Anonymization in Written Circulation: Author-making, Quotation, and Rewriting Strategies in Nefsü’l-emr-nâmes YAZILI DOLAŞIMDA ANONİMLEŞME: NEFSÜ’L-EMR-NÂMELERDE YAZARLAŞTIRMA, ALINTILAMA VE YENİDEN YAZIM STRATEJİLERİ*
Milli Folklor, cilt.19, sa.151, ss.5-16, 2026 (AHCI, Scopus, TRDizin)
- Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
- Cilt numarası: 19 Sayı: 151
- Basım Tarihi: 2026
- Doi Numarası: 10.58242/millifolklor.1788179
- Dergi Adı: Milli Folklor
- Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Arts and Humanities Citation Index (AHCI), Scopus, MLA - Modern Language Association Database, TR DİZİN (ULAKBİM), MLA International Bibliography, Academic Search Ultimate (EBSCO)
- Sayfa Sayıları: ss.5-16
- Anahtar Kelimeler: anonymization, author function, Nefsü’l-emr-nâme, social satire, written circulation
- Açık Arşiv Koleksiyonu: AVESİS Açık Erişim Koleksiyonu
- Ankara Hacı Bayram Veli Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet
Özet
This study examines Nefsü’l-emr-nâmes, Ottoman texts of social satire, within the framework of written circulation in order to demonstrate how anonymization operates in these texts through strategies of author-making, quotation, and rewriting. The use of the concept of nefsü’l-emr, which in kalām and philosophical literature denotes “the existence of a thing in itself,” in the titles of the treatises rhetorically reinforces their claim to represent social life “as it is,” independently of subjective opinions and perceptions. In this context, Nefsü’l-emr-nâmes produce a discourse of truth by claiming to represent social life “as it is,” in its own state; yet once practices of production and circulation are taken into account, it becomes apparent that this discourse is shaped less by the intention of a single author than by the plural and collective workings of written circulation. The treatises generate social critique across a wide spectrum, including the abuse of religious authority and role imposture, violations of public decorum, sexuality, the body and breaches of privacy, ostentation, status mimicry through consumption and dress, violations of professional ethics, and the excessive use of intoxicants. This severe mode of expression, at times colloquial, even coarse, and interwoven with grotesque elements, renders the texts a productive field of inquiry not only within the tradition of satire but also in terms of cultural memory and the circulation of discourse. Rather than constituting a critical-edition or authorship-attribution study centered on variation arising from oral performance contexts, the article seeks to explain the discursive mechanisms through which Nefsü’l-emr-nâmes, as they multiply within manuscript culture, produce anonymization. Within this framework, anonymization is conceptualized as a multilayered transformation that cannot be reduced to the “loss of the author’s name.” The attribution of the texts in some copies to well-known figures such as Lâmi‘î Çelebi or Nev‘î-zâde Atâyî may at first appear to fix authorship; however, colophon (temmet) records, historical references, and inter-manuscript relations suggest that these attributions function within circulation as a mutable “author-function.” Indeed, evaluations based on temmet records and historical data indicate that certain attributions are historically incompatible, demonstrating that authorship is not a matter of “automatic acceptance” but a question that can be tested against internal textual evidence. The findings show that anonymization in Nefsü’l-emr-nâmes operates through three primary strategies: (i) author-making, whereby attribution to recognized names confers authority and legitimacy on the text while simultaneously blurring individual authorship and relocating it within a shared horizon of production; (ii) quotation, as exemplified in Firâkî’s Seg-nâme, whereby formulaic expressions and fragments of discourse are transmitted without acknowledgment, establishing implicit intertextual connections and incorporating the critical idiom into a shared domain of memory; and (iii) rewriting, whereby inherited material is transformed in new contexts, particularly in examples constructed through forms such as fermans and berats, thereby functioning both to individualize and to anonymize the text. These dynamics can be related to Roland Barthes’s “death of the author” and Michel Foucault’s “author-function,” insofar as the text becomes detached from individual authority and opens onto plural meanings within circulation. Moreover, Mikhail Bakhtin’s carnivalesque perspective provides a useful framework for explaining the critical language of Nefsü’l-emr-nâmes, constructed through grotesque imagery, slang, hyperbole, and the inversion of hierarchy; Carl Gustav Jung’s “trickster” archetype, in turn, offers a conceptual account of figures who misuse religious and social roles, transgress boundaries, and render truth visible while disrupting order. In conclusion, this study demonstrates that anonymization in Nefsü’l-emr-nâmes is a process that enables social critique to multiply and gain continuity within written circulation, positioning the text not so much as “speech belonging to one person” as “discourse constituted through circulation.”.