Alevi Martyr Figures

0850-07_Turcica39_08_Hess 23-06-2008 14:51 Pagina 253 Michael REINHARD HESS 253 ALEVI MARTYR FIGURES 1. INTRODUCTION: AIMS, STRUCTURE AND METHODOLOGY T he aim of the following investigation is to illustrate the particular way in which the notion “∞martyr∞” is used in the contemporary Turkish Alevi community.1 This task will be undertaken from three different perspectives. One of them is sketched in the chapter “∞Martyrs in Alevism∞” (4). It consists of a survey of references to the martyr in Alevi texts and rituals, including a close interpretation of some crucial terms. Although this is the section which deals most directly with the subject matter, it is placed at the end of the article. In doing so, the aim is to allow for its contextualization in modern Turkish literature and society. This contextualization is realized in chapters 2 and 3. The first of these two chapters, “∞The concept of ≥ehit and ≥ehadet in the Ottoman Empire and modern Turkey∞” (chapter 2), provides an introduction into the subject from a broader perspective. It deliberately dis- PD Dr. Michael Reinhard HESS Zentrum für Literaturforschung, Schützen-strasse 18, 3rd fl., 10117 Berlin e-mail∞: [email protected]∞ 1 The term “∞Alevi community∞” includes Turkish Alevis inside the Republic of Turkey as well as outside of it (in Europe). The texts and utterances that have been ana- lyzed are in Turkish and German (the latter made by Alevis with Turkish mother tongue). This definition of the source material has been set by my own linguistic back- ground, which prohibits a systematic analysis of Kurdish texts. Concurrently, this delin- eation of “∞Turkish Alevis∞” is in no way meant to be normative. The plurality of definition attempts of the (both Turkish and Kurdish) Alevi community made from within and without Alevi circles seems to hamper such an ambition. For an introduction into the complex issue of Alevi identity see KORKMAZ 2000 (giving an insider’s view), VORHOFF 2003 and the introductory sections of DRESSLER 1999, DRESSLER 2002, and VORHOFF 1995. Turcica, 39, 2007, p. 253-290 0850-07_Turcica39_08_Hess 23-06-2008 14:51 Pagina 254 254 MICHAEL REINHARD HESS cusses aspects of martyrdom which lie outside the Alevi community. The starting point is the Turkish word for “∞martyr∞”, ≥ehit. Two texts containing it are analysed in the context of late Ottoman and modern Turkish literature. This might seem to be a surprising approach, but understanding non- Alevi martyrdom in Ottoman and Turkish culture is an essential prere- quisite to understanding “∞Martyrs in Alevism∞”. The Sunni and nationalistic discourses exemplified in 2.1 and 2.3 form part of the context which allows to evaluate Alevi martyrdom. A further justification of including Sunni texts in an article about Alevi martyrs is brought into being by an existing gap in the exploration of Islamic martyrdom. For in contrast to a considerable amount of scholarly investigations into Islamic martyrdom in general and some of its particular phenomena in Arabic and Iranian Islamic cultures, there is no comparable amount of scientific interest in martyrdom in Turkic2 Islamic cultures. Finally, it can be demonstrated that the apparent contrast created by uniting “∞The concept of ≥ehit and ≥ehadet in the Ottoman Empire and modern Turkey∞” and “∞Martyrs in Alevism∞” in one and the same investigation is not just an intellectual caprice. On the contrary, it reflects a dichotomy which exists in modern Turkish debates. These are touched on in an intermediate chapter (3), called “∞Sunni and nationalist versus Alevi perspectives in Turkish literature∞”. It offers some examples of areas where Sunni and nationalist views are directly competing with Alevi ones. The present contribution focusses on literature. Thus, the discussion about various aspects of martyrdom is primarily carried out on the basis of texts. However, a wide notion of “∞text∞” and “∞literature∞” is applied, which includes “∞classical∞” forms of belles lettres such as poems and the novel, but also less formalized written utterances, for instance, scientific or journalistic descriptions of Alevi rituals. Examples of the latter are contained in chapter 4. The philosophical, theological or historical aspects of martyrdom are not at the center of interest. In particular, the political implications of martyrdom for the Alevi community in modern Turkey are not analysed in depth. 2 The use of the terms “∞Turkic∞” and “∞Turkish∞” corresponds to the habits of Turkol- ogy∞: “∞Turkic∞” refers to any member of the Turkic languages family, while “∞Turkish∞” more specifically denotes the Turkic language officially used in Turkey. 0850-07_Turcica39_08_Hess 23-06-2008 14:51 Pagina 255 ALEVI MARTYR FIGURES 255 2. THE CONCEPT OF ≤EHIT AND ≤EHADET IN THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE AND MODERN TURKEY Beginning with Jan Wensinck’s pioneering monograph about Islamic martyrdom,3 a number of scientific publications has dealt with Islamic martyrdom.4 The 9/11 catastrophe and the subsequent events in Iraq seem to have further increased this interest. Somewhat strikingly though, Islamic notions of martyrdom devel- opped in the Ottoman Empire and in the Turkish Republic have not received an equal amount of scholarly attention.5 There is no monograph or article explicitly dedicated to martyrdom in the Ottoman Empire or Turkey. This field is treated either in the context of other historical top- ics or within biographies of single important martyr figures.6 The following is not a complete outline of all meanings of the (Ottoman) terms sehid and sehadet and its (Turkish) counterparts ≥ehit and ≥ehadet. Only those meanings of these words are investigated which imply a violent death for the sake of a higher cause. This does not mean that the other meanings would be totally unimportant or could not be related to the present subject in some way.7 In a broader diachronic and etymological perspective, all the different meanings of these words are eventually somehow linked to each other. But they are of comparatively little importance in the analysis of Alevi martyr figures which is pre- sented here. 3 WENSINCK 1921. 4 For a general introduction into the subject, see, for instance, BJÖRKMAN 1970, GER- LITZ 1992, KOHLBERG 1997a, KOHLBERG 1997b, PETERS 1997, PREISSLER 1999 and TODD LAWSON 1995. Very important his also PANNEWICK 2004 and the contributions collected there. 5 For instance, although BJÖRKMAN 1970 is a (translated) article written in Turkish and published in the Republic of Turkey, it does not separately discuss martyrdom in the Ottoman Empire or Turkey. 6 See, for instance, BALIVET 1995 and BURRIL 1972. Some information may also be gathered from OCAK 1998. 7 For instance, other meanings of (Turkish) ≥ehadet include “∞witnessing (in court)∞”, “∞Islamic confession of faith∞”(see EREN et. al. 1988∞: 1365, s.v. ≥ahadet∞; KARDA≥ et al. 1995-1996, vol. 4.∞: 2648, s.v. ≥ahâdet, ≥ehâdet∞; PÜSKÜLLÜOGLU 1995∞: 1412, s.v. ≥ahadet∞; STEUERWALD 1988∞: 862, s.v. ≥ahadet). Compare also the definitions for the word ≥ehit in these dictionaries. 0850-07_Turcica39_08_Hess 23-06-2008 14:51 Pagina 256 256 MICHAEL REINHARD HESS 2.1 Ziya Gökalp∞: martyrdom between religion and nation With the rise of Turkish nationalism from the second half of the 19th century onward, the term sehid 8 was often used in a sense which insep- arably united the religious dimension of the word (“∞martyr∞”) with nationalistic, patriotic and military overtones. Even after the constitutional reforms of 1876 and 1908, the Ottoman Empire had essentially remained a theocratic state. Its absolutistic ruler was the Ottoman sultan, who at the same time held the religious title of caliph. This implied that for an Ottoman Muslim subject his allegiance to the nation and the state was inherently identical with his allegiance to the Islamic religion. Therefore, it must appear only consequent that the term sehid “∞martyr∞”, being originally a religious one, was used whenever Ottoman Muslims died in fighting for their state and their nation. The inseparable mixture of nationalistic, military and religious meanings of the Ottoman word ≥ehid can be demonstrated in the work of Ziya Gökalp (1876-1924), one of the most prominent Turkish nationalist writ- ers.9 A pertinent example for the special understanding of sehid by Ziya Gökalp is his 1912 poem ‘Asker Du‘asï “∞Soldier’s prayer∞”. Below, this poem is given in a modern Turkish form. The reason for preferring the modern version over the Ottoman original is that this Turk- ish version was used during in a public debate at the turn of the mille- nium, which will be dealt with further below. Anyhow, this Turkish version is very true to the 1912 original10 and is probably a direct adaptation from it. The only noteworthy difference is that in the Ottoman original the sequene of the stanzas Cenk meydanında… (l. 16-20 of the Turkish text) and Kumandan… (l. 20-25) is exchanged, so that the Ottoman poem ends with ∑oyunu zebun etme Yarabbi∞!11 Another minor difference are the three dots that follow Sultan (l. 3) in the Ottoman version.12 8 ≤ehid is the form of the Ottoman word in scientific transcription. The modern Turk- ish form is ≥ehit. In a diachronical perspective, Turkish directly continues Ottoman. In the following, the Ottoman transcription system will be used whenever reference is made to the Ottoman period, the Turkish form for references to the Republican era. 9 On Gökalp in general see HASAN 1988, which contains numerous references to ear- lier literature. 10 GÖKALP 1330 A. H.∞:

Load more