Debates in the Bulgarian Press About the Status of Demir Baba Tekke: Some Notes on Correspondence Between Ananie Yavashov and Mehmet Celil
Main Article Content
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. Yavaşov 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 Yavaşov'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
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 Yavaşov'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