The Use and Abuse of Archaeology and Anthropology in Formulating the Turkish Nationalist Narrative

Abstract

The ‘Turkish History Thesis’ was the project of constructing a history of origins and an ethnic identity for the Turks in early republican Turkey. In this respect, the project was similar to nation-building efforts elsewhere. Yet, archaeological activities, designed along the lines of the thesis, experienced a paradox between demonstrating the genealogical purity and autochthony of the Turks, on the one hand, and proving that they are part of, if not gave birth to, Western civilization on the other. Here archaeology served both as an instrument for grounding a national existence (autochthonism) and as a medium for participating in ‘contemporary civilization’. For this reason, the Turkish History project, in line with the nationalist vision of depicting the world both as an aggregation of nations and as their field of competition since Herder, is a way of assuring the equality (even superiority) of the Turkish nation with others and validating its right to exist on respective territories through demonstrating its continuous existence from time immemorial (autochthony). With these considerations in mind, ideologically motivated archaeological excavations of the 1930s were carried out under the auspices of President Kemal Ataturk, who personally visited the sites of excavation and showed his open support. Afet Inan (1943, p. 9), the foremost proponent of the thesis and the adopted daughter of Ataturk, explains the anthropological and archaeological concerns of the thesis: No cultural period is alien [to Turks]. Ownership of this land by the Turkish race reaches back to time immemorial. Proto-Hittite and Hittite periods are the starting point of this ownership. The waves of migration that followed brought Turks’ brothers of the same race to the lands of Turkey. This country experienced the rule of different political bodies and changes in its name throughout various epochs of its history. Yet in its racial quality, it has always preserved its Turkish essence. My remarks have two implications: first, the skeletons of our ancestors were preserved under this land for thousands of years; second, the Turkish nation, present dweller and rightful owner of this homeland, I mean, us … This is quite easy to understand for us. But it is our duty to make this known in the international scientific community.