CEU eTD Collection IN THE HYBRID PRESENCE OF THE KARAMANLIS PRESENCE HYBRID IN THE Advisor: Associate Professor Nadia Al-Bagdadi In Partial Requirements for the Degree of CLASH OF IDENTITY MYTHS Nationalism Studies Program Central European University Budapest, Budapest, Gulen Gokturk Master ofArtsMaster Submitted to 2009 By CEU eTD Collection my thesis. toMartinhismy expresseditalso would valuable gratitude Thomen time to who liketo spent and my They friendship. long substituted duringparents myfirst I term experience abroad. huge thanksis for reserved SedaSaluk, ÖzdeÇeliktemel, andCeydilekfor Erdem their care study inandroom garden the we gotbored, especially inwhen thesis A process. the writing in the kitchen, in the together, moments priceless We spent center. residence the at neighbors likegathering thethankI also throughout my all together to weenjoyed year. would single every the for Studies Nationalism in friends my to thanks special offer I tothem.is thesis dedicated all This at choices times. well as my brother Güven as andGöktürk tomy GöktürkMeral Halim indepted parents feel I particularly my academicpath. who always support me to the end and who respect my criticisms,Onur to and Y supervisormygratefulmy am to NadiaI Al-Bagdadi herrecommendationsfor and ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Õ ld ÕUÕ m for his inguidance and encouragement every step Itookon i CEU eTD Collection ILORPY...... 59 ...... BIBLIOGRAPHY 54 ...... CONCLUSION 54 ...... CHAPTER 5 48 THE SELF-UNDERSTANDING ...... OF THE KARAMANLIS 48 ...... CHAPTER 4 21 ...... THE KARAMANLIS INBETWEEN 21 ...... CHAPTER 3 16 ...... THEORETICAL BACKGROUND 16 ...... CHAPTER 2 1 INTRODUCTION...... 1 ...... CHAPTER 1 ...... i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS OFCONTENTS TABLE h eteet...... 42 the settlement...... The Lausanne Peace Convention and the debates about the Karamanlis during 34 discourse in ...... Turkish Nationalism and the perception of the Karamanlis in early nationalist and attempts of the Greek Kingdom inAsia Minor 21 ‘Incongruity’ ofa language and a religion...... Literature Review: CriticalAnalysis of the scholarly 9 debate about the Karamanlis... 7 Methodology: Problematization of Sources...... 24 ...... ii CEU eTD Collection 2 be used inorder tomake the usage of wordthe easierfor English speakers. plural. In the course of the thesis plurality in Turkish. Greek speakers name samethe group as 1 communities. Accordingly,lostnation builders in got often inthese grey the domains recent borders find impossiblebetween belongsin,is to concrete it contemporary Turkey almost where is ofblacks notonly composed and and whites of There opposites. arealso grey domains differencesa Croat. totalizing definitions and essences, that can notbe overcome. If you are a Serb, you can notbe and exclusive cannot mutually on based be to seems identity theory, nationalist classical In easily mutual life of Turks and Greeksin Asia forMinor centuries. Karamanlis namely Christian the community, Greek Orthodox be discerned.the nationalists.by be advertised to chosen is amity than rather enmity nationalism, of Asframework the to well a response to this EspeciallypointTurkish –Greek relations is visiblenot from parts other of world.the Since antagonism fits of view, I chose toof thisaspect itseems that much However, in have how they realize common. together study the Turkish speaking come they when and much incommon, share Sea Aegean of the sides both on in people the causes, own thetheir further to antagonism use nationalists and politicians while that Near wasunaware He question. was an Forme asaTurk. unexpected by that been treated East, that I had spent the previous summer in . He seemedwhich surprised and asked me how Ihad when I wastelling himmy enthusiasm about Turkish the – Greekrelated subjects.him Itold Greece to been hadI me asked whether nationalism working on theorist An established INTRODUCTION 1 CHAPTER Kathryn Woodward, ed. Karamanl 2 If you are a Turk, you can not be a Greek, and vice versa. In practice, however, life however, andbe Ifyou you can viceversa.In practice, aGreek, areaTurk, not Õ in Turkish. One can also use the word , Identity and difference the Karamanli for the singular form and form singular the for (: Sage Publications, 1997), 9. Karamanl 1 Karamanlidhes Õ lar for its plural form. The suffix The form. plural its for the Karamanlis 1 and the suffix , whom I see as a product of for the plural form will form plural the for –des –lar makes the word the makes denotes CEU eTD Collection (Karamanlidika) in Greek. in (Karamanlidika) 7 6 Publishers, 1982), 186. Christians and Jewsthe in : thefunctioning a of plural society 5 Jersey: The DarwinPress, c1999), 118. in agethe ofnationalism: , economy,and society innineteenth century 4 1922,” EUI Working Paper RSC No.2002/17, Badia Fiesolana, Domenico (FI), 5. 3 in Greek characters. Christian communities, namely the Karamanlis, who wrote Turkish in Greek script, inGreek Turkish wrote who Karamanlis, the namely communities, Christian Armenian. write to characters Nicomedia, and Chalcedon (Kad letters. Armenian with in Turkish founded written Catholicby book Thereassigned hewas ageography school priests. Spanish occupational groups were interwoven. For example, the Turkish novelist Halit Ziya attended a in the lands 19 the in people disunited and ofnations created nationalism Before the Ottoman region. of the communities Empire, infusehadinpast andas nation’ the‘model they that mindtothe hybrida result, tried to the subjects of the sultans in all levels and in all years 1553-1555 was the first person to record the existence of the Karamanlis. He noted that noted theexistencerecord Karamanlis. He to of the person wasthefirst years 1553-1555 the between and visited who Dernschwam Hans traveler German The of this thesis. matter thesubject constitute speaking. Greek were all the of almost , Ladino. spoke who Greeks were there inConstantinople, Hasköy of quarter Jewish largely populations many Anatolia, InEuropean Turkey,Slavic the . some of were there Turkophone were Turkishcommunities which seem from extraordinary perspectivethe of contemporary nationalisms. In speaking and used Cyrillic characters to write Turkish. In the The exercise of writing Turkish with Greek script is known as Richard Clogg, A within amillet: , 118. Richard Clogg, “The Greek “The Clogg, Richard Richard Clogg, “A millet within a millet: Karamanlides,” eds. Dimitri Gondicas and Charles Isaawi, Halit ZiyaRe quoted in ú at Kasaba “Greek and Turkish nationalism in formation: Western Anatolia 1919- Millet 6 And in interior Anatolia, there were Turkish speaking Orthodox speaking Turkish were there Anatolia, interior in And in the Ottoman Empire,” eds. Benjamin Braude & Bernard Lewis, vol. 1of 5 It is also known that some Levantine Catholics were writing were Catholics Levantine some that known also is It Õ köy), there were Armenian speaking Greeks who used Greek 3 Moreover in different regions of the empire, there were 2 Karamanl In the places like Nicaea ( Nicaea like places the In Õ ca inTurkish and as (New York: Holmes &Meier Holmes York: (New th and 20 (Princeton, New (Princeton, ȀĮȡĮȝĮȞȜȒįȚțĮ th centuries, The 7 which ø znik), 4 In CEU eTD Collection 12 209 11 Incelemeleri Dergisi, 8 10 Bora, (i.e. the Karamanid Karamanid Dynasty)the (i.e. parts of Anatolia, they were concentrated in the lands where the were concentrated Anatolia, they of parts Karamaniyân in Istanbul, , Bessarabia, , , . and Macedonia, Bessarabia, in Istanbul, Thessaly, living communities small Karamanli also were there , Greater Besides of Turkey. Karaman as werereferred Karamanlis Empire, the Ottoman from the remaining documents Ayd Antalya and Adana; to the south the andto Hüdavendigar; Yozgat far asAnkara, as north tothe settlements: Karamanli east and Sivas; and boundariesfrom inaccordance thatdiffered with the period.unstable Its borders to period to the west as far as the borders of 1864, in accordance with the new administrative regulation called regulation new administrative with inthe accordance 1864, old Roman Cappadocia known and as province Nizamnamesi 9 history. Greek Ni are , Theseprovinces structure. thecontemporary administrative Turkish according to provinces five today includes which province Ottoman an of name the was Karaman Kleinasien (1553-1555). spracht ist turkisch.’ den krichischen glauben. Und ire mes (i.e.mass) haltten sy auff krichisch und vorstehen doch nicht krichisch. Ir 8 who were called who were Christians speaking Turkish (i.e.Yedikule), ‘Giedicula’ near in dwelt , there Foti Benlisoy, ‘ Mustafa Ekincikli, Robert Anhegger, “Evangelinos Misailidis ve Türkçe konu Evangelia Balta, “The adventure of identity in the triptych: vatan, religion and language,” and religion vatan, triptych: the in of identity adventure “The Balta, Evangelia ein cristen volkh, nent man Caramanos, aus dem landt Caramania,an Persia gelegen, seind cristen, haben ÷ (May 2001): 290. de, Kayseri,de, Nev Õ n province. Milliyetçilik [ ]Õ (Istanbul: The Isis Press,2004), 352. “ (i.e. Provincial Redistricting Act) in Ottoman Turkish. The same region was an mmis/dhimmis . 12 Türk milliyetçili (Istanbul: Ileti According Spyros Vryonis, to although Karamanlisthe were living invarious 10 Caramanos F. Babinger, ed. Türk Ordodokslar What is known as Cappadocia today is Nev tothe Whatis restricted known today as Cappadocia (Istanbul, 2003):26. (Munich, 1923): 52, quoted in Richard Clogg, ú ehirand K ú (non-Muslims according to Islamic law) fromKaraman] or im Yay ÷ and who came from inde katedilmemi prevailed from from prevailed 13 Hans Dernschwam Õ . (: SiyasalYay ÕUú Õ nlar ehir. The Karaman province was replaced by Konya Karaman ehir. was in The province replaced Õ , 2002), 925. ú yol: H 3 ’s th Tagebuch einerReise nach Konstantinopel und century to 1487. Thus, they named Thus,they were as 1487. century to Caramania. Õ ú ristiyan Türkler,” eds. Murat Gültekingil and Tan 9 an dindaan or Greater Cappadocia, a region with aregion Cappadocia, Greater or Õ nevi, 1998), 117.nevi, ú Kath’ lar 8 Õ ,” Tarih veToplum, vol. XXXV, No. imas Anatoli: Studies in Ottoman Beylik of 11 Türk Kültürü In the archival Karamano Te ú ú ehir province ehir kil-i Vilayet Zimmiyân-i ÷ ullar Õ l Õ CEU eTD Collection 20 21 Books, 2006),103. 19 University, 2006), 11. 18 17 16 (October2005): 148. 15 göre s göre 14 2003), 109. 13 their Greek speakingco-religionists. their Greek many 300,000Karamanli included in as people whowere Population the Exchange alongside earlier years, church records and years,church records earlier Karamanlis. were150,000 there revealed and officialreports Conference 1923)proceedings that 1922- 24July (20November estimateisdifficultKaramanli numberto exactIt of the population. LausanneThe (1277). state the languagemade theoffical of languagewas Turkish Karamanid MehmetBey (?-1280), ruler region. the in Christians Orthodox define Greek to be employed to itstarted time, In religion. language and race, considering Karamanlis. is unfortunately no solid data about the number of is noKaramanlis. the numberof unfortunately dataabout solid Greeks. Curzon,Lord on 50.000 Karamanlis debateabout the mentioned reconciled about Ottoman in Greece and pointed out 103,642 Turkish speaking Greeks of Anatolian origin.Turkish out103,642 Greeksof in speaking Greeceand pointed until until 19 the data demographic recording on concentrate didnot state the Empire,in Ottoman the that fact the Orthodox faith would stay [in Anatolia] in any case.’ Venizelos quoted in Bruce Clark, 104. Richard Clogg, A millet within a millet Elif R. Özdemir, “Borders of Belonging in the ‘Exchanged’ Generations of Karamanlis” (master’s thesis, Koç Richard Clogg, ‘A millet within amillet: Karamanlides, 133. H. De Ziegler quoted in Evangelia Balta, “Karamanl Balta, Evangelia in quoted De Ziegler H. Spyros Vryonis quoted in Yonca Anzerlio Triantapyllides quoted in Richard Clogg. A millet within a millet Bruce Clark, Bruce Cengiz Tosun, “Dil zenginli “Dil Tosun, Cengiz ÕQÕ fland 20 Venizelos also made Venizelos also thesame assumption ‘50.000Turkishthat, speaking personsof ÕUÕ th 13 century; and after then everything was based on religion not on language; there language; on not religion on based was everything then after and century; Twice astranger: How mass expulsion forged modern Greece and Turkey. lmas Earlier, the word was used to identify the peoples of Karaman region without 15 Õ ,” Müteferrika Dergisi, vol.1 Dergisi, Müteferrika ÷ i yozla ú 16 ma ve Türkçe,” ma kadi Triantaphyllides (1938)took resultsthe of 1928census the , 115. 14 ÷ 19 Here it is important to note that,during note reign to important of is the Hereit lu, During the negotiations of the Lausanne Convention, Lausanne the of negotiations the During codices may reveal numbers. However, because of because the of However, may codices numbers. reveal Karamanl (1998): 4. Õ ca kitaplar Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies1, 4 Õ Ordodoks Türkler Õ n dönemlerine göre incelenmesi ve konular incelenmesi göre dönemlerine n , 21 133. . (Ankara: Phoenix Yay 18 For Clogg, there were as (London: Granta 17 As for the Õ no.2 nevi, Õ na CEU eTD Collection structure structure brought was operable onlybefore theemergence ofnationalism. The part of the Greek Orthodox Greek the part of his followers. over power administrative authority. religious togetherinbrought under a single Christiansestablished Orthodox were 1454andthe 25 24 146. Ibid., Arabs. and Melkites, Syrians, Caramanians, Croatians, Rutherians, Moldovians, Wallachians, Albanians, 23 Brill, 2002), 142. 22 andin millet sultan. of ultimately the each patriarch The system. belief the communual whichsanctified basedreligion commonality framework the of on The hand. at subject the for relevant not are discussions these but debate long a been has not or system well-established a was that Whether In the Ottoman Empire, affairs of the subjects were run under the framework of Ibid., 145. The Greek The Ibid., 145. Kemal H. Karpat, H. Kemal The map indicates the settlements where the Karamanlis were concentrated before the Exchange millet (Millet-i Rum) millets Studies on Ottoman Social and political History: Selected Articles and Essays. 24 had hierarchy of authority culminating in the chief prelate, that is the that prelate, chief in the culminating authority of hierarchy had The patriarch was a respected member of the sultan’s bureaucracy having The amemberbureaucracy patriarch was respected of sultan’s the millet consisted of all the Orthodox dyophysites, Greeks, , Serbians, Bulgarians, Greeks, dyophysites, Orthodox the of all consisted . The cultural, linguistic, and religious autonomy that [Hale Soysü, 1993] 25 The Karamanlis, as having the same faith, were a 5 22 The Greek Orthodox millet was a socio-cultural and millet millet (Leiden: scheme 23 millet. millet was CEU eTD Collection 28 27 26 creates nations and how nations are the constructs of the nationalist elites. In the third chapter, third In the elites. of nationalist the constructs are the nations how nations and creates a theoretical background is given. Themain argumentof this is chapter how nationalism chapter second in hand,the at subject the for framework a constructing of aim the With origins. their about works in scholarly and endeavors nationalist in as ‘subjects’ not as‘objects’, treated of time the most were theKaramanlis fact, study. In of excludesa community itself. community the This is what hasbeen observed duringthe question identity the about outsiders of a discussion and identifiers the of interests national or identification of a group of people by external actors can only provide ‘legitimacy’ politicalto addressed backgroundthe against aboutarguments of their ongoingthe ethnic origins. The be will space and time historical in their Karamanlis the of self-perception the Moreover aims to look at how they have of rivalry “object an became been portrayed in the worksKaramanlis,nor to find an answer to their long debated matterof of origin, but toshowTurkish how they and Greek the scholars. of question identity current the neither discuss to is study this of purpose The question, faced identity enter inbigcities and Greekcommunities the to strived homeleft towns their Odessa, Constanta, ,Adana, Izmir, Beirut, to villages from Cappadocian movements also were There migrate. to Cairo, and started families their Alexandriaalso but men only not and increased movements migration century the of and even to end America. the through However, men. Karamanli the among existed Thesealready had Mersin and Izmir, people who way of life among the Karamanlis. The economic and social developments towards the end of A the 19 migrationnationalist demands. flow to big coastal 19 the decayed during such as Istanbul, This phrase was used by Elif R. Özdemir. Yonca Anzerlio Elie Kedourie, Elie 27 which is regarded significant for the subject matter of this thesis. Nationalism. ÷ lu, op. cit., op. 26 th 165-166. (Oxford: Blackwell, 1993), 112. century limitedbecause satisfy century autonomy such not could the 28 ” between Greekandthe nationalisms. Turkish The study also 6 th century affected the CEU eTD Collection of the 19 towards the Karamanlis and the Hellenization attempts of the Greek Kingdom through the end intelligentsiafrom of both the approaches Greece and nationalistthe Moreover, Turkey ‘incongruity’the of language and religionin the presence of Karamanlisthe is discussed. reached as well as the materials written in materials reached aswell English. as the written easily and were articles books Turkish because was easier task nationalism, the Turkish of development the For in Turkish. or in English either in translation available are which side Karamanlis the of by debateabout the of were exploredusingworks Greek scholars Greek the and nationalism Greek of formation The examined. were and elsewhere Turkey in Greece, subject the on conducted been had which andworks Studies of concern. matter identity the nationalisms andTurkey to Greece ofthedeveloping of attitudes focus. the Instead, and question rootedness was perused.Thelong debated originsof is of Karamanlisthe notthe identity, ethnicity, nationalism, nation, about literature part, theoretical the For Karamanlis. ofSources Problematization Methodology: understanding of Karamanlisthe isstated. self- about of concern scholarly importance Karamanlis, the presenceof in hybrid the Additionally, clash myths identity Greece duringagainst of the Populations. of the Exchange for Karamanlis and reasonsbehindtheirdeportation ‘Greekness’ and the ‘Turkishness’ of the the over debates the reviews chapter conclusion The origins. their about discussions is Karamanlis againstthe sketched the the self-understanding of subsequent chapter, behind theduring Lausanne the Peace (20 NovemberConference 1922-24July reasons the 1923) and deportationThe last part of concernstheir thisExchange talks Population the establishments. chapter of the Karamanlis for Greece with their coreligionists. In the Mainly secondary sources were obtained in order to establish a discussion about the about discussion establish a to in order obtained were sources secondary Mainly problematique th century are examined in light of Greek and Turkish nationalims and the process of process the and nationalims Turkish and Greek of light in examined are century of the Karamanlis towards the end of the nineteenth century is the is century nineteenth the of end the towards Karamanlis the of 7 CEU eTD Collection acquirements were listedany without were andthedata acquirements personal remained vague. comments the number of the Karamanlis, different sources revealed differentnumbers. As a result, some information,was found in that asource,wasrefuted by one. Forinstance,another concerning fact, In pitfalls. created sometimes sources secondary of usage the up, sum To found weresometimes their subjective. over explanations missionaries and becausemost of them cautiously were wereapproached accounts travellers’ from language Karamanlis the However, of inmanifestation perspective of the ‘others.’ services by Karamanlis the inwere used toshoworder ‘incongruity’the of religion and religious in language Turkish the of usage the about travellers the of observations The their public. referring reading to they were usedwhen andwriters publishers Karamanli whichthe identifyingconcepts discoveredwere alsofrom that Balta’s Evangelia sheby work out carried counting the inKaramanlis understanding theirThe self-definition Karamanlis.the publications the of of Toplum, Toplumsal Toplum, Tarih education activities in Cappadocia; and whichcould befound injournals like information impactsKaramanlis themagazinespublished of andthe about bythe themselves Settlement(24 July for1924) wasuseful thearticles, study. the Moreover, which involved Greece Lausanne the after moved to who Karamanlis of generation first the interviews with the question of questionthe Yonca Anzerlioself-understanding. Therefore, of generation Karamanlis, most of mightwhom havepassed away, wereregardedasvaluable for first the of memories the Accordingly, and space. time in historical their were treated scholars theorigins even about of today Karamanlis.the the study, During Karamanlis the nationalistintelligentsia in the lastyears of a decaying empire and the ongoing debates among Turkish and Greek the between rivalry the enlightening at aims project thesis The and Belleten provide information necessary self-about 8 ÷ lu’s book whichlu’s includes book Tarih ve Tarih CEU eTD Collection those of the Turks. In the long in had comparison before with interior Anatoliastarted Turkophonecommunities the of end of the 19 ( 20 nationalism was newly influenced by Jacobin understanding of a nation in beginningthe of provided byFoti Benlisoy,and Stefo Augustinos, Yonca Anzerlio Gerasimos literature light of the underthe been discovered have in bigcities, which wereestablished educational missions in the region and the schooling injectingKaramanlis a senseof Greek with at Greek Kingdom aimed Greek ancestry. the activities of the the Karamanli societies, History,’ written History,’by Özk written Umut by ‘Tormented book the nationalisms, both of comparison the for As used. been have Kitsikis Dimitris and Xydis, G. Stephen Kechriotis, Kitromilides, Pachalis Clogg, Richard beenhaveAhmad Concerning development nationalism, studies the perused. of Greek 29 some works of Ça nationalism, Turkish the of analysis the For examined. been has nationalisms Turkish and or an ethnic Turk. In order to answer this question, the literature about the formation of Greek makesis itGreek Christianized aperson,anethnic point, relevanttoaskwhat Turks. Atthis as them regarded has intelligentsia nationalist Turkish hand, other the on Greeks; ignorant them as approached have intellectuals for along nationalist time.been Greek debated about a historical community, in our case: the Karamanlis. The origins of the Karamanlis a Withoutshadow of hasdoubt, beby this shouldis adopted approach anybody who writing Karamanlis about the debate scholarly ofthe Analysis Critical Review: Literature ) Re th century; Greek nationalism for the most part, had for shapedby mostnationalism already part, the GreatIdea the Greek century; ú at Kasaba, When history ispresented aperspective from that seeks apoint tojustify of view, it produces adistorted picturethatcannotdojustice to theactual recordevents. of op.cit., starting from the second half of the 19 the of half second the from starting ÷ lar Keyder, Eric Jan Zürcher, Kemal H. Karpat, Bernard Lewis and Feroz 15. ÕUÕ ml Õ and Spyros A. Sofos,wasused. and Spyros When Turkish th century, educational propaganda employed by the 9 th century. Hence the Greek interests in interests Greek the Hence century. ÷ lu, Richard 29 CEU eTD Collection 32 31 changed their religion three times in two centuries from ninth century to eleventh century. eleventh to century ninth from centuries two in times three religion their changed He also claimedlanguage that is perennial by Seljukgiving Turksasan example: ‘Seljuks coasts the of Asia Minor and inislands many speaking remained people without Turkish.’ in conditions, these under Even centuries. for (Ottoman) government same the by ruled were oppression of However, oldTurks. the lands Romans includingof themain Greek country say that this community is originally Greek and lost their nationalTurks. vernacular inTurks Anatolia for more thannine since the centuries, by Asia Minoroccupation of Seljuk underinBaykurt,living theKaramanlis AccordingBaykurt to among the Muslim were 1930s. the The earliest book about the Karamanlis in Turkish literature was written by Cami families. Muslim the of that than style life in their difference no have they and Turks Muslim by used their priestspreachin Turkish. They even Turkishfamilycarry names longerwhich are no dialectof Turkish (even purer than of that Muslimthe Turks),they inworship Turkish and <Õ debatesabout‘Diplomacyproceedings aboutthe and Karamanlis, the byOnur Displacement’ Lausanne Concerning the bytheTurkish statesmen. they Turks asethnic were regarded because not todeportthe Karamanlis intention was 1922- 24July1923).Turkish delegation’s in (11November Karamanlis intheLausannePeaceConference interest official appeared the Christians Turkish However, were the Orthodox discussed. Turkishness of Turkophone the 30 19 The Turkish intellectualscomprehensive knowledge features aboutthe and the quantity of Karamanli the publications. started to write about the KaramanlisClogg andAnhegger. Robert Moreover, thestudies of Evangelia Balta provided through the end of the Ibid., 8. Ibid., 6. CamiBaykurt, Osmanl ld th century. In various century. newspapers In suchas ÕUÕ 30 m and Bruce Clark’s book areemployed. ‘Twice aStranger’ book m BruceClark’s and Hedescribed theKaramanlis assuch:speak‘They not Greekbut know apure do ’31 Baykurt tried to refute the Greek point of view concerning the Karamanlis: ‘They refute the Greekpointof view tried Karamanlis: Baykurtthe concerning to Õ ülkesinde H Õ ristiyanTürkler. ( 10 ø kdam, Söz,Hakimiyet-i Milliye ø stanbul:Sanayiinefise Matbaas Õ , 1932), 5. , articles about 32 CEU eTD Collection 36 35 34 33 Vryonis,Augustinos, Speros Alexis AlexandrisStelakou and be seem Vaso to closer tothe Gerasimos Karamanlis, the to scholars Greek the of approaches the Concerning arguments. was Karamanlis,nationhood taken ifitseriously, ethnolinguistic not essenceof was the their the Tosum third chapter. up, in works the of intelligentsiaTurkish nationalist the about in given be will movement his about information A detailed Patriarchate. Orthodox Turkish AnatoliaChristiansinteriorlater established Turkish for supporting the of side.He the Keskinfrom warhe the Ankara).During tried (near mobilize theTurkish-speaking to Eftim wrote this book himself under the name of Teoman Ergene. Teoman of name the under himself book this wrote Eftim ForRichard benefitwar (1919-1922). inthe cause of Clogg, Papa Turkish-Greek Turkish Karamanlis inhis he book; rather appreciated the support of Papa Eftim movementfor the Orthodox Christians. of furtherstudies her contribution Population the Exchange (1923)was Turkophone on the to studyTeoman of oral history with the first generationErgene, of also She Karamanlis Empire. who moved to Greeceon as a resultthe Tourkopoloi/Türkopoller other hand,ideas. Anzerlio similar adopted did not discuss origins of the language.’ their changed never they However, . to later and Nestorian to Shamanism from religion their changed first They Anzerlio Christianity Orthodox wasthe united Empire Byzantine the century to midst fifteenth century. living under the Byzantine rule, the Turks also worked for the Byzantine army from sixth Richard Clogg, A millet with in a millet, 142. Ibid., Ibid., 104 Ibid., 13. 114 ÷ . . lu regarded Baykurt’s books as lu Baykurt’s books about of regarded one Karamanlisthe major the sources and listed the Turkish names which were widespread among the Karamanlis. A Karamanlis. the among widespread were which names Turkish the listed whom for Byzantine the she definedasAnatolian workingwhom Turks 35 Many Turkish scholars like Mustafa Ekincikli and Yonca ÷ lu, in her book, indicated the existence of existence the indicated in book, her lu, 11 33 He asserted that the main factor which He main the asserted factor that kept 34 and among communities the 36 Papa Eftim was a priest CEU eTD Collection 39 the Karamanlis became an object of rivalry between Turkish and Greek official discourse and discourse official Greek and Turkish between rivalry of object an became Karamanlis the communities themselves in their historical time and place. and time historical in their themselves communities Turkophone the of the consciousness investigate beshould to priority Mediterranean, the were inspired byethnic Manichaeism. theregion Since was one of meltingthe of pots more than which complicated much situationis sermons the Balta, the of For Karamanlis. the self-understanding consider to recommend and approaches such criticize rather, They Turks. Greece and Turkey Hirschon. Renée 38 politics, economy and society in the nineteenth century. Historical Demography,’ eds. Dimitri Gondicas and Charles Issawi. 37 Dimostenis Ya Scholars like Evangelia Greeks. call Karamanlis the Turkophone Balta, Stefo Benlisoy,lingua francawasTurkish. Foti Benlisoy,large Elif number Renk ofÖzdemir them migratedbecause was Karamanlis for and Turkish for adopting main of the reasons her,one For Muslims. to major cities whereTurkish-speaking Christian populations remainedas a symbol theirof from distinctiveness the there were many local Christians. the for survival dialectsof mechanism so the absorption by cultural extinction sparedphysical through or Christians the Turkish presence intheregion Islamization. centuries, the Throughout region. the rule over from Byzantine the descendants were the Moreover, interior Turkish speaking Anatolia Greekor communities of Orthodox the that whether wrote the adoptionbe thegrandchildren of Turkswhothe served for Byzantinethe army.Alexis Alexandris of the language not the Karamanlis could Therefore, conquests. the before inAnatolia Turks presence of the of their rulersview that was a the Karamanlis were ethnic Greeks. Speros Vryonis claims that there was no Evangelia Balta Evangelia Vasso Stelakou, ‘Space, place, and identity: memory religionand in two CappadocianGreek settlements,’ ed. AlexisAlexandris, ‘The Greek Census of Anatolia and (1910-1912): A contribution toOttoman ÷FÕR÷ , The Adventure ofidentity, Crossing the Aegean: an appraisal of the1923 compulsory population exchange between . ( New York: Berghahn Books, 2003), 182. lu seem beto more careful to call the Karamanlis, ethnic Greeks or ethnic 38 Furthermore, in Gerasimos Furthermore, his Augustinos preferredworks, to 28. 37 Vaso Stelakou affirms that the Church for the for Church the that affirms Stelakou Vaso 12 (Princeton,N.J.: Darwin Press,1999) , 60-61. Ottoman Greeks in theage ofnationalism: 39 Similarly, Özdemir claims that claims Özdemir Similarly, CEU eTD Collection Sorunu,” (The FifithInternational Congress of , September23-28, 1985),16. 42 Karamanlica/Karamanlidika was a medium for the peoples of Anatolian peninsula to get to peninsula Anatolian of peoples the for medium a was Karamanlica/Karamanlidika Karamanl in written literature the also were there scholars, by provided literature the Besides the journalsthe like Eyice, Robert Anhegger, Merih Erol, Teyfur Erdo Erol, Teyfur Merih Anhegger, Eyice, Robert The articles aboutClogg has theKaramanli inscriptions. works writtenRichard Moreover, contributions. about important made also Eyice Semavi inscriptions, theKaramanli Karamanlisabout writing scholars other many the Among elsewhere. and byAnatolia interior of Fotigravestones Benlisoy, StefoKaramanlica/Karmanlidika inscriptions found infountains, gates,churches, schools and Benlisoy, Semavi the assess to important is it concern, of matter livining. a were they lands is in the majority the Karamanlis the When were interaction with the Turkswho onTurkish theirof aresultChristians gradually as took century; among them there were also therewere among them century; 41 40 him,For in likeAksaray, regions Ni Christianizedfrom Turks remaining Empire Byzantine the (II) the Turkified Christians. or; they the origins: (I)wereeither different hadAnhegger,Karamanlis two the according to scholars like RichardClogg and RobertAnheggermade crucialcontributions. example, For also but scholars Greek and Turkish not only Karamanlis,about debate the Concerning more important. is a group him,self-definition of For of categorize the people. be agroup criteria the not to historiographies. Robert Anhegger, “Evangelinos Misailidis’in Tema Dimostenis Ya Elif R. Özdemir, Õ ca/Karamanlidika published and by Karamanlisthe themselves. ÷FÕR÷ op.cit., 41 Tarih veToplum,Toplumsal 40 AccordingDimostenis to Ya lu, “Karamanl 4. Õ Rumlar ve kimlik köken tart ÷ Yörüks de, Kayseri, Christian de, Turks were livingin 16 the 42 ú a-i Dünya adl (i.e.Nomadic Turks). He also agrees that some that agrees He also Turks). (i.e.Nomadic 13 ÷FÕR÷ ÷ and du, and Evangelia Balta can be found inbe found du, can Balta andEvangelia lu,language, religion and origin should Õú Belleten. malar Õ kitab Õ ,” Õ ve Türkçe Konu Az Õ nl Õ kça 39 (August 2008):35. ú an Ortodokslaran th CEU eTD Collection 47 en langue turque en caractères grecs. XXe siècle. Centre d’Etudes d’Asie Mineure, 1987). Evangelia Balta, Bibliographieanalytique d’ouvrages en langue turque encaractères grecs. Turque Imprimes en Caractere (1584-1850).Grecs. 46 45 44 (1996): 47. published in Latin characters. The book aims inpublished Thebook Latin lessonscharacters. atgiving moral through experienced or it inwas written Greek script, Turkish readers couldread not until book the it1986 when was Efendi.in Thesewerepublished was Misiliadis’s 1875.However book inpublished 1872.As novels known as the first Turkish novels: Turkish first asthe known novels Cefake Dünya veCefakar-u 43 of input wasmadebypublisherandnovelist Evangelinos Misiliadis. completeneeded thisjob.published to Among books by the Karamanlisthe 30% themselves, century. 20th the materials belonging to other compilation with Balta in In 1966, 1974.her samethe published 1987. year,shepublishedanew compilation The first finished compilation three Dalleggiowere in bySévérien Salaville, Eugène 1958, and Evangelia Balta compiledwhich have hadbeen thebooks in published Karamanlidika. Exchange(1923). the inGreeceafter coreligionists speaking by Greek their tobeaccepted communities of Turkophone endeavor the the and Exchange Population the War, World First the as such era the of events dramatic the history, medicine; books of literature, and and the 20 the century, there was a cultural awakening and there were also the books about grammar, observed that in 18 observedthe that libri octo Gennadios Scholarios tothe and Sultan 1451-81) could(1444-46; in befound explaining faith Orthodox the It waspresented Sultan the to by II. Mehmed Patriarch the blended from 1718 until 1930s. SévérienSalaville&Eugène Dalleggio, Ibid., 47. Ibid., 47. Teyfur A. Erdo Teyfur Merih Erol, “19. Yüzy “19. Erol, Merih of Martin Crusius. Martin of ÷ du, “Di du, Õ lda bas lda ÷ er bir Nev bir er th century most of the books were about the holy book. In the 19 the In book. holy the about were books the of most century Õ lan Karamanl lan ú is the first novel written in Turkish. In Turkey, there are two are there Turkey, In in Turkish. written novel first is the 44 ú ehir Salnamesi: Rum Harfleriyle Türkçe,” Rum Harfleriyle Salnamesi: ehir Concerning the contents of the Karamanlica books, it is 43 Karamanlidika: Bibliographie AnalytiqueD’ouvrages enLingue The first known text in Karamanlidika is the pages is the in Karamanlidika text known first The Õ ca Eserler,” (Athènes: Centre d’Etudes d’Asie Mineure, 1987). Hasan Mellah vol.1-2.(Athenes: 1958). Evangelia Balta, 14 Karamanlidika. Bibliographie analytique d’ouvrages Toplumsal Tarih Dergisi 128 45 Sévérien Salaville, Eugène Dalleggio, and Hüseyin Fellah Additions (1584-1900), (Athènes: 46 It seems that further effort is Tarih ve Toplum Dergisi 145 th century were narrating century 47 His book (August, 2004):66. of Ahmet Mithat of Karamanlidika. Turcograciae Tema ú a-i th CEU eTD Collection 52 51 50 49 ø translations and the works of them published either in English or in Turkish. books andUnfortunately, to articles were providedbytheGreekscholars restricted the includemostthem. to of study attempts matter Karamanlis. of This to thesubject the contributions scholarly other many are there part, in this mentioned scholars the Besides were publishedany without contribution of Karamanlisthe themselves. Becausethey literature. of be Karamanli shouldthe notas apart considered books these Balta, free inlarge quantities 5000)by (up to missionary inschools Asia Minor. publishedThe books by mostlythese organizations were andreligious for weredistributed American Board of Commissioners for Foreigh Mission and Internationale Tractgesellschaft. Knowledge, Christian for Promoting Society, Society Tract Religious Homily Society, and Book Prayer Society, Missionary London Society, Missionary Church Society, Bible published in 19th century by foreign organizations missionary such as British and Foreign untilinformation bepublished. about itwhen to continued 48 deBronze Filles Dumas’s such as Karamanlica/Karamanlidika into translated novels French were some century, ancestors. of their culture to the ignorant are who communities Greek Turkophone to stories fabricated Evangelia Balta, Evangelia Balta, Karamanl Balta, Evangelia Richard Clogg, Robert Anhegger, Evangelinos Misailidis ve Türkçe konu stanbul: Cem Yayinlari, 1986), VIII. Vedat Günyol, “Önsöz” in Evangelinos Misailidis, The CountofMonteCristo 48 Misiliadis publishedanewspapercalled A millet within a millet., “ (Constantinople, 1891). Karamanl Õ ca kitaplar Õ ca Bas ÕOÕ Eserler,” Õ n dönemlerine göre incelenmesi ve konular incelenmesi göre dönemlerine n 126. (Constantinople, 1882) 50 Tarih ve Toplum 62 There were also Karamanlica/Karamanlidika books Karamanlica/Karamanlidika also were There Seyreyle Dünyay 15 ú an dinda Anatoli ú (1989): 122. lar Õ (Tema 49 Õ , 291. and deMontepin’s Xavier Toward the end of nineteenth endof the Toward in isnoprecise1851. There ú a-i Dünya ve Cefakar-u Cefake Õ na göre s göre na 52 51 ÕQÕ For Evangelia For fland ÕUÕ lmas Less Õ , ú 8. ), CEU eTD Collection 56 55 54 53 selectively; and even alters them drastically for its own benefit. wealth and cultural cultures pre-existing events, historical compiles vice Nationalism versa. not a and crafts nation istheory what thatnationalist affirms isGellner background required. pertains to the community in the intersection zone of Turkishness and Greekness, a theoretical iswhat meant bynationalism, nation, and ethnicity, thesis identity the throughout itas people like bureaucrats portray people but interests’ likebureaucrats portray asrepresentingthemselves ‘national their In order to form a sense of nationalism,appeared recently. the role of elites is crucial. Specific nature for not and agesandof products nations someof history doexist some others the groups of consciousness. national requires which fulfillment satisfy human nations andto stimulate the are neededto awakening national human a kindand of theexistence nations since of thepresence postulates theory nationalist nation. a particular realization of through flourishes nationalism history but of Kinship,nature. common genes and ethnicity are the bases of a nation and the primordialists, nations Nationalists, traditionally, perceive thedid nations as primordial or at as leastexistperennial. For since the humanhandleadsat same ustothe conclusion. presence and they are not creations of of Turkey 19 products werethe which THEORETICAL BACKGROUND 2 CHAPTER Anthony D. Smith, Ernest Gellner, Ernest Anthony D. Smith, Ernest Gellner, Ernest To explore the the hitherto unprecedented conflict of nationalisms of Greeceand nationalisms of of unprecedented conflict explore thehitherto the To Nationalism. Nations and nationalism. 56 op.cit., Myths and memories of the nation. 5. (London : Phoenix, 1998), 8. 1998), : Phoenix, (London 55 For the perennialists, on the other hand, nations arethe nations hand, other the on perennialists, Forthe (Oxford: Blackwell, 2006), 54. th and early 20 16 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999), 4. th centuries respectively, and to clarify to and respectively, centuries 53 The analysis of the subject 54 As Gellner affirms, the CEU eTD Collection 63 Fikret Adan Fikret 62 61 60 59 nationalism. of phenomenon complicated the explain not can anation of bases the as territory and language note likethat themodernistWeberiantheory, understanding whichtakessolely religion, to important is also it However else. insomewhere territory on based or be ethnolinguistic element. other any and territory language, than dominant more and constituent major the was religion nationalisms, Balkan for example, have For hands. intheir material elites what with in accordance region and region to from diverges Nationalism nationalism. in of diffusion be underestimated not should technology and modernity of role the However, nationalisms. of types different comprehend reqiurementfor industrial and capitalistmodernity. Such an understanding is sufficientnot to Westernof By . we don’tmeanso, sayingit thatexisted asa consequence orasa 58 1, Actually,nationalism is one of the phenomenon of the 19 destroying local ties for the interests of the center and the whole community. for people, claimingmobilizing redrawing the map a ‘homeland’and and for accordingly, nationalists everywhere. nationalists nation, assomething beyond theindividuals and institutions, hasbeen by worshipped 57 aheroic from figure. event or past homeland,avictorious myth the an of anchestral seeksformaterial. acommunity’sidentity. Itmay unique Nationalism cultural be formed on inhistory, discoveringcultures roots ancient and selectively exhibiting discovered the of this kind. archaeologists intellectuals arethe nationalist and the nationalism not always offers true claims. always offers true not nationalism Anthony D. Smith, Fikret Adanir, Antony D. Smith, Boyd C.Shafer, Antony D. Smith, Antony Smith, Haris Exertoglou, “Shifting boundaries: language, community the and ‘non Greek speaking Greeks,” (Athens 1999):76. Õ r and Suraiya Faroqhi, Suraiya and r 63 ‘The formation of a ‘Muslim’ nation in Bosnia-Hercegovina: a historiographic discusison,’ eds. discusison,’ ahistoriographic Bosnia-Hercegovina: in nation ‘Muslim’ of a formation ‘The Myths and memories of the nation Nationalism: myth andreality. Myths and memories of the nation., Nationalism: Theory,ideology, history. Nationalism, 60 It, in the hands of elites, can be exploited for social change, for change, social for beexploited can elites, of hands inthe It, 11. The Ottomans and the . 62 Nationalism in Balkans has been it butethnoreligious may 57 (New York : Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1955), 6. , 12. Nationalism can be seen as ‘political archaeology’ ‘political as seen be can Nationalism 17 61. (Cambridge : Polity,2001), 33. (Leiden ;: Brill, 2002), 303. th century century andwas a itproduct 58 Their job is digging into isdigging job Their 61 Historein 59 The CEU eTD Collection 68 67 Verso, 1991), 37-46. 66 65 64 public a common history, a shared myths, common has who community human a named minds. their in communion their of image the members even andin situation this occurs the smallest Therefore, nations. they can onlyhave fellow- their of few a know barely can nation a of members because imagined is it him, For community.’ political ‘imagined an as nation of concept the defines Anderson Benedict left of be vernacular may a community tochange. the generations, two in or one adopted, areeasily languages Since like Karamanlis. the community help educationof as well as the printing press, language can be employed tonationalize a raw kathareuousa (e.g. vernaculars, administrative generated print-capitalism and nationalism of coalition butcommonality,printtechnology capitalism provided languages’effectiveness.and The linguistic of traditions standing long emergeof realization as aresultof not nations did him, For nationhood. of condition cultural as the language of role critical the emphasizes of feeling the of emergence loyalty the and of creation the consciousness, printingthe pressandsoon, these became elements influential in the formation national of industrialism becamewidespread brought andmodernity ussuch inventions asphotography, could not love the whole country. they country, the of rest the see to chance no had they when times, in pre-modern However live. they in which place the to attached feel intrinsically People nationalism. of elements is worth for.dying why than can appreciate other a Serb person noexample, For questions. worldwide existent to explanations systematic provide not does it and universal not is Nationalism Benedict Anderson, notes. lecture Brubaker, Rogers Benedict Anderson, Boyd C.Shafer, William Pfaff, inGreece The wrath ofnations. op.cit., op.cit., Imagined communities: reflections on theorigin and spread of nationalism. 33. ) which helped to create national consciousness. create helped to which 6. 64 Loyalty, patriotism and national consciousness are the major (New York :Simon& Schuster, c1993),15. 65 Therefore, as the technological developments of developments technological the as Therefore, 68 18 Smith, on the other hand, defines the nation as 67 66 Moreover, with the patrie. (London: Anderson CEU eTD Collection 74 73 1990. 72 71 70 69 collective identity. values, symbols,myths and haveintraditions strengtheningeffect of developmentthe a bondsclasses andregions which loose like andfunction group. Memories,provide ainterest could becommunity a of identity cultural collective of ingredients The group. a of identity collective rather elements such possible through individual lensesof the today. Inthisstudy, isnot concern the identities as castes, ethnic communities, religious sects, nations; or amongleast elites. the at andameasure of solidarity culture, shared memories, shared anchestry, of myths common homeland, a with community human named is a hand, culture, a single economy, and common rights and duties for all members. Ethnie, on the other occurred in occurred 1960s, sciences social into identity of concept the of introduction the fact that the Concerning examined. them are on about self-understanding debatesgoingthe against eyes andtheir claims. historical specific more into life everyday of traditions affirms,nationalism into ispartly converting ethnicity of a matter the cultural transforming hogot h hss te identity the thesis, the Throughout etnicity. than other identity of notions idiomatic or interests material of basis the on distinguished was It anation. of formation for the criteria is there noobjective that noted be also should common features of memberscommunity uniqueness and is It of a community, significant. Accordingly, in the formation of a nation, the role of the elite which seeks ways toindicate has longa mixed didmodern Common exist ancestry. nations enviroments before appeared. Anthony D. Smith, Rogers Brubaker & CooperFrederick. Anastasia N. Karakasidou, Boyd C.Shafer, Craig Calhoun, “Nationalism and ethnicity Anthony D. Smith, (, London: The University of Chicago Press, 1997), 19. 72 op. cit., Nationalism, Nationalism, 74 73 National identity, as a form of collective identity is relatively arecent isrelatively identity collective of form as a identity, National an argument about identity of a historical community could only be 16. Fields of wheat, hills of blood: Passages tonationhood in Greek Macedonia, 1870- 19. 13. Beyond “Identity,” Theory and Society ,” Annual ,” Annual Review of Sociology 19 problematique 19 of a community from the external the from community a of 70 In truth, every modern nation modern every truth, In (1993):224. 29 [1] (2000): 3. 69 As Calhoun 71 CEU eTD Collection 77 76 75 endeavour endeavour to develop an identity for them by external actors. subjectivity soughtwhilewas ahistorical analysing community’s geuinestance the against This subjective. is purely It difference. and sameness with connection semantic have a are not the same. The latter excludes other’s opinions. Moreover, self-understanding does not identity themselves Wecommunity and wasdiscussed. self-understanding knowthat about the of perception the when interchangeably used was self-understanding and Identity these assumptions areproblematic andhave been encountered during study. the approach regards identity understanding something as canhave that people without it. Another identity. national or racial ethnic, have should or have groups all that claims people Some identity. collective concerning made are assumptions false many practice, policital the time of seeks most identity collective of understandings for strong and be strong to boundednessseems identity National and homogeneity.identity. to andweakapproaches strong are there Cooper, Brubaker and According to In everyday experience national consciousness. and likenational characteristic has terms anditconcept replaced of people and in same meaning during the study. the evoke to employed were theconcepts of both difference, this of aware being mind that, Ibid.,33. Brubaker, Rogers. &Frederick Cooper., Ibid.,17. op.cit., 20. 20 77 However, itinshouldbe kept 76 All of 75 CEU eTD Collection 78 80 79 Michigan Press, c1998), 27. K ‘at that, reported Asia about Minor, book in histravel Leake, W. M. otherwise. be obtained not could which Anatolia of image an provided they that sense in the important describe Muslims. frequentlyneutral they not usedbiasedphrasesto becauseand stance wasusually their On the other hand, the reports and observations speak Greek; if in dideven priest not the liturgy Greek was celebrated of the travellersthe Christians, speaking Turkish of consisted community the where villages the In are neighbors. Muslim their and the succeeding GreekWar They Turkish- (1919-1922). relationshad always good with Warin ofAnatolia Great the (1914-1918) BlackSea the during and Aegeanparts the region 19 by the minds wereshaped whose people of eyes the from was problematic Karamanlis the of position Community, the Christian Orthodox speaking Turkish a As areligion ofalanguageand ‘Incongruity’ INBETWEEN THE KARAMANLIS 3 CHAPTER before and during 19 the reports of Bible BritishAsia and agentswho Minor travellers and Foreign visited Society partially employed whenthe liturgy was sung. read completely in Turkish. It is also known that throughout inbutAsiaappearance, only religion. Minor,from Turkish their Muslimnationswas which were yet to be formed. Unlike the Greeks of coastal regions, they were different neighbors Greek and Turkish the of frontiers the between domain in grey the in fact were Karamanlis neitherlanguage religion nationalistic ideals and which as regarded basesof the Thea nation. with regard to their occupation, class, nor in their Richard Clogg, Richard Clogg, A millet within a millet, 120. Michael LlewellynSmith, I kath’ imas anatoli, Ioanian vision: Greece in Asia Minor, 1919-1922. th century. Their should be observations approached suspiciously 343. 78 They never experienced any kind of violance like the ones the like violance of kind any experienced never They 21 80 Thisinformation from was provided the (Ann Arbor: The University of 79 or itwas sometimes or th ȩ century nia (i.e. CEU eTD Collection Karamanl 83 (London: Folklore Society, 1930), 132. 82 geography of that country. 81 is called script Greek in written Turkish and theliturgical books. Kuruçe Kayseri study to at the Patriarch III(1716-26; Hieremias 1732-33) made for arrangements youngthe from Christians as 18 as early situation wasawareof this Patriarchate Orthodox Greek the that of some travellers that the actual liturgy was in Turkish are, I believe, not correct. inpreached,I haveheard myself one Fertek —in —Cappadocia, butstatements at Turkish, were all. at Sermons language understand the not did people even where Greek, everywhere observations with ‘The languagethese words: Liturgical of Orthodox the Church was have thefour gospels and the prayersin Turkish.’ church, but who is ignorant of the language, which is noteven used in the church service: they Greek the to belonging Christian a of in thehouse accommodated comfortably are we Konya) N.S. Rizos quoted in Richard Clogg, A millet within amillet, 122. Richard M. Dawkins, ‘The recent study of folklore inGreece,’ in William Martin Leake, Martin William ú mefour in tofive for Constantinople and yearstoread understand Holy the Scriptures Õ ca in Turkish. Hundreds were publishedbooks of language in this between the A Karamanli church in Küçükköy, Ni Journal of a Tour in Asia Minor with comparative remarks on the ancient and modern (London: John Murray, 1824),46. Megal 83 Ɲ tou Genous Schol touGenous 22 ȀĮȡĮȝĮȞȜȒįȚțĮ Ɲ (i.e. Great School of the [Greek] Nation) at ÷ 81 de [Image: Gulen Gokturk] Moreover, R. M. Dawkins reported his Jubilee Congress of theFolk-lore society (Karamanlidika) th century. The century. in Greek and 82 It seems It . CEU eTD Collection Koruma Vakf Genim, 91 90 89 Society, 1804-2004. Batalden,Kathleen Cann& John Dean, 88 87 which was published in 1875. 86 85 Minor speaking Cretan Muslims were writing Greek with Arabiclettering. Muslims Greekwith speaking Cretan were writing Greek Karamanlis.The the unique to not is religion and language ‘incongruity’ of The Greek lettering likely to be it was being the alphabet of the language of the Church. above. It is not possible to make a precise statementeither the Armenian or of theirLiturgy. but a reason from by information there,they were keeping using Turks andspeaking Turkish were Greeks behind their adoption althoughArmenians his to , According ofwhomwerefrom report, ‘Caramania’. some of Society Bible Foreign preaching was inTurkish. performed Anatolia, eitherhas been explained reference with to factthe that, mostof Turkishthe Armenians speaking of Gregorian This or Greek? understand not could if they script, Greek the use Karamanlis Why didthe Uniate, were celebrating the Liturgy in Armenian when the Syrian border, to Istanbul still find it difficult to become a part of Greek community in their in community Greek of a part become to difficult it find still Istanbul to border, Syrian nearthe a Turkish cameHatay, from who community Orthodox speakingGreek Arabic with gravestones and fountains schools, Cefake Cefakar-ü 84 Misailidis’s (Evangelinos vernacular inTurkish written novel first years 1718-1929. Evangelia Balta, “Karamanli Press ( 1845-Athens 1926),” eds. Oktay Ibid.,Belli, 358. Yücel Da Pinkertonquoted in Richard Clogg, Wayne Detzler, ‘Robert Pinkerton: Principal agent of the BFBS in the kingdoms of ’, eds. Stephen H.Berberian quoted Richardin Clogg The first Turkish novel1729. to inArabicdated was lettering script was Arabic in book Turkish printed first The Evangelia Balta, Karamanl Balta, Evangelia 90 ø zzet Günda so his quotation is much more questionable than those of the travellers mentioned travellers the of those than questionable more much is quotation his so Õ , 2005), 28. ÷ (Sheffield: Phoenix Press, 2004), 268. 84 Kayao ú Among these, first the inprinted book languageTurkish , 1872) 88 ÷ , reported what he learned from the Armenian Mekhitarist monks in what helearned Mekhitarist from Armenian , reported the Õ lu Hatira Kitab ca Bas 86 exist. The Karamanlis also beautified their houses, churches, houses, their beautified also Karamanlis The exist. ÕOÕ Ikath’ imas anatoli, Eserler,57. Sowing word: the the cultural impact of theBritish and Foreign Bible I kath’ imas anatoli, Õ Makaleler. 87 Karamanlica/Karamanlidika Hasan Mellah and Hüseyin Fellah Pinkerton Pinkerton (1780-1859), anagent of and British 23 ø 358. stanbul: Türkiye An Türkiye stanbul: 356. 89 Pinkerton did not travel in Asia Pinkerton nottravel did Õ t Çevre Turism De Turism t Çevre 91 of Ahmet Mithat Efendi inscriptions. Moreover, the migrant the Moreover, Tema 85 ú (1718) andthe ÷OÕ a-i Dünyave and M. Sinan ÷ erlerini CEU eTD Collection 92 education bethefocal will Asia Minor andthethrough Hellenization attempts points. commuunities of Turkophone the of perspective Greek causetowards the background, the Againstthis chapter. in (1830)willbe this dealt formation GreekState the of the Idea) after claims among the leading statesmen and intelligentsia under the name of name the under intelligentsia and statesmen leading the among claims Minor in Asia Kingdom oftheGreek attempts and Hellenization Nationalism Greek on enthnolinguistic basis. Both views will bein dealt followingthe parts. nationalist intelligentsia, on the other bewaiting through easily beHellenized Turkish education. forgedcould andthey The to hand, tried to prove the Turkishnessmaterial raw as regarded were Karamanlis the of intelligentsia, thenationalist Greek the For Karamanlis only be seen as possible from a blindnationalist perspective. can language a and religion a of incongruity the Therefore, nations’. ‘model shape to try who be only could narrow-minded understanding possible from perspective of the nationalists the speaking Muslims and the Hungarian Catholicsspeaking be would abnormal well.as Sucha treated as abnormal? If people are supposed speakto the language of their Church, the Persian aTurkish Christian Why speaking or Muslim speaking isregarded asincongruent? aGreek Turkey Turkishmajority.and the Why are aparticular religion language and aparticular languagean identity give rise to question theiroutside realm, the Greekcommunity among in constitutes an imbroglio theirhybrid and in presence terms of their‘incongruent’ religion and position also be Their Greekscan seenasthenewKaramanlis. speaking The Arabic accept Arabictheir community. Greeksinto needs time to speaking community of Istanbul Greek the itseems that and schooling for Greeklanguage adapt the haveto speaking Greeks new Arabic home.There in arenoArabic minority the speaking schools Therefore, Turkey. Ceren Zeynep Ak,“Antakyal The development of the sense of the Greek nation, and the spreading of irredentist of spreading andthe Greeknation, senseof the the of development The Õ Ortodox Az Õ nl Õ÷Õ n Günümüzdekin Durumu,” 24 Az Õ nl Õ kça 43 Megali Idea Megali (January 2009):24-26. (Great 92 CEU eTD Collection 99 south-easternof Europe 98 97 south-easternof Europe. 96 Russians. the namely north, the from liberators 95 94 end an to came Expectation’ ‘Russian the However, nation. Orthodox fellow a as Russians Greek expectations time. the of thought political and historical of Greek context the determined II Catherine from the Russian in of reign the warsrepeated the culture, in Greek relations international of to the discovery Empire were also relatedbe identified as‘RussianExpectation.’ to the notion of seeing the legendof the tothe wasattributed confidence Particular to get rid of the Greeks the among hopes raised Ottomans the and Russians betweenthe tension The Greeks. Ottoman ‘ 1787-1792 werefeltmost severely of among the peoples includingSoutheastern Europe, the among the Greekintelligentsia. and TheRusso-Ottoman 1768-1774 wars of 1711, 1735-1739, Dimitri Kitsikis, Türk-Yunan 93 18 The all ideasand hostile to fiercely Western until itself that time. emerged Westerncivilization, outside is among acommunity which bynon-Christians ruled of of Westernization. be idea community influencedby the to in first wasthe carried Ottoman Empire, out and the was mostly non-Muslims.havingcomposed bigof Greeks, a share which incommerce was inEmpire Ottoman the bourgeoisie The accumulation. hugematerial with Westbesides the of connections world inthis bourgeoisie the part provided activities The trading closest. the Région Intermédiaire 19 the of beginning the From Ibid., 357. Paschalis M. Kitromilides, Richard Clogg, Paschalis M. Kitromilides, Elie Kedourie, Elie Ibid., 116. A term used by Kitsikis to define the region that both has the features of the West and the East in Eurasia. th Nationalism in Asiaand Africa. century witnessed the emergence of a revolutionary national consciousness national a revolutionary of emergence the witnessed century A concise . 94 , 354. Elie Kedourie describes Greek nationalism as the first nationalism first asthe nationalism Greek describes Kedourie Elie (Hampshire: Variorum, 1994), 354. , 93 namely the Russian and Ottoman Empires, which were geographically Enlightenment, nationalism, orthodoxy:studies in the culture and political thought Enlightenment, nationalism, orthodoxy:studies in the culture and political thought ø mparatorlu yoke ’ through the intervention of the Russians in the east. the in Russians the of intervention the through ’ ÷ u. (Istanbul: Ileti th century, the developments in the West influenced the influenced West in the developments the century, 98 (Cambridge: Cambridge University 1992),Press, 17. If the wars of Peter the Great provided an initial step (London: Frank Cass, c1971), 42. 25 97 Thisapproachinpolitical thoughtcan Greek ú im, 1996),23. xanthon genos, 95 a fair haired raceof haired a fair 96 99 CEU eTD Collection études Balkaniques 1 Turk Young of the aftermath 104 Eastern Europe, 103 Turkey. for thesalvationhim, of federation peoples For multinational Ottoman of the Empire. Rigas Ottomanism. 102 Idea) (Great demonstrates his leadingrole notonly Federation,but also Balkan of the of the and intentions revolutionary clothed classically Rhigas’s reveals this Xydis, to According embellished with replicas of coins and with a portrait of . 101 100 Muslims. including which carried Constitutionthe of 1793, which replaceaimed to theOttoman administration with a new system principles by inspiredPrincipalities, presentedaconstitutional French the 1797), Rhigas draft of equality,Danubian the and Archipelago, the Minor, Asia Roumeli, of Inhabitants the of freedomConstitution of religion, and the rule of law for all, ȇȠȪȝİȜȘȢ revolution. bourgeoisie national a secondly and political and social a primarily articles, whichexpected wrote (1757-1798) Greekbourgeoisthe RigasVelestinlis influencedby ideas Highly the spreadbytheFrench Revolution (1789) andJacobinism, political thinkers. against all misleading expectationsinforeign aid wasgraduallydeveloped amongGreek the with the realization of the false promises of the and a sense of self-reliance ȆȡȠțȒȡȣȟȘ Vangelis Kechriotis, “Greek-Orthodox, Ottoman Greeks or just Greeks? Theories of coexistence in the in ofcoexistence Theories Greeks? just or Greeks Ottoman “Greek-Orthodox, Kechriotis, Vangelis Lederer, IvoJ. and Sugar F. Peter eds. Nationalism’, Greek ‘Modern G. Xydis, Stephen Mazower quoted in Umut Özk Dimitris Kitsikis, Ibid., 365. (London: Hurst & Company,2008), 19. , IJȘȢȂȚțȡȐȢǹıȓĮȢ (Democratic Proclamation, 1796) and 1796) Proclamation, (Democratic 103 104 (Seattle, London: University of Washington Press, 1969), 228. and be asa Kechriotis, of hisstancecould regarded for Greek version Kitsikis, on the other hand, argued that Rigas had never proposed a thatRigas hadnever hand, Kitsikis, proposed ontheother argued 100 op. cit., op. (2005): 67. 102 He also published a map of the Balkans and of the coast of Asia Minor 167 revolution,” . ÕUÕ , ml IJȦȞȂİıȠȖİȓȦȞȃȒıȦȞțĮȓIJȘȢǺȜĮȤȠȝʌȠȖįĮȞȓĮȢ Õ & Spyros A. Sofos, Académie des Sciences de Bulgarie Institut D’études Balkaniques 26 Tormented by history: nationalism in Greece and ȃİȐȆȠȜȚIJȚțȒǻȚȠȓțȘıȚȢIJȦȞțĮIJȠȓțȦȞIJȘȢ 101 In his In Nationalism in (New Political (New ǻȘȝȠțȡĮIJȚțȒ Megali Idea CEU eTD Collection 110 109 Xanthos. 108 Emmanouil and Tsakaloff, Athanasios Skoufas, 107 111 106 105 modern glorifies Greekswith theof connection that This in an endcreated the understanding himself called aGreek era, post-Byzantine and Byzantine In the nationalism. and secularism growing the by whichsymbolized Greeks, adopted the ‘Hellene’ was pagan term identity. Christian Orthodox than rather Greek of basis the The nationalist before consciousness and during independence the movement developed on and their during endeavors theuprising became the symbols of Greeknationthe in end. the Greeks immigrant impoverished Philiki Etairia setthat the fire of independencethe movementin 1821was flourished by attempts the of the Greek the of integrity against the threat first the were southern ,and Europe, Eastern and ofcentral Greek the spread among largely promoted by largely late 18 neoclassicist romanticintellectuals promoted and of the modernity went handin the handwith renewed in interest heritage ofantiquity the and was As mentioned above,connotation. ‘Hellene,’ on the other hand, was implying thepaganism. desire to breakRoman ties and with under the the pastOttoman and rule, to welcome he was called Western uprising. decades of century. nineteenth firstthe two eighteenth and the of last decades the three the of intellectual revival for the responsible were centers European in living already who were or West the with connections had who merchants Greek The Ottoman Empire, hismilitant theory was tofailuresentenced from beginning.the for multinational the affirms, for State.HoweverasKitsikis the structure desireda republican Richard Clogg, Ibid., 233. Stephen G. Xydis, Richard Clogg, The Greek The Clogg, Richard Stephen G. Xydis, Richard Clogg, Dimitris Kitsikis, 108 The A concise history of Greece, A concise history of Greece, or ‘Friendlyor Society’ which foundedwas in in Odessa 1814 by three Etairia op. cit., op. op.cit., op.cit. , 211. 168-169. 232. very soon lost control of the revolution but the leaders of the revolt Millet in theOttoman Empire, 192. 107 so as to organize and to prepare the Greeks for an for theGreeks prepare andto as toorganize so 27. 27. 27 Rum Philiki Etaria , a had apungentreligiousterm that 110 millet Gradually the classical and 106 111 was founded by Nikolaos . The intellectual ferment intellectual . The The revolutionary ideas The revolutionary th and 19 105 th Rhomios centuries. 109 or CEU eTD Collection 115 London, Newbury: Sage Publications, 1991),32. 117 116 in StephenG. Xydis, 113 114 and changes underwent several Idea Great the itsyears life, of hundred one approximately Orthodox rite; and people who were neither Greek Orthodox nor spoke Greek. have not did Greek speak Greek; speakers who not didbutGreek whowere GreekOrthodox would peoples have included Such astate civilization. of Hellenic classicalboundaries the 1922, ferventnationalists pursuedanobjective toexpand boundaries the of theirto kingdom state. andHellenic Orthodox, Greek a multinational, capital of most extremeits In Aegean. the of sides both on and form, region Sea Black in the Balkans, southern in the living it aimed at revivingpeoples of ‘Hellenization’ of mission cultural thea employed inherently Idea Great ByzantineThe Empire with Constantinople as the words: primary meeting of the first constitutional government, he addressed the parliament with these in the inEarly 1844, posts. in and other then Interior the of hadas Secretary served revolution The first political actor talking about the Great Idea was Ioannes Kolettes who during the 112 Idea). adopted an irredentist, expansionist semblance which was symbolized in was symbolized semblance which expansionist anirredentist, adopted in infreed from administration territory later, Ottoman the 1830,untilit almost acentury ‘oriental’ Ottomans. the vis-à-vis Greeks of Modern superiority’ and ‘cultural emphasized era actors classical the The speech is taken from E. Driault and M. Lhéritier, Stephen G. Xydis quoted in Paul R. Brass, Ibid., 238. Stephen G. Xydis, Vangelis Kechriotis, Umut Özk 113 Greek race… or Crete,whatever orSamos,in Greek, countryishistorically orwhoever isofthe orConstantinople, orTrapizond, Yannina,or ,Adrianople, orThessaloniki, whowho kingdombutalsohe livesin notonlyone Greece.Greek livesinthe A is The KingdomofGreece onlyapart,thesmallestis notGreece;itis andpoorest, of The Great idea followed a path that aimed at ‘liberating the enslaved brothers.’ ÕUÕ ml Õ & Spyros A. Sofos, op.cit. op. cit., op. op. cit., op. 112 115 After Greek nationalism attained its first objective of astate creating of objective its first nationalism attained After Greek ,235. 237. 60. op.cit ., 22-23. Ethnicityand nationalism: theory andcomparison. 28 Historie diplomatique de la Grèce de 1821 à nos jours, 116 In fact, from Infact,from 1830 upuntil Megali Idea 117 (New Delhi, (New Throughout (Great 114 CEU eTD Collection 120 century. 119 118 Greek dated Affairs May Foreign bytheMinistry to letter of 22, 1871which was circulated Hellenization of‘our brethren’in AsiaMinor chieffeasible asbeingmost ‘our in and duty’ a needs. fulfilled their institutions that educational and societies Greeksformed Kingdom local and the founded subgroupswithin Hellenicthe communities. Both Greeks the from coming the of empire in the dealtmajor who cities with the commerce state of Hellenic Greeks the Ottoman largerEmpire, a audiencethrough informal wasinfluenced and official channels. between in Orthodox communities GreekKingdom the (Greek) the the and were created Aslinks communities. non-Greek speaking‘Greek’ those The Karamanlis belongGreek. to inGreeks living Ottoman who were speak andespecially territories, among those who did not followedGreek Kingdom apolicy among and of culture anational consciousness erecting the community. national Greek of the boundaries the locate them to within identity need and the communities Christian non-Greek speaking of ‘discovery’ the to was aresponse national of formation the in position main its from language of dislocation the words, In other Ottoman Empire. the from claims and political interests of Greek national concepts correctly, by Exertoglou detects emerging be direction lookingat the this only understood can andas its all lineimportance lost of as In time,language a dividing in east. the especially importance, it secondary has atleast, definea sign notor language anation is to idea that languageof todefine anational Many of intellectualsthe of timecommunity.the in united the 19 late the In ‘unredeemed’ Greeks of the Ottoman Empire continued. adopted different policies, different adopted Gerasimos Augustinos, Haris Exertoglou, Stephen G. Xydis 120 (Ohio: The Kent State University Press,1992), 151. The prime minister of the day, Alexandros Koumoundos stated that the re- the that stated Koumoundos Alexandros day, the of minister prime The , op. cit., Shifting boundaries: language, community, and the ‘non-Greek speaking Greeks,’ th century, a scholarly debate started in Greece concerning the importance the in Greece concerning started debate ascholarly century, TheGreeks of Asia Minor: confession, community, and ethnicity in the nineteenth 241. 118 however, ‘Hellenization’ attempts viathe attempts educating ‘Hellenization’ however, 29 119 Accordingly, the Accordingly, 76. CEU eTD Collection 125 123 127 121 Kayseri, Nev of cities three the by fromed triangle the in located villages the and towns the In in missionaries region. the Protestant and activities of Catholic propaganda the against Christianity Orthodox protecting at was alsoaimed behind. It reason another bishoptoKayseri. metropolitan Tukish in services appointment anddemanded their church a Turkishof speaking 122 124 126 (No.10:11. and Langa quarters of of in andLanga quarters Istanbul. They gathered clerics. Orthodox often were teachers the and Minor Asia in other each to linked closely been always Hellenism. Until the end of the 19 Empire. of graduates The totheir university the returned andspread of hometowns gospel the power house for the effort to ‘(re-)Hellenize’ the unredeemed Greek residents of the Ottoman in East. consuls Another response to this attempt came from the Karamanlis who were livingin were Kumkap the came who tothis attempt response from Karamanlis Another the Cappadocia found themselves led bynationalist bishops as well as nationalistthe teachers. of communities Orthodox the Church, Orthodox the of nationalization of consequence foundedExcharchate wasby firmanin ofSultan Abdülaziz 1872 (1861-1876). the Bulgarianchurchto andits the this declaredapproach, independence Bulgarian the Orthodox Accordingly, As was other than language of inChurches. use prohibited a any Greek reaction state. Greeknation the of and aspirations interests the whoembraced prelates generation nationalism in to 19 the converted continued. endeavor this propaganda, educational Paschalis M. Kitromilides, “Greek in Asia Minor andCyprus,” Gerasimos Augustinos, Evangelia Balta, Richard Clogg, Richard Clogg, Mustafa Ekincikli, Robert Anhegger, Evangelinos Misailidis ve Türkçe konu 123 Although senior prelates opposed, the opposed, Although prelates senior ú ehir and Ni 121 A millet within a milet: the Karamanlides, A concise history of Greece, Karmanl As partof project,the University the Athensof wasfoundedin a 1837 as op.cit., op.cit., Õ 117. ca Bas ÷ de which are part of Greater Cappadocia, most of the Orthodox 153. ÕOÕ Eserler, 126 Involvement of church in nationalization activities had activities innationalization church of Involvement th century. This was partly a result of the rise of new 50. th 59. century when the Ottoman authorities restricted authorities Ottoman the when century 30 Rum Aya Kiriaki ú 129. an dinda 122 (i.e. Greek) Orthodoxchurch (i.e. gradually Moreover, learning and church had church and learning Moreover, ú lar Õ , church and defended the useof 294. Middle Eastern Studies 26 127 124 , As a 125 Õ CEU eTD Collection 131 130 Toplumsal Tarih quoted in Foti Benlisoy and Stefo Benlisoy, “19. Yüzy dillendirilen kilise kelam 129 128 Turkish was defended in almanac the of “Papathe Yeorgios” Society in 1913: Karamanlis, usageof the Turkish speaking was most the of population the (Neapolis) where andfactions emergedwithin community.the protect tradition.the was, intheend of 19 instinctWhatever thereason to resisted. This couldbe resistance explained byhabitual whatisopposition newto by and an who people werealso vernacularthere but Greekastheir adopted people Turkophone However, success individualsgroup. within the ethnic needs helpedkeep and satisfied the ecclesiastical was notOr atleastas Augustinos claims, the adoption of Greek byyoungsters through education always obtained. and provide civilization.progress them and Turkophonesleep communities from their deep the awaken would language As Greek the that was belief the Moreover, period. inthis written a result ofCappadocialinguistic were about studies and of historical archeological,the geographical these attempts, some of the 19 inLater the Orthodoxy. Paisios, the metropolitan bishop of Kayseri, reports the situation in 1839: easefirst, speaking objective the for them youths.wasto reading of At books of religious the in elsewhereKingdom in or Asia Cappadocia aimed Minor toteach Greek toTurkish The schools run by the Greek social and economicAs conditions. financial permitted, schoolsresources founded. were communities themselvesto tied were activities educational the places, those In speaking. wereTurkish communities or by the prosperous citizens of the Gerasimos Augustinos, Evangelia Balta, H Gerasimos Augustinos, Õ ristiyan nüfus, yabanc understandingwhat isbeing saidinchurch. of are evenincapable people communities.These foreign are livingamongthe Christianity (Greek)becausethey usingthelanguageof The Christian left populace 74 The adventure of an identity ib the triptych: vatan, religion, language, religion, vatan, triptych: the ib identity an of adventure The (February 2000):28. ÕQÕ th op.cit., op.cit., century, the aim of educating the people was to Hellenize them. Most anlamaktan aciz durumdad Õ milletler aras 164. 164. Õ nda bulundu Õ Õ 31 ÷ lda Karamanl r. r. Translated by Gulen Gokturk.Yoanna Petropulu 131 u için H For example, in For example, provincethe of Nev 129 Õ ristiyandilini kullanmay Õ lar ve e ÷ itim: Nev ú ehir Mektepleri,” Õ b 33. th Õ rakt century, rivalry Õ . Halk, kilisede ú ehir 130 128 CEU eTD Collection Studies. 136 135 134 133 Stefo Benlisoy, olanlar kaç? Bu türden bir eseri anlamak içinse iyi Yunanca bilmek gerekir. Vaktiyle okullar Vaktiyle gerekir. bilmek Yunanca iyi içinse anlamak bir eseri Butürden kaç? tavsiye ediyor. Onlara Onlara ediyor. tavsiye above: grandfather tohis in Daniilidisgransdon Ürgüpin1910 mentioned revaleals situation the form new identity also of developednotion of nationness. a Greek names Among the Karamanlis,embraceit. to resited people Turkophone the of some because successful only partially who were identity national Greek a of formation the took targeted which activities education The on Greek in GreektoTurkophone teaching aschildren. their vernacular, in opened late 19 the the adoption of Ancient 132 learn Greek other rarely would They arithmetic. basic sometimes and prayers texts, learn religious they would than memorizing readandwrite; and howto The pupils weretaught ateacher.be could as a priest employed the religious teachers. Sometimes hire private would enough were wealthy thedate, who ones that Prior to texts.19 mid the before communities Christian the among itisAt note this to point, important educationthat did inactivities existalready Cappadocia Quoted in Evangelia Balta, Evangelia in Quoted Ibid., 33. The names ending in the Turkish suffix – Eleni Karaca quoted inFoti Benlisoy & Stefo Benlisoy, 25. “Hem Õ n hangisinin akl (Athens: Centerfor Minor Asia Studies, 2004), 144. standing for hours...standing for Rums whowithout understandingwith anything, fear ofGod, prayed inthe church, ChristianswhoTurkish.read Comfortthespiritofthose areobligedto the gospelin lessonsGo again aboutour religion andournation. tochurchandcry forthepoor ... of Greek. How of Greek. How many ofuswhowere taughtGreek in ourschools consider this? in Greek? Inordertounderstandwe aworklikethis, needtohave a goodknowledge who arenotcompetent Greek who and in arecompetent people ofthe the percentage publish this almanac inGreek. We respond totheir demand withwhat aquestion: is Our fellow us vernacular our townsmen advise (Turkish)and to leave Anatolian ú ehrilerimizin baz ehrilerimizin Come my child, and we’ll thearoundyou andgive people Come doitagain.Gather my child,and 134 op. cit., op. which symbolize a secular Greek nation was common. Those who adopted a adopted who Those common. nation was Greek asecular whichsymbolize ú 29. Õ u soruyla cevap veriyoruz: Yunancay veriyoruz: cevap soruyla u ndad th century, there were also kindergartens. The kindergartens werecrucial kindergartens The kindergartens. also were there century, Õ lar Õ r bunlar?” Translated by Gulen Gokturk. Anheggerquoted in FotiBenlisoy & Õ ȆȡȠțȩʌȚ Anadolu dilini (Türkçe) terk etmemiz ve bu salnameyi Yunanca yay Yunanca ve busalnameyi etmemiz terk (Türkçe) dilini Anadolu 136 , Ürgüp: photographs from the archive of theCenter for Minor Asia R÷ lu (son of) were common among the Karamanlis. the among common were of) (son 32 Õ yeterince bilenler yüzde kaçt yüzde bilenler yeterince th century century when emerged. schools public 133 Among the schools which were 135 A letter written by a ÕPÕ zda Yunanca ö Yunanca zda Õ r, bilmeyenler yüzde bilmeyenler r, Õ mlamam ÷ renmi 132 Õ]Õ ú CEU eTD Collection assisted the Turkish cause, which will be discussed below. Smith argues that although although the argues that below. Smith bediscussed will cause,which Turkish the assisted Turkish-Greekmost however, war A fewneutral. of (1919-1922), of them remained them of Karamanlisthe Greekirredentistthe supported claims inWesternAnatolia during the itresisted to and Accordingly, in within arivalry some end the appeared sometimes agroup. ancient butsome Greek names anew identity and took Greek form secular of people adopted 138 137 epoch. languageThus, ingredient religion wasreplacing nationnessas primary the inthenew of language among in the youngeducation was generations. Minor Greek spreadof Asia the impactform of Greek the of important Themost education. peopleamong through these have been should erected feeling Anational their of ethnic ignorant origins. remained result Karamanlisthe intellectuals, were the of most for because weight had cutAnatolia interior of offKaramanlis from mainstream Greek‘ignorant life in the shores Greeks’ of Asia Minor andof as thea Ottoman Empire continued. In this endeavour, the Turkophone progress. and justice ethnic of name the in sovereign foreign ‘illegitimate’ an from compatriots of and force andlogic in of of vision freeing land benefits, Idea. Therewereeconomic the the the state (1832),asearly anirredentistas 1840s, approach was employed inthename of Great the national consciousness by the endeavors of the clerics. After the establishment of the Hellenic formation of religious identity diminished butits function intensified in adoption of Greek classical past was The consciousness. historical mode asecularindependence of created wayto the and opened rediscovered and These incidents commerce. West the through with merchans interaction of andGreek the glorified. revolution French the wars, Russo-Turkish like As events international a of result a result as intelligentsia of this, the role Greek the among appeared revival Neohellenicof the or intellectual the theconclusion, In church in Paschalis M. Kitromilides, Gerasimos Augustinos, 138 137 However, these attempts of Hellenization were only partially successful. Some successful. partially wereonly Hellenization of attempts these However, Thisideal several experienced butchanges objectivethe of Hellenizing the op.cit., Greek irredentism in AsiaMinor and , 200. 33 7. CEU eTD Collection 911. Translated by Gokturk.Gulen 1838’den 1995’e,cilt 3:Devriminyap 141 (nationalist) intellectual who went to Anatolia in order to save the of a Kemalist theloneliness described novel which from a Turkish taken conversation the regardedthemselves many as Turks of people situation indicated very Islam. This was in well nationalist revival Greeks.the fact,of even In the Turkish-Greekduring war(1919-1922), than later much appeared Turkishness their of realization the For Muslims, century. 19 in theearly by elites the to bespread started hadfervent already nationalistbefore 140 139 as or founded onethnicity. either Muslim or non-Muslim and identityNationalism inTurkey ofdiscourse nationalist belonging did not findto a state inearly supportKaramanlis ofthe perception the and Nationalism Turkish had neverfor a long been timeprimarily among the populationsPopulations (30January1923). of Anatolia,of Exchange the concerning Convention the of result a as Greece to moved they when for Hellenization. communities The Turkophone gradually gave uptheTurkish language theneed abrogated peoples of and unmixing (1923) exchange Idea andpopulation the Great thelong soldiers terminated Greek standing the by Mustafa inAsiaarmy Kemal’s Minor a create solid sympathy not with fordid union demand Greece. Greeksin educated Asia Greece’snationalist with sympathized Minor such intheory, desires A conversation from Yakup Kadri’s novel, Kadri’s Yakup from conversation A Umut Özk Michael LlewellynSmith, Rhomoi Peasant—we are Muslims elhamdulillah… whatKemalist intellectual—Then areyou? sir. Turks we arenot Peasant— Kemalist intellectual—Ifoneis Turk, how come hedoesnotsupport him? Peasant— the ones who support Kemal Pasha… Kemalist intellectual —who are you talkingabout? Peasant —Iknow sir, youareoneofthose. ÕUÕ ml (Rums) atradition people whichmeantChristianity of whohad Orthodox even Õ & Spyros A. Sofos, 140 Most of identify Mostof simply wouldasChristians, themselves Greeks the op.cit., 29. ÕVÕ op.cit., ve kurtulu Yaban 27. ú quoted in Do tan sonra Türkiye.(Istanbul: Tekin Yayinevi,1985-1988), 34 141 ÷ an Avc ÕR÷ 139 lu, Milli Kurtululu, Consequently, the defeat of patrie during the war: ú Tarihi: th CEU eTD Collection 144 143 Foti Benlisoy and Stefo Benlisoy quoted I. Valvanis from her article. See Foti Benlisoy & Stefo Benlisoy, 32. 142 governmentwhich fullgrants citizenship rights tothenon-Muslims; and curbsthearbitrary other words, Ottomanismcentury. state. ForMuslims, religion was still to define dominant an identity in beginningof the 20 intended a was shaped community being bybeing identity than that personal the partof partof rather to their identity own create collective shaped bytheir distinguishing cultural and and religious features had which communities of wascomposed Empire the nation; rather anOttoman no was there Ottoman 1830s, the until Empire, Ottoman the in formation nation of process the Concerning patriotism‘Turk’. populationsand the because constitutional slowly were developed formation nation of process the unenthusiastic nationalism, Turkish to be ableGreek, he would persistby saying heis that a Christian.’ to be labeleda be may he that him tell you If Christian. a is he ethnically but Christ Jesus in believe also they that as eithercontinue would and know not he does that say would he a are, you ’Greek’ what then Christians also or a thinking andif youinsist by claiming thethat Russians, Franks the and the Armenians are without Christian’ ‘a say he would are, you what Christian a ask you if Today, nation. Turkophone Christians as such: ‘Greeks of Anatolia do not even know the name of their members of members midstthe citizens,through of with communities appearedof 19 the book his in Valavanis I. fact, In as well. 20 of the quarter first the until even Muslims ordinary the for identity of determinant main the was Religion Kemal H. Karpat, H. Kemal Umut Özk I. Valvanis quoted in Evangelia Balta, “Karamanl Balta, Evangelia in quoted Valvanis I. 143 144 The idea of Ottomanism asaYoungOttoman program, aimed atreplacing ÕUÕ ml Õ & Spyros A. Sofos, th Osmanl century. It is possible to make the same argument for Christian populations Õ da de ÷Lú im,modernle op.cit., 2. Mikrasyatika ú me ve ulusla Õ ca kitaplar 35 Õ n önsözleri,” n ú ma. (1891) described self-perception the of (Ankara: 142 Therefore, as for Greek and Greek as for Therefore, Tarih ve Toplum 74 ø mge Yay Õ nevi, 2006),nevi, 428. th , (1990): 20. century. In th CEU eTD Collection 151 Past and Today’s Turkey. 150 149 147 148 145 146 and the repressive and centralist policies of the Young Turks from and of policies Turks Young repressiveand centralistthe the 1908 onwards. nationalismOttoman asareaction communities, Christian developed Turkish inthe rule to Istanbul of populations to 1916. committed end the until same. asthe were regarded Consequently, wasadopted byMuslims; Ottomanism only andIslamism and Ottomanism started to demand independencefrom their starting beginning the 19 the of sultan. the of power with these words: these with by Unionists.the Progress (CUP) was secretly founded in 1889 inorder bringto back shelvedthe constitution Liberals and everybodyUnionists. whointended to overthrow the despotic regime of Sultan Abdülhamit II, including AsYoung a fraction Turks of the wereYoung Turks,the successorsthe Committee of Unionof the and Young Ottomans. Their movement embraced being divided. they fought to preserve what remained everyin tomake means Muslims’ state the the order existing own Ottoman and 1918 after of that Ottoman Muslim indicated Unionistideology the that for an sought Muslim They Ottoman state. considered State and to prevent it from First byCUPbefore WorldWar policiesthe Zürcher claims the andduring adopted that Ottoman history. defeat of Ottoman Army in 1918. This isperiod known as second constitutional in period See Karabekir quoted in Zürcher in quoted Karabekir See Erik, J. Zürcher, “Young Turks, ‘Ottoman Muslims and TurkishNationalists,” ed. Kemal H. Karpat, Feroz Ahmad, Ibid., 435 Bernard Lewis, Bernard Umut Özk Kemal H. Karpat H. Kemal constitutional regime. Albanians mayalsojoinprovidedthey are supporters andthe offreedom This society is buttoallMuslimOttomans. Arabs not onlyopentoTurks, and . ÕUÕ ml 150 The making of modern Turkey. Õ The emergence of modern Turkey. & Spyros A. Sofos, , Osmanl Enver Bey, a leading figure in CUP circles, explain the CUP nationalism CUP the explain circles, in CUP figure leading a Bey, Enver 149 TheCUP ruled the country from 1908Youngthe Turk Revolution to the 145 (Leiden: Koninklijke Brill, 2000), 173 However, it was too late because the Balkan nations hadalready late nations Balkan itwas too the because However, Õ da de 151 ÷Lú , 174. 146 im,modernle op.cit., However, Ottomanism could hardly Arabic keep the hardly could However,Ottomanism 28. (London:Routledge, 1993), 33-34. ú me ve ulusla (Oxford: Oxford University Press,1968), 219. 36 ú ma, 431. 147 In fact, Arab nationalism, like nationalism, Arab fact, In th century. Ottoman 148 The CEU eTD Collection 157 156 155 154 153 152 way: in astriking people ordinary bythe identity ‘Turkish’ and therealization Akçura’s theatmosphere words in expresses of narrates described religion andlanguage based ethnicity. the Ottoman Empire.’ in than Istanbul other idea in of this followersplaces are don’t there think that recent…I quite ‘the thesituation expressed with formation words: based nationalism these is ethnicity of theorist nationalism of Turkism person the and talking first asa about program, political non-Muslims from 1908 onwards. Ottoman Empire modern times, was gradually employed bytheleading political figures shape a to nation in the language, in of acrucial determinant a nation order to saveMoreover adecaying empire. name of Turkism, which emerged later as a response to the conditions of the time, appeared in in the or Ottomanism of name the in either nationalism, that out point to important is It aresultexcludedOttoman cause. of their of as abandonment nationalism. of the base religious the confirms leftout were andArmenians , Bulgarians, Greeks, Enver Bey’sdefinition, while in explicitly mentioned were Albanians and Arabs Muslim that fact The confession. religious Thus, the nationalist program of Muslims that Ottomans, not notof only world.’ the the Turksandthe certainly of that of the CUP was based Therefore,on ‘their ethnicity nationalism was only consisting of Ottoman Muslims, notwhich that of all of the was determined by Yusuf Akçura quoted in UmutÖzk Kemal H. Karpat Lewis, Bernard Kemal H. Karpat H. Kemal Ibid., 174. Ibid., and we new and it,asonedoes became thatare atfirst, of proudof boots uncomfortable ourselves ‘Ottomans’or‘Osmanlis’. Lateron it turned outthatwe really are ‘Turks’, ...They (Christians)would callus inorder‘Turks’ toinsultus, atthetime we called 173. op.cit., 154 , Osmanl , Osmanl and the was imposed ArabsAlbanianslanguageon imposed Turkish and as and wasas well the 157 219. A paragraph from bestsellingthe ‘Birds book Wings’ Without (2004) Õ Õ da de da de ÷Lú ÷Lú ÕUÕ im,modernle im, modernle ml 155 Õ & Spyros A. Sofos, In fact, the Turkish nationalist fervent derived both from both derived fervent nationalist Turkish the fact, In 156 However, Yusuf amodernist However,Akçura (1876-1935), Yusuf ú ú me ve ulusla me veulusla 37 153 However, Arabs and Albanians were also were Albanians and Arabs However, op.cit., ú ú ma, 435. ma ,439. 27. 152 CEU eTD Collection form form languageof last religion and basedethnicity the nationalism was nationalisms the among independence that they only thefailednon-Muslim reforms andnon-Turkish forwhen and the elements opted turned to a nationalism stated ‘theirSofos (Turkish intelligentsia) relationship nationalism to instrumental;was itwas of their own.’ Ottomanism and Islamism or Turkism tried saveto the collapsing empire. of framework in the either nationalism Turkish hand, other the On administration. Ottoman living Greekswhowere ‘backward’ under Diaspora the andsalvation of independence West and impacts of international the Greeknationalismevents. soughtfor consequently the with interaction the of result a as appeared nationalism Greek before, As discussed state. anation create to of the project each other andareconsequences to are related 158 strugglethe independencefor and the exchangepopulation of 1923-1924. War, First World the during Christians of nationalize deportation economy, the the desireto major four important issueswerethe political most the years Between 1912-1922, path. the religion andlanguage based young followedethnicity. The Turkish Republic same also the homogenization fervent of which isbasedas a adopted policy nationalist the on consequence (1908-1922). 162 161 160 163 Gökalp was a memberand amajor slogan: ‘To the of wording bein the is it as the Turkism-Islamism-Modernism of blend Turkisha was imbroglio identity nation, of the Islamic foundingThe fatherother of Turkism wasZiyaGökalpwhose solution (1876-1924) to the religion, and of European civilization.’ 159 Louis de Bernières, de Louis Umut Özk Zücher, E. J, Ibid., 36. First constitutional period was between the years 1896-1878. Ibid., Gökalp quoted in Umut Özk Iskander thepotter) of the prologue smart.(From exceedingly andlook feet intothe but thensettle 39. ÕUÕ 160 ml op. cit., op. Õ Themembers Young (later Turks of inCUP) whoachieved power 1908 & Spyros A. Sofos, Birds Birds without wings. 158. ÕUÕ 158 ml Õ & Spyros A. Sofos, op.cit., (London:Vintage, 2004), 5. idéologue 39. 38 op.cit., of CUP in the second constitutional period 34. 163 Turkish nationalism inthe nationalism Turkish 162 161 As Özk All these events ÕUÕ ml Õ and 159 CEU eTD Collection Papa Eftim Karahissaridis)(Efthymios was a deputy metropolitan bishop from Keskin. years (1919-1922). occupation during the movement by Eftim Papa the considerable extent a in shaped was nationalism Turkish in Karamanlis the of perception later The Istanbul. published inpublished Baykurt. Before that, he mentionedwrote bookabout above, first in the theKaramanlis Cami belonged published to Turkey a number of articles concerning the Karamanlis which were originally The argumentTurks. same was in continuously repeated daily were Christiansregions these the of that claiming werepublished , articles paper of the region. Moreover, in Christianity in inAnatolia agesand adopted the spreadof thereligion during this early they newspaper Greek.’ Sami wrote that ‘just as every Muslim is not a Turk, so every Orthodox Christian is not a 166 165 language, 164 Turks. weredefinitely Greeks; they discussions concerning the origins of the Karamanlis took place inTurkish press. took Karamanlis of the concerning origins discussions muchto theKaramanlis of 1923, laterFrom that than Greek nationalism. started to 1899 nationalism Turkish of attention The reverse. the indicated Christians Turkophone of origins asapart concerningdebates regarded the However, of nation. Turkish not Karamanlis were the that assume may one Christians, were As they nationalism? of model inthis community Christian Turkophone a of place the be could What Karamanlis? the about What state. of communitiesother in thein Ottoman Empire and enditthe looked for ahomogeneous Foti Benlisoy, Greek The Clogg, Richard ù emsettin Sami quoted in Evangelia Balta, in Evangelia quoted Sami emsettin 164 166 30. Therefore, for him, the Turkophone Orthodox Christians could not be regarded as be regarded not could Christians Orthodox Turkophone the him, for Therefore, , Turkish Christians speaking were the descendants of Turkswhomovedthe to ø zmir in 1918. Later the same articles were printed in samein articles Later the the were printed zmir 1918. Türk milliyetçili Aç Millet Õ kgöz, ÷ inde katedilmemi in theOttoman Empire, 185. a newspaper published inKastamonu andin 165 For The adventure of an identity in the triptych: vatan, religion, ø zzet Ulvi, who was writing in ú yol: H 39 Õ ristiyan Türkler, 927. Hakimiyet-i Milliye ø kdam Söz ø stiklal, newspaper in newspaper as well. as ù emsettin a local As CEU eTD Collection 170 169 168 1951), 7-8. ForRichard Clogg,Papa Eftim wrote this book himself under the ofname Teoman Ergene. 167 Orthodox Patriarchate in Kayseri. Patriarchate Orthodox Turkish the establish to was aim main His irredentism. Greek against and in Istanbul variousmobilize ininterior towns Anatolia andtriedto theChristians against Patriarchate the Christianstheir forget Turkishness. make being of Patriarchate this for tragedy and of Anatolian responsible to endeavoring Orthodox Phanar the he accused and war in this Muslims the than less not suffering were During the Greekinvasion he publishedadeclaration Christiansclaiming the that ofAnatolia Eftim as such: Eftim Hadjiefthymiadis, a ChristianTurkophone from Kayseri expressed hismemory with Papa Efstathios cause. in theGreek believed them of some and neutral them remained some of before, mentioned As Christians. Turkophone among popular that not was movement Eftim exchange of populations, which is the subjectmatter of next chapter. It is known that the Papa notion was defended inLausanne Conference during thenegotiations concerning the indisputable. This is so their Turkishcause the Turkishness peoplesupported these even Turkishness of Karamanlis.the The beliefseatedin nationalistthe affirming discourse that of indicator as an warwasshowed the during his stance in that sense the important mass displacement. from exempted were sixty people, and the during population Papa andhisfamily,exchange consistingEftim approximately of 1922; on 21 and declared. Yonca Anzerlio Ibid., Ibid., 18. Papa Eftim quoted in Teoman Ergene, Teoman in quoted Eftim Papa and for us to declare ourselves Orthodox Christian Turks in order toavoidthe inorder ChristianTurks us declare ourselvesOrthodox and for to Kayseri apatriarchate ustomake appeared.Hewanted (Eftim) …Then PapaEfthym 26. 169 After the retreat of the Greek Army from Asia Minor, the congress lost its effect lost congress the Asia Minor, Army from of Greek the retreat After the ÷ st lu, of September, the establishment of the Turkish Orthodox Patriarchate was Patriarchate Orthodox Turkish the of establishment the September, of op.cit., 296. 168 ø stiklal Harbinde Türk Ortodokslar 167 A congress inKayseri was convened on 16 During the war, on his way to Kayseri he visited 40 170 Papa Eftim’s movement was movement Eftim’s Papa Õ . ( ø stanbul: ø . P. Ne ú tiyat Servisi, th of July of CEU eTD Collection 176 175 174 Nationalities Affairs 172 Studies, 171 173 them. of be descendants to whoclaimed for thenationalists important as wasregarded historical depth of proving rootedness in aland, continuity the and legacy culturesof ancient and their of a sense of nationness to communities which seems to look rootedness of Turkishthe in nation be theselands.Thiscould possible attributionthrough the like ‘them.’ adopted linguistican ethnonationalismyears was era(1923-1950) first Republican the the of In Asiadeclareis motherland. to their that Minor which wasseeking cause their for legitimacy sides both from nationalists provide could community ancient an of thegrandchildren whoKaramanlis wereregardedas Greeknessof the Turkishness or of proof The years. in those Minor Asia in claims irredentist had which nationalism in least discourse. at were farfrom being but for homogeneous conflicting homogenization, struggled nationalisms Empire oftheOttoman territories the Moreover, time. at that wasclouded Empire Ottoman decaying the landsfuture of of because the the nota coincidence was Benlisoy, according to concerning the originsAnatolian of intensifiedChristians during the years. occupation This, of inhaving one’s place (root) by world the specificpast.’ giving references to is the awareness ‘It mean? rootedness does What rootedness. of sense the with be explained can Karamanlis the of origins Turkish prove to nationalists Turkish of commitment The important tonote important that, typethis ethnicist of nationalism in shouldin beconsideredTurkey Kemal Karpat Kemal Evangelia Balta, Ibid., 930. Malgorzata Melchior, “Rootedness inplace, rootedness in memory as exemplified by Polish-Jewishidentity,” Quoted in Evangelia Balta, Foti Benlisoy, Türk milliyetçili 22. to givehim300 sovereigns his travellingfor expenses… Exchange. Tosaythatwe Orthodox butofTurkish are origin.He Christians us forced 176 175 and lostits religion importance in defining Turkish nation.Atit this point is This situation was not only true for Turkish nationalism but also for the Greek the for also but nationalism Turkish for true only not was situation This , Osmanl The adventure of an identity in the triptych: vatan, religion, language, religion, vatan, triptych: the in identity an of adventure The 31 (2007): 71. 173 Õ da de Concerning the Turkish side of the issue, there was a need toprove the ȆȡȠțȩʌ ÷Lú ÷ im, modernle inde katedilmemi , Ürgüp: photographs, from the archive of theCenter for Minor Asia ú me ve ulusla ú yol: H 41 Õ ristiyan Türkler, ú ma, 442. 171 930. 174 30. In this endeavor this In 172 Thedebate CEU eTD Collection Citizenship and the nation state inGreece and Turkey. 178 (Istanbul: Ileti 177 November 1922, the representatives of the Allied Powers, Turkey in and Greececonvened Powers, of Allied the representatives the November 1922, 20 the on (1919-1922), Greece and Turkey between war devastating the Following during the settlement Karamanlis about the debates the and Convention Peace The Lausanne minoritiesthe inLausanne Peace Conference (20 November 1922–24July 1923). as war (1919-1922)aresultof movementandPapa Eftim during indicated about was the talks basis and regardedthem Turks.This intensifiedas positive attitude during the Turkish-Greek excluding all it non-Muslims,the approached theKaramanlis exceptionally on ethnolinguistic nationalism Turkish when Karamanlis, the Concerning policies. as adopted were Muslims as well as Arabs andAlbanians. During the CUP rule, homogeneization and and Islamismrescue sink.Turkism, shipthe beseen to as astruggle to which can was about Ottomanism gradually lost Briefly,Turkishthenationalism, their Ottomanism,eithernameof underthe Islamism or effect in origins about the nation thediscussions Karamanlis the of a decadeago. 1930s, resembles as a result of seperatist movements of the non- and ‘Turkish blood’. PresidentAtatürk himself made speeches which emphasized uniquenessthe of race’ ‘Turkish been influenced byblood andideas behind racebased nationalistAt era, regimes. these that Greece andlater in fascistSpain,regimes were prevailing. The Turkish statesmen must have in in fact, in Germany, Italy, In time. that at world of the conjuncture with the accordance nationalism. ethnicist of claim the for significant was Keyder to according which thesis’ ‘Turkish-history ‘Sumerian Turks’ and ‘Hittite entered school books. This theory known was later as about texts and rediscovered Anatolia were of cultures ancient 1930s, In the Greece. to Ça Cemil Koçak, “Kemalist milliyetçili ÷ lar Keyder, ‘A history and geography of Turkish nationalism,’ eds. Faruk Birtek &Thalia Dragonas, ú 178 im Yay The endeavor to attest that Anatolia is the historical isAnatolia the attest that to Theendeavor Õ nlar 177 Õ , 2002), 40. In any case, this was too late for the Karamanlis who already moved ÷ in bulan Õ k sular (Oxon, New York: Routledge, 2005), 7. 42 Õ ,” eds. Murat Gültekingil and Tan patrie Õ l Bora of Turkish the of , Milliyetçilik. th of CEU eTD Collection 1934. 180 Books,44. 2006), 179 According to the first two articles of the convention: the of articles two first the to According Curzon; and byKemal Fridtjof and Nansen,hisAffairs, ; by leaderthe of newly founded Republic of Turkey Mustafa military a High Foreign of Minister by Greek Commissionerthe supported community,international was approval the of commander Aegean the the Sea, with across largenumbersofpeople moving ideaof convention, the inIsmet; the League by the conflict distribution forthe territorialof legacy ofan empire. in During the negotiations the of Nations.Britisharmed an of point Foreign culminating the was 1923) July (24 Treaty Peace Lausanne The Affairs Settlement. the Lausanne of realization with the appeared big contradiction Ministertheir homelands, which could be regarded as inhumane. Accordingly, for the minority issue, a Lord Turkish Populations ended upwith unmixingthe of peoples and deportation of them from and Greek of Exchange the concerning Convention the hand, other the on but reciprocity, inrequirements favor of non-Muslims in the Turkey and Muslims in Greeceon a basisof vast offered treaty the hand, one the On minorities. the of protection the and straits the of abolishment the status of issues,capitulations, publicsuch asterritorial Ottoman debts, 24 23 on the began theconference of secondthe phase yearand next the midst of several times the until interrupted was TheLausanne. conference experience this of was inhumanhistory kind andsigned it on 30 unmixing of inaccordance withpeoples Population the Exchange Protocol first the was Onur Y Onur Clark, Bruce th of problemsJuly 1923.Various of and were discussed concludedduringthe Convention (New York: Routledge,2006), 8 (a) TheGreek inhabitants Constantinople.of The following shallnotbeincludedinthe persons exchange provided in for ArticleI: Greek nationalsoftheMoslemreligionestablished inGreek territory. nationals oftheGreek Orthodox inTurkish religion established territory, andof As from the 1 Õ ld ÕUÕ m, Twice astranger: How mass expulsion forged modern Greece and Turkey Diplomacy and displacement: reconsidering the Turco-Greek exchange of populations, 1922- st of May,1923,thereshall takeplace acompulsory exchange ofTurkish . 43 rd of April until the 1923 andcontinued of th of 1923. January of (London: Granta 179 The 180 CEU eTD Collection 182 January 30, 1923, ed. 181 history human the of movement expulsion mass compulsory last, the not but first, the Treaty, Lausanne the to attached Agreement’ Populations of ‘Exchange the with accordance In was never ratified. agreement the out, broke War Great the Since problems peacefully. solve Turkish-Greek to in order Vilayet inhabitants ofTurkish Aydin and the voluntary Thrace speaking of exchange Greek the for a initiated negotiations with Porte the who was in 1910-1915, between years the office Venizelos, Eleftherios minister WarWorld Greekprime the first before the In fact, Greece. 1922), expelling Muslim minority the theleading ideafor was anattractive in statesmen number of incoming refugees from Asia Minor right after Turkish-Greekthe war(1919- their and facedbythe with the Turkishthe counterparts, increasing difficulties government as sameconcerns lessthe more or Having Greece. homogeneous for an ethnically butGreece’ ‘Greater for longer no was opinion public the Minor, in Asia defeat the after Greece, In nationalizing the economy deportation through of the non-Muslims. means build to thewished-for Turkishnation,including homogenising and nation the consideredevery attempts fervent nationalistic building, nation of years hecticthe early Throughout ideal. national acommon by united but men of conglomeration haphazard be a national the discourse Accordinggathering. nationalists, to of longer would no on establishmentthe of youngthe Turkish Republic beingin turmoil forand a struggling minorities Turkishnationalistscame on which agenda the havingleadingwould enable role a religious of exchange the (1919-1922), war of aftermath the in side, Turkish the For Michael LlewellynSmith, Convention concerning the ExchangeofGreek and Turkish Populations and Protocol, signed at Lausanne, (b) TheMosleminhabitantsof . (province) in Asia Minor for the Muslim populations of inAsiapopulations Minorfor(province) Greek MacedoniaandEpirus of theMuslim Renée Hirschon. Renée op.cit., 182 33. See also Bruce Clark, Bruce Seealso 33. Crossing theAegean ( 44 Oxford: BerghahnBooks, 2003), 282. op. cit., op. 181 53-54. CEU eTD Collection room room for in Karamanlis. Christians the Turkey except no was There question. minority the about state Turkish of stance the about clues gave speech that he cannot take any risk which can harm the Turkish state and its national sovereignty. His minorities may turn to destructive weapons with the interference of foreign forces. He added inmade Turkish inthe Lausanne, delegation aspeech he the which emphasized that 189 188 187 186 185 184 of forimportant especially for Turkish-Greek the future Turkey the sought settlement, which run. long in the rights minority given been Bruce Clark, voluntary exchange (which later turned to be aforced one) of populations took in place the region in1919. See 183 namely Karamanlis. onesininterior, the the except expel Anatolia inGreeks desireall the was to showthat side telegraphs of Turkish the their reason by the claim of non-Muslimsby thetheir wars. during affairsdisruptive of claim the reason Greeks andin AnatoliaArmenians tobe butalsoand Istanbul deported .Theyadvocated not deputiesfrequently Ankaraonly inthedeclared that were Lausanne, the parliament expelAnkara to all non-Muslim in groups Turkey. Beforeand the during negotiations in in parliament the in reached was consensus a convened, Conference Lausanne Before birthplaces. come backtheir to refugees for the was left nohope authorities, by the signed convention the After war. the duringand after homes lefthad their already Muslims thousand hundredone Greece. Greecebeing from moved to Turkey, and400.000Muslimsbeing moved toTurkey from place. took ø Ibid., Ibid., 62. Y Onur, Ibid.,12. Ibid., Xii. After its defeat in First World War, was forced to retreat from Western Thrace. And a small scale asmall And Thrace. Western from to retreat forced was Bulgaria War, World First in defeat its After smet 62. 184 ø nönü quotednönü Onurin Y Õ ld Before the Convention gathered approximately one million Orthodox Christian and Christian Orthodox million one approximately gathered Convention the Before op. cit., op. 183 185 ÕUÕ m, As a result of faithmoreit, Asa million people than havingGreekOrthodox result of 1.2 op.cit 53. ., 64. Õ ld ÕUÕ m, 69 188 187 In December 12, 1922, InDecember 12, 45 They were considered as‘Turks’ and may have 189 The status of the Karamanlis was Karamanlis the of status The ø smet headPasha, the of 186 Theearly CEU eTD Collection 193 192 191 190 Cappadocian Christians would stay. in The Turkish in the future. the beginningside was confident that of the convention the incommunity handhadneverdemanded position aprivileged notseem and do so they to do Patriarchate and eventually get rid of it with its Greek flock. its itrid and Greek of with get Patriarchate eventually Greek Orthodox from the Christians Cappadocian the separate intended to statesmen leading had by Patriarchate been Therefore, already Orthodox established Papa Eftim (1922). Turkish the Moreover, neighbors. Muslim their than different not was style life their and vernacular intheir were Turkish they Infact, be created. wasto which nation’ ‘Turkish to the asharmless wasseen leastneutral. Their at presence or ignorant of remained Karamanlis the andChristianity. Islam of co-existence show peaceful the to to be removed from Istanbul. was Patriarchate that the proposed delegation Turkish their the for stay, return stay.should In Istanbul of theGreeks insisted that side Greek the inLausanne, negotiations the During on Karamanlis. the the agreement subverted Istanbul of residents Greek the and Phanar in Patriarchate Orthodox Greek the of status the of Onbehalf by confirmed Turkey, Venizelos. first, provided At thisTurkish opportunity tothe state. stay the Karamanliswas the of have would they and neighbors Muslim their with peacefully lived always had Christians new republic the minorities would be treated not different than other citizens. Phanar because within in the state likea state been working a whichhad for Patriarchate the need also had no was there state, Turkish new the of fathers founder the for But sultan. the to flock its of provideloyalty ofitsit to from was supposed share In the return tax collecting taxes, powers. and administrative had Patriarchate Orthodox Greek the well, working was system Ottoman Onur Y Onur Ibid., Ibid., Clark, Bruce 104. 102-103. Õ ld ÕUÕ m, op.cit., op. cit., 101. 75. 193 Turkish side had two reasons for this claim. When the 191 During the Greek occupation in Western Anatolia, most Anatolia, in occupation Western During Greek the 46 ø smet Pasha was happy to declarePashasmet the washappyto that 192 However, the deal concerning deal the However, 190 In fact, theKaramanli In fact, CEU eTD Collection 200 199 198 197 196 195 194 deportation. Karamanlis were expelled eventually as the last group of people who were subject tomass Patriarchate. Greek Orthodox flockpowerful of the politically Turkishthe the authorities, Karamanli Christianscouldlonger no be ifthey tolerable remain As a result of the practical Greek sideof stay Thraceinthe suggested Western Muslims inhabitants of Greece. entanglement, the position of the Karamanlis changed. For of Orthodox world. makeit leader the to term plan long the asapartof remain inIstanbul to Patriarchate for the remove insisted to delegation his post. the Patriarch and mentionedIn accordance with theTurkish Asia Minor during above war. the reasons the friend of Venizelos, worked hardbad fame becauseto sustain of its support for Greek materialcause during the war. The Patriarchand Meletios moral IV, a assistance for the Greeks of strategy to bringitlike abetter seemed it. Therefore, overthrow even and of GreekPatriarchate the power the Karamanlis may the curb of Papa Eftim, this influence weretaken the under Cappadocian Christians to Greece. minority. of Greek the Venizelos convinced the itTurkish side would just that beaspiritual body for divine services of Patriarchate the functions and administrative thepolitical suggested annulling thestay Patriarchate. the of longer accepted no and resist could delegation Turkish the pressure, American and British the of asaresult Consequently, unacceptable. Ibid., Bruce Clark, Bruce Onur Y Onur Bruce Clark, Bruce Ibid., 76. Onur Y Onur Bruce Clark, Bruce 105. Õ Õ ld ld ÕUÕ ÕUÕ m, m, op.cit., op. cit., op. cit., op. cit., op. cit., 95-96. 195 97. 102. 76. 198 76. For the Greek representatives in Lausanne, the Turkish claim was Turkish inLausanne,claim the Greekrepresentatives the For As a gesture to stay of the more than 100.000 Greeks in Istanbul, the 47 200 As a consequence of trade off politics the 194 ThesawTurks the Greekdesire 199 For the Greek side, if 196 Lord Curzon 197 and CEU eTD Collection 201 Orthodox Christians. Their attitude changed from time to time according toconditions. from on Muslims or basisthe language todistinguishof themselves from Greekspeakingthe the Karamanlis formed their identity either on the basis of religion to indicate their difference difference from Muslims;the and and sometimes race nation were included. Among these, religion,18 mid by the states, Gerasimos place Augustinos As identity. one’s define to alone sufficient not is of origin, placechange, one’s identity may also change or remainof stable. But certainly the perceptionresidence, of origin conditions the When lives. she he or which in space and time the of conditions the by shaped culture and identity from inlanguage;Whateverown origin theirunderstanding. his hasa heridentity is person, or of sense their but Karamanlis the of be origins not or should concern our However, their it. in truth Karamanlis were concentrated. where the region the rule over Karamanid and Seljuk from Byzantine, the remaining sources Both of theremains above mentioned unsolved views about Karamanlis of origins the debates innot The but their language religion. vernacular may have andsome sortseem beganorigins;living butmasses,in among asthey theTurkish theywere their ofTurkified to continue Greek areof populations these rulers; (II) language their of the not but religion the adopted without anywere answer Turkish because startingfrom 11 conquests Anatolia tocontinuous the before immigrated soldiers of lack who of Turks descendants were the Karamanlis The (I) by scholars: be embraced seem to whoof primarywere employed asTHE SELF-UNDERSTANDING mercenaries OF THE KARAMANLIS CHAPTERin 4 the Byzantine army. They Gerasimos Augustinos, th century, Greeks the living in Asia expressedMinor theiridentity in various ways. As discussed concerning inprevious chapters, views theof origins Karamanlis,the two op.cit., 190-191. 48 th century or they 201 It seems that CEU eTD Collection adventure of identity mahludi hatt mahludi 205 204 was inpublished 1896, theKaramanlis definedthemselves as such: Dergisi: ‘Anatolda ilmin terakkisi kabil mi de In the book the In Karamanlis. Christians Turkophone calling opposed also was Misailidis Evangelinos publisher and novelist The word. that with themselves identify not did Karamanlis the connotation, negative a had it Since Anatolia. interior of Christians Turkophone speaking 203 konular calling usKaramanl coreligionists whose only ismerit speaking Greek, are laughing atusand trying toinsultus by in magazine letter to the way:‘…Some of our in this hisresentment congratulatory Anatol Ahteri, because of‘incongruity’ of languagetheir with their religion. Ioannis Gavrilidis, areaderof 202 ignorant of language of ignorant the of Church. the KaramanlistrueChristians werenot becausethey living the were inGreeks regions, coastal In the formation ofidentity, others’ views are alsoimportant. As an example,for many The Karamanlis had lower status among the Ottoman Greek Orthodox ( among Ottoman the Greek Orthodox hadlower status The Karamanlis Gerçi Rum isek de Rumca bilmez Türkçe söyleriz. Ne Türkçe yazar okur, ne Rumca söyleriz. Öyle bir Öyle söyleriz. Rumca ne okur, yazar Ne Türkçe söyleriz. Türkçe bilmez Rumca de Rumisek Gerçi Misailidis quoted in Anhegger, Evengelinos Misailidis’in Tema From Constantis o Paroritès quoted in Evangelia Balta, Karamanl Balta, in Evangelia quoted oParoritès Constantis Õ na göre s göre na Greek either. Weare amixture. Ouralphabetis Greek,we speak Turkish. writedon’t we don’treadand we Turkish (i.e.inArabiclettering), and don’tspeak weAlthough we andwe areRums, Greek (Rumca) don’tknow speakTurkish.We Karamanli. Christian.cannot beaperfect (i.e.black)religion;he/sheis He/Shehaskara a elsewhere Karaman andspeakingTurkish them.Apersoncoming or from define word to the proper is ‘Greek’;‘Karamanli’ don’t deservethename Christian. They living inIstanbul,and Izmir Europe do notthinkso. their eyes In anAnatolianishalf the Greekspeakers But course Ofnot. Isitafault? Turkish. The peoplespeakmerely Anatol Ahteri, Rums Õ tarikat ÕQÕ a weekly magazine in published (i.e. Greek Orthodox people) preferred to use the word ‘Karamanlis’ to name ‘Karamanlis’use the word people) to to preferred Greek Orthodox (i.e. fland ÕPÕ , 25. 202 Kaisareia Metropolitleri z vard October1, 1886, vol.5. Quoted inStefo Benlisoy, “Karamanl Õ ÕUÕ lar…’ lmas Õ r. Hurufumuz Yonaniçe, Türkçe meram eyleriz. Quoted in Evangelia Balta Evangelia in Quoted eyleriz. meram Türkçe Yonaniçe, Hurufumuz r. Õ ,4. 203 In order to emphasize their difference andinsult them, Greek ÷ il mi?’” (i.e. the Metropolitan Bishops of Kayseri) which Kayseri) of Bishops Metropolitan the (i.e. Toplumsal Tarih 154 49 Karamanlica/Karamanlidika Õ ca kitaplar ca ú a-i Dünya.15. Õ n dönemlerine göre incelenmesi ve incelenmesi göre dönemlerine n (October, 2006): 59. Õ ca haftal Rum) , expressed his , expressed Õ k Anatol Ahteri 205 Community 204 , The CEU eTD Collection 209 208 207 206 define race used to were which elements research, the In that themselves. Karamanlis by the readers Karamanli for the published were which publications research Karamanli on the Balta, conducted Evangelia Karamanlis, the self-understandingof the about idea an develop to order In Muslim could not convert to Christianity in principle, so the reverse was not possible. Islam,he A she a haveto or vice converted Onlyif Turk. could beenregardedas versa. one had the same life style, the Muslims werefaith, for them, wereeither theMuslims. Turks or Even if samethey regardedspoke the language, and as different in the eyes of Christians and ‘There were no Turks among us, the village was not mixed.’ not village among the was Turks nous, ‘There were no Turks. were there people), CappadociaRumshouseholds. assuch: ‘There Allbelonged were185 (GreekOrthodox to in his village described Papadopoulos Serafi basedonreligion. differentiation was reveal that in Karamanlis after settled generation Exchange of the in1924, Populations who Greece of Anzerlio Yonca by conducted Interviews identity. or nationality nation, of sense millet, The nationality. on nation and not religion, on based lines were segregation the NearEast the regarded as a significantdividing for Christians line both and Muslims. neighbors and though they even samespoke the language, religious difference the was relations had theirchangingthey with Muslim good without Islam. if to religion Even their Muslims of eyes the in Turk a as seen be impossibleto almost was it Christian, a For Greekness and Turkishness. In this definition, Karamanlis the expressedhybridity their in theintersection of zone Anastasios Apostolidis quoted Yoncain Anzerlio Mihail Papadopoulos quoted inYonca Anzerlio Evangelia Balta, Dimostenis Ya the religious community to which one belonged, was the determining factor of which was factor of religiousthe community belonged, one’s determiningthe to one ÷FÕR÷ The Adventure ofidentity, lu, (genos) op. cit., , nation 35. ’ 208 Anastasios Apostolidis makes the same differentiation: same the makes Apostolidis Anastasios (ethnos) 207 41. ÷ lu, ÷ lu, 139. and religion and relations between them were 50 op.cit., ÷ lu in various parts of Greece with the first the with Greece of parts various in lu 138. 209 The people who had Islamic had who people The 206 As Balta affirms, in CEU eTD Collection 215 vernacular.) Anatolian our in witnessed been never has this like a novel that think ilmin terakkisi kabil mi de 214 213 210 212 211 19 of end the Towards describe Turkish as Anatolian‘(our) vernacular’ in their publications. it language.indicated ‘Greek’ was the word used, wherever the Moreover, wanted emphasizeto ‘ethnicity’, they employed the word that, the term ‘Greek’ was not used denoteto ethnicity in Karamanli publications. When they not know Greeklanguage’,‘Eastern do Christians who ‘Anatolians’. and brethren’, Christian ‘our ‘coreligionists’, Karamanlis. the by religion to their be athreat seen to as started activities began andMissionary Bibleof Society the activity the when signifier a as ‘Orthodox’ with complemented were Anatolia’ of ‘Christians frequentlymost ones the were Anatolia’ of Christians employed.‘Orthodox Anatolia’, of ‘Christians ‘Christians’, The use of theseprovided behind releasing writing atranslation or In abook. accordance with study,this terms wasreasons the (II) and them, to alsoconnection their reflect they how and changing readers the addressed over time. and translators writers the how ‘Christians’ endeavour: (I) in this wereconsidered points analysed. Two or economic and social Thisdevelopments. change was extensively feltespecially in the Karamanlis: the Athenocentric Hellenic itisPopulation Exchange, threetypes possibleabout identity totalk amongof the ones and From amongamong of educated the emigrees. end the the 19 self-understanding of Karamanlis the to change.started Anew form identity of was developed was embraced by few people. In the 19 the In by fewpeople. was embraced Waridentity Thelast by fomented one (1919-1923). during Turkish-Greek Papa Eftim the Ibid., 34 See footnote number102. See also Stefo Benlisoy, Karamanl Evangelia Balta, Evangelia Balta, Richard Clogg, Ibid., 42. . A millet within a millet, The Adventure ofidentity, The Adventure ofidentity ÷ il mi?’, 57.‘…zira bu gibi bi roman zann th 210 century, with the changing social and economic conditions, the conditions, economic and social changing the with century, The reading Karamanli public was also referred to as 127. , 40-41. 43. 215 , the traditional Greek Orthodox, and the Turkish the and Orthodox, Greek traditional , the 211 th century, the Ottoman Empire was facing new ‘pious Orthodox Christians from Anatolia’, 51 Õ ca haftal ÕPÕ Rum za göre Anatol lisan Õ k Anatol Ahteri Dergisi: ‘Anatolda which means Greek Orthodox. Greek means which 214 212 th century until the Õ Balta also states nda görülmedi.’ (we 213 They would CEU eTD Collection during the warandfollowed the way by initiated Eftim emphasizedPapa who the Turkishness cause Turkish the with themselves identified them of few a before, mentioned As in cause. lack of Greeknational the concern may it totheir be Anatolia related or Western from their of spaces distance the and isolation their be may ignorance their behind reason The irredentism. Greek to ignorant remained Cappadocian in during note general war, Christians that crucialalso Turkish-Greek the to to note notspeakingthat isnot asufficient Greek signfornot adoptingit Greekidentity isbut 219 131. 218 217 216 as 1880s. late by as people elderly andwas onlyknown Greek kathareuousa remainedR. M.speak Turkish. ofCappadocia According Dawkins, continued to Greekdialects to weak in opposition to Turkish and the bookish Greek of the schools (i.e. people remainedignorantandmaintained their traditional ( Greek Orthodox many fact, In wereall successful. say attempts these to would it bewrong that However, previously. Somebuilt of withthem the evenaid of thetook Greeklocal Greek community.classical Moreover,Kingdom the pupils educated in society schools andembraced in the ones Greek a newsort homes, namesof Hellenic many toof identityindicatethem schools. society establishing by as such ways werevarious in towns home their assisted asHellenized mentioned their as a Greekness.result of identity in big cities by founding societies with their townsmen and through thistheir manner they endeavour to be partencountered anidentity in theirproblem new spaces. and Theyreproduced reified their of the were employed as unskilled workers and some of them dealt with commerce. The emigrees in them of Most Mersin. and Izmir, Istanbul, like cities to Anatolia interior from communities Turkophone the among seen was flow migration a century, the Throughout cities. seaboard See observations of Paulos Karolid Richard M. Dawkins, “Turko-Christian Songs,” 185-186, quoted inRichard Clogg, Petropulu quoted in Foti Benlisoy & Stefo Benlisoy, 29. FotiBenlisoy & Stefo Benlisoy, Nev ). 218 Infact evenin formerly Greek speaking communities, Turkish was adopted Ɲ s, Henri Grégoire and N. S. Rizos in Richard Clogg, 131. ú ehir Mektepleri, 26. 52 219 At this point, it is important A millet within a millet, Rum ) identity and 216 In their 217 CEU eTD Collection by the emigrants living inbig founded cities. ‘Society’ The bythe inscriptionassisted been have is may translated school the and by education Nikosfor Agiotis. wasresponsible time same the at by Christians.Turkophone script The in this plate is Greek. The house might beenhave owned by priestwho a above exit the doorclaimed that the house was owned by a priest before 1923. The village Aravan was inhabited 220 identity their main signifier of the religion was GreekOrthodox the attempts, until Hellenization the mostfor of them, terms Turkand the Muslimevoked same meaning.Wealso knowthat because as themainof and Turkishness IslamicTurks was regarded the component religion as themselves see not did they that know do we least At hand. in sources the with Karamanlis the of self-understanding the about remark concluding a make to easy not is It Phanar. in Partiarchate Orthodox Greek the against fiercely fighting was who and Karamanlis the of Door plateof a school Aravan in (School the Place in of Aravan = Built with the honourableassistance of Today Kumluca, a village located in Ni the Society, 1891 May 1) ÷ de. The contemporary ownerof the house where this plate was found 220 53 [Image: Gulen Gokturk] CEU eTD Collection from the perspective of the nationalists, a debate aboutidentity theira debate nationalists, of the from perspective the ‘incongruent’ are language and religion whose Community Christian Turkophone a For ‘others’. determining effect onboundaries of belongingfor certain groups of inpeople eyes the of speaking during once proved MuslimsCrete again religion’s the massdisplacement of ExchangeTheirPopulations of (1923-1924). wellas expulsion as deportation the of Greek the The Christianvillages ofCappadocia were deserted by Karamanlisthe asa resultof the CONCLUSION CHAPTER 5 sungin and Turkish the use of Turkish intheGreekOrthodox Church was regarded Karamanlis aboutanxious the because inmost of Litury villages, the Cappadocia the was schooling. Before the attempts of the Greek Kingdom, the Patriarchate in Istanbul was already through be Hellenized could they and Christians Orthodox were Karamanlis the was, reason relationship to theyhad state, the use Turkish. to Greekstatesmen, According to the whatever in Accordingly, Turkish. languagetheir authority the was ruling of the language. Moreover, vernacular their left have may people some neighbors, Muslim their with interaction speaking? The isolation some thereason,why haveremainedspeaking. If Greek was Cappadocians would latter Greek argument, were inhabitants the where Sinasos) (e.g. settlements Christian also were there on theformerspeaking Muslimmasses. claim Their because in seems questionable Cappadocia, other hand,seen asis the heartquite of Greek be could which possible.regions, from coastal the isolation of their asa result either vernacular their life, or they must have As forgotten Karamanlis,basicly in their eyeswere ‘ignorant’Greeks.Theymust Turkish have adopted as a result their Greek of amongtheirthe the ‘salvation’ Turkish of theinevitable at the age ‘enslavedof nationalism. fact, In after the establishment of the Greek State in 1830, brothers’ came on the agenda of the Greek statesmen. The 54 problematique was CEU eTD Collection conditions, what could be the approach of Turkish nationalists towards Turkish speaking towards nationalists becouldTurkish conditions, the approach of what or non-Muslim. As a result, Arabs and Albanians alsoleft the Ottoman cause. Under these and the Turkishlanguage was imposed on non-Turkish speaking communities either Muslim employed was policy a Turkification Accordingly, invoked. was nationalism based religion Ottomanism same evokedthe CUPrulethe meaning.During ethnicity (1908-1919), and and Islamism and Muslims; by only embraced was Ottomanism futile. remained patriotism Ottoman ofcreating attempts The be nationalized. to started hadalready in empire the in the form of savingTurkism wastargeted the decaying communities the empire. However, or Islamism Ottomanism, of form the in either hand, other the on nationalism, Turkish irredentist project wasstill prevailing. the (1922), AsiaMinor in Greek armies of until defeat In fact, the Greece’. ‘Greater project called project irredentist the of part a was Christians Orthodox Turkophone the on state Greek the of interest townsmen in big cities and helped theirhometowns by building schools and churches. The fellow their with societies established also They cause. national Greek on took and vernacular most be of intheir partof local them question.were Hellenized Greek communities, the To from Cappadocian towns tobig cities. The Karamanlis,in their new faced homes identity the appeared movement migration new a cities, Ottoman major in vivacity social and economic the as a of result Moreover, ofAsia Minor. settlements schools invarious to teachers speaking in Orthodox community Istanbul. 19 the In initiatedof independent Bulgariancomplaints Exarchate in1870andan the among Turkish establishment the caused end in the This, nationalism. to converted Church Orthodox Greek the words, other In increased. identity national a of realization on role its and diminished theChurch.also affected in areligious The determining identity roleof Church the by identity this Kingdom, the Whenasecular Hellenic initself. was problematic embraced Megali Idea. The Kingdom, for the Greek statesmen, was just a small part of 55 th century, the Greek Kingdom appointed GreekKingdom the century, CEU eTD Collection The Greek side, on the other hand, preferred to bring the Karamanlis to Greece Papa because to tobringthe hand, Karamanlis other The Greekside,on the preferred the Karamanlis loyal to the Patriarchate was seen risky for the Turkish state by the statesmen. of stay the Christians, of Orthodox group large asa conditions, these flock.Under Orthodox for thereligious of it andwere dissolved ceremonies Greek remainedthe only responsible center of Orthodox Christianity.Turkish In the end, statesmen all the administrative The movement. Greek the supported Patriarchate the during war, the Moreover, sultan. of the also powersregarded of the Patriarchate its subjects Orthodox theGreek of affairs for the responsible body as anadministrative worked existence as a partbefore of a long lawsterm planeither same the betreated would everybody Republic, Turkish the For them,under Patriarchate. the to make Muslim it the or theideaof existence of fiercely opposed Turkishstatesmen The changedthepicture. non-Muslim.Istanbul Theredefended was no needthe delegation Turkish forstay the 1923) July the 1922- (November talks, of Lausanne Patriarchate the the During Karamanlis. which However, the discussions about the Patriarchate in 221 pan-Turkist group?’ Turkishness based on nation the Turkishnessbasedof Turkish Republic; or a multinational on of Turkishness meanherewe (about the Karamanlis): Turkisness based ethnicon an group; ‘Turkishness’still vague. Ya is Dimostenis by meant been has What topic. this on studying scholars Turkish the among idea dominant Turkishnationaliststhe ‘Turkishness’ a‘proof’ oftheKaramanlis,of whichis still the mobilized Christians the Turkophone support to the Turkish His cause. movementprovided againstfought GreekOrthodox the inPatriarchate Phanar during years the occupation and who Papa Eftim emergedparallel with Christians Turkophone the to Turkishthe nationalists of published.attitude claiming solid of Karamanlisthe the However, were ‘Turkishness’ the in which were articles newspaper, various 1923, community?Orthodox From 1899 to Dimostenis Ya ÷FÕR÷ lu, 221 op. cit op. This question deserves to be Thisquestion to emphasized. deserves ., 34. ÷FÕR÷ 56 lu raises this ‘Whatkind andquestion asks: CEU eTD Collection spread in Anatolia, some of them become Greeks. Some of them remained Greek Orthodox Greek Some ofthem remained Greeks. become inAnatolia, of them some spread they were Empire, Ottoman of lands in the simplyidentity one’s of identifier main the was religion Since either. the Greek Orthodox endthe 19 of towards attempts Hellenization Christians Until the as Turks. saw themselves never Karamanlis the therefore, requirement, (i.e. before theiras a groupof people long with lasting lineagein theirold in hometowns interior Asia Minor expulsion.Karamanlisin their new spaces in Greece. Throughout the thesis, theKaramanlis were treated the of self-understanding show to To aimed never study be this above, repeated As of the Karamanlis,regarded however, should be the concern. self-understanding The constructs. own their believed everybody end, the At Karamanlis. of as a Turk,myths’—neatly by tailored Turkish and Greek intoStates—came beingin hybridthe presence Islam ‘identity of clash the fact, causes. In nationalist legitimizing sake of for the exploited were was Karamanlis the of origins the concerning debates The Muslisms. and thecoreligionists their first fromover highpolitics, they were deported their with home together hundred of thousands of and foremostproducts of the centuries mutualof life. They werein the grey domain.As a result of concerns Karamanlis were in the intersection zone of Turkishness and Greekness. They were the ethnic Turks or ethnic Greeks, would be ablesay to that Anatolia is their of descendants were the Karamanlis the that Whoever demonstrates in land. a rootedness Greeks.Itis Turks or theclaim the is of of homeland natural Anatolia that the to prove endeavor the of part a is Karamanlis the of Greekness or Turkishness over debate The massdeportation. the last of whowereexposed politics,to hometowns group left asthe theKaramanlispeople their off of as a trade result flock. Consequently, with a largeCappadocian Patriarchate Orthodox may haveEftim Patriarchate power Orthodox and his weakenedthe of Turkish Greek the th 57 century, they did not see themselves as Greeks Rums ). After the nationalist fervent patrie. However, the However, CEU eTD Collection 222 being aTurkis something political andcultural. Christians and afew become of them As Turks. says, Pfaff being a French,being a Greek or William Pfaff, op. cit., op. 20. 58 222 CEU eTD Collection Balta, Evangelia. Balta, Avc Augustinos, Gerasimos. Augustinos, Anzerlio Anhegger, Robert. “EvangelinosAnhegger, Robert. Misailidis’in Tema Anhegger, “Evangelinos Robert. Misailidis ve Türkçekonu Alexandris, Alexis.‘The GreekCensus of Anatolia and Thrace (1910-1912):Acontribution Anderson, Benedict. Anderson, Ak, C.Zeynep.“Antakyal Ahmad, Feroz. Adanir,Fikret. BIBLIOGRAPHY ÕR÷ Asia Studies. kurtulu lu, Do the nineteenth century. the nineteenth 28, 1985. Ortodokslar The Sorunu.” Fifth Congress International of Turkology, 23- September Vol. XXXV, No. 209 nineteenth century. Ottoman Greeks in theageofnationalism:politics,economy andsociety inthe to Ottoman Historical 2009): 24-26. Demography.’ Eds. Dimitri Gondicas and Charles Issawi. nationalism. Leiden ; : Brill,Boston 2002. Discusison.’ Eds. FikretAdan ÷ lu, Yonca. ÷ ú an. ‘The formation of ina ‘Muslim’ nation a historiographic Bosnia-Hercegovina: tan sonra Türkiye. The modern Turkey.making of ȆȡȠțȩʌȚ Milli Kurtulu London:Verso, 1991. Athens: Center for Minor Asia Studies, 2004. Karamanl Imagined communities: reflections ontheorigin and spread of The Greeks of Asia Minor: confession, community, and ethnicity in community, The GreeksofAsiaMinor:confession, Õ Ortodox Az Ortodox , Ürgüp:photographs fromthearchive oftheCenter Minor for Princeton, N.J.: Darwin Press, 1999. (May 2001):290-298. Ohio: The Kent State University Press, 1992. Õ ú Ortodoks Türkler. Tarihi:1838’den 1995’e, cilt3: Devrimin yap Istanbul: Tekin Yayinevi, 1985-1988. Õ r and Suraiya Faroqhi,r and Suraiya Õ nl Õ÷Õ n Günümüzdeki Durumu.” 59 London: Routledge, 1993. Ankara: Phoenix Yay ú a-i a-i Dünya adl ú an dinda The OttomansandtheBalkans. Õ kitab ú lar Az Õ Õ Õ nevi, 2003. ve TürkçeKonu .” Õ nl Tarih ve Toplum, Õ kça 43 ÕVÕ ve (January ú an CEU eTD Collection Clark,Bruce. Calhoun, Craig. “Nationalism and ethnicity. and “Nationalism Craig. Calhoun, Brubaker, Rogers and Cooper. Frederick, Brubaker,Rogers Paul.Brass, R. Benlisoy, Stefo. “Karamanl Benlisoy, Foti. Benlisoy,Foti, and Benlisoy, Stefo. “19. Yüzy Baykurt, Cami. Baykurt, ------“The adventure of identity in the triptych: vatan, religion and language.” ------“Karamanl ------“Karamanl ------“Karamanli Press (Smyrna 1845-Athens 1926).” Eds. Oktay Belli, Yücel Da ------London: Granta Books,2006. 239. (2000): 1-47(2000): Publications, 1991. mi de Gültekingil and Tan Mektepleri.” Kültürü Incelemeleri Dergisi8 Kültürü Incelemeleri VÕQÕ Türkiye An and Genim, M.Sinan siècle. XXe grecs. caractères fland ÷ Karamanlidika. Bibliographieanalytique d’ouvrages en langueturque Twice astranger: How expulsion forged modernmass Greece andTurkey. il mi?’” “ Ethnicity andnationalism: theory and comparison. Osmanl ÕUÕ Türk milliyetçili Türk lmas Õ t Çevre Turismt De . Toplumsal Tarih Toplumsal Tarih154 Õ .” Õ ülkesinde H Õ Õ ca Bas ca kitaplar Müteferrika Dergisi,Müteferrika vol.18 Õ Õ l Bora, ca haftal ø ÕOÕ zzet Günda ÷ Eserler.” inde katedilmemi inde Milliyetçilik. Õ n dönemlerine göre incelenmesi ve konular Õ Õ Athènes: Centre d’Etudes d’Asie Mineure, 1987. k Anatol Ahteri Dergisi: ‘Anatolda ilmin terakkisi kabil ristiyan Türkler. 74 (Istanbul, 25-44. 2003): ÷ erlerini Korumaerlerini Vakf (February 2000): 24-33. Tarihve Toplum62 ” AnnualReview Sociology of 19 (October, 2006):(October, 56-60. ÷ Beyond “Identity.” TheoryandSociety29 Beyond “Identity.” Kayao 60 Õ lda Karamanl Istanbul: Ileti ú yol: H yol: (1998):3-19. ÷ ø lu Hatira Kitab lu stanbul: Sanayiinefise Matbaas Õ ristiyan Türkler.” Eds. Murat Eds. Türkler.” ristiyan Õ Õ lar ve e , 2005. ú im Yay (1989): 121-123. New Delhi: Sage ÷ itim: Nev Õ nlar Õ Makaleler. Õ , 2002. , (1993): 211- ú Õ ehir na göre ø Türk stanbul: Õ , 1932. [1] ÷OÕ CEU eTD Collection Exertoglou, Haris.“Shifting boundaries: language,community and the ‘non Greek speaking Erol, Merih. “19. Yüzy Ergene, Teoman Erdo Ekincikli, Mustafa. Detzler, Wayne. ‘Robert Pinkerton: Principal agent of the BFBS in the kingdoms of ------De Bernières, Louis. De Bernières, Dawkins, M. Richard. ‘The recent study of folklore in Greece.’ in ------“The Greek Clogg, Richard. “A millet within a millet: Karamanlides.” Eds. Dimitri Gondicas and Charles and Gondicas Dimitri Eds. Karamanlides.” millet: a within millet “A Richard. Clogg, ÷ du, A. Teyfur. “Di Greek.’” (August, 2004): 66-71. Toplum Dergisi 145 Phoenix 2004. Press, cultural impact oftheBritishandForeign Bible Society,1804-2004. Dean, & John Cann Kathleen Batalden, Stephen Eds. Germany.’ University Press, 1992. 2004. Folk-lore society plural society. Lewis, vol. 1of in nineteenth century. in nineteenth Isaawi, A concise historyofGreece.A concise Kath’ imas Anatoli: Studies inOttoman Greek History. The OttomanGreeks in theAgeofnationalism: politics,economy, and society . Historein 1, ø stiklal Harbinde TürkOrtodokslar Türk Ordodokslar Birds without wings. New York:Holmes & Publishers,Meier 1982. Õ Christians andJews intheOttomanEmpire: of a functioning lda bas . London: Folklore Society, 1930. ÷ er bir Nev Millet (1996): 47-50. (Athens 1999):75-92. Princeton, New Jersey: The Darwin Press, c1999. Õ lan Karamanl in the Ottoman Empire.” Eds. Benjamin Braude & Bernard ú ehir Salnamesi: Rum Harfleriyle Türkçe.” . Ankara: Siyasal Yay London: Vintage, 2004. Cambridge, New York, Victoria: Cambridge Õ ca Eserler.” 61 Õ . ø stanbul: Toplumsal Tarih Dergisi 128 Õ nevi, 1998. ø . P.Ne Jubilee Congressthe of Istanbul: The Isis Press, Isis The Istanbul: ú Sowing theword: the tiyatServisi, 1951. Tarih ve Sheffield: CEU eTD Collection Kedourie, Elie. Kedourie, Kechriotis,Vangelis. “Greek-Orthodox, Ottoman Greeks or just Greeks? Theories of Kasaba, Re Kemal. H. Karpat, Keyder, Ça ------Karpat, H. Kemal. H. Karpat, Karakasidou, N. Anastasia. Hirschon, Renée. Hirschon, Günyol, Vedat. “Önsöz” in Evangelinos Misailidis, ------“Anadolu’da ‘Karamanl Gellner, Ernest. Gellner, Eyice, Semavi. “Anadolu’da Eyice,“Anadolu’da Semavi.‘Karamanl Bulgarie InstitutD’études Balkaniquesétudes Balkaniques 1 Dragonas, coexistence in the aftermath of Turk Young the aftermath of inthe coexistence Essays. 2006. EUI Working PaperRSCNo.2002/17,Badia Fiesolana, SanDomenico(FI). Routledge, 2005. Macedonia, 1870-1990. Cefakar-u Cefake Cefakar-u Belleten XLIV173-176 Belleten XXXIX 153 ú ÷ at. “Greek andat. Turkish Nationalism inFormation: Western Anatolia 1919-1922.” lar. ‘Ahistory and geography Turkishof nationalism.’ Eds.Faruk &Thalia Birtek Leiden: Brill, 2002. Nationalism. Nationalism inAsiaand Africa. Nationalism. Nations and nationalism. Crossing theAegean. Citizenship andthenationstatein Greece andTurkey. Studies onOttoman Socialand political History: SelectedArticles and Osmanl ú ). Õ da de (1975):25-48. Fields wheat,of hillsofblood:Passages to nationhoodinGreek ø stanbul: Cem Yayinlari, 1986. Oxford: Blackwell, 1993. London : Phoenix, 1998. (1980):683-696. Chicago; London: TheUniversity Chicago Press, 1997. of ÷Lú im, modernle Õ Oxford: Berghahn 2003. Books, ca Kitabeler: Grek Harfleriyle Kitabeler.” Grek Türkçe ca Kitabeler: Õ Oxford: Blackwell,2006. ca Kitabeler: Grek Harfleriyle Türkçe Kitabeler II.” 62 London: FrankCass, c1971. ú me veulusla Seyreyle Dünyay revolution.” ú ma. Ankara: (2005): 51-71. (2005): de Sciences Académie des Õ (Tema Oxon, New York: ø ú mge Yay a-i Dünya ve a-i Dünya Õ nevi, CEU eTD Collection ------Smith, D. Anthony. D. Smith, Shafer, C. Boyd. Salaville, SévérienandDalleggio, Eugène. Pfaff, William. Özk Özdemir, R. Elif. “Borders of Belonging in the ‘Exchanged’ Generations of Karamanlis.” Melchior, Malgorzata Melchior, Malgorzata . “Rootedness in rootednessplace, in memory exemplifiedas by Polish- Lewis, Bernard. Leake, M. William. Koçak, Cemil.“Kemalistmilliyetçili Kitsikis, Dimitri. Kitsikis, ------“Greek irredentism in Asia Minor and Cyprus.” Kitromilides, M. Paschalis. M. Kitromilides, ÕUÕ ml 1999. 1955. Athenes: 1958. Grecs vol.1-2 (1584-1850). Imprimes enCaractere D’ouvrages enLingueTurque Turkey. Master’s thesis, KoçUniversity, 2006. Jewish identity.” ancient andmoderngeographyofthat country. Bora, (No. 1):3-17. political thought ofsouth-eastern Europe. Õ , Umut, and Sofos, A. Spyros. Milliyetçilik. London: Hurst& Company, 2008. The wrath ofnations. Nationalism: Theory,ideology, history. The emergenceofmodernTurkey. Nationalism: mythandreality. Türk-Yunan Türk-Yunan Myths andmemories ofthenation. Journal of a Tour Journal ofaTour in Asia Minorwith comparative remarks onthe Nationalities Affairs Istanbul: Ileti Enlightenment,nationalism, orthodoxy: studies in theculture and ø mparatorlu ÷ New York : Simon & Schuster, c1993. in bulan Tormented by history: nationalismin Greece and ú im Yay ÷ Karamanlidika: Bibliographie Analytique u. Istanbul: Ileti 31 63 Õ k sular (2007): (2007): 71-80. Õ New York : Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, : NewHarcourt York nlar Hampshire: Variorum, 1994. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1968. Õ Õ , 2002. , .” Eds.MuratGültekingil and Tan Cambridge :Polity, 2001. London: JohnMurray, 1824. Oxford: Oxford University Press, ú im, 1996. Middle Eastern Studies26 Õ l , . CEU eTD Collection Zürcher, J. Erik. “Young Turks, ‘Ottoman Muslims and Turkish Nationalists.” Ed. Kemal H. <Õ Woodward, Kathryn.Woodward, Ed. Ya Xydis, G.Stephen. ‘ Nationalism.’ Eds. Peter F. Sugar and Ivo J. Lederer, Tosun, Cengiz. “Dil zenginli inmemory and andidentity: ‘Space,place, religion two Vasso. Stelakou, Smith, L. Michael. Soysü, Hale. ld ÷FÕR÷ ÕUÕ m, Onur. Karpat, populations, 1922-1934. (August2008): 34-35. Studies1, 1969. Nationalism inEastern Europe. Books, 2003. and Turkey Greece between compulsory exchange population RenéeHirschon. Ed. Settlements.’ University of Michigan Press, c1998. lu, Dimostenis. “Karamanl Kavimler Kap Ottoman Past andToday’sTurkey. Diplomacy anddisplacement:reconsidering theTurco-Greekexchange of no.2 (October 2005):136-154. Ioanian vision:GreeceinAsia Minor, 1919-1922. Identity andDifference. ÕVÕ ÷ -1. i yozla New York: Routledge, 2006. Istanbul: Kaynal Yay Õ Rumlar ve kimlik köken tart ú ma ve Türkçe.” Seattle, London:University Washington Press, of Crossing the Aegean: an appraisal of the 1923 Crossing theAegean:anappraisalof 64 Leiden: Koninklijke Brill, 2000. London: SagePublications, 1997. Journal ofLanguage and Linguistic Õ nlar Õ , 1993. Õú malar Ann Arbor: The Arbor: Ann . Õ New York: Berghahn New York: .” Az Õ nl Õ kça 39