CAS_WTP_Bilmez

8/7/2019 CAS_WTP_Bilmez

1/27

This text presents the unpublished result of research carried out a t CAS. It has not undergone language editing and is not to be cited.

Blent BilmezWe, the People fellow 2004 2005

MYTHS OF ORIGIN AND AUTOCHTHONY INSHEMSEDDIN SAMI FRASHRIS (1850-1904) TEXTS

CONTRIBUTING TO THE CONSTRUCTIONOF BOTH ALBANIAN AND TURKISH WES.

I) Introduction

This paper deals with some representative texts of anOttoman intellectual , ShemseddinSami Frashri (1850-1904), who has simultaneously been represented in contemporaryTurkey and Albania as one of the fathers of Turkish and Albanian nationalisms,respectively.1 Accordingly, he is known with two different names in these countries:Sami Frashri in Albania and emseddin ( emsettin) Samiin Turkey. In order to avoid partisanship in this question, either his full name (as in the title) or the short versionSamiwill be used in this paper.The intended multi-layered analysis of some of Samis texts, which contributed to thediscursive construction of two national identities, will be based on thecontextualisation of them through a brief biography of the texts2 and of their author,i.e. through an account of the authors life, the story of their productions, and the milieuthey were produced within.The text corpus of this project, the reason for the choice of which will be discussed below, consists of three texts by Sami:1- a Turkish article published in Samis own journal Hafta in 1881 in Istanbul,3 2- the preface (fade-i Meram) of his monolingual Turkish dictionary Kamus-i Turkiin1900 in Istanbul,4 and3- his much disputed Albanian book Shqipria, published in 1899 in Bucharest withoutthe name of the publisher.5 It must be stated, however, that the main focus in the latter book will be on its first partwhich consists of rather a mythological general history of the Albanians and Albania.The reason of this focus is that, this part shares with the other two texts similar thematicand theoretical framework, which makes a comparative analysis of all three textsmeaningful. It is also worth noting that these texts have been canonized through beingcounted among the initial texts contributing to the emergence of the national(istic)discourse in both cases; and that they indeed contain pioneering ideas presented with arevolutionary rhetoric.

II) Contextualisation: Sami and his texts

1 In accordance with the Albanian and Turkish historiography and with some Western scholars, the terms Albanianismmaybe used here for Albanian nationalism, andTurkismfor the Turkish nationalism without anythorough discussion of these terms.2 Tom Quirk, Introduction, in James Barbour & Tom Quirk, ed., Biographies of Books: The Compositional Histories of Notable American Writings, University of Missouri Press, 1995, 1-10.3 emseddin Sami, Lisan- Trki (Osmani) [Turkish (Ottoman) Language], Hafta, Istanbul, 12, 10 Zilhicce 1298(03 November 1881), 177-181.4 emseddin Sami, Kamus-i Trki, Istanbul:kdam Matbaas , 1317-1318 [1900].5 Shqipria. ka qn, sht e do t bhet? Mendime pr shptimin e mmdheut nga rreziqet q e kan

rrethuar , Bukeresht, (publisher and the author not indicated), 1899.

1


2/27


One could find accounts of Samis life and works in many secondary sources (includingsome encyclopaedia entries) in Western languages. However they must be read withcaution, because there is much contradictory factual information on concrete issues, asmany aspects in his life have not yet been systematically studied. Writing acomprehensive and accurate account of his life and works is still an unfulfilled duty,which can not be even attempted to be accomplished here. Therefore, only theinformation about his intellectual and political activities on which there is consensus inthe historiography will be summarized here.6Known as one of the most productive members of the Ottoman intelligentsia of the lastquarter of the nineteenth century due to his writings as a linguist, lexicographer, novelistand playwright, Sami was born in 1850 in Frashr, a small village in the district of Berat,in the south of todays Albania, then a bigger village in the province of Yanya (Gr.:Ionnina) in the Ottoman Empire. He was from a Bektashi family, the members of whichwould become the most prominent personalities of the Albanian nationalist movementafter the San Stefano Treaty (1878), following the defeat of the Ottoman Armies in theOttoman-Russian War of 1877-78.Finishing initial education in traditional institutions in his village, after the death of hisfather he moved together with his family to Yanya where he attended the famous Greek secondary school, Zossimea.7 There he must have undergone a kind of epistemological break through the acquisition of modern ideas and scientific knowledge, and learningWestern languages (French, Italian, and ancient and modern Greek) besides improvinghis already existing oriental languages (Ottoman Turkish, Persian and Arabic). Hismother tongue was Albanian, which had not had a written tradition yet, and to theevolution of which he and other intellectuals would later contribute.It was this firm educational background that helped him after his move to Istanbul, thestill intellectual, cultural and political, as well as the administrative centre of the

Empire, to make a successful career as a journalist and writer (novelist,8

translator 9

and playwright10) within a short time in the 1870s: He was already quite well known whenhe started publishing his own newspapers, firstSabah (Morning) in 1876, and later Tercman- ark (Interpreter of Truth) in 1878. His main reputation in his time,however, was based on his six-volume universal encyclopaedia in Ottoman Turkish and

6 For an earlier article underlining different contradictory issues about Samis life in the historiography, seeBilmez Blent Can, lmnn Yznc Y ldnmnde emsedin Sami Frashri,Toplumsal Tarih, No 126(Haziran), 2004, Istanbul, 50-55.7 The essential role of this school in the intellectual and political formation of Sami has unfortunately not beenstudied yet.8 His only published novel (The Love Affair of Talat and Fitnat) published in 1872 has often beenacknowledged as the first modern Turkish novel in Turkey:emseddin Sami,Taa uk- Talat ve Fitnat , ElcevaipMatbaas , 1289 [1872].9 For his published partial and complete translations See [Madame de Saint Ouen,]Tarih-i Mcmel-i Fransa, 1.cz, transl.,. Sami,stanbul: Caml handa, 1289 [1872]; [Jean Pierre Claris de Florian,]Galatee, transl.,. Sami,stanbul: Zartaryan Fabrikas , 1290 [1873]; htiyar Onba , Be fas l facia, transl., . Sami, Istanbul: ZartaryanFabrikas , 1290 [1873]; [Fredrick Souli,] eytan n Yadigarlar , transl., . Sami, stanbul: Mihran Matbaas ,1295 [1878]; Victor Hugo,Sefiller , transl., . Sami, Istanbul: Mihran Matbaas , 1297 [1880] (it was later re- published in the Turkish Republic as well: Victor Hugo,Sefiller , 2 Vol., (Transl.: . Sami), (2nd edition), CihanKtphanesi, 1934); Daniel de Foe, Robinson, transl.:. Sami, Istanbul: Mihran Matbaas , 1302 [1884]; Bakinin E ar- Mntehabesi, ed. and transl.,. Sami, (Ktphane-i Mntehabat, Aded: 1) Mahmut Bey Matbaas , 1317[1899] and Ali bin Ebi Tal ib, Kerremallah Vechahu ve Radiyallah anh Efendimizin E ar- Mntahabeleri ve erh Tercemesi, (Ktphane-i Mntehabat, Aded: 2), ed. and transl.,. Sami,stanbul: 52 Numaral Matbaa, 1319[1901].10 For his published theatre plays, see. Sami, Besa yahud ahde vefa. Alti Fasildan ibaret facia, (Matbuat-

Ceyyide, Aded: 1),stanbul: Tasvir-i Efkar Matbaas , 1292 AH [1875];. Sami,Seydi Yahya, Be Fas ldan baret Facia, (Matbuat- Ceyyide, Aded: 2), Istanbul, Tasvir-i Efkar Matbaas , 1292 AH [1875] and. Sami,Gave, Be Fas ldan baret Facia, (Matbuat- Ceyyide, Aded: 3), Istanbul: Tasvir-i Efkar Matbaas , 1293 [1876].

2


3/27


monolingual (Turkish-Turkish)11 and bilingual (French-Turkish12 and Turkish-French13)dictionaries, and his writings in the press on Turkish language and literature in theOttoman Empire, and on many other issues like the position of women,14 literature,languages and linguistics.15 He is also known through his writings on Islam and Islamiccivilization with moderate Pan-Islamist tendencies, where he was trying to offer amodernist interpretation of Islam and its history, to prove that Islam is not incompatiblewith modern (Western) civilisation, and to promote the brotherhood among Muslims.16It has been suggested in modern Turkey that Sami dealt with the Albanian questiononly through his writings in the press during the time of the Prizren League (1878-81).The fact that Sami actively took part in the Albanian nationalist movement until the endof his life17 has always been neglected or denied. However, Sami was the chair of the Albanian Committeein Istanbul from the beginning of the 1880s,18 as has beencommonly stated in the Albanian historiography. The Albanian SocietyShoqria e t Shtypuri Shkronja Shqip(Society for Publishing in the Albanian Language) was re-organized illegally on the initiative of Sami in Istanbul to support the Albanianmovement and to promote the publication of Albanian works.19 A common letter dated04 August 1882 was signed by many prominent Albanian intellectuals in Istanbulincluding Sami, who was indicated as the chair of the Albanian Society in Istanbul.20 It is also well known that Sami was actively involved in the efforts of getting licence for

11 emseddin Sami, Kamus-i Trki, Istanbul:kdam Matbaas , 1317-1318 [1900].12 emseddin Sami, Kamus-i Fransevi, Frans zcadan Trkeye Lgat , Istanbul: Mihran Matbaas , 1299 [1882].For later editions, seeemseddin Sami, Kamus-i Fransevi, Frans zcadan Trkeye Lgat , (2nd ed.), Istanbul,Mihran Matbaas , 1315 [1898];emseddin Sami, Resimli Kamus-i Fransevi, (3rd ed.), Istanbul, Mihran Matbaas ,1318 [1901] andemseddin Sami, Resimli Kamus-i Fransevi, (4th ed.), Istanbul, Mihran Matbaas , 1322 [1905].13 emseddin Sami, Kamus-i Fransevi, Trkeden Frans zcaya Lgat , Istanbul: Mihran Matbaas , 1302 [1885]

and . Sami, Kk Kamus-i Fransevi, Trkeden Frans

zcaya Lgat , Istanbul: Mihran Matbaas

, 1304 [1886].14 emseddin Sami, Kad nlar , (Cep Ktphanesi, Aded: 3), Istanbul: Mihran Matbaas , 1296 [1879]. For a later edition see, emseddin Sami, Kad nlar , (Cep Ktphanesi, Aded: 3), (2nd ed.), Istanbul: Mihran Matbaas , 1311[1894]. For a later publication with modern Turkish alphabet, seeemseddin Sami, Kad nlar , transcribed bysmailDoan, Ankara: Gndoan, 1996.15 emseddin Sami, Lisan, (Cep Ktphanesi, Aded: 27), Istanbul: Mihran Matbaas , 1303 [1886];emseddin Sami,Usul-i Tenkit ve Tertip, (Cep Ktphanesi, Aded: 32), 1303 [1886];emseddin Sami,Tasrifat-i Arabiye, irket-iMrettibiye Matbaas , 1304 [1886];emseddin Sami, Nev Usul Sarf-i Trki, Istanbul:irket-i Mrettibiye Matbaas ,1308 [1890];emseddin Sami,Yeni Usul Elifba-i Trki, (Medrese-i Etfal, Aded: 1), Istanbul: Asadoryan Matbaas ,1308 [1891] andemseddin Sami,Tatbikat- Arabiye, Istanbul, 1318 [1899].16 On Pan-Islamism and/or Islamism as a project for a supra-national identity in the late Ottoman Empire, see Azmizcan, Pan-Islamizm. Osmanl Devleti, Hindistan Mslmanlar ve ngiltere (1877-1914), Istanbul: ISAM, 1992;Cezmi Eraslan, II. Abdlhamid ve slam Birli i, stanbul: tken, 1995; Jacob M. Landau,The Politics of Pan- Islamism. Ideology and Organisation, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994 and Mmtazer Trkne,Siyasi deoloji olarak slamc l n Do u u, Ankara: Lotus Yay nevi, 2005. For Samis books that can be taken as clear indicators of moderate Pan-Islamism in him, see his Ottoman Turkish book (emseddin Sami,Medeniyyet- i slamiyye, (CepKtphanesi, Aded: 1), Istanbul: Mihran Matbaas , 1296 [1879]) and another book in Arabic. Sami, Himmet-ul- Himam fi Ne r-il- slam, Istanbul: Mihran Matbaas , 1302 [1885]. For the reprint of the first book, seeemseddinSami, Medeniyyet- i slamiyye, (Cep Ktphanesi, Aded: 1), (2nd ed.), Istanbul: Mihran Matbaas , 1302 [1885]; andfor a later edition in modern Turkish alphabet, seeemseddin Sami,Medeniyyet- i slamiyye, (Transcription by RemziDemir), Ankara: Gndoan, 1996. For the translation of the latter into Albanian, see Sami Frashri, Prhapja e Islamizmit , (Transl., Miftar Ajdini), Prizren, 1989; and into Turkish, seeemseddin Sami, slamiyetin Yay lmas inYap lan al malar , (Transl., Remzi Demir), Ankara: Gndoan, 1997.17 See the letter of Jani Vreto (1822-1900) sent to Sotir Kolea (1872-1945) on 23 October 1893. (Arkivi Qendror iShtetit (Central State Archive), F. [Fondi/Stock] 54, D. [Dosja/File] 70, fl. [fleta/page] 59-68). Also see the text of his speech at a meeting on 14/27 January 1896 in the Albanian society Dituri in Bucharest. (Arkivi Qendror iShtetit, F. 21, D. 3, fl. 5-9).18 See the letter of Thimi Mitko in Egypt to Jeronim de Rada in Italy sent on 14/27 June 1880. Arkivi Qendror iShtetit, F. 24, D. 54/6, fl. 186-187, the quotation is from fl. 186b.19

Kristo Frashri, emseddin Sami Frashri Ideolog i Levizjes Kombtare Shqiptare,Studime Historike, No 2,1967, 79-94, 88.20 Arkivi Qendror i Shtetit, F. 51, D. 6, fl. 2b.

3


4/27


opening Albanian schools in 1885-87.21 Sami pursued his activities as a nationalistAlbanian intellectual through his leadership of an illegal Albanian association, the Albanian Committeein Istanbul up to the 1890s: Only the Society of Istanbul, changedtowards the end of the century into an Albanian Committee, still under the leadershipof Sami Frashri, continued to carry on its activity clandestinely.22 Sami also kept hisorganic relations with Albanian nationalist circles abroad to the end of 1890s.23 It wasthrough these relations that his Albanian books were published in Bucharest24 andSofia25 during his life time. As mentioned above, he was also one of the publishers of thefirst Albanian periodical, Drita, in Istanbul in 1884, which in 1885 changed its name to Dituria from the fifth to the twelfth, and last, issue.It must be emphasised, however, that an overwhelming majority of Samis writings arein Turkish, mainly either on common issues aimed at general Ottoman readership or onOttoman Turkish literature and linguistic issues.

The biographies of the analyzed texts and their canonizationThe most important contribution to the canonization of SamisTurkish texts in question(i.e. the Turkish article in Hafta and the preface of Kamus-i Turki) came from thestatements on these texts made by of some prominent Turkish nationalist scholars.26 Itwas these Turkish texts that were chosen to be published as appendices in themonographs on Sami or as selections from his writings in the general Turkishanthologies. Examples of such publications of Samis writings based on selective perception will be shown below.These Turkish texts of Sami have been portrayed in the Turkish historiography of thetwentieth century as two early manifestations of Turkish (cultural) nationalism in the previous century because they emphasize that the common language in the Empire is notOttoman, but Turkish. Although this may sound very clear today, it was a pioneering

revisionist suggestion for that time, contributing directly to the emergence of Turkishnationalism.27 After his work as a translator, author and editor in the Ottoman-Turkish press and after the publication of abovementioned short-lived newspapersSabah and Tercman- ark in Istanbul of the 1870s, Sami published his first magazine Aile[Family] in 1880, whichhad to cease only after the third issue. After this family magazine mainly aimed atwomen, Sami published in 1881 the weekly periodical Hafta, which continued for five

21 Vissar Dodani,Memoriet e Mija. Kujtime Nga Shvillimet e Para e Rilindjes t Kombit Shqipetar Nde Bukuresht ,Albania: Constantza, 1930. See also, Kristo Frashri,emseddin Sami Frashri Ideolog i Levizjes KombtareShqiptare,Studime Historike, No 2, 1967, 79-94, 86.22 Kristo Frashri,The History of Albania (A Brief History), Tirana, 1964, 152. See also, Kristo Frashri,emseddinSami Frashri Ideolog, 88. Samis role as a chair of this committee continued until October 1900. (Kristo Frashri,emseddin Sami Frashri Ideolog, 92)23 A small part of Samis correspondence with the Albanian nationalist circles in Diaspora was published in Vissar Dodani, Memoriet e Mija, 32-35, 43, 45-47.24 For his Albanian works published in Bucharest, see S. H. F., Abetare e Gjuhs Shqip, Bukuresht: Drita, 1886;S. H. F., Shkronjetore e gjhuse shqip, Bukuresht: Drita, 1886; S. H. F.,Dheshkronj , Bukuresht: Dituri, 1888; S.H. F., Abetare e Gjuhs Shqip, (2nd ed.), Bukuresht: Drita, 1888; and S. H. F., Abetare e Gjuhs Shqip, (3rd ed.),Bukuresht: Drita, 1900.25 For the Albanian translation of one of his dramas published in Sofia, see Sami Bej Frasheri, Besa, Dram meGjasht Pamje, (Transl.: Ab A.[bdyl] Ypi Kolonja), Sofj: Shtypshkronja Mbrothsia, Kristo P. Luarasi, 1901.26 See, for example, mer Faruk Akn, emseddin Sami, slam Ansiklopedisi, Vol 11, Eskiehir: Anadoluniversitesi Gzel Sanatlar Fakltesi 1997 [1967], 411-422, 416; Agah S rr Levend, emsedin Sami, Ankara: Trk Dil Kurumu Yay nlar , 1969; Etem al k, emseddin Sami ve Medeniyet-i slamiyye, Istanbul:nsan Yay nlar , 1996;mer Faruk Akn, Hayat , Eserleri, Trkle Hizmetleri ve Kamus-i Trki ileemseddin Sami, inemseddin Sami,

Kamus-i Trki, (Ed.: mer Faruk Akn, Istanbul: Alfa, 1998, 1-32, 27; andecaattin Tural, emsettin Sami, Istanbul:ule Yay nlar , 1999, 28.27 David Kushner,The Rise of Turkish nationalism, 1876-1908, London : Cass, 1977, 8-9.

4


5/27


6/27


transcribed into modern Turkish alphabet and published in a number of periodicals38 andanthologies39 and as an appendix to some books written on Sami.40 In this essay, it isimportant to take this preface into account, because it was published almost in the sameyear as the Albanian book, whereas his article in question was published almost 20 yearsearlier. Hence, a consideration of these texts is of interest in answering the question of whether Sami changed his attitude in the texts written during this long period.Samis much disputed Albanian book Shqipria, on the other hand, which is the onlyAlbanian text (96 pages) in the main text corpus of this study, was published in 1899, inBucharest without the name of the author and publisher.41 Samis authorship of this book has usually been rejected in Turkey, and never been disputed in Albania and Europe, and provides the theme for a separate article.42 I have also dealt elsewhere with the history of the publication of different editions of this book in different languages43 to conclude thatSami is the author of the book, the first edition of which was published by the AlbanianassociationShoqria Dituria(Society of Knowledge) in Bucharest, Romania.The book started to be canonised already in the first years after its publication.44 Indeed, the main work by Sami used in the construction of his mythologized image inAlbania has always been and still is this book, because it has always been seen as (oneof) the first manifesto(s) of Albanian political nationalism foreseeing an Albanianstate.The book was re-published once in Bulgaria in 1907,45 once in 1919 in the USA46 andseveral times in Albania.47 It was also translated into Turkish and published by Shahin

38 See, for example,emseddin Sami Kamus-i Trkinin nsz, (Bugnk Dile eviren: mer As m Aksoy),Trk Dili, Ankara, Vol. 43, No 355 (Temmuz 1981), 30-35.; Kamus-i Trkinin nsznden - I,Trk Edebiyat ,(Sadeletiren: Mertol Tulum),stanbul, No 141 (Temmuz), 1985, 18-19; Kamus-i Trkinin nsznden - II,Trk Edebiyat , (Sadeletiren: Mertol Tulum), stanbul, No 142 (Austos), 1985, 70-71 and Kamus-i Trkininnsznden - III,Trk Edebiyat , (Sadeletiren: Mertol Tulum),stanbul, No 143 (Eyll) 1985, 63-64.39

See, for example, Hizarc

, Tanzimat Edebiyat

Antolojisi, 105-106;kr Elin & Muhtar Tevfikolu, YeniTrk Nesiri Antolojisi, Ankara: Kltr ve Turizm Bakanl Yay nlar , 1987, 23-26; Hseyin Tuncer, Aray lar Devri Trk Edebiyat 1: Tanzimat Edebiyat , zmir: Akademi Kitabevi, 1994, 359-366; andemsettin Kutlu,Tanzimat Dnemi Trk Edebiyat Antolojisi, stanbul: Remzi Kitabevi, 1981, 308-310.40 See, for example, Levend,emsedin Sami, 172-185; al k, emseddin Sami, 87-99 and Tural,emsettin Sami,87-100.41 Shqipria. ka qn. Below, it will sometimes be referred to this Albanian book shortly as the book or Shqiperia.42 Blent Bilmez, emsettin Sami ve Sak ncal bir Kitapla ilgili Tart malarda Milliyeti Retorik,Mteferrika,29 (2006/1), Istanbul, 2006, 45-87.43 Bulent Bilmez New Findings on Some Open Questions in the History of the Disputed Book of ShemseddinSami Frashri:Shqipria (1899), Seminari Ndrkombtar pr Gjuhn, Letrsin dhe Kulturn Shqiptare, XVI (August 2004), Prishtina, Kosovo, 2005 and Blent Bilmez, emsetin Sami mi Yazd bu Kitab ? Yazar Tart mal Bir Kitap: Arnavutluk Neydi, Nedir ve Ne Olacak?,Tarih ve Toplum Yeni Yakla mlar , No 1 (Bahar)2005, 97-145.44 For the praise of the book and a long quotation in the Albanian press of that time, see Drita, no 1, 1/14.11.1901,1.45 Sami Frashri,Shqipria. ka qn, sht e do t bhet? Mendime pr shptimin e mmdheut nga rreziqet q e kan rrethuar , (Pershtypje e Dyte), Sofje: Mborthesia, 1907.46 Sami Frashri,Shqipria. ka qn, sht e do t bhet?, Worcester, 1919.47 See, for example, Sami Frashri,Shqipria. ka qn, sht e do t bhet? Mendime pr shptimin emmdheut nga rreziqet q e kan rrethuar , (Botim i Gjasht), Tiran: Botonjs Luarasi, date unavailable; SamiBej Frashri,Shqipria. ka qn, sht e do t bhet? Mendime pr shptimin e mmdheut nga rreziqet q e kan rrethuar , (Prshtypje e Tret [Third edition]), Tiran: Mbrothsia Kristo Luarasi, 1923/1924. (On thecover, where it is clearly stated that this is the third edition, the publication year is given as 1924, whereas on the back of the title page it is stated as 1923); Sami Frashri, Shqipria: ka Qen, sht e do t Bhet?, (Po botojm nga ky libr i sami Frashrit disa pjes), Zeri popullit , 13 qershor, 1950; Sami Frashri,Shqipria. kaqn, sht e do t bhet? Mendime pr shptimin e mmdheut nga rreziqet q e kan rrethuar , Tirana, 1962;Sami Frashri,Shqipria. ka qn, sht e do t bhet? Mendime pr shptimin e mmdheut nga rreziqet q

e kan rrethuar (Biblieteka e Nxnsit), Tirane: Shtpia e Botuese e Librit Shkollor, 1980; Sami Frashri,Shqipria. ka qn, sht e do t bhet? Mendime pr shptimin e mmdheut nga rreziqet q e kanrrethuar, (Reprint of Sami1899a), in Idem, Vepra 2, (Ed.: Xholi, Z.; Dodi, A.; Prifti, K.; Pulaha S. & ollaku

6


7/27


Kolonja, in Albanian alphabet as a series in the Albanian periodical Drita (in Sofia), between 19 November 1904 (No 53) and 9 August 1906 (No 82).48 This translation was published in Sofia in 1907 by Kolonja as a book, this time in Ottoman-Turkishalphabet.49 The German translation by A. Traxler published in 1913 was based on thisTurkish version.50 Besides, a very long summary in German was given in a later articleon this book by Klaus Lange in 1975.51 There are also an unpublished Greek manuscript,a partial translation without a date, by Fan Noli,52 another partial translation published inthe Albanian periodicalShqiperia in Cairo, in 190653 and a full Greek translation published in 1907 by Thanas [Athanas] Sinas.54 The book was also translated by LuigiLorecchio into Italian and published in 1923.55 All these re-publications and translationsof the book can obviously be seen as a sign of the considerable interest in this text inAlbania and abroad.This book has played, on the other hand, an important role in the mythologisation of Sami in the nationalist Turkish historiography as well, because of the claims that Samicannot be the author of the book.56 This attitude of rejecting and/or neglecting theauthorship of Sami in Turkey can also be observed in the entries on Sami in Turkishencyclopaedias and lexica, which are important sources for the canonization of a text onmore popular level: As I tried to demonstrate elsewhere,57 Sami is usually represented inthese entries as aTurkishlinguist and author of the first Turkish novel, and as one of the pioneers of Turkish nationalism. Most of these entries start by stating that Sami wasTurkish.58 In some other encyclopaedias his nationality is not mentioned.59 In one of

Sh.), Tiran: Akademia Shkencave e RPS t Shqiperise, Institui i Historise, 1988, 17-94; Sami Frashri,Shqipria.ka qen, sht e do t bhet , Tirane: Mesonjetorje e Par, 1999; Sami Frashri,Shqiperia dhe Shqiptaret ,(Transl.: Zyber Hasan Bakiu), Tiran: Dajti 2000; Sami Frashri,Shqipria Shqipria. ka qn, sht e do t bhet?, Prishtin: Shtpia Botuese Libri Shkollor, 2001; and Sami Frashri,Shqipria Shqipria. ka qn,sht e do t bhet?, Tiran: nf, 2002.48

Apart from the issue on 22 April 1905 (No 60), the series continued regularly in all issues between these twodates.49 . Sami Fraeri, Arnavutluk ne idi, nedir ne olacak?, (Transl.:ahin Kolonja), publication place, publisher anddate not indicated. Shahin Kolonja had added some information in the brackets within the text.50 Sch. Sami Bey Frascheri,Was war Albanien, was ist es, was wird es werden? Gedanken und Betrachtungenber die unser geheiligtes Vaterland Albanien bedrohenden Gefahren und deren Abwendungen, (Transl.: A.Traxler), Wien und Leipzig: Alfred Hlder, K. U. K. Hof- und Universitaets-Buchhaendler, 1913. Understandably,all changes and additions in the Turkish version (Fraeri, Arnavutluk ne idi, nedir ne olacak?,) were alsotranslated; and a short preface by the translator was added.51 Klaus Lange, Zur Problematik des Nationalgedankes bei Sami Frashri, in Peter Bartl & Horst Glassl, eds.,Sdosteuropa unter dem Halbmond (Prof. Georg Stadtmller zum. 65. Geburtstag gewidmet), Mnchen: Dr. Dr.Rudolf Trofenik, 1975, 177-187.52 Arkivi Qendror i Shtetit, F. 14, D. 41, fl. 1-75.53 Sami Bey Fraeri, Alvania ti ito, ti ine ke ti prepi na ine? Skepsis pros apelefterosin tis patridos apo tus perikiklundas avtin kindinus, (Transl.: Fani Noli),Shqiperia, (Kairo), No 2, 11 Tetor 1906.54 Sami-Bey Frassari, Alvania ti ito, ti ine ke ti prepi na ine? Skepsis pros apelefterosin tis patridos apo tus perikiklundas avtin kindinus, (Transl.: Gerontos tis Nemertzkas [Thanas Sina]), Sofia, 1907.55 Sami Bej Frashri, LAlbania Suo Passato, Presente e Avvenire, (Traduzione dall Albenese per LuigiLorecchio), Albania, No 8, Roma, 1923.56 For a detailed discussion of this denial and/or negligence in the Turkish historiography, see Blent Bilmez,emsettin Sami ve Sak ncal bir Kitapla ilgili Tart malarda Milliyeti Retorik, passim. It is very telling that this book has never been translated into modern Turkish. (Some parts of the Kolonjas Ottoman-Turkish translation(Fraeri, Arnavutluk ne idi, nedir ne olacak?) were transcribed and published by Orhan Seyfi Orhon in a series of artricles on Sami in his periodical naralt in 1943: O.[rhan] S.[eyfi] O.[rhon Koynumuzda Beslediklerimiz. Bir hiyanet ve Nankorluk Vesikasi, naralt , No 106-110 and No 113, October 2, 9, 16, 23, and 30, 1943.57 Blent Bilmez, Mythologization of an Ottoman Intellectual in the Modern Turkish and Socialist AlbanianHistoriographies based on selective perception: Sami Frashri or emseddin Sami Bey?, Balkanologie, Vol VII, No 2 (December), 2003, Paris, 19-46. For an Albanian translation of this article, see Blent Bilmez, SamiFrashri apo Shemseddin Sami?, (Transl., Artan Puto), Prpjekja, Vol IX, No 18 (vjesht-dimr), 2003,118-145.58

See, for example, emseddin Sami, in Hakk Devrim, ed., Dictionnaire Larousse, Ansiklopedik Szlk , Vol 6,stanbul: Milliyet, 1993- 1994, 2235.; emseddin Sami (Fraer, Yanya 1850 - Istanbul, 1904), inTrk Ansiklopedisi, Vol. 30, Ankara: Milli Eitim Bas mevi, 1981, 251-252; emseddin Sami, inMeydan Larousse.

7


8/27


them he is defined as an Ottoman writer, although it is stated in the same entry thatSami believed the term Ottoman could only be used for the (Ottoman) state, but notfor the language or nationality.60 In two other encyclopaedias, the entries of which arealmost identical, Samis nationality is not stated. However, it is noted that his mother tongue was Greek.61 In an encyclopaedia published by a nationalist publishing house theethno-centrist attitude is formulated very clearly:

Though originally Albanian, he chose Turkish nationality; believed thatTurks are a great nationality, performed surveys especially on Turkishlanguage with a nationalist mentality, produced valuable works thatenlightened the Turkish languages past and enriched its future.62

These encyclopaedias usually give conflicting information even on factual issues like his publications, the periods he lived in different places. Furthermore, almost all of theseentries consist of laudatory writing, praising Sami for being the writer of the firstTurkish modern encyclopaedia63 and dictionary64 that was to remain the main source for all studies on Turkish language for a long time. In the framework of this paper, however,it is important to note that they all neglect Samis activities and publications that madehim known as one of the pioneers of Albanian nationalism in the historiography of Albania. There is one exception to this attitude, which can be found in an encyclopaediathat is a translation from French with some modifications and additions. However, it isstriking to find two separate entries in the same encyclopaedia on Sami: the one carryingthe title emsettin Sami presents the common mythologized image of him by stating atthe beginning that he was Turkish, while it also contains information on his activitiesas an Albanian intellectual that cannot be found in other encyclopaedias.65 However, theeditors of this Turkish version did not even recognize that another entry on Sami withthe title Fraeri (Sami Bey) was put in another volume of the same encyclopaedia. Inthis entry, which consists of a very brief summary of his activities as a national Albanian

intellectual and which is probably just an accurate translation of the entry in the Frenchversion, it is stated that Sami is an Albanian author and his book Shqipria kaqn, sht e do t bhet is his most important work.66 This ambiguous exception,

Byk Lgat ve Ansiklopedi, Istanbul: Sabah, Vol. 18, publication date unavailable, 504; emsettin Sami, in Byk Larousse Szlk ve Ansiklopedi, Vol. 18, Istanbul: Geliim Yay nlar , 1986, 11047. (Second edition:emsettin Sami, in Byk Larousse, Vol. 21, Istanbul: Milliyet Yay nlar , date unavailable, 11047); emsettinSami, inGeli im Hachette. Alfabetik Genel Kltr Ansiklopedisi, Vol. 10, stanbul: Geliim Bas n ve Yay n A. .,1976 (?), 4086-4087; emseddin Sami, inMeydan-Larousse, Vol. 11, Istanbul: Meydan Yay nevi, 1989, 758.;emseddin Sami, inevket Rado, ed., Hayat Kk Ansiklopedi, 1968, Istanbul: Hayat Yay nlar , 1079; andemsettin Sami (1850-1905), inYeni Hayat Ansiklopedisi, Cilt 6, stanbul: Doan Karde Yay nlar , 1978, 2985.(Note the incorrect date of Samis death in the title of the last entry.)59 See, for example, emseddin Sami (1 Haziran 1850 - 18 Haziran 1904), in Ba lang c ndan Gnmze Byk Trk Klasikleri, Tarih-Antoloji-Ansiklopedi, Vol. 9, 1989, 111-119, 111-2; M. Nihat zn & Baha Drder,Trk Edebiyat Ansiklopedisi, stanbul: Remzi Kitabevi, 1967, 187; emseddin Sami, Ana Britannica, Vol. 29, Istanbul: AnaYay nc l k, 1994, 89;hsan I k, emsettin Sami, in idem,Trkiye Yazar Ansiklopedisi, (Geniletilmi 2. Bask ),Ankara: Elvan Yay nlar , 2002, 871; Atilla zk r ml , emsettin Sami, in idem,Trk Edebiyat Ansiklopedisi, Vol. 4,1987, 1071-1073; emsettin Sami (1850-1904), inGeli im Alfabetik Genlik Ansiklopedisi, Vol. 9, 1980, 2313; andkran Kurdakul emsettin Sami, in idem, airler ve Yazarlar Szl , Istanbul:nk lap, 1999, 613-614.60 emseddin Sami, inTrk ve Dnya nlleri Ansiklopedisi, Istanbul: Anadolu Yay nc l k, Vol. 10, 1983, 5206.61 brahim Alaettin Gvsa, emseddin Sami, inMe hur Adamlar , Vol. 4, Istanbul: Yedign Yay nevi, 1933-1938, 367-8 and emseddin Sami, in Resimli Yeni Lgat ve Ansiklopedi (Ansiklopedik Szlk), Vol. 5, Istanbul:skit Yayinlari. 1947-54, 2652-3.62 emseddin Sami, inTrkiye Gazetesi Yeni Rehber Ansiklopedisi, Vol. 18, Istanbul:hlas Holding, 1994, 259.63 emseddin Sami, Kamus-ul Alam. Tarih co rafya lgatini ve tabir-i essahla kaffe-i esma-i hassa-y camidir (Dictionnaire Universal dHistorie et de Geographie), Vol. I-VI, Istanbul: Mihran Matbaas , 1889-1899.64

Sami, Kamus-i Trki.65 emsettin Sami, in Byk Larousse Szlk ve Ansiklopedi, Vol. 18, Istanbul: Geliim Yay nlar , 1986, 11047.66 Fraeri (Sami Bey), in Byk Larousse Szlk ve Ansiklopedi, Vol. 7, Istanbul: Geliim Yay nlar , 1986, 4284.

8


9/27


however, does not change the common attitude of ignoring or rejecting Samisauthorship of this book in Turkey.

III) Analysis of the Text Corpus

One of the most important characteristics of Samis Albanian book (Shqiperia, 1899) isthe (re-)production of the myths of the ethnogenesis and antiquity among theAlbanians. Before discussing these myths, it must be stated that

Every ethnic collectivity will have one or possibly more than onemyth of ethnogenesis and antiquity. Myths of this kind fairly obviously answer thequestion of where we are from in our collective existence. However, thesemyths become more than just self-legitimation when used to try to establish primacy over all other ethnic groups in a given territory. The argument is that, because one group was there first, it has a superior right to that territory over all others, meaning that, say, the rights of citizenship must take second placeto those of ethnicity and that those who have primacy also have the right todefine (and maybe circumscribe) the rights of citizenship.67

Furthermore, the place of these myths in the nationalist discourse among some Albanianintellectuals of his time should also be kept in mind, while analysing Samis Albanian book: . As with any other people, the myth of origin, or ethnogenesis, was of specialimportance for Albanian nationalist writers.68 Considering Samis Albanian book, it is bluntly maintained in its first section titledPelasgians, where Sami claims that the Albanians are the eldest people of Europe anddirect descendants of the Pelasgians.69 As Coakley states,

In many cases, the national story incorporates a particular episode in which

the nation was crystallized into its modern form. Here, there were broadlytwo types of claim. First, the nation had existed in the same territory fromtime immemorial. () Second, the ancestors of the nation moved fromelsewhere, but at a particular point in time settled permanently in their currentlocation, establishing a decisive presence.70

In Samis case it is obvious that he evidently prefers the second type, as his book startswith the following sentence:

67 George Schpflin, The Functions of Myth and Taxonomy of Myths, in Geoffrey Hosking & George Schpflin,eds., Myths and Nationhood , London: Hurst & Company, 1997, 19-35, 34. The discussion in this paper on themyths, history and nationalism is mainly based on Walker Connor, The Nation and Its Myth, International Journal of Comparative Sociology, Vol. 33, No. 1-2, 1992:, 48-57; Geoffrey Hosking & George Schpflin, eds.,Myths and Nationhood , London: Hurst & Company, 1997; Anthony D. Smith,Myths and Memories of the Nation,Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999; Rumina Sethi,Myths of the Nation: National Identity and Literary Representation, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999; John Coakley, Mobilizing the Past: Nationalist Images of History Nationalism and Ethnic Politics, No: 10, 2004, 531-560. For the works more specifically on the myths of origin/decent/ethnogenesis, see Joshua Fishman, Social Theory and Ethnography: Neglected Perspectives onLanguage and Ethnicity in Eastern Europe, in Peter Sugar, ed., Ethnic Diversity and Conflict in Eastern Europe, Santa Barbara: ABC-Clio, 1980, 69-99; Donald Horowitz, Ethnic Groups in Conflict , Berkeley and Los Angeles:University of California Press, 1985; and Thomas H. Eriksen, Ethnicity and Nationalism, London: Pluto Press,1993.68 Piro Misha, Invention of a Nationalism: Myth and Amnesia, in Stephanie Schwandner-Sievers & Bernd J.Fischer, eds., Albanian Identities Myth and History, London: Hurst & Company, 2002, 33-48, 42. For a conciseaccount of the myths of origins and priority in the nationalist discourse of Samis time and afterwards, see NoelMalcolm, Myths of Albanian National Identity: Some Key Elements in the Works of Albanian Writers andAmerica in the Early Twentieth Century, in Stephanie Schwandner-Sievers & Bernd J. Fischer, eds.,Albanian

Identities Myth and History, London: Hurst & Company, 2002, 70- 90, 73-79.69 Shqipria. ka qn, 3-6.70 Coakley, Mobilizing the Past, 544.

9


10/27


Albania consists of every land (vendi) where Albanians live (rrine). TheAlbanians are one of the eldest people [nations] (kombeve) of Europe. Theycame from Central Asia to the European continent before all others71

Being one of the core elements in the nationalist discourse of the nineteenth century, theaim in this claim is obvious: To declare Albanians the real and only owners of theterritories through proving their greater antiquity. It is worth remembering that while behaving so, Sami and his Albanian and Turkish contemporaries were not exceptional atall. Indeed,

a myth of origin is an essential ingredient in any nations self-conception.() In recent years, advances in genetic research allowed the regionalclustering of particular gene types to be mapped, and these advances have alsooffered more conclusive evidence to the absence of genetic purity, and ongenetic mixing as the norm within spatially defined groups. But the nationalistimage of national origin is simpler: a single group or people is identified as prime ancestor.72

Here, we encounter an intellectual, himself mythologised, acting as a myth-maker and/or distributor of modern myths: 73 As it was common in his time, Sami deals with theearliest history of the Balkans in this chapter selectively replicating the theories of thenineteenth century, which were based on very little information, speculation and modernmyths. As stated by Anthony Smith in one of his most recent books,

Myths of origins, whether of the genealogical or the territorial-political kind,are usually regarded by members and by many analysts as key elements in thedefinition of ethnic communities. Not only have they often played a vital rolein differentiating and separating particular ethnies from close neighboursand/or competitors; it is in such myths thatethnies locate their foundingcharter andraison detre.74

Pelasgians being the eldest, Sami lists all the names of the people of antiquity in theBalkans, with stereotypical knowledge of that time: Pelasgians and the tribes ( fise) astheir branches - Illyrians, Epiriots, Macedonians and Thracians.75 There, he also givesthe etymology of the name of the people of the ancient times on the Balkans to show thatthey were ethnic Albanian.76The second (rather short) section of the first part of the book is devoted to the Illyriansand the Epirots. It is interesting to recognize that the idea of an uninterrupted directrelation between the Illyrians and the Albanians of today (hence the continuity betweenthem), which as a dominant theory (or myth among the Albanians) of the twentiethcentury has overshadowed the Pelasgian one, is not explicitly displayed here.77 However, it is hinted at an implicit relation between the Illyrians and the Albanians,

because Illyrians are believed to constitute one of the Pelasgian tribes, who were, as71 Shqipria. ka qn, 3.72 Coakley, Mobilizing the Past, 542-543.73 For the construction of the mythologized imageof Sami in the Albanian and Turkish historiography, see BlentBilmez, Mythologization of an Ottoman Intellectual, passim; and Bilmez Blent Can, Arnavut ve Trk Tarihyaz m nda emsedin Sami: Arnavut Milliyetisi mi, yoksa Trk Milliyetisi mi?,Toplumsal Tarih, Istanbul, No 114(Haziran), 2003, Istanbul, 54-57. For the role of the press of the both countries in this mythologozation, see myforthcoming article on the place of Sami in the Albanian and Turkish press: Blent Bilmez, Modern Trkiye veSosyalist Arnavutluk Bas n nda emsetin Sami Frashrimaj , proceedings of a conference in December 2003 inTirana to be published by IRCICA in autumn 2006 in Istanbul.74 Anthony D. Smith,Chosen Peoples, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003, 173.75 Shqipria. ka qn, 5.76 For such etymology games in the Albanology and among the Albanian intellectuals, see Malcolm, Myths of

Albanian National Identity, passim,especially 78.77 For the theories on Pelasgians and Illyrians as the ancestors of Albanians, see the section below onintertextuality.

10


11/27


claimed by Sami in the previous chapter of the book, ancestors of todays Albanians.Furthermore, it is stated there that

according to the ancient Greek historians and authors the Illyrians andEpirots spoke the same language and had the same customs and traditions.From their language and customs developed (stemmed), later on, those of todays Albanians.78

The Turkish article, on the other hand, starts with the question about the proper name of our language, Turkish, and about its origin:

We do not think the term Ottoman language is quite correct, because thisterm is used only as the title of the State according to the name of the familyof the well known conqueror, first of the Sultans who founded this state. Yet,the language (lisan) and nationality/ethnicity (cinsiyet ) are older than the birthof the mentioned person and the formation of this state. The name of the people (kavim) who speak this language is really Turks (Trk ) and the nameof the language they speak is Turkish language (lisan- Trki). This name,

which is seen as a derogatory term by ignorant people and used by some for the peasants of Anatolia, is the name of a great community (mmet ) whichshould be proud to be called so.79

If one is aware of the pejorative use of the term Turk in the late Ottoman Empire,which was not used by any ethnic group as an endonym, these sentences can be read asclear appeal for the emergence of national consciousness among the Turkish-speaking people, for whom this kind of self-perception was new.80 Apart from the important factthat Sami obviously includes himself into this group (nation), it is interesting to see thereference to the roots of the Turks before the formation of the Ottoman Empire.81

Sami describes in this article also what Ottoman means: All people living as the subjects

of the Ottoman state are called Ottoman (Osmanl ).82

For him, the term Turk, on theother hand, is the name of the great community, only a fraction of which is the subject of the Ottoman state:

The relationship between Ottoman and Turk is similar to the one betweenAustrian and German: Austrian is used for all people who are subjects of theAustrian State, the Germans of Austria being the dominant community amongthem. German [on the other hand] is used for all members of this big community,in Austria and in Prussia and Germany, as well as in Switzerland, Russia andelsewhere. Similarly, also members of all the peoples subject to the Ottomandynasty are called Ottomans, whereas Turk is the name of a great community

extending from the shores of the Adriatic to the borders of China and interior of Siberia.83

According to Sami, the reason why people should not feel insulted by being calledTurks and, on the contrary, feel proud carrying this name is that our language, which

78 Shqipria. ka qn, 7.79 Sami, Lisan- Trki (Osmani).80 Kushner, The Rise of Turkish nationalism, 8-9.81 Below, in the section on intertextuality, the emergence of the interest (first among the Western scholars andthen Ottoman intellectuals) in the pre-Islamic history of the Ottoman Turks and discovery of the Turkic people,the construction of the discourse of the brotherhood of all Turkic peoples in Asia and the influence of thesestudies on Sami (and other modern Ottoman intellectuals) will be discussed.82

This definition can also be found in Article 8 of the first Ottoman constitution of 1876:eref Gzbyk &Suna Kili,Trk Anayasa Metinleri, Tanzimattan Bugne Kadar , Ankara: Ajans-Trk Matbaas , 1957, 26.83 Sami, Lisan- Trki (Osmani).

11


12/27


had already existed for a long time by the time of the formation of the Ottoman state, isshared by lots of people in Asia outside the territories of the Empire as well. Thelanguage spoken by those people and our language are, according to Sami, two major branches of the same language.84

After discussing the brotherhood of all Turkish-speaking people, Sami deals with theissue of the ancestors of the Turks: When our ancestors (ecdad m z) came from inner Asia, they did not bring their literature and the grammar of their language (lisanlar n nimlas n ), but gradually invented a new one and modified it several times in history.When he talks abut the Turkic people in Asia, whom he calls Eastern Turks ( ark Trkleri), Sami uses the term hem-cinsler , meaning of the same ethnic group(nationality). He includes himself into the Western Turks living in the OttomanEmpire through constant use of the pronouns we and our:

As I see it, since the language of the Turks in those distant regions is one withours, it is perfectly proper to give them the common name of Turkish and, caseswhere it is desirable for the for difference between them to observed, to calltheirs Eastern Turkish and ours Western Turkish.85

The rest of the article is mainly about the modernization of the language and purification of it from the foreign words of Arabic and Persian origin.The problematic use of the terms likecins/cinsiyet , mmet , kavim, millet , halk , anas r ,etc. (race, stock, nation, people, religious group, etc.) by Sami in his Turkish writingsshould be discussed (together with other discursive elements) in a separate project, in theframework of both `conceptual history` in Koselackian sense86 and conceptual-historical analysis of discursive construction of Albanian and Turkish nations.87 However, it could be shortly stated here, however, that these terms were used by Samiwithout clear definitions and distinctions. It was rather in later years after the emergenceof political nationalism among Muslim intellectuals that the ambiguity started fading

84 Op. cit. 85 Op. cit. 86 See Reinhart Koselleck, Einleitung,Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe. Historisches Lexikon zur politisch- soziallen Sprache in Deutschland , Band 1: A-D, Otto Brunner, Werner Conze & Reinhart Koselleck, eds.,Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta, 1972, xiii-xxvii; idem, Begriffsgeschichte und Sozialgeschichte, Peter Christen Ludz, ed., Klner Zeitschrift fr Sozilogie und Sozialpsychologie, Sonderheft 16: Soziologie und Sozialgeschichte, Opladen:Westdeutscher Verlag, 1972, 116-131 (later re-published in idem, Historishce Semantik und Begriffsgeschichte,Stuttgart: Klett-Kota, 1978, 19-36 and idem,Vergangene Zukunft. Zur Semantik Geschichtlicher Zeiten, Frankfurtam Main: Suhrkamp, 107-129. For the English translation of the latter book, see idem, Futures Past. On theSemantics of Historical Time, (Transl. by Keith Tribe), (Studies in Contemporary German Social Thought),Cambridge (Mass.) & London: MIT Press, 1985. For a leter article of Koselleck on conceptual history, see idem,Sozialgeschichte und Begriffsgeschichte, Wolfgang Schieder & Volker Sellin, ed.,Sozialgeschichte in Deutschland: Entwicklungen und Epochenbewustsein, Gttingen:Vandenhoek & Ruprecht, 1986, 89-109. (For theEnglish transation of this article, see Reinhart Koselleck, Social History and Conceptual History, in idem,The Practice of Conceptual History. Timing History, Spacing Concepts, Translated by Todd Samuel Presner andothers, Introduction by Hayden White, (Cultural Memory in the Present), Stanford, Calif.: Stanford UniversityPress, 2002, 20-37. For the analysis of the German concepts in same semantic field of the above mentionedOttoman terms on collective identity (cins/cinsiyet , mmet , kavim, millet , halk , anas r , etc.), see the entry onPeople, Nation, Nationalism, Mass in the standard work of conceptual historical studies, Basic HistoricalConcepts: Volk, Nation, Nationalismus, Masse in Otto Brunner, Werner Conze & Reinhart Koselleck, ed.,Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe. Historisches Lexikon zur politisch-soziallen Sprache in Deutschland , Band 7:Verw-Z, Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta, 1992. Also see Melvin Richter,The History of Political and Social Concepts. ACritical Introduction. New York: Oxford UP, 1995.87 For conceptual-historical analysis and discursive construction of national identities see Ruth Wodak, Rudolf deCillia, Martin Reisigl & Karin Liebhart,The Discursive Construction of National Identity, Edinburgh: Edinburgh

University Press, 2001; Ruth Wodak, & Michael Meyer, ed.Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis, Sage, 2001 andA. Triandafyllidou & R. Wodak, Conceptual and methodological questions in the study of collective identity: Anintroduction, Journal of Language and Politics, 2003, vol. 2, no. 2, 205-223.

12


13/27


away and the idea of racial difference in an ethnocentric sense gradually gained moreimportance in Turkish nationalism. Indeed,

in the political rather than the scientific sphere, what is normally meant byracial difference is a general sense of the alienness or otherness of communities or individuals that come from radically different cultures andreligions, or whose appearance in terms of skin-colour or even costume ismanifestly different.88

Another set of terms to be studied in such analysis would be the pronouns we, our,etc. used in the definition of different collective identities:

At the heart of any discussion of the nation and nationalism lies the issue of identity. And, if we go beyond the purely personal level, questions of identitydivide the world between we/us and they/them. By defining who we are,we naturally exclude all those who cannot be fitted into the definition.89

What makes Samis case remarkable is that, he also uses the term of we meaning theAlbanians at many places in his Albanian book.90 If one considers that Albanianness wasdefined by the Albanian intellectuals of that time through not being Turkish,inter alias,Samis case becomes more striking because these two wes meeting in one authorhave actually been conflicting with, and ,at least in case of the definition of Albanianness, excluding each other.In the last paragraph of Samis Turkish article, Sami openly mentions the politicaldimension of his Turkish nationalist ideas, by claiming that through the unification of areformed/standardized Turkish language, there will emerge a unified great Turkish people/nation (Trk mmeti), with a population of twenty million, in the place of the present Western Turks that are not more than eight to ten millions. He doesnt mention

any state-like organization, or other political entity of this Turkish-speaking people suchas nation, and it is not clear what kind of unity he foresees. However, it is obvious thatthese revolutionary and groundbreaking expressions could be taken as first steps in the process of the emergence of linguistic nationalism among Turkish-speaking people,and that they evidently maintain characteristics of cultural Pan-Turkism.91 What isstriking here is that they are written by a native Albanian speaker using similar rhetoricto contribute at the same time to the emergence of Albanian nation, to which he alsofeels loyal.This becomes more interesting when we see similar rhetoric on Turkish language in atext published almost in the same year as the publication of Shqiperia: In the preface of Kamus-i Trki, after almost twenty years, Sami repeats his theory of one Turkishlanguage with two (Eastern and Western) branches; and uses again the pronouns weand our when he talks about the Turkish-speaking people (Turks) and Turkishlanguage. He also explains once again why their language should not be called Ottoman, but Turkish. This explanation, together with the fact that the dictionary was publishedunder this title (i.e. Turkish Dictionary), can be taken as an open appeal in favour of Turkish (cultural) nationalism in that period.

88 Clive Christie, Race and Nation: A Reader , London & New York: I.B. Tauris Publishers, 1998, 230.89 Op. cit., 1.90 Shqipria. ka qn, passim.91 For the emergence of Pan-Turkism and its history in the late Ottoman Empire, see Jacob M. Landau, Pan-

Turkism in Turkey: From Irredentism to Cooperation, London: Hurst & Company, 1995 [1981], 7-73; and for theessential role of Sami in this process, see Jacob M. Landau, Pan-Turkism in Turkey: From Irredentism toCooperation, London: Hurst & Company, 1995 [1981], 31.

13


14/27


It is more remarkable in the framework of this paper to read the following line in hisTurkish article: we have had a written and literary language for thousand years. Here,as in the Albanian case, the antiquity of the people is claimed because of the antiquity of the language. Of course in the Turkish case, it was very clear that the Turks are not theautochthones of their new homeland (Anatolia). It is worth noting, therefore, that thequestion of the autochthones of Anatolia is not problematised by Sami at all.92 IV) The question of intertextuality and interdiscursivityThe texts analysed in this study can be seen as direct products of a broader historicalcontext: emergence of nationalism and the first attempts towards the construction of Albanian and Turkish national identities. Therefore, it is always likely to read some previous or contemporary texts of others and/or different discourses embedded withinSamis texts. A more precise study of the rhetoric in these texts and their discourseanalysis would be most productive, though such an analysis is beyond the scope of thisessay. However, different texts and discourses absorbed in Samis ones can be discussed

here.First of all, it is widely known that Albanian people as an ethnic group andAlbanianness as an imaginary collective identity had already beendiscovered byEuropean scholars and intellectuals when Sami published his book. It is also known atleast by specialists that before the publication of the book this discovery had alreadyimposed its influence on some Albanians, who can be seen as the real standard-bearersof proto-nationalism, serving the emergence of Albanian ethnocentrism amongAlbanians outside Albania.93 If this background, which can be read in Samis book, iswell understood, one can better evaluate the pioneering role of the book in thetransformation of Albanian ethnocentrism into political nationalismand in the discursiveconstruction of Albanian national identity.The Albanian nation as an entity did not exist in the Ottoman Empire in pre-moderntimes. The Albanian language might have been a kind of binding element for some people in certain circumstances; however it did not play any role in the formation of acollective identity. The main component of collective identities then had rather beenreligious loyalty, i.e. being a member of a religion (millet ) in general, or morespecifically, of a confession/sect (mezhep) and/or an order (tarikat ). Besides, loyalty tosome secular (tribal, occupational and/or regional) groups like clans, large families,tribes, etc. could sometimes be even stronger. Therefore, the discursive construction of modern national identity among the existing we-groups of the Ottoman Balkans bymodern(ist) intellectuals had to be based on an act of neglecting, ignoring, denyingand/or underestimating the existence or importance of these loyalties; and byoverestimating, on the other hand, language and history as the modern (progressive) and

92 For a critical account of the discussions in Turkey on the question of autochthony and ethnogenesis, see SuaviAyd n, Kimlik Sorunu, Ulusall k ve Trk Kimli i, Ankara: teki Yay nevi, 1999, 60-73.93 Almost all Albanian intellectuals who played decisive role in the discursive construction of Albanian nation andemergence of Albanian nationalism lived outside Albania. In the same sense as people like Gandhi, Nehru, andCoomaraswamy have all discovered their India by leaving it (Sethi, Myths of the Nation, 198, fn. 51), all of theseAlbanian intellectuals discovered their Albania only after leaving their home and contacting with the West.Indeed it is very unclear what should be understood under the terms Albania and Albanian used in that period.

While traditional non-ethnic (religious, tribal, regional and/or imperial) identities were still dominant among themost Albanians, they also had strong influence on the intellectuals who experienced a kind of epistemological break through some kind of intellectual contact with West.

14


15/27


most important cohesive elements and insisting that they had always played the samerole in the past.94 However, this new understanding of we group, which was an inseparable componentof a broader Eurocentric and modern episteme, did not emerge among the Balkan peoples through indigenous dynamics. It was rather a direct import from the Westernworld, which was imported by the local intellectuals, influenced by the modernWestern knowledge and ideas. It was this process that made these intellectuals perceivethemselves and the groups they belonged to, differently. Therefore, they strived for theenlightenment of their people by imposing the new episteme on them, i.e. convincingthem that common language and history should play the decisive role in the definition of their collective identity. The most significant role in this new perception was played bythe accumulation of (new) knowledge through Orientalism: grasping and studying thenon-European world with the terms and values of the modern paradigm.Likely motives for these modern Western studies were multifold: intellectual curiosity,the aim of serving/contributing to their countries imperialistic interests, etc.; however,their regular influence on the intellectuals of the Balkans has almost always caused akind of epistemological break , not only through the transfer of the new (linguistic,ethnographical and historical) findings articulated in modern terminology, but also (andmore importantly) through the change in the way of seeing themselves, their surroundings (we-groups) and their past, by using the scientific methods of every possible ology with which they have became familiar.The interest in the culture, history and language of the Albanians by modern Westernscholars started at the end of the eighteenth century. However, actual scholarlyethnographic, folkloristic, linguistic and historical studies were to emerge from the beginning of the next century on, which can be taken as the beginning of Albanology.There are implicit and explicit references in Samis book to the earlier texts of this very

Albanology in the context of the ancient history of Albanians and their language andculture.Sami mentions once the great German linguist ( philologist ) of the nineteenth century,Austrian scholar Johann Georg von Hahn (1811-1869), who has been known as thefather of Albanology.95 This reputation and Samis admiration is mainly due toHahns Studies on the language and origins of the Albanians: Albanesische Studien,1854.96 As Sami did not know German and Hahns works had not been translated intoany language that Sami knew, it is not clear how and to what extent Sami could havemade use of his writings.97 Sami states that Hahn discovered some texts on a tombstone,the letters of which were Phoenician and the language of which was Albanian. From this

94 Some traditional (pre-modern) religious elements, the role which in the construction of national identity issometimes misinterpreted and overemphasized by some scholars like Anthony Smith, were used only after a kindof re-evaluation, and after giving them a new meaning through a process that could be called invention of tradition Eric Hobsbawm & Ternce Ranger, eds.,The Invention of Tradition, Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress, 1984.95 Arshi Pipa, The Politics of Language in Soicalist Albania, New York: Columbia University Press for EastEuropean Monographs (No 271), Boulder, Colorado, 1989.96 Johann Georg von Hahn, Albanesiche Studien, Vol I, (reprint), Athens: Reprint Verlag Dion. Karavias, 1981[1854]. (It was originally published by Verlag Friedrich Mauke in Jena.)97 In the preface of Samis unpublished translation of Kutadgu Bilig , Sami writes that his daughter Samiye and hisson Mithat (actually Samis son-in-law and real son of Samis eldest brother Abdyl) helped him working on theGerman book because of his little knowledge of German. (Dal olu, emsettin Sami Bey, 54. Also see Tural,emsettin Sami, 121 and Levend,emsedin Sami, 96) This book, which was translated into Ottoman-Turkish inthe last years of Samis life through the help of Vamberys (1832-1913)German translation published together

with the original text in 1870, played an important role in the construction and/or strengthening of the myth of antiquity and continuity of the Turkish nation from the Turkic people of Asia among the first Turkishnationalists.

15


16/27


Hahn concluded, according to Sami, that the Albanians could already write their language that early in history.98 Sami also refers to the ancient Greek historians andauthors99, and talks about the great geographer [deshkronjes] Strabo100 who describedour [Albanian] territories circa two thousand years ago...101 It is worth noting that bothStrabos work and the Epirot king Pyrrus ( Pyrrua a Burri) mentioned in Samis book,were cited by Hahn in hisStudies.102 Besides explicit signs of influence of the texts of nineteenth-century Albanology onSami, which can be observed through direct references, we can also see their implicitinfluence on Sami throughout his book, where he reflects the common Albanologicalknowledge of that time on Albania and the Albanians. Many materials, including someterms, techniques, developed in the tradition of these studies, were borrowed by theAlbanian intellectuals of that time, Sami being one of the most important of them; andthey were used in the discursive construction of the national identity. Many facts andmyths in Samis book are borrowed from this very tradition. This can be best observedin Samis book where he emphasizes the antiquity of the Albanian people and their language. This myth of antiquity, serving the creation of the national pride amongAlbanians, was based on the novel information found in the works of European scholars.Although there were different theories competing with each other during the nineteenthcentury, Sami was certainly devoted, as seen above, to the Pelasgian theory alsoencompassing the Illyrian one.103According to Arshi Pipa, The romantic theory of the Pelasgian origin of the Albanianshas long been discarded as absurd. Georg von Hahn, the father of Albanology, wasamong the first to maintain that Albanians are the descendants of Illyrians, a thesisaccepted by many Albanologists.104 However, this is not exactly the case: The Illyriantheory cannot be separated from the Pelasgian one that plainly and undoubtedly, becausethe history of the theories of origins of the Albanians and their language is much more

complicated: It is important, first of all, to underline that the Pelasgian and Illyriantheories have overlapped, rather than contradicted each other.There have also been other theories, contradicting the Pelasgian and Illyrian theory,some of which were assuming a later migration of the ancestors of the Albanians to theregion and, hence, rejecting the proposition of the autochthony of the Albanians. Thesetheories could be classified according to the proposedUr -Homeland and/or Ur -Ancestors as follows 1) The Italian theory supported by some Renaissance writers; 2)the Tatars theory, that was essentially discarded in 1835 by Joseph Ritter vonXylander,105 who put forward the still sustaining theory of the Indo-Germanic originof the Albanians; and 3) the once very popular Caucasus theory, advocated since theRenaissance by Aeneas Silvius Piccolimini (1509),106 the French diplomat Franois

98 Shqipria. ka qn, 18.99 Shqipria. ka qn, 7.100 Greek geographer, historian, and philosopher Strabo (ca. B.C. 63- ca. A.D. 24), mostly known for hisGeographika(Geography), a 17-book work containing history and descriptions of people and places all over theworld as known to him.101 Shqipria. ka qn, 68.102 Hahn, Albanesiche Studien, 216, 254, 301, 328 and 307.103 For a concise account of different theories of Albanian ethnogenesis among the European scholars and their reception among the Albanian nationalist intellectuals, see Pipa,The Politics of Language in Soicalist Albania,155-161; Noel Malcolm, Kosovo. A Short History, London: Papermac, 1998, 28-40 and Malcolm, Myths of Albanian National Identity, 73-79.104 Pipa,The Politics of Language in Soicalist Albania, 155.105 Xylander, Die Sprache der Albenesen oder Skipetaren, Frankfurt am Main: Andreasische Buchhandlung,

1835.106 Eneo Silvio Piccolomini (Pope Pius II),Cosmograhia Pii Papae in Asiase & Europe eleganti descriptione,Paris, 1509.

16


17/27


Pouqueville (1820-1821)107 and the Greek student in Gttingen (Germany) Nikolaos Nikokles (1855).108 These three theories had partly lost their credibility by the lastquarter of the nineteenth century.

One last attempt to salvage the [Caucasus] theory, however, was made by anArbresh109 writer, Francesco Tajani,110 who suggested that Ur-Albanianswere Scythians who spoke an Indian language but whose place of residence, before they moved to Albania, was in the Caucasus.111

The Pelasgian-Illyrian theory, which was supported in Samis text, became graduallymore dominant in the second half of the nineteenth century, though without beingundisputed among academics and without all other theories being totally discarded andeliminated. The publication of the book Untersuchungen ber die Geschichte der stlichen europaeischen Vlker in 1774 by the German scholar Johann Thunmann112 isusually taken in Albanology as the beginning of the Pelasgian theory, which was basedon the mythological people described as the non-Greek and/or pre-Greek inhabitants of the region by several ancient Greek authors, including Strabo who was mentioned bySami in his text.113

The Pelasgian-Illyrian theory was later established through the works of the Arbreshscholar Angelo Masci (Engjl Mashi);114 the French geographer Conrad Malte-Brunwho first published the French translation of Macis text with his own criticalannotations115 and then identified the Ur-language of the Albanians as Pelasgian in alater publication;116 and through an Arbresh writer, Giuseppe Crispi (Zef Krispi).117

The author who removed these confusions and finally established thePelasgian theory in what was to become its classic form was the greatAlbanologist Johann Georg von Hahn, in his Albanesische Studienof 1854.Von Hahn reverted to Mascis original classification of Illyrians, Epirots andMacedonians as a single linguistic group (constituting the Ur-Albanian

107 Franois C. H. L. Pouquevile,Voyage dans le Grece, 5 Volumes, Paris, 1820-1821.108 Nikolaos Nikokles, De albnensium sive Shkiptar origine et prosapia, Gttingen 1855.109 The Arbresh are the Albanians who settled in Italy in the Middle Ages and kept their peculiar language andculture in remote villages.110 Francesco Tajani, Le istorie albenesi, Slaerno 1886.111 Malcolm, Myths of Albanian National Identity, 74.112 Johann Thunman,Untersuchungen ber die Geschichte der stlichen europaeischen Vlker , Leipzig, 1774.113 For a detailed account of these ancient Greek writings on the Pelasgians, see Fritz Lochner-Httenbach, Die Pelasger , Wien: Gerold & Co., 1960, 1-92 and J. L. Myres, A History of the Pelasgian Theory,The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 27, 1907, 170-225. In contrary to its title, the latter has nothing to do with the history of thePelasgian theory in modern times; it is a study on the ancient sources. Furthermore, it is not understood under coinage Pelasgian theory the theory that Pleasgians are the ancestors of the Illyrians and the Albanians. For information on the part of Strabos book on the Pelasgians referred to by Sami, see Lochner-Httenbach, DiePelasger, 126. For two modern studies not on the Pelasgian themselves or the history of the studies on them, butrather on Pelasgian language, from which no text has sustained, see A. J. van Windekens, Le Pelasgique Essaisur une langue indo-europenne prehellenique, Louvain Publications Universitares (Institue Oriantaliste), 1952 and A.J. van Windekens, Etudes Pelasgiques, Louvain Publications Universitares (Institue Oriantaliste), 1960.114 Angelo Masci (Engjl Mashi), Discorso sull origine, costume e stato attuale della nazione Albanese, Naples,1807. Masci argued that the languages spoken by the Illyrians, Epirots and Macedonians in classical timeswere substantially the same, and that this was the source of the Albanian language; he did not however, identifythis Ur-language as Pelasgian. Malcolm, Myths of Albanian National Identity, 75.115 Angelo Masci, Essai sur lorigine, les moers et letat actuel de la nation albanaise, in Conrad Malte-Brun (ed.) Annales des voyages, de la geographie de lhistorie, 24 vols, Paris: F. Buisson 1808-1814, vol. 3, 145-234.116 Conrad Malte-Brun, Precis de la geographie universelle, ou description de toutes les parties du monde, 2ndedn, 8 vols, Paris: F. Buisson 1812-29. According to Malte-Brun the Albanians were descended from Illyrianstribesmen who had spoken a language affiliated to that of the Pelasgians, Dardanians, Greeks and Macedonians.However, while identifying the Albanians as Illyrian and their language as basically Pelasgian (The Albanianlanguage is an ancient, important and distinct link in the great chain of Palesgo-Hellenic languages), Malte-Brun

described Pelasgian as a primitive version of Greek, and distinguished it from Illyrian, which he regarded as a branch of the Thracian language. (Malcolm, Myths of Albanian National Identity, 75-76)117 Guiseppe Crispi,Memoria sulla lingua albenese, Palermo, 1831.

17


18/27


language), and added to this theory of Malte-Bruns identification of the Ur-Albanians as Pelasgians: this meant the language spoken by the Pelasgianswas not a version of Greek, but something different and perhaps moreancient.118

Sami could also have made use of the discussions of the Pelasgian question in the beginning of the 1890s in Ellis Hesselmeyers German book,119 and/or in EduardMeyers book, where it was claimed that the question of whether the Pelasgians, wholived only in Thessaly and Crete, were Greek or pre-Greek was still open.120We know that Sami could understand most of the languages necessary to read theancient scholars works used by the Western Albanologists. However, we dont knowwhether Sami made use of these texts by reading them himself or rather through readingthe informative Albanological texts on them. It is an important and unfulfilled duty tofind out more about possible use of these texts in Samis works. However, any possibleinfluence of Western Albanology on Sami does not always have to be directly from thetexts of these Albanologists; it may sometimes take an indirect route: via the writings of other Albanian intellectuals who were the pioneers of Albaniancultural nationalism.This is not the place to offer an in-depth discussion on the term cultural nationalism

which is a selective and partial category, and where imagination andmanoeuvre play a vital role in fashioning identity. Cultural nationalismderives its strength from the past mainly folk traditions, religion, ruraldialects - in order to demonstrate cultural uniqueness and thereby stimulatenational consciousness.121

Both the earlier works of the Albanian intellectuals (before 1870s) and those of Samiscontemporaries (from 1870s to 1904) were transmitting the accumulation of Albanologyto a broader readership, though their success was still relatively marginal in this period:122

The main myths created by those who were the so-called men of theAlbanian renaissance (Alb.:rilindja), who nourished Albanian nationalromanticism, are typical myths of European romanticism of the nineteenthcentury, creating the pride in Albanian of being a unique people. Among themain myths are those exalting the antiquity of the Albanian people andAlbanian as one of the oldest languages.123

Sami was not alone in the popularisation of the Pelasgian-Illyrian theory among theAlbanian intellectuals of his time; most of his contemporaries were playing a similar role, as this was the only dominant theory among them. Already in 1860-61, one of thefirst Albanian periodicals, which was published weekly in Albanian and Greek languages in Lama (Greece), was entitled Pellazgu, the Pelasgian.124 In the introductory

118 Malcolm, Myths of Albanian National Identity, 76.119 Ellis Hesselmeyer, Die Pelasgerfrage und Ihre Losbarkeit , Tubingen: Verlag von Franz Fues, 1890.120 Gustav Meyer, Etymologisches Wrterbuch der Albanesischen Sprache, Strassburg: Verlag von Karl J.Trbner, 1891. For Meyers claim see also Lochner-Httenbach, Die Pelasger, 136. For the later discussions onthe Pelasgian question in the twentieth century, see Lochner-Httenbach, Die Pelasger, 136 ff.121 Sethi, Myths of the Nation, 5. An alternative term used in the literature for cultural nationalism is scholarly nationalism. In this context, the term scholarly Turkism is sometimes used here for Turkish cultural nationalismand scholarly Albanianism for the Albanian cultural nationalism.122 The question of the readership in Albania during this period hasnt been studied much. However one can findvaluable information in many secondary sources about the extent to which the circles that could follow thesediscussions in different languages, including Albanian were limited.123 Fatos Lubonja, Between the Glory of a Vritual World and the Misery of a Real World, in StephanieSchwandner-Sievers & Bernd J. Fischer, eds.,Albanian Identities Myth and History, London: Hurst & Company,

2002, 91-103, 92.124 Palok Daka, Bibliografi retrospektive e shtypit periodik shqiptar e mbi Shqiperine e viteve 1848-1944, (I.1848-1908),Studime Historike, Vol 25 (13), No 3, Tiran, 1971, 139-170, 141; Seit Mansaku, Pellazgishtja, in

18


19/27


section of his well-known pamphletThe Truth on Albania and the Albanianswhich was published in 1878 and 1879 in different languages, Wassa Efendi (Pashko Vasa), whowas collaborating with Sami in the cultural-political activities in Istanbul, also advocatedthe idea of the Pelasgians (and Illyrians as their later branch) as the ancestors of theAlbanians in order to prove the autochthony of his people.125 The so-called national poet of modern Albania, Naim Frashri, who was Samis brother,also lived in Istanbul and showed radical nationalist tendencies, wrote in his poemShqipria (Albania), printed in Faik Konitzas journal Albania of 25 May 1897, thatthe first Albanians were called Pelasgians. He published another poem with the titlePellasgt-Shqiptaret (Pelasgians-Albanians) in the following issue of the same journal,in which he re-produces the myth of the Pelasgian origins of the Albanians whilereferring to the ancient Greek writer Herodotus. 126In many cases, Sami might have had anindirect access to such Western knowledge andideas on the history of the Albanians through the books and press articles of theAlbanian intellectuals of his time, with whom, we know, he had organic relations.127There may also be borrowings from others texts in Samis other examples of themodern myths of military valour, of resistance and aristocracy128: the Epirot kingPyrrus ( Pirro, Pyrrua, Burri) and the Illyrian queen Teuta (Tevta) were praised by Sami because of their resistance against the Roman invasion.129 It was within the context of the abovementioned theories of Pelasgian-Illyrian origin and continuity (as the products of Albanology) that the myths of the great Albanian men of antiquity werecreated, among whom were Alexander the Great and Pirro of Epirus.130

A kind of amalgamation of different discourses, i.e. explicit interdiscursivity in Samis book can be observed more surely. As an interesting case, one can discuss theinterception of the usual modernist paradigm observed especially in the last part of the

book, where Sami paints a modern(ist) picture of the future Albanian society and stateon the one hand, and his romanticist attitude, in the same book, on the other hand. There,he underlines the positive side of the centuries-long isolated life of Albanians remotefrom civilisation in the barbarian times:

How did it happen that Albanians were able to preserve their language duringall these barbarian times? How was it possible that the Albanian languagesurvived without changes or damages despite the lack of letters, writing, andschools, while other languages written and used with great care have changedand deteriorated so much that they are now known as other languages? Theanswer to all these questions is very simple: Albanians preserved their language and their nationality not because they had letters, or knowledge, or

civilization, but because they had freedom, because they always stood apartAleks Buda, et al. eds., Fjalori enciklopedik shqiptar , Tiran: Akad , e Shkencave e RPSSH, 1985, 817 andXhevat Lloshi, Pellazgu (1860), in Aleks Buda,et al. eds., Fjalori enciklopedik shqiptar , Tiran: Akad , eShkencave e RPSSH, 1985, 817. Another Albanian periodical with the same name would be published in 1907.(Zihni Reso, Pellazgu (1907), in Aleks Buda,et al. eds., Fjalori enciklopedik shqiptar , Tiran: Akad , eShkencave e RPSSH, 1985, 817)125 Wassa Efendi [Pashko Vasa] The Truth on Albania and the Albanians, Historical and Critical Issues,(Translation by Edward Saint John Fairman), London: Centre for Albanian Studies, 1999 [1879], 3-13.126 For an annotated re-publication of both poems, see Naim Frashri,Vepra t Zgjedhura, Vellimi I , Tiran: NaimFrashri, 1980, 242-247, 249-254.127 As mentioned above, Sami was the leader of the secret Albanian nationalist Istanbul Committeeuntil the end of 1890s.128 George Schpflin, The Nature of Myth: Some Theoretical Aspects, in Stephanie Schwandner-Sievers &

Bernd J. Fischer, eds.,Albanian Identities Myth and History, London: Hurst & Company, 2002, 26-32.129 Shqipria. ka qn, 7.130 Lubonja, Between the Glory, 92.

19


20/27


and didnt mix with other people or let foreigners live among them. Thisisolation from the world, from knowledge, civilization and trade, in one word- this savage mountain life allowed the Albanians to preserve their languageand nationality.131

This romanticist picture of isolated barbarian life might remind us of Rousseaus ideaof the noble savage, which is also displayed, though implicitly, when Sami admires theAlbanians for being brave warriors at several places in the book. Nevertheless Samismain goal is the modernisation of Albania, which logically means elimination of allthose pre-modern values and institutions however romantic they are. It is noteworthy,therefore, to remember also that the Ottoman government had actually been attemptingmodernisation of the empire, including Albania. It is not astonishing to see thisambivalence in other regions of the world as well: Writing on India during the Britishcolonial period, Rumuna Sethi states that

the writing of indigenous history has spread to take two self-contradictorycourses: configuration within the orientalist constellation by an emphasis onthe ancient past, and urge to break away from that very past. In terms of modernity and development, the nation-state could follow hardly any directionother than what had been modelled by the British. The ambivalence is seen inthe abandonment of ancestral culture for a more advanced standard and thedemand that the ancient be retained as a mark of identity. Both the reliance onantiquity and the affirmation of modernity persistently held the emergingnation-state within the orbit of Orientalism, representing what ParthaChatterjee calls the liberal-rationalist dilemma of nationalist thought.132

One can observe a similar amalgamation of different texts and discourses within SamisTurkish articles as well. Here, again, the referred facts (directly or indirectly), terms and

information are from the texts on the history, language and culture of Turkish-speaking people produced either by Western scholars and intellectuals, or Turkish-speakingtransmitters through their earlier works influenced by modern Western studies.It is important to note, first of all, that the honour of discovery of Turkey as a countryand of the Turkish people belongs to Western scholars, contributing to the emergenceof Turcology, a source of future inspiration for Turkish nationalism.133 Even theethnonym Turk for all Turkish-speaking people of the Ottoman Empire (andsometimes for all Muslims) and the very ambiguous toponym Turkey with a newmeaning were imported by Ottoman intellectuals from European languages: The termTurk, had been used in the Ottoman official idiom for crude, ignorant, nomadic people in a patronizing manner: until the 18th and 19th centuries the Turks, usually

thought of as the heart of the empire, took only a limited part in governing, and the veryname of Turk was used to mean uncouth peasant lout. Turk was an insultingepithet not only among the meritocracy, but also the Istanbul populace at large.134 Theemergence of cultural Turkish nationalism based on cultural studies in the fields of linguistics and history attributed a new meaning to the word Turk. It started to be usedto signify a noble nation which had in the past been the founders of glorious

131 Shqipria. ka qn, 17-18.132 Sethi, Myths of the Nation, 17.133

lber Ortayl , The Problem of Nationalities in the Ottoman Empire Following the Second Siege of Vienna, inidem, Studies on Ottoman Transformation, Istanbul: ISIS, 1994, 19-32, 32.134 Op. cit., 21-22.

20


21/27


civilisations. These studies possessed at the same time a kind of defensive character andwere counterpoised against the modernist characterization of Turks as barbarians.135 Turcological studies in the West played an important role in not limiting Turkish historyto the Ottoman period and tracing the history of the Turks back to the pre-Islamic era:The emergence of interest in the pre-Islamic history of the Ottoman Turks, the discoveryof the Turkic people and the construction of the discourse of the brotherhood of allTurkic peoples in Asia were also contributed by Western Orientalists/Turcologists.Using Chinese, Islamic and the Turkish sources, Western Orientalists, had already fromthe eighteenth century on began with to write books about the Turks as founders of great civilisations before the Ottomans, and had a rich language and history. The novelinterest of these Western scholars in the pre-Islamic history of the Ottoman Turks and inthe Turkic people outside the Empire, and the construction of the discourse of thebrotherhood of all Turkic peoples in Asia were voluntarily taken over by someOttoman intellectuals136 in the second half of the nineteenth century. As a result of linguistic, historical and literary studies among the first Turkishcultural nationalists,increasing attention of the Turkists was devoted to the civilization of the Turks in theworld:

In the later part of the nineteenth century, partly under European impact,there developed in the Empire much interest in Turkish studies. Nativescholars rediscovered their past history, the riches of their language and the beauty of heir literature. Although interpretations and conclusions obviouslyvaried, many historians and linguists found their research was uncovering a past going back hundreds years and even thousands years, embracing other peoples of kindred origins.137

The most influential books that played vital role in the introduction of the sentiment of Turkishness among some Ottoman intellectuals were: Joseph de Guignes (1721-1800)

Historie generale des Huns, des Turcs, des Mongoles, et autres Tartares occidenteaux,etc., avant et depuis Jesus-Christ jusqa a present , Paris, 1756-1758; Arthur LumleyDavids (1811-1832) A Turkish Language Grammar. With preliminary discussion on thelanguage and literature of the Turkish nations, a copious vocabulary, dialogues, acollection of extracts in prose and verse, etc., London, 1832;138 and Leon Cahuns(1841-1900), Introduction a lhistorie de lAsie, Paris, 1896. In this latter book, which

135 Kushner, The Rise of Turkish nationalism, 12.136 As in the cases of two of fathers of Turkish nationalism Sami and later Ziya Gkalp (1876-1924),inter alias,and in the case of more radical Turkist intellectuals of the later periods, these intellectuals were sometimes noteven originally Turkish or native Turkish speakers. Furthermore, It is interesting to note that none of thefounders of the first nucleus of the main Young Turk organisation, the Committee of Union and Progress,[founded in 1889] in the Royal Medical Academy was of Turkish origin, and they represented the importantMuslim groups in which a strong sense of nationalism was yet to develop Albanians, Kurds, Circassians.krM. Haniolu, Turkish Nationalism and the Young Turks, 1889-1908, in Fatma Muge Gek, ed.,Social Constructions of Nationalism in the Middle East , Albany: State University of New York Press, 2002, 85- 97, 87.137 Jacob M. Landau, Pan-Turkism in Turkey: From Irredentism to Cooperation, London: Hurst & Company,1995 [1981], 30.138 This was important not only as the first systematic grammar of Turkish to be published but also as anhis

CAS_WTP_Bilmez

Documents

Transcript of CAS_WTP_Bilmez