Version classiqueVersion mobile

Multidisciplinary approaches to food and foodways in the medieval Eastern Mediterranean

 | 
Sylvie Yona Waksman

Byzantium and beyond

Ottoman period sources for the study of food and pottery (15th‑18th centuries)

Filiz Yenişehirlioğlu

Résumé

Written and visual materials concerning different types of pottery and food consumed during the Ottoman period are significant sources for research. However, the historical geography of the Ottoman Empire and the local and regional differences between the provinces must be taken into consideration.
Although it is very difficult to match the visual materials and archaeological finds with the written sources, an attempt can be made to show the main forms of the pottery used at least in Istanbul, the capital of the Ottoman Empire, and the Palace. This paper introduces these sources and endeavours to provide a relevant list concerning pottery forms and the food consumed in Istanbul.

Texte intégral

Introduction

  • 1 An exhaustive bibliography on the subject is at the end of the book.

1The study of food, recipes and menus based on sources of the Ottoman period has become a major area of research during at least the last twenty years in Turkey, both in academia and in popular books. Migration from rural to urban areas, cultural changes in consumption habits, the ease of finding local flavours in large cities, the opening of restaurants featuring local food, special programs on TV and restaurant and food critiques in newspapers and periodicals have all contributed to the development of this interest in food, including the discourse on “the better quality of natural food that was consumed in the old days”. Indeed, very important historical reference works have been published in the last ten years, mainly in relation to Istanbul, the capital of the Ottoman Empire (Singer 2011;1 Avcı et al. 2014; Bilgin 2004; Işın 2010; 2014; Yerasimos 2002; Yerasimos 2011).

2The historical geography of the Ottoman Empire changed over time according to the integration into or the retraction from the Ottoman State of different regions. Each region had its own food production and consumption traditions that existed before the arrival of the Ottomans. These would have influenced the recipes of the newcomers, who had themselves acquired different food patterns originating from their contact with different cultures and peoples. The multi-ethnic and multi-religious structures of Ottoman society contributed to this mosaic of fusion and distinctiveness. It is also argued that under the Ottomans the Roman and Byzantine tradition of bread, wine and olive oil consumption shifted to the consumption of rice, sugar and butter (Yerasimos 2002, p. 13).

3Pottery forms followed a similar pattern. While local forms and productions continued, new production techniques and ornamental styles were adapted or preferred by those among the locals who were following the trends of the capital and importing ceramics from Anatolian ceramic production centres, mainly Iznik and Kütahya. The material culture of the Ottoman Empire is important for understanding the dissemination patterns of objects and trends, but this paper will not deal with the provinces but rather attempt to concentrate on introducing different written and visual sources that may provide information on food consumed and pottery used in Istanbul during the period of the 15th to the 18th centuries.

4Historical archive material and endowment deeds, price registers, period recipe books, dictionaries, and travellers’ accounts form the largest part of these written sources, while miniatures, engravings and paintings provide information concerning the forms and types of pottery. To this list must be added the results of archaeological excavations, museum objects and archaeometric analyses. This written and material evidence provides us with the names of both raw and cooked food. But it is still extremely difficult in many cases to match these cooked foods with the recipients in which they were cooked and/or served. Ottoman visual materials, mainly miniatures, rarely depict scenes containing house interiors or household material. Festivals or receptions for ambassadors or highly ranked civil servants organized by the ruling class were the main illustrated themes in the 16th century (fig. 1). Price registers for the market make reference to the size of a recipient and its provenance rather than its function. The eating customs of the Ottomans, who did not sit on chairs at tables and were not served on individual plates, probably contribute to this lack of information. Food was served in large dishes and/or bowls, placed in the middle of a low table formed by a large tray around which people would sit cross-legged on the ground. There were no tableware sets and no cutlery was used, except for spoons attractively carved from different types of wood (fig. 1). The diners would eat with three fingers from these plates and would use the spoon when drinking soup from a bowl or drinking hoşaf (fruits cooked in water with some sugar). Thus, the food that was served did not request a large variety of pottery forms for different types of dishes, probably limiting the repertoire of pottery designed for use at the table.

Fig. 1 – The festive meal provided by Sultan Ahmet III on the sixth day of the circumcision ceremony for his four sons held in Istanbul at the Golden Horn (1720) (Seyyid Vehbi, Sûrnâme, TSMK.A.3593 y.85b-86a 7 Ertuğ 2000).

Fig. 1 – The festive meal provided by Sultan Ahmet III on the sixth day of the circumcision ceremony for his four sons held in Istanbul at the Golden Horn (1720) (Seyyid Vehbi, Sûrnâme, TSMK.A.3593 y.85b-86a 7 Ertuğ 2000).

5It must not be forgotten that the quality of the food served, and the type of pottery used would have differed according to the social background of the consumer. Pottery used by soldiers in fortresses, during campaigns or on ships, those used in hans (city markets), or caravanserais, hospitals, tekke (residence for Sufi orders), imaret (public kitchen) would be different from that used in the house of a rich person or a member of the ruling class or in the palace itself. An excavation in Istanbul near Yenikapı has provided a collection of ceramic sherds from the pre-1575 period of Iznik ceramic production, probably from a kitchen of a rich citizen or from the imperial kitchen after a fire (Binay 2014). The existence of Chinese porcelain (celadon pieces and those with red colour) and other blue and white and polychrome Iznik wares provide evidence for the quality of the pottery used in this anonymous household where plates appear to provide the largest percentage of the finds. Types of glazed pottery from random excavations in Istanbul near the Topkapı Palace and the Hippodrome, where most of neighbourhoods palaces of the vizier and grand vizier were situated, differ in quality from the examples recovered from neighbourhoods such as Ayvanserail or Eyüp, where the more modest populations of Istanbul lived. Even among the imported ceramic wares there are differences between the localities of the city. Examples of Meissen and Sèvres have been found in the richer quarters, whereas sherds of Staffordshire pottery are abundant in the more modest localities in the 19th century.

Evidence from museums, archives, travellers’ accounts, miniatures and archaeological finds

6Based on museum pieces and archaeological finds of the 16th century, the pottery used for serving food can be classified according to closed or open ceramic forms, glazed or unglazed, plain or decorated. These are mainly:

  • dishes of different size (tabak, sahan) with or without rims, shallow or deep or in the form of tondinos (an Italian form that probably arrived in Iznik with orders from Italian merchants);
  • tazi (ayaklı tabak);
  • bowls (kase, üsküre, badya);
  • covered bowls (kapaklı üsküre);
  • footed basins (ayaklı leğen).
  • 2 This classification was made by Atasoy & Raby (1989, pp. 37‑47).

7For the storage of food, jars (kavanos) were used. For drinking, jugs (bardak), tankards (maşrapa) and small bowls were used. For pouring water, water bottles (sürahi) or jars (testi) were used.2

8Most of these forms had their equivalent in metal ware as well (fig. 2). High-quality Iznik blue and white ceramics and Chinese porcelain were depicted in miniatures only when a royal reception was illustrated. Ordinary people used coarse ware, unglazed or glazed pottery or mostly metal ware. As depicted in miniatures, in the case of royal receptions, Chinese porcelain, Iznik blue and white and polychrome underglazed wares would have been placed in larger metal dishes or bowls in order to bring the plates from the palace kitchen to the reception room and to keep them warm (fig. 2).

Fig. 2 – The festive meal provided for the high administrative officials coming from the Balkan provinces for the circumcision ceremony of Sultan Murat III’s son (Intizâmî, Sûrnâme-i Hümâyûn, 1587, TSMK, H.1344, y.75a), painted by Nakkaş Osman and metalwork similar to that represented in the miniature painting (private collections).

Fig. 2 – The festive meal provided for the high administrative officials coming from the Balkan provinces for the circumcision ceremony of Sultan Murat III’s son (Intizâmî, Sûrnâme-i Hümâyûn, 1587, TSMK, H.1344, y.75a), painted by Nakkaş Osman and metalwork similar to that represented in the miniature painting (private collections).

9Unlike rural settlements, in cities houses did not have ovens and food was thus cooked at the public bakery (fırın) where public bread was also baked. Pastries such as börek and baklava would definitely be sent to the oven facility in small or large metal trays after being prepared at home. It has also been suggested that only six percent of the households in Istanbul had a kitchen and would buy their cooked food from shops (Yerasimos 2002, p. 18 and n. 38).

  • 3 Examples were found in Istanbul during the Saraçhane and Tekfur palace excavations in Istanbul: Ye (...)

10Pottery used for cooking was different,3 being unglazed and identifiable in excavations by evidence of burning in the surface texture. These recipients can be deep, rimmed dishes or bowls with or without a cover. Reuse of these cooking pots would have added to the flavour of the cooked food as they would have retained the taste of the previous dish (fig. 3).

Fig. 3 – Contemporary cooking ware from Menemen (ca 1980) (Yenişehirlioğlu collection).

Fig. 3 – Contemporary cooking ware from Menemen (ca 1980) (Yenişehirlioğlu collection).

11Pans were also found in the excavations, in a complete form or represented by only the handle. They were used either for frying food or for roasting coffee beans.

12Sieves, a form that continued to be used in Istanbul from the Roman period onward, were quite common in Istanbul even during the 19th century among Ottoman coarse wares (fig. 4).

Fig. 4 – Part of a sieve found in the Tekfur Palace Ottoman kiln excavation (1993-2002). Product of Eyüp potters in Istanbul (photo F. Yenişehirlioğlu).

Fig. 4 – Part of a sieve found in the Tekfur Palace Ottoman kiln excavation (1993-2002). Product of Eyüp potters in Istanbul (photo F. Yenişehirlioğlu).

13Travellers’ accounts provide us with the most colourful descriptions of food consumed in Istanbul. The details in the descriptions strongly evoke the odour of the food. The 16th century traveller Hans Dernschwam provides detailed descriptions of cooked food, types of fish, pastries, including a description of stuffed vegetables and vine leaves that matches exactly the way they are prepared today.

Courgettes and aubergines were stuffed with finely chopped mutton mixed with garlic, spices and salt and cooked in plain water. Carrots were stuffed in the same way. Usually yogurt was spread over this type of dish just before it was served. Vine leaves were rounded around a similar mixture of chopped meat and stewed with sour plums placed under them in water (Dernschwam in And 1994, p. 124).

14Mutton was the main type of meat consumed at the capital. Fish was also consumed, especially at the palace. Fish such as mackerel and mullet are still consumed today, whereas swordfish has become a delicacy. Dernschwam also mentions that the Turks and the Greeks very much esteemed caviar, whereas the Jews did not eat it at all. Lobsters and crabs were also consumed. Belon, in Istanbul in the mid‑16th century, mentions that the Roman fish sauce garum made “by soaking the entrails of horse mackerel in brine was still to be found; Turks and Greeks used it on fish dishes like vinegar” (Belon 1553 in And 1994, p. 183). Other cooked dishes that are similar to what is consumed today are chicken soup, chicken and rice, stewed or roasted mutton and kelle-paça, sheep’s head and feet.

There were many shops which sold chicken roasted in big domed ovens rather like lime kilns. These ovens had either one or two shelves and the heat from red-hot embers came up through holes in the bottom. The chicken or meat was put in a covered earthenware pot so that it cooked in its own steam (Dernschwam in And 1994, p. 128).

15Before traditional restaurants were replaced in the last 20‑30 years by those offering fast food, there existed restaurants that specialized in head and feet, or in chicken soup, chicken and rice and tavuk göğsü (chicken meat cooked with milk, sugar and corn flour).

16Different types of pastries were typical in Ottoman food. Dernschwam (And 1994, p. 124) describes how poğaca (small buns) were prepared and baked:

Very tasty small buns were made with unsalted dough rolled and cut to about an inch thick. Charcoal embers were put inside an earthenware pot, the buns were placed on the embers, and then more embers were piled around the pot and over the lid so that the buns baked in fifteen minutes.

17Another traveller, Busbecq, describes a modest meal (And 1994, pp. 52‑53):

Their meals consisted for the most part of yogourt, cheese and various fruits stewed in pure water. These were set out on large earthenware trays, from which each man bought what he fancied, ate the fruit as a relish with his bread, and lastly drank the remaining juice.

18Although little information can be gleaned from miniature paintings on everyday food consumed by families, raw and cooked material sold in shops can be visualized in paintings that depict shopkeepers and their shops. Sûrnâme‑i Hümâyûn, an Ottoman manuscript of 1582, was commissioned to record the 40‑day festivities organized for the circumcision ceremony of Sultan Murat III’s princes that took place at the Hippodrome (at meydanı) in Istanbul. During the ceremony shopkeepers paraded their shops reconstructed on wheels, performing their usual activities. Thus, the cooks, börekçi (pastry makers), kebabçı (kebab makers) and pelteci (starch pudding makers) are recorded for us (fig. 5‑6). The recipients represented in these shops appear to be metal rather than pottery, except for the starch pudding makers, in whose shop two underglaze decorated recipients are represented next to metal trays.

Fig. 5 – Cooks (left; 263a), pastry makers börekçi (right; 271a) (Sûrnâme-i Hümâyûn, p. 121), a metal plate similar to the one represented at the pastry shop (right, above) (private collection).

Fig. 5 – Cooks (left; 263a), pastry makers börekçi (right; 271a) (Sûrnâme-i Hümâyûn, p. 121), a metal plate similar to the one represented at the pastry shop (right, above) (private collection).

Fig. 6 – Kebabçı (left; 343a), starch pudding makers pelteci (right; 300a) (Sûrnâme-i Hümâyûn, pp. 118, 121).

Fig. 6 – Kebabçı (left; 343a), starch pudding makers pelteci (right; 300a) (Sûrnâme-i Hümâyûn, pp. 118, 121).

19In the case of fresh fruit and vegetable shops, various fruits appear to be abundantly illustrated in large plates whereas vegetables appear to be scarcer (fig. 7). During the 16th and 17th centuries fruits were also consumed as vegetables are today, meat being cooked with fruits such as apricots and plums rather than vegetables. This probably provided a sweet-and-sour taste, with spices such as cinnamon also contributing to this effect. Salomon Schweigger, a chaplain in Istanbul (1577-1581), describes the Sultan’s gardens, in which fruit trees occupied more space than vegetables (Schweigger). The bostancıbaşı (head gardener) was responsible for the royal gardens.

Fig. 7 – Vegetable sellers (left; 286a), fruit sellers (right; 283a) (Sûrnâme-i Hümâyûn, pp. 119‑120).

Fig. 7 – Vegetable sellers (left; 286a), fruit sellers (right; 283a) (Sûrnâme-i Hümâyûn, pp. 119‑120).

20Miniatures that show festive receptions given at the palace for foreign envoys, or those given by grand viziers, focus on the quantity of food served rather than the food itself. Members of foreign missions to Istanbul in the 16th century describe in general how food was served, in particular rice with mutton, meat rissoles and chicken and various fowl, including capons and plover, served in porcelain plates, without specifying the form of the plates or bowls (And 1994, p. 143). Miniatures also provide general depictions of the food but with few details, as the quantity of food and the ceremony were more important than the depiction of the food itself. In Lewanklaw’s album on Ottoman History (ca 1590), a painting presents a reception scene in which servants holding a footed ceramic bowl (decorated in underglaze colours) in their hands are aligned in the hall, waiting to serve food at the small low tables. The footed bowl may be seen in the middle of the table with loaves of bread illustrated according to the number of people sitting around the table (And 1994, pp. 110‑111) (fig. 2). The many food plates and bowls in the hands of the servants are indicative of the hospitality offered and the abundance of food served on such occasions (fig. 1). Similar scenes can be found in the 16th century Sûrnâme-i Hümâyûn and the 18th century Sûrnâme-i Vehbi. The scene in the Nusretnâme, another manuscript of the 16th century in which the grand vizier Lala Mustafa Paşa gives a reception, is an exception in that the artist depicts in detail the food in the plates (fig. 8). One can distinguish different types of rice (with almonds, raisins), and chicken meat confirmed by the presence of the bones on the table. Yerasimos argues that when a reception was for foreign envoys, the dishes were served in a sequence, so that the visitors could taste them one after another, whereas for more common people all the food was placed on the table (Yerasimos 2002, p. 16).

Fig. 8 – Lala Mustafa Paşa giving a festive lunch at Iznik (Gelibolulu Mustafa Âli, Nusretnâme, 1584, TSMK, H.1365, y.34b; in Bağcı et al. 2006, p. 167).

Fig. 8 – Lala Mustafa Paşa giving a festive lunch at Iznik (Gelibolulu Mustafa Âli, Nusretnâme, 1584, TSMK, H.1365, y.34b; in Bağcı et al. 2006, p. 167).

21Another large reception was given at the Palace when the janissaries received their salaries. In this case, food was served in earthenware plates, up to 3,000 in number (Yerasimos 2002, p. 25), which were placed on the ground of the courtyard, whereupon the janissaries would run to their food. This was called çanak yağması (the cup looting) (fig. 9).

Fig. 9 – Çanak Yağması, food served to the janissaries. They would rush towards the food when the signal was given. The food included rice, vegetables with minced meat, bread, grilled or stewed mutton, goat or veal on certain days (Sûrnâme-i Hümâyûn, pp. 36‑37).

Fig. 9 – Çanak Yağması, food served to the janissaries. They would rush towards the food when the signal was given. The food included rice, vegetables with minced meat, bread, grilled or stewed mutton, goat or veal on certain days (Sûrnâme-i Hümâyûn, pp. 36‑37).

22The subject matter of miniatures became more diversified after the end of the 17th century, with depictions other than just royal themes and royal receptions. Scenes from daily life increased and scenes where food is depicted became more detailed. Scenes from a meyhane (tavern) or scenes in which young men are depicted around a table eating, drinking and discussing (çilingir sofrası), present lively impressions of everyday life. The types of food represented are more varied than in a royal scene, suggesting perhaps that the presence of meze that would accompany drinking rather than large quantities of food served for main meals was already an established tradition, which is still practised today. Meat, chicken, fish, pastry and fruit are depicted on large plates, but there are no bowls with soup or rice. Turnips are on the table and knives replace the spoons. An underglazed ceramic bottle lavishly decorated in Iznik style is placed next to the table or depicted being filled from a wooden wine barrel. Glasses are used to drink the wine and are represented half full in a red colour (fig. 10‑13).

Fig. 10 – A thief being bitten by a snake (Atayi, Hamse-i Atayi, 1721; The Walters Art Museum W.666, y.60a; art.thewalters.org/detail/84845/a-thief-being-bitten-by-a-snake, accessed 10/12/2019), and an Iznik bottle from the Victoria and Albert Museum, no. 6785‑1860 (collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O77052/bottle-unknown/, accessed 10/12/2019, © Victoria and Albert Museum, London).

Fig. 10 – A thief being bitten by a snake (Atayi, Hamse-i Atayi, 1721; The Walters Art Museum W.666, y.60a; art.thewalters.org/detail/84845/a-thief-being-bitten-by-a-snake, accessed 10/12/2019), and an Iznik bottle from the Victoria and Albert Museum, no. 6785‑1860 (collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O77052/bottle-unknown/, accessed 10/12/2019, © Victoria and Albert Museum, London).

Fig. 11 – An innocent youth being entertained by a group of sodomites (Atayi, Hamse-i Atayi, 1721; The Walters Art Museum, W.666.y.88b; art.thewalters.org/detail/84853/an-innocent-youth-being-entertained-by-a-group-of-sodomites, accessed 10/12/2019).

Fig. 11 – An innocent youth being entertained by a group of sodomites (Atayi, Hamse-i Atayi, 1721; The Walters Art Museum, W.666.y.88b; art.thewalters.org/detail/84853/an-innocent-youth-being-entertained-by-a-group-of-sodomites, accessed 10/12/2019).

Fig. 12 – The poet Atai talking to a learned man in a tavern (Atayi, Hamse-i Atayi,1721; The Walters Art Museum, W.666, y.44a; art.thewalters.org/detail/84838/the-poet-atai-talking-to-a-learned-man-in-a-tavern, accessed 10/12/2019).

Fig. 12 – The poet Atai talking to a learned man in a tavern (Atayi, Hamse-i Atayi,1721; The Walters Art Museum, W.666, y.44a; art.thewalters.org/detail/84838/the-poet-atai-talking-to-a-learned-man-in-a-tavern, accessed 10/12/2019).

Fig. 13 – Depiction of a tavern, the plates hanging on the wall appear to be European imports (Hûbân-ı Rum, Fazıl Enderûnî, Hûbannâme ve Zenannâme, 1793, İÜK, T.5502, y.41a); Çanakkale ware, used for ordinary consumption in the 18th century, was abundantly found in Istanbul in the period when this miniature was painted.

Fig. 13 – Depiction of a tavern, the plates hanging on the wall appear to be European imports (Hûbân-ı Rum, Fazıl Enderûnî, Hûbannâme ve Zenannâme, 1793, İÜK, T.5502, y.41a); Çanakkale ware, used for ordinary consumption in the 18th century, was abundantly found in Istanbul in the period when this miniature was painted.

Price registers

23Goods and objects sold at the market in Istanbul were under the control of the kadı (the judge). There were four kadı in Istanbul for the four administrative units of the city: Topkapı, Galata, Eyüp and Üsküdar. The kadı determined the prices of the goods and objects and inspected the markets every week. Such registers (Es’ar Defterleri) included the market prices of raw food, textiles, wood, pottery and all other everyday objects sold at the market with an emphasis on goods and objects coming from outside Istanbul. The M.1640 dated register has been published (Kütükoğlu 1983) and provides us with important evidence for what was sold in the market and at what prices; these registers are important for economic history as well as for an understanding of the material culture. Both raw material and cooked food are listed, such as chicken, mutton, rice, eggs, etc. and kebab, head and feet (kelle-paça), soup with chickpeas and lemon juice, etc. The provenance of the raw material is also listed, as prices changed according to the origin of the food: olives from Edincik, cheese from Midilli (Lesbos), honey from Athens and Crete, etc. Thus, these price registers constitute an important archival source material for food and pottery in different cities of the Ottoman Empire.

24The prices for pottery also changed according to the size and the origin of production. Imported porcelain from China (Es’ar’ı Fağfurcuyan) was called Portakal which in contemporary Turkish means the orange, but at that time was a reference to the country Portugal since the porcelain was brought from China by Portuguese ships. The registers list mostly coffee cups (fincan) either by size, large or small, or according to quality – very good (ala), standard (evsat) or small (küçük boy). We obtain interesting information from these registers in that prices also changed according to the number of cracks in the cups (çatlağı bir direkli olursa). This supports the information given by Evliya Çelebi concerning the shops and craftsmen specialized in restoration of ceramics in Istanbul. In this case it could be suggested that not only the porcelain cups that were broken after being bought but also those that were sold on the market in a broken state could have been repaired by specialized craftsmen.

25Porcelain plates were marked medium size, smaller, very small. Thus, the dimensions were considered according to popular perceptions of size and quality. Chinese coffee cups from the 17th and 18th centuries can be found at the Topkapı Palace Museums together with a very important collection of Chinese porcelain cups, bowls, plates and jars. In fact, Chinese porcelain production was a model for the Iznik potters in the production of their blue and white ceramics. Certain designs and compositions on Iznik plates were exact copies taken from Chinese porcelains.

26Pottery production was marked as (Es’ar-ı çömlekçiyan). The origin of the pottery as well as its type and function were consistently mentioned:

Jar from Enez/Aino (İnoz küpü) medium size (orta) 28 akçe, large size (battal) 58 akçe
Large cup for yogurt from Inöz (Enez)
Medium size cup (imaret harcı çanağı, cup probably used in public kitchens [imaret]) from Inöz (Enez)
Large, medium and small cups for sweet fruit juice (şerbet) from Inöz (Enez)
Earthenware pot (toprak tencere) from Selanik/ Thessaloniki
Green pot, yellow pot
Jug (bardak) with a lid, large and small from Dimetoka (Didymethiko)
Jug (bardak) with a spout, large, medium and small from Dimetoka (Didymethiko)
Small jar (parmak hurdası) from Dimetoka (Didymethiko)
Üsküre-i paluze-i Kütahya
/ a Kütahya bowl for starch pudding (pelte).

27Enez and Dimetoka appear to have been the two main suppliers of pottery for everyday use in Istanbul. Although there was a production centre of pottery at Eyüp in Istanbul in the same period, Eyüp production is not mentioned in these registers, unless the green and yellow pots were made at Eyüp.

28Iznik production was grouped under pottery from Iznik. In this case the plates are measured differently for size with different criteria that can be guessed: “one size, two size and two in one size”. There are plates for sugar (tabakk-ı sükker), two types of earthenware cups (üsküre) for soup, one called paşa and the other Kütahya, indicating probably another size common in Kütahya and reproduced by Iznik, jars (kavanos), coffee-cups (reddish and green), green tiles.

Perspectives

  • 4 Dictionary for Turkish words compiled from every region in Turkey (Dictionary).

29Examples for food and pottery are not limited to the sources mentioned in this paper. Very important research was carried out after the Ottoman period in the early days of the Republic to compile the different words used in Turkish in different regions of Turkey. The idea was to purify the Turkish language, by removing Persian and Arabic words and by searching for pure Turkish in rural areas where the language was still used in its original, unchanged forms.4 This list of words needs a thorough etymological analysis. Hamit Zübeyr Koşay, a folklore specialist, compiled a list of words related to material culture, including pottery, that are mentioned in this list (Koşay 1957). For those who would like to search and match the pottery words with their function and then find these words in historical documents or Ottoman period dictionaries, there are huge problems to overcome. Words used for the same type of pottery vary enormously from one region to another. For çömlek (pottery) there are at least 20 different words, for testi (jug) at least 10. Nevertheless, it would be a very important contribution for someone to continue this research and learn whether the same vocabulary is still used, and to make a photographic record of these objects.

30To establish a closer and more scientific approach to the relation between food and pottery for the Ottoman period, multidisciplinary research must be increased. Examination of archaeological finds from well-defined contexts could be an important first step. In general, these finds are the least researched and are only classified as “kitchen ware”. A more detailed classification of both glazed and unglazed pottery that matches archaeological finds with representations in miniatures and with descriptions in price registers and other archival documents would probably lead to a more inclusive understanding of the use of pottery during the Ottoman period and would help determine the changes in eating habits, food consumed and pottery types over time.

Bibliographie

And 1994: And M., Istanbul in the 16th century: The city, the palace, daily life, Istanbul, 1994.

Atasoy & Raby 1989: Atasoy N., Raby J., Iznik, London, 1989.

Avcı et al. 2014: Avcı A., Erkoç S., Otman E. (ed.), Yemekte tarih var – yemek kültürü ve tarihçiliği, Istanbul, 2014.

Bağcı et al. 2006: Bağcı S., Çağman F., Renda G., Tanındı Z., Osmanlı resim sanatı, Ankara, 2006.

Belon 1553: Belon P., Les observations de plusieurs singularitez et choses memorables trouvées en Grèce, Asie, Iudée, Égypte, Arabie, et autres pays estranges, redigées en trois livres, Paris, 1553.

Bilgin 2004: Bilgin A., Osmanlı saray mutfağı (1453-1650), Istanbul, 2004.

Binay 2014: Binay H., Yenikapı metro ve TEİAŞ arkeolojik kazılarıından açığa çıkarılan İznik seramiklerinin değerlendirilmesi, MPhil, Istanbul Technical University, 2014 (unpublished).

Busbecq: Forster E.S. (ed.), The Turkish letters of Ogier Ghiselin de Busbecq (1554-1562), Oxford, 1927.

Dernschwam: Babinger F. (ed.), Hans Dernschwam’s Tagebuch einer Reise nach der Konstantinopel und Kleinasien (1553-1555) nach der Urschrift in Fugger-Archiv, Munich-Leipzig, 1923.

Dictionary: Türkiye Türkçesi ağızları sözlüğü, 12 vol., Ankara, 1932-1934, 1952-1959.

Hayes 1992: Hayes J.W., Excavations at Saraçhane in Istanbul, vol. 2, The pottery, Princeton, 1992.

Işın 2010: Işın P.M., Osmanlı mutfak sözlüğü, Istanbul, 2010.

Işın 2014: Işın P.M., Osmanlı mutfak imparatorluğu, Istanbul, 2014.

Koşay 1957: Koşay H.Z., “Türk halkının maddi kültürüne dair araştırmalar II”, Türk Etnografya Dergisi s.II, Ankara, 1957.

Kütükoğlu 1983: Kütükoğlu M., Osmanlılarda narh müessesesi ve 1640 tarihli narh defteri, Istanbul, 1983.

Schweigger: Stein H. (ed.), Salomon Schweigger, sultanlar kentine yolculuk (1578-1581), Istanbul, 2004 (transl. S. Türkis Noyan).

Singer 2011: Singer A. (ed.), Haydi sofraya, mutfak penceresinden Osmanlı tarihi, Istanbul, 2011.

Sûrnâme-i Hümâyûn: Atasoy N. (ed.), Sûrnâme-i Hümâyûn, Istanbul, 2002.

Yenişehirlioğlu 2003: Yenişehirlioğlu F., “Tekfur Sarayı çini fırınları kazısı (1995-2002)”, 24. Kazı Sonuçları Toplantısı. 1. Cilt, Ankara, 2003, pp. 329‑344.

Yerasimos 2011: Yerasimos M., Evliya Çelebi Seyahatnamesi’nde yemek kültürü yorumlar ve sistematik dizin, Istanbul, 2011.

Yerasimos 2002: Yerasimos S., Sultan sofraları: 15. ve 16. yüzyılda Osmanlı saray mutfağı, Istanbul, 2002.

Notes

1 An exhaustive bibliography on the subject is at the end of the book.

2 This classification was made by Atasoy & Raby (1989, pp. 37‑47).

3 Examples were found in Istanbul during the Saraçhane and Tekfur palace excavations in Istanbul: Yenişehirlioğlu 2003; Hayes 1992.

4 Dictionary for Turkish words compiled from every region in Turkey (Dictionary).

Table des illustrations

Titre Fig. 1 – The festive meal provided by Sultan Ahmet III on the sixth day of the circumcision ceremony for his four sons held in Istanbul at the Golden Horn (1720) (Seyyid Vehbi, Sûrnâme, TSMK.A.3593 y.85b-86a 7 Ertuğ 2000).
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/10254/img-1.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 1,9M
Titre Fig. 2 – The festive meal provided for the high administrative officials coming from the Balkan provinces for the circumcision ceremony of Sultan Murat III’s son (Intizâmî, Sûrnâme-i Hümâyûn, 1587, TSMK, H.1344, y.75a), painted by Nakkaş Osman and metalwork similar to that represented in the miniature painting (private collections).
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/10254/img-2.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 409k
Titre Fig. 3 – Contemporary cooking ware from Menemen (ca 1980) (Yenişehirlioğlu collection).
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/10254/img-3.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 845k
Titre Fig. 4 – Part of a sieve found in the Tekfur Palace Ottoman kiln excavation (1993-2002). Product of Eyüp potters in Istanbul (photo F. Yenişehirlioğlu).
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/10254/img-4.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 239k
Titre Fig. 5 – Cooks (left; 263a), pastry makers börekçi (right; 271a) (Sûrnâme-i Hümâyûn, p. 121), a metal plate similar to the one represented at the pastry shop (right, above) (private collection).
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/10254/img-5.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 1,3M
Titre Fig. 6 – Kebabçı (left; 343a), starch pudding makers pelteci (right; 300a) (Sûrnâme-i Hümâyûn, pp. 118, 121).
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/10254/img-6.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 753k
Titre Fig. 7 – Vegetable sellers (left; 286a), fruit sellers (right; 283a) (Sûrnâme-i Hümâyûn, pp. 119‑120).
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/10254/img-7.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 956k
Titre Fig. 8 – Lala Mustafa Paşa giving a festive lunch at Iznik (Gelibolulu Mustafa Âli, Nusretnâme, 1584, TSMK, H.1365, y.34b; in Bağcı et al. 2006, p. 167).
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/10254/img-8.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 2,4M
Titre Fig. 9 – Çanak Yağması, food served to the janissaries. They would rush towards the food when the signal was given. The food included rice, vegetables with minced meat, bread, grilled or stewed mutton, goat or veal on certain days (Sûrnâme-i Hümâyûn, pp. 36‑37).
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/10254/img-9.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 2,1M
Titre Fig. 10 – A thief being bitten by a snake (Atayi, Hamse-i Atayi, 1721; The Walters Art Museum W.666, y.60a; art.thewalters.org/detail/84845/a-thief-being-bitten-by-a-snake, accessed 10/12/2019), and an Iznik bottle from the Victoria and Albert Museum, no. 6785‑1860 (collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O77052/bottle-unknown/, accessed 10/12/2019, © Victoria and Albert Museum, London).
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/10254/img-10.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 1,4M
Titre Fig. 11 – An innocent youth being entertained by a group of sodomites (Atayi, Hamse-i Atayi, 1721; The Walters Art Museum, W.666.y.88b; art.thewalters.org/detail/84853/an-innocent-youth-being-entertained-by-a-group-of-sodomites, accessed 10/12/2019).
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/10254/img-11.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 1,5M
Titre Fig. 12 – The poet Atai talking to a learned man in a tavern (Atayi, Hamse-i Atayi,1721; The Walters Art Museum, W.666, y.44a; art.thewalters.org/detail/84838/the-poet-atai-talking-to-a-learned-man-in-a-tavern, accessed 10/12/2019).
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/10254/img-12.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 1,6M
Titre Fig. 13 – Depiction of a tavern, the plates hanging on the wall appear to be European imports (Hûbân-ı Rum, Fazıl Enderûnî, Hûbannâme ve Zenannâme, 1793, İÜK, T.5502, y.41a); Çanakkale ware, used for ordinary consumption in the 18th century, was abundantly found in Istanbul in the period when this miniature was painted.
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/10254/img-13.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 1,7M

Auteur

Koç University, Department of Archaeology and History of Art, VEKAM, Pınarbaşı Mahallesi, Şehit Hakan Turan Sokak no. 9 Keçiören, Ankara, Turkey, fyenisehirlioglu@ku.edu.tr

Acheter

Volume papier

LCDPUleslibraires.fr
Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search