‘Mother Turkey is coming!’ – Border Magazine

We spoke with Hassan Ozgen from Nöbetci Ajans about the documentary they are producing with the help of the Ministry of Culture and Tourism, which will be finalized in Edirne.
Hudut: “Mother Turks are Coming” is commonly used in Europe, why did you choose such a title for your work?
HO: I was reading a book called Image of Turks in the West, an article that states that every European above a certain age is afraid of the arrival of Turks. Going to use the idea of ​​barbaric Turks so widely in the West, I thought, what are we doing? Unfortunately, recent TV series have focused on war and violence, which will strengthen this image. We have been in this geography for at least a thousand years, most of this time coincides with the years where societies suffocate and fight with each other. That the army used far more violence than we did at this time; Crusaders like the Mongols, but none of them were permanent. If we are permanent in this land, we cannot explain it by the sword alone.
Hudut: What do you think is the reason for this?
HO: Because we are the carriers of culture in this land. Coming to this land from faraway Asia, we brought with us our own culture and parts of the culture of the inhabitants with whom we came in contact on that difficult road. And we have created a new synthesis of the inhabitants of this geography, sometimes meeting and sometimes opposing. It is this synthesis that makes us permanent in this country.
Hudut: In a sense, have you opened up the concepts of “barbaric Turks” and “wild nomads” for discussion?
HO: Yeah, that’s our starting point. The idea that the settlers created civilization and the nomads were barbaric is as serious a mistake as the idea of ​​”barbaric Turks”. It can also be said that nomads were the real carriers of civilization and culture.
GR: Didn’t the Ottoman Empire build on the cultural, political, and commercial traditions of its inhabitants? Where is the importance of nomads in the Ottoman Empire?
HO: If we look at the founding of the Ottoman Empire, we see that the founders were nomadic Turkmen tribes. This is not only the first installation, when the Ottomans turn west, both the army and the ruler show a very similar structure. We know that there were areas where the Bektashi Turkmen were active and rallied supporters long ago and it is known that important victories came with these fighters.
Hudut: But when the Ottoman Empire is a universal power, does it not lose its effectiveness when it comes to the establishment power?
HO: Fatih Sultan is an important and great figure in our history. The person who established and institutionalized the Ottoman Empire. And he is a sultan who is open to the world and none of his successors have been able to make such a development.
However, it destroyed the Turkmen aristocracy and established the so-called “state of life”. Thus, the activities of nomadic Turkmen within the state put an end to their partnership. An empire is established, but it becomes a state where these doormen play a leading role. And because of the land rule of the nomadic Turkmen, the already existing conflict with the state is growing. In other words, the Ottoman Empire had to defend the state, which, depending on the strength of its nomadic tribes, gradually alienated these tribes and separated them from the management partnership.
This incident is not something that is considered romantic and emotional. Because there is also the dialectic of being a state. Like all medieval kingdoms, the Ottoman Empire was a military / conquering state dependent on land rule. On the one hand, he needed the Turkmen nomads needed for Gaza and the logistics of victory, on the other hand, he had to settle them. Due to taxes, military recruitment etc.
Similarly, the history of the Ottoman Empire was cut short by this conflict.
The Ottoman land system also carries an increasingly conservative character. In the words of Mehmet Genç, he did not think about soil fertility or agricultural technology. Let us remember that we spent the first years of our republic by plowing the land.
The main mistake, however, is that the conservative structure that considers this state to be “eternal” and believes that they do not care and do not want to understand what is happening in the world, especially in the West. He was not interested in saving capital or acquiring scientific knowledge … and this scissor is still our problem.

Hudut: Where does this documentary work in Edirne?
HO: The documentary will end in Edirne. There are several reasons for this. It is a well-known fact that the elders / conquerors opposed the move from Edirne, the capital of the Ottoman Empire, to Istanbul, which needs to be well understood and explained. We need to re-evaluate and understand that the Selimiye Mosque was built in Edirne, much later than Bursa and Istanbul, long after Istanbul became the capital. None of the statements made so far are credible enough and are not supported by documents. Just as the Ottomans wanted to convey a message by building the first Mevlevihan in Edirne, did they not show a moment’s silence by building the capital of the Fatah Turkmen in Edirne?
Moreover, Bursa maintains its importance as a “spiritual capital”. Edirne should have a similar meaning. Edirne is not just a gateway to victory. A “Mona City” where the sultans, saints and saints sought and nurtured that vindictive spirit.
Hudut: An interesting point, we think you will start an important discussion.
HO: Yes, we are trying to bring a different perspective. After all, we are not documentaries, historians. We question, historians discuss.

Leave a Comment