The Republican Revolution: From an 'Invisible' Turkish Nation to a 'Nation-State'

In Turkish public opinion, and particularly among some of the intelligentsia, there are two interconnected theses—or rather, two assumptions—regarding nation-building and the nation-state. The first is that the Turks' most recent political unity and state was the Ottoman Empire, and that this empire was not a national state, nor did it have a national community behind it. The second, derived from the first, posits that the most fundamental task facing the Republic of Turkey was the idea of creating a nation.

This article aims to open a discussion on the problematic and invalid nature of both these theses. In this context, it will first briefly touch upon the theoretical basis for the emergence of nation-building and the nation-state, followed by the theoretical infrastructure behind the formation of a new state based on the Turkish nation following the liquidation of the Ottoman Empire. Subsequently, indicators of the existence of the concept of 'Turkishness' in the Western world will be summarized. Finally, under Atatürk's guidance, the cultural infrastructure of how the 'invisible' Turkish nation was transformed into a 'visible' Turkish state will be examined.

How Did the Concepts of Nation-Building and the Nation Emerge?

The concepts of nation-building and the nation spread throughout the world, particularly in the 18th and 19th centuries.

The birth of the idea of the nation in a political sense emerged largely in the 18th century with the Enlightenment and the French Revolution. A nation can be defined as a community of citizens who possess a common political will and live under the same sovereignty.

The nation-state model is based on a model of defined territory, centralized administration, common citizenship, and a single legal system. Nationalism is an idea that aims to unite all classes, groups, and identities, and in this respect, it is an equalizing and egalitarian concept. 

Ernest Gellner(1), who has original approaches to nationalism and the nation, also bases his understanding of the nation-building process on two premises: one cultural and the other based on will.

Accordingly, Ernest Gellner defines nationalism primarily as a principle that envisions the congruence of the political unit and the national unit. Gellner also explains the socio-economic origin of nationalism as follows: "The most fundamental structural characteristic of an agrarian society is that it is fragmented and multi-layered. People lived largely in communities; the vast majority never left the place where they were born. The individual's encounter with the state was very rare, and community leaders acted as a kind of intermediary between the state and the individual. Based on this, he interprets national identity and the nation as a new and contemporary phenomenon created by the industrial revolution."he characterized it as.

Gellner states that nationalism emerges in societies with states, and adds: "If there is no state, it is clear that there can be no issue of whether its borders coincide with the borders of the nation. Since there are no rulers when there is no state, it is not asked whether the rulers and the ruled are of the same nation"he says.

------------------------------------------

 (1) Hasan Aksakal, 2011. Some Observations on Ernest Gellner's Theory of Nationalism. Yalova Journal of Social Sciences, issue 2, p. 1 https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/800206

Ernest Gellner, 2018. Nations and Nationalism. Hil Publishing, Istanbul

According to this interpretation, it can be said that the liquidation of feudalism and the transition to industrial societies through the formation of states also enabled the emergence of nation-based states by facilitating the production of goods and services at higher levels and the realization of marketing opportunities.

Why Did the Search for a Nation-State Emerge in the Ottoman Empire?

During the disintegration process of the Ottoman Empire in the early 20th century, the question of which political path to follow was debated.

In this context, one of the prominent thinkers, Yusuf Akçura, in 1904 in Cairo "Turk" published in the newspaper titled "Three Styles of Politics" (2) analyzed the different approaches followed to strengthen the Ottoman Empire in his article.

The first of the propositions discussed in "Three Styles of Politics" ("Üç Tarz-ı Siyaset") is "Ottomanism," which aimed to unite all nations within the borders of the Ottoman Empire (Turks, Arabs, Greeks, Armenians, etc.) on the basis of equal citizenship. The second is"Islamism,"

which is defined as the idea of uniting all Muslims around the Caliphate. The third is Turkism.

This approach, which emerged as a reaction to the failure of the first two, advocates for the Turkish nation to become the primary subject of the state. "Turkism"is. Turkism is the creation of a national state based on Turkish identity.

According to Akçura, there is no such thing as an Ottoman nation. It is impossible to create one. This is because nationalism-based uprisings in the Balkans had already begun, and the Bulgarians and Greeks had already established their own states. It is also impossible to realize Islamism.

The only remaining option is a national Turkish policy based on the Turkish race, or more accurately, the Turkish nation.

Another famous thinker of Turkish nationalism is Ziya Gökalp(3). According to him, the character of societies is not hereditary but is shaped through culture and education. For this reason, he was opposed to nationalism based on racial foundations. Gökalp's approach involved an effort to reach a synthesis by blending the unique moral and cultural values of Turkish society with certain values adopted from the West. "Turkify, Islamize, Modernize" In this approach, which he summarized as such, the cultural element was Turkism, and the moral element was Islam. He placed folk literature in opposition to palace literature. He adopted the understanding of positive science that enabled the West's technological and scientific development. He viewed religion as a supplementary element in ensuring social unity.

---------------------------------------------------------------

(2) Yusuf Akçura, 1991. Three Types of Politics. Atatürk Supreme Council for Culture, Language and History. Turkish Historical Society Publications VII. Series - No. 73b

(3) Ziya Gökalp, 2016. Turkification, Islamization, Modernization, Toker Publications. Ziya Gökalp, 2018. The Principles of Turkism, Kapra Publications.

The approaches to Turkism expressed by Yusuf Akçura and Ziya Gökalp, despite the differences between them, became the most significant intellectual movements that played a role in the success of the subsequent National Struggle and the organization of the Republic.

Who Was the Dominant Lineage Among the Human Communities That Formed the Ottoman State?

The human society that formed the Ottoman State was, of course, not composed of a single “lineage”. The Ottoman Empire was a multi-national, multi-ethnic, and multi-religious empire. 

However, the origin of the founding core element is the Oghuz Turks. The Oghuz formed the main body of the Turkish communities that migrated to Anatolia in the 11th–13th centuries. The origin of the Ottoman Dynasty also traces back to the Oghuz Turks who came from Central Asia.

However, there were also different peoples in Anatolia, where the Ottoman Empire was founded. Among these were the Greek communities remaining from the Byzantine era, Armenians, Assyrians, Kurds, and Arabs. As the Ottoman Empire expanded, Bosniaks, Albanians, Serbs, Bulgarians, and Jews (especially those who arrived from Spain after 1492) in the Balkans and other regions were incorporated into the imperial structure.

Consequently, the founding core of the state and the lineage of the dynasty were Oghuz Turks.

What Were the Official Language and the Language of the People in the Ottoman Empire?

The official language of the Ottoman Empire was Ottoman Turkish, which contained grammatical rules and vocabulary from Arabic and Persian (4). This language was used as the official language within the vast Ottoman bureaucracy. Beyond the Turks, minorities and Arabs were required to use Ottoman Turkish, the state's official language, in official matters with the government.

With the Tanzimat reforms, the dominance of Arabic and Persian in written works in Ottoman Turkish would be reduced, and Turkish would also become a language of science.

The language spoken by the majority of the people in Anatolia and the Balkans was also Turkish. It can be said that the language spoken in Arabia, North Africa, Iraq, and other countries was Arabic. In other regions under the state's sovereignty, minorities used their own languages.

However, because the founding core lineage of the state was Oghuz Turks and they constituted the majority of the population, Turkish was the dominant language in the Ottoman geography.

What Was Literature Like in the Ottoman Empire?

Ottoman literature consisted of various genres. Divan literature (5), folk literature (6), and Sufi literature were the significant branches of Ottoman literature. 

-----------------------------------------------------

(4)https://islamansiklopedisi.org.tr/osmanli-turkcesi

(5)https://islamansiklopedisi.org.tr/divan-edebiyati

Divan literature was the most prominent branch of Ottoman literature. Fuzuli, Baki, Nedim, and Şeyh Galip were the most important poets of Divan literature. These poets produced works on both religious and secular subjects.

Folk literature was another significant branch of Ottoman literature. Folk poets reflected daily life, the emotions of the people, and their attitudes toward the state in their native language, Turkish. Yunus Emre, Pir Sultan Abdal, and Karacaoğlan were important representatives of folk literature.

It can be stated here that Divan literature was an elitist literature, and its sphere of influence was limited in terms of population.

For this reason, folk literature, which reflected daily life, the emotions of the people, and their attitudes toward the state, has survived to the present day and served as a source for contemporary Turkish literature. Its reflections are observed not only in literature but in all branches of culture, from music to the fine arts. 

Ottoman literature changed over time, and in the 19th century, Western influence began to affect it. Contemporary literary movements transformed traditional literature.

How Did the Western World Characterize Ottoman Society?

The Christian Western world first encountered the Turks at a state level in 1071, following the defeat of the Eastern Roman Empire, alongside the Western Huns. However, the first Turkish state they later encountered during the Crusades was the Anatolian Seljuks. The conquest of Istanbul in 1453 became a turning point in relations between the Western world and the Turks. From this date onward, they were forced to continuously retreat into Europe in the face of the Turks. The Turkish army had set out to conquer Europe, taking Belgrade and Budapest, and had reached the gates of Vienna.

As the Turkish army advanced toward the West, feelings of admiration and the belief that their power could not be contained emerged among Europeans. For example;  "Turquerie" fashion was revived, and nobles had portraits painted of themselves wearing Turkish clothing. At the same time, Turks were also portrayed as cowardly, overly proud, rude, lazy, ignorant, and cruel tyrants who wanted to destroy Christians.

Europe also used the "Turkish Identity," which it viewed as a threat, to define its own identity and establish its unity. "Turkish Identity"of a "other"has felt the need to be perceived as such. European history cannot be written independently of Turkish history, starting from the Great Seljuk Empire, the Anatolian and Syrian Seljuk States, the Ottoman Empire, and even the modern Republic of Turkey.

In this context, the word 'Turk,' which was used synonymously with the word 'Muslim,' led to the perception of Islam as the dominant component of Turkish identity. Thus, it is observed that the Turkish presence contributed not only to the formation of a Christian European unity but also to the construction of a common consciousness. This situation revealed two sides of a conflict that would continue for many centuries on the basis of Turkishness.

-------------------------------------------------

 (6) Nâzım H. Polat, The Perspective of Ottoman Period Literary Histories on Folk Literature https://www.millifolklordergisi.com/PdfViewer.aspx?Sayi=99&Page=12

All of this served as a basis for the acceptance that the communities defined as lineages in the Ottoman Empire period and in the geography where this state held sovereignty were of Turkish descent.

Numerous examples can be given as evidence for this (7):

• In addition to the Crusades, the Papacy organized against the Turks to resist the Ottoman conquests in the West.

• In maps prepared in Europe, the territories of the Ottoman Empire are written as "The Turkish Empire".

• Ottoman sultans are described as "The Turkish Emperor". 

• Travelogue writers, ambassadors, and Western statesmen referred to the communities living in these lands as "Turkish" .

• Turkish designations are also observed in music and the fine arts. The name of the work composed by Mozart is not "Ottoman March" but "Turkish March" . 

• In many languages and countries, the name 'Turk' appears in racist words, idioms, and proverbs related not to the Ottomans, but specifically to the Turks.

• The West did not call it “Devlet-İ Aliyye” (The Sublime State), but rather “Turkey.” Depending on the Western language in which the state's name was written, it was “Turquie”, “Turkey” , “Turchia”  or “Türkei” and as explained above, the empire was referred to as “Turkish Empire” .

• In the Ottoman Empire, the name of the state  was used as "Devlet-İ Aliyye"(8), however  the definition of  "The Great Ottoman State" (Devlet-İ Aliyye-yi Osmaniye) was established in the 19th century. Nevertheless, there was no change in its official name, and it remained as "Devlet-İ Aliyye". In international correspondence and in the Turkish translations of agreements made with foreign countries, "Devlet-İ Aliyye" term exists.

The transformation of the invisible Turkish nation into a visible Turkish state under Atatürk's guidance

During the Ottoman Empire, Turks experienced a loss of identity. The pre-Islamic history of the Turks, the civilizations they created, their origins in Asia, and their migration from there had been erased from collective memory and forgotten. For this reason, under Atatürk's guidance, the prioritization of cultural and educational policies, alongside political-economic practices, became the most important issues in the transformation of the invisible Turkish nation into a visible Turkish state. The primary practices and institutions implemented in this direction were: “Unification of education (March 3, 1924), adoption of the new Turkish alphabet (November 1, 1928), establishment of the Turkish Language and Historical Societies (1931-1932), reorganization of university education - secularization of education (May 31, 1933), and innovations in the fine arts.” have been.

------------------------------------------------------

 (7) Mustafa Kaymakçı, 2021, Orientalism, Philhellenism and Turkocratia. In: Mustafa Kaymakçı, Cihan Özgün, Nilüfer Erdem (Eds.), The Image of the Turk in Greek Perception (Origins and Cultural Ways Out for Friendship), Publications of the Rhodes, Kos and Dodecanese Turks Culture and Solidarity Association, İzmir.

(8) https://www.haberalp.com/osmanli-ismi-ilk-defa-ne-zaman-kullanildi

Efforts to make the Turkish cultural identity visible and sovereign were, as mentioned, carried out with the establishment of the Turkish Language Association and the Turkish Historical Society.

Atatürk summarized the purpose of the Turkish Historical Society as follows: “To study, research, promote, disseminate, and publish works on Turkish history, the history of Turkey, and related subjects, including the contributions of Turks to civilization, through scientific methods, and based on these, to write the history of the Turks and the history of Turkey.” Because “(In the West) there is the notion that Turks belong to a yellow race, are a second-class race compared to Europeans, that Turks lack civilized qualities, and there are historical claims over Turkish lands” he said. Atatürk noted that this view  “The Eastern Question” was a product of a colonial policy aimed at partitioning the Ottoman Empire, and he pointed out that its foundation lay in the fact that the history of the 'ummah' (religious community) had been dominant from the establishment of the Empire, which was based on Islamic principles, until the Tanzimat era.

The purpose of the Turkish Language Association, also founded by Atatürk, can be defined as: "To conduct science-based research on the written and oral sources of the Turkish language, and to operate with the mission of ensuring the development of Turkish as a language of science, art, literature, and education, and its correct usage in every field"(10) Scientific studies have been and continue to be conducted toward this goal, aiming to purify the written Turkish language of loanwords and grammatical rules taken from languages such as Arabic, Persian, and French, and to bring it closer to the spoken language.

Conclusion

In the first of the two most important functions of the Republic, established under Atatürk's leadership following the National War of Independence, the transition from subjecthood to citizenship was ensured; in the second, efforts were made to implement regulations toward establishing a Turkish Republic that would make the Turkish cultural identity visible and sovereign.

According to Atatürk, these two functions were a sociological and political necessity. This was because, in terms of population majority, the dominant ethnicity in the lands liberated from the yoke of imperialism was Turkish, and the native language was Turkish. Furthermore, the era was the age of nation-states.

The work accomplished by the Republic under Atatürk's leadership was not, as some have incorrectly assessed even if with good intentions, to create a nation that did not exist. It was to make the Turkish identity and culture, which constituted the vast majority at the founding of the state, visible. Because a nation cannot be created from nothing, nor can it be destroyed if it exists.

----------------------------------------------------

(9) https://belleten.gov.tr/tam-metin/1840/tur

 (10)https://ataturkansiklopedisi.gov.tr/detay/413/T%C3%BCrk-Dil-Kurumu

Our final word is this: As written in Atatürk's “Civil Knowledge and the Handwritten Notes of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk” book,  “The people of Turkey who founded the Republic of Turkey are called the Turkish Nation” this determination will continue to shed light on the Republic of Turkey in the future, just as it does today.

What some political approaches put forward The validity of "Neo-Ottomanism" is non-existent from both a sociological and political perspective.