Sina Akşin Perspective Problems of Turkish History

My Teacher and Father

Prof. Dr. Sina Akşin (1937) is my teacher from Mülkiye.

The late Pilgrim was born a year after my father.

Although they lived in the same period, there was never a chance for the two lives to intersect.  Born in The Hague/Netherlands, my teacher graduated from Robert College in 1955 and Istanbul Faculty of Law in 1959, while my father, who was born in the Küre Mountains, could only learn to read and write in the military.

My Teacher's Father and Bekbam (My Grandfather)

"Atatürk's Foreign Policy Principles and Diplomacy." [i]  The author, retired ambassador Aptülahat Akşin (1892-1974) is the father of my teacher.

Bekba'm Hasan is the father of my father and is the brother of three martyrs, one of whom was a martyr of Çanakkale. While he himself was conscripted into the army at the age of 16, he turned away due to the end of the War of Independence. He is a Little Veteran.

My teacher's father made history, Bekbam made history.

Like a Brief History of Turkey...

Those who make history and those who write it are from separate classes.

 My Teacher and Me

While my teacher was doing his graduate studies at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy in the USA and teaching History of Civilization at the Department of Human Sciences at Robert College College in 1961-67, I was not even born yet. 

The year I was born (1968), he completed his doctorate.

It was only the first year of my life when I entered the Chair of Turkish Political Life at Ankara University Faculty of Political Sciences in 1969.

When my teacher became an associate professor in 1975, we had not yet immigrated to Istanbul.

Perhaps our names were reminiscent of a certain geography, Sinai was the name of the Desert between Israel and Egypt, where the Jews of Egypt disappeared for 40 years.

Selahattin is the name of the just Sultan who ruled both sides of this desert.

Intersection-Property Years[ii]

 When my teacher received the title of professor in 1989, I was a second-year student in Mülkiye.

He said he would gift a book to the student who would get the highest grade in the class. He must have promised to give this to a friend named Mete. Because when I went to his room to get the book I deserved, he was indifferent at first, then he kept his promise, he signed a book of a book and gave me my award a little reluctantly. He presented a volume of the History of Turkey, which was 3 volumes at that time. That book has now become 5 volumes.

I was proud to receive my award, albeit belatedly.

It was just like the joy I felt when I was the only candidate who won the assistantship science exam in Mülkiye in 1991...

If my late father had not said, "Let them not say that the Son of Yakup Master has become a teacher, you should be the Governor", perhaps we would have breathed the same academic environment as my Sina teacher. 

If my memory does not force me, he became our teacher during my master's degree in 1992. I think it was the first seven years of the Republic.

A Brief History of Turkey

Sina Akşin's book "A Brief History of Turkey" was published in its 25th and final edition in May 2018 by Türkiye İş Bankası Kültür Yayınları.[iii]

On the cover of the book, there is a picture of the Battle of Sakarya Square.

Eser; It is an alternative to the concise Turkish political history books put forward by historians such as Feroz Ahmad, Bernard Lewis and Erik Jan Zurcher.

The method followed by Akşin in these chapters, just like the previous ones, is aimed at consolidating historical knowledge with a conceptual background. Thanks to this method he followed, the reader not only learned about a history of about 200 years chronologically, but also fed with arguments that could discuss the period.

The work consists of five main chapters and thirty-four titles.

There are four headings in the Introduction section of the work. In the following sections of this chapter, where the history of the Turks until Islamization is summarized, Akşin touches on the topics and concepts that can enable us to better comprehend the content of the book; provides the reader with a perspective on the classical Ottoman political and social order.

I'm just going to take a critical approach to this part of the book.

The criticism I present as a question of perspective never overshadows the contributions of my esteemed professor to the science of history and especially to our recent history.

In his own words, data and facts are framed, not tried to be hidden, but interpretation can be made differently for everyone. I will use this right.

He gave the most striking example of this himself: Akşin framed an important fact for those years by mentioning in his book Sultan Vahdettin's dialogue in which he conveyed to Mustafa Kemal Pasha his hopes that he would save the country. However, he based his interpretation on the treachery of the Sultan.

He saw it as a shame to hide the truth. And the interpretation is a requirement of freedom... The last one was his interpretation.

Constitutionality and Union and Progress

Akşin Kolağası treats Niyazi Bey's  ascent to the mountain in Manastır as the beginning of the Second Constitutional Period. This also points to the origin of the founding cadres of the Republic of Turkey. 

The leader of the constitutional movement explains the Committee of Union and Progress with five components:

Turkism, youth, being from the class of rulers, schooling, being with a bourgeois (Western) mentality.

To this can be added the component of being a man.

Akşin, who says that the Committee of Union and Progress is based on the cell organization model of the Italian Carbonari Masonic Organization, remembers his students very well that he was in a persistent search for an Egyptian princess to refute the thesis that the Society was not a female member, perhaps to prove that he had no contact and affiliation with the Masonic organization other than the structural similarity of the Society.

My teacher explains in his own commentary that the component of being a bourgeois mindset is parenthetized by me as being Western-minded: "The concepts of imperialism and exploitation introduced by the Marxist Alexander Helpand, who was the advisor of the Committee of Union  and Progress" show the importance of not being a Liberalist or a Marxist, but of being a Westerner, albeit with different views. Perhaps this brings a  memory of a family or clan affiliation.

Three Homelands of the Turks

In his book, Akşin Hoca has identified three homelands for Turks: the first homeland is the North of China, the second homeland is Turkestan, and the third homeland is Anatolia and the Balkans. Let's look at the propositions in order: 

"The first appearance of the Turks on the stage of history was with the Hun Empire. The dates of occurrence and last invention given for this establishment are 220 BC and 216 AD. There is something that emerges from these dates. That is that the Turks have appeared on the stage of history "late". In other words, the Turks are a relatively "young" people in this respect...  Although the region where the Hun Rule originated (the 1st homeland) is called "Central Asia" in our country, it is actually the region in the north of China."

This perspective is a reflection of a Western perspective. This verdict, which was given without determining the relationship of the Sumerians, Hittites, Trojans, Lydians, Thracian tribes and Scythians with the Turks, is both incomplete and wrong. The Scythians, Thracians and Sumerians played a key role in the Motherland.  As a matter of fact, this issue began to take place in the article: "Since the Scythians (Saka) are still the subject of debate from the point of view of Turkish history, it is one of the most important views accepted today to start the written Turkish history with the Asian Hun State. According to the available sources and data, it can be said that the Huns were the first fully formed Turkish state in history.  But this situation cannot make us ignore the Scythians in the panorama of Turkish history."[iv]

Marking a "late" nation without adding to history the nations mentioned, especially the Scythians who held Anatolia before the Greeks and Persians, which have been proven by DNA experiments that they are 82 percent descendants of the Turks and Turkmens, has no function other than to disturb the Turks in their original homeland.

Perhaps the homeland of the Central Asian Turks is Mesopotamia, Eastern Europe and Anatolia.

The components of the Anatolian Turks will be made the subject of a separate article. 

Akşin Hocam briefly summarizes the pre-Ottoman Turkish history: "After the dissolution of the Hun Sultanate, the Turkish tribes did not go to the top organization for a long time. In 552 AD, the Göktürk Reign was established in the region, which was the 1st homeland of the Turks, and lasted until 745. An important feature that distinguishes the Göktürks from the Huns is the appearance of writing very close to the end of the Göktürks period (Ötüken, 730).  With the first migrations, the first four main states were established a little west of the 1st homeland of the Turks: the Uyghurs (745-940). There was writing among the Uyghurs, there were cities, there was agriculture.  With the migration of some Turkish tribes to the west even more, the Turks 2. They came to their homeland. This place was roughly east of the Caspian Sea, south of the Aral Lake. It is also known as Maveraünnehri. The Turks here gradually began to convert to Islam between 900-1150. Three important states were established: the Qarakhanids (940-1211), the Ghaznavids (963-1186), the Great Seljuks (1038-1157). We see an important beginning of literature during the Qarakhanid period. In 1070, Yusuf Has Hacip's Kutadgu Bilig appeared, and in 1074, Mahmud of Kashgar's Divanü Lûgat-it-Türk appeared. With the great Seljuks and the victory of Malazgirt, we see that the migration of the Oghuz Turks to Anatolia and Rumelia, the 3rd homeland, began. The first Turkish state in Anatolia was the Anatolian Seljuk State (1077-1308). It seems more plausible that Turks have largely integrated with the local population through marriage, acceptance of Islam, recruitment, and slavery. The fact that the Turks do not resemble their Central Asian compatriots much and that the Turks of Turkey do not have uniform physical characteristics among themselves seems to be evidence of this meddling. However, regardless of racial status, the fact that Turkish has become the common language of Anatolia, even partially absorbing Christians, can be considered an important link that connects this people to Central Asia."

However, this approach drew the first written source of the Turks to thousands of years ago. However, the Göktürk inscriptions of 1500 years ago destroyed this prejudiced view.

History is comparative.

For example, how many years old is the first written source of the British?

If it is hieroglyphic writing, is Turkish tamgas also acceptable as writing?

While English is a new language in itself, does its appearance on the stage of late history prejudice His power of expression?

Where would a nation be without the migration of tribes? Where is the homeland of the Spaniards?

A Note on the Ages of History

 "According to the understanding that is especially prevalent in France and which has influenced us, the ages of history (that is, the history of mankind after the publication of writing) are divided into four:

-3000 BC-476 AD (Fall of Western Rome): Antiquity;

-476-l453: Middle Ages;

-1453-1789: New Age;

Post-1789: Late Age or Near-Age." The Andalusian Iberian island of tomorrow will never fit into this ranking. Just like the geography of Seljuk and Ottoman Turkey... 

Akşin Hoca, while weighing the ages with Western patterns, proposes an era of history that is not parallel for the Turks: "220 BC-1071 AD: Antiquity;

1071–1839: Middle Ages;

1839-1908: New Age;

After 1908: Late Age or Recent Age.

I think such a distinction is meaningful in terms of pointing to the stages of social organization of the Turks of Turkey: Antiquity is the period of nomadic animal husbandry of the Turks. The Middle Ages was the period of transition of the Turks to settlement, agriculture and peasantry. The New Age shows that a step towards Westernization and the rule of law has been taken seriously. The Recent Age indicates the point at which the Turks of Turkey turned to widespread urbanization and capitalism."

First of all, it is far from explicable to start the first age of a Nation that weaved the Pazirik Carpet 2500 years ago almost 2,500 years later. Expecting a positive discrimination in terms of Turkish history would be a two-sided erroneous expectation and dream. However, this provision is incompatible with reality and is not objective. If comparing the Middle Ages of a nation in which Istanbul, the most populous and civilized city in history, was the capital, with the Middle Ages of Europe, the latter stands closer to the first years of the first age. 

Since the book is a Brief History of Turkey, the relations of the Turks of Turkey with the Sumer civilizations that found the writing, Lydia who found the money, Scythian who tamed the horse, and the Hittite civilizations that invented the chariot cannot be ignored. Just as today's Western civilization was formed with the grafting on ancient Greece, Turkish civilization flourished in Central Eurasia with the vaccination of Kipchak, Karluk and the most intense Oghuz Turks in Anatolia, the Caucasus and the Balkans. Undoubtedly, the lifeblood of this civilization is Islam and it has placed the Turkish and Muslim analogy in the Southwest of Eurasia.

The German economist Fritz Neumark also addresses the historian Sina Hoxha: [v]"The Turks are not very aware, but the Europeans are aware of this fact. If Turks are removed from history, there will be no such thing as history."

"No People Has the Right to Be a Slave"

Sina Teacher's reference to the main currents of ideas (Islamism, Garpism, Turkism, Socialism) in the Second Constitutional Period under subheadings allows us to understand the general ideological content of the period.  Since Turkism is preferred among these four currents, the preferred ideology should benefit Turks the most.

The judgment that[vi] "No People Has the Right to Be a Slave"  that he quoted from Mahmoud Assad in an interview was made for the Great Turkish People.

Since this slavery includes economic, cultural and historical humiliation as well as being a prisoner or a slave, the liberation of the Turkish people necessitates a welfare society, cultural development and intellectual enlightenment.

Making History Is Just As Important as Making History

However, as M. Kemal Atatürk stated: "Writing history is as important as making history. If the writer does not remain faithful to the doer, the unchanging truth will take on a character that will surprise humanity."[vii]

It turns out that history-makers and history-makers belong to different classes.  It is time for those who make history to make history.

 "Whose Homeland Is It?"

Orhan Ş., one of the poets of the homeland, the son of the Western Black Sea, who grew up in the clean lands of our people who made history and always remained at the peaks of making history. In one of his poems, Gökyay states who this homeland is:[viii]

"This land belongs to those who stand like mountain ranges in the black bosom of the land, who have given themselves to history for the sake of it throughout history."

Akşin makes the following observation at one point: "Niyazi Berkes is standing on a quote by Ziya Gökalp. When Gökalp compares the madrasas with the Enderun School in Topkapı Palace, where the children continue to become high administrators, Gökalp points out that the former took the non-Turk and made them Turks, while the latter took the Turk and turned them into non-Turks (Arabs). Indeed, while the language of the administration and Enderun School was Turkish, the language of science and madrasa was Arabic. From our point of view , the oddities do not end there. In a country that proclaimed to be based on religion, those who were Jadjaded Muslims were not involved in military service and administration, but the child of a Christian family ruled the fate of that country."

Yiğit Martyr's Father[ix]

I don't remember what year it was, it could have been in the mid-90s. I was going to Istanbul via Osmancık, Tosya and Gerede. I crossed the Kargı turnoff and saw the man standing on the side of the road raising his hand.

I think it was the end of autumn and it was about to get dark. He saluted, took off his helmet and got into the car... *We met... Halil Kendirci forty-five; perhaps he was a very tall, brunette man in his fifties. We talked from the right and the left... He pointed out a road detour before he reached Tosya." God bless me there." There was no house in sight, no light in the distance... *I asked, "Where are you going?" I'll walk in the village ahead." My heart did not agree, so I decided to take it. No way... I insisted. He agreed.*We went a long way... We climbed a winding raw road to the village, leaning against the slope of a hill. I stopped, he didn't get off...*"I won't leave without a cup of tea," he said... I agreed.* Otherwise he would have suffered a crush; I know he would be upset. The Anatolian peasant said...*"Aha ev bura"... Surrounded by high adobe walls, the sash door of the house was pushed open. I parked the car in the large courtyard, next to the tractor. It looked like a wealthy house.On both sides of the two-story whitewashed house there were stretching porches, and in the depths of the porches there were closed spaces such as barns and haystacks.* He welcomed in. I entered a large room. Obviously, it was the guest room... It was a spacious space.*It was equipped with carpeted cedar on three sides and pillows covered with cedar carpets... New rugs were laid on the floor. There were framed large and small photographs on the walls. These were soldier photographs. The room smelled of lavender...*The crunchy and sweet warmth of the wood stove that was burned so that you would get cold: It was milking mercy from an unknown land... My childhood memories were enveloping me with a subtle melal...*Halil Kendirci was happy. It was obvious from every situation... I am smiling with thick eyebrows almost adjacent to each other, a whisker, and a deep cut mark that descends from the right temple I just noticed to the earlobe; he was coming in and out of the room. He was obviously giving instructions to the household for food...*I was very, very pleased to be a guest.*He offered whatever God gave... We ate and drank the tea. We smoked cigarettes. The time had come. It was time to say goodbye...*I left unanswered the insistence that "it would be nice if you stayed, you would go in the morning". I really had to go. Otherwise I would have stayed.*Just as I was leaving the room, I pointed to the soldier's photograph placed between the two windows." Your son?"" Yes," he said... *He opened the winged door and I started the car. I went up to the front of the house and we got off and embraced. I asked: "When is the child discharged?" he paused for a moment, and said in a low voice: "Life has fallen a martyr in Ağrı, it is three months"... And he added: "He was my only son..." *I stayed. I'm stuck.I'm broken. I felt small.*It was as if I had eaten a Sürmene wedge on my chest...*The wealth of tolerance and heart he showed to hide his pain had devastated me.*What a noble thing it is not to mention a son who was martyred during a meeting and conversation that lasted about six or seven hours?.. What kind of soul glory is this?*Anadolu: Baba was also full...*I was crying as I walked away. At one point I looked in the rearview mirror. With the smack of the full moon hitting from behind: Halil Kendirci was waving like an eagle that would soon take wings and fly... *His imposing shadow: He was loading from the mountains of Ilgaz to the Taurus. It has fallen into the Mediterranean...