Language used for "mülhid" and "zındıqs" according to Ottoman chronicles of classical period

Human kind has had for ages an effort of transferring the moral lessons to the next generations learned from significant events that has been experienced in the course of history. While these narrations had been produced mostly with oral and visual images till the invention of writing, special situations began to be recorded in the aftermath of the invention of writing. Thus, the earliest historical materials emerged. In the Ottoman State as a medieval state, historiography was shaped around the palace circles in accordance with the existing conditions. Accordingly, the Ottoman historiography matured in a way that appealed to the literate high-ranking class gathered around the state. This situation led to the newly-emerging understanding and corpus of historiography to be centralist as much as possible. The Ottoman historians determined their positions on many instances basing themselves on the custom and practices of the state. Therefore, historical information that was considered against the state's ideology and that was beyond the boundaries drawn by the state was usually supplied by anonymous works. However, as can be assumed, the number of these is few. The traditional historiography in the axis of state naturally constructed an 'otherizing' and 'constructing' language. This construction brought harsh and destructive language to the classes which stayed out of the official ideology of the state. The terms 'mülhid' and 'zındık' were among the most common concepts that were used for 'otherizing' people and social groups at the Ottoman State. It is natural in the societies that were build up upon religious motives to observe a religiously differentiating language against those who were seen as others. This linguistic style became one of the important means of easily 'otherizing' people and/or gaining legitimacy for the state under the existing conditions. This study focuses on the 'otherizing' language constructed in the Ottoman chronicles. Scanning the resources produced by the Ottoman historians during 14th-17th centuries has been utilized as the method of the study. The approach by Ottoman intellectuals towards a person or people labeled as 'mülhid' and 'zındık' has been revealed in the light of these contemporary works. The main theme of the study has been constituted with the assessment of the gathered data. Human kind has had for ages an effort of transferring the moral lessons to the next generations learned from significant events that has been experienced in the course of history. While these narrations had been produced mostly with oral and visual images till the invention of writing, special situations began to be recorded in the aftermath of the invention of writing. Thus, the earliest historical materials emerged. In the Ottoman State as a medieval state, historiography was shaped around the palace circles in accordance with the existing conditions. Accordingly, the Ottoman historiography matured in a way that appealed to the literate high-ranking class gathered around the state. This situation led to the newly-emerging understanding and corpus of historiography to be centralist as much as possible. The Ottoman historians determined their positions on many instances basing themselves on the custom and practices of the state. Therefore, historical information that was considered against the state's ideology and that was beyond the boundaries drawn by the state was usually supplied by anonymous works. However, as can be assumed, the number of these is few. The traditional historiography in the axis of state naturally constructed an 'otherizing' and 'constructing' language. This construction brought harsh and destructive language to the classes which stayed out of the official ideology of the state. The terms 'mülhid' and 'zındık' were among the most common concepts that were used for 'otherizing' people and social groups at the Ottoman State. It is natural in the societies that were build up upon religious motives to observe a religiously differentiating language against those who were seen as others. This linguistic style became one of the important means of easily 'otherizing' people and/or gaining legitimacy for the state under the existing conditions. This study focuses on the 'otherizing' language constructed in the Ottoman chronicles. Scanning the resources produced by the Ottoman historians during 14th-17th centuries has been utilized as the method of the study. The approach by Ottoman intellectuals towards a person or people labeled as 'mülhid' and 'zındık' has been revealed in the light of these contemporary works. The main theme of the study has been constituted with the assessment of the gathered data.