221-22] by "Sultan Alâeddin Keykubad."

Since it was badly damaged in the earthquake of 718 [1318-19], it was repaired by "Gümüşlüzâde Tâceddin Mahmud Çelebi," around 768 [1366-67] by "Şemseddin Şâdgeldi Paşa," after the earthquake of 818 [1415-16] by "Sultan Murad Han II," and in 918 [1512-13] by "Mustafa Bey," one of the beys of "Prince Sultan Ahmed"; since it was again damaged by an earthquake in 1079 [1668-69], it was rebuilt by "Hoca Ahmed Paşazâde Ali Bey" and Hakalalı "Silahdarzâde Yusuf Ağa."

The lower tower of this fortress facing the city was set aside for the residence of the dizdar beys and ağas who were guards of the fortress; their administration and zeamet lasted until 1255 [1839-40]. At the beginning of the conquest "Mübarek Gazi," one of the Danishmendid emirs, was dizdar of this fortress and guardian of the provincial center; many emirs such as "Emir Celâleddin Karatay" also served as dizdar.

At the beginning of the Ottoman period "Hasan Bey" was the fortress dizdar. The zeamets of the dizdars, to be taken from the tithe (öşür) of the villages of Moramul and Yağmur, rose from 13,000 to 33,000 akçe; among them arose beylerbeyis and beys such as Ahmed Paşa, Osman Paşa, Receb Paşa and Memi Bey. In the retinue of the dizdar ağas there were the fortress steward (kethüda), the fortress yamak, the fortress gatekeepers and garrison soldiers; in time of campaign these were the guards of the city. There were many cannon in the fortress; in 1248 [1832-33] one was left and the others removed, and in 1281 [1864-65] the famous "Ziya Paşa," mutasarrıf of Amasya, had the old cannon removed and a muzzle-loading cannon put in its place. This cannon was left in the room of the dizdar ağas, its front opened, and it came to be fired only on official and religious days. Because its site is high, the sound of the cannon reaches villages two hours away. From the beginning of Ramadan to the end of the festival the cannons are fired and the drums played. The gunners and drummers are salaried by the Amasya municipality and have an annual allowance.

Sağında bunun türbe-i Şirvânî-i Kâmil
Kandîl-i hüdâ feyz-i Hudâ nûr-ı fezâ'il
Yanında yatar Hazret-i Îsâ gibi fâzıl
Etrâfı bütün kümmel ü ahyâr-ı Amasya

(To the right of this is the tomb of the perfect Şirvânî; the lamp of guidance, the grace of God, the light of virtues. Beside him lies a man of merit like His Excellency Jesus; all around are the perfect and the good of Amasya.)

The tomb on the right side of this fortress, that is, to its northeast, is called "Şirvanlı Türbesi." Before Şirvânî İsmâil Sirâceddin Efendi was buried there, this place was called "Şamlılar Üstü." When his son, the former grand vizier "Mehmed Rüşdi Paşa," had the tomb built in 1284 [1867-68], it became known by this name. There is a mosque adjoining the tomb; its courtyard is wide and its structure elegant. In the courtyard of the tomb there is a fine mansion, with a şadırvan (ablution fountain) before it; its garden and view are very beautiful.

Although a certain amount was taken from the water flowing to the fountain of the Şamlılar Quarter, later the whole of the water was given to this tomb and cut off from the fountain. Inside the tomb are buried the son of the said sheikh, "Ahmed Hulûsi Efendi," one of the notable judges, and his son-in-law, the well-known scholar "el-Hâc Îsâ Efendi." The south and east sides of this tomb are a cemetery from end to end; here lie very many pious scholars and benevolent men of merit.

The north sides of the cemetery are the "Tatar Quarter"; above this quarter and the cemetery, and to the west and north of the tomb, are vineyards. These vineyards came into being after 1300 [1882-83]; although their air is healthy and their site beautiful, because they have no water they were called "Ahmak Bağları" (Fools' Vineyards). Some wits, adding three dots to the word "ahmak," said "Uçmak Bağları," meaning thereby "Vineyards of Paradise."

Solunda dahi makbere-i Hazret-i Cû'î
Feyzin buradır mebde'-i pür-zevk-i tulû'ı
Bulmuş buralar nâm-ı kerîmiyle şuyu'ı
Hakkâ buradır mecma'-ı esmâr-ı Amasya

(On its left too is the grave of His Excellency Cû'î; the delight-filled place of the rising of grace is here. These places have spread and become known through his precious name; truly it is here that the fruits of Amasya are gathered.)

The left side of the Upper Fortress, that is, its west, is the vineyards known as "Şeyh Cû'î." Among the people it is called "Cığcığı." In the upper part of these vineyards are the tomb of "Cemâleddin Mehmed Cû'î Çelebi," one of the famous sheikhs of the Mevlevî order, the Mevlevî lodge he had built in 817 [1414-15], and the village called by his name. The vineyards below are watered from the water the said sheikh brought to his village. Its water, village and field are waqf.

Since the beauty of these vineyards in the first happy days of spring is very famous, the notables of Amasya and the wealthy migrate here from the twentieth of April. Its air is fine, its cherries famous, its pavilions very elegant. That place is a source of spiritual pleasures and a gathering place for pleasant conversation.

For those who want to stroll and make merry in Amasya there are many picnic grounds and places of outing; their season begins in spring and lasts until the end of May. The first and foremost of these picnic grounds is these "Şeyh Cû'î Bağları." Next the "Ziyaret," "Kirazlıdere" and "Derbend" vineyards are also among the famous places of outing. The picnic grounds set aside for Fridays and for women are, in order, the places called "Şirvanlı," "Saraydüzü," "Çanaklar" and "Kaşık Pınarı."

Kelkis idi evvel buranın nâm-ı kadîmi
Tezyîn ediyor bahçesini bâd-ı nesîmi
Erbâb-ı tenezzüh alıyor feyz-i amîmi
Ezvâkı burada bulur efkâr-ı Amasya

(Kelkis was formerly the old name of this place; the sweet breeze adorns its garden. Those who stroll and make merry take abundant grace from here; the thoughts of Amasya find their pleasure here.)

It is written in the Şeyh Cû'î Waqf Deed that these vineyards were formerly known as "Kelkis" until the time of the late Şeyh Cû'î. In this place, which is mentioned in the Arabic histories by the name "Kalis," the said sheikh lived for a long time, and because he built and developed charitable works such as a mosque, Mevlevî lodge, school and tomb, these places became known in general by the name "Şeyh Cû'î" and the old name was forgotten.

Because the place where the northern and western mountains of Amasya join forms a circle resembling a bow, while the whole circumference of this bow was known by the old name "Kelkis," its middle gained fame under the name "Şeyh Cû'î." Because in the times of the Umayyad rulers "Velîd bin Abdülmelik" and "Hişâm bin Abdülmelik" and in the time of "Seyfüddevle-i Hamdânî" the Islamic braves attacked from this side, in the Arabic histories its name is recorded as "Kalis" and its vineyards as "Batn-ı Kalis" (the valley of Kalis). The bodies that come out within these vineyards recall that they are a memorial of wartime.

Mağrib tarafı kûh-ı refî'-i Karamânî
Olmuş eteği Akbilek'e cây-ı emânî
Tefsîr ile takvâda alem pîr-i zamânî
Kudsî-şiyem ü mefhar-i ethâr-ı Amasya

(Its west side is the lofty Karaman mountain; its foot has become for Akbilek a home of hopes. There lies the man known in exegesis and piety, the elder (pîr) of his time, of holy temper and the pride of the pure ones of Amasya.)

Notes and Research

Old Words in the Text

• mevsûm: named, marked
• ta'rîb / mu'arreb: Arabicizing a word / Arabicized
• tahrîf / muharref: corrupting / corrupted
• hazf: dropping, omission
• batn / butûn: generation / generations
• nessâbe: genealogist
• ism-i menhût: a name shortened by cutting off its head or a part
• esâtîr-i evvelîn: tales of the ancients
• mürtefi': high
• musanna': ornamented, artful
• ibârât-ı mahkûka: carved inscriptions
• kable'l-feth: before the conquest
• dârü'z-ziyâfe: guesthouse, soup kitchen
• dizdâr: fortress commander, warden
• ze'âmet: a revenue grant (dirlik) with income above 20,000 akçe
• a'şâr: tithe taxes
• neferât-ı müstahfeze: fortress garrison soldiers
• gavvâs: diver
• diyet-i şer'iyye: blood money paid in case of death according to the sharia
• tereşşuhât: seepages
• dahme: burial chamber, tomb
• riyâzet: hardship, fasting undertaken to discipline the self
• tahassun: taking refuge, protection
• mesîre / mütenezzih: place of outing
• erbâb-ı yesâr: wealthy people

The Name Harşene and Mütenebbî's Couplet

Hüsameddin begins this section with citations showing that the name of the Amasya fortress appears in Arabic sources as "Harşene." The first witness is İbn Arabşah. This Damascene historian's Arabic work Acâ'ibü'l-makdûr fî nevâ'ibi Tîmûr was probably completed in 1435 and tells of Timur's life and campaigns in a heavy, artful language. The work was translated into Turkish in 1698 by Nazmîzâde Murtaza under the title Târîh-i Timurlenk and was among the first books printed in Istanbul in 1729. İbn Arabşah's saying that Çelebi Mehmed was in the Amasya fortress agrees with known history: that in the first years of the fifteenth century Prince Mehmed, fleeing Timur's armies, took refuge in the Amasya fortress is also found in other sources. That the Amasya fortress is called "Harşena" or "Harşene Kalesi" today and that the mountain on which it stands bears the name Harşena Mountain shows that this old name lives on.

However, whether the "Harşene" in Mütenebbî's couplet is Amasya needs to be dwelt on. In Byzantine sources there was a fortress known as Kharsianon (Charsianon) and a military-administrative district (theme) attached to it. This fortress is in Cappadocia and is today matched with the ruins of Muşalikalesi in the Akdağmadeni district of Yozgat. The fortress is first mentioned in 638; the Arabs took it in 730, and through the following century it was a frontier fortress much contested in the Byzantine-Arab wars. The target of Seyfüddevle's raids was also this region: the Hamdanid emir plundered the regions of Lykandos and Kharsianon in 950, and in 960 took and plundered the fortress of Kharsianon. It is known that in the years when Mütenebbî was with Seyfüddevle he told of his Byzantine campaigns in his panegyrics. The phonetic closeness between the Arabic "Harşene" and Byzantine "Kharsianon," and the fact that Seyfüddevle's campaigns were directed to this region, suggest that the place mentioned in the couplet may be this Cappadocian fortress rather than Amasya. This is a conclusion we drew from the sources we examined; we could not find a study directly discussing which fortress the couplet belongs to. The relation between the Amasya fortress's bearing the name "Harşene" and the "Harşene" of the Arab geographers is therefore not as clear as Hüsameddin supposed.

Hüsameddin's Name Analyses

The author's analyses linking "Harşene" to "Karasan" or "Karaçan," "Rûm" to "Barum," "İlikan" to "İli Han," and "Sâm" to "Sülim" are a product of an outlook that grew stronger among Ottoman intellectuals at the beginning of the twentieth century and tried to link the ancient peoples of Anatolia to the Turkish line. Hüsameddin often relies on the Mir'âtü'l-İber on this subject. A linguistic or historical study supporting these matchings was not found in the sources we examined; they are the author's own interpretations. It is right for the reader to read these pages not as historical knowledge but as an interpretation reflecting the historical understanding of the age the author lived in. His observations on sound changes (such as Gürgân becoming Cürcân and Kûgend becoming Hocend), on the other hand, show the attention of a scholar who knows that Arabic fits foreign names to its own sound system.

The debate on the founder of the fortress has not been settled with a definite conclusion even today. In local records it is written that the fortress was built, according to the Arab historians, by the "Turkish ruler Karsan Han" and, according to the Western historians, by the Pontic king Mithridates; this dual narrative rests directly on Hüsameddin's book. For the construction of the inner fortress associated with Mithridates, around 250 BCE is given; this too corresponds to the date Texier gives as "two and a half centuries before the Common Era." Although Amasya is thought to have a past reaching back to the Hittite period, when and by whom the fortress was first founded is not known from documents. Hüsameddin's expectation that "Hittite studies will resolve this question" is in this respect a wish that remains valid.

The Fortress and Its Repairs

The list of repairs the author gives is repeated almost exactly in official records today: after 1075 Dânişmend Ahmed Gazi, in 1146 Mesud I, in 1222 Alâeddin Keykubad I, in 1319 Gümüşlüzâde Tâceddin Mahmud Çelebi, in 1369 Şâdgeldi Paşa, in the Ottoman period Murad II, in 1511 Mustafa Bey, emir of Prince Ahmed, and in 1669 Hoca Ahmed Paşazâde Ali Bey. These Gregorian dates are the equivalents of Hüsameddin's hijri dates; that is, the source of a significant part of present knowledge is again his book. It is also recorded that Seljuk Sultan Mesud I repaired the inner fortress in 1146, chose Amasya as his center, and had a mosque, madrasa, bathhouse and palace built in the inner fortress. The building Hüsameddin describes as "the palace where Kılıç Arslan IV resided" must be this Seljuk palace.

According to Ottoman records of the early sixteenth century, in the fortress there were a dizdar, a kethüda and fifty-seven garrison soldiers; in the inner part of the fortress there were mud-brick houses where the fortress officials lived. Every day, morning and evening, trumpets and drums were played from the fortress toward the city. This information shows how old a root there was to the custom, in Hüsameddin's own time, of firing cannon and playing drums at Ramadan and the festivals. Evliya Çelebi, who came to Amasya in 1640, writes that the fortress had forty-one towers, that inside it there were palaces, arsenals, provision stores and water cisterns, and that the underneath of the fortress is full of caves; he also notes that against the Celali attacks the city's rich hid their valuables in the fortress. From the eighteenth century the fortress lost its military importance and began to fall into ruin. Hüsameddin's saying that the dizdarship lasted until 1255 [1839-40] corresponds to the period when with the Tanzimat the old fortress organization was liquidated.

The date 1281 [1864-65] given for Ziya Paşa's having a cannon placed in the fortress agrees with the Amasya mutasarrıflık of the well-known poet of the Young Ottomans. Halil İnalcık, introducing Kenan Akyüz's publication of documents on this subject, writes that Ziya Paşa's mutasarrıflık in Amasya lasted two years between 1863 and 1865 and that at the end of the struggle he engaged in with the local eşraf and ulema he was transferred to the mutasarrıflık of Canik.

It is known today that the fortress has eight defensive tiers from the Yeşilırmak bank to the top of the mountain, that the upper tier is built of cut stone and the walls of about two kilometers of rubble stone. The fortress is today referred to by four gates named Helkis (Belkıs), Saray, Maydonos (Midenos) and Meydan. Hüsameddin's counting two gates suggests that he meant only the gates of the upper fortress. Harşena Mountain and the Pontic royal rock tombs were placed on the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List in 2015.

Cilanbolu

The Cilanbolu Hüsameddin describes is today one of the best-known structures of the fortress. It is said to be a passage carved into the rock, descended by about 150 steps, eight meters in diameter; these measures are the same as the author's. The steps in the lower parts have disappeared over time. In cleaning work begun to open the well to tourism, 170 meters was reached in 2009. Since the height of the fortress above the Yeşilırmak is about 300 meters, it is thought that this water structure descended to the river. This information gives unexpected support to the folk account Hüsameddin relays, which says that the water descends to the river at "Leğen Kaya." There are also views that the passage, when first built, reached the Yeşilırmak and the royal tombs; but these are not yet established knowledge.

Hamilton's descent into the well, relayed by Texier, is also confirmed by documents. The English geologist William John Hamilton came to Amasya in 1836 and published his observations in his work Researches in Asia Minor, Pontus and Armenia, printed in 1842. Hamilton writes that he found very little trace of ancient architecture in the fortress, that most of the standing walls are Byzantine or Turkish work, and that the most interesting thing was a passage resembling the underground staircases he had also seen in other fortresses on rocky hills such as Ünye, Tokat, Turhal and Zile. According to him, whether these passages were opened to draw water or to make secret sorties from the fortress, they are undoubtedly ancient and Hellenic work. The information Hüsameddin relays as "first thought it a fortress passage, then understood it was a well" must be the form that Hamilton's dual interpretation, between water-drawing and secret exit, took in Turkish retellings.

The explanation "Cilanbolis" the author proposes for the name "Cilanbolu" is, by his own expression, a conjecture. No reliable explanation of the name's origin was found in other sources either.

The Royal Tombs and the Aynalı Mağara

Hüsameddin counts twelve caves in the Amasya valley and thinks that they are more than the number of Pontic kings and that some may have been carved earlier. Present counts are more numerous: around the city twenty-one rock tombs, large and small, have been identified. Five of these are in the Kızlar Sarayı section, and researchers attribute them to Mithridates I (d. 266 BCE), Ariobarzanes (d. 250 BCE), Mithridates II (d. c. 210 BCE), Mithridates III (d. c. 190 BCE) and Pharnaces I (c. 155 BCE). On the slope of Harşena Mountain, inside the fortress, there are nine more rock tombs. The author's saying "five above the Kızlar Sarayı" corresponds to this group; they are also the chambers Moltke describes as "five adjoining one another."

The tombs were carved into limestone after Mithridates I, who founded the Kingdom of Pontus in 281 BCE and made Amaseia the capital; their heights vary between 8 and 15 meters. The largest is the tomb counted as belonging to Pharnaces I, and the inscription on it states that Metrodoros, commander of the fortress, dedicated to the gods an altar and a flower garden for King Pharnaces. Texier's question "the tombs of which kings?" has thus found a partial answer. The most comprehensive study of these tombs is Robert Fleischer's work Die Felsgräber der Könige von Pontos in Amasya, published in 2017.

The tomb Texier mentions, with the "great seer" inscription over its door, is, as Hüsameddin notes in a footnote, the Aynalı Mağara. About 3.3 kilometers from the city center, on the Ziyaret road, this tomb is the best worked and most complete of the rock tombs. Because its facade was polished smooth, it shines when the sun strikes it and takes its name from this. The inscription on its pediment is read as "Great Priest Tes," and the tomb is accepted as belonging to a priest who lived in the second century BCE. The tomb chamber was used by the Byzantines in the eleventh century as a monastery cell, and the twelve apostles were painted on its vault. This information confirms the account Hüsameddin relays, "the caves became before the conquest a place of austerity for Christian priests." The account of the "tomb of the metropolitan named Astiris," which the author says in a footnote is widespread among the Rum, he himself also notes to be baseless.

Two Events in the Caves

Hüsameddin gives two examples of the caves' use in the Islamic period. The first is Yörgüç Paşa's killing the Kızılkocaoğulları in these caves with straw smoke. Yörgüç Paşa was the lala of the twelve-year-old Prince Murad whom Çelebi Mehmed sent to Amasya in 1414; after Murad II came to the throne he was made beylerbeyi of Rum in 826 [1423]. In the first years of his beylerbeyi-ship he dealt with the Kızılkocaoğulları bands under four brothers, who cut roads around Amasya and Tokat and at times came as far as the cities, and brought them to obedience. In some records it is written that by certain stratagems Yörgüç Paşa had this group and its ringleaders seized and killed. The date 833 [1429-30] Hüsameddin gives falls in these beylerbeyi years; but the detail that the killing was done in the caves and by straw smoke was not found in other sources we examined.

The second event is the Karayazıcı revolt. Karayazıcı Abdülhalim was the first leader of the great Celali uprisings that began at the end of the sixteenth century. The state at one point appointed him to Ayıntab and then to the sanjak of Amasya to appease him, and he governed Amasya for about six months. He himself died around 1602, but his men's plundering continued. According to local records, in 1603 Karayazıcı's followers burned Amasya, and the plunder was so severe that the city's eşraf and âyân had to take refuge in the royal tombs with their wealth. This information coincides entirely with Hüsameddin's account; the author's date 1011 also corresponds to 1602-03. It is recorded that in the same events the Amasya Mevlevî lodge also burned and its sheikh died.

The Şirvanlı Tomb

The building Hüsameddin calls "Şirvanlı Türbesi" is today also called "Yukarı Türbe" among the people and stands on a high hill above the Şamlar Quarter; the quarter the author calls "Şamlılar" is today's Şamlar Quarter. İsmâil Sirâceddin Şirvânî (1782/83 or 1786 - 1848), who lies in the tomb, is among the important sheikhs of the Khalidi branch of the Naqshbandi order in the Caucasus and Anatolia. Born in the village of Kürdemir in Shirvan, he migrated first to Akhaltsikhe when the Russians advanced in the Caucasus, and after the war of 1828-29 to Amasya with his disciples. After living in Sivas for a time he returned to Amasya in 1841 and died of plague in 1848. The Khalidi line to which Ghazi Muhammad and Sheikh Shamil, leaders of the anti-Russian resistance in the Caucasus, were attached also ran through his deputies (halife).

The construction date of the tomb is given differently in the sources. Hüsameddin says 1284 [1867-68]; it is reported that the tomb's construction inscription says 1283 [1867]; in some records the date 1287/1870 appears, in others 1869. The date on the inscription is the most reliable and is very close to the year Hüsameddin gives. His son Şirvânîzâde Mehmed Rüşdi Paşa (1828-1874), who had the tomb built, was born in Amasya and became grand vizier in 1873. The author's calling him "sadr-ı esbak," that is, former grand vizier, is according to the time the book was written; in the years he had the tomb built Rüşdi Paşa was not yet grand vizier. As an interesting coincidence, Rüşdi Paşa, dismissed from the ministry in 1871, was sent into exile again to Amasya.

The tomb consists of two domed square spaces made of brick and stone; adjoining it is a small mescit. Inside lie İsmâil Sirâceddin, his son the Istanbul judge Seyyid Ahmed Hulûsi Efendi, and his son-in-law Hacı Îsâ Rûhi Efendi; this information agrees with what Hüsameddin gives. Outside the tomb there is a burial enclosure (hazire) belonging to the Şirvânîzâdes. The mansion Hüsameddin mentions still stands north of the tomb today and, together with the octagonal wooden structure beside it, is used as a Qur'an course. From the viewing terraces built on the east wall of the garden the city is seen at a wide angle.

Şeyh Cû'î and Kelkis

Most of what is known today about the Mevlevî sheikh Cemâleddin Mehmed Cû'î rests on Hüsameddin. According to this, Şeyh Cû'î served as sheikh at the Amasya Mevlevî lodge in the time of Şâdgeldi Paşa and in the first years of Ottoman administration; in 1414 he withdrew to his own village and had a Mevlevî lodge, tekke, school and fountain built there, and endowed all the village's land to the Mevlevî lodge. He lived for a long time in his village, did not come down to Amasya, and when he died was buried in his village. The author's date 817 corresponds to this year 1414. When Şeyh Cû'î left the city, the sheikhship of the Amasya Mevlevî lodge passed to Mecdüddin Küpeli Dede.

Şeyh Cû'î's name lives today in two places. In central Amasya a quarter bears the name Şeyhcui. The Şeyh Cû'î Baba Tomb is shown in some records in the village of Yuvacık, attached to central Amasya, beside the mosque; it is noted that although the village's official name is Yuvacık, people still call it "Cıcui" or "Şeyhcui," and that the fountain Şeyh Cû'î had built also stands beside the mosque. The folk pronunciation "Cığcığı" Hüsameddin relays and this "Cıcui" form are the oral counterparts of the same name.

The author's information on the name "Kelkis" is also noteworthy. That one of the four gates of the inner fortress today bears the name Helkis (Belkıs) and that the quarter east of the fortress is called Nerkis suggests that an old place name lives on in different forms. However, no source was found that makes a link between Hüsameddin's "Kelkis" and these names; this similarity can only be noted as an observation. The claim that the records "Kalis" and "Batn-ı Kalis" in the Arabic histories belong to Amasya must be met with a caution similar to that on the "Harşene" question in Mütenebbî's couplet.

Picnic Grounds

At the end of the section Hüsameddin lists the vineyards and picnic grounds to which the people of Amasya migrated in spring in his own time: the vineyards of Şeyh Cû'î, Ziyaret, Kirazlıdere and Derbend; for Fridays and for women, Şirvanlı, Saraydüzü, Çanaklar and Kaşık Pınarı. This vineyard migration, beginning on the twentieth of April, is valuable testimony on Amasya's daily life at the beginning of the twentieth century. Ziyaret still keeps this name today as a town attached to Amasya. Akbilek, named in the last quatrain, and the man "known in exegesis and piety" continue to be told of in the next section.

Bibliography

Primary sources

• Abdîzâde Hüseyin Hüsâmeddîn Yasar, Amasya Tarihi, Amasya Belediyesi Kültür Yayınları, 2022, vol. 1, p. 94–100. amasya.bel.tr

Academic studies

• İlhan Şahin – Feridun Emecen, "Amasya", TDV İslâm Ansiklopedisi, vol. 3, İstanbul 1991. https://islamansiklopedisi.org.tr/amasya
• İsmail Aka, "Acâibü'l-makdûr", TDV İslâm Ansiklopedisi, vol. 1, İstanbul 1988, p. 318. https://islamansiklopedisi.org.tr/acaibul-makdur
• Fahameddin Başar, "Yörgüç Paşa", TDV İslâm Ansiklopedisi. https://islamansiklopedisi.org.tr/yorguc-pasa
• Mehmet Ali Beyhan, "Şirvânîzâde Mehmed Rüşdü Paşa", TDV İslâm Ansiklopedisi. https://islamansiklopedisi.org.tr/sirvanizade-mehmed-rusdu-pasa
• İsmail Durmuş, "Mütenebbî", TDV İslâm Ansiklopedisi. https://islamansiklopedisi.org.tr/mutenebbi
• Halil İnalcık, "Akyüz, Kenan: Ziya Paşa'nın Amasya Mutasarrıflığı Sırasındaki Olaylar, Belgeler I" (book review), Belleten, vol. 30, no. 117, Ocak 1966. https://belleten.gov.tr/tam-metin/3252/tur

Official sources

• Amasya İl Kültür ve Turizm Müdürlüğü, "Amasya Kalesi". https://amasya.ktb.gov.tr/TR-59516/amasya-kalesi.html
• Amasya İl Kültür ve Turizm Müdürlüğü, "Şirvanlı Azeriler Camii". https://amasya.ktb.gov.tr/TR-59531/sirvanli-azeriler-camii.html
• Kültür Portalı, "Şirvanlı İsmail Türbesi". https://www.kulturportali.gov.tr/turkiye/amasya/gezilecekyer/yukari-turbe-srvanli-smal-turbes
• Amasya Belediyesi Kent Rehberi, "Yukarı (İsmail Şirvani) Türbesi". https://kentrehberi.amasya.bel.tr/kategoriler/turbeler/yukari-ismail-sirvani-turbesi
• Amasya Belediyesi Kent Rehberi, "Aynalı Mağara". https://kentrehberi.amasya.bel.tr/kategoriler/oren-yerleri/aynali-magara
• T.C. Amasya Valiliği, "Osmanlı Dönemi". https://www.amasya.gov.tr/osmanli-donemi

Books

• William John Hamilton, Researches in Asia Minor, Pontus and Armenia, London 1842 (excerpts from the Amasya section). https://www.romeartlover.it/Amasya1.html
• Robert Fleischer, Die Felsgräber der Könige von Pontos in Amasya, Istanbuler Forschungen 56, Tübingen 2017.

Other sources

• Abdulhalim Durma, "Amasya'da Mevlevilik". https://www.semazen.net/amasyada-mevlevilik-abdulhalim-durma/
• "Şeyh Cui Baba Türbesi / Amasya – Merkez – Yuvacık Köyü", Sosyo Denemeler. http://sosyodenemeler.blogspot.com/2013/08/seyh-cui-baba-turbesi-amasya-merkez.html
• "Cilanbolu Kuyusu", Gezi Klubu. http://www.geziklubu.com/?pnum=42&pt=Cilanbolu Kuyusu
• "Amasya Castle", Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amasya_Castle
• "Tombs of the kings of Pontus", Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tombs_of_the_kings_of_Pontus
• "Charsianon", Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charsianon
• "Sayf al-Dawla", Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sayf_al-Dawla
• "Karayazıcı Abdülhalim", Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karayazıcı_Abdülhalim
• "Ismail Sirajuddin Shirvani", Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ismail_Sirajuddin_Shirvani