Re-imagining the Ottoman past in Turkish politics: past and present.

• Author: Erken, Ali
• Position: Report

The article presents an analysis of the popularization of the 'Ottoman Past' as a central theme in Turkish politics. It starts with a brief discussion of the treatment of Ottoman history in Republican historiography, and the challenging views to it in the 1940s and 1950s. It continues with an analysis of the re-appraisal of Ottoman history in the 1960s and 1970s in intellectual circles and investigates how it was articulated in the political discourse of the two ideologically driven parties, namely the CKMP (Cumhuriyet Koylu Millet Partisi-Republican Peasant Nation Party)-MHP (Milliyetci Hareket Partisi-Nationalist Movement Party) and the MNP (Milli Nizam Partisi-National Order Party)-MSP (Milli Selamet Partisi-National Salvation Party). The study contends that the appropriation of revivalist discourse in politics that drew inspiration from the Ottoman past had a strong impact on the formation of the perception of youngsters and university students of the time on the question of "order" and westernization. The final section compares this political orientation with the post-1980 nationalist discourse and looks at the role of pro-Ottomanist discourse behind the rise of the RP. It links this discussion with the use of Ottoman history as a framework for the AK Party's foreign policy. The article, thus, aims to make a contribution to the understanding of current debates revolving around the rise of "neo-Ottomanism" in Turkish politics.

Republican Historiography and Ottoman Heritage: A Brief Overlook

The agents of political nationalism in the 1920s and 1930s were the Republican elite, who favored a top-down model of social change and imposed their secular vision of nationalism through various means. The early Republican elite was determined to build a Turkish national identity independent of any religious connotation, and Islam was gradually eliminated from the Kemalist nation-building program. It could be said that the pace of westernization surpassed the pace of nationalism from 1923 to 1930; recourse to the westernization project, which had its early roots in the Tanzimat reforms of the mid-19th century, ignited the Kulturkampf of the previous century. This time, however, westernization reforms came with a much greater force and on a larger scale. Reform laws were swiftly passed and forcefully implemented in various segments of society during the first decade of the new republic.

It is a fact that the educated elites and political leadership in Turkey closely watched the intellectual-political currents in Europe at the time and often expressed this inspiration in their political behavior. (1) The ruling elite sought to benefit from academic studies to build a new Turkish national culture. The Faculty of Language History and Geography (Dil Tarih Cografya Fakultesi-DTCF) in Ankara University, for example, was established in 1935 to encourage research in language, history, and material culture. (2) The ruling elite was willing to ascribe certain qualities to the Turkish nation with the help of evidence found in scientific research on Turkish history. Accordingly, the first Turkish History Congress was convened in Ankara in 1932 in the presence of Mustafa Kemal. Over two hundred participants took their seats, as fifteen researchers presented their papers on various aspects of Turkish history. (3) Most of the researchers suggested that the early ancestors of the Turkish nation had flourished in Central Asia thousands of years ago. (4) Charting the history of the Turkish people, most of the presentations dwelt on pre-Islamic Turkish history, and the Ottoman era was reduced to a minor stage of the Turks' long venture in history for tens of thousands of years. (5) As a culmination of these studies in the early 1930 the "Turkish History Thesis" was presented to Mustafa Kemal and this perspective of historiography has been propagated through the media as well as school textbooks ever since.

Republican historiography fostered the ruling elite's view that they should take pride in the Ottoman experience. There was a consensus among the historians and Republican elite that the Ottomans had misinterpreted the role of religion in society, stood against scientific discoveries, and let non-Turkish people hold positions in the state administration. (6) The Turkish History Thesis also argued that the migration of the Turks from Central Asia to Europe and Anatolia contributed to the progress of world civilization. (7) In school textbooks, this praise of the pre-Islamic heritage was emphasized, whereas Ottoman history was dismissed and the Ottoman rulers received paltry coverage. (8)

Meanwhile, independent of the state apparatus, the ideology of nationalism found a voice among civil circles again in the early 1930s with the writings of Nihal Atsiz, a young scholar at Istanbul University from Turkist circles, who held extreme racist views. (9) Atsiz published the Atsiz Mecmua in 1931 and Orhun in 1933. In these publications and in his later works Atsiz criticized the CHP, especially over its view of history and rejection of Pan-Turkism. (10) Furthermore, he denigrated the school textbook prepared by the Turkish Historical Society under the title Turk Tarihi (Turkish History), and condemned its mocking interpretation of Ottoman history, claiming that the Ottoman family was "the greatest family in the whole of Turkish history." (11)

Atsiz and a group of Turkist intellectuals continued to promote a different understanding of history than that of Republicans in the 1940s and 1950. Converging with the Turkists in their criticism of Republican historiography was a group of intellectuals who did articulate a different view of nationalism, namely conservative nationalism, in the 1940s. Nurettin Topcu, who was the publisher of the Hareket (Movement) journal since 1939, defended the idea that nationalism should draw on shared cultural values that were immersed in tradition and cultural practices maintained by the Anatolian people. (12) Necip Fazil Kisakurek, a leading poet and thinker in religious and nationalist circles, launched his Buyuk Dogu (Great East) in 1943, which promoted the restoration of the Ottoman heritage and religious institutions against the Republican reforms. (13) Lastly, Osman Yuksel Serdengecti, who was a journalist, launched the Serdengecti journal, in which he published various articles praising the Ottoman Sultans and statecraft throughout the late 1940s and 1950s. (14) In spite of their prolific intellectual contribution to the debate, neither conservative nationalists nor Turkists were able to extend their reach to the majority of Turkish society. Their appeal was mainly confined to educated groups who had access to their publications or speeches, a relatively small number in a country with only 35 percent literacy. (15)

The post-1946 democratization marked an important step in the popularization of conservative nationalist views across the country. Gavin Brocket's study demonstrates that the liberalization of the press and the spread of provincial newspapers contributed to the diversification of views of nationalism at the grass-root level and Islam occupied a very central place in this formation of popular national identity. (16) Small-scale nationalist societies promoting Turkist or conservative nationalist views, founded during the late 1940s, joined forces under the Federation of Union of Nationalists (Milliyetciler Birligi Federasyonu), which upheld the idea of nationalism rooted in the "belief in God, fatherland, history, language, tradition, and morality," in 1951. (17) These developments in the late 1940s and 1950s were indicative of the rising appeal to the Ottoman legacy within the political and intellectual circles, challenging the Republican view of its Turkish-Islamic past.

Longing for Ottoman Legacy: Intellectuals and Politicians

In the aftermath of the 27 May Coup, the NUC (National Union Committee-Milli Birlik Komitesi), composed of 38 members, was formed, but shortly after its formation a deep split among the Committee members led to the expulsion of fourteen Committee members, who were sent to exile. After their return to the country some members of the fourteen, led by Colonel Alparslan Turkes, joined the CKMP in 1965. (A party that had been founded by Osman Bolukbasi in the previous decade) and took over its control in the same year. Though in the early years they seemed to be in line with the Republican Kemalist values and secular nationalism, the party's 1969 congress, where the party changed its name to the MHP, marked a shift in its ideology, bringing a new evaluation of culture and history. (18) The CKMP-MHP leadership focused their attention on recruiting youngsters, especially in the universities, in the face of growing socialist movement in the country.

As the MHP moved into a new phase, some of the conservative nationalist ideologues forged stronger ties with the party youth and the leadership. The Aydinlar Klubu (Intellectuals' Club), founded in 1962 in Istanbul, was one of the first organizations where leading ideologues of conservative nationalist thinking in Turkey held weekly seminars on a wide range of topics. (19) Less formal than the Aydinlar Klubu, the Marmara Kiraathanesi (Marmara Coffeehouse) was located in Beyazit near the University of Istanbul. It became an attractive location for those who moved in rightist circles, including those in the Aydinlar Klubu, providing a comfortable setting for young university students and conservative nationalist intellectuals to meet around the same table. (20) These thinkers had an interest in the arts and humanities in general. Most of them were imbued with a religious sensitivity to varying degrees, but did not have expertise in Islamic sciences. Among them there were scholars such as Osman Turan Erol Gungor and Ziya Nur Aksun, poets such as Necip Fazil Kisakurek and Hilmi Oflaz, and columnists such as Ahmet Kabakli and...