Özet:

Riyazi, who was one of the leading poets of his time and made a name for himself in our classical literature with his tezkire titled “ Riyazü’ş-Şu’ara”, completed his work in 1610. The work is the first tezkire of the 17th century in Anatolia. The work, which is different from the anthological tezkires of the century, bears the traces of the classical tezkire tradition. It is similar to Latifi and Aşık Çelebi tezkires from this perspective. Sometimes, by increasing the number of poetry samples, it paves the way for tezkires that have the characteristics of an anthology. It would be appropriate to consider the work as a transitional work between the classical tradition and the anthology tradition. Riyazi made objective evaluations in the margins he called “iradcık”. One of the most remarkable features of the Tezkire is these evaluations of the author. The author especially criticized the findings of Hasan Çelebi and Aşık Çelebi and clarified some misinformation around the poets. It is seen that Riyazi acts abstractly from interests such as closeness-friendship-rank-status when evaluating poets. However, he praised the poets he believed to be worthy of praise by providing justifications, and in his own words, he did not shy away from giving them their due. The study will focus on the criticisms in Riyazi’s work. The author’s critical view will be evaluated through his own sentences.

Anahtar Kelimeler: