Rethinking Tolerance: Hagia Sophia and the Forgotten Ottoman Legacy
The announcement of the reopening of Hagia Sophia to Muslim prayers has sparked controversy and criticism from Western leaders and revived discussions about the Islam-inspired policy of the Justice and Development Party (‘AKP’) government and Turkey's historical relationship with Christians. There is no doubt that the decision has a symbolic political significance, coming at a time in which tensions between Turkey and Greece are particularly high. At the same time, reconverting the iconic monument into a mosque marks another sign of Turkey's attachment to its glorious Ottoman past when Orthodox Christians were under the Sublime Porte's protection.
The Ottoman Legacy
When it comes to treating minorities, Turks should not look to the West for guidance but instead to their Ottoman roots. Local culture can be a strong base for developing successful policies, as it also happened with Syrian refugees. The current Government has implemented various reforms to meet the criteria for membership of the EU, some of which have resulted in better treatment towards both officially recognized and unrecognised minorities. A closer look reveals how the AKP government is following an Islamic-inspired policy which has its origins in the Ottoman times, when Christians enjoyed high levels of protection and freedom, in contrast to what happened later during the turbulent 20th century. The Ottomans’ ability to manage a multi-ethnic and multinational state until the era of Tanzimat in the 19th century was quite successful compared to what came after.
Ironically, these reforms transformed one of the most historically tolerant empires with an ethnically diverse population into a land where massacres, forced migration, expropriation, and exclusion of minorities became increasingly common. These events have led to a dramatic decrease in Turkey's Christian population from millions at the end of the Ottoman Empire to around 155,000 today. However, in the last two decades, the Turkish Government has taken a more inclusive approach towards their Christian citizens. This change in attitude has occurred against the backdrop of the current Government’s aforementioned efforts to join the European Union. However, these efforts are not just part of joining the European bloc or for the purpose of being 'friendly' with the Western nations. They are a key part of Ankara’s own approach to tolerance.
Turkey-Greece political disputes at the heart of the problem
The recent change in the Hagia Sophia’s status is part of this approach, representing Turkey's strong re-commitment to its Ottoman past. The debate around this move is not new. Those who condemned the recent move left out the fact that since the early 1990s prayer was already allowed in the Hagia Sophia via a small chamber dedicated to Muslims. Knee jerk reactions that condemned the move often left out the context in which the monument was converted into a museum in 1934. This conversion was, allegedly, a message to the Western World that Turkey had become 'peaceful and secular'. However, the decision itself was shrouded in secrecy and the Turkish press only found out two months later about the conversion, prompting criticism even from a pro-republican newspaper.
In the current context, the reopening of Soumela Monastery for mass service after five years of restoration works on 15th August, which Western media mostly failed to notice, along with the ongoing construction of the first church in Turkey since the founding of the modern Republic signals it is not tolerance at the core of the issue but politics, marked by recent developments in Turkey's relations with its Western allies, and particularly with Greece.
Ankara endures strained relations with Athens, in contrast to 1934 when the conversion of Ayasofya (Hagia Sophia) into a museum took place, purportedly in a bid to strengthen links between the two nations. Hopes were raised of an improvement to bilateral ties in 2019 by then-Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras' visit to Turkey and discussions about the Istanbul Halki Orthodox Seminary's reopening were revived but no further improvements have been made since. It is also worth remembering that Turkey's stance was clear in affirming the reopening of the Halki Theological Seminary only after Greece improves the Turkish minority's situation in the Northern Trace Region and opens a mosque in Athens (Greece has finally finished construction on their first mosque in the capital but this has yet to be opened).
The reciprocal nature of negotiations is a key feature of Turko-Greek diplomacy. The Treaty of Lausanne 1923, which defined the borders of the modern Turkish Republic, also jointly established the treatment of the Greek minority in Turkey and the Turkish minority in Greece. Article 45 of the treaty states clearly that any rights granted by the Turkish state to its non-Muslim minorities ‘will be similarly conferred by Greece on the Muslim minority in her territory’. This style of diplomacy, where each guarantees the safety of their own citizens in the other's territory, is part and parcel of the Greek/Turkish relationship.
Orthodox Christians as Ottoman subjects
Nationist ideology is partly responsible for the continuous deterioration of relations between the two states, which unfortunately has affected the demographics in Turkey and left the country with a reduced Greek Orthodox Christian population. Before the rise of Greek and Turkish nationalism, the situation was completely different.
In the Ottoman Empire, Christian Orthodox subjects of the Sultan were mainly able to practice their faith unmolested. Justin McCarthy writes in The Ottoman Turks that, after the conquest of Constantinople, Sultan Mehmed II, guided by both Islamic principles of respect towards Christians and practical reasons of peace and acceptance of Ottoman rule, showed favor to the Orthodox Church. Greek clergy were left in charge of Church administration and exempted from paying taxes. Church authorities were given greater powers than they ever had under Byzantine rulers. By strengthening the Church's authority and centralizing its power, this new system benefited both the Sultan and the Church; the Sultan enjoyed acceptance by his new subjects and the clergy expanded their power and influence. The great historian Kemal Karpat writes that, until 1821, Greeks enjoyed a privileged position unsurpassed by any other ethnic group in the empire.
This priviledged position was partly a result of the millet system, the method used by Ottoman authorities to organise and rule their non-Muslim subjects. Within this system, each religious community had its own millet (meaning ‘people’ or ‘nation’ in Turkish), which conferred on its members a certain degree of autonomy. Religion, rather than ethnicity, was central in defining the different millets: the Greek Orthodox millet comprised all the Orthodox citizens of the empire. Under this system, each confessional community was able to live under their ‘personal’ law, wherein each millet would have their own courts applying their own religious-based legal code, provided that these laws did not conflict with Islamic law.
Until the era of Tanzimat in the 19th century, when a successive line of Sultans introduced reforms designed for a better transition to modernity, religion took precedence over the concept of ethnicity. However, during the Tanzimat all imperial subjects became equal citizens before the law and lost their old privileges. The Tanzimat was supposed to strengthen the already shrinking loyalty of the empire's different nations but, instead, had the opposite effect. The reforms fueled an already rising tide of Nationalism and led to general discontent among non-Muslim Ottoman citizens. It was this triumph of Nationalism that led to the dissolution of the empire.
Unfortunately, the era of Tanzimat did not just amount to a transition into a modern, independent republic which granted more civil liberties to its citizens, or to the creation of different nations among the former Ottoman territories. On the contrary. During the 20th century, Christians suffered their bloodiest period since the beginning of the Ottoman empire; the 1922 Great Fire of Smyrna/Izmir, large scale population transfers and forced migration to Greece in the post War period and the 1955 Istanbul Pogrom directed at Orthodox citizens, not to mention the atrocities suffered by Armenians and other Christians in the last days of Ottoman Empire. This persecution often occurred amidst accusations of cooperating with ‘the enemy’ and having separatist intentions and was fueled, in part, by Nationalist sentiment that treated tolerance as a relic of times gone by.
Back to Islam: Turkey in 21st century
Discussion of the current Government’s Islamization policy does not include a proper accounting for Turkey’s past. This policy has, in fact, improved the situation of the Christian minorities in the last two decades. However, without wishing to glorify the Ottoman empire, when we speak about Christian minorities in Turkey, we would do well to remember the legacy the Ottomans left behind. Ottoman legacy and liberal Republican values should co-exist, not oppose each other in the public mind. While this co-existence is a matter of politics and governance, the idea itself opens the path to unity in the Turkish already divided society.
Author: Ana-Lavinia Popa