Reading a bureaucratic career backwards: how did Hüseyin Hilmi Pasha become the Inspector-General of Rumelia?

ABSTRACT

When Hüseyin Hilmi Pasha (1855–1918) was appointed as the Inspector General for the Rumelian Provinces (Vilâyât-ı Selâse Umûm Müfettişi) in November 1902, his eligibility for such a position was questioned by some of his contemporaries. This article aims to reconstruct and understand the path that led this statesman, from the very beginning of his career, towards the inspectorate during the time of Sultan Abdulhamid II (r. 1876–1909). Hüseyin Hilmi Pasha began his bureaucratic life in Midilli (Lesbos Island) in 1874, and he was very fortunate to encounter Namık Kemal and become his protégé. Apart from his early career, he mainly served in the southern Anatolian and Syrian regions of the empire, and later in Yemen. However, these regions were afflicted with similar problems, a fact that helped Hüseyin Hilmi Pasha evolve into a ‘crisis management expert’. The experiences he gained at each post opened the door for the next one, thus transforming him into a prominent statesman of the Hamidian administration and ultimately enabling him to reach the inspectorate of Rumelia.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes

1. Prime Minister's Ottoman Archives (Hereafter BOA) Y. A. RES. 118–82 (16 Teşrinisani 1318/29 November 1902); Güler Yarcı, ‘Osmanlı Diplomasisinde Makedonya Meselesi (1876–1912)’ (PhD Thesis, Marmara University, 1996), p.163.

2. ‘Biz Makedonyalılar, bütün bu ahvali asabi bir heyecan ile takip ediyorduk. İstanbul gazeteleri bu meseleden bahsedemiyorlardı. Fakat, teşebbüsler tafsilatıyla yabancı gazetelerinden haber alınıyor, Makedonya'nın her tarafında duyuluyordu. İşte bu sırada bir gün Rumeli Vilayetleri Umumi Müfettişliğine Hüseyin Hilmi Paşanın tayin olunduğunu haber aldık. -Bu Hüseyin Paşa kim? birbirimizden soruyorduk. Kendisi meşhur ricalden değildi. Rumeli'de hiç bulunmamıştı. Şimdi koskoca Rumeli'yi bir nevi prens gibi yarı istiklal ile idare edecek olan bu müfettişin halinin hususiyetini anlamak için her yerde günlerce bundan bahsedildi’. Fazlı Necip, ‘Makedonya'da son günlerimiz ve Umumi Müfettiş Hüseyin Hilmi Paşa’, Yakın Tarihimiz, Vol. IV (Istanbul: Türk Petrol, 1962), p.362.

3. This document is incomplete; it looks as if it was begun by Hilmi Pasha and then either could not be completed or else the sequel has been lost. İslam Araştırmaları Merkezi Hüseyin Hilmi Paşa Evrakı (Hereafter İSAM-HHP) 1–20 (16 Şubat 1318/29 January 1903).

4. İSAM-HHP 22–1412 (29 Cemazielahir 1299/18 May 1882).

5. ‘Efendi: ... (5)Title used by the Scribes and secretaries of the Ottoman civil service’, Selcuk Aksin Somel, A to Z of the Ottoman Empire, (Plymouth: The Scarecrow Press, 2010), p.82.

6. Hüseyin Hilmi Pasha's Sicill-i Ahval Record, BOA. DH. SAID. 25–90. This document is the main chronological scheme that this study takes as its base. For a detailed description and evaluation of the Sicill-i Ahval records, see. Olivier Bouquet, Sultanın Paşaları (1839–1909), (Istanbul: İş Bankası Kültür Yayınları, 2016), pp.55–119.

7. Namık Kemal was a prominent member of the Young Ottomans during the reign of Sultan Abdülaziz. He was known for his liberal ideas and was also a member of the committee that prepared the Kanun-ı Esasi. He was later exiled by Abdülhamid II, along with the other Young Ottomans.

8. Ali Ekrem Bolayır, Namık Kemal, (Istanbul: Devlet Matbaası, 1930), p.52; Ömer Faruk Akün, ‘Nâmık Kemal’, İslam Ansiklopedisi, Vol.32, (Istanbul: Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı, 2006), p.370.

9. ‘Mutasarrıf’: The governor of a sanjak of which several form a vilayet, under a governor general or Vali', Sir James W. Redhouse, ‘Mutasarrıf’, Turkish and English Lexicon, 1890, p.1704.

10. BOA. DH. SAID. 25–90.

11. A number of Namık Kemal's personal letters were actually written down by Hüseyin Hilmi. Namık Kemal referred to Hüseyin Himi as his clerk. See: Fevziye Abdullah Tansel, Namık Kemal'in Mektupları III (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Basımevi, 1973), p.140 and passim.

12. Ibid. II, III and IV, passim.

13. Ali Akyıldız-Azmi Özcan, Namık Kemal'den Mektup Var (Istanbul: Türkiye İş Bankası Yayınları, 2013).

14. Akyıldız-Özcan, p. XLIV, [44]; Intisab can be defined as ‘being or becoming attached to the household of a grandee’ in Lexicon, Sir James W. Redhouse, p.209. In the Ottoman tradition, it was very common for bureaucrats to raise young and promising men for state service by their side, even literally within their household. This method provided the master with able and loyal companions and the young men with proper training and a chance for a better future. For further reading see: A.H. Dursun, ‘19. Yüzyılda Adam Yetiştirmede Hânegî-Himâye Usûlü’, Kubbealtı Akademi Mecmuası, No.100 (1996), p.78.

15. Letter dated 16 Mayıs 1298/28 May 1882, İSAM-HHP 832 in Akyıldız-Özcan, p.47.

16. BOA. DH. SAID. 25–90; İSAM-HHP 14–913 (26 Kanunusani 1299/7 February 1884).

17. Martin Strohmeier, ‘Mehmed Tevfik Bey, Companion and Collaborator of Namık Kemal During His Years in the Aegean Province’, Archivum Ottomancium, No.23 (2005/06), p.272.

18. Letter dated 11 Cemazielahir 1296/2 June 1879 in F. A. Tansel, Namık Kemal'in Mektupları II (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Basımevi, 1969), p.431.

19. Letter dated 13 Kanunuevvel 1297/25 July 1881 in Tansel III, pp.110–111; Ibid., p.273

20. ‘Midilli Tahrirat Müdüriyeti'nde bulunan Hüseyin Hilmi Efendi bendeleri mebâdi-i memuriyet-i bendeganemden beri ahlakça evliya-yı umur hazeratının sahihen takdirine şâyân olacak kadar istikamet, marifet ve iktidarca Midilli'de yetişmiş bir memurdan hemen hiçbir vakit memul olunacamayacak derecelerde kifayet göstermiş olduğundan ve vilayât-ı hazret-i padişahîde o meziyet-i irfanı haiz belki bir iki mektupçu bulunamayacağından memuriyetçe daha mebâdi-i neş'ette bulunan ve yetiştiği hâlde devlete gerçekten hizmet edeceği nezd-i çakeranamede bilfiil sâbit olan mûmâ-ileyh bendelerinin bir mektupçuluğa tayinini suret-i mahsusada istirham eder ve ahlâk ve iktidarı hakkındaki şehadet-i kemteranemin nâiliyetiyle müftehir olduğum teveccühat-ı celile-i rahîmaneleri iktizasınca nezd-i sâmî-i dâver afhamilerinde mazhar-ı hüsn-i kabul olacağına itimad eylerim.’ Letter dated 7 Mayıs 1299/19 May 1883 from Sinan Kuneralp Collection in Akyıldız-Özcan, pp.64–5.

21. Letter dated 2 Temmuz 1299/14 July 1883, from Sinan Kuneralp Collection in Akyıldız-Özcan, pp.77–8.

22. ‘Memûriyetini mukaddime-i ikbâl olmak şartıyla tebrik ederim’ İSAM-HHP 13/843 (30 Temmuz 1299/7 August 1883); also see: İSAM-HHP 14 / 913 (26 Kânunusânî 1299/7 February 1884), İSAM-HHP- 23/1506 (23 Ağustos 1301/4 September 1885).

23. Reşat Kasaba, ‘İzmir’, in Ç. Keyder, Y.E. Özveren, D. Quataert (eds.), Doğu Akdeniz'de Liman Kentleri 1800–1914 (Istanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yurt Yayınları, 1994), pp.1–22.

24. Raif Nezihi, İzmir'in Tarihi, E. Üyepazarcı (ed.), (İzmir: İzmir Büyükşehir Belediyesi Kültür Yayınları, 2001), p.4.

25. Hüseyin Hilmi Effendi's Sicill-i Ahval record as Hüseyin Hilmi Paşa'nın Syria Vilâyeti Mektupçusu- İSAM-HHP 22 /1413 (15 Kânunusanî 1304/27 January 1889).

26. Abdülhamid II ascended to the throne in September 1876, and his early reign was occupied with the 1877–78 Russo-Ottoman War, the first trial of the constitutional monarchy in the empire and the power struggle between the Sublime Porte and the palace. By the early 1880s, Abdülhamid ‘overcame’ these obstacles and began to consolidate his absolute rule.

27. Letters dated 8 Mart 1300/20 March 1884 and 16 Mart 1300/28 March 1884 from İSAM-HHP collection in Akyıldız-Özcan, p.143,147.

28. Letter dated 4 Eylül 1301/16 September 1885 from ISAM-HHP Collection in Akyıldız-Özcan, p.209.

29. ‘Beyrut gibi mühim bir mutasarrıflığa tayini mukaddema Naşid Paşa tarafından dahi arz ve inha edilen Suriye mektubi-i esbakı Saadetlü Hüseyin Hilmi Efendi ...’ BOA. Y. MTV. 73–137 (20 Cemazieahir 1310/9 January 1893.

30. BOA. DH. SAİD. 25–90.

31. The following letter from Namık Kemal is dated 1 November 1885, and suggests that Hüseyin Hilmi refrain from changing offices (memuriyet tebdili) since the grand vizierate was held by Kamil Pasha at the time, and it would be better to wait for Said Pasha to regain this post. Letter dated 20 Teşrinievvel 1301/1 November 1885 from İSAM-HHP Collection in Akyıldız-Özcan, pp.211–12.

32. BOA. DH. MKT. 1445–108 (22 Zilhicce 1304/10 September 1887).

33. BOA. DH. SAİD. 25–90.

34. Ibid.; Mektubi Hüseyin Hilmi Effendi received the Order of the Crown of Italy of the second degree along with the mutasarrıf of Beirut, Nasuhi Bey, and the deputy governor Eşref Pasha, due to their hospitality during the visit of the Italian crown prince to the province of Syria when he was on his way to Jerusalem in early 1887. BOA. İ. DH.1036/81512 (7 Ramazan 1304/30 May 1887). A letter in Italian, written from the Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Rome, was addressed to ‘Hüseyin Hilmi Effendi’ and is present among his papers: ‘I am happy to announce to your excellency that his majesty the king, my august sovereign, has favored to give you, upon my proposal, the Order of the Crown of Italy, which is the level of great officials.’ İSAM-HHP 20/1374 (14 April 1887).

35. BOA. İ. DH. 1073–84179 (11 Recep 1305/24 March 1888).

36. Letter dated 31 Teşrinisâni 1304/25 November 1888 from Turkish Historical Society Namık Kemal Papers in Akyıldız-Özcan, Appendix I. pp.251–2.

37. F.A. Tansel, Namık Kemal'in Mektupları IV (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Basımevi, 1986), p.602.

38. BOA. DH. SAİD. 25–90.

39. İSAM-HHP 22/1424 (8 Nisan 1308/17 April 1892).

40. İSAM-HHP 22/1422 (18 Nisan 1308/27 April 1892).

41. ‘Bir hayli tebaası bulunduğu için umur-ı ecnebiyesi de suret-i mahsusada şayan-ı dikkat olan Mersin Sancağı mutasarrıflığında sadakat ve dirayetiyle beraber lisan ve muamelat-ı ecnebiyeye vakıf ve gayet müteyakkız bir bendenin istihdamına mütevafık olduğundan el-yevm mutasarrıflıkda bulunan Fehim Paşa'nın diğer bir mahal-i münasibe kaldırılarak yerine kifayet ve sadakati ve umur-ı ecnebiyede malumat ve tecarib-i kafiye ile elsine-i müteaddideye vukufu malum olan ve Beyrut gibi mühim bir mutasarrıflığa tayini mukaddema Naşid Paşa tarafından dahi arz ve inha edilen Suriye mektubi-i esbakı Saadetlü Hüseyin Hilmi Efendi Hazretlerinin tayini hakkında istida-i müsaade-i seniyye-i cenab-ı mülükaneye mücaseret olunduğu...’ BOA.Y. MTV. 73–137 (20 Cemazielahir 1310/9 January 1893).

42. BOA. İ. DH. 1301/24 (22 Cemazielevvel 1310/12 December 1892).

43. Ma'an is located in today's Transjordan. İSAM-HHP 23–1531, (1 Mart 1309/13 March 1893).

44. Engin Deniz Akarlı, ‘Establishment of the Maan-Karak Mutasarrifiyya, 1891–1894’ Dirasat, Vol.13 (1896), No.1, p.28.

45. Eugene L. Rogan, Frontiers of the State in the Late Ottoman Empire, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999), p.52.

46. Mustafa L. Bilge, ‘Maan’, İslam Ansiklopedisi, Vol.27, (Istanbul: Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı, 2003), p.270.

47. A. Latif Armağan, ‘XVIII. Yüzyılda Hac Yolu Güzergahı ve Menziller’, The Journal of Ottoman Studies, No. 20 (2000), p.94.

48. Akarlı, pp.28–9; Rogan, p.52.

49. BOA. BEO. 168–12532 (27 Şubat 1308/11 March 1893).

50. Akarlı, p.32–3.

51. İSAM-HHP 23/1531 (1 Mart 1309/13 March 1893).

52. Rogan, p. 54–5.

53. İSAM-HHP 11/653 ( 9 Teşrinievvel 1309/21 October 1893).

54. İSAM-HHP 11/635 (29 Cemazielevvel 1313/17 November 1895); İSAM-HHP 11/652 (27 Cemazielevvel 1313/15 November 1895).

55. İSAM-HHP 20/1345 (28 Şubat 1309/12 March 1894).

56. İSAM-HHP 11/683 (5 Kânunuevvel 1309/17 December 1893).

57. İSAM-HHP 11/654 (15 Receb 1311/22 January 1894).

58. ‘... dört seneye karib bir zaman mezkur livada (maan) kalmış ve Hükümet-i Seniyyenin hakkıyla tesis edemediği o yerleri teşkilat-ı muntazama dairesine ve kavanin-i mevzua tahtına almağa muvaffak olmuşdur .’ Abdurrahman Şeref, ‘Viyana Sefir-i Sabık Hüseyin Hilmi Paşa’, Tarih-i Osmani Encümeni Mecmuası, No. 49 (1325), p.65.

59. Rogan, p.55.

60. BOA. Y. MTV. 137–105 (18 Ramazan 1313/3 March 1896).

61. Beshara Doumani, Rediscovering Palestine: merchants and peasants in Jabal Nablus, 1700–1900, (California: University of California Press, 1995), p.1–2.

62. BOA. Y. MTV. 137–105 (18 Ramazan 1313/3 March 1896).

63. BOA. BEO. 776–58138 (23 Zilkade 1313/6 May 1896).

64. İSAM-HHP 20/1339 (22 Nisan 1312/4 May 1896); İSAM-HHP 13/804 (24 Nisan 1312/6 May 1896); İSAM-HHP 13/810 (25 Nisan 1312/7 May 1896).

65. ‘Zikrolunan ahvâl ve avârıza nazaran müşarunileyhin havası mu'tedil ve sahil mahallerden birinde bir müddet istihdamı muvâfık-ı fen olduğunu mübeyyin rapordur’ İSAM-HHP 13/806 (24 Nisan 1312/6 May 1896).

66. Halil Ersin Avcı, Türkiye 1908: İngiliz büyükelçisi Sir Gerard Lowther'in 1908 yılı Türkiye Raporu, (Çanakkale: Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart Univeristy, 2003) p.31.

67. BOA. BEO. 863/64663 (29 Cemazielahir 1314/5 December 1896).

68. BOA. BEO. 874/65519 (24 Cemazielevvel 1314/31 October 1896).

69. Abdulhamit Kırmızı, Abdülhamid'in Valileri (Istanbul: Klasik Yayınları, 2007), p.46.

70. Abdurrahman Şeref, p.65.

71. BOA. BEO. 924/69296 (19 Şevval 1314/23 March 1897).

72. BOA. İ.DH. 1344/45 (19 Şevval 1314/23 March 1897).

73. BOA. DH. SAID. 25–90.

74. İSAM-HHP 10/98 (no date); HHP 20–1334 (21 Şevval 1314/25 March 1897).

75. Cemal Paşa, Hatıralar (Istanbul: Türkiye İş Bankası Kültür Yayınları, 2001), p.393; Tetsuya Sahara, What Happened in Adana in April 1909?, (Istanbul: Isis Press, 2013), p.54.

76. İSAM-HHP 11–668 (7 Mart 1897/16 May 1897).

77. ‘Müşarileyhin görülen lüzum-ı siyasiyye mebni azli Meclis-i Mahsusu Vükela kararıyla lede'l-arz makrun-ı müsâ'ade-i seniyye-i cenab-ı padişahi olmağla 1315 senesi Cemazielahiresinin 21′inde (5 Teşrinisani sene 313) infisal eylemişdir.’ DH. SAID. 25–90.

78. İlhan Ekinci, ‘Ermeni Meselesinin Uluslararası Boyutuna Bir Örnek Brazzafoli Meselesi’, Ermeni Araştırmaları, No.18 (2005), p.89–94.

79. According to İnal, an official apology was demanded from the governor Hüseyin Hilmi, who refused to provide one and was therefore dismissed. İbnülemin Mahmud Kemal İnal, Son Sadrıazamlar, XI.-XIV. Fascicle, (Istanbul: İş Bankası Kültür Yayınları, 2013), p.1658.

80. BOA. İ. HUS. 59/1315 (18 Recep 1315/13 December 1897).

81. BOA. BEO. 1053/7893 (20 Recep 1315/15 December 1897); BOA. BEO. 1054/79027 (23 Recep 1315/18 December 1897).

82. BOA. Y. A. RES. 90/56. (24 Recep 1315/19 December 1897).

83. Gökhan Çetinsaya, Ottoman Administration of Iraq (London: Routledge, 2006), p.68.

84. Abdurrahman Şeref, pp.65–6.

85. ‘Yemen işleri Abdülhamid'i pek rahatsız ettiği sırada Hüseyin Hilmi Efendi Avusturya sefaretinin şikayeti üzerine [Adana valiliğinden] mazulen İstanbul'da bulunuyordu. Abdülhamid İmam Yahya'yı çekemiyor, asker kuvvetiyle hakkından da gelemiyordu. Bunun için bir kere de yumuşak ve tatlı siyasi tedbirlerle Yemenlileri elde etmek suretini düşündü. Fakat ulema içinden Yemen'i iyi idare edecek kimseyi göremedi. Arap İzzet Paşa Kerek Mutasarrıflığında dört sene bulunarak geçen devirlerde hükümetin hakkıyla teessüs edemediği o yerleri nizam altına almağa muvaffak olmuş bulunan Hüseyin Hilmi Efendi'yi tavsiye etti. Hüseyin Hilmi Efendi vaktiyle medreseye devam etmişti; bulunduğu mansablarda işgüzarlık göstermiş, hüsnü sülûkiyle maruf olmuştu. Abdülhamid de nu Yemen hakkında tasavvurlarını icraya ehil addetti; Yemen valiliğine nasbedildi (29 Zilkade 1315).’ Süleyman Kani İrtem, Osmanlı Devleti'nin Mısır Yemen Hicaz Meselesi,Osman Selim Kocahanoğlu (Ed.) (Istanbul: Temel Yayınları, 1999), p.145.

86. ‘Did governors prefer some provinces appointments to others? The more distant provinces were more disliked by the nominees for governor. Yemen was the most disfavoured place, not just due to the distance, but also because of the domestic rebellions led by Imam Yahya, the incursions of British and then Italian forces in the south and Red Sea, and the smuggling of weapons into the highlands via powerful and defiant tribes.’ Abdulhamid Kırmızı, ‘Rulers of the Provincial Empire: Ottoman Governors and the Administration of Provinces, 1895–1908’ (PhD Thesis, Boğaziçi University, 2005), p.62.

87. Yahya Yeşilyurt, ‘Hüseyin Hilmi Paşa'nın Yemen Valiliği ve Ona Yapılan Suikast’, OTAM, No.34 (2013), pp.280–1.

88. Ibid., pp.259–60.

89. BOA. Y. A. RES 92–50 (3–1) (28 Zilkade 1315/20 April 1898).

90. BOA. BEO. 1123- 84202 (30 Zilkade 1315/22 April 1898).

91. BOA. Y. A. RES 92–50 (3–1) (28 Zilkade 1315/20 April 1898); BOA. BEO. 1123–84202 (30 Zilkade 1315/22 April 1898)

92. ‘On the day that the new governor arrived, most of the provincial officials put on their ulama attire. Some of those who could not obtain robes wore cloaks; a very few appeared in frock coats. They all wrapped white thin fabric around their fez. It was in this bizarre ulama attire that the governor and his officials performed their first Friday prayer in the great mosque of Sana.’ ‘Yeni vali gelince bir günde vilayet memurlarının çoğu ulema kıyafetine girmişlerdi! Cübbe tedarik edemeyenlerden bir kısmı maşlah giymişlerdi; pek azı redingot ile görünmüştü. Hepsi feslerine bulabildikleri beyaz ince kumaşları sarmıştı. Vali ve memurlar bu garip ulema kıyafetiyle ilk cuma namazını Sana'nın büyük camiinde kıldılar.’ İrtem, p.146.

93. İbnülemin, p.1660.

94. The ‘reputation’ of Hüseyin Hilmi Pasha's Yemeni outfit was so widespread at the time that, even when he was appointed to Rumelia as the inspector general, it was still being talked about. The journalist Fazlı Necip visited the pasha on his arrival in Salonika and wrote that he pictured Hüseyin Hilmi Pasha in his Yemeni outfit and was surprised to see him wearing a monocle and dressed in quite a chic fashion. Fazlı Necip, p.362.

95. Yeşilyurt, pp.262–3.

96. Hüseyin Hilmi Pasha put the aide-de-camp of the former governor in jail, along with other officials who had abused their authority and oppressed the Yemeni people. Casear E. Farah, The Sultan's Yemen: 19th-Century Challenges to Ottoman Rule (London: I.B. Tauris, 2002), p.179.

97. Yeşilyurt, p.266–70.

98. Abdurrahman Şeref, p.66; 20 Muharrem 1317/31 May 1899 is the date of vizirate according to his Sicill-i Ahval Record. BOA. DH. SAİD. 25–90.

99. Olivier Bouquet, p.XIX, XXII.

100. BOA. Y. PRK. MYD. 23–23(29 Zilhicce 1317/30 April 1900).

101. BOA. Y. PRK. UM. 46–50 (22 Muharrem 1317/2 June 1899).

102. Farah, p.179.

103. Ibid., p.188.

104. Farah also mentions a memorandum: ‘Hilmi submitted a memorandum to the government outlining ways to improve the situation in Yemen and to avoid the excessive cost of constantly having to suppress rebellions caused by misadministration of self-serving officials. Justice could only be served, he argued, with decrees that were derived from the Shariah and strictly implemented. Taxes should be equitably levied and collected, but not by military officers using force. To increase revenue, the state should promote trade and economic growth, secure roads, build more technical, trade and craft schools and recruit Yemenis for police duty to lessen resistance.’ Ibid., p.251 ; İrtem, pp.148–9.

105. BOA. Y. EE. 65–21; 65–22 (24 Mayıs 1316/6 June 1900).

106. Yeşilyurt, p.275.

107. Ibid., pp.275–6.

108. BOA. Y. MTV. 205–98 (1 Ağustos 1316/14 August 1900).

109. For one of the many pieces of evidence relating to such controversies, see Hüseyin Hilmi's telegram to the palace, which features claims of the personal sacrifices he had made in order to get along with the commander, as well as certain complaints. BOA. Y. EE. 10–16 (4 Kanunusani 1314/16 January 1899); for Sadaret's warning see İSAM-HHP 16–1029 (20 Mayıs 1315/1 June 1899).

110. BOA. DH. MKT. 487–42 (8 Nisan 1318/21 April 1902).

111. ‘Haşa hizmetten kaçınmak ve rahatımı aramak gibi şiar-ı diyanet ve sadakate münafi hal vallahi ve billahi hatır-ı çakeranemden bile geçmeyerek her nerede bulunsam velinimet-i bi-minnet-i azim efendimize sıdk u sadakatle hizmet ederek rıza-yı hümayun-ı cenab-ı hilafetpenahilerini bir kat daha istihsale mazhariyet aksa-yi makasıd-ı abidanemden olmağla Trablusgarb, Bağdad, Bitlis, Mamuretü'l-aziz vilayetlerine veya hangi mahal ve hizmete ferman buyurulur ise oraya naklimle yeniden ihya buyurulmaklığımı hak-i pay-i akdes-i hilafetpenahilerine yüzümü gözümü sürerek ve ağlayarak min gayr-i haddim arz ve istirhama cüret eylediğim maruzdur’ BOA. Y. PRK. UM. 54–20 (13 Safer 1319/1 June 1901)

112. İbnülemin, p.1661.

113. BOA. DH. SAİD. 25–90.

114. Farah, p.235.

115. Ibid., p.181.

116. BOA. DH. SAİD 25–90.

117. Fazlı Necip, p.362.

118. Robert Graves, R. Storm Centres of the Near East (London: Hutchinson & Co.,1933), p.196.

119. BOA. Y. MTV. 205–98. (1 Ağustos 1316/14 August 1900).

120. Feroz Ahmad, ‘Husayn Hilmi Pasha’, Encyclopedia of Islam (EI2), Vol.3 (Leiden: Brill, 1971), p.624.

121. See Figure 1 for a map of Hüseyin Hilmi Pasha's career up to the inspectorate.