Bamsi Beyrek and Irony

As you all may know, the basis of the The Story of Bamsi Beyrek is that Bamsi is taken hostage during his wedding night by infidels.  Everyone believes Bamsi because Yaltajuk, who wants Bamsi out of the picture so he can marry Banu Chichek, dips a Bamsi's shirt he left behind in blood.  While imprisoned by the infidels, it is revealed that the daughter of the King of the infidels is in love with Bamsi.  His only way out of imprisonment is to promise to marry the infidel king's daughter if he gets away in sixteen years.  He does get back home during that time, where he is eventually reunites with Chichek.  However, he does not marry her right away; he actually goes back to marry the infidel king's daughter and then comes back to marry Chichek.

The irony to the ending of this is that Bamsi was an Oghuz Turk. The Book of Dede Korkut is known for stories that represent pre-islamic and Turkish beliefs.  The Oghuz Turks were monogamous, meaning that they marry only one person.  It was the religion of Islam that supported polygamy, which is where people have multiple spouses.  The irony behind the story of Bamsi Beyrek is that it is the ONLY story in The Book of Dede Korkut that has polygamy.

Do you think that the polygamy part of the story was put in there on purpose?  Why do you think they made Bamsi's marriage polygamous when the Turks believed in monogamy?

And yes, don't mind this picture of Bamsi looking seductive.

A Lie of Omission

Bamsi Beyrek’s story is both interesting and really crazy. Several times throughout the story, Bamsi proves himself to be relatively observant but does not say anything about his observations – he keeps his head down and his mouth shut. In exchange for saving some merchants, he asks for the horse, club, and bow that they are supposed to bring back to his father as gifts for him. While they are willing to do so, if unhappy about it, Bamsi allows them to bring the items to him so that they will not get in trouble for losing them and so that his father can give them to him. Instead of claiming what they technically owe him and earning his name now that he has killed men, he allows himself to remain nameless instead of shaming the merchants.

               Bamsi also later conceals his encounter from his father when asked what kind of woman he wishes to marry. Rather than say that he met his betrothed in the woods or use her name when describing her, he allows his father to interpret his description into Banu Chichek. While marrying her certainly has its own repercussions (her brother’s overprotectiveness, specifically), I am focusing more specifically on the potential repercussions of Bamsi’s manipulation of his father. Are Bamsi’s omissions to his father more likely to have beneficial or damaging consequences, and why?