I. Session: The Influence of Ottoman and Turkish Perception in Balkan States’ Nation Building Processes / Chair: Aydın Babuna

Dimitar V. Atanassov,- “Nation-building processes in the Balkans: a non-canonical interpretation”

The paper aims to offer a different interpretation of the processes, lead to the formation of the nations in the Balkans.

Local historiographies insist on the viewpoint, that the period of XIX c. should be regarded as "National Revival", because according to the predominant representation the Ottoman conquest lead to decline of group consciousness amongst local peoples, so it was "revived" during XIX c. Therefore, the pivot figures of the secular education movement were considered as "people, who waked the group up". It is stated, that they didn't create new form of collective cohesion project, but re-activated and upgraded the ethnic consciousness, dating from the Middle Aged, relating that way the XIX c. actuality to the historical "Golden Era": in the Greek national projects it was Hellenic culture, spread over Byzantine map and combined with the Orthodoxy; in the Bulgarian ones the link took to the time of late IX and early X c., when the state was regarded as "stretched to three seas"; Serbian example was tied to the mid XIV c. - the time of "Stephan Dushan's kingdom".

Marxist historiography based its interpretation of the process of nation building on the concepts of the economy, and particularly on the idea of accumulation of capital. Key analytical instruments were conflict model, explaining social development, formation theory and class struggle.

Having into consideration history of thinking the national essentiality, a series of deficits could be underlined. From one side, the dynamics of the dictionary, harnessed to deliver an explanation of the group identity construction, is not taken into account. Non-flexible vocabulary is used mainly, being based on static meanings of terminology. It is particular for nationalistic and Marxist historiography, but not only for these two paradigms. Social depth of the analysis is also not represented: it is carried out "from the peoples position" without taking into consideration the idea, that the authentic speakers of the peoples were elites, and in historiography the sound of the epoch belongs to the medium figure of the researcher. The last one originates several key myths: from one side, it is the myth, representing the nation as ideologically homogeneous collective; from the other, it creates an illusion for non-mediated access to the past reality.

The questions set about nation construction processes remains still open. The paper is focused on history of the projects for group identity from the Late Middle Ages to XIX c., taking into account the Ottoman context of the history and in interpreting the problem nowadays, including all the variety of attitudes towards it.

Anna Alexieva,-“Bulgarian National Culture: Debates during the National Revival Period. "Ex-centrism", "ego-centrism", Ottoman Context”

The paper is focused on the problem of conceptualization of the National Culture,  which took place during the second half of XIX c. Those period coincided with so called National Revival Epoch - an emotional concept, particular for Bulgarian popular and academic publicity. The analyis is based on the key notions "ego-centric nationalism" and "ex-centric nationalism", forged by Nickolay Trubetskoy. The intellectuals, which followed the conception of the "ex-centric nationalism", used to imagine the national culture representations in accordance with the images of the French culture, dominant that time. Intelligentsia, related to the concepts of the "ego-centric nationalism", insisted on the representation of national culture as having its own center, and could be defined as oriented to the ideas set of the autochtonism. Thus, the second group is famous with initiatives, related to folklore researches and popularizing the medieval heritage, regarded as "Golden Era".

These two ideological tendencies are marked with one initial paradox. From one side, national cultural policy making emerged in the context of so called National Revival period as an intellectual instrument to establish symbolical distance between the national essentiality and the Ottoman heritage, using Russian culture, the cultures of the Western Europe, or of the local "authenticity" and "peoples' tradition" as they were accessible through accessible representations of them. From the other side, these debates were born during the Tanzimat era as direct outcome of the modernization projects, which were taking place in the Ottoman Empire that time: a context, where so called National Revival Epoch was installed. There is one more paradox: these discussions remained underpresented and distanced from the mass cultural taste. Peoples' attitudes towards the image of the national culture, incompatible with the visions by the intelligentsia, neglected the options for civilization orientation and struggles for national essentiality, keeping on numerous Ottoman key cultural elements.

Danilo Serenac,- “The Final Push Against the Eternal Enemy : The Serbian Preparations for the First Balkan War”

The First Balkan War has been perceived in Serbia as the most popular war ever fought in the national history. The contemporary Serbian elite saw it as the crucial step in the long history of the Serb-Ottoman struggle. From 1889 until 1912 the Serbian army had developed more than ten offensive plans against the Ottoman Empire. Moreover, the preparations for the “final war against the Ottoman-Turkish enemy” meant mobilizing all segments of Serbian society. In the first decade of the 20^th century there was no Serbian political party that didn’t stress the need for an urgent liberation of the so called Serbian “historic lands”. Similarly, there was no school in which pupils were not thought of how importance it was to continue the liberation struggle. The decades of preparations created conditions for complete national fever which culminated in October of 1912. The war’ euphoria proves to be a very insightful moment for studying the way how the Serbian society perceived the Ottoman Empire since the moment when it obtained its independence in 1878. However, the long preparations for the immanent war have also been of great use when studying the inner phenomena of the Serbian society such as demographical change and military-civil relations.

Adriana Cupcea, “Approaches of the Turkish and Tatar Identity in Dobruja (Romania) throughout the 20th Century: From Religious Community to Ethnic Community”

I approached this study following the assertion of Maria Todorova that in all fields (cultural, social and economic), except the demography and folklore, the break with the Ottoman heritage as a continuity occurred immediately after the independence of the Balkan states and was completed at the end of WWI. The conclusion of Todorova is that in fact the most important part of the Ottoman heritage can be detected in the demographical field, and that actually only the ethnic and religious diversity can be considered as traces of a common continuous heritage.

Thus, in my study I approached Turkish and Tatar communities in Dobruja (Romania) as part of this specificity of the Balkans. Using the text analysis (literary and  journalistic), combined with the field research (semi structured interviews, life histories, participant observation) and documentary research I tried to identify the political, economic, cultural  and social factors that have determined, through the 20th Century, the evolution of the collective mentality of the Muslim Turks and Tatars in Dobruja, from perceiving themselves as a religious community to the present self-perception as ethnic communities. Finally I tried to identify the present overlays between the two hypostases (religious and ethnic), in the collective imaginary of the Turkish and Tatar Muslims in Dobruja.

Ledia Dushku,” Provisional Government of Vlora, Deottomanization Process and the Albanian society”

The Declaration of Independence and the establishment of the Albanian state placed the institutions and their organization into a new political, legal and administrative reality, different from the one they had operated in so far. Despite the provisional legitimacy Ismail Kemal Vlora’s government focused on fundamental governance issues- three of them were: Building centralized secular systems, the creation of a military force and the establishment of economic institutions. These efforts can be considered as the beginning of a long deottomanization and state formation process which the Albanians had to go through.

Building centralized secular systems is considered as an important initiative for Albania at that time, which aimed at abolishing the heterogeneity and force of religious authority as a leading, organizing and fragmentary power within the new state. Albanians had to have a secular perception of their own state, which could not belong to any particular religion, but to everyone. This would lead to the creation and deployment of the state’s authority over the whole of society.

Initially, secularization was projected into the justice system. On 5^th May 1913 the provisional government adopted the Canon of Jury, which was a combination of European principles of law with Ottoman Sheriat Law. Secondly, since 30^th August 1913, mastery of the Albanian language was set as an essential prerequisite in the new state administration for all existing employees and newcomers who wished to work in state institutions. Thirdly, the Provisional Government of Vlora aimed to extend secularism in education. Minister, Gurakuqi was seriously committed in this process.

Despite the will and concrete measures of the provisional government of Vlora, the process of secularism generally remained on paper. Besides the difficult political situation in which the government worked, the reasons should be sought in the backwardness of the Albanian society, the lack of experience in organizing life around national institutions, lack of cultivating Albanian as a written language, the insufficiency of human and material infrastructure. Tradition and heritage of a religious form of organization and the Ottoman State imperial system was rooted in the Albanians’ life, behavior, feeling and psychology. It could not disappear only by drafting the legal framework and during a short period of time. The Albanians’ adaptation to  the process of replacing or changing traditions, ideas, worshipping system, ecclesiastical organization and their relationship with their state, would prove to be a long-lasting difficult process.

 

II. Session: Ottoman and Turkish Image in Balkan Literature and Historiographies / Chair: Büşra Ersanlı

Genciana Abazi-Egro,- “On Concept of Turk in 18^th Century Albanian Literature“

In the Albanian literature of the 18^th century, the terms Turk (Albanian turk) and Turkishness (Albanian turqëri) had a specific usage linked directly with the relations established by Albanians with the Ottoman Empire and Islam as the religious backbone of this political state formation.

In his Albanian Divan, written in the first decade of the 18^th century, Nezim Berati sees the world as divided into Turq (Muslims) and Kaurrë (Christians). In this religious perception of the world, he denominates the community of Muslim believers as Turqëri, a word coined in the Albanian language from the name Turk with the suffix - ri commonly used in Albanian for the formation of collective nouns. 

Poet Hasan Zyko Kamberi (XVIII cent.) uses also the term Turk to denominate all Muslim believers, without distinction in time and space. Turks is the term used for Muslim believers at the time of Prophet Muhammad, during the wars of the second caliph ‘Umar and also for the Muslim contemporaries of the poet. 

The usage in the 18^th century Albanian of the words Turk and Turqëri to denote the Muslim believers and the religious faith of the Muslims, Islam, is closely linked with the experience of Albanians with this faith and directly with the phenomenon of their first contacts with this religion and the form in which it was institutionalized, beginning from the second half of the 14^th century. It is a well known historical fact that this process of institutionalization began to be implemented with the arrival of the Ottoman armies at Albanian territories and the ever more intensive contacts of Albanians with the Ottoman state and with the Ottoman Turks, in particular.

Dritan Egro, “The Perception and Image of the Ottomans and Turks in Official Books of Albanian History”

One of the most complicated issues of Albanian modern historiography is the attitude to Ottoman period in general, and to terms Turk and Ottoman in particular. Debates related to this issues started since the first half of the 20^th century, but especially after the Second World War, it gained an severe ideological character.

In official books of national history, written during the communist period (1^st edition in ‘50ies and 2^nd edition in ‘80ies), the Ottoman Empire and Turks become responsible for Albanian national backwardness.

After the change of political regime at the beginning of ‘90ies, Albanian historians began to reflect on different issues of Ottoman period. In the last edition of History of Albanians  (vol. I-II, 2002) the term Turk was replaced by Ottoman.

Thalia Dragonas, “The Turks are good?”: Greeks constructing the national ‘other’

Anna Frangoudaki, “The image of Ottomans and Turks in Greek School History”

The 1980’s mark important transformations, as regards the consolidation of a democratic Greek society and its adaptation to European principles and values.  School history is streamlined according to such an orientation and does away with the cultivation of negative feelings towards neighboring countries and the rest of the European peoples. Hence, all explicit negative references or derogatory evaluations of the Ottoman Empire and the Turkish Republic were removed from history textbooks. Nevertheless, school history, all through primary and secondary education, has retained a strongly ethnocentric approach. As a result, Greek history holds the principal position in the historical narration, and with few exceptions (such as for example the French Revolution), the history of other states and peoples is mentioned only in relevance to the Greeks across time. Thus, the only aspects of the historiography of the Ottoman Empire and that of the Turkish Republic, featuring in history textbooks, are those that relate to the history of Greeks.  Therefore, the history of the Empire appears as fragmented and partial. It is only mentioned as regards its military power, and the battles with Greece from the War of Independence onwards.  The civilization and culture silenced leaves children with the impression that the Empire lacked such properties. The same holds true for the history of the Turkish Republic.  Children come across very little, if any, information regarding contemporary Turkey. These findings will be discussed through a sociological and psychosocial analysis.

Ramiza Smajić, “Perception of the terms "Turkish" and "Ottoman" in the post-Yugoslav period in the Balkans”

Yugoslav socialist historiography has left large white patches in painting a very extensive sphere of life of the people. One of these patches represents a historiographical production related to the Ottoman period. During the research of topics about the adequacy of the use of terms that occur through the processing of the Ottoman period, I noticed a number of technical errors and seemingly casual and continuous practice in preference to anachronisms. In addition to the questionable use of the term "occupation" for almost five centuries of Ottoman rule over a large area of the Balkans, the most common example of illogic lies in the use of the terms "Ottoman", "Turkish" and "Turk". While it was a result of the influence of Western authors, governments and their administrative vocabulary at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries, today it is a kind of weapon in the expression of revulsion and minimization of everything that applies to Islam and Muslims. Despite the effort and argumentation of one part of researchers, we notice conscious ideological attitude and perseverance in the appointment of Muslim people as Turks, regardless of their ethnic and national citizenship. In contrast, the Muslim nations are experiencing a new meaning of "turcisation" in the sense of alienation from the Islamic tradition. This presentation I want to give an overview of the perception of such terms, using a multidisciplinary approach, through science, everyday life, music and others.

 

III. Session: Impact of Ottoman Heritage in Relations between Turkey and Balkan States / Chair: Zuhal Mert Uzuner

Emanuel Plopeanu,- “Turkey neutrality as seen by the Axis. Romanian hopes and Turkish influences (1939-1944)”

The special features of Turkish neutrality are very well known. Turkey situation was not similar with that of other neutrals countries, as Sweden and Switzerland, first of all because of the very close presence, at the borders, of the Axis and United Nations Powers.

For Romania, Turkish situation was perceived in three main directions: as a source of hope, since Turkish diplomats never ceased to express their belief into Axis victory and Soviet Union defeat (but only into discussions with Romanian diplomats); in internal respect, Romanian diplomats largely reported the war constraints for the Turkish economy and society and the measures adopted for diminishing them; as another source of hope, especially since 1943, as Turkey became a passage route for the Romanian talks for a separate peace, with United Nations Allies, especially United Kingdom and United States of America.

We will try to highlight these three main directions, using especially unpublished Romanian documents.

Metin Ömer,- “Perceptions of the Turkish Emigration from Dobruja to Anatolia in the Bucharest-Ankara Interwar Relations”

Undoubtedly, emigration was one of the most important processes that have marked the history of the Turks and Tartars from Romania. Part of the Ottoman Empire since the XV^th century, Dobrudja has gathered over time an important population of Turks and Tatars. After 1878 when they became subjects of a state with totally different traditions than the Ottoman ones, Turks and Tatars started to seek ways to protect their interests. This concern has generated much debate among intellectuals supporting the emigration to Anatolia and those who opposed leaving Dobrudja. Even though those that have continued living in Dobrudja after 1878 were under Romanian rule, the cultural and historical ties with the Ottoman state and then with the Turkish Republic continued to influence the main developments of the community.

The scale of emigration transformed this issue in a major point of discussion in the relation between the two countries. Interestingly, the Romanian officials did not support the emigration process in their talks with their Turkish counterparts. However, some of the measures taken in the region contradicted the official attitude. Turkish state also did not have a coherent policy regarding the emigration from Romania to Turkey. There were moments when Ankara tried to stop this process but there were also some moments when it was encouraged the settlement of Turks from Dobrudja to Anatolia.

In our paper we try to analyze the importance of the emigration for the Romanian state, Turkish state and the Dobrudja Turkish community. We will try to reveal the real reasons that encouraged one part or another to sustain or stop the process of emigration. 

Antoanela Petkovska, “Macedonia in the Interaction between the European and the Ottoman Heritage”

The complexity of the epistemological structure for studying the processes in culture, the cultural dynamics, the intercultural communication, the development of cultural identity, necessitates the use of diachronic as well as the synchronic approach. This perspective in the sociological discourse of culture prevents the dangers of misbalance between the mythologized and real interactive dialectics of phenomena in building the identities and causes for their systematic determination.

The discursive historical and actual framework of the Macedonian culture is based on the cultural pluralism built on myriad of processes of cultural contacts, which took place on its own territory, very much like in its neighborhood as well. The cultural heritage of Macedonia, for the most part, was established through the following contexts: the ancient-Mediterranean complex, Byzantium (Christianity), Slavic culture, the ottoman period (orientalism and Islam), and the socialist narrative after the Second World War. On the other hand, the regional and global movements and integrations which characterized the twentieth and the beginning of the twenty-first century brought to the Macedonian cultural scene quite a few values from the western civilization, particularly Europe.

This diachronic and multicultural, geographical and civilizational positioning of Macedonian society is reflected in the nature of its recent value structures which are generally divided between the East and the West, the Christian and Islamic civilization, tradition and modernity, liberalism and traditionalism. In the “rethinking” of its own tradition and national-cultural heritage, in the Republic of Macedonia, there is a clash of identities which are either against the ottoman-Islamic, oriental and patriarchal tradition, or the socialist ideological model.

There is also a collision between two different conceptualizations of the cultural heritage regarding its historical origin: “the Slavic” against the “ancient Macedonian” version and vice versa. The reminiscences of the ottoman past and its cultural traces are significantly present in the Macedonian folklore and customs which makes the ottoman cultural heritage not only considerable but also an acceptable part of Macedonian culture generally. There is of course, on the other hand, a critical attitude towards these oriental-cultural links on behalf of the European cultural values. These cultural dilemmas are embedded in the relations between the Republic of Macedonia and the Republic of Turkey: they both see each other in the light of the mutual “ottoman past” but at the same time they transcend this connection towards a cooperation based on values and principles of the western world.

Sanja Arezina, “Turkish Foreign Policy towards Serbia in the context of Current International and Regional Trends”

Modern developments in the geopolitical scene of Southeast Europe, and thus of the former Yugoslav states, actualized the presence and role of Turkey whose position has substantially changed since the 1970s and 1980s, and its presence has become far more noticeable due to existing geopolitical interests. As multidimensionality becomes the characteristic of its foreign policy, Turkey is becoming more active on the Eurasian geopolitical scene, trying to establish itself as (macro)regional power in the process of creating a multipolar world order. Serbia comes into focus of Turkey’s foreign policy as a key state in the Balkans that represents, in addition to the Middle East and the Caucasus, its primary sphere of influence and a bridge to the West and in which Turkey carries out visible political, economic and cultural impact. This paper is focused on research of certain international and regional trends that influence the foreign policy of Turkey and its modality of cooperation with the Balkan countries and Serbia in particular.