T. composed five historical works in Ottoman Turkish, the first three dedicated to Murad III and the last two to Mehmed III. Four texts are eye-witness accounts in the campaign monograph (gazaname) tradition, and all except one contain at least one miniature painting, done probably in the palace workshop. All are clearly written in a professional nesih script and are in good condition. Each is a unique manuscript, apart from the Şema’ilname, of which one other partial copy exists.
T. wrote mainly in the Ottoman inşa prose style. His texts were conceived as works of high literary art, with a considerable proportion of Arabic and Persian vocabulary, extensive use of metaphor, simile and various forms of wordplay, frequent Koranic and other Arabic quotations, and generous use of verse within the prose text. Although T. incorporated some of his own verse in all his compositions, and his final work, Egri Fethi Ta’rihi, is in verse throughout, there is no separate collection of poems (divan) attributed to him. Each of T.’s historical works contains an increasing amount of autobiographical information, usually in the introduction but with incidental details scattered through the text. The four gazanames provide valuable insight into the conduct of sieges, military manoeuvres and the general atmosphere of war, while the Şema’ilname is valuable for its portrayal of the Ottoman dynastic image at the end of the sixteenth century.

The first of two gazanames on the Ottoman-Iranian war of 986-998/1578-1590 lacks an original title. Although sometimes called Revaniyye, it does not cover in detail the capture of Revan (Yerevan) in 991/1583. Nor does it deal with any of the campaigns of Özdemiroglu Osman Paşa as suggested by the title Gazavat-ı Osman Paşa given in the library catalogue. The more appropriate title Gürcistan Seferi was introduced by A.S. Levend. The six main chapters cover Ferhad Paşa’s 992/1584 campaign in Georgia, notably the capture of Tumanis; the despatch of a new governor and garrison to Tiflis (Tbilisi); defection to the Ottomans of a Georgian former ruler of Tiflis, Davud Han (d. ?); and victory in battle over a combined force of Georgians and Qızılbaş led by Imam Qulı Han (d. 1042-43/1632). 
Contents: 1b: [Introduction]. 5b: Güftar der arz-ı leşker-i bi-tul. 8b: Güftar-ı bina-i beyan der bina-i darü’l-mucahidin-i din, qale-i metin-i Tumanis. 10b: Güftar-ı suret-i qale-i Tumanis. 16a: Diger ihtisas yaften-i Davud Han bin Lursa[b] Han, Şah-ı Gürcistan, be-şeref-i mütabaat-i dergah-i alem-penah. 23a: Güftar ender firistaden-i beglerbegiyan be-imdad-i Rı∂van Paşa ve yaveri kerden-i işan bih.

T.’s second gazaname on the Iranian war deals fully with Özdemiroglu Osman Paşa’s Tebriz campaign of 993/1585. The main narrative of eight chapters covers Osman Paşa’s march from Qastamonu to Tebriz; the relatively easy capture of that city and its refortification; the author’s conversations with certain citizens of Tebriz concerning events just prior to the capture of the city; skirmishes with the Qızılbaş army of Hamza Mirza (d. 994/1586); Osman Paşa’s death and an account of his career; the return march to Bidlis (Bitlis) under Cigalazade Sinan Paşa (d. 1014/1606); and a digression on the Kurdish hans of Bidlis. T. records how he had been singled out by Osman Paşa for his letter-writing ability and awarded a small increase in salary. He laments the fact that Osman Paşa’s death had deprived him of a potentially influential patron.
Contents: 1b: [Introduction] 11a: Güftar ender nehzat-i Osman Paşa ez qışla-i meşta-yı Qastamunı be-su-yı Erzurum ve miyan besten be-güşaden-i şehr-i Tebriz be-ferman-ı ferman-ferma-yı Arab u Acem ü Rum. 12b: Güftar ender nehzat-i leşker-i qıyamet-engiz be-belde-i fahire-i Tebriz medine-i dil-aviz. 24a: Güftar ender münazara-ı haqir ba-eşraf-ı Tebriz ez her bab ve cevab-ı işan. 33b: Sıfat-ı saray-ı Emir Han-ı Leng ez oymag-ı Türkman der tu-yı (?) Tebriz ve ahval-i u. 36b: Güftar ender piş giriften-i Paşa-yı cihan-güşa itmam-i qale-i cihan-ara ve çegunegi-yi ahval-i Tebriz ve Tebriziyyan ve hareket kerden-i şerayin-i fitne-i ada-yı şerr-ayin. 41b: Zikr-i da’ire-i deveran ve hadise-i hadesan ki der tava’if-i in ahval ruy-nümud ve beyan-ı vaqıa-ı ha’ile-i qatl-i am ve küşte şüden-i avam hem çun hevamm. 46a: Güftar der bimari-yi hazret-i Paşa-yı alem-güşa çun çeşm-i huban-i na-bahşa ve perişani-yi sipah çun zülf-i huban-ı miskin-külah. 55b: Sıfat-ı subh ve şa’i şüden-i vefat-ı Paşa-yı cihan-güşa.

T.’s first work as official historiographer, written ca. 1000-1002/1592-1294, contains a lengthy, partly autobiographical introduction followed by a thematic portrayal of the Ottoman dynasty through twenty distinguishing qualities (hassa or mevhibe). The work is dedicated to Murad III and is assumed to have been commissioned by him. The twenty qualities include the Ottomans’ Islamic heritage and their adherence to the shari’a; their rule over Mecca and Medina; the succession of strong rulers, marked by personal bravery and good health; the value of Istanbul as a capital city, the geographical extent of the empire, its prosperity, the variety of peoples under Ottoman rule, and the importance of having command over both land and sea; Ottoman sovereignty over minor rulers such as the hans of the Crimea, military strength and lack of foreign intervention in Ottoman affairs. The longest section (44a-78b) is devoted to the dynasty’s love of poetry and is in effect a biographical dictionary (tezkire) of imperial poets from Mehmed II (r. 855-886/1451-1481) onwards, including several princes. 
The principal copy of this work has several folios bound out of sequence and the final three hassa missing. This probably reflects the fact that Murad III was not happy with its content and asked T. to revise it. An incomplete copy of the work exists, catalogued as Ta’rih-i Al-i Osman, with a slightly different arrangement of content and blank pages left for miniatures. It is not clear whether this was a first draft or an attempted revision. In the introduction to his next work, Şehname-i hümayun, T. discusses the Şema’ilname and presents a revised order of distinguishing qualities.
Contents: 2b: [Introduction] 14b: Güftar ender tertib-i Şahname-i cevheri-terkib. 18b: Güftar ender zuhur-ı padişahi be-inayet-i irşad-ı ilahi. 21b: Mevhibe-i kerime-i ula la şerefe ala mine’l-İslam kelamınca siyadet-i suriyyeyi saadet-i maneviyye cem itmekle muharras-ı (?) riyaseteyn ve na’il-i neva’il-i neş’eteyn olduqlarıdur. 22a: İzzet-i seniyye-i saniye hamiyyü’l-harameyn ve’l-beledeynü’l-mükerremeyn olduqlarıdur. 24a: Mevhibe-i halise-i salise meziyyetü’l-ibn ale’l-ebdür. 35a: Atiyye-i rabia-i mennaniyye şecaat-i heyulaniyyedür. 44a: Hassa-ı hamise quvvet-i nazmiyye. 79a: [Altıncı hassa] Istanbul-manendi darü’s-saltanat-i bi-manende malik olduqlarıdur. 81a: Yedinci hassa-ı cesime-i mader-zad istiklal ve istibdaddur. 84a: Sekizinci hassa-ı iqbal-i pişine-peyvend devlet-yaveri leşker-perveridür. 93a: Doquzuncu hasis selamet-i unsur-ı nefisdür. 94a: Onıncı hassa-ı hasene-i kamile quvvet-i kamile-i qudsiyye-i şamiledür. 96a: On birinci hassa-ı Hüda-dad adem-i istimdaddur. 101a: On ikinci hassa-ı refia-i felek-mümas teraküm-i milel ve teşabük-i ecnasdur. 101b: On üçünci hasis-i cesim malikiyet-i heft iqlimdür. 102a: On dördünci hasis-i muazzam vilayet-i Arab u Acemdür. 102b: On beşinci hasisa-i fahire(-i) muteber(e) himayet-i bahr u berdür. 102b: On altıncı hassa-ı ali-şan şahnişan olduqlarıdur. 114b: On yedinci hasis-i sami umran-ı memalik ve mahamidür. 116a: [a new section without a heading begins here; hasisas 18, 19 and 20 are missing] 119b: Hatimetü’l-kitab.

The first of two gazanames on the Hungarian war of 1001-1015/1593-1606, Şehname-i Hümayun covers the period from Zilhicce 1001/ September 1593 to Cemaziyelevvel 1004/January 1596, and was probably written during 1003/1595 and early 1004/1596. It narrates Qoca Sinan Paşa’s (d. 1004/1596) initial campaign from the autumn of 1001/1593, beginning with his council of war in Belgrade and the conquest of the Habsburg fortresses of Vesprem (Veszprém) and Palota (Várpalota) in October 1001/1593, before retiring to winter quarters in Belgrade. The principal topic is the 1002/1594 campaign, covering the capture of Tata (Tata) and Sanmartin (Szent Márton), and the longer siege and conquest of Yanıq on the Raab in Zilhicce 1002/September 1594. Other major episodes include the arrival of the Han of the Crimea, Gazi Giray II (d. 1016/1607), and his troops; a battle against Habsburg relief forces near Yanıq, and the capture of Papa (Pápa) by the Tatars. From fol. 102b onwards, T. notes the death of Murad III (Cemaziyelevvel 1003/January 1595) and addresses a lengthy section (in verse) of congratulations and advice to his new patron Mehmed III. The work concludes with a brief account of Sinan Paşa’s career and his Wallachian campaign of 1003/1595 (on which T. was not present), which serves as a lead into T.’s next work on the campaign of 1004/ 1596 (see: Şehname-i Sultan-i Selatin-i Cihan or Egri Fethi Ta’rihi:). 
Ch. Woodhead’s 1983 edition of the Şehname is annotated, transcribed and accompanied with content summaries in English and a discussion of T.’s literary style. This edition does not contain a facsimile or an index.

T.’s last known work covers Mehmed III’s Hungarian campaign of 1004/1596, the two principal events being the capture of the fortress of Egri and victory over a major Habsburg army in the three-day battle of Haçova (Mezökeresztes). T.’s account of the desperate fighting around the person of the sultan during a surprise enemy attack on the Ottoman camp is particularly detailed. The work begins with another lengthy section of counsel to Mehmed III on the political and social evils of the time, and concludes with a vivid account of the sultan’s triumphant return to Istanbul. The final dedication to Mehmed III includes acknowledgement of Naqqaş Hasan (d. 1032/1623), the illustrator of the work (shown in a final half-page miniature, together with the author and an unnamed calligrapher). The Egri Fethi Ta’rihi differs from T.’s other works in being composed in verse throughout (aside from chapter headings), with a predominantly Turkish vocabulary and significantly less rhetorical artistry and Arabic or Persian content. The text is also fully vowelled.
Content: 2b: [Introduction] 12a: Bu dasitan Egri seferinün sebeb-i vuquı beyanındadur. 14b: Bu dasitan Egri altında qonılub qale hisar ve dögilmek içün toplar ihzar olındugıdur. 19b: Bu güftar vezir-i azam qalenün mezid-i hasanet ü meziyyet-i rasanetinden alınması meşgul oldugın görüb, naqqablar hazır itdürdüb, naqb itdürdügi ve hisarı ve naqbe atdurdugıdur. 23a: Bu dasitan mahsur olan begler qalenün satvet-i sultani ve quvvet-i qahire-i qahramani birle fethi quvvet-i qaribede oldugın bilmek ile qaleyi virdükleridür. 25a: Bu dasitan qalede olan Nemçe begi [Pişeni] ve Macar begi olan beg vire eyleyüp, aman ile taşra çıkub vezir-i azam … gelüp, el öpdürüp … saadetlü padişah-i devlet-penah … qaleyi seyr ü temaşa buyurup, … otag-ı hümayun-ı felek-nümunı oldugı mahallden qaldurup, qaleye qarib meydan-ı vesi-damanda qurup, hayme vü hargar hem-cenab-ı mihr u mah oldugıdur. 28b: Bu dasitan hazret-i sahib-qıran-ı cihan-sitan qaleyi temaşa vü seyr eyleyüp mustahıqqına enva-i inayat u ihsan buyurup, otag-ı asuman-vifaqları qaleye qarib bir menzil-i dil-ferib[de] qurıldugıdur. 30a: Bu güftar qale-i Egri alınup … burcların imaret ve içine asker qonılup ve zahiresi tedarük olınup, … Feth Giray Han gelüp … düstur-ı mebrur Cafer Paşa-yı kişver-güşa qarşu gönderilüp … azm-i rezm-i küffar eyleyüp varduqda, … ol gice bir tund-bad asup … üftan u hayran orduya avdet eyleyüp, Cafer Paşa … küffar-ı na-pak üzerine muqabil yürüyüb … melain bir ugurdan Paşanun üzerine hücum idüp, … çoq adem düşüp ve çoq adem alınup kendüsi dahi alına-yazup, aqıbet, bir ademi cebren atınun inanın alup döndürüp orduya gelüp irişdügi beyanındadur. 34a: Bu dasitan Cafer Paşa cengden geldükden sonra … müşavere eyleyüp, kafir üzre varmagı ihtiyar itmekle … padişah-ı gazi azm-i rezm buyurup, … ikinci günde düşmene mülaqi olup, … cenge agaz eyleyüp, azim-i ceng olup, … melain-i siyeh-ruzgarı … berüye geçürüp, … çadırlar içine girüb, hatta saadetlü padişahun üzerine hücum eyleyüp … padişah … yalnız qalup, dört yanın düşmen alup, şol hale vardı ki kafir hazine üzerine sancaq dikdi; aqıbet … iç oglanları bir anda melaini zir ü zeber ve hak-ı siyaha beraber eyleyüb … bir ugurdan hücum eyleyüp, kafir sınup, nice kerre yüz bin kafir bir an-ı qalilde qılıçdan geçüb, adem-abad-ı asliye gitdügidür. 44b: Yedi banun asker-i padişah-i heft-iklimün çar etrafın alup, afitab-i yek-süvar gibi cümlesin münhezim itdügidür. 45a: Bu dasitan saadetlü padişah-ı din-penah miyan-ı küffar-ı ru-siyahda qalub, kapu agası ve silahdar aga huzur-ı hümayunında def-i mekayid-i küffar-ı pür-kin ve ref-i şeda’id-i esrar-ı müşrikin içün tedabir-i cihangir ile küffara pay-i mal [ü] destgir itdükleridür. 53a: … şahname-guy-i faqir Taliqi-yi haqir, küffar-i bi-miqdar çadırlar arasında girdükde Cerrah Mehemmed Paşanun hayme-i hargahı ve bar u bargahı olan mahallde gah tir [ü] hadeng ve gah şimşir-i şir-ceng ile melain-i rübah-iştibahı qatl-i vecallerin tebah itdügidür. 54b: Bu dasitan … Erdel-i erzelün cümle askeri gıda-yı şir-i şimşir-i düşmen-zida olub, … hisar-ı … Varad ve Belgrad giriv u feryadla dolub … bin üç yüz kafir-i mecruh-ı cism-i bi-ruhla diyarına varub; ve yedi banun üçi hengam-i ceng-i cehennem-aheng olub; ikisi dahi pür-yare sad pare evlerine varub; … kar-ı İslam-i sahte [ve] hırman-ı küfr-i suhte ve rayat-ı din-i efrahte ve sem-i devlet-i efruhte oldugı ve tablları çalınup ve topları alındugıdur. 57b: Der intişa-ı sada-yı seyyar-ı hazret-i şehriyar der dar u diyar. 59a: Maqbulan-ı ashab tahmin-i maqtulan-ı küffarı iki yüz bine qadar virdükleridür … 60a: Bu güftar taburda olan küffar … ateş-i duzah-ı deniyye gönderilüp … iki gün aram olınup, … firar idenler ve firarla gidenler yoqlama qılınup, … bahadırlarun sebze-zar-ı ümidleri seyrab olup ve firar eyleyenlerden … şahsar-ı pür-hasar-ı vücudları defter-i alemden na-mevcud olup oradan qalqılub, bir menzil gidilüp Egri hizasında qonılup … darü’l-cihad-ı Belgrad-ı itat-mutada … azm-i hümayun olındugıdur. 64a: Bu güftar saadetlü padişah-ı gerdun-iqtidarun Edirneden darat-ı dara ve şevqet-i cihan-ara birle Istanbula azimet-i ruz-efzun buyurup Davud Paşa nam menzil-i meserret-nümune vüzul-i hümayun buyurduqlarıdur. 64b: Bu güftar sahib-qıran-ı zafer-qarin … valide … hazretleriyle mülaqat buyurup iqamet-i mevacib-i istirvah içün iki gün oturaq buyurduqlarıdur. 67b: Bu dasitan hazret-i şehriyar-i cihan-sitan darü’s-saltanati s-seniyye-yi mahfuze-i Qostantiniyyeye dahil olduqlarıdur.

Only one other, non-historical, work by T. is known. The Firasetname was composed ca. 983/1575, probably as an accession gift for Murad III, and is T.’s earliest known work. It is a conventional composition with a brief introduction and three parts: a definition of “the science of physiognomy,” firaset; the effect of varying climates upon the human temperament and appearance; how true character may be discerned from a man’s outward features. Pre-Ottoman Muslim personalities comprise most of its subject matter. This text has not been studied.