Part 24

The bath is a legal establishment of the Islám, founded on the text of the Korán: “If you are polluted, purify yourselves.” The two baths which existed in Constantinople before the conquest were those of the Azabs and the Takhtáb. The first bath built after the conquest was that at the mosque of Sultán Mohammed II., for the use of the workmen employed in the building of the mosque. Afterwards the bath of the Azabs was converted to the use of the Moslems. The baths next built were those of Vafá, Eyúb, and Chokúr. All these baths are still kept up and repaired by the endowment (_wakf_) of Sultán Mohammed. I have preferred assigning each of the principal baths to a certain class of men in the following amusing way: For the sick, the bath of Ayúb Sultán; for the Sheikhs, that of Ayá Sófiyah; for the Súfís, that called by the same name; for strangers, that called the bath of strangers (_gharíb_); for the Bostánjís, the garden-bath (_bóstán_); for the market-people, that called the Friday-market (Juma’ bázár); for debauchees, the Chokúr (the pit); for painters, the Chínlí (Chinese); for the women, the khátún (lady); for sportsmen, the Kojeh Mohammed Páshá; for the Janissaries, the bath of the new barracks (yení oda); for the workmen, that so called (irghát); for the surgeons, the Jerráh (surgeon) Alí Páshá; for the men of the Seráï, that of the Ak-seráï; for the black Arabs, that called the mice (Sichánlí); for the saints, that of Sultán Báyazíd II., the saint; for the insane, the variegated bath (Alájeh); for cruel tyrants, that of Zinjírlí-kapú (chained-gate); for the oppressed, that of Sultán Selím the Just; for the porters, the Sort-hammám; for poets, that of Sultán Suleïmán; for Dervíshes, that of Haider Páshá; for the children of the Arabs, the Takht-ul-kala’; for the favourites, that of the Khásekí; for astronomers, the Yeldiz-hammám (star bath); for merchants, that of Mahmúd Páshá; for mothers, that of the Válideh; for horsemen (_jinjí_), that in the Hippodrome; for Muftís, that of the Muftí; for the Zaims, that of Gedek Páshá; for the armourers, that of Dávud Páshá; for Khoajas, that of the same name; for Sultáns, the bath so called; for Mollás, the bath of Mollá Korání; for the Greeks, the Fener bath (in their quarter); for singers, the Balát (Palatium) bath; for villains, the Khanjarlí (armed with a dagger); for musicians, the Lúnja (or parade); for sailors, the bath of the port of galleys (kádirga límán); for the _imáms_, or chiefs of the baths, that of Little Ayá Sófiyah; for the members of the Díván, the bath of Bairám Páshá; for the eunuchs (_khádim_), that of the eunuch Mohammed Aghá; for the vezírs, that of Alí Páshá; for the generous, that of Lutfí Páshá; for the gardeners, that of Yení-bághcheh (new garden); for the Albanians, that of the Adrianople-gate; for the Mevlevís, that of the Yení-kapú (new-gate); for the stone-masons, that of the Silivrí-gate; for the magicians, that of the Seven Towers; for beggars, that of Chár-ták; for clerks, that of Nishánjí Páshá; for the Drogománs, the bath so called; for invalids, that of Lanka; for miners, that of Sárígurz; for doctors, the Majúnjí-hammam (medicine-makers); for the Kádíaskers, the bath of the same name; for the Persians, the bath of the Ajem-oghláns; for the sellers of weights and scales, that of the Veznejilár (weighers); for the Shátirs (foot-guards), that of Pertev Páshá; for gamblers, the painted bath (Tesvírlí-hammám); for the Sháfeís, that of the mint (Dharab-kháneh); for lovers, that of the cage (kafeslí); for the Aghás, that of the Little Aghá; for the barley-merchants, that of the Arpa-amíní (the inspector of barley); for the Seids (descendants of the Prophet), that of Abbás Aghá; for women, that of the women-market (Evret-bázár); for the Jews, that of the Jehúd-kapú (Jews-gate); for grooms, that of the Akhor-kapú (stable-gate); for the infirm (Maatúh), that of Koja Mohammed Páshá; for buffoons, that of Shengel; for Kapudáns, the Deníz-hammám (sea-bath); for the Ehl-touhíd (unitarians), the bath of Koja Mustafá Páshá; for dwarfs, that of the Little Aghá; for the elegant, that of the Chelebí (_petit maître_).

In the same manner we allotted the baths in the suburbs, which, with those within, amount to one hundred and fifty-one, all of which I have visited. Seventeen more were built during my travels, but these I have not seen. The most elegant and commodious is the Chokúr-hammám, built by Mohammed II. It is paved with granite, and can accommodate five thousand men. Next in rank may be noticed the baths of Mahmúd Páshá, of Takht-ul-kala’, of Báyazíd, and of Koja Páshá; the best lighted up are those of Haider Páshá, the Suleïmáníeh, and the Válideh; the cleanest, those of Ayá Sófiyah, of the Súfis, of Abbás Aghá, and of Mohammed Páshá, in the Chehár Shemba-bázár.

When I was received into the haram of Sultán Murád IV., on the night that I read the Korán, I had the good fortune to see the imperial bath, with which no other in the world can be compared. The four sides of it are assigned to the use of the pages, and in the centre there is an inclosed bath for the emperor. Water rushes in on all sides from fountains and basins, through pipes of gold and silver; and the basins which receive the water are inlaid with the same metals. Into some of these basins, hot and cold water run from the same pipe. The pavement is a beautiful mosaic of variegated stones which dazzle the eye. The walls are scented with roses, musk, and amber; and aloes is kept constantly burning in censors. The light is increased by the splendour and brilliancy of the windows. The walls are dry, the air temperate, and all the basins of fine white marble. The dressing rooms are furnished with seats of gold and silver. The great cupola of the first dressing-room, all of bright marble, may be equalled by that at Cairo only. As this bath stands upon a rising ground it towers to the heavens: its windows all look towards the sea, to Scutari, and Kází-koi. On the right of the door of the dressing-room is the room for the musicians (motrib-khán) and on the left, the cupola of the inner treasury (khazáneh khás). I have no where seen so splendid a bath, except that of Abdál, the Khán of Tiflís, in the province of Ván.

Most of the above baths are adorned with chronographs; and they are all double (chifteh), that is, consist of two rooms, except that of Mohammed Páshá, in the Little-market. In the afternoon women are admitted. If to the great public baths we add the smaller ones, the number would exceed three hundred; and if the private ones are reckoned, they will amount to the number of four thousand five hundred and thirty-six.

END OF PART I.

NOTES.

_Note 1, p. 6, Section III._—_Pillars and Rings._

The existence of these pillars and the rings fixed in them is noticed in Dr. Clarke’s Travels. It is a curious fact that similar iron rings are found not only in the rocks at Parávádí in Romeilí, but also at Jáník and Natolia, as is mentioned by the great Turkish geographer Hájí Khalífah in both his works, the Jehánnamá (p. 627), and the Description of Romeilí: (Rumeli und Bosna geographisch beschrieben von Mustafa Ben Abdallah Hadschi Chalfa, p. 32). We must refrain from giving any judgment whatever on these curious facts till the rocks of Jáník and Parávádí shall have been the objects of the researches of European travellers, none of whom have yet directed their attention that way.

_Note 2, p. 9._—_Caverns._

Though the Danube never passed through this channel, these caverns, which no European travellers have noticed, are deserving of attention. They are also mentioned by Hájí Khalífah in his account of the village of Injighiz, near the mountain of Chatáljah (Rumelí und Bosna, p. 17); and may be easily visited, as they are not much out of the way in going from Adrianople to Constantinople.

_Note 3, p. 17._—_Altí Mermer._

In the present day nothing is seen on the spot of Altí Mermer except the mosque of that name. Some of these columns, which were probably used to ornament it, may perhaps be seen in the interior.

_Note 4, p. 23._—_Sieges of Constantinople._

It is here necessary to rectify some of the author’s mistakes by the more correct chronology of Hájí Khalífah and the Byzantines. Evliyá states that the first siege took place in the year 34 of the Hijreh: this, however, is probably only a mistake of the copyist. He confounds the second siege, which took place in the year 47 (A.D. 667). _Vide_ Theophanes and Cedrinus, who call the Arab general Yezid, (Ἵζεδ), with the third in 53 (A.D. 672), and in which Ayyúb was killed. No mention is made either by Hájí Khalífah or the Byzantine historians of the third siege. Theophanes merely records the siege of Tyane in the year 91 (A.D. 710). The fourth also, in 97, seems to refer to the fifth, which by Hájí Khalífah and Theophanes is recorded as having happened two years later, _i.e._ 99, in the first year of the reign of Leo I., the Isaurian, when the Arabs are said to have built the mosque of Galata, which bears their name, and that called the Gul-jámi (rose mosque) in Constantinople. This tradition seems to be derived from the ancient names of the churches; that at Galata having been built by one Areobinthus, which to the Turks sounded like _Arab_; and the Gul-jámi having been called the rose-church because it was formerly a house belonging to a person of the name of Triantaphyllus (a rose), and was afterwards converted into a church by Romanus Argyropulos in the year 1031: _vide_ Cedrinus. Evliyá takes no notice of the siege by the Bulgarians, under their chief Paganus, in the year 764. Bullardus erroneously reckons this the fifth siege, it being in fact the sixth after the five preceding ones by the Arabs; and the eighth, if the two sieges of the ancient Byzantium are reckoned. The sixth and seventh sieges are also erroneously stated by Evliya. The former of these, which he states to have been in the year 160 of the Hijreh, ought to be four years later, _viz._ 164 (A.D. 780), as it is evidently the same as that of Hárún-ur-rashíd, which took place then, and not, as Evliyá gives it, in the year 255, which is too late by a century, as is also his seventh siege.

The tenth siege (p. 28) ought to be the sixteenth, if, according to Bullardus, Constantinople was again besieged by the Arabs in the year 798; by the Bulgarians a second time, in 822; by the Sclaves in 895 (_vide_ Abulfarage, A.H. 282); by the Bulgarians a third time, in 914; by Tornicius in 1048; and by the Venetians and French in 1204.

_Note 5, p. 29._—_Báyazíd in the Iron Cage._

The truth of this story has been often questioned by European writers; but it is so generally recorded by the most authentic Turkish historians, that there seems no reason to doubt it any longer.

_Note 6, p. 35._—_Abd-ur-ruúf Zindání._

This personage, who was buried at the prison-gate at Adrianople, is the saint of the prisoners, as Ja’far Bábá is at the Bagnio at Constantinople. It was probably this Abd-ur-ruúf who furnished a Turkish poet with one of the best tales in Turkish literature. _Vide_ the German Annual “Minerva,” Leipzig 1814.

_Note 7, p. 39._—_Sú-Kemerlí Mustafá Chelebí._

If Mustafá was three years old at the siege of Constantinople in 1453, he must have been fifty-four at the conquest of Cairo in 1517 (and not twenty-five as he is made to say), and consequently a hundred and thirteen years of age at the siege of Siget.

_Note 8, p. 53._—_Falakah._

Falakah properly means the wooden block in which the feet of the culprit who receives the bastinado are confined.

_Note 9, p. 54._—_Sheikh-ul-Islám or Muftí._

Sultán Mohammed II. was the first who gave precedence to the Muftí or head of the law over the two Kází-asker, or military judges of Rúmeilí and Anadolí.

_Note 10, p. 110._—_Sultán Ahmed._

Sultán Ahmed was the fourteenth and not the sixteenth of the Ottoman Sultáns. There are no means of accounting for this mistake, as Suleimán Kánúní is the tenth Sultán by the unanimous consent of all historians.

_Note 11, p. 123._—_Abáza’s speech._

This speech is remarkable as it attributes all the rebellions which shook the Ottoman empire after the death of Sultan Othmán II. to the mutinous spirit of the Janissaries, who, until the beginning of the present reign, baffled all the attempts of the Sultáns who attempted to subdue them.

_Note 12, p. 126._—_Confession of faith._

“There is no God but God, and Mohammed is his prophet.” Abáza himself performed all the preliminaries for his execution, in the hope of preventing it by the appearance of resignation.

_Note 13, p. 137._—_Káfíah, Jámí, &c._

This passage is interesting as giving a good account of the nature of the education received by the imperial pages, and of the books used by the professors in the colleges. It may be useful here to give a short notice of these works from Hájí Khalífah’s Bibliographical Dictionary:—

_Káfíah_ is a celebrated Arabic grammar, by Ebn Hájeb. It has been printed at Rome, and two editions with a commentary have appeared at Constantinople.

_Jámí_, the great Persian poet, is known to most Oriental scholars. But the work here mentioned is his famous commentary on the preceding work of Ebn Hájeb. It is considered the best amongst more than a hundred commentaries which have been written on this work.

_Tefsír Kází_ is an extensive commentary upon the Korán by Kází Khán, one of the most celebrated Turkish divines.

_Misbáh_, the lamp, is a small grammatical work by Imám Násir Abdullah Altarazí.

_Díbácheh_ is a commentary by Soyútí on a collection of traditions of the prophet, commonly called Sahíh Moslem.

_Jáma-ul-Bokhára_, another collection of traditions by Bokhárá. It is considered the best of the kind.

_Multeka-al-bahr_, a very large work on Mohammedan jurisprudence, compiled by Ibrahim Halebí.

_Kudúrí_, another treatise on jurisprudence. This work has lately been printed at Constantinople.

_Sa’dí’s_ works are too well known to require any remark.

_Nisáb-us-sibyán_, a short Arabic vocabulary in verse.

_Loghat Akhterí_, a Persian and Turkish vocabulary.

LONDON: Printed by J. L. COX and SON, Great Queen Street, Lincoln’s-Inn Fields.

* * * * *

Transcriber’s Notes

Obvious typographical errors have been silently corrected.

There are many variations in the spelling, hyphenation and accents of proper names and other Arabic terms. Except in cases where there is an obvious dominant spelling and a variant that may legitimately be seen as a typographical error, these remain unchanged.

There is no Section IX among the sub-sections of SECTION XV.

Italics are represented thus _italic_.