Identity among Turkish Shi’is: An Ethnographic Study
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
I would recommend to change the structure of the article slightly: to start with the setting (1), but then turn quickly to the main question of your ethnographic research (2), doing interviews with Shia members at Igdir about their religious-ethnic-national identity - a hyphenized concept of "identity" which Hall summarizes as "cultural" identity which is always fragmented and part of historical as well as contemporary negotiations between different groups in a society; and these processes will be analyzed here in detail for the case of Turkish Shiis - how their religious belonging (as a specific "minority" opposed to Sunni Islam) relates to other aspects of modern identity like national belonging (within the Turkish nationstate) and regional-ethnic belonging (referring to historical ties and developments in the region of "Ottoman Empire" and other powers in the region, e.g. Iran as part of a religious "centre").
The explanations of specific concepts of Shiism should be integrated in this section of analysis why their religious identity was historically contested and has become a minority position in comparison with Sunni Islam. So it could be dealt with as an subtext (Exkurs) of section (3) in which the main argument is explicated that the position of Shiism profited from Ataturk (historical) nationalism as due to his postulates & policies for Turkey as a secular modern nationstate he cared for coexistence between different religious streamings of Islam instead of competitive and violent relations. Somehow this supported Shiism situation in a modern state as a religious "minority" without being threatened to get suppressed by religious majorities. From a collective perspective national identity received a dominant status or frame and religious & regional identities were subordinated. From the individual perspective, and speaking with Hall, this offered subjects the opportunity to identify with the national project on the level of statehood, but simultaneously also enabled citizens to continue with diverse ethnic, linguistic and/ or religious traditions as aspects or markers of their "cultural" identities in forms of con-vivivality.
As the main publication by St. Hall was during the 1990ies, it could be productive to integrate some arguments by his critics since then, and to demonstrate by discussing critical voices (e.g. more essentialist positions on "identity") why the conceptualization by Hall is still plausible, also 30 years after his publication. Perhaps it could be supportive to involve other anthropological studies like Gerd Baumann (The multicultural riddle) or Erik Eriksen on the relation between national and ethnic and religious identities in modern nationstates -?
Details on the ethnographic design (mainly conducting & documenting interviews) should be given in a foot- or endnote: e.g. about numbers of participants, about difficulties to get access to female interlocutors, and about general difficulties with tape documentation.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you very much for your recommendations. I changed the structure of the article as you suggested. I added a classic introduction part instead of the setting part. In this section, I clearly emphasized the purpose of the study. And then I put the methodology and data sources section. I expanded the basic concepts about the Jafaris and made it a separate section. This was previously inside the Setting section. I have tried to include primary sources here as well. I also paid attention to your criticism about the number of references. And the number of references, which was 20, doubled and exceeded 40.
Again, as you mentioned, I included a discussion on their relations with the State and Diyanet (religious affairs administration) in order to add depth to the article and to better understand the sociopolitical and sociocultural positions of the Ja'faris. In this context, it was emphasized what the Diyanet's functioning as a Sunni institution meant for Shi'i Turks, and that this tension caused secularism to be used as a shelter for Ja'faris just like Alevis. This helped to highlight the features of the secularism that you mentioned in favor of the Ja'faris. Thank you for that too.
Kind Regards
Reviewer 2 Report
A clear and well written article.
If possible, normalize spelling for Igdir
r. 44: ahl al-Bayt
r. 130: Ja'faris
r. 154: , but (insetad of . but)
r. 314: . When
r. 297, r. 344, r. 348, r. 350: and instead of ve
r. 351, r. 353, r. 379: not in capitals
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you for your encouraging comments. I have uploaded the file again taking into account the changes you mentioned.
Kind Regards
Reviewer 3 Report
A very good contribution. Appropiately based and documented
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you for your encouraging comments. I have uploaded the file again taking into account the changes you mentioned.
Kind Regards
Reviewer 4 Report
This is a very interesting study covering an under-researched theme and deserves our notice. The are a few issues that should be addressed though.
In the setting section more sociodemographic data must be included, i.e. how many are these people and what is their relation to the state, i.e. the Diyanet (Directorate of Religious Affairs) and their status? Are they recognized only culturally as the Alevis, or as a distinct offshoot of Islam in Turkey? Furthermore, how many of them are ethnically Azeri, Turkish or Kurdish? Do we have any reliable statistics provided by the state? The whole section suffers from the lack of proper documentation/citations.
In line 51 the author calls Ali the Prophet's nephew; as far as I know he was his cousin (the son of his uncle Abu Taleb) and son-in-law. There are many historical sources that manifest these facts and should be cited here.
I would like to read some mor einformation on the Shia Turkish mullah and their economic status and relation with the state. How are they financially sustained? Does the state pays money for them and ther mosques or everything relies on the collective effort of the community?
From the line 188 to 194 there is dense historical information without any citations at all.
Last but not least, in section 4 I think that the discussion of Ataturk's reception by today's Ja'afaris should include more specific references to Ataturk's secularization policies in the 1920s and the 1930s and the shia responses to them so as to contextualize the present situation and today's favorable attitudes. Also a comment on Shi'a doctrine and its iconolatry practices would add analytical value in the author's attempts to explain the phenomenon of Ataturk's portraits in the Shiia mosques. I think this last one is very important
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you for your encouraging and guiding comments. I tried to make the changes you suggested as best I could.
I changed the structure of the article as you suggested. I added a classic introduction part instead of the setting part. In this section, I clearly emphasized the purpose of the study. And then I put the methodology and data sources section. I expanded the basic concepts about the Jafaris and made it a separate section. This was previously inside the Setting section. I have tried to include primary sources here as well.
Again, upon your recommendation, I added another discussion about the Alevis' view of the Jafaris and the socio-cultural relations and ties of these two religious groups.
As you suggested, I included a discussion on the relations of the Ja'faris with the Diyanet and their view of Atatürk in this context (343-371). This contribution helped add depth to the article.
(In line 51 the author calls Ali the Prophet's nephew): It was an honest mistake. I corrected that.
(From the line 188 to 194 there is dense historical information without any citations at all): I added some primary sources and two other sources for that part.
I also focused on your criticism that the article was not sufficiently referenced. The number of sources from 20 doubled to 40. I also added some primary sources about Ja'farism.
Kind Regards
