This article was originally published in Journal of Central Asian and Caucasian Studies in No: 2 Volume: 1 pp:149-161

Present prosperity of idol-temples comes from our ruin

a union of the infidels-from our distress

Islam in itself is the same as it was

Every defect in existence comes from us who claim to be a Muslim

Islam is our honor, Islam is our happiness[1]

  Abstract:              

At the beginning of the twentieth century, all Muslim societies went through critical changes in various areas such as education, religion, politics, and nationalism. From the Ottoman Empire to Iran; from Egypt to Bukhara, key cities of Islamic geography have been affected by the modernization movement. The Muslim elite who were involved in these modernization activities hoped that the Muslim states would return to their powerful and glorious days. In this article, one tried to compare the nation concept and modernization in the Bukharan and Ottoman societies. One also sought the similarities of nation concepts in the Homeland or Silistra of Namik Kemal and the Indian Revolutionaries of Abdalrauf Fitrat. In the article, how the Jadids utilized the theater as a mean of education also discussed. One on the other hand tried to see how the homeland notion appeared and evolved in the Uzbek literature.

Keywords: Bukhara, Fitrat, Uzbekistan, Indian, Revolution, Dram, Woman, Modernization, Nationalism, Ottoman Empire, Namik Kemal, Homeland, Silistra, Jadidism.

At the beginning of the twentieth century, all Muslim societies went through critical changes in various areas such as education, religion, politics, and nationalism. Since the Islamic societal network was active, these changes ignited other local modernization activities of Muslim communities. From the Ottoman Empire to Iran; from Egypt to Bukhara, key cities of Islamic geography have been affected by the modernization movement. The Muslim elite who were involved in these modernization activities hoped that the Muslim states would return to their powerful and glorious days. In this process, Bukharan society gave birth to their own new elite[1], who led the community in the movement. In search of answers to the problems of the Emirate of Bukhara, these intellectuals[2] brought their gaze to bear upon all branches of social institutions. Bukharan merchants and pilgrims assisted them by bringing cultural and social news from outside the emirate, thus they accelerated the modernization process.

The new elite of Bukhara were termed Jadids, since they were proposing (and defending) new ideas. The Jadids offered various solutions for the emirate's problems; addressing a range of issues from the economy to religious institutions[3]. The Jadids also discussed nationalism, liberation, education and women in their publications and tried to popularize their ideology. The Jadidist concepts have played an important role in the history of the entire Turkic peoples. The Bukharan Jadids utilized various tools to popularize their ideology. Education was the main tool which helped the popularization of all jadidist activities in Central Asia and in Volga region. Another tool which was intelligently utilized to reach the Bukharan people was drama. It had a remarkable influence considering the communication conditions of the time. The dramas were presenting the goals and ideas of Bukharan jadids with the motifs of daily life. This article will try to illuminate whether or not the Bukharan Jadids were affected by their Ottoman counterparts in the sense of modernization. It will compare the women characters and their manner and behavior in the dramas. It will also explore how the term vatan (homeland) evolved and how it developed different meanings over time.

Drama, the playwright’s art, takes its name from the Greek verb dran, meaning “to do” or “to act”. Drama is most often defined as that part of words and actions having the potential for “doing”; to put it another way, able to become living words and actions[4]. Drama and acting were not new concepts in Turkic culture. On the contrary, the Uzbeks had a rich store of oral literature, including prose and poetry. Drama played an important role in the modernization process in Bukhara; indeed, it was utilized as an instrument by innovators not only in Bukhara but in the Near East as well.^[5]

In 1911, Mahmud Khoja Behbudi[6] wrote one of the first jadidist dramas. Given his position (mufti) and background, Behbudi was somewhat unique amongst the jadids. For one thing, he was the leading proponent of a form of jadidism that sought a balanced combination between modernity and the ancient cultures of the East and Islam. Behbudi expressed his views on the theater in an article titled Teyatr Nedur? (What is Theater?) and published in his periodical Âyina,

“What is theater? Theater is lesson; theater is preachment; theater is way of warning (nasihat). Theater is a mirror in which the general manners were becoming tangible and significant, though eyes could see, ears could hear and understood it.”[7]

In another article, he stressed that the theater is a place for preaching and exhortation^[8]. He also added that, in his opinion, theater is the first prerequisite if a nation is to progress^[9]. The prominent dramas which were generally discussed in Central Asian studies are Munâzarâ of Abdalrauf Fitrat and Padarkush of Mahmud Khoja Behbudi. These two dramas influenced the later ones with the main theme of awakening the public from the sleep of ignorance, and stressing the importance of education. The progress of the jadidist drama and its concepts correlated to the political formation of the Young Bukharans in the Emirate of Bukhara.

Abdalrauf Fitrat (Bukhara. 1886-1938) was an eminent modernist figure in Russian Central Asia. The son of a prosperous merchant, Fitrat received a traditional Islamic education in Bukhara before being sent to Istanbul in 1909 by a Bukharan benevolent society that was founded by the Jadids[10]. He spent four intensive years in Istanbul in close collaboration with the modernist Young Turk circles. These years made a remarkable contribution to the formation of his world views. In 1914, he returned to Bukhara and became involved in cultural and educational Jadidist activities. Fitrat was planning to transport his cultural modernization to the political arena. The October revolution created opportunities for his political plans that he developed in Istanbul in the Young Turk circles. Fitrat emerged as one of the main leaders of the Young Bukharans following his return to Bukhara. When the Bukharan People's Soviet Republic was declared in 1920, Fitrat served as the chief of the economic advisory board and as Minister of Education. Fitrat's supportive manner to the unity and liberation of Turkestanian people disturbed the Soviets in Moscow and he was ousted from public office in 1923. He spent the rest of his life as a scholar who specialized in the Turkic cultural heritage of Central Asia and published numerous works on Turkic language, literature, and music. Fitrat was arrested in 1937 during the Great Purge and executed the following year.

Fitrat introduced the keywords vatan and millat in his preliminary work Munâzarâ. His first usage coincided with the entrance of Russian troops to Bukhara, caused by the Sûnni-Shiite clash[11]. The Russian forces, waiting to firm their control over Bukhara since 1868, exploited this opportunity and entered the city. Fitrat wrote the opening line as: hamvatanân-i ‘Azîzem, millet-i necîbe-i Bukhârâ in Munâzara[12]. Actually, the vatan concept of Fitrat was as innocent as an infant’s cry to its mother. Fitrat later expressed his feelings regarding to vatan in verses of Sayha:

Oh my dear mother,

O land of Bukhara

My Pride with you,

And my trust is with you…[13]

In another poem he says:

Begin to blow about my homeland in the morning

Oh, did I say homeland, rather the place where

I prostrate my body and soul

Both my safe place of rest, my honor and glory

And my ka’ba, my qibla, and my garden[14].

When he first wrote about the vatan (homeland), he meant the city of Bukhara-i Sherif. In preliminary works, the term vatan represented only a local identity. Over time, his concept of nationality, which could be easily seen in his works, widened and progressed. Komatsu wrote that when Fitrat mentioned the term vatan in 1920’s, he meant Turkestan, which included all Turkic nations[15]. Therefore, Fitrat’s homeland concept evolved in its content and geographic coverage.  It is also possible to follow the tracks of this change in his works. The homeland concept fluctuated from time to time from Turkestan to the geography of all Islamic countries.

The evolution of the concept of homeland generated the ‘liberation’ notion. Fitrat explained the occupation of Muslim lands by the ignorance of Muslims. He wrote that “300 million of Muslim population was under the domination of infidels” in the Munâzâra. Fitrat defined his notion with three terms: homeland, nation and liberation; all which are vital to build a state. His concept of homeland started with Bukhara-i Sherif, then developed to include the Emirate of Bukhara, and finally a more comprehensive area including Turkestan.

Actually, the progress of his nation concept was following a line similar to the vatan. But Fitrat was stressing the foreign domination over Muslim nations and especially his nation. Perhaps, the notions of liberty and liberation in Fitrat’s ideology were inspired by the Young Turk circles during his stay in Istanbul. Before focusing on the plot of Hind Ikhtilâlchilari (Indian Revolutionaries) of Fitrat, one needs to have a closer look at Namik Kemal who was also known as a homeland poet in the history of Turkish literature.

Namik Kemal was born in Tekirdag in 1840. He was educated in various locations in the Ottoman Empire, due to his father’s assignments. He had his first career in an Ottoman newspaper, Tasvir-i Efkâr, with Şinasi. Eventually, he joined the Young Ottoman circles[16]. He was expelled several times by the Ottoman sultan to various cities of the empire. He went (“ran away” gives a meaning of “escaped” – did you mean this?) to Europe at the invitation of Mustafa Fazil Pasha and observed many fields, from the education system to civil rights in Paris and London. His articles always came to the attention of the palace and he was usually sent into exile. His nationalistic, patriotic and sentimental play Vatan yahut Silistre[17] drew great applause from the public, when it was staged in Gedikpaşa Theater in 1873[18]. As a consequence, the play was banned and the playwright was sent into exile. Thus, the event was the first censorship in the history of Turkish theater. Namik Kemal wrote other plays similar to Vatan yahut Silistre to provoke Ottoman society[19]. However, Vatan yahut Silistre, which emphasize the word ‘vatan’ for a multi-ethnic empire, was a milestone in the history of Turkish drama,. He introduced the word vatan into Ottoman daily usage, while he was writing in Tasvir-i Efkar[20].

Namik Kemal’s concept of homeland was also religiously oriented. This could easily be observed in his earlier articles[21].  He believed that vatan was the most effective way to keep all nations together in the empire and admitted that the Ottoman Empire was his vatan. Over time, he extended the definition of vatan to encompass the entire Islamic world. Namik Kemal defined that; ‘the homeland is not insignificant lines that are drawn by such a victorious’ sword or a secretaries’ pen. But it is combination of many sublime emotions such as nation, freedom, benefit, friendship, sovereignty, respect to ancestors, and the love of family’[22]. After Şinasi’s play, he explored the theatre and its usage. Namik Kemal utilized the stage as a pulpit to preach to his spectators via characters in the drama[23]. In fact, Islam bey, one of the figures in the drama, was literally reading a text in the play instead of acting. This drama was presenting a legendary characteristic[24]. Actually the timing of Vatan yahut Silistre was the most appropriate from the point of the hero, who was trying to stop the Ottoman Empire’s[25] loss of power.

Fitrat first wrote Chin Sevish (True love), which has a plain plot compared to Hind Ikhtilâlchilari (Indian Revolutionaries)[26]. After Chin Sevish, Fitrat completed Hind Ikhtilâlchilari with more complicated plot and casting. However, Fitrat hesitated to publish it in the political atmosphere of Republic of Bukhara[27]. The play was published in Berlin in 1923 by students of Fitrat who had been sent to Germany for higher education. The Hind Ikhtilâlchilari was one of the subsequent works of Fitrat. Its literal quality was high and its aim was to preach to the public; perhaps it was written for the stage, but records about the staging of this play have not been found. In the Chin Sevish and Hind Ikhtilâlchilari, Fitrat exemplified the liberation of India in the form of an imaginary revolution against the colonial British rule. Fitrat’s preliminary homeland concept just covered Bukhara, but this perception expanded to Turkestan in the Hind Ikhtilâlchilari. The interest of Fitrat in India stemmed from the historical commercial and cultural relations of Central Asian people with India[28]. One also believes that as a colony of the British Empire, India was a comparable example to Bukhara in the context of colonialism.

The cast list was large compared to other plays of Fitrat. Rahimbakhsh is an educated young Indian man Dilnevâz is an Indian girl, who is the lover of Rahimbakhsh. Lalahardiyal is an Indian dervish (qalander). Âkunar is the chief of the police in Lahore. Maulânâ No^cman is the commander of the castle at the Indian-Afghanistan border. Gulâm Nebi is the janitor of Maulânâ No^cman. Merling is a British spy. Reduni Bibi is the servant of Âkunar. Punter and Parlinson are majors in the British army. In the drama, there were also a number of other figures such as beggar woman, Revolutionaries and a captain.

In the Hind Ikhtilâlchilari, there were two stories which progress and intersect at a point. Rahimbakhsh and Dilnevâz are lovers. Rahimbakhsh loves his homeland as much as Dilnevâz. He is also angry with the British domination over India. One day, Rahimbakhsh is arrested by the British forces without cause. Meanwhile, there are many rumors in India that all Muslims are going to join the Jihad invitation of the Caliph. At the same time, Indian Muslims are discussing the possibility of German support for any liberation attempt in India. British spies are trying to convince prominent Muslim leaders that the British domination brings many benefits to the Indian Muslims compared with other groups in India. Rahimbakhsh escapes from the Police station and joins the revolutionist group. The Police chief would like to marry Dilnevâz, nevertheless, she doesn’t want to marry a British collaborative even though he is an Indian. Actually, she loves Rahimbakhsh, who is one of Indian Revolutionaries fighting against British domination. While this is going on, Indian leaders in various locations are discussing their situation. However; these leaders are not even sure about each others ideas and groups. Meanwhile, British forces are searching for German agents in India. Rahimbakhsh returns to the Police station in Lahore and saves Dilnevâz from Âkunar.  The two escape to  the revolutionist’s camp where they take up residence.  In response, the Police chief and the commander of the British forces send out a spy to find the location of the revolutionist’s camp. The woman finds the camp and informs the British forces. Following the raid, Dilnevâz and Badrinath, who is one of the Indian Revolutionaries, are captured by the British commander. Rahimbakhsh and some of the other Revolutionaries are able to escape and meet at a point where they devise a plan to save Dilnevâz and Badrinath. Rahimbakhsh and his friends attack the British commander and Indian police in the forest. The plan works and the British commander, the spy and the Indian policemen have to release Dilnevâz and Badrinath. Upon the urging of Rahimbakhsh, the Indian policemen join the Indian Revolutionaries to liberate India. The play ends with the slogans , “Viva India”, “Viva Future”.

In Namik Kemal’s ‘Vatan yahut Silistre[29]’, the plot has similarities with the Hind Ikhtilâlchilari of Fitrat. The prominent figures of the drama are İslam bey and Zekiye. İslam bey is an officer in the Ottoman Army, whose ancestors were martyred in various wars of the Ottoman Empire. Hanife is the wet nurse of Zekiye. Sïdkï Bey is an Ottoman officer, who has experienced injustices in the Ottoman Army and is complaining about the administrative system, but he is ready for martyrdom. Rüstem Bey is also an Ottoman Officer. Abdullah Çavuş is a sergeant in the Ottoman Army, but he is so characteristic with his repeated slogan: “Is this the end of the world?[30]” He is also in the team with İslam bey and Zekiye when they try to reach the enemy front. İslam bey and Zekiye fall in love with each other. One day, İslam bey enters Zekiye’s room and describes his feelings. Meanwhile, the Ottoman Empire is loosing the wars taking place in various parts of its geography. İslam bey is going to join the army. He tells Zekiye about his decision. The situation is stressful for the couple, who were only able to express their feelings just a short time before. However, İslam bey explains that this mission is for the homeland (vatan). Zekiye accepts his will to join the army but, one day she hears that İslam bey is in the street inviting volunteers for the war with; ‘the one who loves me, will not leave by me to the war’. Zekiye dresses like a man and plans to follow İslam bey into war. Hanife sees her condition and begs and tries to convince Zekiye not to go to the war. In the war, Zekiye convinces the commander Sïdkï bey that she should work during the war at the castle. Sïdkï bey is an officer, whose rank was decreased due to his resistance to the governor, who had tried to take his wife[31]. He was banished and his rank was reduced. He changed his name and started from the first rank in the army. What he did not know was that Zekiye was the daughter of Sïdkï bey. Zekiye disguised as a young boy, finally, convinces Sïdkï bey to send her to the front. Under the intensive attack of the enemy, Sïdkï bey asks for a volunteer to infiltrate the enemy headquarters. İslam bey volunteers for the mission. İslam bey does not know that Zekiye is in the castle with a boy costume. Upon İslam bey’s volunteering, Zekiye also volunteers for the mission. Sïdkï bey also assigns Abdullah Çavuş to the team. During the operation, İslam bey is wounded. Abdullah Çavuş and soldiers carried him to a bed and Zekiye waited by his bed while he was sleeping. After a while, İslam bey wakes up and recognizes Zekiye that she is the girl which he is in love. İslam bey tells the story to Sïdkï bey how Zekiye joined the army in a boy costume just to be with him. Sïdkï bey then meets with Zekiye and barely recognizes his daughter, which he lost her traces during his banishment. Sïdkï bey decides that Zekiye must marry with İslam bey. After the mission, the Ottoman army wins the battle and the enemy retreats from the field. The drama ends with the slogans; “Viva Homeland!”, “Viva Ottomans!”

The Hind Ikhtilâlchilari (Indian Revolutionaries) and Vatan yahut Silistre (The Homeland or Silistra) had a lot of common points. Perhaps, it was the result of Fitrat’s education in Istanbul and his relations with the Young Turk circles. In both dramas, Fitrat and Namik Kemal are trying to show the love of homeland. Both playwrighters were citizens of a multi-ethnic state. The drama of Namik Kemal takes place within the borders of the Ottoman Empire while Fitrat’s drama takes place in India, which is not his homeland. Mainly, the pressure of the Emir of Bukhara on the Young Bukharans and the Russian colonial domination affected his writing. He might have thought that it was more appropriate to project the plot into other state. India was certainly the most suitable example in his mind, with its cultural and historical ties to Bukhara[32], and its multi-ethnic and multi-religious character.  Namik Kemal was a Young Ottoman, therefore, he was mainly propagating Pan-Ottomanism in his drama, which is apparent in his final slogan, “Viva Ottomans![33]” However, Fitrat ends his drama as; “Viva Future!”, “Viva India[34]”. Perhaps, it would be appropriate to interpret “Viva Future!” as prayer for the future of the Turkestani peoples, as well as the Emirate of Bukhara. With a glance at the chronology, it would be possible to see that the period that the Hind Ikhtilâlchilari appeared was in sequence with the revolution of the Young Bukharans in Bukhara and the bombing of the Russian forces in 1920. Therefore, it was a wish for the future of Bukhara and Young Bukharans. The condition of Bukhara was also a question, for the Young Bukharans.

But both dramas have a theme of love which begins between two people. Human love is transformed or integrated into a love of homeland. In the homeland, or Silistra, İslam bey and Zekiye are the lovers and Zekiye follows İslam bey to the front. The love theme was more artistically analyzed in the homeland or Silistra. In all steps of the drama, it is possible to feel and smell the traces of love. However, in Hind Ikhtilâlchilari , the love theme is only discussed at the beginning of the drama. In the rest,  political issues are more dominant than the love between people. The love motif is used as motivation for Rahimbakhsh to save Dilnevâz from the police station. In the beginning of Hind Ikhtilâlchilari, Dilnevâz is asking Rahimbakhsh, “Do you love me as much as you love India?” Rahimbakhsh answers the question, “to love India does not mean I don’t love you, does it?” Rahimbakhsh deduces and then expresses to her that to love India is the same as to love her, “One who loves his homeland (yurt[35]) does not love the soil and rocks, but the beauties of it. The one, who martyrs for his homeland, gives his life for the history, virtues and wealths of his homeland. You are one of the beauties, and virtues of my homeland. To love them is to love you”[36].

Rahimbakhsh’s realization of the nature of his love is actually demonstrating Fitrat’s understanding of nationalism. According to this deductive logic, the homeland (vatan) is the source of all love; therefore, all subjects of the homeland have to become martyrs if they are asked to. As an individual, the subjects are not crucial; the homeland is itself enough to originate the homeland concept. But in the Western type of nationalism, the individuals were a sine qua non component of the ideology[37].

In Hind Ikhtilâlchilari, the love discussion continues with these lines of Rahimbakhsh, “I love you from the bottom of my heart, but the word love is not enough to identify it; I adore you.” In the drama, the relationship between nightingale and rose is told by Dilnevâz.  This is a frequently used metaphoric expression of mystics, as well as in folk tales in Eastern civilizations. Following these lines, Rahimbakhsh warns Dilnevâz about the British soldiers, who might assault her. But he does this in a more poetical way. Rahimbakhsh says that the eyes of British soldiers, who are here to pick up Indian flowers, would look at you. Dilnevâz asks what will happen if they look at her. Rahimbakhsh replies to her, ”what will happen if an animal’s foot touch to one page of the Qur’an? This is same as the British soldier’s eyes on the Indian beauties face[38].” Upon the reply of Rahimbakhsh, Dilnevâz sarcastically tells to him that the eyes of Indian girls are not made of glass and their hearts made of stone, hence they are conscious about what is going on. The discussion goes on to make a point about the education of women. Rahimbakhsh expresses that it would be irrational to lock all flowers in the pen to protect them from the animals. He adds that the right manner should be to tie the animals, instead of burying the flowers. Rahimbakhsh also mentions that ignorance (tarbiyasïz) of women would cause the annihilation of a nation. Fitrat also dealt with the education of women, which is a major problem of usûl-i jadid in Bukhara[39]. A similar approach is also present in the Homeland or Silistra[40]. Sirman evaluated the attitude of Zekiye in the drama as that of an educated woman who perceived the priorities of her life and nation. In both dramas, the women figures are categorizing their love to a male and their homeland. The women of the new generation are well educated enough to determine which love is primary for them.

In fact, a major interesting point is the comparison of a page of the Qur’an, which sanctifies women, and Indian women, the consecration of women is a result of the deductive understanding of the love of homeland. As discussed above, the love of Dilnevâz is the same as the love of the homeland; therefore, Fitrat implies the homeland is as holy as the Qur’an. In Hind Ikhtilâlchilari, Rahimbakhsh is adding that the perfect training to the British forces will be to sweep them away from India[41].

In Hind Ikhtilâlchilari, Fitrat introduces the term ulus which is a new word for the Uzbek language. While he is describing the power of the Indian nation, he uses ulus, instead of halq. Perhaps, the word ulus holds the sui generis character of nation which the new elites are trying to form. Actually, Fitrat is a representative of new nationalist elite, which Chatterjee defined[42]. The nationalists not only said things in a new way, but they also had new things to say. Two of the dramas give particular attention to women, education of women and family concepts. Actually, both dramas are trying to probe the role of educated women, relative to the new method of schooling, during the struggle of national liberation. On the other hand, both playwrights are trying to bring women into the battle field without jeopardizing their respectable place in the home[43]. In both dramas, there is a story the formation of a family which takes place in the course of a struggle. Zekiye and Dilnevâz are following their lovers on the way to the liberation of their homelands. The story is telling the painful effort to be a family, which is core part of a nation. Both women participate in the struggle; Zekiye as a soldier in the battle field, Dilnevâz as a member of the Indian Revolutionaries, where she cooks and helps them in other ways. In the end, the drama finishes with the start of new nationalist families and where both partners have role in the history of the struggle and the building of national identity. Probably, the playwrights are dreaming of the children of these holy families, who struggle for liberation. The circle is reminiscent of Turner’s approach to social dramas which consist of four steps: breach, crisis, redressive action, and reintegration[44]. The breach is the struggle which creates the crisis step. In the crisis step, the women figures of both dramas stand with their lovers. Their victory in the struggle process is apparent redressive action in sense of Turner. The formation of new nationalist families ends the reintegration step, which is also beginning of a new society.

This article has attempted to illuminate the cultural networks of Muslim geography which is not apparent at first sight. The geographical distance of Bukhara and Istanbul is not an obstacle for spreading ideologies. The Ottoman modernization was a source of inspiration and had a spill over effect on the other Muslim communities. Fitrat and Namik Kemal were both mainly discussing the generation of nationalistic feelings through a story of love and revolution. The love story theme also has metaphorical meanings which are imposed on the lover and the homeland. It should be noted that counterpart playwrights have similar points in their plays. It might be possible to assume that Fitrat was inspired by Namik Kemal, an effective writer in the Ottoman Empire during his time in Istanbul. Kocaoglu believes that “both plays have similar points…., however plays are entirely different from each other.[45]” But both Namik Kemal and Fitrat have their own writing style and fiction in these plays. The provocative approach to nationalism in both dramas are critical to grasp the mental condition of 20^th century Islamic people who were mainly under the domination of colonial powers such as the British, Russians, and French. Fitrat also tries to individualize the nationalism and liberation feelings by adding a love theme to the play. The love theme is the main subject of many legends and stories of oral tradition in the Central Asia. Thus, the reader would catch the notion from a different point of view. The Bukharan Jadids also emphasized the education of woman and participation to their modernization efforts. Hind Ikhtilalchilari was also stressing the importance of role of women in the transformation process of Bukhara and Turkestan at a higher level. Fitrat defined women as solid supporters of the men during the modernization process of Bukhara. The Hind Ikhtilalchilari proves that in all Muslim societies the modernization process was affected by each other. To see a vivid example just look at the case; a Central Asian writer inspired from an Ottoman counterpart and wrote on the Indian revolutionaries.