The main problems that the Turkish nation-state is obliged to face, but persistently postpone, are growing like a "snowball" day by day. The Kurdish issue, the Armenian Genocide, the Alevi question are among these kind of problems. The only method used by the nation-state in 100 years was "indoctrination". This policy almost created a "conglomeration". Turkish state has ignored the fact that these lands are multi-coloured. One of these colors is undoubtedly Alevis. They were deemed “worthy” of many adjectives such as faithless, denier, sinner by the hegemony, and were subjected to plenty of massacres. However, they never took a step back from the struggle for equal citizenship. They are now waiting for a new paradigm to be built and a democratic system to be established. History, practices and theological structure of Alevism undoubtedly have drawn the attention of many researchers from abroad. One of these researchers, Assoc. Dr. Daria Zhigulskaya has been conducting her scholarly studies in the Institute of Asian and African Countries at Moscow State University in Russia. She also wrote the book entitled “The Alevis of Turkey”. We talked to Daria Zhigulskaya about Alevism. 

 

Firstly, I would like to get your opinion about the concepts of Alevism and Qizilbash. How can these concepts be interpreted etymologically?

 

 

The term “Alevism” is quite new and only became widespread in the 20th century, when it replaced and then completely supplanted the term “Qizilbash” (which had derogatory overtones).

The term “Qizilbash” is linked to the Safavid dynasty, whose influence should be seen as the decisive factor in the evolution of Alevism. The Safavids’ support base in the 15th century consisted of the western Turkmen (Oguz) tribes of Iran and Anatolia, together with various Sufi/mystic groups of itinerant dervishes (in particular the Vefa’iyye dervishes). The disgraced Shaykh Junayd (1429–1460) began popularizing Shiite ideas amongst the aforementioned tribes and groups. After his death, his newborn son Haydar (1459–1488) was revered by his followers as the earthly embodiment of God. Haydar’s militant murids were given the name “Qizilbash” (redheads) from their red 12-gore hats symbolizing the 12 Shiite imams. 1487 saw the birth of Haydar’s younger son Ismail, who went on to become the all-powerful Shaykh of Iran and founder of the Safavid dynasty. 

After consolidating their power in Iran, the Safavids distanced themselves from the Qizilbash and adopted Twelver Shiism (Isna ‘Asharism). Following the battle of Chaldiran (1514), in which the Qizilbash took part as the military elite on the Safavid side, their forces were disbanded, and during the reign of Shaykh Abbas (1587 to 1629) the Qizilbash movement in Iran was completely dissolved within Twelver Shiism (Isna ‘Asharism).  

 

Interestingly, the Qizilbash ended up as hostages to the political interests of two empires, and were subsequently marginalized not only by the Ottoman Sunnis but also by the Safavid Shiites with whom they had formerly been in alliance.

 

By renaming the Qizilbash “Alevis” in the 20th century, the nationalist narrative was not only endeavoring to integrate any dubious groups into the young Turkish nation, but was also confirming their Islamic nature, even if the Islam practiced by such groups was regarded as heterodoxy. On this basis, one may conclude that political interests had a major influence on the reconceptualization of the Qizilbash groups as Alevis.

 

Apart from these definitions, some Ottoman sources mention terms such as People of Light and the Light Worshippers. What would you like to say about this? Are those who are Alevi, Qizilbash and others separate religious groups?

 

As noted above, there is every reason to assume that the terms “Qizilbash” and “Alevi” refer to the same phenomenon, the latter replacing the former, which had derogatory overtones, in the socio-political circumstances of 20th century Turkey.  

 

Indeed, in some sources, as well as scholarly and popular literature, there is a tendency, often under the influence of political circumstances, to identify the Alevis with other essentially syncretic religious groups, such as the Ahl-i Haqq (also self-designated as Yarisan or Kakai), the Yazidis and others. Despite some highly focused points of similarity with the other groups listed above, largely due to their syncretic nature, there are no substantive grounds for assuming that these groups are identical.

Returning to the question, one cannot ignore the existence of a new movement amongst the Alevis that has developed an alternative understanding of Alevism and its history: Işık Alevism (Işık Aleviliği), also known as Chinarism (Çınarcılık), named after and inspired by the thinking of Erdoğan Çınar. This movement draws upon the fact that some Ottoman documents from the 16th century refer to the ancestors of today's Alevis as "Işık Taifesi", meaning "People of Light". According to the Ishikis, this is proof of a connection between the Alevis and the Anatolian Luvians, the word "Luvi" meaning "people of light" in the Hittite language.

 

It is known that the abovementioned religious dynamics were regarded by Ottoman clergy as faithless, and they were marginalized by the ruling class. Are these elements of Islamic origin, or do they date back to the polytheistic era?

 

 

It is undeniable that in the Ottoman Empire the Alevis were persecuted and experienced severe discrimination. This led them to adopt a secretive lifestyle in rural locations far from the big cities, and to minimize contacts with the Sunni majority. It is also believed that the majority of Alevis supported the establishment of a secular republican regime, in which they placed their hopes of achieving equal rights with the Sunnis and an end to harassment.

As for the “nature” of Alevism and its roots, scholarly and popular commentators have so far failed to develop a common approach to the question of whether Alevism is a separate religion or a movement within Islam. Alevism is often portrayed as an independent philosophy of life, a sort of life journey. 

It is difficult to determine to within a century exactly when Alevism emerged in Anatolia. The evidence indicates that before the 16th century, which saw the apotheosis of the Shiites’ anti-Ottoman struggle in Asia Minor, there was no evidence of a separate religious Alevi community. It would probably be more accurate to talk about a diversity of Sufi movements in Anatolia which were in close contact with and influenced one another. Separate mention should be made of the Sufi order Vefa’iyye, as well as the substantial influence of surviving pre-Islamic faiths - shamanism, Zoroastrianism etc. – on the highly eclectic religious picture of Anatolia at that time. 

 

20th century Turkish historiography on the origins of Alevism was dominated by Fuat Köprülü, who proposed that Alevism’s roots lid in the shamanism of the ancient Turks. But it is essential to understand the environment in which this theory arose, coinciding with the creation of a new Turkish nation in the early republican period. This subject has been brilliantly analyzed by Markus Dressler in his book ‘Writing Religion: The Making of Turkish Alevi Islam’.

 

One could maintain that the various connotations associated with Alevis and Alevism in the 20th century (Alevism as the successor of pre-Islamic Turkish tradition and culture, Alevism as an ideology of the class struggle, Alevism as a Turkish philosophy, Alevism as secular Islam, Alevism as a post-Zoroastrian Kurdish religion) are reflections of the complex process of identity politics in Turkey, in which religious, ethnic, nationalist and class interests come into conflict with one another. 

 

Particularly a few religious rituals in Dersim, also known as Tunceli, have been recently drawing the attention of researchers. People from this region bless sun, and also celebrate the Gaghant festival as new year. Today, the people living in Dersim are called Alevi or Qizilbash Kurds, but they have extremely different religious rituals. Can it be said that it is a pre-Islamic belief? Do they bear the traces of Zoroastrianism?

 

 

To answer this question, I would like to begin by saying that it is quite difficult and not entirely accurate to make generalizations about Alevism. Alevism cannot be reduced to a specific ethnic or linguistic attribute, nor can any single “standard” form of practice be singled out. Indeed, some customs and rituals, such as those of the Kurdish Alevis of Tunceli Province and the Turkish Alevis of Mugla Province, vary enormously. The customs of the Arab-speaking Alawites of Hatay Province are also very distinct.

 

In the context of the comprehensive process of resignification of Alevism in Turkey in the 20th century, aimed primarily at integrating the Alevis into the new Turkish society, the erroneous understanding arose that the Alevis form a separate and rather homogeneous socio-religious group, despite their regional variations. The internal differences between the various groups of Alevis became lost in the modernist narrative and homogenizing nation-state project. I therefore strongly believe that any study of Alevism must embrace its historical and conceptual transformation, as well as methodological issues. 

For a long time, Turkish scholarly studies on the subject of Alevism were dominated by the theory that Anatolian Alevism had Central Asian roots. This trend can be explained by numerous constraints in the political environment of that time. For a long time, the very concept of Kurdish Alevism was dismissed. From the 1980s, as the Kurdish movement arose, the Turkocentric definition of Alevism became controversial, with Kurdish intellectuals of Alevi origin insisting on the distinctions between Turkish and Kurdish Alevism. Countering assertions that Alevism’s roots lay in shamanism, they maintained that Zoroastrianism and Mazdeism were the dominant influences. 

It is clear that as a result of their geographical isolation over many centuries, the Kurdish Alevis were remote from Turkish Ottoman culture. To make a somewhat sweeping generalization, it could be said that while the influence of Central Asian religious motifs, Turkish shamanism and Tengrism were notable in the practices and rituals of the Turkish Alevis at that time, the Kurdish Alevis displayed motifs taken from Mesopotamia and ancient Iranian faiths. For example, worship of the forces of nature and the sun held an important place in the life of the Dersim community. According to the researcher Ali Kemali, the Dersimis worshiped the first reflection of sunbeams on the Earth. The Dersimis explained that this ritual originated in a legend, according to which Ali ascended to the heavens after his death and turned into the sun. This practice is identical to the rituals of the Yazidis living in Mardin and Diyarbakir in the 19th century.

Another feature of the religious practices in Dersim is the “snake cult” (which once existed amongst the Armenians of that region). Several tribes had centres of pilgrimage in which an image of a snake was an object of worship. The best-known example of this was the village of Kiştim, not far from Erzincan. 

There is every reason to believe that the practices described above have their origins in the ancient faiths of Mesopotamia. However, due to space limitations, the examples given here do not reflect the full diversity of the cults of the Kurdish Alevis. Some quite detailed and valuable information on the subject of the Kurdish Alevis can be found in studies by Peter Bumke, Martin (van) Bruinessen and Erdal Gezik.

 

 As known, the central Alevi communal worship service is called cem, which is performed in special houses named Cem Evi. Plenty of researchers claim that the cem ritual symbolizes ascension. Thus, they link Alevism again to Islam. Do you think this is true? It is thought that the cem ritual was also performed by Sumerians and Zoroastrians. I wonder if cem ritual is older than Islam?

 

To answer this question, I would like to focus on three aspects that should be examined separately. First, the roots and nature of the Alevis’ rites - the cem; second, the meaning and key function of this ritual for the Alevis; and third, the changing nature of the cem today under the influence of urbanization and globalization.  

There are indeed various theories tracing the roots of the Alevis’ cem rites back to pre-Islamic traditions, such as Zoroastrianism, shamanism etc. But it is not yet possible to support any one of these theories with absolutely certainly.   

It is also important to understand the purpose of these rites, which is to worship God, to achieve spiritual renewal and provide a mechanism of social and individual control. Alongside its religious significance, the cem traditionally performed educational and public information functions. During the Ottoman Empire, in particular, the cem also acted as a judicial body for the Alevis, who made no use of the Ottoman courts. Personal problems, family issues, friction between the individual and society – all these things were discussed during the cem.

There are various types of cem (including ikrar/musahiplik cemi, görgü cemi, rızalık alma cemi, dârdan indirme cemi and others), all of which are imitations of archetypes from another, eternal world.   

As a result of the continuous changes in the political and socio-economic life of Turkey in the 20th century, it is fair to talk about the emergence of a new and more inclusive concept of Alevism. Rapid migration to the big cities dramatically changed the social and spatial dimensions of a religion which was previously constrained by the strictly limited structure of the community and the oral tradition of passing on religious knowledge. In these new circumstances, the tradition of collective prayer in Alevism – cem – has also undergone serious changes and become a key marker of the Alevi movement, its purpose being to confess Alevism. While the traditional cem was restricted to a limited community of talips and their ruling dede, the new cem is open in nature, not only reaching out to members of the community but also striving to communicate information about itself to the outside world. 

 

Thus, in my view, the key problem of Alevi studies today is the attempt to “tie” Alevism’s roots to one specific tradition. As with any social/religious phenomenon, however, it should be considered not only in its static state but also in transition, and should be studied not in an overly narrow geographical framework but in conjunction with transregional events and contexts impacting the subject under investigation. 

 

* Do you come across any extraordinary documents in the Russian archives? What kind of hypothesis is put forward by Russian researchers? Do they share also the idea of Islamic Alevism?

 

Unfortunately, Russian scholars have very little to say on the subject of Alevism and the Alevis. Amongst the few works worth mentioning are some essays by academician V.A. Gordlevsky and a monograph by Yu.A. Averyanov entitled “Haji Bektash Veli and the Sufi Bektashi Order”.

 

V.A. Gordlevskiy was interested in a wide range of issues related to the cults and beliefs of various regions of Turkey. He wrote a series of articles on the history of the Sufi orders in Turkey and the hieratic practices of the Bektashi and Qizilbash movements; he was also interested in the itinerant dervishes (Qalandars, Abdals) and the rituals of the Shiites of Iranian Azerbaijan.

 

Yu.A. Averyanov studied the historical, and theological/philosophical aspects of Bektashism.

 

My own PhD dissertation, which I defended in the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences in 2014, was devoted to the social and political history of the Alevis in the 20th and 21st centuries, and led to the publication of a monograph entitled “The Alevis of Turkey”. I am currently continuing to work on the subject, having greatly expanded the scope of my studies. However, my main focus is on the contemporary history of the Alevis, their cultural and political self-identification, their relationship with the authorities and their participation in social processes. I am also interested in the Alevi diaspora and issues around historical memory and the revitalization of Alevi self-awareness. In view of the historical period covered by my studies, I rarely have to work in archives, focusing instead on field studies to explore the current status of Alevism.  

 

Due to the virtual absence of research work on the topic of Alevism in Russia, until recently, scientific and popular circles tended to categorize the Turkish Alevis as Shiites, which is clearly wrong. Today, with access to a wide range of information, interest in the subject of Alevism is growing. I hope that future comprehensive research into Alevi issues will help to fill the gaps in the study of the history and contemporary status of Alevism. 

 

MA / Ismet Konak