Two known mss.:
In one of his last books, Mevâidü’n-nefâis fi kavâidi’l-mecâlis ("Tables of Delicacies Concerning the Rules of Social Gatherings"), Ali reiterates some of themes presented in Künhü’l-ahbâr. For instance, he speaks of poets and scholars made viziers by previous illustrious kings (B13); the need for the sultans to choose well-bred servants, even when these were originally infidels, using the science of physiognomy (B15-16; cf. also B167-69); janissaries placed in special barracks until they grow up (B17); the young men in royal service should not associate with people outside the palace, as it was done until the reign of Suleyman (B20); the same is valid for the aghas of the palace (B20-21). “Ignorant products of the palace slave system… have infiltrated the ranks of the Divan scribes”, taking positions that used to be given only to renowned ulemas (B23ff). Elsewhere, Ali turns against the excessive number of palace artisans (B57-58). He also reiterates his charges against excessive numbers of field marshals (serdar), adding that the system of appointing a vizier as “virtual monarch” (padişah-i manevî) leads to the disordering of public affairs (B82). Especially young kings should campaign personally (B110-11). An interesting point is Ali’s discussion of pirates, whom he describes as potential fighters of the faith (B33ff). Ali observes that “God made members of the human race dependent upon one another through the diversity of crafts and abilities … The sultans of the world… absolutely need every single man of trade and must have recourse to them”; so, “there is certainly a need for the kings and princes to assign position and glory (…); for wealthy persons to expend property and goods for the public weal; certainly for craftsmen to display their artistry and mastery; and for farmers to harvest canonically lawful food from their plowed lands. Similarly, there is demand on all sides for the knowledge of scholars, for the benevolent prayers of the righteous, for the warring and raiding of men of combat” (B37-38, ch. 12). In the chapter on ulemas (ch. 28, B67-74) we read: “whether [the graduates of the medreses] be a poor son of the Turks or a wealthy man, whether a lowly sort blessed with comprehension or one of the privileged, by following the orderly path they attained the rank permitting them to be called learned”. Ali criticizes the law of Mehmed II on assigning ranks and degrees to the ulema, because the late Sultan did not consider the fact that even an accomplished ulema of high rank could be corrupted with bribery; this corruption of the learned class started mainly in the last days of Suleyman (B67-68). In the days of Selim II, ignoramuses and rogues became judges and accumulated wealth; Ali praises here Mehmed III as a person who prevented bribery and restored some of the high offices of ulema into their previous purity (B70); however, it did not occur to these days sultans that “the maintenance of good public order is dependent upon orderly maintenance of laws and ordinances” (B72).
A special chapter (ch. 15, B43-46) is devoted to the behavior of kings (“men who conquer their way to power”, sahib-i zuhur; cf. Fleischer 280ff). “As for monarchs of any age, their being “The Shadow of God” is determined by their conforming to the Shari’a”. Ali criticizes ignorant people who now and then make their appearance among some Turkmens or Tatars and think they can become kings “with the right to Coin and Sermon” (he mentions explicitly Celalis). “Given that every realm has an established ruler, these people cannot maintain stability and power unless the possessor of a realm is utterly tyrannical… [o]r unless the claimant proves himself superior and more powerful than the established ruler, and in comparison to him takes more bribes, so that the non-Muslim and Muslim subjects and the army all turn against the ruler and dispatch a letter of invitation to someone who calls himself a celali” (B45). Ruling lineages have their own time-span allotted to them, which reach its end due to negligence that comes from wine-drinking (of the king), inclination to accumulate wealth, and falling into the wiles of women. The true treasury of a kingdom is its subjects, neglect of which will surely lead to destruction of the king. Another chapter (ch. 96, B162-65) speaks of generosity and beneficence. A ruler whose treasury realizes an annual income of 2,000 yük akçes should expend 20 yük annually in gifts (i.e. 1%) and 2 yük per occasion to a person who merits it (i.e., 0.1%). Ali calculates the gifts given by the Ottoman sultans and finds them rather ungenerous; this contradicts somehow some other advice he gives elsewhere, but one should note that here he talks of gifts granted to erudite men (among which he obviously would like to be counted himself).
Some other themes are also relevant to political issues. Ali stresses that loftiness of aspiration leads to high ranks (ch. 23, B58-60). From this observation he goes once again to a criticism of bribery and nepotism (implying that nowadays aspiration is not enough). Now, “to ensure that the workshop known as the Ottoman state (…)… should not suffer damage through bribery” the king needs to use intelligent and learned persons. “However, whenever the foundation of a state (…) is damaged so that the great personages turn their thoughts to bribery; whenever kings and ministers toss aside the safeguarding of the law so that their intelligent subjects, who seek their rights without having to pay money, rot in corners, dismissed from office; whenever unworthy and unprincipled low-brows who know only how to count out the coinage of bribery are raised day by day to offices of lofty rank” –then the state begins to collapse (B59). Here Ali uses a simile of the state as a workshop; the task of securing its functioning as a big waterwheel; the king as the master of the workshop; the vizier as a capable apprentice who can repair the waterwheel. In another point, while describing the clothing suitable for each class (ch. 81, B137), Ali distinguishes society in four distinct classes, namely sultans and princes, viziers and governors, notables of the realm who are considered to be among the middling ranks, finally artisans, merchants and craftsmen. Of special interest is the chapter on kings’ sociability (ch. 41, B92-95). Older kings used to take their meals together with their children, viziers and companions; this custom stopped in the reign of Selim I (see Brookes’ note 585, p. 93). Ali criticizes this new practice of seclusion with the verse: Haughtiness does not suit a king whom I love. A chapter on “evil persons” (ch. 103, B170-72), however, stresses that the reaya should not mix in the company of people in power (…) and that “they should not become cross by thinking that extrajudicial taxes (tekâlif-i örfiye) are unprecedented when they are imposed”. Although the corruption of judges and provincial governors has disrupted the order of the world, the subjects should not have the permission to bar from their villages beys and judges whom they do not want, because thus lowbred and wicked people “aveng[e] themselves on their rulers”.
 “The manifest one”, by which Ali means men not born into a ruling house but who rise to power by force of arms (n. by Brookes, B43).