H. B. Paksoy, D. Phil.
 

Inaugural lecture by H. B. Paksoy,

Texas Tech University, The Special Collections Library Presentation Series,

21 February 2002, Formby Room, 7:00 PM

 
As a means of focusing our attention, let us consider two questions:

1) What is the Identity of Fundamentalism? For example: Is Religion equal to Nationality?

2) Who is more eager for the Central Asians to be "fundamentalists?”

Now, we can consider a population in 1990, exhibiting the
following confessional attributes: 35,0481 operating churches,
clustered in 219 denominations; 58.6 % of the total population
maintaining church membership; 335,389 pastors in parishes; 537,379
total clergy. This country has 203 seminaries with 52,025 students
enrolled. One sect alone operating 8,913 schools, not counting other
denominational parochial schools. These figures do not include
resources devoted to overseas evangelical and missionary activities.
This political entity has 3.5 million square miles of territory and
145,383,738 out of a total population of 248 million are church
members.

The political entity in question, of course, is the United
States.[1] There are no comparable statistics with respect to Central
Asia, which has a land mass akin to that of the U.S., but its
population of approximately 80 million is clustered in several
irrigated patches separated by uninhabitable expanses.

From the late 1930s until 1990 there were only two seminaries
in Central Asia, with a student body not more than several dozen
students in attendance.[2] Total number of operating mosques, according
to varying Soviet statistics, numbered around one hundred. The holy
book Koran was published less than half a dozen times until 1984 in
limited quantities.[3] The entire clergy was under the total control of
the state. The bureaucratic apparatus of the center selected the
seminary students for training and the graduating clergy were then
assigned by the state apparatus to practice religion who paid them
monthly. All "official" clergy reported to one of the four Moslem
Spiritual Boards.

In Central Asia the US type evangelical TV or radio stations
are not indigenous. In the earlier periods, such as between the 12th
and 16th centuries, the propagation medium of religion and legitimation
of a new ruler was literature, especially poetry. Instead, especially
during the past two centuries, Central Asia has been a target of
proselytization, both Islamic and Christian, rather than a jubilant
exporter of religion. The sources of these efforts to variously
Islamicize or Christianize Central Asians are diverse, and now
continuing with renewed vigor.

At this point, it may be useful to remind ourselves of a
fundamental difference between Christianity and Islam: Christianity
generally operates within a set administrative church apparatus. The
Christian sects have a hierarchy, with a church pastor answering to a
bishop of his denomination as well as the congregation. The bishop, in
turn, answers to a higher level cleric, and so on. And, some of the
denominations maintain a world-wide spiritual leader, with a suitable
supporting state apparatus. None of this is the fundamental case with
respect to Islam. A prayer leader only answers to his congregation.
This is because Islam believes that there ought not be any type of
mediation between a soul and God, a thought that fueled the Christian
Reformation in the 16th century. Each individual will communicate with
the deity at his own personal level and receive unconditional
salvation. Again, in its original form, Islam did not make a
distinction between the spiritual and the profane worlds; religion and
statecraft are of one fabric. That is, when the mosques are not under
the control of the political state, be it the 8th century Caliphates or
the 21st century sovereign states. As mentioned above, on the other
hand, the Soviet Union totally took over religion and placed it firmly
under state control. Nothing religious, regardless of sect, could take
place without the knowledge or permission of the security organs. The
purpose, as demonstrated in related literature, was to remove this
religious influence from the ruling equation, to make the population
more pliable in general to the demands of the state. After all, a
religion usually has legitimation issues involving the ruling strata
and may support or oppose a political system or politician.

Much has been written about the rise and fall of Islam as a
political movement, military power and distinct civilization. A great
majority of those commentaries aim to view Islam as a monolith. Indeed,
some of the practitioners and even opponents of Islam wish to portray
it as such ---  each for its own benefit.[4] One look at the record
indicates that, much like Christianity, national interests have always
taken precedence over that putative unity. Christian Europeans have
killed each other by the tens of millions during the 20th century World
Wars under various grievances. Likewise, Islamic states also went to
war with each other during the same period. Were all those wars fought
in the name of religion? At the time of the fighting, the combatants
claimed so. Further, all parties insisted that theirs was the true
religion, and the belief of the opposing party was nothing but heresy.
But, everyone, deep down their hearts could at least sense that there
were other reasons. These are as varied as the desires and dreams of
all humans. Some can be lumped together under economic, even political
sub-headings.

In order to better understand this puzzle, it may be helpful
to delve into the identity of the belief systems, stripped of their
outer garments. It is commonplace to have a person or polity to have
more than one identity. Political (political party preference),
economic (fee market or restricted forms of daily economic activity),
belief systems (for example, Buddhist or Christian, etc). But, choices
and occurrences do not stop there. We, as individuals cannot choose our
birth order, an occurrence that also contributes to one's identity,
much like being a parent, member of a particular social or service
club, or a graduate of a specific school. This complexity of identities
certainly contributes, as a package, to the outcome. Within the
foregoing framework, therefore, it may be necessary to investigate the
needs of various identities and the interactions among those needs, and
associated costs.

GOVERNANCE

The statecraft of Central Asia has deep roots, with surviving
manuals from the tenth century and even earlier. The nature and
identity of political systems of the region have evolved according to
the needs of the populace and ecological environment. As it always is
the case, a certain "ruling exhaustion" (born of long term governance)
had already set in by the time outsiders first "discovered" Central
Asia. These outsiders began publishing their understanding of the
events, institutions and practices. However, the visitors --- whether
they were traveling in an invading army, or collecting intelligence or
peddling commercial wares --- had arrived with pre-conceived notions.
These prejudices included both expectations of what to find and also
their own perceptions of personal worth and capabilities.
Unfortunately, those published works served to establish the bases for
foreign policy options of a number of neighboring and far away states.
This practice produced disastrous consequences for all, born of a
mismatch between what is expected of the central Asians and the
conditions that existed in central Asia.

Most of those issues are still alive and well. When the
polities that come under pressure from outside sources to modernize,
open up to global trade, their long standing local values are
disrupted. These disrupted polities will wish to preserve their
identities as a means of preserving and maintaining their life styles
in many manners they think appropriate. After all, they realize, this
is war by other means. Anytime a problem is defined, the mind wanders
about casting for an answer or solution. There may not always one ready
to hand, other than the invisible hand that apply to economics. That is
not to say that there ought not be any communication whatever among
polities. Rather, the question is at what level? And, what ought be the
qualifications of those communicators? And their numbers, intentions,
objectives? If the designated communicators are there with the
pre-conceived notions, to impose their will on the other side, the
entire enterprise fails, and the hostilities commence once again.

It has been suggested that peace, enduring peace, can only be
devised by global participation of all polities. This is difficult to
defend or demonstrate. Some governance systems are designed for
perpetual conflict without which they cannot survive. To quash such
particularistic systems, other polities must arm and wage real war. The
necessity to establish additional forces and logistics for the purpose
eventually recalls Napoleon's dictum: "One can do everything with a
bayonet, except sit on it" The federative model of governance is a
solution advanced to check the excesses of a overly centralized and
overly authoritarian world government. In that case, the laws enacted,
rules promulgated with executive decree in the name of the majority (it
those indeed reflect the clear decisions of the majority), presumably
for the good of all will not suit the needs and aspirations of the
minority or minorities. Will that mismatch not constitute a violation
of rights pursued by the majority as well? Will the minority be forced
into submission into a set of circumstances, for example, buying a
certain product, for the sake of 'efficiency?' If the producer of, say,
genetically engineered agricultural products have the right to engineer
and market them, should not the consumers also have the right to accept
or reject them?

BELIEF

Assaults on belief systems are not uncommon to Central Asians,
who, in the course of a millennium, have braced themselves against a
number of major campaigns. However, shamanism is the earliest known
belief system, based on spirituality, courage, physical prowess,
hospitality and generosity. It has two discernible basic branches: one
of the earliest known monotheisms, the Tengri; and the dual diety Erlik
and Dirlik (Sky and Underground gods, respectively). Over time, the
Turk shamanism came into contact with neighboring belief systems, such
as Zoroastrianism, Buddhism, Mithraism; and exchanged tokens (images
and lores) or significant eschalatological aspects. The entry of Islam
into this Shamanist territory created new traditions, and in some cases
seriously eroded the basics of both belief systems. There are myriad
poems and stories demonstrating the shamanist resistance to Islam, from
all over Central Asia.[5]

For example: A Turkmen rider encounters a dismounted kinsman.
The latter had stuck a twig in the ground, in the vast expanses of the
bozkir (semi desert, arid-lands) to create a semblance of private
space, and is performing namaz (ritual prayer) behind it. The rider
chides the worshipper: Anan, atan işid�r �arpmak, yıkmak, talamak. Kim
kodu sana �öpe tapmak, toprak yalamak? It is the tradition of your
forebearers to strike, to raid. So, who induced you to worship the twig
and lick the dirt? In another instance, precepts of Islam were being
explained to a gathering of Kazaks. The preacher, attempting to review
and reinforce his message, puts the question to the assembly: "And, how
will the Kazaks enter paradise?" To which an attendee responds without
hesitation: "On horseback." [6] Among some of the Turk groups,
reverence is articulated towards the ancestral superstars in poetry:
Kök k�mbezin k�r�ldetip, Ürk�tme bizni Biy Temir; Qaraqaş taşın
qımıldatıp, Qorkutma bizni Biy Temir Do not scare us Bey Temir By
making your blue dome thunder; Do not frighten us Bey Temir By moving
your black stone Haris Sisenbay, c. 1922 [7]

Of course, many an ode was written to Islam as well as
Christianity.[8] The following is a rare 'fusionist' (combining Turk
Shamanism with Islamic doctrines) poem, somehow attempting to merge the
two. Bir kapıdan Baba Ilyas �ıktı Ayak �ıplak baş a�ık sine �ryan
Erenler katında ulu ka�ıktı Yarı İslâm idi yarı şaman [9] Baba Ilyas
emerged from a door Barefeet, open headed, bare chested Among the
saints, a grand ole holy fool Half Shaman, the other half Islam.
Perhaps the Turk proverb "Avcu nice al bilse, Ad�k anca yol bil�r" (As
many devices the hunter knows to hunt with, so does the bear to escape)
is still meaningful.

ECONOMICS

In the recent months, works on 'influence of modernity' on
Central Asia began appearing. According to this observation, capitalist
consumer goods flooded third world countries as a part of the
globalization process. This caused an outflow of capital from
essentially poor economies to wealthy ones, leaving the poor countries
even more destitute. Artisans, merchants and others became unemployed
reducing income generation. Poverty deepened. The foregoing can be
either a Marxist or a Capitalist view. Only the proposed solutions
differ. The Marxist demand that all outside intervention to cease,
foreigners to go home. Capitalist require loans to be made from their
financial institutions to the countries at hand. Economic, political
and military institutions form an inseparable trivet. Does any one of
these have an absolute superiority over the other two? Not even in
absolute regimes can they be separated. This, however, does not stop
absolutists from trying. Marxists demand and fund national liberation
fronts, while the Capitalists --- by now having been converted into
Mercantilists monopolists ---  insist on joint-ventures and free trade.
Both parties will also desire a military solution, involving the basing
of troops, previous withdrawal demands notwithstanding, from both sides
on the soil of the third party. So far, as it is noticed, suggestions
and demands have been pouring from out side in. No one yet consulted
the populace that became a target of outside theories, generally
hatched without reference to the practices followed in daily life.

This is where the Identity issues become clear. Global Trade
is war by other means. It is an attempt at transferring wealth and
resources from the losing party to the victor. The party that amasses
the most wealth will be known as the most noble. Since Second World
War, it has been argued that a world government is necessary to prevent
global wars. This is in essence an idea first advanced over two
centuries ago, at least in two different major versions: The Hobbesian
variety relied on a strong central ruler (as in Leviathan) to impose
order. In the other, Mill foresaw a trade based mutually dependent
environment conducive to peace. Kant then made an attempt to combine
the two, by means of cosmopolitan laws. In all cases, the sovereignty
of the nation states are reduced in favor of cosmopolitan laws. These
writings greatly influenced the present forms of the United Nations and
the World Trade Organization. It can be argued that both approaches can
be associated with a unique transference of initiative, resources and
sovereignty from the individual to multinational organizations led by
yet to be tested.

One relatively new experiment on these principles is the
formation of the European Union. In addition to a large bureaucratic
apparatus, the EU also possesses a legislative body based in
Strasbourg. However, the European Parliament lacks the real means of
regulating the multinational organizations. If, on the other hand,
should the European Parliament acquires such means, there is always the
danger of that body going beyond the intention of the population ---
that may, perhaps, endow that body with q stronger charter ---  in
general. As one response, perhaps Consumerism need to adapt, to
consider such agreements as NAFTA regulations where a grieved person or
company, from a polity outside of the USA may force the closure of a US
business; in a secret meeting, closed to the public.

THOUGHTS ON IDENTITY

The issue, at once, becomes cultural; thus, a matter of
Identity. Moreover, the tussle and the concern is not over a specific
product, but over the pre-eminence of ideas and approaches to that
intellectual output. A 'problem' is defined in cultural terms,
containing the seeds of a proposed solution. If a polity is regarded as
the problem, should it be exterminated? What if the same polity also
regards the earlier one in the same terms? What is likely to transpire?
Mutual annihilation? For example, when the steelmakers of other
polities put the US steel plants out of business, what was the problem,
and its solution? During the 1960's and 1970's waves of international
terrorism swept Europe. Prominent European politicians and businessmen
were kidnapped and killed. When caught, the perpetrators defended
themselves with the assertion that they had the right to break the law,
and such a right could not be truncated by any authority. Some judicial
organs and Thought Employers [10] understood the true nature of the
claim; it was to stress the nature of the laws and associated
intentions. At the time, no polity was bombed by the armed forces of
any country. It appears a world government, as has been proposed, has
some issues to resolve yet. The bow of a boat arrives at its
destination first, ahead of the stern. But, it is the stern that guides
it there.

Thus, Identity is a composite. [11] A great many ingredients
are stirred into a solution, which, from the outside seems a solid
unchanging mass. This makes Identity an extremely fluid structure, but
one with definite parameters. Shifts in the composition are
predictable. That is, it is definite that anger and despondency will be
exhibited when income reduced or lost. What we do not know is when this
person or better yet a group of persons in the same set of conditions
will take some firm action, such as revolting by various means.
Identity components are strongly influenced by culture.

Culture, by its original definition, is cultivation of mind.
This is specific to place and time. What was handed down from the
parents from childhood on. A composite of values transmitted from one
generation to the next determines the general culture of a given
polity. It is both changeable and immutable. This seeming contradiction
is best understood by learning the specific culture. If a given polity
has a culture of unchanging adherence to certain principles in personal
life, for examples as Amish live, then there will be a collision,
between a given immutable principle and the society at large.
Literally. In Ohio and Pennsylvania there are regular accidents between
horse drawn Amish carriages and motorcars. Does that create a certain
tension within the community? The consequences of intergenerational
conflict in a large part of the world have been appearing ever since
the first generation. This shift of emphasis, or change, is forced by
changing conditions in the immediate vicinity. However, the reception
of the depth and range of change differs from one polity to the next.
This is not because a polity cannot handle the change or its speed. The
priority is attached to the leavening of the given culture. How and
what was learned.

The Marxist culture, for example, equates "enlightenment" with
empowerment, so that individuals can take their fate into their hands.
The opposing camp, the capitalists, fervently believe the solution lies
in "education." Even if the terminology is somewhat different, both end
up with the same methods and means. So far, however, it must have
become apparent, the real competition is actually between two groups
who interpret and staunchly practice their ideologies. The target
polity is a field of contention, the prize, or, at best, a testing
laboratory. Then, after a while, the target polity, or its components,
begin assessing these outside factors influencing and affecting their
lives. These alien thoughts appear to be contrary to their own desires
and expectations, as leavened by their own culture. As a result, they
decide to take action, in order to remove the outside obstacles to
their own lifestyle. The methods they choose to obtain will vary from
one polity to the next. But they will also learn from the methods
directed at them by all camps. And, they will turn the tables on alien
influences. It will be costly to all parties involved. Belief systems
have always been a part of human endeavor. In turn, there has always
been a raging competition between belief systems. Is it the ideas
themselves, or the agents they influence and act upon that compete? How
well do the agents understand the basic precepts of the belief systems?
Or, did the agents deliberately distort those tenets, for pecuniary
interest?

Central Asia has been, and still is, a battlefield of belief
systems, with Islam being one of the latest entrant into the fray. And,
many interpretations of Islam have been fueled not only by indigenous
interest groups, but also by the outside players. The latter may have
the distinction of constituting the majority of such initiatives. The
belief systems, once released onto a polity, begin interacting with the
economic, political and military trivet, leading to a new set of issues
and possible solutions. What complicates this already crowded matrix is
that most, if not all, belief systems tend to have subdivisions. These
internal components of a belief system may and do contain
self-contradictory doctrines in themselves. The existence of such
bifurcations are an ideal opening for outside forces to exploit, for
the purpose of influencing the affairs of target polities. When the
target polity objects to the outside entities and their aims and
methods, these outsiders may and will resort to clandestine methods.
They will, essentially, insist on getting their way. All throughout
recorded history one warlike visit begat a return of the same upon the
initial aggressor. As an extension, when clandestine operations become
known--- and they will invariably become public --- the same response
can be expected. These responses need not be on the same level of the
outside offenders. The targeted polity will choose its timing and
methods. Even after a long wait, lasting decades. If the clandestine
forces of the outside polities choose to concentrate on bifurcations of
belief, governance or economic systems to exploit, that does not mean
that the target polity will respond in kind. But, respond, they will.
Both the authoritarian and the mercantilist systems, while competing
against each other, will also initiate paramilitary operations. At a
certain activity level, these operations will be penetrated and
compromised.

This is exactly the case with respect to Afghanistan and the
rest of Central Asia. Not only the immediate neighbors of Afghanistan
in Central Asia, but also polities from other regions have been
partaking in this process of exploitation of bifurcated belief and
governance systems. A portion of the targeted population, originally
grieved by economic and political depredations, will respond decisively
to the provocation. This will be in the direction of military action.
This includes, necessarily, the struggle waged between the 17th and
20th century struggle between the mercantilist and the capitalist
governance systems; the latter attempting to change the world, as the
former doggedly resisting. Central Asia, even if the term implies a
block of land, is not a monolith in cultural terms. Afghanistan has a
different history and culture than Iran or the Newly Independent States
of Kazak, Kirghiz, Tajik, Turkmen, Ozbek. Even within the NIS, the
experience, for example, of Tajikistan is different than the adjacent
neighbor Ozbekistan. For example, Afghanistan did not exist as a state
before the 20th century. The five states of Central Asia were part of a
much larger entity, named Turkistan. Languages spoken in Afghanistan,
that is, the existence of large minorities are not the same elsewhere.

WHAT TO EXPECT

The issue at hand, then, becomes: 1) Will the polity at hand
evolve politically and economically, if left to its own devices? 2) How
much external interference in whatever form will be tolerated a) by the
governance strata of the target polity b) the people of the polity? The
political systems of the region, prior to the arrival of outside
authoritarianism in the form of various external clandestine services,
were designed or evolved according to local realities. These "eastern"
or "Oriental" governance systems, labeled 'unsophisticated,'
'primitive,' and so on, were in existence for millennia or more, when
they were discovered or designed for the past two hundred years within
the "western" reaches of the world. When Bismarck, in late 19th century
was designing his Governance Participation Units (factory unions;
workplace representatives, etc) or multi-party and coalition
initiatives were taking place in their neighborhood, such systems have
been functioning in places such as Afghanistan and in the east for
quite sometime. They were established institutions long before
university based social scientists created books of terminology to
explain them.

All these old and new systems of Governance Participation
Units came into being for the obvious reason: to share in the
resources, to keep the polity in balance. Every Governance
Participation Unit, through its membership strength and leadership
skills, sought to obtain what they deemed a fair share of what is
available. In terms of functions, who gets how much water and who gets
to build a golf course or travels to space as a tourist work on the
same principles. One of the implications of this (often is regarded
euphemistically as a resource sharing arrangement by the outsiders) is
that the polities targeted by authoritarian or mercantilist polities
will assess the relative merits of what is being imposed on them.

In the end, the target polity members may reject what is on
offer from the outside, in favor of keeping what is and has been there
as far back as the existence of the polity. The more the pressure on a
target polity, the more energetic the objections and resultant counter-
measures. Corruption, under many guises will take place, despite
prescribed safeguards. Corruption is basically an attempt at subverting
the rules of governance. It is a dash to jump the queue, divert
resources for the benefit of a sub-group or individual at the expense
of the rest of the polity. If the polity does not have effective
recourse to enforcement of the rules, corruption will cause the
eventual collapse of the system, and the polity. Some polities engage
their secret services, in full force, to deal with corruption. To
eradicate it. Other polities' secret services fully cooperate with the
players of corruption and become corrupt themselves. The entire polity
suffers from a range of ills, including human rights abuses and
distortions in income distribution. When the corruption is exported
along with a political and economic system, the recipients not only may
not appreciate the incoming product, but also resent the defective
nature of the process and choose to fight it with tools at their own
disposal. The abusers of belief systems are rather adept at exploiting
all of the above ideas and means.

As usual, when a new system arrives, it has to do battle with
the existing one. The new recruits or converts will be more eager to
prove their worth than the rest who have been in it for a longer
period. Similarly, adherents of an old system will seek revenge. The
methods of the revenge are not necessarily salient; revenge, itself,
is. The so called fundamentalism is a hybrid. First there exists a body
of disgruntled people. Second, there are individuals and groups who
abuse the belief system for either institutional or personal gain.
Third, the interest groups from the outside place unwanted pressure on
the same people. The resultant cocktail can well be overly potent. And,
one fundamentalism, regardless of its origin and location, will fuel
others; just like one armed visit will begat a military invasion in
return. Central Asian political movements emerging at the beginning of
the 20th century stressed a separation between religion and state,
before the coercive Soviet methods were put into place. This can be
observed from the platforms and programs they issued over time. When
the Bolsheviks militarily incorporated Central Asia into what became
the Soviet Union, all plans for the a secular and independent Central
Asian state were also postponed.

In closing: to place the issue of fundamentalism into
perspective, perhaps the two initial questions need to be reiterated:
1) Is religion equal to nationality? 2) Who is more eager for the
Central Asians to be "fundamentalists?" 

Notes:
1.Constant H Jacquet, Jr. Editor, Yearbook of
American and Canadian Churches 1990 (Nashville: Abingdon Press,
Communications Unit of the National Council of the Churches of Christ
in the USA, 1990).

2. "In 1900, it was estimated that in Turkestan alone, without
counting the khanates of Bukhara and Khiva, there were 1503
congregational mosques and 11230 parish mosques with a total of 12499
imams (prayer leaders) to minister to 6 million persons, that is, one
mosque for every 471 believers." See Geoffrey Wheeler, The Modern
History of Central Asia (New York: Praeger).

3. H. B. Paksoy, "Deceivers." Central Asian Survey Vol. 3, N. 1, 1984.

4. H.B. Paksoy, "Nationality or Religion?: Views of Central
Asian Islam" AACAR Bulletin (of the Association for the Advancement of
Central Asian Research) Vol VIII, No. 2, 1995; Reprinted in
International Journal of Central Asian Studies Volume 3, 1998;
Translation in Central Asia and the Gulf, Masayuki Yamauchi, ed.
(Tokyo: Asahi Selected Series, 1995) . Original reprinted in Essays on
Central Asia (Lawrence, KS: Carrie, 1999) also accessible at:  http://www.ku.edu/carrie/texts/carrie_books/paksoy-6/cae02.html

5. H. B. Paksoy, "Sun is also Fire" Central Asian Monuments (Istanbul: Isis, 1992).  http://www.ku.edu/carrie/texts/carrie_books/paksoy-2

6. With many thanks to Dr. Buğra Atsız.

7. Z.V. Togan, Hatýralar (Istanbul, 1969) . Sisenbay was the
Baþkurt orderly to Z.V. Togan (1890-1970) during the Turkistan National
Liberation Movement of the 1920s and 1930s. See "The Basmachi Movement
From Within: An Account of Zeki Velidi Togan" Nationalities Papers Vol.
23, No 2. June 1995. Pp. 373-399. Reprinted in CENTRAL ASIA READER: The
Rediscovery of History H.B. Paksoy, Editor, Translator (New
York/London: M. E. Sharpe, 1994). 'Biy Temir' (or Temur Bey) is the
correct spelling of what has been rendered as 'Tamarlane:' And the
'black stone' is the very large, very dark green jade marking Timur's
burial location, inside the moseleum known as Kök k�mbez 'Sky Blue
Dome' ('sky blue' or 'Turquoise' has been the primary royal color among
Turks).

8. See Peter B Golden "Codex Comanicus'" in Central Asian Monuments (Istanbul: ISIS Press, 1992).

9. http://www11.ewebcity.com/ahibirlikleri/aef.html  

10. H.B. Paksoy, "Dusunce Isvereni" Turk Tarihi, Toplumlarin Mayasi, Uygarlik (Izmir: Mazhar Zorlu Holding, 1997)  http://www.ku.edu/carrie/texts/carrie_books/paksoy-3/turk15.html