Ottomans, Turks and the Balkans : Empire Lost, Relations Altered
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
OTTOMANS, TURKS AND THE BALKANS OTTOMANS, TURKS AND THE BALKANS Empire Lost, Relations Altered Ebru Boyar Tauris Academic Studies London • New York Published in 2007 by Tauris Academic Studies, an imprint of I.B.Tauris & Co Ltd 6 Salem Road, London W2 4BU 175 Fifth Avenue, New York NY 10010 www.ibtauris.com In the United States of America and Canada distributed by Palgrave Macmillan a division of St. Martin’s Press, 175 Fifth Avenue, New York NY 10010 Copyright © 2007 Ebru Boyar The right of Ebru Boyar to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted by the author in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patent Act 1988. All rights reserved. Except for brief quotations in a review, this book, or any part thereof, may not be reproduced, stored in or introduced into a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the publisher. Library of Ottoman Studies 12 ISBN: 978 1 84511 351 3 A full CIP record for this book is available from the British Library A full CIP record is available from the Library of Congress Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: available Printed and bound in Great Britain by Replika Press Pvt. Ltd From camera-ready copy edited and supplied by the author To my parents, Mediha and Yunus Boyar CONTENTS Notes on Transliteration, Dates and Names ix Acknowledgements xi Introduction 1 1. History-Writing in the Late Ottoman/Early Republican Era 9 2. ‘A Belt of Large Dumplings’: The Definition of the Balkans 29 3. The Representation of the Balkans 42 4. The Balkan Peoples and the Balkan States 72 5. The Multi-Images of the Balkans 82 Conclusion 141 Notes 148 Bibliography 209 Index 237 NOTES ON TRANSLITERATION, DATES AND NAMES All texts in Ottoman Turkish have been transliterated into modern Turkish orthography and no diacritical marks are used. Dates have been given in both Hicri (A.H.) or Mali and Miladi (A.D.). In cases where it is impossible to establish whether the Ottoman date is Hicri or Mali , the Miladi (A.D.) equivalent for both is given, that for Mali being in brackets. Surnames have been given in brackets when the period referred to preceeds the surname law of 1934. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like first to express my deep gratitude to Dr. Kate Fleet, who supervised the Ph.D. thesis upon which this book is based. She not only taught me about how to do research but also showed me what a good academic should be. She never ceased to be interested in my work, was always there when I needed her and never lost patience with me. I should like to thank Professor Palmira Brummett, Dr. George Dedes, Miss Julian Chrysostomides, Professor Salih Özbaran, Dr. Tuba Çavdar, Dr. Svetla Ianeva, Dr. Stefka Parveva and Dr. Svetlana Ivanova. I am most grateful to the Skilliter Centre for Ottoman Studies which opened new horizons for me, not only because of its invaluable collection but also because of the stimulating environment which it provided. I should like to thank Newnham College very much both because it has the Skilliter Centre and also for its friendly and supportive environment. I am also most grateful to the library of the Türk Tarih Kurumu and for the efficiency and kindness of the personnel working there. In particular I should like to thank Mustafa Sönmez. The staff of both the Ba şbakanlık Osmanlı Ar şivi in İstanbul and the Ba şbakanlık Cumhuriyet Ar şivi in Ankara were unfailingly helpful. Even when the Ba şbakanlık Osmanlı Ar şivi was at its busiest, the staff continued to be most efficient. This made my research times in the archives both enjoyable and productive. The staff at the Oriental Department of the National Library of St Cyril and St. Methodius in Sofia, too, were extremely helpful. I should also like to thank l’Istituto per l’Oriente in Rome, the library of the Faculty of Oriental Studies, Cambridge and the Cambridge University Library. xii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am most grateful for the financial support throughout my Ph.D. from YÖK (The Turkish Higher Educational Council) and the Cambridge University Overseas Trust which gave me the Mehmet Fuat Köprülü Scholarship. Finally I am deeply indebted to my family who have trusted and supported me throughout. INTRODUCTION The land which my grandfather ploughed and into which he poured his soul Has gone and will never come back! 1 In 1913 the Ottoman empire lost its soul, or that at least was how many felt. The Balkans, symbolising far more than territory, was at the very heart of what made the empire. Its loss plunged the Ottoman intellectual elite into a search for what had gone, and drew the Ottomans into a complex of sensations, shame, grief, anger and a questioning about their own identity. Beaten by their own subjects, their great empire brought down by ‘former shepherds and servants,’ 2 the Ottomans felt an overwhelming sadness for the alienation of a land that had been theirs for centuries and regret for the blood which they had pointlessly shed for it. The trauma of the loss of the Balkans was shattering for the Ottomans and its reverberations were felt in the early Republic and beyond. It coloured the mind-set of the new Turkish elite and shaped their way of thinking about their neighbours, about Europe and about themselves. However much political relations with their Balkan neighbours might be good, the edge of bitterness and anger remained, and surfaced whenever a conflict appeared. Balkan nationalism does not resemble the nationalism of other nations. Balkan nationalism has a special, bloody history full of raids, assassinations, bombs and banditry. Balkan nationalism is rapacious, barbarous. Balkan countries resemble zoos for wild animals, behind every frontier there is a bloodthirsty nationalism which consists of teeth and claws separated from each other by 2 OTTOMANS , TURKS AND THE BALKANS iron bars. These nationalisms continuously stretch out their claws against each other between the bars of the frontiers and tear each other to pieces. However barbarous they were when they jointly attacked us, they were equally vicious, as we saw after the Balkan War, when they were at each other’s throats. 3 Although these words were written in 1920, these sentiments continued. Angered over the loss of the Balkans, the Ottomans and later the Turks also suffered an acute sense of injustice, that the Balkan peoples, for whom they had done so much, should have turned on them in this way, and that the Europeans should have always taken their side, despising the Turks as barbarous and uncivilised. This the Europeans continued to do well into the Turkish Republic. This book considers the development of the Ottoman/Turkish intellectual relationship with the Balkans and tries to understand in what ways the loss of the Balkans coloured Ottoman/Turkish self- perception and shaped the relations of the empire and later the Republic with the outside world. Sources In trying to understand the place of the Balkans in the Ottoman/Turkish mentality, one of the main primary sources is clearly the history- writings of the period. The standard histories such as Ahmed Cevdet Pa şa’s Tarih-i Cevdet (Cevdet’s History) or Mustafa Nuri Pa şa’s Netayic ül-Vukuat (The Consequences of Events), were written by historians from within the establishment, Ahmed Cevdet Pa şa, for example, being the official court historian ( vakanüvis ), and thus reflect the establishment view of history and of the Balkans. These histories are also important in that they became the standard reference works for later generations. Apart from these standard histories, there are the history text books written for schools, both those written by famous historians such as Mehmed Fuad (Köprülü), Ahmed Refik (Altınay) and Ali Re şad who were very important historians both of the late Ottoman and early Republican eras, and historians who were not well known such as Lütfiye Hanım. These texts responded very much to the needs of state education and were thus a reflection of what the state wanted to inculcate the population with, and were very important for the development of national identity. Some text books, such as Resimli ve INTRODUCTION 3 Haritalı Osmanlı Tarihi (The Illustrated Ottoman History with Maps) written by Ahmed Rasim, the well-known journalist and writer, or the Türk Tarihi Tetkik Cemiyeti (later, Türk Tarih Kurumu, the Turkish Historical Society) publications Tarih III (History III) and Tarih IV (History IV), then became standard works for later historians. Kemal Karpat for example made considerable use of Tarih IV in his book Turkey’s Politics: The Transition to a Multi-Party System published in 1959. 4 A further type of history used in this study consists of histories specifically related to the Balkans, such as Kamil Kapudan’s book on Montenegro or Halil Yaver’s books on Bulgaria, as well as books published by military publishing houses such as Askeri Matbaa and Askeri Deniz Matbaası and written by military officers, including the works of Halil Sedes on Ottoman military campaigns against the Serbs, in Montenegro, in Bosnia-Herzegovina and against the Bulgarians, and that of Mithat I şın on Crete. By combining these various types of histories, it is possible to gain a more in-depth understanding of how the Balkans was represented in the histories of the late Ottoman/early Republican period and of the relation of the Balkans to the creation of a national identity in the early Republican era. The second kind of sources examined is literary works of fiction.