MUSLIM MINORITIES OF BULGARIA AND GEORGIA: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF POMAKS AND AJARIANS A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES OF MIDDLE EAST TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY BY ALTER KAHRAMAN IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR PHILOSOPHY IN THE DEPARTMENT OF AREA STUDIES OCTOBER 2020 Approval of thE thEsis: MUSLIM MINORITIES OF BULGARIA AND GEORGIA: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF POMAKS AND AJARIANS submittEd by ALTER KAHRAMAN in partial fulfillmEnt of thE rEquirEmEnts for thE degrEE of Doctor of Philosophy in ArEa Studies, thE GraduatE School of Social SciEncEs of MiddlE East TEchnical University by, Prof. Dr. Yaşar KONDAKÇI Dean GraduatE School of Social SciEncEs Assist. Prof. Dr. Derya GÖÇER Head of DEpartmEnt ArEa StudiEs Prof. Dr. AyşEgül AYDINGÜN SupErvisor Sociology Examining CommittEE MEmbErs: Prof. Dr. ÖmEr TURAN (Head of thE Examining CommittEE) MiddlE East TEchnical UnivErsity History Prof. Dr. AyşEgül AYDINGÜN (SupErvisor) MiddlE East TEchnical UnivErsity Sociology Prof. Dr. Pınar KÖKSAL MiddlE East TEchnical UnivErsity Political SciEncE and Public Administration Prof. Dr. Suavi AYDIN HacettEpE UnivErsity Communication SciEncEs Prof. Dr. AyşE KAYAPINAR National DEfEncE UnivErsity History PlAGIARISM I hErEby dEclarE that all information in this documEnt has bEEn obtainEd and prEsEntEd in accordancE with academic rulEs and Ethical conduct. I also declarE that, as rEQuirEd by thesE rulEs and conduct, I havE fully citEd and rEfErEncEd all matErial and rEsults that arE not original to this work. NamE, Last namE: AltEr Kahraman SignaturE: iii ABSTRACT MUSLIM MINORITIES OF BULGARIA AND GEORGIA: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF POMAKS AND AJARIANS Kahraman, AltEr Ph.D., DEpartmEnt of ArEa StudiEs SupErvisor: Prof. Dr. AyşEgül Aydıngün OctobEr 2020, 301 pagEs This thEsis analysEs thE transformation of idEntitiEs of two rEligious minoritiEs, Pomaks and Ajarians, locatEd on thE oppositE sidEs of thE Black SEa rEgion, in Bulgaria and GEorgia rEspEctivEly. Both minoritiEs EmbracEd Islam undEr thE Ottoman rulE and EncountErEd difficultiEs with thE growth of Ethno-religious nationalism in their rEspectivE countriEs’ national idEologiEs in thE post-Ottoman era. ThE thEsis rEviEws thE litEraturE on Ethnic and rEligious nationalism, for thE relation bEtwEEn religion and nationalism was intimatE in both Bulgaria and GEorgia, and rEligion has bEEn an intEgral part of national idEntity as wEll as thE national discoursE of thesE countriEs, and it collEcts data through sEmi-structurEd in-depth intErviews conductEd in Bulgaria and GEorgia with ElitEs and ExpErts as wEll as thE ordinary mEmbErs of both Ajarian and Pomak communities. It undErscorEs thE intolerancE Bulgarians and GEorgians, whosE faith is not Orthodox Christianity, arE subjEctEd to in Orthodox countriEs likE Bulgaria and Georgia, whErE rEligion and ethnic and national identity is superposed. That is, it draws attention to thE Ethno- religious nationalism causing intolErancE EspEcially towards minoritiEs who wEre iv formErly considerEd as Orthodox Christians. The findings of the study demonstratE that minoritiEs having morE commonalitiEs with thE majority yEt diffErEncEs in tErms of rEligious affiliation suffEr morE. Keywords: Pomaks, Ajarians, Bulgaria, GEorgia, minority v ÖZ BULGARİSTAN VE GÜRCİSTAN’IN MÜSLÜMAN AZINLIKLARI: POMAK VE ACARALILARIN KARŞILAŞTIRMALI İNCELEMESİ Kahraman, AltEr Doktora, BölgE Çalışmaları Bölümü Tez YönEticisi: Prof. Dr. AyşEgül Aydıngün Ekim 2020, 301 sayfa Bu tEz, KaradEniz’in iki yakasında, Bulgaristan vE Gürcistan’da yErlEşik iki dinî azınlığın kimlik algısındaki dEğişimini ElE almaktadır. HEr iki azınlık da Osmanlı dönEmindE İslam’ı kabul Etmiş ve Osmanlı sonrası dönEmdE vatandaşı oldukları ülkElErin Etno- dinî milliyEtçilik idEolojilErinin hedefi hâline gelmişlErdir. Bu tEzdE din ilE etnik ve ulusal kimliğin bütünlEştiği Bulgaristan vE Gürcistan gibi toplumlarda, dinî aidiyEt açısından çoğunluktan farklılaşan ama Etnik, dil, tarih vE kültür olarak büyük ölçüdE benzEşEn dinî azınlıkların çoğunluk grubuyla ortak kültürEl, dinî ve dilsEl özElliklErE sahip olmayan Etnik azınlıklara görE daha fazla ayrımcılığa vE asimilasyona maruz kaldıkları savunulmaktadır. Başka bir ifadEylE, etno-dinî milliyEtçilik, özElliklE daha öncE Ortodoks Hristiyan olarak kabul EdilEn azınlıklara karşı hoşgörüsüzlüğE nEdEn olmaktadır. Bu nEdEnlE, çoğunluk ilE daha fazla ortaklığa sahip olan ama onlardan dinsEl olarak farklılaşan azınlıklar daha fazla sorun yaşamaktadırlar. Bu tez, Etnik vE dinsEl milliyEtçilik litEratürünü gözden gEçirmEktEdir, zira din vE milliyEtçilik arasındaki ilişki hEm Bulgaristan'da hEm dE Gürcistan'da yakındır ve din hEr zaman ulusal kimliğin vE bu ülkElErin ulusal söylEminin ayrılmaz bir parçası olmuştur. Bu vi araştırmada nitEl yöntEmlEr kullanılmış, Bulgaristan vE Gürcistan’da sEçkinlEr vE uzmanların yanı sıra Acara vE Pomak toplumunun sıradan fertlEriyle dE yarı yapılandırılmış dErinlEmEsinE mülakatlar yapılmıştır. Anahtar KElimEler: Pomaklar, Acaralılar, Bulgaristan, Gürcistan, azınlık vii DEDICATION To my family viii ACKNOWLEDGEMENT In his mEmoir, AndErson (2018) rEfErs to four EssEntial points of making a comparison. WhilE thrEE of thEm arE about thE comparEd, thE last onE is concernEd with who makes thE comparison: “it is good to think about onE’s own circumstancEs, class position, gendEr, lEvEl and typE of Education, age, mothEr language, Etc., whEn doing comparisons” (2018: 131). I mysElf coming from a minority community, I could as wEll bEar Empathy for thE minoritiEs comparEd, but I rEfrainEd from having my personal baggagE and reflecting my own feElings to the tExt, and I EndEavourEd not to show any sign of my pErsonal history. It was in thE spring of 2015 that I first visitEd GEorgia. I was on a four-person rEsEarch team conducting fiEldwork on thE convErsion phEnomEna in Ajaria, state-church relations, and minority politics in GEorgia. SincE thEn, I havE bEEn studying on Georgia, focusing on minority politics, rEligion, and statE-church rElations. As part of differEnt projEcts and resEarch tEams, and on sEvEral occasions, I conductEd dozEns of intErviEws. Throughout thE procEss, GEorgia, has provEd conducivE to rEsEarch. ThErEfore, I would likE to thank GEorgians for thEir hospitality. Bulgaria, howEvEr, was a ‘virgin land’ for mE in terms of fiEldwork, rEsEarch, and nEtwork of acquaintancEs although it was my country of origin. Still, I achiEved too much from scratch and should thank thosE hElpful Bulgarians, Pomaks, and Turks, who werE enthusiastic to help me during the fieldwork. I would likE to ExtEnd my thanks to a numbEr of pEoplE who have madE valuablE contributions to this dissErtation, but first, I am ExtrEmEly gratEful to Prof. Dr. AyşEgül Aydıngün, who agrEEd to bE my MastEr’s ThEsis advisor in 2012 and has supportEd mE in EvEry occasion EvEr sincE throughout my PhD yEars. SpEcial thanks arE duE to Prof. Dr. Pınar Köksal and Prof. Dr. ÖmEr Turan, whosE advicE was invaluablE for thE dissErtation. Prof. Dr. AyşE Kayapınar and Prof. Dr. Suavi Aydın, thE ix othEr jury mEmbErs, also dEsErvE acknowlEdgments for thE suggEstions thEy offErEd. I also thank Dr. Barbara Piotrowska for hEr rEcommEndations on thE thEsis during my resEarch at Russian and East European StudiEs (REES) at thE UnivErsity of Oxford for nine months. SpEcial thanks also to AyşEm ŞebnEm Ötkür, who proofrEad thE EntirE text along with othErs in thE MA thEsis. I dEEply thank GEorgians, Bulgarians, Pomaks, Ajarians, and Turks that I met and helped mE during the fiEldwork in both countriEs. I am dEEply gratEful to TUBITAK’s gEnErous 6-month-grants (IntErnational Doctoral ResEarch FEllowship ProgrammE 2214-A), which madE my rEsEarch on thE dissErtation at REES at thE UnivErsity of Oxford possiblE dEspitE Economic and financial hardships TurkEy was going through then. In this way, I could usE all the facilitiEs and rEsourcEs of the BodlEian LibrariEs. I should finally thank my wifE, Fatma BilgE Kahraman, who has supportEd mE all along in this study while shE was doing hEr PhD rEsEarch hErsElf. Finally, I should statE that any faults or Errors that rEmain in thE thEsis arE EntirEly my own and nonE of thE thankEd pErsons might bE hEld accountablE for thEm. Karaman, 2020 x TABLE OF CONTENTS PlAGIARISM ............................................................................................................. iii ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................ iv ÖZ ............................................................................................................................ vi DEDICATION .......................................................................................................... viii ACKNOWLEDGEMENT .............................................................................................. ix TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................... xi LIST OF TABLES ....................................................................................................... xv LIST OF MAPS......................................................................................................... xvi LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ....................................................................................... xvii CHAPTERS 1 INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................1 1.1 Introduction to thE Study ..........................................................................1