Multi-Purpose Empire: Ottoman History in Republican Turkey
2014; Taylor & Francis; Volume: 50; Issue: 4 Linguagem: Inglês
10.1080/00263206.2014.892481
ISSN1743-7881
Autores Tópico(s)Islamic Studies and History
ResumoAbstractThis article examines popular, academic and political perceptions of the Ottoman Empire in Republican Turkey, challenging the widespread assumption that there has been a continuous clash between pro-Ottoman Islamists and secular, anti-Ottoman, Kemalists. It argues that in the Republican period Kemalists effectively appropriated the Ottoman past for use in their nationalist narrative, not only through using a 'theory of fatal decline' but also by simply defining positive cultural or political symbols from the years 1299 to 1923 as 'Turkish' rather than 'Ottoman'. This serves as a backdrop for the article's main argument, that the 1940s and 1950s saw a thorough Kemalist appropriation of the Ottoman past, celebrating the empire's golden age as secular, pro-western and Turkish. The 500th anniversary of the conquest of Istanbul in 1953 gave the Turkish government an opportunity to showcase this new interpretation of Ottoman history as well as to use the relatively new rhetoric of 'Ottoman tolerance' to claim for Turkey a place among its new allies in the democratic, anti-communist West. At the level of domestic politics, the Democratic Party sought to wrap its modernization policies in the mantle of a progressive, democratic Fatih Sultan Mehmet II, while the Republican People's Party condemned the Democrats for betraying Fatih's memory and the nation's honour by downplaying the Ottoman past in order to placate potential anti-communist allies in Greece and the Arab world. Ultimately, the article argues that it is impossible to understand contemporary Islamist and liberal uses of the Ottoman past without understanding the way the empire was incorporated into the dominant Turkish nationalist narrative between 1923 and 1953. Notes1. See A. Çınar, Modernity, Islam and Secularism in Turkey: Bodies, Places and Time (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2005); E. Copeaux, Espaces et temps de la nation turque: analyse d'une historiographie nationaliste, 1931–1993 (Paris: CNRS éditions, c.1997); S. Kaplan, The Pedagogical State: Education and the Politics of National Culture in Post-1980 Turkey (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2006); G. Brockett, How Happy to Call Oneself a Turk: Provincial Newspapers and the Negotiation of a Muslim National Identity (Austin, TX: University of Texas Press, 2011).2. Atatürk'ün Söylev ve Demeçleri, Vol.2 (Istanbul: Maarif Matbaası, 1945), p.154.3. A Speech by Gazi Mustafa Kemal (Leipzig: K.F. Koehler, 1929), p.586.4. It would be similarly anachronistic to ask how Turks in Istanbul today could deny the enormous impact of Armenians on their city's history when they are surrounded by enormous mosques designed by an 'Armenian' architect like Mimar Sinan. The discourse denying the existence of an Armenian past is inextricably linked with the discourse denying the 'Armenianness' of Mimar Sinan and his works.5. Typical was a work from the Military Press in 1933 which described the 'Crete Campaign' as one of the most difficult in Turkish military history, but in which the Turks succeeded through 'their strength of will'. E. Yüzbaşı Ziya and Rahmi, Girit Seferi (Istanbul: Askeri Matbaa, 1933).6. Almost a third of the entries in the 1945 encyclopaedia Türk Meşhurları (Famous Turks), for example, were Ottoman Pashas, as were a substantial number of the entries in the more expansive Meşhur Adamlar (Famous Men) from 1935. I.A. Govsa, Türk Meşhurları Ansiklopedisi (Istanbul: Yedigün, 1945); I.A. Govsa, Meşhur Adamlar (Istanbul: Yedigün, 1935).7. F.F. Tülbentçi, Geçmişte Bugün (Ankara: Akba, 1943). Building on Zeki Taştan's summaries of popular history books from the period, Murat Kacıroğlu concludes that while works by authors such as Turan Tan and Nizamettin Nazif were often quite critical of even famous sultans such as Fatih or Suleiman, their heroes were men such as Heyreddin Barbarosa or fictitious soldiers whose bravery secured victory for the Ottoman army and state. Z. Taştan, 'Türk Edebiyatında Tarihî Romanlar' (PhD thesis, Istanbul University, 2000), as cited in Murat Kacıroğlu's '"Cehennemden Selam" Romanı Örneğınde İlk Dönem (1927–1940) Tarihi Macera Romanlarda Kanonik Söylem Yahut Angaje Eğilim', Turkish Studies, Vol.5, No.2 (Spring 2010), pp.449–81.8. http://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osmanl%C4%B1_k%C3%BClt%C3%BCr%C3%BC (accessed 14 March 2013).9. Consider, for example, S. Nüzhet, Türk Temaşası: Meddah – Karagöz Ortaoyunu [Turkish Entertainments: Storytellers and Karagoz Theatre] (Istanbul: Matbaa-I Ebuzziya, 1930).10. C. Bektaş Türk Evi (Istanbul: Yapı Endüstri Merkezi Yayınları, 2013).11. Istanbul's fountains were a product of 'Turks' benevolent spirit' (I.H. Tanışık, Istanbul Cesmeleri I, Istanbul: Maarif Matbaasi, 1943). Fatih Camii was a 'beautiful and powerful example of Turkish artisans' aesthetic' that also showed 'the development of national genius' (H.B. Kunter and A.S. Ulgen, Fatih Camii ve Bizans Sarnici, Istanbul: Cumhuriyet Matbaasi, 1939, p.5). In the Bursa Halkevi journal, Sedat Çetintaş wrote that the Ottomans had developed a 'modern and advanced architecture … without falling under the influence of any foreign civilization'. 'Türk Mimarı Tarihimizde Bursa Eserleri', Uludağ, No.32 (1935), pp.21–8.12. S.A. Kansu, 'Anadolu'da Turk Mutefekkirlerinin Coğrafi Yayılışı Uzerine Bir Araştırma', Ankara Üniversitesi Dil ve Tarih-Coğrafya Fakultesi Dergisi, Vol.1, No.1 (Sept. 1942).13. Z. Sakir, Türkler Karşısında Napoleon (Istanbul: Anadolu Türk Kitap Deposu, 1943).14. G. Romeran and Tepedelenli, Ali Paşa, trans. A.K. Aksut (Istanbul: Ikbal Kitabevi, 1939).15. A. Inan, 'Bir Türk Amirali XVIinci Asrin Büyük Coğrafya', Belletin, Vol.1 (1937), p.317.16. A.R. Seyfi, 'Akdenizin Kurtları', Resimli Şark, No.8 (Aug. 1931).17. C. oglu Mustafa, Osmanlı Imparatorluğunun Yükselme Devrinde Türk Ordusunun Savaşları ve Devletin Kurumu, Iç ve Diş Siyasasi, trans. S. Tokdemir (Istanbul: Askeri Matbaasi, 1937).18. Hariciye Vekaleti to Yüksek Basvekalet, 20 Dec. 1933. Cumhuriyet Arşivi, 030-0-010-000-000-2410631-37.19. Hariciye Vekaleti to Başvekalet, 9 July 1942. Cumhuriyet Arşivi, 030-0-010-000-000-233-573-22. Several years earlier, by contrast, poet M. Faruk Gürtunca had reminded Italians coveting Anatolian soil that, in addition to riding on Rome with Attila, the Turks had sunk Andrea Doria's fleet with Barbarossa and were ready to do so again. 'Ask', he suggested with reference to Ottoman incursions in southern Italy, 'which lion Janissary rests in your great-grandmother's heart?' M.F. Güntunca, Bu Arslan Dokunmayın (Istanbul: Ülkü Kitap Yurdu, 1939).20. B. Ersanli, 'The Ottoman Empire in the Historiography of the Kemalist Era: A Theory of Fatal Decline', in F. Adanir and S. Faroqhi (eds.), The Ottomans and the Balkans: A Discussion of Historiography (Boston: Brill, 2002).21. A. Inan, 'Türk-Osmanlı Tarihinin Karakteristik Noktalarına bir Bakış', Belletin, Vol.1 (1937), pp.165–79.22. Ibid., p.125.23. Ibid., p.126.24. Ibid., p.130.25. Ibid., p.132.26. Tarih: Yeni ve Yakın Zamanlarda Osmanlı – Türk Tarihi, Vol.III (Istanbul: Devlet Matbaası, 1931), p.3.27. Ibid., pp.3, 5, 28.28. Ibid., pp.32, 52.29. Ş.A. Zorlu-Durukan, 'The Ideological Pillars of Turkish Education' (unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Wisconsin, Madison, 2006), p.158 (emphasis added).30. Ibid.31. K.H. Hüsnü, Manzum Türk Tarihi (Izmir: 1933), pp.3–4.32. Ibid., p.95.33. 'Türkü bozan dervişlerle hocalar / bu hakandan yedi hayli sopalar', 'Hocalarla devlet işi yürümez / Dua ile hiç bir gemi yürümez', ibid.34. A.Z. Polar, Osmanlı Imparatorlugunun Cokuş Sebepleri (Istanbul: Ak Kitabevi, 1962), p.10.35. Quotes F. Köprülü, The Origins of the Ottoman Empire, trans. G. Leiser (Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1992).36. Ibid., p.51.37. See for example, S.N. Tansu, Osmanlı Tarihi Özü (Istanbul: 1944).38. Köprülü, Origins, pp.54–5.39. O. Koçak, 'Westernization Against the West: Cultural Politics in the Early Turkish Republic', in C. Kerslake, K. Öktem and P. Robins (eds.), Turkey's Engagement with Modernity: Conflict and Change in the Twentieth Century (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010).40. S. Savcı, 'Dolmuşta', Vatan, 3 June 1953.41. Newspapers gave detailed information about these festivities, for example, 'Fetih yılı programı', Milliyet, 21 May 1953.42. F. Öner, 'Fethin 500 uncu yıldönümü Tören ve Şenlikleri başladı', Cumhurriyet, 30 May 1953.43. Ibid.44. 'Everest'in fethinin akisleri', Milliyet, 3 June 1953.45. 'Beşiktaş Fenerbahçeyi dün 2-1 mağlup etti', Milliyet, 1 June 1953.46. M. Kaplan, 'Turks Here Will Sip "Lion's Milk" To Mark Victory of 500 Years Ago', New York Times, 29 May 1953.47. F. Oner, 'Fethin 500üncü yıldönümü Tören ve Şenlikerli başladı', Cumhurriyet, 30 May 1953.48. 'Istanbul bugün Fetih yılını kutluyor', Cumhuriyet, 29 May 1953. See Esra Özyurek's analysis of a similar ritual during celebrations of the Republic's tenth anniversary in Nostalgia for the Modern: State Secularism and Everyday Politics in Turkey (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2006), p.131.49. 'Fatih ve Topkapı'daki torende yüzbinlerce Istanbullu bulundu', Vatan, 30 May 1953.50. M.F. Fenik, 'Seferihisar'da Genc Ulubatılı Hasanlar', Zafer, 30 May 1953.51. The full version of this legend is related by the Turkish Ministry of Religion outside the tomb of the Sofu Baba, located on the Fındıklı yokuşu in Istanbul's Cihangir neighbourhood.52. 'Istanbul Fatih'i kucakliyordu', Istanbul Ekspres, 29 May 1953.53. H.A. Yücel, 'Fethin Önemi', Cumhuriyet, 29 May 1953.54. S.N. Tansu, 'Sanatkar Fatih', Cumhuriyet, 31 May 1953.55. Ibid.56. 'Fatih'e ait seminerler devam ediyor', Vatan, 6 June 1953.57. Yücel, 'Fetihin Onemi'.58. N. Ataç, 'Yeni', Ulus, 31 May 1953. In 1955, Bülent Ecevit would describe Fatih as a liberal-minded young intellectual, an admirer of the newly emerging Renaissance art, and a great poet. 59. I.H. Sevuk, 'Fatih ve Dar-us-sefeka', Cumhuriyet, 27 May 1953.60. 'Times'in Fatih ve Atatürk yazısı vesilesile', Cumhuriyet, 10 June 1953.61. See Brockett, How Happy, Chapter 6.62. Zafer, 30 May 1953.63. S.N. Tansu, 'Sanatkar Fatih', Cumhuriyet, 31 May 1953.64. Promoting a secular reading of Fatih's accomplishment required not just telling the right anecdotes but policing those who told the wrong ones. On 29 May 1957, for example, the Istanbul police detained a 'youth by the name of Mesud Yavuz Bilgin' for reading a poem at an unofficial ceremony in Eminonu which used 'emotional language' to criticize Ayasofya's transformation into a museum. 'Fethinin 504. yıldönümü dun törenle kutlandı', Cumhurriyet, 30 May 1957.65. Karayolları Haritası, 1953. Atatürk Kitaplığı Map Collection, Hrt_003544.66. Beş Yüzüncü Fetih Yılında Devlet Calışmalarına Umumi bir Bakış (Istanbul: Parsadan Basın, 1953).67. For example F. Ahmad, Turkey: The Quest for Identity (Oxford: Oneworld, 2003) or, most explicitly, Y. Çolak, 'Ottomanism vs. Kemalism: Collective Memory and Cultural Pluralism in 1990s Turkey', Middle Eastern Studies, Vol.42, No.4 (July 2006), pp.587–602.68. 'Fatih yıldönümü için Meclise bir soru önergesi verildi', Cumhuriyet, 2 June 1953.69. 'Fetih Şenlikleri dün sona erdi', Cumhuriyet, 8 June 1953.70. 'S. N. Tansu, "500üncü Fetih yılında neler olmazdı"', Cumhuriyet, 23 May 1949.71. Cumhuriyet, 28 May 1953; Cumhurriyet, 3 June 1953.72. 'Fetih yılına dair Meclis'e iki takrir verildi', Vatan, 2 June 1953.73. 'Terbiyemiz bakımından Fetih', Cumhuriyet, 8 June, 1953.74. S. Savci, 'Dolmuşta', Vatan, 3 June 1953.75. 'Fetih yıldönümü törenleri bitiyor', Vatan, 7 June 1953.76. F. Merril, 'Phanar and Five Hundredth Anniversary of Conquest of Constantinople', Despatch No.445. 15 Jan. 1953, Turkey, Istanbul Consulate General Records Re The Patriarchate, Box 1, RG 84, National Archives and Records Administration of the United States.77. Ibid.78. 'Turk Istanbul', Cumhurriet, 31 May 1953.79. I.H. Danişmend, 'The Importance of the Conquest of Istanbul for Mankind and Civilization', trans. E.A. and B.M. (Publications of the Istanbul Society for Celebration of the Conquest No.15). This rhetorical outreach was sufficiently effective that the New York Times noted '[t]he modern Turk believes his was the first country to establish a legal basis for the co-existence of all religious and racial groups'. Kaplan, 'Turks Here Will Sip "Lion's Milk"".80. O. Turan, 'Milliyet ve Insanlık Mefkurelerinin Tarih Tedrisatinda Ahenkleştirilmesi', Ankara Üniversitesi Dil ve Tarih-Coğrafya Fakültesi Dergisi, Vol.10, No.1–2 (March–June 1952), p.210.81. Ibid., p.212.82. Ibid., p.225.83. B.S. Baykal, 'Şark Buhranı ve Sabah Gazetesi', Üniversitesi Dil ve Tarih-Coğrafya Fakültesi Dergisi, Vol.6, No.4 (Sept.–Oct. 1948), p.252.84. Ibid., p.233.85. Beş Yuzuncu Yüzüncü Fetih Yılında Devlet Calışmalarına Umumi bir Bakış.86. S. Djanasia and N. Berzenisvili, Gürcüstan Meselesi (Georgian Academy: 1945) as quoted in Ş. Altundag, 'Osmanli Idaresi ve Gurculer', Ankara Universitesi Dil ve Tarih-Coğrafya Fakültesi Dergisi, Vol.10, No.1–2 (March–June 1952), pp.79–90.87. Ibid.88. Ibid., p.79.89. Ibid., p.81.90. Historian Ismail Hakkı Uzunçarşılıoğlu had earlier tried to secularize Ottoman mosque-building by claiming that the empire's many mosques were 'social foundations' where, in addition to worshipping, citizens could hold meetings, reach collective decisions and find out community news. I.H. Uzunçarşılıoğlu, Osmanlı Tarihi, Vol.2 (Ankara: Türk Tarihi Kurumu, 1947), p.284.91. Damat Mehmet Şerif Paşa Çavdaroğlu, Faith Sultan Mehmed Han-i Sani ve Istanbul Fethi, Ciğercan Tarih Kitapları Serisi No. (Istanbul: Hilmi kitabevi, 1953).92. See Orhan Kocak on the emergence of such nostalgia in the 1940s: O. Kocak, 'Westernization Against the West', in Kerslake et al., Turkey's Engagement with Modernity, p.315.93. C. Çandar, 'Muhteşem Tehlike', Radikal, 28 Nov. 2012. In Istanbul, Pamuk devotes a reverential chapter to Kocu's work, but nonetheless depicts him as a failed imitator of the western encyclopaedic style who never realized the importance of prioritizing fact over anecdote. Alternatively, Kocu could be seen as a consummate imitator of the western popular history style, perhaps even someone who improved upon the genre defined by works like Ripley's Believe It Or Not, by interspersing serious archival research with his historical curiosities and tales of the macabre. O. Pamuk, Istanbul: Hatıralar ve Şehir (Istanbul: Iletişim, 2003), pp.157–8.94. M. Rona, 'Eski Istanbul Nasıl Eğlenirdi?', Hafta, No.92, 29 May 1953.95. H.Y. Şehsuvaroğlu, Asırlar boyunca Istanbul: sarayları, camileri, abîdeleri, çeşmeleri (Cumhuriyet Gazetesi, 1953), p.173.96. Y. Kemal, A. Sinasi and A. Hamdi, Istanbul (Istanbul: Doğan Kardeş Yayınları, 1953), pp.59–79.97. F.F. Tülbentçi, Barbaros Hayrettin geliyor: büyük tarihî roman (Ankara: Ankara kitabevi, 1949), p.7.98. Ibid., p.95.99. Ibid., p.366.100. 'Esir Kızlar Kalyonu', 12 Teşri Nisan, Sayi 23. This was followed by 'Gökten Düşen Kız' (The Girl from the Sky) on 19 Teşri Nisan (Sayi 24), and on 25 Sonteşrin (No.36) a story about a heartbroken Circassian dying for his beloved.101. Tarih Dunyası [Bound Volume] (Istanbul: Şaka Matbaasi 1950), p.404.102. Ibid., p.400.103. Ibid., p.443.104. Ibid., p.448.105. Ibid., p.453.106. Ibid., p.550.107. Ibid., p.37.108. D. Karamanoğlu, 'Osmanlı Tarihinde Kadı Sekavetleri', in ibid., p.40.109. Ibid., p.1512.110. Tarih Hazinesi, 26 Nov. 1952.111. Tarih Hazinesi, No.1, 15 Nov. 1950.112. Ibid.113. Tarih Hazinesi, pp.281 and 254.114. Ibid.115. Tarih Hazinesi, No.2, 1 Dec. 1950.116. 'Abdulhamid'in Ittihatcilara ve Sultan Reşada Verdiği Ders', Tarih Hazinesi, p.8.117. Ibid., p.512.118. Ibid., p.828.119. See Asırlar Boyunca, pp.23 and 61, or I.H. Konyalı, Mimar Koca Sinan'in Eserleri (Istanbul: Ülkü Basimevi, 1950), p.41.120. Asırlar Boyunca, p.11 or Tarih Hazinesi, p.171.121. Ş. Hanioğlu, Atatürk: an Intellectual Biography (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, c.2011) and Ş. Hanioğlu, A Brief History of the Late Ottoman Empire (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, c.2008).
Referência(s)