{"title":"DEMİR BABA TEKKESİNİN STATÜSÜ HAKKINDA BULGARİSTAN BASININDA YAPILAN TARTIŞMALAR: ANANİE YAVAŞOV VE MEHMET CELİL ARASINDAKİ YAZIŞMALAR ÜZERİNE BAZI NOTLAR","authors":"Memi̇sh Syuleyman Merdan","doi":"10.34189/hbv.95.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study deals with the opinions put forward about Demir Baba Tekke, Mausoleum and Village in Mir, Zname and Rehber newspapers published in Bulgaria and focuses on the publications about the discussions around these views. These broadcasts were carried out mutually by Ananie Yavashov in Mir and Zname and by Mehmet Celil in Rehber. Yavasov and Celil shared their views about Demir Baba Tekke, Mausoleum and Village through the press and these views continued for a while as mutual discussion. This study is about the discussion in these people and newspapers. Thus, it is limited to the information and opinions put forward in these individuals and newspapers. The research resorted to written sources, as it took place around the debate on the status of Demir Baba Tekke, Mausoleum and Village at the beginning of the twentieth century.\nA few correspondence articles were published in Mir, Zname and Rehber newspapers published in Bulgaria in 1928 and this publication started a discussion later. The subject of discussion in the articles published in these newspapers was about whether Demir Baba Tekke's land and the tomb in the building staff were the tomb of the Bulgarian (Protobulgar) ruler Han Omurtag or the tomb of Demir Baba. In addition, the second title of the discussion, which was held in connection with this discussion, was about the ownership of the lodge.\nTwo different opinions were reflected in the newspapers and they presented the evidence they had on both sides with these publications and declared the opinions they claimed. The first of these views, which also started the discussion, was published in the newspapers Mir and Zname by Ananie Yavashov, who was also the head of the Razgrad Archeology Society founded in 1922. Yavashov cited the source of the Greek inscription in the Holy Forty Martyrs Church (Sveti Chetirideset Machenitsi) in Tarnovo as evidence and justification for his opinions and claims. Based on this inscription, the tomb in the Demir Baba Tekke was originally built as the tomb of Han Omurtag in the ninth century, but later it was based on the views and allegations that this tomb was turned into a tomb of a “fake” dervish named Demir Baba. The second opinion was put forward in the articles written by Mehmet Celil in the newspaper Rehber. Mehmet Celil also argued that Yavasov's claim that the tomb in the Demir Baba Tekke was the tomb of Han Omurtag was essentially the purpose of seizing his lodge and property.\nConsequently, the part of this study that we find remarkable is that the opinions of Demir Baba Tekke, Mausoleum and its land are given together by Ananie Yavashov, President of the Razgrad Archeology Society, and Mehmet Celil, the Chief of the Chief Mufti's Office. In these discussions, the subject was tried to be put forward with full clarity. In addition, some issues were made more clear and understandable and new questions emerged about the emerging issues regarding gaps or difficult to explain. The subject and the discussions are up to date and discussions about Demir Baba Tekke, Mausoleum and its land included ideas about the status of the lodge. We can say that the echoes of these views are felt even today, approximately 100 years later.\nKeywords: Han Omurtag, Demir Baba, Ananie Yavashov, Mehmet Celil, Deliorman","PeriodicalId":39168,"journal":{"name":"Turk Kulturu ve Haci Bektas Veli - Arastirma Dergisi","volume":"3 1","pages":"101-142"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Turk Kulturu ve Haci Bektas Veli - Arastirma Dergisi","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.34189/hbv.95.004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This study deals with the opinions put forward about Demir Baba Tekke, Mausoleum and Village in Mir, Zname and Rehber newspapers published in Bulgaria and focuses on the publications about the discussions around these views. These broadcasts were carried out mutually by Ananie Yavashov in Mir and Zname and by Mehmet Celil in Rehber. Yavasov and Celil shared their views about Demir Baba Tekke, Mausoleum and Village through the press and these views continued for a while as mutual discussion. This study is about the discussion in these people and newspapers. Thus, it is limited to the information and opinions put forward in these individuals and newspapers. The research resorted to written sources, as it took place around the debate on the status of Demir Baba Tekke, Mausoleum and Village at the beginning of the twentieth century.
A few correspondence articles were published in Mir, Zname and Rehber newspapers published in Bulgaria in 1928 and this publication started a discussion later. The subject of discussion in the articles published in these newspapers was about whether Demir Baba Tekke's land and the tomb in the building staff were the tomb of the Bulgarian (Protobulgar) ruler Han Omurtag or the tomb of Demir Baba. In addition, the second title of the discussion, which was held in connection with this discussion, was about the ownership of the lodge.
Two different opinions were reflected in the newspapers and they presented the evidence they had on both sides with these publications and declared the opinions they claimed. The first of these views, which also started the discussion, was published in the newspapers Mir and Zname by Ananie Yavashov, who was also the head of the Razgrad Archeology Society founded in 1922. Yavashov cited the source of the Greek inscription in the Holy Forty Martyrs Church (Sveti Chetirideset Machenitsi) in Tarnovo as evidence and justification for his opinions and claims. Based on this inscription, the tomb in the Demir Baba Tekke was originally built as the tomb of Han Omurtag in the ninth century, but later it was based on the views and allegations that this tomb was turned into a tomb of a “fake” dervish named Demir Baba. The second opinion was put forward in the articles written by Mehmet Celil in the newspaper Rehber. Mehmet Celil also argued that Yavasov's claim that the tomb in the Demir Baba Tekke was the tomb of Han Omurtag was essentially the purpose of seizing his lodge and property.
Consequently, the part of this study that we find remarkable is that the opinions of Demir Baba Tekke, Mausoleum and its land are given together by Ananie Yavashov, President of the Razgrad Archeology Society, and Mehmet Celil, the Chief of the Chief Mufti's Office. In these discussions, the subject was tried to be put forward with full clarity. In addition, some issues were made more clear and understandable and new questions emerged about the emerging issues regarding gaps or difficult to explain. The subject and the discussions are up to date and discussions about Demir Baba Tekke, Mausoleum and its land included ideas about the status of the lodge. We can say that the echoes of these views are felt even today, approximately 100 years later.
Keywords: Han Omurtag, Demir Baba, Ananie Yavashov, Mehmet Celil, Deliorman
本研究针对在保加利亚出版的Mir、Zname和Rehber报纸中对Demir Baba Tekke、Mausoleum和Village提出的观点,并着重于围绕这些观点进行讨论的出版物。这些广播是由阿娜妮·亚瓦绍夫在米尔和兹纳姆和穆罕默德·塞利尔在雷贝尔共同进行的。Yavasov和Celil通过媒体分享了他们对Demir Baba Tekke, Mausoleum和Village的看法,这些观点作为相互讨论持续了一段时间。这项研究是关于这些人和报纸上的讨论。因此,它仅限于这些个人和报纸上提出的信息和意见。这项研究采用了书面资料,因为它发生在20世纪初关于德米尔巴巴特克、陵墓和村庄地位的辩论中。1928年在保加利亚出版的Mir、Zname和Rehber报纸上发表了一些通信文章,该出版物后来开始了讨论。这些报纸上发表的文章讨论的主题是德米尔·巴巴·特克的土地和建筑中的坟墓是保加利亚(原保加利亚)统治者汉·奥穆尔塔格的坟墓还是德米尔·巴巴的坟墓。此外,与这次讨论有关的第二个讨论题目是关于小屋的所有权问题。报纸上反映了两种不同的观点,他们用这些出版物展示了他们在双方身上掌握的证据,并宣布了他们声称的观点。这些观点中的第一个,也引发了讨论,由Ananie Yavashov在Mir和Zname报纸上发表,她也是1922年成立的Razgrad考古学会的负责人。Yavashov引用了位于特尔诺沃的圣四十位殉道者教堂(Sveti Chetirideset Machenitsi)中希腊铭文的来源,作为他的观点和主张的证据和理由。根据这一铭文,德米尔巴巴特克的坟墓最初是在9世纪建造的,是汉·欧慕尔塔格的坟墓,但后来的观点和指控是基于这个坟墓变成了一个名为德米尔巴巴的“假”苦行僧的坟墓。第二种观点是由穆罕默德·塞利尔在《雷贝尔报》上发表的文章中提出的。Mehmet Celil还认为,Yavasov声称Demir Baba Tekke的坟墓是Han Omurtag的坟墓,本质上是为了夺取他的住所和财产。因此,我们发现这项研究中值得注意的部分是,Demir Baba Tekke, Mausoleum及其土地的意见是由Razgrad考古学会主席Ananie Yavashov和首席穆夫提办公室主任Mehmet Celil共同提出的。在这些讨论中,力图把这个问题完全清楚地提出来。此外,一些问题变得更加清楚和可理解,关于差距或难以解释的新问题出现了新的问题。主题和讨论是最新的,关于Demir Baba Tekke,陵墓及其土地的讨论包括关于小屋地位的想法。我们可以说,即使在大约100年后的今天,人们仍能感受到这些观点的回响。关键词:Han Omurtag, Demir Baba, Ananie Yavashov, Mehmet Celil, Deliorman
期刊介绍:
Turkish Culture and Hacı Bektas Veli Research Quarterly is an international refereed journal, which fills the gap in its field, sets forth the most contemporary and striking opinions about the related issues, and gives place to unique scientific studies. Articles that will be sent to our journal should not be previously published and they should not be under consideration for publication elsewhere. If a study was presented before in a scientific conference or workshop, name, place, and date of that conference or workshop have to be specified. If a study is supported by a research center or fund, name of the supporting institution and project ID have to be specified.