A major show at the Royal Academy of Arts celebrates Turkish art. Amina Elbendary queues up, pondering its significance For centuries the word "Turk" had all sorts of uncomfortable connotations for the European mind. It is therefore quite interesting to see people from all walks of life queuing in an orderly British fashion to see "Turks: A Journey of a Thousand Years, 600 -1600" at the Royal Academy of Arts. It comes at an interesting moment when Europe is reluctantly coming to terms with the idea that Turks are here to stay. After all, the European Union has just begun negotiations with Turkey on its membership. Introducing the new member-to-be would be a valid cultural enterprise. And in 21st century fashion the exhibition is funded by a number of Turkish and British businesses including a major Turkish conglomerate and a UK steel company. The hype and the queues also suggest an interest in things Turkish and Islamic -- something that finds wider expression in a series of public lectures and workshops on various topics in Turkish history. "Turks" carries an impressive number of artefacts from disparate geographical locations and historical periods. It follows nomadic Turkish tribes from the Central Asian steppes to Constantinople to the Balkans. The 350-some objects on display have been culled from the collections of the Topkapi Palace Museum, the Istanbul Turkish and Islamic Traces Museum and other public and private collections. One salient theme is that of "journeys" -- of movement and cultural assimilation. The Turkish people have been on the move -- often westward -- since AD 600. On their way they assimilated various local cultures (Chinese, Mongol, Persian, Arab), set up states and empires, and Turkified Anatolia. They also proved quite cultured, patronising art and architecture and encouraging literary pursuits. The curators evidently intend to argue for the cultural and religious diversity of the Turks. An ironic undertone is de- emphasising the Turks' connection with Islam -- not an easy task given the nature of the surviving heritage. That Turks have not always been Muslim remains an underlying point of this show. It reflects the obsession of modern Turkish national discourse to distance Turkey from Islam. (It is significant for example that this is an exhibition on "Turks", not "Ottomans", which given that the bulk of artefacts date from the Ottoman Empire, would make sense. But in the contemporary political context, "Turks" makes even better sense. Though this exhibition is also hailed as "the first largely Islamic exhibition at the RA since the highly popular and critically acclaimed International Exhibition of Persian Art" -- of 1931.) To make its point, the exhibition displays artefacts from ancient history and symbols of pagan religions. The second gallery reflects religious diversity in Turkish history, pointing out the influence of Manichaeism, Christianity, Mazdaism and Buddhism on various Turkish peoples. A striking statue representing a pagan fertility goddess dominates that gallery. Given that many Turkish peoples converted to Islam as early as the classical period, however, many of the objects celebrated here are Islamic: countless manuscripts of the Quran, for example, with exquisite calligraphy and binding. In fact the exhibition brings together quite a number of manuscripts; in addition to Qurans, histories, cosmographies and copies of the Shahnameh (Persian Book of Kings) are also displayed. Of particular interest are several tughras (calligraphic signatures) of Ottoman sultans. Since many of the manuscripts on display are not in Turkish, the exhibition would have benefited from more explanation on the history of the Turkish language and its connections with Persian and Arabic. But despite the exhibition's focus on the diversity and breadth of the geographical expanse the Turks have covered, there seems to be more emphasis on what was happening in Anatolia and later Istanbul, on the predecessors of modern-day Turks. Thus for example, the Mamluk Sultanate (of Turkish slave-soldiers) who ruled Egypt and Syria from 1250-1517 receive scant mention though several of the artefacts on display are probably Mamluk. Are they Turkish or Egyptian or Syrian? Even the explanatory cards reflect this ambivalence -- "probably Egypt" and "probably Syria" is how they explain several inlaid metal objects. The curators tend to focus on historical societies that were majority Turkish; in the case of the Mamluks, it was the ruling elite who formed a Turkish caste separate from the rest of the non-Turkish societies. Many other Turkish dynasties who ruled in Asia, receive due mention nonetheless. Thus the exhibition makes room for the Uighurs, Seljuks, Timurids... and, unavoidably, the Ottoman Empire, which is the focus of five of 11 galleries. Of particular interest is Gallery Four, devoted to the paintings of Muhammad Siyah Qalam (Muhammad of the Black Pen). The works of this enigmatic circa 14th- century figure are strikingly different from other royal art. Originally kept in two albums at the Topkapi Palace Museum, they depict scenes from nomadic life, Sufi dervishes as well as demons in a robust style. Human and animal figures are depicted at disorienting angles producing an almost caricaturish effect. In fact these are among the rare objects on display that show real Turks rather than idealised portraits of Ottoman Sultans; Gentile Bellini's and Shiblizade Ahmed's of Mehmed II, for example, or the ancient cave murals. Also of interest are several exquisite carpets including a 13th- century Seljuk one originally made for the mosque of Sultan Alaaddin Keykugad in Konya. Since fabrics and textiles were an important part of Turkish and Eastern Mediterranean culture in general, many such artefacts survive. Also on display are several caftans that belonged to the Ottoman sultans, including several intriguing under-garment caftans covered with calligraphy that served as talismans for the wearer. Among the striking objects on display are the wooden doors designed by the famous architect Sinan for the harem of the sultan Murad III in 1578, and measuring over 2.5 metres in height. Some critics have wondered at the curators' decision not to focus on Turkey's conflicting relations with Europe. This would have required discussion of the 1453 fall of Constantinople or the 1683 siege of Vienna for example, or even, perhaps, the numerous Ottoman terms that have made their way to European lexicons. But then it seems that this is what this exercise is precisely not about; it is not meant to be an exercise in "othering" the Turks. Instead, on some level, "Turks" is an attempt to humanise them in European terms, however patronising or politically incorrect the endeavour. For one might leave the Royal Academy with an impression that the Turks are really quite a diverse and ancient people, with a rich and sophisticated cultural heritage including both pagan and monotheist religious traditions and a courtly imperial past. In other words: the Turks aren't really that different from Europeans. Or from the Chinese who, at a geographical distance farther than Turkey, seem to have been more readily accepted in the fabric of modern Europe. In fact, the first few galleries do focus on the rise of the Turks as China's neighbours. Several of the ancient murals displayed here and even Siyah Qalam's paintings are reminiscent of Chinese paintings and Japanese prints. At one point in the show Turks look like a tribe of Chinese nomads. Yet this Chinese connection, like the Arab or Persian connections, is not fully explored or tied up into a meaningful argument, despite the inclusion of rare Chinese porcelain from the Topkapi Saray collection. Why start at AD 600 is an easier question to answer than why stop at 1600? There is always something to be said for beginning at the beginning; in this case, the first Turkish political entities in recorded history. Perhaps by choosing 1600 as a cut- off point, the curators were pointing out to the end of the "geographical" journey of expansion that the Turks were undertaking as well as a defining point in the formation of classical Ottoman culture. For the exhibition stops at the reign of Suleyman the Magnificent. But if the intention was to throw light on the artistic and cultural heritage of the Turks, then surely something could have been said for the past four centuries. Largely due to the nature of the surviving artefacts, many of the objects on display belong in the courts of elites rather than civilian households. And in fact the organisation of the galleries itself follows dynastic history. More emphasis is placed on the dynasties and courts that patronised the artwork now celebrated than on the workmen and workshops that produced it. As such there is more emphasis, especially after the first two galleries, on dynasties and men of state, to the disadvantage of more popular (folk) culture and women. Similarly, the Turkish Sufi traditions and tariqas, which played important roles in Turkish social and political history, barely register here. The context of high politics and Turkish dreams of accession to the EU notwithstanding, "Turks" also raises questions for the specialised fields of Islamic and Middle Eastern history and for museum studies. That is, it is not quite clear whether this exhibition, organised in the year 2005 by the Royal Academy, is at all conscious of the Orientalism debate or of postmodern history. Had such an exhibition been hosted in the year 1905, would it have been much different? Does it offer something beyond a collection of curious, exotic, objects on display? Even if this was not the intention behind organising it, "Turks" does provide an opportunity for the lay European to experience first hand some of the outstanding cultural products of mediaeval and early modern Muslim courts, thus providing another context for Islam than the contemporary, contentious one. And of course it must be argued that no exhibition in the world can be all-inclusive. Some things have to be left out. In some sense, though, one might feel that it was in fact the Turks who were left out here. "Turks: A Journey of a Thousand Years, 600 -1600." Royal Academy of Arts, Burlington House, Piccadilly, London. 22 January -- 12 April 2005. For more information see www.turks.org.ukwww.turks.org.uk
