Journal of Ecclesiastical History, Vol. XIX, No.

r, April 1968

The Publication and Distribution of

Karamanli Texts by the British and
Foreign Bible Society Before 1
by RICHARD CLOGG

O ne of the most interesting of the various groups of Orthodox

Christians that constituted the Rum Milleti within the Ottoman
Empire were the Karamanli Christians of Asia Minor. 1 These
Karamanli Christians, or Karamanlides, were a substantial body of
Christians Orthodox in religion but Turkish in speech. During the Otto-
man period they were largely concentrated in the interior of Asia Minor,
although they were also to be found in the Crimea and on the shores of the
Sea of Azov. The question of their origin is a matter of controversy and is
likely to remain so. Greek scholars incline to the view that the Karaman-
lides were of Greek descent and adopted Turkish as their vernacular, either
by force or as a result of their isolation from the Greek speaking Orthodox
Christians of the coastal regions. Turkish scholars regard them as the
descendants of Turks who had migrated to Byzantine territories before the
conquest or had served as mercenaries in the Byzantine armies and who
had adopted the religion but not the language of their new rulers.
Their knowledge of Greek was frequently limited to the alphabet.
Those of them that were literate employed this to write Turkish and to
print the surprisingly large number of books in Turkish with Greek
characters8 that were published for their use during the eighteenth and
nineteenth centuries. Recent publications3 have reflected a growing
interest in the literature and history of the Karamanlides, and it may be of
use to recount some of the activities of the British and Foreign Bible Society
in publishing and circulating Karamanli biblical texts during the first part
of the nineteenth century. The Bible Society, quantitatively speaking, was
probably the most prolific single publisher of Karamanli works and its
1
Greek, Kapa/iavXijSes; Turkish Karamanhlar.
2
In Greek known as KapaumXrjSiKa; in Turkish as Karamanlica.
8
Notably S. Salaville and E. Dalleggio, Karamanlidika, Bibliographic analytique
d'ouvrages en langue turque imprimis en caracteres grecs, i (1584-1850), Athens 1958; ii (1851-
1865), Athens 1966. See also J. Eckmann, Die karamanische Literatur in J. Deny et al., ed.,
Philologiae Turcicae Fundamenta, ii, Wiesbaden 1964, 819-35; I. T . Pamboukis, nerepiiuC,
oXtyai \e£as em rrjs avvSeoews TUIV BpijOKevriKcuv flifiXituv rfjs rovpKotjxavov eAAi)w/ci;j tj>t\oXoyias,
Athens 1961; a n d F. Halkin, Acolouthies grico-turques a I'usage des Grecs turcophones d'Asie
Mineure, Memorial Louis Petit (Archives de l'Orient Chretien, i) Bucharest 1948, 194-
202.
57
 R. CLOGG
activities in ensuring a wide distribution for its publications throw much
incidental light on what is still a somewhat neglected field of ecclesiastical
history.
The British and Foreign Bible Society was founded in 1804 with the
object of encouraging a 'wider circulation of the Holy Scriptures, without
note or comment' in Great Britain and her dominions. The Society's
constitution contained the further provision that it 'shall also, according
to its ability, extend its influence to other countries, whether Christian,
Mahometan or Pagan'. 1 The Society's activities in Europe were, however,
considerably hampered by the Napoleonic domination of Europe. Only
after 1815 were its agents able freely to operate in many parts of Europe. 2
Nevertheless, the Society early showed a concern for the particular needs
of the Karamanlides, whose difficulties in preserving their Orthodox faith
while understanding little or no Greek, and living in small, and for the
most part, isolated communities in the midst of a predominantly Moham-
medan population do not require to be stressed. Their need for Turkish
books printed in Greek characters was first brought to the Society's notice
in a letter of 20 February 1816 from a correspondent in Mardin, who wrote
as follows, 'The only language in use among the Angora Christians, is the
Turkish, which they are unable to read in its proper character. Some Bibles
in the Turkish language, but in Armenian or Greek letters, would be very
acceptable there. A Greek Priest showed me what he called the Testament,
printed in Turkish, with Greek letters, at Venice 3 ; but it turned out to be
some lessons of Scripture with reflections and exhortations'.4
Shortly afterwards, in the course of a lengthy tour of Russia, the Rev.
R. Pinkerton wrote from Kaffa to the Committee of the Society of the
Turkish speaking Orthodox Christians of Mariupol. He had originally
worked as a missionary for the Edinburgh Missionary Society in Karass, to
the north of the Caspian Sea, and was active in the foundation of the St.
Petersburg and Moscow Bible Societies. In the course of his tour in 1816,
he visited the Crimea and the Sea of Azov, maintaining contact with
auxiliary branches of the Bible Society in such towns as Odessa, Simferopol,
Kaffa and Taganrog. 5 'On my way from Tahanrog', he wrote, 'I visited
1
W. Canton, A History of the British and Foreign Bible Society, London 1904, i. 18. Some
of the Bible Society's activities in Greece during this period have been discussed recently
by M. Siotes, 'Constantine Oikonomos of the House of Oikonomos and the Operations
of the British Bible Society in Greece (1780-185 7)', Greek Orthodox Theological Review,
vi (i960), 7-55, originally published as 'O KtavaravrTvos 6 ig OIKOVOJIOIV KM cd itercujipaoets
•rijs 'Ayias rpa<t>ijs els rljv veoeXXijvucqv, Thessaloniki 1959.
2
See J. M. Roe, A History of the British and Foreign Bible Society igo^-ig^, London
1965, 6.
8
Possibly the 'At^t, 'AvioroXoaXaprpi ifieXepri f}k pexroimXefrf (The Acts and Epistles of the
Apostles), Venice 1811.
1
British and Foreign Bible Society, 13th Report, 1817, 23.
5
See J . Owen, The History of the British and Foreign Bible Society, London 1820, iii.
13, 14, 211-15; G. Browne, The History of the British andForeign Bible Society, London 1859,
i-3 I 7>38i,387;ii. 29; W.Canton, op. cit., i. 225-6,408; ii. 3-5. Pinkerton's own account
of his work in Russia (Russia, or, miscellaneous observations on the past and present state of that
country and its inhabitants . .., London 1833) contains no reference to his activities among
the Turkish-speaking Orthodox of the Crimea.
58
 PUBLICATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF KARAMANLI TEXTS
23,000 Greeks in the district of Maryoupoule,1 which town is inhabited
by about 30,000 of them. There I made arrangements for getting this
people supplied with Greek Testaments from Tahanrog, and also engaged
them to promote their circulation among their brethren in Asia Minor, by
means of trading vessels which visit their port. I am sorry, however, to say,
that the Greeks in Maryoupoule, and the vicinity, are in a most lamentable
state of ignorance; very few of them, comparatively, understand the
Modern Greek. The Tartar, which they brought with them from the
Crimea, is the only language which is generally spoken among them.' 3
Whittington, also travelling in 1816, noted that the Greeks of Mariupol
'retain the language of the Crim Tartars, making no use of the Romaic'. 8
In fact the Turkish speaking Orthodox Christians of Mariupol and the
surrounding region appear to have spoken a dialect of Ottoman Turkish
rather than the generally prevalent Tatar Turkish. 4 This would explain
why Pinkerton found such a large number of Karamanli books in this
region; they would be equally intelligible to the large numbers of Ana-
tolians he encountered and to the indigenous Turkish speaking Orthodox
of Mariupol and district. Perhaps it was these latter who prompted
F. Becattini to write that the 'Tartari della Crimea . . . nutrono una grande
indifferenza per le cose di Religione . . . passando essi senza pena alcuna
dal Paganesimo, al Maomettismo, e dal Maomettismo alia Religione
Greca'. 5
It was Pinkerton's next letter, however, written in Odessa on 26 June
1816 which probably prompted the Committee to take some action in the
matter, and it is perhaps worth quoting in full, as it contains a unique list
of Karamanli publications seen by Pinkerton in the Crimea. 'During my
journey from Tahanrog,' he wrote, 'through the Crimea to this place, I
have endeavoured, to the utmost of my power, to obtain authentic in-
formation respecting the state of the Holy Scriptures among the Christian
inhabitants of Anatolia. For this purpose, I sought out, and conversed
with, intelligent men from almost every quarter of Asia Minor.6 The result
1
F o r t h e G r e e k s o f M a r i u p o l s e e : G . L a g o s , IlepX -rwv 'Ek\fym>v TTJS nnfipj ,
A t h e n s 1853, 4 4 - 5 ; P . M . K . , TlepX Maptavovn6\eo>s, navhwpa x v i ( 1 8 6 6 ) , 5 3 3 - 5 ; V .
Grigorovich, Zapiska antikvara 0 poezdke ego na Kalku i Kalmius, v Korsvnskuyu Zemliu i na
yuzhnuiya pobererfi'ya Dnipra i Dnistra, Odessa 1874, 8-11; K. A. Palaiologos, '0 evrfj vorltp
'Pwaalif 'EXXTJVIOIIOS, Tlapvaooos v (1881), 613; F. A. Braun, 'Mariupol'skie greki', %hwaya
Starina, i. pt. ii (1890), 78-92; and P. S. Pallas, Bemerkungen auf einer Reise ..., Leipzig
1799, i. 488-9. Two valuable recent studies are D. Spiridonov, 'Istorichny interes
vivchennya govirok Mariyupil's'kikh grekiv. Skhidny Svit, Vostochnuy Mir xii. pt. 3 (1930),
171-81 and I. I. Sokolov, 'O yazuike grekov Mariupol'skogo i Stalinskogo okrugov',
Yazuik i Literatura, vi (1930), 49-67.
2
Letter of 8 June 1816, B.F.B.S., 13th Report, 1817, 70.
8
Whittington, Account of a Journey through Part of Little Tartary . . ., in R. Walpole,
Travels . .., London 1820, 464. See also P.M.K., op. cit., 5 3 3 : ' . . . olmSmv . . . FpaiKol, <5»
01 p£v iXdSow ypaiKurrl, ol Be TO ye irkeurrov ron-apum". According to P.M.K.., 9 of the 24
Greek villages in the region of Mariupol were Turkish speaking.
1
G. Doerfer, 'Das Krimosmanische', P.T.F., Wiesbaden 1959, i. 272.
8
F. Becattini, Storia della Crimea, piccola Tartaria . . ., Venice 1785, 28.
• The inhabitants of Anadol in the Mariupol district migrated from Pontus in 1826
and retained the Pontic dialect, see M. V. Sergievsky, 'Mariupol'skie grecheskie
59
 R. CLOGG
of my inquiry shows that there still remains much to be done by Bible
Societies for the poor, ignorant, and oppressed Christians of Lesser Asia,
the majority of whom, in the present day, have almost entirely lost the
knowledge of their native language, and speak and understand nothing
but Turkish. The two Christian nations which I have particularly in view
are the Greek and Armenian. Several worthy men belonging to the former
have assured me that the cruel persecutions of their Mahomedan masters
have been the cause of their present degraded state of ignorance, even in
regard to their native tongue; for that there was a time when their Turkish
masters strictly prohibited the Greeks in Asia Minor even from speaking
the Greek language among themselves, and that they cut out the tongues
of some,1 and punished others with death, who dared to disobey this their
barbarous command. It is an indisputable fact, that the language of their
oppressors has long since almost universally prevailed, and that in a great
part of Anatolia even the public worship of the Greeks is now performed in
the Turkish tongue. The following works, in the Turkish language, but all
in the Greek character, afford further proof of what I have now stated;
1. The Psalms in Turkish: printed in Venice. (Since Pinkerton lists
separately the first recorded edition of the Karamanli translation of
the Psalter by Seraphim of Antalya, sometime bishop of Ankara,
(odm)K<x "EyKiovpov MrjTpoTroXXovTTOV 'ArTaXeiaXi., Zepa^elfj. Paxnrrev),
the WaX-rfipiov Aa.^18 IJanaaax j8e IJayafineplv TecnrixarXapiXav nepanep,
Venice 1782 (see No. 6 below), this must be either the first recorded
edition of the Psalms in Karamanlidika, the WaXrrjpiov Tleya^Trlp /?e
IlaTioax NrafiovTow Constantinople 1764, or the second edition of
Seraphim of Antalya's translation, the WaXr-qpiov AafilS IlaTiaaax /Je
TlayanTreplv reamxaTXapiXav irepanep, Venice 1810. As Pinkerton makes
no mention of the translator of this copy and later refers to Seraphim's
edition as a 'second version' it would seem that he is here referring to
the 1764 edition. For the Karamanli versions of the Psalter discussed
above see Salaville and Dalleggio, op. cit, i. 40-2, 63-6, 146-7.)
2. A Collection of Sermons, selected from the Greek Fathers, for every
Sunday in the Year; printed in Venice. (This was probably one of the
three Karamanli editions of Agapios Landos's KvpiaKohpo^iov, TCov^Xe
an<
aevevrjv KvpioucrjXepive T^e/Jcor )Se vaaaarXdp, Venice 1756, 1795 ^
1805. Pinkerton was apparently able to buy a copy of this work and
the copy of the 1805 edition now in the Bible House Library may be
govorui. Opuit kpatkoi kharakteristiki', Izvestiya Akademii Nauk S.S.S.R., vii (1934), 535.
The presence of so many Anatolian Greeks in the Crimea is further evidence of the
strong tendency on the part of the Greeks of the interior to emigrate, if only temporarily,
throughout the period of the Tourkokratia, see, for example, N. S. Rizos KamraSoKiKa,
Constantinople 1856, 76, 78, 85; I. Balabanis, MiKpamanKd, Athens 1891, 170; and
E. Naumann, Vom Goldnen Horn zu den Quellen des Euphrat, Leipzig 1893, 2 °8-
1
This legend is frequently met with as a popular explanation of the reason for the
adoption of Turkish as the vernacular among the Karamanlides. See G. F. Bowen,
Mount Athos, Tnessaly and Epirus, London 1852, 41; and E. Naumann, op. cit., 207. See
also A. K. Hypsilantis, Ta fuera TTJV "AXwaw, Constantinople 1870, 117.
60
 PUBLICATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF KARAMANLI TEXTS
the same copy. Salaville and Dalleggio, op. cit., i. 22-5, 97-8, record
1756 and 1795 editions of this work, and the Bible House copy is thus
a rare example of the 1805 edition.)
3. A Concise System of Christian Doctrine. (It is not clear to which work
Pinkerton here refers. Two possibilities come to mind: the KoXdi 'Ipav
NaaxeroC, Venice 1753 and 1806; and the AiSaoKccXLa Xpionavucr] rrjs
y
Op66bo^ov rjyLcijv IlioTews- TaXrjjM Meaiyr} 'OpdoSogos [J.ovov[irjv lfiavrjfj,i^-qv
Bucharest 1768. It is just possible that Pinkerton refers to the Kara-
manli version of Gennadios Scholarios's treatise on venial and mortal
sin, /IiSaovcaAia evavvonros. Tlepl TQ>V 6avaalfi(ov Kal ovyyvojoT&v
a[iapT7][idTCDv, published in Constantinople in 1816, the year of Pinker-
ton's letter. (See no. 12 below.) See also Salaville and Dalleggio, op.
cit., i. 17-21, 43-8, 125-7, I75-7-)
4. The Gospels read in Church during the Passion Week; in MS.
5. A few sheets of the Gospels, Greek and Turkish, in two columns; also
in MS. (Extracts from MSS. of the same provenance as those men-
tioned by Pinkerton were published by O. Blau in his 'Griechisch-
tiirkische Sprachproben aus Mariupoler Handschriften, in £eitschrift
der deutschen morgenldndischen Gesellschaft (hereafter cited as Z-D.M.G.),
xxviii (1874) 562-76. Blau makes further reference to these in 'Ober
Volkstum und Sprache der Kumanen', £.D.M.G., xxix (1875), 568-9.
See also V. Grigorovich, op. cit., 9-12. These MSS. included both
secular and religious works and Blau regarded them as affording
examples of the spoken Turkish dialects of the Crimea during the
sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, ibid., 571. Blau's opinion has
been authoritatively disputed, however, and these extracts should be
regarded rather as examples of Ottoman Turkish dialects, see W. H.
Heffening, Die turkischen Transkriptionstexte des Bartholomaeus Georgievits
aus den Jahren 1544.-1548, Abhandlungen fiir die Kunde des Morgen-
landes, Leipzig 1942, 11; J. Eckmann, 'Anadolu Karamanh agizlanna
ait arastirmalar, I Phonetica', Ankara Oniversitesi Dil ve Tarih-Cogrqfya
Fakiiltesi Dergisi, viii (1950) 166; and G. Doerfer, op. cit., 280. One of
the MSS. discussed by Blau was a liturgical MS. dated c. 1779.
Pinkerton's Gospel extracts must have been somewhat similar and
doubtless reflected the Turkish dialect of the Mariupol Greeks or of
migrant Karamanlides from Anatolia.)
6. A Second Version of the Psalms in Turkish, by Seraphim, late metro-
politan of Karamania; printed in Venice, 1782. (This is the first
edition of Seraphim of Antalya's version of the Psalms, WaXrqpiov JajSiS
IJariaoax jSe IlayafnTeplv TeCTTri^aTAaptAav irepairip, Venice 1782.)
7. The Lives of the Saints, by the same Author; printed in Venice 1783.
(This is either the Ztrmafir) naxr^e rrovav/zao-o^, Venice 1783, Salaville
and Dalleggio, i. 72-5, or the 77a^apt Xeylar, yidvia, 'A£l£, ^CTC^IT SXav
MaprvpoaXapiv va/cAtenj, Venice 1783, Salaville and Dalleggio, i. 76-
81.)
61
 R. CLOGG
8. Liturgy and Ritual of the Church Service, by the same; Venice,
1782. (The Poiix 'AfaerXiyrj, Venice 1782, contains several chapters
devoted to explaining certain liturgical practices and ceremonies,
e.g. chapter 3, XpioriavXiyrjv, 'EKKXrjoa'Ca yueTipnicXepi, 7rp6a<f>opa,
Xeirovpyia SXowaovv vret, vek yLCtvirip, ovovv TreavivreTip. The significance
of the offering which Christians bring to Church so that the Liturgy
may be celebrated, and chapter 5, nporiyiaofxivri XeiTovpyLavqv raAij/it,
ireavrjvreTovp. The definition and meaning of the Liturgy of the Pre-
sanctified. See Salaville and Dalleggio, i. 67-71. This may have been
the book Pinkerton saw; it was both compiled and translated by
Seraphim of Antalya.)
9. Prayers and Preparations before partaking of the Communion, by
Anastasio of Asitania; printed 1804.
10. A Short History of the Church; printed in Venice, 1784. (The only
recorded Karamanli edition of 1784 is a description of Mount Sinai,
PiaaXeyi Zeppl<j> fieoXeK OvXXax fjiovKorrks T^eTreXrj ZJwavrjV Treyicarq-
vrerovp, Venice 1784. Salaville and Dalleggio, i. 82-8.)
11. The Wisdom of Solomon; printed in Constantinople in 1799. (This is
the 2o<f>6s ZoXiofiwvow napoi/jLiaXapT), Constantinople 1799. Salaville
and Dalleggio, i. 105-6.)
12. A Catechism of the Greek Church; Venice 1753. (This may also refer
to the KoXm lp,av vaoixerov, Venice 1753, 1806. See no. 3 above. If
Pinkerton did refer to this work, then it would seem more likely that
no. 3, A Concise System of Christian Doctrine was the JtSacr/caAi'a XpiaTiavucr)
•rfjs 'Op6o86£ov rjfjuov nUtTeus, Bucharest 1768, rather than either of
the two editions of the KoXdi 'Ifj.av Naaixerov.)
13. Ritual of Ordinances, &c: Venice 1794. (It is not altogether clear
what Pinkerton meant by a Ritual of Ordinances. The only other known
Karamanli edition of this date is the second edition of the Poi>x
'AfaerAtyq, Venice 1794. Salaville and Dalleggio, i. 91-3. The
Poi>x 'AfaerXiyri does describe certain aspects of the ritual of the
Orthodox Church.)
14. Liturgy, etc.; Venice 1793.
15. The Acts of the Apostles, and all the Epistles; printed in Venice, 1810.
(This is very probably the 'A£q£ 'AiroaroXoaXap-qv a/xeXepf) fie
fiexroun-Xeprj, Venice 1811. Salaville and Dalleggio, i. 148-51. The
discrepancy in dates is probably due to error, although it is possible
that there was an unrecorded edition of 1810.)
These works are all in the common Turkish language, but in the Greek
character. I have been able to procure only the five first. For no. 15 I
offered a good price, but could not prevail on the Anatolian Greek to part
with i t . . . It is therefore my humble opinion, that, in order to effect more
thoroughly the benevolent object of the Bible Society, among the Christians
of Anatolia, we ought to print an edition of the Turkish Testament in the
62
 PUBLICATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF KARAMANLI TEXTS
Greek, and another in the Armenian character, and strive to distribute
these, with our Greek and Armenian Scriptures, among our poor Christian
brethren in Asia Minor'. 1
Of the thirteen Karamanli titles listed by Pinkerton, six can be posi-
tively identified, four tentatively, while the remaining three show no
apparent resemblance to any known Karamanli editions. Pinkerton
possessed, in addition to a lively intelligence and interest, the linguistic
ability accurately to describe the books that he saw and his descriptions of
those works which can be positively identified are accurate, if brief.
Consequently there seems little reason to doubt that all the books that
Pinkerton saw and described were in fact Karamanli editions, and, if this
is so, we have evidence of at least three hitherto unrecorded Karamanli
editions, nos. 9, 10 and 14. The presumption is, I believe, particularly
strong in the case of no. 9, Prayers and Preparations before partaking of the
Communion by Anastasio of Asitania (1804), of which Pinkerton gives both
author and date of publication.8
A similar list of books, printed at the Patriarchal press in Constantinople
c. 1820, was included by the Rev. Robert Walsh, chaplain to the British
Embassy to the Porte, as an appendix to an account of his residence in
Constantinople.3 Of the five Karamanli titles listed four can be positively
identified. The list is of some interest for the history of Protestant mission-
ary activity as it includes four Protestant religious tracts: To reXos rod xpovov
(1818); a translation of Isaac Watts's The End of Time; the Bios rov
.TouAieA/xou K4XXv, 17 6 EVSM/JLCDV Xpioriavos (1819), a translation of the well-
known tract The Happy Man; or, the Life of William Kelly, which was
published in many editions. Also listed is the 'Anocvdio-fiara e/< r&v rod 'Ayiov
'Itudwov rov Xpvcroar6fj.ov vtpl rrjs uvayvdjoeios rfjs IlaXaias KOU. Neas
dtadrJKrjs. All three translations were apparently made in England but as
they were 'very badly done' they had to be corrected by Alexandras
Argyrammos, superintendent of the Patriarchal press.4 A fourth tract
included in the list but not mentioned in Walsh's 'notices of the authors' is
'0 AWloip 'Wrjpenj? . . . vvv irpwrov TUTTOIS ii<8oQels irapa -rrjs iv AovSlvut
'Eraipelas rwv Qp-qoKevTiK&v IJovrjudrcov (i.e. the Religious Tract Society)
(1818).5 A Protestant tract consisting of extracts from Ghrysostom cer-
tainly was circulating at this time. The American congregationalist
missionaries, the Revs. Pliny Fisk and Levi Parsons distributed copies
during their visit to the famous Academy of Chios in 1820. Neophytos

1
B.F.B.S., 13th Report, 1817, 76-7.
2
Most Karamanli works were translations of Greek originals, but I have been unable
to discover the Greek original of this work. It is possible that the author was Anastasios
the Sinai te.
8
R. Walsh, A Residence at Constantinople, London 1836, ii. 487-9. This interesting list
is not included among the publishers' and booksellers' catalogues in G. I. Phousaras's
useful recent publication, Bif}\iaypa<j>ia T&V {XXrjvucwv f}ifi\ioypa$iu>v 1791-19,47, Athens 1961.
4
The Life of William Kelly was apparently translated via the French.
5
See D. Gkinis and B. Mexas, '£AAijw/c^ Bif&wypafia 1800-1839, i. Athens 1939,
nos. 1103, 1129, 1019, 1075.
63
 R. CLOGG
Bambas apparently recommended his students to read the tract 'with
attention and seriousness'.1 It is curious to find that at this early date
Protestant missionary propaganda was apparently being printed at the
Patriarchal press.
It is regrettable that Pinkerton, in his list, did not give more detailed
information about nos. 8, 13 and 14. Nos. 8 and 13 may refer to editions of
the Povx 'A^ierXiyrj which, while it contains chapters devoted to aspects of
liturgical worship, can in no sense be described as a Turkish version of the
Liturgy. Even if this identification with the Povx 'A^ierXiyij is correct,
there still remains no. 14, Liturgy, &c, Venice 1793, which it is difficult to
relate to any known edition. Admittedly if the tentative identification of
nos. 8 and 13 is correct, then Pinkerton's use of the term 'liturgy' is so all-
embracing as to be meaningless. However, this entry does raise, although
it by no means answers, an intriguing problem of the religious history of
the Karamanlides, namely whether the Orthodox Liturgy (that is, either
of the three liturgies in use among the Orthodox; the Liturgies of St. John
Chrysostom or St. Basil or of the Presanctified) was ever celebrated among
them entirely in the Turkish language. The evidence on this point is slight
and decidedly ambiguous, but the question perhaps merits a closer study.
It is well known that certain parts of the Liturgy, notably the Gospel
and Epistle, were read in Turkish as well as Greek in many parts of Asia
Minor. Before the Exchange of Populations the practice of reading the
Gospel at the Aevrepi) 'Avdarao-r) in Greek, Turkish and occasionally
Armenian was widely observed, as, for instance, in Pharasa (Farasa)
where the Gospel was read in Greek, Armenian and Turkish, and in
Anaku, where it was read in Greek and Turkish. In Anaku, the local
schoolmaster was sometimes called upon after the service to translate the
'ATTOOTOXOS and the o~q/j.epov Kpefiarai em £v\ov into Turkish. 2 At Ayvallk,
a noted centre of the 'Neo-Hellenic Enlightenment', the Gospel on Easter
Sunday was customarily read in Arabic, Turkish, Latin, French, Italian
and Greek, but this was clearly exceptional.3 The practice of reading the
Gospels in the two languages was already well established in the eighteenth
century. For, as Seraphim of Antalya records, on Easter Sunday, during
the celebration of the Holy Liturgy and at Vespers, the Gospel was read
first in Greek and then in Turkish.4 Preaching was, of course, usually in
1
Missionary Herald, xvii (1821), 79.
2
D. Loukopoulos and D. Petropoulos, 'H Aai/07 Xarpela T<SV Qapaowv, Athens 1949, 114,
and T. Kostakis, 'H 'AVCCKOV, Athens 1963, 212. See also B. A. M(ystakidis), KamrahoKiKa,
Ilapvaoaos, xv (1893) 456-7, P. A. Chikbachev, Klein-Asien,Leipzig 1887,179,and B.F.B.S.,
20th Report, 1824, 80. The MSS. of the Gospels seen by Pinkerton were doubtless
intended for liturgical use.
8
A. Firmin Didot, Notes d'un Voyage fait dans le Levant..., Paris 1826, 398.
* KepeK AarovpyiaTa omwav, Kepkx 'Etrnepivis /Joocrara 'IKLVT^J] 'Avdaram oXovaow. Bk pco^rja,
fik TO^I TTOv/wrrfe yaf/ia/u($v Per^rj irovrovpta, tfipa 6X Kiovvri 'IKI XioaviXev OKOvpXap rai/xa Evocy-
yiXmv, 7XT£IAIJ T£e/JcwrAapi, Poiix 'AfierXiyj, Venice 1782, 54. T h i s section, t h e Gospel in
Greek and Turkish, in Professor Dawkins's copy (now in the Taylor Institution, Oxford)
is heavily stained with candle wax; evidence perhaps of its frequent liturgical use! See
also Salaville and Dalleggio, i. 69.
64
 PUBLICATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF KARAMANLI TEXTS
Turkish in those regions where the Orthodox population was predomi-
nantly Turkish speaking. Seraphim of Antalya, a monk of Kykkos in
Cyprus and later metropolitan of Ankara (1775-9), w n o was respon-
sible for the publication of many Karamanli editions during the eighteenth
century, taught and preached in Constantinople in both Greek and Turkish.
Indeed, it appears that Turkish was Seraphim's first language, for in his
introduction to the 'IimXa. KeXafii (Venice 1753) he states that he had for a
long time studied Greek and the religious texts necessary for the education
of the Orthodox Christians of the East.1 During the early part of the
present century R. M. Dawkins heard a sermon in Turkish at Fertek and
H. Grdgoire found that this practice was observed in Pharasa, although
both these villages were nominally Greek speaking.2 The Rev. Theodore
Theodoridis, a native of Pharasa, recalls that in his native village the
Gospel was customarily read on Easter Sunday in Greek, in 'Pharasiotika'
(from a version of the Kyriakodromion in the local Greek dialect) and in
Armenian. It is perhaps significant that the specimens of the dialect of
Pharasa published by P. Lagarde consists of passages from the Easter
Gospels.3
It was not only the Orthodox clergy who employed Turkish for
preaching. In a communication to the Committee of the Bible Society,
dated 4 August 1823, C. Bianchi, one of Louis XVIII's Oriental secre-
taries, related how he had heard Latin missionaries from France and
Austria, as well as Catholic Armenian priests, using Turkish for preaching. 4
It was possibly for the use of such Latin priests that a Turkish manuscript
(Turkish MS. no. 23) in the John Rylands Library, Manchester, was
compiled. This consists of an eighteenth-century French/Turkish diction-
ary, the last 61 pages containing a Turkish translation in Roman charac-
ters of passages from the New Testament, entitled 'Plusieurs passages de
1'eVangile tres utiles tant pour converser que pour exhorter apres la con-
fession. 1767'.6
This partial use of Turkish in the Liturgy was widespread throughout
Asia Minor. Yet some authorities, mainly travellers, have gone further
than this and have claimed that in certain parts of Asia Minor, and even in
Constantinople, it was the practice for the Liturgy to be sung entirely in
Turkish. Alexander Helladius, writing in the early eighteenth century,
noted that the 'Caraimanlii', in addition to using a Turkish translation of
the New Testament, celebrated the sacred offices in Turkish: 'Cum enim
1
D. E. Danieloglu, 2epcuj>elix ixrjTpoiroXlmjs 'Ayiajpas \<4TTaAAeus, Constantinople 1865,
4. Salaville and Dalleggio, i. 14.
a
R. M. Dawkins, 'The Recent Study of Folklore in Greece,' Papers and Transactions
. . . Folk-Lore Society, London 1930, 132; and H. Gregoire, Bulletin de Correspondence
Hellinique, xxxiii (1909), 148.
8
P. Lagarde, 'Neugriechisches aus Kleinasien', Abhandlungen der Koniglichen Gesell-
schafl der Wissenschaften zu GBttingen, xxxiii (1886), 8-14.
4
8
B.F.B.S. 20th Report, 1824, 147.
The following note is appended at the end of the passage; 'Tous ces passages de
l'Evangile ont 6t6 Merits par le pere Gery Desirs de Cambray. Le turcq est un turcq choisi,
et qu'un chacun comprend aise'ment'. I owe this reference to Mr. J. R. Walsh.
5—J.E.H. 65
 R. CLOGG
Graecam linguam ignorent, Graecae tamen religioni addictissimi sint, &
sacra officia iis & novum Testamentum in Turcica lingua conscriptum,
cum in Asia, turn Constantinopoli, in Parochia S. Constantini versus
septem turres.. . legi permissum est'.1 W. M. Leake, in his account of his
travels in Asia Minor in 1800, wrote that, 'at Konia we are comfortably
accommodated in the house of a Christian belonging to the Greek church,
but who is ignorant of the language, which is not even used in the church-
service: they have the four Gospels and the Prayers printed in Turkish'. 2
Leake's reference to 'the four Gospels and the Prayers printed in Turkish'
at such an early date is of considerable interest. For, although short
extracts from the Gospels were incorporated in several Karamardi books
(e.g. the 'InnXa KeXafjU, Venice 1753) published before this date, the first
complete edition of the Gospels was not published until 1826 in Con-
stantinople. Possibly here Leake refers to an unknown earlier edition,
published prior to 1800. In an earlier work Leake had written that 'the
generality of the Cappadocian Greeks are ignorant of their own language
and use the Turkish in the church-service', adding that 'Seraphim,
Metropolitan Bishop of Angora' had published 'several religious Tracts
in the Turkish language, for the use of the Christians of Asia'. 3 Leake's
account is especially interesting for the only sizeable Orthodox community
in the region of Konya at this time was Sille, where a dialect of Greek was
spoken until the Exchange of Populations in 1923-4. C. Niebuhr, however,
who visited Sille in 1766, noted that although the women and those who
had little contact with the Turks spoke only Greek, many of the men who
earned a living as shopkeepers in Konya spoke 'freilich auch tiirkisch', which
they wrote with Greek characters. 4 At the time of Niebuhr's visit Sille was
inhabited solely by Greeks but by the early nineteenth century the popula-
tion was half Greek, half Turkish; this influx of Turkish inhabitants
doubtless accelerated the use of Turkish by the Orthodox inhabitants of
Sille.5 In 1827, H. D. Leeves lodged with the 'chief Greek' of the town of
Soma, a native of Sille, who was 'highly pleased at obtaining a copy of
the Turco-Greek Testament, as he understood Greek very imperfectly'.6
That Turkish was in frequent use among the Orthodox inhabitants of Sille
is confirmed by a recently published inscription in Karamanlidika from
the church of the Archangel Michael, recording that the church was re-
stored for a third time in 1833.7 The adoption of Turkish as the vernacular
by the Greek-speaking communities of the interior was a continuing pro-
cess until the early years of the present century. Andaval, for instance,
1
Alexander Helladius, Status praesens Ecclesiae Graecae, Nurnberg?, Altdorf? 1714, 137.
• W. M. Leake, Journal of a Tour in Asia Minor, London 1824, 46.
* W. M. Leake, Researches in Greece, London 1814, 87, 228.
4
C. Niebuhr, Reisebeschreibung, iii: Reisen . . . durch Kleinasien . . ., Hamburg 1837, 128.
5
Archbishop Kyrillos, 'Iaropiicq Tl<ipiypa$-{\, Constantinople 1815, 44.
6
B.F.B.S. 24th Report, 1828, 89.
7
See S. Eyice, 'Konya ile Sille arasmda Ak Manastir, Manakib al-'arifin'deki
Deyr-i Eflatun', Sarktyat Mecmuasi, vi (1966), 158. A corrupt Greek (/xm>{owc p'ov^la) was,
however, still spoken in Sille at this time, as throughout the nineteenth century. See
Moysis of Adana, Movrevefia IXifiXeplv iT?/toAi}, Smyrna 1836, 156.
66
 PUBLICATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF KARAMANLI TEXTS

appears to have been Greek-speaking until the middle of the nineteenth

century, although by the end of the century it was almost entirely Turkish-
speaking.1
Pinkerton also claimed that 'it is an indisputable fact . . . that in a
great part of Anatolia even the public worship of the Greeks is now
performed in the Turkish tongue'. 2 Somewhat later in the century,
B. Poujoulat wrote of the Greeks of Usak, Kula and Geubek that they were
'completement Strangers a la langue de leurs ancetres; cette belle langue
est perdue parmi eux; ils ne connaissent que celle des Osmanlis, leurs
dominateurs. L'EVangile et les prieres de l'figlise sont traduits en turc. Les
papas eux-memes ne savent pas un mot de la langue d'Homere. Rien de
pareil ne se rencontre peut-etre dans toutes les autres parties de l'Orient'. 3
Writing at the end of the century both E. Naumann 4 and G. Jacob 5
referred to P. A. Chikhachev's assertion that in Isparta in ancient Pisidia
the entire divine service was held in Turkish. In fact Chikhachev's evi-
dence on this point is somewhat ambiguous. In his travel notes he records
that in 1847 he visited Isparta, where he stayed in the house of a rich
Greek merchant. In Isparta, Chikhachev wrote, Greek had passed
completely out of use and the Greeks 'bedienen sich auch beim Gottes-
dienste ausschliesslich des tiirkischen'.6 Yet in his Klein-Asien his assertion
is not quite so sweeping. Describing another visit to Isparta in 1853, he
writes of his astonishment on hearing the Gospel read in Turkish: 'aber
wie gross war mein Erstaunen, als ich die Kirche betrat und den Priester
das Evangelium tiirkisch verlesen horte, unseren Heiland in der Sprache
Mohameds, des Erzfeindes des Christianismus, verkiindend'.7 Interesting-
ly, Chikhachev noted that the translation used for this purpose was one of
the British and Foreign Bible Society's, but he makes no mention of the
rest of the service being in Turkish.
At the turn of the present century, E. Nahmer, prompted by his visit
to Enegil, noted that 'selbst im Gottesdienst wurde bisher iiberall und
wird auch jetzt noch vielfach die tiirkische Sprache angewandt oder die
Priester plapperten auswendig gelernte Spriiche her, die ihnen wie der
Gemeinde unverstandlich waren'.8
1
'Ev 'AvSafidA,OTTOOirpo dAiyou I n \pivov eAaAeiTO r) 'EXkfjvucq, vvv TcAeicor ^ f
roiho 8e Kiv&weva va ffv/iftj Odrrov ij fSpahiov els airdaas Toy 'E)&qvoif>u>vovs K(l>pas, P . Karolidis,
rXwooapwv £vyKpiTut6v . . ., S m y r n a 1885, 37.
8
See above, 60. Pinkerton, however, did not actually travel in Asia Minor.
8
B. Poujoulat, Voyage a Constantinople, dans VAsie Mineure . . ., Paris 1840, i. 126. See
also G. Bowen, op. cit., 41, 'in the interior . . . there are . . . Christian villages where
. . . the ritual of the Church has been translated into Turkish for their use.' Bowen also
did 4not travel in the interior, hence no great weight can be attached to his evidence.
6
E. Naumann, op. cit., 208.
G. Jacob, 'Zur Grammatik des Vulgar-Turkischen,' Z.D.M.G., lii (1898) 696.
6
H. Kiepert, P. v. Tschihatscheff's Reisen in Kleinasien und Armenien 1847-1863, Peter-
mann's Mittheilungen, Erganzungsheft Nr. 20, Gotha 1867, 4.
' P. A. Chikhachev, op. cit., 179.
6
E. von der Nahmer, Vom Mittelmeer zum Pontus, Berlin 1904, 166. See also H. H. von
Schweinitz, In Kleinasien. Ein Reitausfiugdurch das innere Kleinasiens..., Berlin 1906, 110-11;
'selbst der Gottesdienst wurde in turkischer Sprache abgehalten'.
67
 R. CLOGG
The accounts of these and other travellers do not, perhaps, carry a
great deal of conviction. The impression remains that, ignorant of either
spoken Greek or Turkish or both, but more frequently of the latter, they
were incapable of distinguishing between Greek chanted by unlettered
priests, who spoke no word of Greek and had little idea of its correct
pronunciation, and Turkish. Hearing, perhaps, the Gospel read un-
mistakably in Turkish, they assumed the rest of the service to be in the
same language.
Other, and more authoritative evidence, however, exists for the use of
Turkish throughout the Liturgy. According to the noted liturgical scholar
A. Baumstark, the Liturgy was celebrated in Turkish on an island in the
Egridirgolii: 'Erwahnung verdient schliesslich noch die Tatsache, dass
eine vereinzelte orthodoxe Gemeinde auf einer Insel des Egerdirsees in
Kleinasien die byzantinische Messe in tiirkischer Sprache feiert'.1 As
Baumstark gave no reference for this statement, W. Heffening believed
that his source may have been oral information. Another possibility is that
he had seen the account of D. G. Hogarth, the classical scholar and
archaeologist, who visited the Egridirgolii with a companion in 1890. At
the time of Hogarth's visit the village contained about fifty families with a
church and two priests. 'No service is held,' he wrote, 'except on the
greatest festivals, and then in Turkish, for neither priest nor laity under-
stand a word of Greek. The priests told us that the families become fewer
and fewer every year; the fathers could teach their children nothing about
their ancestral faith, for they knew nothing themselves; the Moslems were
"eating them u p " . ' 2 It is not clear, however, whether Hogarth actually
attended a service and what led him to believe that the services were held
in Turkish, although the most likely source of this information was one of
the priests. He mentions finding a dust- and mould-encrusted vellum
service book, dated 1492, after forcing the door of one of the churches on
the island. It is an intriguing though unlikely possibility that this MS.
service book was written in Turkish and that this was the source of his
remark.
Accounts of Egridir after the Turkish conquest unfortunately throw
little light on the Orthodox community of Nis adasi and even less on the
liturgical language in use among them. Among early travellers, for
instance, Ibn Battuta, who visited 'Akridur' in 1331, merely noted that it
was a prosperous town, 'a great and populous city with fine bazaars and
running streams, fruit trees and orchards'. 3 The account of the seven-
teenth-century Ottoman encyclopaedist, Katib Celebi, is rather more
1
A. Baumstark, Die Messe im Morgenland, Kempten 1906, 61, cited in W. Heffening
and C. Peters, 'Spuren des Diatessaron in liturgischer Oberlieferung. Ein tiirkischer und
ein Karsuni-Text'. OriensChristianus, 3rd Series, x (1935), 226. Baumstark was presumably
referring to the larger of the two islands in the lake, Nis adasi (Nijoi, the present-day
Yejil adasi).
8
D. G. Hogarth, A Wandering Scholar in the Levant, London 1896, 83-4.
8
The Travels of Ibn Battuta, a.d. 1325-1354, ed. H. A. R. Gibb, Cambridge 1962, ii.
422.
68
 PUBLICATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF KARAMANLI TEXTS
informative. He described two islands in the lake near 'Ekerder', the one
uninhabited, the other containing about 200 houses and inhabited partly
by Muslims, partly by Christians.1 At the time of P. Lucas's first visit to
'Igridi' in 1704, one of the islands was inhabited solely by Christians.2 In
1816 O. F. von Richter noted that the smaller of the two islands in the
lake 'Dshennada' (Can adasi), contained the house and garden of the
governor (kaymakam?), while the larger, 'Nis', was inhabited by Greek
fishermen and weavers.3 The Rev. F. V. J. Arundell, British chaplain in
Smyrna, visited Egridir in 1834 and found one of the islands, 'Djin-ada'
(Can adasi) the property of a Turkish landowner, while the other 'had a
mixed population of Turks and Greeks; the latter composed partly of
natives who speak only Turkish, and partly of Greeks from Cyprus'. 4 At
the time of Arundell's visit, the priests of Isparta and Honaz, both Turkish
speaking Orthodox communities in the region of Egridir, were of Pelopon-
nesian and Cypriot origin respectively. They presumably celebrated the
liturgy in Greek, while if, as Arundell noted, part of the Orthodox
community in Egridir consisted of Cypriots, it would seem likely that the
liturgical language in use would have been Greek. W. J. Hamilton visited
the town of Egridir, but not the islands, in 1836. He merely noted that the
two islands contained 150 houses, half of them inhabited 'by Armenians
or Greeks'.5
None of these travellers' accounts give any direct indication of the
languaged used by the Christians of Egridir in their worship. A traveller in
mid-century, A. Schonborn, did, however, attend the funeral of a child on
Nis adasi. According to him the service was in Greek, although neither the
priest nor the congregation could understand it, as they were all Turkish-
speaking.6 As Heffening has pointed out, if Greek were used in the burial
service at this time, then it is highly probable that the language of the
liturgy would have been Greek also, for it would have been less important
1
' . . . insula . . . alia & majori, ubi circiter 200 domicilia, eaque culta partim
Muslemiis, partim Infidelibus, qui sunt nautae, quorumque mulieres telam texunt,'
Katib Qelebi (Haci Khalifa), Gihan Numa, geographia orientalis, ed. M. Norberg, Londini
Gothorum 1818, ii. 435.
2
P. Lucas, Voyage . . . dans la Grece, VAsie Mineure . . ., Paris, 1712, i. 325-6. Lucas'
account of his second visit to 'Igridy' in 1714 makes no mention of Christians, Voyage . . .
en IJ14 . . . dans la Turquie . . ., Amsterdam 1720, i. 184.
8
. . . Wallfahrten im Morgenlande, ed. J. P. G. Ewers, Berlin 1822, 362.
• F. V. J. Arundell, Discoveries in Asia Minor ..., London 1834, '• 334> 35°> "• 165.
s
W. J. Hamilton, Researches in Asia Minor, Pontus, and Armenia . . ., London 1842, i.
481-2. Although uninformative about the Greek community Hamilton did record the
curious local tradition that, until some 800 years previously, Lake Egridir had been dry
land until a river running through it had been blocked 'by a magician named Eflat,' i.e.
Eflatun or Plato; see F. W. Hasluck, 'Plato in the Folk-Lore of the Konya Plain',
Annual of the British School at Athens, xviii (1911-12), 266.
6
'Doch wurde in des Reisenden Gegenwart ein totes Kind vor die Thiire gelegt, damit
der Papas es einsegne, was wie bei dem Gottesdienst in griechischer Sprache geschah, die
aber Niemand verstand, selbst der Papas nicht, da alle nur tiirkisch redeten . . . ' : A.
Schonborn, whose MS. account of his visit in 1841 was used by G. Ritter, Vergleichende
Erdkunde des Halbinsellandes Klein-Asien, Berlin 1859, ii. 486. Only a few merchants who
had traded on the coast knew their native tongue.
69
 R. CLOGG
services, such as those for burial and marriage, which would have been
first translated into the Turkish vernacular. F. Sarre visited the Egridir-
golii in the 1890s, at which time the larger island was inhabited by a few
Turks and about a thousand Turkish-speaking Greeks. He described the
town and islands in some detail but made no mention of the liturgical
language in use. He visited two churches on the eastern shore of the island;
one apparently unused, the other dedicated to St. Stephen.1 At this second
church he bought from the two priests a number of liturgical vessels.
Among these was a curious pewter bowl, with the inscription 'M. Luther'
repeated five times on the rim. 2 The following inscription, in four parts,
separated by rosette ornaments, had been added: 'O "Ayios ZJrefavos, an
indecipherable Turkish word with the date 1772 (?), the monogram IQ
('Icjdwrjs), Xal,-q and Haci Toan, preceded by an intertwined X and F.
The coincidence of the inscription with the dedicatory name of the church
provides strong evidence for the existence of an Orthodox, and very
probably Turkish-speaking community on Nis Adasi during the eighteenth
century. 3 The situation was little changed when H. Rott visited the island
in the early years of the present century. The priest understood no word of
Greek and was unable to decipher Rott's letter of introduction from the
Oecumenical Patriarch without first having it translated.4
The accounts of travellers who visited the Egridirgolii are far from
conclusive on the question of the language employed in the Liturgy. The
evidence of scholars such as Hogarth and Baumstark, however, is not to be
dismissed lightly. Moreover, if Baumstark did not follow Hogarth's
account, it is highly significant that both recorded the use of a Turkish
version of the Liturgy in the same small, isolated community in the
interior of Asia Minor. It would seem, however, that if Turkish did become
the liturgical language of the community, the change from Greek must
have taken place after Schonborn's visit in 1841 and presumably before
Hogarth's visit in 1890.
Other credible evidence exists for the use of Turkish as a liturgical
language among the Karamanlides. V. Grigorovich came across a MS.
from Mariupol, dated, c. 1779. This, according to O. Blau, consisted of the
entire Liturgy: 'er enthalt den completten liturgischen Apparat an
Gebeten, Doxologien, Perikopen, Exordien, u. dgl., der in griechischen
Gemeinden der orientalischen Kirche gebrauchlich ist. . .'. 5 Yet the MS.
to which Blau apparently refers scarcely merits, on the basis of Grigoro-
vich's own account of its contents, the description 'the entire liturgical
apparatus'. According to Grigorovich's description it appears to have been
a curious mixture of prayers and exorcisms, consisting of evening prayers,
1
F. Sarre, Reise in Kleinasien, Berlin 1896, 149-55.
2
For an illustration of bowls of this type, of sixteenth or seventeenth-century date
and originating from Augsburg or Niirnburg, see H. Otte and E. Wernicke, Handbuch der
kirklichen Kunst-Archdologie des deulschen Mittelallers, Leipzig 1883, i. 434-5.
8
F. Sarre, op. cit., 152-3.
* H. Rott, Kleinasiatische Denkmdler ..., Leipzig 1908, 86.
6
O. Blau, 'Griechisch-turkische Sprachproben', op. cit, 571.
70
 PUBLICATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF KARAMANLI TEXTS
prayers of St. Basil against evil demons, the prayer of the Seven Boys
(Sleepers) of Ephesus, a service of blessing of the Very Holy Mother of
God, an invocation against the afipa ascribed to Gregory the Miracle
Worker, prayers for the safe delivery of a child, for the dying, for funerals,
for a third marriage, a phylakterion (in Turkish), a synaxarion with only
St. Ephraim of Kherson listed for 7 March, an index to the Psalms and a
prayer for headaches'. 1 Blau was apparently able to examine the MS.
himself and this may have led to his description of it as 'the entire liturgical
apparatus'. At any rate, the existence of this and other Karamanli MSS.
from the region of Mariupol led him to believe that 'die dortigen griechi-
schen Christen selbst als liturgischer Sprache sich des Tiirkischen be-
dienten'. 2 B. A. Mystakidis also believed, on the basis of extant Karamanli
books, that the entire liturgy was celebrated in Turkish: 'aAAore /cat
avrf) oXrj 17 Xeirovpyia ireXelro TovpKiari, <I)S [laprvpovai TOVTO TCC virdp^ovra
/JijSAta, rovreoTiv at Si' eAAiji't/cdiv xaP<XKThpwv rovpicurrl jU.eTa<^pacreis'.3
Certainly Ottoman Turkish was used as a liturgical language among
certain of the Jacobite (Monophysite) Christians of Syria. W. Heffening
has discussed MS. versions of the wedding service (sixteenth century) and
the short Liturgy of St. James (c. 1800), both written in Turkish with
Syriac characters.4 On linguistic grounds it appears that these texts came
from the region of Malatya. 5 A MS. intercession to the Virgin (partly in
Karshuni and partly in Turkish Karshuni) was copied at the Church of
the Virgin in the Sikoglu quarter of Constantinople in 1866.6 It is signifi-
cant, however, that in the Anaphora, although the greater part was in
Turkish, especially sacred passages were still said only in Syriac, as, for
example, the prayer of consecration and the private prayers of the priest.
There does exist, then, a certain amount of evidence that, at least in
certain regions, the Turkish-speaking Orthodox Christians of Asia Minor
did celebrate the Liturgy in Turkish. This evidence is, however, by no
means conclusive and depends heavily on the accounts of two scholars
1
' . . . molitvami na povecher'e, . . . molitvui Vasiliya V. protiv zlukh demonov,
molitva sedmi otrokov v Efese, sluzhba Blagoveshcheniiu Presv. Bogoroditsui, zakliatiya
protiv aurui, pripisuivaemuiya, Grigoriyu chudotvortsu, razreshitel'nuiya molitvui
rodil'nitse, pri razluchenii dushi, na pogbrebenie, na tretii brak, molitva <f>v\aKrjpiov (po
turetski), sinaksar, v kotorom pod 7-m marta stoit' pamyat' tol'ko sv. Efrema Kherson-
skago, oglavlenie psalmov i molitva ot golovnoi boli'; Grigorovich, op. cit., 11. For a
German translation of this and other passages of Grigorovich's •work, see O. Blau, 'Uber
die griechisch-tiirkische Mischbevolkerung um Mariupol', Z.D.M.G., xxviii (1874),
577-80.
2
O. Blau, 'Ober Volksthum und Sprache der Kumanen', op. cit., 568.
8
B. A. Mystakidis, op. cit, 457.
* See W. Heffening and C. Peters, op. cit., 225-38 and W. Heffening, 'Liturgische
Texte der Nestorianer und Jakobiten in siid-turkischen Mundarten', Oriens Christianus,
series 3, xi (1936), 232-5.
6
W. Heffening, Die tiirkischen Transkriptionstexte. op. cit., 9. See also A. Mingana,
Catalogue of the Mingana Collection of Manuscripts, Cambridge 1933, i, Syriac ami Garshuni
Manuscripts, 966-7, no. 527 and C. Korolevsky, Living Languages in Catholic Worship,
London 1957, ao.
6
J. N. Berkers, 'Catalogue des manuscrits du fonds patriarcal de Rahmani conserves
a Charfet contenant des anaphores', Proche-Orient Chritien, xii (1962), 241.
 R. CLOGG
who do not elaborate as much as one might wish on their remarks. Yet
there is also considerable evidence against such a use of Turkish.
In the first place no MS. or printed book reproducing the entire
Liturgy in Turkish appears to have survived, despite the fact that Pinker-
ton, Blau and Mystakidis all refer to such works. Some of the liturgical
books in use among the Orthodox were translated into Karamanlidika, as,
for example, the EvayyeXiov and the WaXrrjpiov. However, the enormous
and complex task of accurately rendering into Turkish all the numerous
liturgical books used in Orthodox worship, and more especially the
EvxoXoyiov TO [ieya, containing the Liturgies of St. Ghrysostom, St. Basil
and of the Presanctified, was very probably beyond the intellectual
capacities of the Karamanlides themselves or of those who translated
religious works into Turkish on their behalf. Several Karamanli books
were, on the other hand, devoted to exposition of the significance of the
Liturgy. Among these were parts of the Poi>x 'A^ierXiy^ (Venice 1782)1
and the AeirovpyiKa yiavi oepl<j> Xeirovpyiccvqv re<f>aipi (Constantinople
1898).2 The "EXeyxos Sia/zapTupo/xeVwv. . ., (Athens 1876), which was
published to counter Protestant missionary activity in Asia Minor, con-
tained a section entitled 'Concerning the Holy Liturgy' Seplj> XenovyLa,
XaKKTjvrd. This consisted of an explanation of the meaning of the Liturgy,
together with a Turkish translation of important passages. The "AyKvpa
lx.r)TpoTTo\ovTov ouQX, -nehepiyLit, KXrjfievTos . . . , (Constantinople 1852) in-
cludes a detailed explanation of the Liturgy of the Presanctified, and of
the services for marriage and for Good Friday, together with the Turkish
text of the service for baptism, in which are included three short prayers in
Greek.3 In this version the words of ministration pronounced by the priest
over the child read as follows: 'AXXaxradXeviv KOVXOV (. . .) Bavrls oXovp,
IleTeplv lofilve. 'Aprfv. Be 'OyXovXovv. 'Afi-qv. Be 'At,l^ Povxow.*
Moreover, there seems to have persisted among the Karamanlides the
strong feeling that to translate the most sacred mysteries of the faith into
Turkish, the language of the infidel, was blasphemous. 'If you ask', reads
an anonymous passage in the 1803 edition of the 'A-navQioyM TT}S Xpio-
Ticcviicfjs niorews 'why these prayers for day and evening use are written
solely in Greek, you should know that the mysteries and rites of our religion
may not be translated into common Turkish . . . these prayers are written
in Greek only, so that the Christian who reads them does not blaspheme
against God'. 5 The passage adds that most of the books written by
1
See above, 62.
8
See J. Eckmann, op. cit., 830. This was a translation by S. Aliagiozoglu of Ioannis
E. Mesoloras's detailed explanation of the Liturgy, 'Eyxa-piSlov Xarovpyuajs -rrjs opfloBdfou
taiaroXudjs 'EKKXrjolas, Athens 1895.
3
Salaville and Dalleggio, ii. 15. See also the 'haSkS vafU, Constantinople 1852, ibid.,
ii. 12-13.
* The Greek text reads as follows: Bann^Tax 6 SoCAos TOO 0eoO (...)elsro Svo/xa nu Ilan-pos,
'A/t^v KOI TOV Ylov, 'Afirfv KOI TOV ''AyCov Ilvev^iaTos, 'fA\xrr\v.
8
"Eyep oopapocnnql, vi I)T£OOT m>0 /OOUVTOV? j3^ y«€T?ev^v o/coAoufli'oiCTOATyiowoan) yiot{7)Afnjy « j p ;
IlrjXrjv KI •n)vrijj.Tjt>ijv irqpXap Kmra TovpKT^t njAi]>T6 aXvl Te<f>olp dAfiayia HOVVKTJV -reylX-rqp . . . TIoC j3er{
oitpi lirarkr ytaAijnjJ ytourcarq AjjactvijvTe yia£i)A/iijj TT)/> KI dvoi 'AWaxa Kapar) aoryXeiv Xpioriav
72
 PUBLICATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF KARAMANLI TEXTS
Seraphim of Antalya are displeasing to Anthimos, patriarch of Jerusalem,
KOVTO oepr]<jyr)p Tlarpiyl Kvpios Kvpios "Avdipos xa£pe7v\e/)t. I t is, perhaps,
significant that this edition of the 'Andvdia[j.a was published at the patri-
archal press in Constantinople and that this particular passage is printed
only in Turkish, although the rest of the text is given in both Greek and
Turkish. Anthimos's apparent disapproval of Seraphim of Antalya's
efforts to provide religious tracts in the vernacular is somewhat curious in
view of his sponsorship of the 1799 edition of Seraphim's IIpooKvvrjTdpiov.
The British Museum copy of this work contains a portrait of Anthimos
facing the title page, but this is apparently wanting in the other known
copy. Moreover, Anthimos, patriarch of Jeruslaem, 1788-1808, was him-
self the author of two theological works in Arabic, an edition of the Psalter
together with his own commentary 'after the fathers of the Church', the
commentaries of Athanasius and Eusebius (Vienna 1792), and a treatise
entitled al-Hidayat al-Kawimah (The right way of the nation), (Vienna
1792). Anthimos's condemnation was, however, scarcely out of character,
for he was the epitome of orthodox reaction. The AiSao-KaXla ITarpiK^,
published under his name in Constantinople in 1798, strikingly illustrates
the persistence of the Byzantine mentality during the Tourkokratia. This
curious opuscule was a violent onslaught on the ideas of liberty and equality
propagated in the French Revolution, and an impassioned plea for the
preservation of the Orthodox faith pure and undefiled in the face of the
diabolical doctrines of the West, namely Catholicism, Lutheranism and
Calvinism. In support of these views the bizarre argument is propounded
that God had raised up the Ottoman Empire with the purpose of pre-
serving Orthodoxy. Its precise authorship is in dispute, yet as 'Odysseus'
pointed out 'no hostile and satirical critic' could have better defined the
position of the Orthodox hierarchy at this time.1 Anthimos's position as a
champion of Orthodox reaction was acknowledged in Sergios Makraios's
dedication to him of his self-styled rout of the adherents of Copernican
cosmology, the Tponaiov e/c rfjs eAAaSt/ojy TravoirXlas /cam rcov OTTOCSCUV TOV
KonepviKov iv rpiol 8ia\6yois (Vienna 1797). In these circumstances it is
perhaps scarcely surprising to find Anthimos condemning Seraphim's
efforts. It was, indeed, fortunate for the Karamanlides that other members
of the Orthodox hierarchy held different views, both more realistic and
more in keeping with Orthodox tradition, on the translation of sacred
texts into the Turkish vernacular. Indeed, the first printed Karamanli
Psalter, WaX-rripiov Tleya\vnkp ]8e IJaTiaax Nrafiovrovv (Constantinople
1764) states on the title page that it has been translated from Greek into
Turkish 'with the Holy Permission of God', 'AXXaxiiv ?£w <jep«f>l IXe.
It is also highly significant that many accounts record that Greek was
retained in church services even in those Orthodox communities in which
Kioixf>oip aoyX€/j.&n}v reyiov, p . 8 1 , quoted in Salaville and Dalleggio, i. 115. See also G. G.
Ladas, '0Mi^rp<moXirqsNaviraKTOV Kcd'ApnjsNeoQvrosMavpon/uiTr)s • • •,"0£vWdicn)s,i (1947),
44-
1
(C. Eliot), Turkey in Europe, London 1900, 277.
73
 R. CLOGG
not only did the congregation speak only Turkish, but where the priest, as
likely as not, was equally ignorant of Greek, and able to understand little
or nothing of the prayers he chanted. One of the earliest of these is a
document of 1437, part of a report presented to the Council of Basel,
published by S. P. Lambros: 'notandum est, quod in multis partibus
Turcie reperiuntur clerici, episcopi et arciepiscopi, qui portant vestimenta
infidelium et locuntur linguam ipsorum et nihil aliud sciunt in greco
proferre nisi missam cantare et evangelium et epistolas. Alias autem
orationes multi dicunt in lingua Turcorum'.1 Hans Dernschwam in the
mid-sixteenth century recorded that there dwelt in Constantinople, near
'Giedicula' (Yedikule) 'ein cristen volkh, nent man Caramanos, aus dem
landt Caramania, an Persia gelegen, seind cristen, haben den krichischen
glauben. Und ire mes (i.e. mass) haltten sy auff krichisch und vorstehen
doch nicht krichisch. Ir sprach ist turkisch'.2 Later in the same century,
Stephan Gerlach noted in his diary, dated 1577, that he had heard that
the few Christians in Philadelphia (Alasehir) and its neighbourhood spoke
Turkish, as did all the Christians in the interior, and that their priests
could only read the Liturgy, without understanding it: 'und die da seyen
reden wie alle Christen so weit in Asien wohnen alle Tuerckisch . . . Ihre
Priester verstehen kein Wort in der Mess nur dass sie es lesen koennen'.8 In
the latter part of the seventeenth century, J. Spon found Turkish generally
spoken in the Christian villages in the region of the Apolyont Golii in
ancient Bithynia, and that sometimes it was only the priest who knew any
Greek.4
More recent accounts also point to the use of the Greek Liturgy in
Turkish-speaking communities. Richard Chandler, who travelled in Asia
Minor in 1764-5 on behalf of the Society of Dilettanti, visited Philadelphia,
which at that time had an Orthodox population of some 300 families and
six churches each with its priest. He found that although the Orthodox
Christians were Turkish-speaking, the Liturgy was celebrated in Greek.
Through an interpreter, he spoke with the 'proto-papas or chief priest', the
bishop of Philadelphia's deputy, who knew only Turkish. 'We were
assured,' Chandler wrote, 'that the clergy and laity in general knew as
1
Ndos 'EXXijvopvrfiiwv, vii (1910), 366. This document is dated prior to the conquest and
thus Turcie refers here to Asia Minor. This often quoted passage is cited by, among
others, R. M. Dawkins, Modern Greek in Asia Minor, Cambridge 1916, 1 and P. Wittek,
Das Furstentum Mentesche, Studie zur Geschichte Westkleinasiens im 13-15 Jh., Istanbul 1934,
114. O. L. Barkan, in 'Les deportations comme mdthode de peuplement et de colonisa-
tion dans l'Empire Ottoman, Revue de la FaculU des Sciences Economiques de I'UniversiU
d'Istanbul, 11 (1949-50), 76, following the Turkish translation of Wittek by O. S. Gokyay,
Mentese Beyligi, 13-15 inci asvrda garbi Kugiik Asya tarihine ait tetkik, Ankara 1944, 113, in
which is given the Latin text together with a Turkish translation, is not justified in
claiming that in certain regions of Asia Minor Christian priests 'officiaient en turc'.
2
F. Babinger, ed., Hans Dernschwam's Tagebuch einer Reise nach Konstantinopel und
Kleinasien (1553-55), Munich 1923, 52.
s
Stephan Gerlachs des Aeltem Tage-Buch der. . . an die Ottotnannische Pfortezu Constantinopel
abgefertigten und durch . . . David Ungnad . .. vollbrachter Gesandtschafft, Frankfurt 1674, 372.
• J . Spon, Voyage d'ltalie, de Dalmatic, de Grece et du Levant, fait aux armies 1675 & 1676,
Amsterdam 1679, i. 216.
74
 PUBLICATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF KARAMANLI TEXTS
little of Greek as the proto-papas; and yet the liturgies and offices of the
church are read as elsewhere, and have undergone no alteration on that
account'. 1 Benjamin Barker,2 the Bible Society's agent in Smyrna, during
a tour of Asia Minor in the summer of 1823, recorded that in a Greek
village a short distance from Iznik, 'the people speak no other language
than the vulgar Turkish, like those of Isnic; the church books being in
Greek, are interpreted to them in Turkish by the priest'. The metropolitan
of Bursa told him that, although he preached in Turkish and the Gospel
was read in church in that language, 'the prayers in church are read in
Greek'. 3 C. F. M. Texier wrote of the Greeks of Urgiip that 'il n'y en a pas
un qui connaisse la langue grecque, et leurs pretres meme n'en font guere
usage que dans la liturgie'. 4 During the middle and late nineteenth
century, the liturgical language of those Greeks settled in the Crimea and
in the region of Mariupol, even among those whose vernacular was
Turkish, was apparently Greek.5 According to I. Balabanis, an acute
observer of the Orthodox Christians of Asia Minor, yu6vr\ T\ fj.rjrr)p'EKKXr)ota
. . . d>s KaXrj KCtl <f>iX6<7Topyos a$eX<f>r) TrepteTTTv£a.TO iv r a t ? ay/caAat? avrrjs
TTJV iXXrjvLKrjV yXaiooav . . . 'Ev (JLOVT) rfj 'EKKXTJOICC 6 MiKpaoidrrjs r)KpoS.TO
<f>d6yya)v eXX-qviKobv . . .6 R. Oberhummer and H. Zimmerer recorded that
although the Gospel was frequently read in church from Karamanli texts,
the Liturgy itself was in Greek, which many priests could scarcely read,
let alone understand.7 G. Hirschfeld similarly noted that even in com-
munities in which Karamanli books circulated the Liturgy was celebrated,
if uncomprehendingly, in Greek.8 E. Naumann was assured by a
Dr. Isaakides, a native of Kermir, that nowhere in Turkey was the divine
service celebrated entirely in Turkish, for it lay in the interests of all
Greeks, even those in exclusively Turkish speaking communities, to pre-
serve for Greek as large a part as possible in the services of the church.9
Occasionally a mixture of both Greek and Turkish seems to have been
used. G. T. Keppel noted that the Orthodox villages in the region of Sart
and Kula were Turkish-speaking. 'Their prayers', he added, 'are recited
in an odd medley of both languages. I believe the Lord's Prayer to run
thus: 'Tldrep bizim 6 iv TOIS ovpavois &C.'.10
1
R. Chandler, Travels in Asia Minor . .., Oxford 1775, 250.
2
For an interesting account of Barker's activities in Rumania, see E. D. Tappe, 'A
Bible Society Agent in the Rumanian Principalities', The Slavonic and East European
Review, xlii (1963-4), 388-402.
8
B.F.B.S., 20th Report, 1824, 79-80.
4
C. F. M. Texier, Description de I'Asie Mineure . . ., Paris 1839—49, "• 82 and the same
author's Asie Mineure . . ., Paris 1862, 554.
6
K. A. Palaiologos, op. cit., 613 and G. Lagos, op. cit., 45.
9
I. Balabanis, op. cit., 11.
7
R. Oberhummer and H. Zimmerer, Durch Syrien und Kleinasien, Berlin 1899, 116.
See also E. Bore1, Correspondance et mhnoires d'un voyageur en Orient, Paris 1840, i. 212.
8
'Die Griechen des Innern hatten ihre eigene Sprache fast aller Orten vergessen,
lasen Biicher in tiirkischer Sprache, aber mit griechischen Lettern, verstanden so wenig
wie ihre Priester die Gebete, welche sie mechanisch in ihrer verlorenen Muttersprache
hersagten': G. Hirschfeld, Aus dem Orient, Berlin 1897, 313.
8
E. Naumann, op. cit., 208.
10
G. T. Keppel, Narrative of a Journey across the Balcan . . ., London 1831, ii. 331.
75
 R. CLOGG
Even in Greek speaking communities the Liturgy, chanted mechani-
cally by illiterate priests, was virtually incomprehensible. The Rev. John
Covel, Chaplain to the Levant Company in Constantinople during the
late seventeenth century, observed rather acidly that 'when any one
mumbles over the Lord's Prayer, or any other, not minding what he saith,
or quite thinking of something else, and speaks or repeats it to himself
purely (as I may say so) Mechanically, or like a Parrot; at this time, I
cannot but think, that there is neither true Faith nor Affiance nor Devotion
in him: and how can we think otherwise of a Drousy Yawning Greek;
(perhaps then well drencht with Wine P)'.1 During the same period J. Spon
recorded a similar impression after attending the Esperinos at a small
Greek village on the Hellespont: 'le Pretre les chanta de la plus miserable
maniere du monde, & Ton ne discernoit pas un mot de ce qu'il disoit.
Peut-etre aussi n'y entendoit-il rien lui-meme; car ils sont la pliipart si
ignorans dans les Villages, qu'ils ne sgavent pas seulement lire leur Office,
& ce qu'ils en disent, ils le sgavent ordinairement par coeurV If Greek
chanted by Greek-speaking priests was so difficult to understand, then
liturgical Greek chanted by Turkish-speaking priests must have been
doubly unintelligible. This, as has been remarked above, was probably
responsible for the belief on the part of several travellers that the entire
Liturgy was celebrated in Turkish.
Finally, there seems little reason why the Karamanlides would have
clung so tenaciously to the Greek alphabet long after they had ceased to
understand Greek if it were not so that they should be able to read the
Greek service books, even though they could not understand their con-
tents. It is, moreover, interesting to note that in negotiations at the time of
the Turkish War of Independence with Papa Eftim, the 'General Repre-
sentative of the Christians of Anatolia' and head of the Turkish Orthodox
Church, the Oecumenical Patriarch Meletios IV, was prepared to meet
his demands to the extent of setting up 'a special ecclesiastical province,
autonomous but subject to the Oecumenical Patriarchate, in which the
liturgical language would be Turkish'. 3 At a 'National Assembly' of the
Turkish Orthodox Church held in Kayseri in May 1922 it was resolved
that the church service books be translated into Turkish.4 However, in the
two of the three churches in Galata presently within the jurisdiction of the
1
J. Covel, Some Account of the Present Greek Church ..., Cambridge 1722, 380.
2
J. Spon, op. cit., i. 157. See also Salomon Schweigger, 'all ir Gottesdienst wird in pur
oder fein Griechisch verricht/welches der Gemein Poesel nicht/oder doch gar wenig
d a r a u s versteht . . .,' Ein newe Reyssbeschreibtmg . . . nach Constantinopel und Jerusalem . . .,
Niimberg 1608, 213. In modern times liturgical Greek seems to have remained largely
unintelligible in the Greek-speaking villages of Asia Minor; see C. Danguitsis, Dialecto-
logie nio-hellinique. £tude descriptive du dialecte de Dimirdisi-Brousse, Ash Mineure, Paris 1943,
27 and Daniefidis, 'Evrvncooeis «« rijs Mwpas 'Aoias, iSevo^anjy, vii (1910), 314.
3
See H. J. Psomiades, 'The Oecumenical Patriarchate under the Turkish Republic:
The First Ten Years', Greek Orthodox Theological Review, vi (i960), 62. See also Echos
d'Orient, xx (1921), 364.
4
D. Mauropolos, IlaTpiapxiKai oe\!Ses. To OlicovfienK&v IlaTpiapxetov OTTO 1878-1949,
Athens i960, 280.
76
 PUBLICATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF KARAMANLI TEXTS
Independent Turkish Orthodox Patriarchate (Bagimsiz Turk Ortodoks
Patrikhanesi) which are used by Turkish Orthodox Christians, Greek
service books are apparently still in use. It does seems, however, that an
attempt was made to introduce a Turkish Liturgy in the 1930s, as part of
an effort to bring the Turkish Orthodox Church into line with the drive
to 'Turkicise' Muslim worship. After the introduction of the Latin
alphabet in 1929 the British and Foreign Bible Society's Turkish transla-
tions in Latin character were used for the Epistle and Gospel.1
It is also significant that among the considerable body of Turkish-
speaking Armenians, both Gregorian and Uniate, the Liturgy was
celebrated in Armenian, although preaching was frequently carried out in
Turkish. 2 Whether this was always the case is not clear. Among a number
of MSS. despatched to the Bibliotheque du Roi in 1741 by the Comte de
Castellane was the following, described as 'Libro che, quantumque sia
scritto con caratteri armeni, con tutto cio e in lingua tartara, ed e compendio
delTufficio-divino degli Armeni, il quale contiene in se le orazioni ed altre
cose piu essenziali e necessarie dell'ufficio divino'. 3 Instances of a similar
uncomprehending attachment to the traditional liturgical language are
found among other bodies of Christians. William of Rubruck in the mid-
thirteenth century noted that the Nestorians in China, 'say their offices
and have their sacred books in Syrian, but they do not know the language,
so they chant like those monks among us who do not know grammar'. 4
John of Monte Corvino, during his mission to the Mongols later in the
next century, found a similar ignorance of the Syriac in which his
Nestorian predecessors had conducted their worship. He accordingly
celebrated the Roman mass in Uigur Turkish, although he never com-
pleted his proposed translation of the entire Roman office into that
language. 5 This ignorance of the liturgical language persisted in several
Nestorian communities during the nineteenth century. 6 Likewise, in the
thirteenth century Jacques de Vitry remarked that the Arabic-speaking
Orthodox Christians of Palestine were quite ignorant of the Greek
liturgical language in use.7
1
G. Jaschke, 'Die Ttirkisch-Orthodoxe Kirche', Der Islam, xxxix (1964), 126. The
liturgical texts, however, remained typewritten. Gotthard Jaschke's recent and very full
account of the Turkish Orthodox Church throws a great deal of light on this curious
episode in recent Turkish history. It seems that the Rev. J. A. Douglas's colourful
assertion that the 'Angoran Parliament . . . bastinadoed poor Papa Eftim' into leading
the Turkish Orthodox Church is very wide of the mark, 'The "Turkish National
Churches'", The Christian East, iii (1922), 124. For an interesting account from the
Turkish Orthodox viewpoint see Teoman Ergene, Istikldl Harbinde Turk Ortodokslan,
Istanbul 1951 and liana EiBvntyevSiviv'Op868o£o$ e^oAie fiovpaSfcarri pi IlaTpiKxaveyl teapoy
)j,ovSa<f>aavai±(cn, Istanbul n.d.
2
H. Berberian, La Literature Armino-Turque, P.T.F., ii. 809.
8
H. Omont, Missions archiologiques francaises en Orient, Paris 1902, ii. 688.
4
The Journey of William of Rubruck to the Eastern
6
Parts of the World, 1253-55, e d-
W. W. Rockhill, London 1900, 158. C. Korolevsky, op. cit., gi.
e
G. P. Badger, The Nestorians and their Rituals: with the Narrative of a Mission to
Mesopotamia and Coordistan in 1842-1844 . . ., London 1852, i. 61, 218.
''Jacques de Vitry's History of Jerusalem, Palestine Pilgrims' Text Society, xi (1896),
68-9.
77
 R. CLOGG
On balance, then, we may agree with the opinion of R. M. Dawkins,
who knew more than most about the situation of the Orthodox communities
of Asia Minor, that 'the liturgical language of the Orthodox church was
everywhere Greek, even where the people did not understand the language
at all. Sermons were preached—I have heard one myself at Fertek in
Cappadocia—in Turkish, but statements of some travellers that the actual
liturgy was in Turkish are, I believe, not correct.'1 The accounts of some
scholars, however, as distinguished as Hogarth and Baumstark, and the
references, such as those of Pinkerton and Mystakidis, to the existence of
Karamanli versions of the Liturgy, make it difficult to arrive at conclusions
on this subject with absolute certainty.
Pinkerton followed up his discoveries in the Crimea during his visit to
Venice and Vienna later in the same year, 1816. While in Vienna he
enquired into the possibility of having the entire New Testament printed
in Karamanlidika in Venice for the Society. He reported to the Committee
that 'the edition in the Greek character ought, in my opinion, to be printed
in Venice. I have here seen a catalogue of Greek and Turkish books2;
printed in that city: the latter all in the Greek character; among which I
was happy to find the version of the Acts and Epistles, a copy of which I
saw in Bahchisaray, published by Glyky, a distinguished printer in
Venice.3 One of his friends here informed me, that he would certainly be
very willing to undertake an edition of the whole New Testament, and
that it may be printed at a very reasonable rate. Mr. Kopitar 4 has already
written to a learned correspondent in Venice, and directed him to purchase
for me a copy of all that has been printed of the Holy Scriptures, in the
Turkish language, in the Armenian and Greek characters. I therefore
hope to be soon in possession of the Acts and Epistles; and shall, with the
aid of our learned friend, Baron von Diez,5 in Berlin, examine the correct-
ness of the translation and language; should we find these good, then one
of our friends in Vienna, or one of your correspondents in the Ionian
Islands, might be authorized to employ the same person in Venice, who
1
R. M. DawkinSj The Recent Study of Folklore in Greece, op. cit., 132. See also C. Huart,
'Notice sur trois ouvrages en turc d'Angora imprimis en caracteres grecs', Journal
Asiatique, xvi (1900), 459-60 and P. Karolidis, op. cit., 30.
2
See G. I. Phousaras, op. cit., 26-7, for catalogues of Nicholas Glykis for 1798, 1802,
1805, 1806, 1812 and 1818. The 1818 and 1821 catalogues have sections devoted
especially to Karamanli books.
8
This was the 'A{fit, 'ATrooroXooXaptjv ap-tXtp-fj fi& iitxTovirXepy, Venice 1811.
4
Bartholomaeus Kopitar, librarian of the Hofbibliothek in Vienna, was censor of
Slavonic and Greek publications printed within the Habsburg Empire, see his 'Selbst-
biographie' in Barth Kopitars kleinere Schriften, ed. F. Miklosich, Vienna 1857, i. 11. See
also I. F. von Mosel, Geschichte der Kaiserl. Konigl. Hofbibliothek zu Wien, Vienna 1835,
227-8; and P. K. Enepekides, Kopitar und die Griechen, Wiener Slavistisches Jahrbuch,
iii ('953)> 53-7 0 - Kopitar's official title was apparently 'Censor graeco-slavicus ordi-
narius', see M. Tersakoved, Kopitar und Vuk, Jagic-Festschrift, Berlin 1908, 480. Kopitar's
private library was offered for sale to the British Museum in 1843 but declined. The
catalogue (British Museum Add. MS. 18277) contains no Karamanli works.
6
Baron Heinrich von Diez, a former Prussian Ambassador to Constantinople and a
proficient Orientalist, had been asked by the Bible Society to prepare for publication the
Leiden MS. of Albert Bobowski's translation of the Bible into Turkish.
78
 PUBLICATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF KARAMANLI TEXTS
published the Acts and the Epistles, in 1810,1 to print an edition of the
whole New Testament, at the expense of the British and Foreign Bible
Society'.2 Nothing came of Pinkerton's plans to have the New Testament
printed in Venice. He did, however, learn from the Armenian Mekhitarist
monks in Vienna, some of whom were from 'Caramania', 'that the common
people there, Armenians as well as Greeks, understand nothing but the
common Turkish dialect spoken in Anatolia, and that all their business is
transacted in that language, written with Greek or Armenian characters—
that thereby their affairs are kept secret from the Turks whose Arabic
alphabet not one in a thousand of the Greeks and Armenians knows how to
read, or ever attempts to learn'. 3
It was not until his visit to Constantinople in 1819 that Pinkerton was
able to take any further action with regard to the Bible Society's proposed
Karamanli translation. In Constantinople he was also actively concerned
with preparations for an edition of New Testament in Turkish with
Armenian characters; in a letter of 12 October 1817 to the Rev. William
Jowett of the Church Missionary Society he had stressed the need for a
'common Turkish' translation in Armenian character for the Turkish-
speaking Armenians of Asia Minor. He added that he had been in contact
with the Armenian Patriarch in Constantinople as to the best way of
bringing about such a translation.* The basis for the Greek and Armenian
character editions was to be the Society's Arabic-character Turkish New
Testament then in the process of being printed in Paris. In Constantinople
Pinkerton was assured by M. Ruffin, a leading Orientalist, that the
Society's proposed Arabic-character edition 'was not in the pompous style
of the Divan, a mixture of Arabic and Persian, but chaste and elegant,
which would be read with pleasure by the man of letters and be under-
stood by the lowest in Society'.5 Pinkerton's informant seems to have been
the same Ruffin who, as the unfortunate chargi d'affaires of the French
Embassy to the Porte at the time of Napoleon's Egyptian expedition,
spent three years imprisoned in the fortress of Yedikule.6 According to de
Peysonnel, Ruffin, sometime Professor of Turkish and Persian at the
College Royal de France, 'could have challenged in Turkish, Persian and
Arabic, both for the purity of the style and the knowledge of the literature,
the ablest Mahometan writers'.7 The Society's Paris editions of the New
1
Pinkerton again refers to an 1810 edition of the 'AXftt, 'AnoaToXooXafrqv a/x
tiexrovTtXepri, Venice 1811. See above, 60.
2
Letter of 1 September 1816, from Vienna, B.F.B.S., 13th Report, 1817, 98-9.
3
Ibid., 98. It appears that rather more of the Karamanlides could read the Arabic
alphabet than this passage would suggest. On this point see pt. II. Pinkerton's 1816
letters are also printed in a pamphlet entitled Letters from R. Pinkerton, on his late tour in
Russia . . ., to promote the object of the British and Foreign Bible Society, L o n d o n 1817.
* Missionary Register for 1818, 299.
8
Letter of 7 October 1819, from Constantinople, B.F.B.S., 16th Report, 1820, 17.
6
See L. Lagarde, 'Note sur les journaux frangais de Constantinople a Pe'poque
reVolutionnaire', Journal Asiatique, ccxxxvi (1948), 275.
7
C. C. de Peysonnel, An Appendix to the Memoirs of Baron de Tott. .., London 1786, 9.
For a useful memoir of Ruffin, see T. X. Bianchi, 'Notice historique sur M. Ruffin',
Journal Asiatique, vi (1825), 283-97, 335-58 and vii (1825), 90-104.
79
 R. CLOGG
(1819) and Old (1827) Testaments in Turkish with Arabic characters were
based on a MS. translation of the Bible into Turkish compiled in the mid-
seventeenth century by Albert Bobowski (Bobovius). Of Polish birth,
Bobowski had been sold as a slave in Constantinople where he was raised
a Muslim and given the name of Ali Bey, and employed as dragoman
(Terciiman basi) to Sultan Mehmet IV. Encouraged and possibly assisted
by Levinus Warner, resident of the States General in Constantinople,1
he undertook the translation of the Bible into Turkish. On completion,
c. 1662-4, t n e MS. was forwarded by Warner to Leiden. Bobowski had
earlier (c. 1653) translated the catechism of the Book of Common Prayer
into Turkish, at the request of the Rev. Isaac Basire.2 In addition to his
Bible translations, Bobowski was also the author of a number of tracts on
Turkish institutions and on the Mohammedan faith.8 Warner sent
Bobowski's MS. to Leiden with the intention of having it printed, but,
apart from the publication of the first four chapters of Genesis in 1739,* no
move was made to publish the MS. in full until 1814 when the Bible
Society borrowed it from Leiden. Pinkerton initially examined it at Leiden
to assess its suitability and its revision for the press was entrusted to von
Diez. On the death of von Diez in 1817, the work of preparing the MS. for
publication was undertaken by John Daniel Kieffer, a Lutheran and First
Secretary and Interpreter of Oriental Languages to Louis XVIII. Like
Ruffin, Kieffer had spent a number of years imprisoned in Yedikule.5
Satisfied as to its suitability, Pinkerton made arrangements for Alexan-
der Petropolis, 'the chief Turkish Secretary of the Patriarch', to transcribe
the Paris edition of the Turkish New Testament into Greek characters and
to prepare the work for the press. Pinkerton was gratified to receive the
'unqualified approbation' of the patriarch Gregory V for this work, indeed
the clergy 'seemed to enter warmly into the cause of the universal dissemi-
nation of the Holy Scriptures'. Also present at the meeting was the
1
See K. Rozemond, Archimandrite Hierothcos Abbatios, I5gg-i664, Leiden 1966, 38.
8
See Isaac Basire (Basier), A Letter . . . Relating His Travels and Endeavours to propagate
the Knowledge of the Doctrine and Discipline, established in the Britannkk Church, among the
Greeks, Arabians, &c, appended to The Ancient Liberty of the Britannkk Church, and the
Legitimate Exemption thereof from the Roman Patriarchate . . ., London 1661, 4-5. The original
of Bobowski's translation of the catechism, in Turkish and Latin, is now in the Hunterian
Museum, University of Glasgow; see A Catalogue of the Manuscripts in the Library of the
Hunterian Museun .. ., Glasgow 1908, 501, no. 352. The Bodleian Library possesses an
autograph letter from Bobowski to Basire.
8
A Latin version of Bobowski's treatise on the Mohammedan faith was edited by
Thomas Hyde, Tractatus .. . de Turcarum Liturgia, Peregrinatione Meccano, Circumcisione,
Aegrotorum Visitatione, &c, Oxford 1690; English translation, A Treatise Concerning the
Turkish Liturgy ..., London 1712. For details of Bobowski's life, see J. Spon, op. cit., 196,
according to whom Bobowski knew 17 languages; Hyde's prefaces to the Latin and
English versions of the Tractatus; G. Toderini, Letteratura Turchesca, Venice 1787, ii.
136-7 and J. Deny, 'A propos des traductions en turc osmanli des textes religieux
chrdtiens', Die Welt des Islams, n.s. iv (1956), 32, 39. I have not seen Deny's article on
Bobowski referred to in the foregoing article.
4
N. W. Schroeder, Quatuor prima capita Geneseos Turcice et Latine, Leipzig 1739.
6
T. H. Darlow and H. F. Moule, Historical Catalogue ... of Holy Scripture ..., London
1903-11, ii. 1635-6.
80
 PUBLICATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF KARAMANLI TEXTS
metropolitan of Caesarea 'next in dignity to the Patriarch'. The archbishop
of Sinai and the patriarch of Jerusalem also offered their active support.
Copies of such a work, wrote Pinkerton, 'will be most extensively useful
not merely in Asia Minor, and different parts of Syria and Palestine, but
also here in Constantinople, where the Turkish is so well understood by
the lower classes of the Greek population'. 1 Karamanlides are recorded as
living in Constantinople from the early years of the Conquest onwards. 2
In fact the Samatya-Yedikule quarter of Constantinople was known as the
quarter rov 'Aytov Kayvaravrlvov rrjs Kapafiavias or TLOV Kapafj,avuuTwv;
until about 1830 patriarchal documents had to be translated into Turkish
for the sizeable community of Karamanlides in Constantinople. 3
Pinkerton's direct involvement with the Society's proposed Karamanli
edition ended with the appointment in 1820 of the Rev. H. D. Leeves as
the Society's first permanent agent in the Levant. Until his death in 1857
Pinkerton was more directly concerned with the Society's activities in
Western Europe. Leeves's arrival in Constantinople, early in 1821,
signalled a new phase in the Bible Society's efforts to secure the publica-
tion of the Scriptures in Karamanlidika. Much preparatory work, how-
ever, yet remained to be done and it was not until 1826 that the first con-
crete results of the efforts of Pinkerton and Leeves became apparent.
1
Letters of 25 and 27 October 1819; B.F.B.S., 16th Report, 1820, 23, 25.
8
See A. M. Schneider, 'Die Bevolkerung Konstantinopels im X V Jahrhundert',
Nachrichten der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Gottingen, Phil-Hist. K l . ix (1949), 2 4 0 - 1 .
8
See M . Gedeon, To icqpvyna rov 6eu>v Aoyov ev TT) 'EKKXIJOI^ T&V Kara) ypovaiv, 'EKKX-i)aiaarucfi
'AMidaa, viii (1888), 200. See also F. Babinger/Dernschwam, op. cit., 52; Nicholas
Nicholay, The Navigations, Peregrinations and Voyages, made into Turkic . .., London 1585,
128; S. Gerlach, op. cit., 217; Eremya Celebi Komiircuyan, ed. H. D. Andreasyan,
Istanbul Tarihi, XVIIasirda Istanbul, Istanbul 1952, 2, 28. The church of St. Constantine
€ls rljv Kapapaviav is mentioned by, among others, T. Smith, De Graecae Ecclesiae Hodiemo
Statu Epistola, Oxford 1676, 31; Helladius, op. cit., 137; and Konstantios, K<ovoTcu>runas
iraXttii re KO.1 vewrepa . .., Venice 1824, 112. The topography of the Yedikule/Samatya/
Narh Kapi quarters is discussed in A. M. Schneider, 'Yedikule und Umgebung', Oriens,
v (1952), especially 202, 207 and 208.

(To be continued)

6—J.E.H. 81