TRACES OF MYTHS IN THE WORKS OF HALIKARNAS BALIKÇISI AND THEIR

CONTRIBUTIONS TO COMPARATIVE MYTHOLOGY

Halikarnas Balıkçısı’nın Eserlerinde Mitlerin İzleri ve Karşılaştırmalı Mitolojiye

Katkısı

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Medine SİVRİ*

Sibel KUŞCA†
“I gave cradles to Noah
Swings, hammocks
Only yesterday your Eve was a child,
I am Anatolia,
Do you know me?”
Ahmet Arif (Arif [t.y.]: 69)
Abstract

Myths both create primary literary text of oral tradition periods and constitute a source

of inspiration for contemporary literature. Many authors employ the mythical elements in

their fictional works with the aim of providing meaningfulness or transform legends.

However, Cevat Şakir Kabaağaçlı, also known as Halikarnas Balikcisi, an important figure of

Turkish literature, goes beyond the use of myths as literary materials and has started to be

accepted as a mythologist. He reveals the significance of Anatolian myths for the whole

civilization history with his studies on mythology, especially in comparative mythology.

Kabaağaçlı, who argues that Hellenic culture glorified and embraced by the West is actually

originating from Anatolia, was one of people who carry out the comparative mythology

studies. This study concentrates on analyzing mythical elements in the certain mythological

studies of the author, Hey Koca Yurt, Anadolu Tanrıları, Anadolu Efsaneleri, Merhaba

Anadolu and Anadolu’nun Sesi, and evaluating the way in which myths are approached. It’s

also targeted to present the author’s contributions to comparative mythology. In this paper, it

*
Associate Professor, Department of Comparative Literature, Faculty of Science and Literature, Eskisehir Osmangazi
University, Meselik Kampusu, 26480 Eskisehir, Turkey, medinesivri@gmail.com, tel. +90(222) 2393750
†
MA Student, Department of Comparative Literature, Institute of Social Science, Eskisehir Osmangazi University, Meselik
Kampusu, 26480 Eskisehir, Turkey, skusca@gmail.com, tel. +90(534) 8112103
is targeted to draw attention to the contributions of Cevat Şakir Kabaağaçlı to mythological

studies, his being the initiator of comparative mythology in Turkey, and it is also aimed to

demonstrate the importance of Anatolian myths in the civilization myths.

Key words: Halikarnas Balıkçısı, Kabaağaçlı, comparative mythology, Anatolian mythology,

Blue Anatolianism

Özet

Mitler hem sözlü kültür dönemlerinin öncül edebi metinleri oluşturmakta hem de

çağdaş yazın için esin kaynağı olmaktadır. Birçok yazar, kurgusal eserlerinde çok anlamlığı

sağlamak gibi kaygılarla mitik unsurlara başvurmakta ya da efsaneleri dönüştürmeye tabi

tutmaktadır. Ancak Türk edebiyatının önemli şahsiyetleri arasında yer alan Cevat Şakir

Kabaağaçlı ya da diğer adıyla Halikarnas Balıkçısı, mitleri edebi malzeme olarak kullanmanın

ötesine geçmiş ve mitoloji alanında yaptığı çalışmalarla bir mitoloji uzmanı olarak anılmaya

başlamıştır. Mitoloji, özellikle de karşılaştırmalı mitoloji alanlarında yaptığı bilimsel

incelemeleri ile Anadolu mitlerinin tüm uygarlık tarihi için taşıdığı önemini gözler önüne

sermektedir. Batının yücelterek sahiplendiği Helen kültürünün aslında Anadolu kaynaklı

olduğunu savunan Kabaağaçlı Türkiye’deki ilk karşılaştırmalı mitoloji incelemelerini de

gerçekleştiren kişi olmuştur. Bu çalışmada, yazarın mitolojik incelemelerine yer verdiği Hey

Koca Yurt, Anadolu Tanrıları, Anadolu Efsaneleri, Merhaba Anadolu ve Anadolu’nun Sesi

adlı eserlerindeki mitik unsurlar çözümlenecek mitlerin ele alınış biçimleri değerlendirilecek

ve yazarın karşılaştırmalı mitolojiye katkıları ortaya konacaktır. Cevat Şakir Kabaağaçlı’nın

mitoloji çalışmalarına sağladığı katkılara, yazarın Türkiye’de karşılaştırmalı mitolojiye

önderlik yapmış olmasına dikkat çekmek ve Anadolu mitlerinin uygarlık tarihindeki önemini

ortaya koymak bu çalışmanın temel hedeflerini oluşturmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler: Halikarnas Balıkçısı, Kabaağaçlı, karşılaştırmalı mitoloji, Anadolu

mitolojisi, Mavi Anadoluculuk

1
 Myths, probably the most fundamental cultural phenomena, are the products of

collective consciousness created by human mind with experiences in the process of self-

understanding and explanation of environment and they also have lived thousands of years.

These products are full of traces which allow to understand mental structure and

developmental stages of society in which they have developed. Therefore, myths are

important in that they show the development stages of human consciousness; demonstrate

historical realities of science and art and in that they are a reflection of everyday life. First, it

is required to think about what the “myth” is actually while looking to the ages in which

myths have occurred and dealing with these products of collective consciousness.

So many things have been said about what the myth is and isn’t and various

definitions have been given. However, many definitions of this comprehensive, multi-

dimensional and complex concept are insufficient but they complement each other. Mircea

Eliade, historian of religion and philosopher, indicates that “myth” is quite a difficult concept

to define. According to Eliade, myth is “an extremely complex cultural reality which can be

approached and interpreted from various and complementary viewpoints.” (Eliade 2001:15)

This complex structure makes the definitions of myth inadequate and defective. Therefore,

Eliade makes the following definition which seems least inadequate to him as the most

embracing is this:

Myth narrates a sacred history which relates an event that took place in primordial

Time, the mythic time of the "beginnings." In other words, myth tells how a

reality came into existence through the deeds of Supernatural Beings, be it the

whole of reality, the Cosmos, or only a fragment of reality such as an island, a

species of plant, a particular kind of human behaviour, an institution. Then, myth

is always an account of a "creation". It relates how something was produced,

began to be (Eliade 2001: 15-16).

2
 Myths, which are “an account of creation” according to Eliade, are among the

essential elements that create a culture. With a mutual interaction, mythical narratives and

understandings shape the society as well as they reflect that society in which they have

occurred. Joseph Campbell also emphasizes the social importance of myths and states that

mythological symbols touches and release the deepest centers of motivation, moving literate

and illiterate alike, moving mobs, moving civilizations (Campbell 1979: 12).

One of the most important features of the myths is their being universal. Even if the

cultural structure and regions change, no important differences are observed in the areas that

people are interested in and faith needs. Therefore, myths address similar issues and create

similar heroes. These similarities and common grounds in the world of mythology enabled

comparative mythology, which give different dimensions to mythology studies, to become

exist. This field of study reveals the relationship between cultures by examining the

similarities and differences between the myths of nations.

Comparative mythology aims to bring out the creation of the origins of the universe

and people living all over the world and detect the similarities and differences between them.

Thus, it is targeted to obtain more accurate information by reaching the unity of human,

nature and the universe, and to achieve the synthesis finally. Comparative mythology

analyses the re-written domestic and foreign forms of a literary legend within the

phenomenon of hypertextuality (Aktulum 2011: 247). It provides the achievement of new

data collocating literary legends produced in different cultures. Comparative mythology

makes a point of evaluating the re-written texts within the context of their own history and

culture. Literary legend is its starting point while doing so. This discipline questions how

and why a legend of a period and a region re-written and interpreted. In this process, it takes

into account the structure, meaning and historical dimension of the legend. Ev Cochrane says

the followings about comparative mythology and the study field of this discipline;

3
 Like comparative anatomy in biology, comparative mythology allows for the

recognition of parallels in seemingly diverse forms from different times and

places; and once such parallels are established, the reconstruction of a god's cult

can begin (Cochrane 1991: 51).

In comparative mythology studies carried out so far, it has been determined that so

many cults were moved to different regions and were worshiped after undergoing a number of

changes, similar characters were created in mythic narratives and same problematic situations

were discussed. These interactions, partnerships and similarities also give cultural details.

Therefore, the comparison of myths also enables us to recognize the cultural interactions and

the social structures of ancient periods. Campbell who states that comparative mythology

includes cultural history evaluates comparative mythology studies as follows:

The comparative study of the mythologies of the world compels us to view the

cultural history of mankind as a unit; for we find that such themes as the fire-theft,

deluge, land of the dead, virgin birth, and resurrected hero have a worldwide

distribution—appearing everywhere in new combinations while remaining, like

the elements of a kaleidoscope, only a few and always the same (Campbell 1979:

3).

According to Campbell, seeing the cultural mythology as a whole should be the basic

principle of comparative mythology studies. The cultural, artistic and scientific sub-structure

of the comparative mythology studies is quite deep and one of those who carried out the first

studies in this field of study is Halikarnas Balıkçısı 1 or Cevat Şakir Kabaağaçlı, with his real

name. Halikarnas Balıkçısı is a leading researcher who opens way of the scientific studies

whose absence has been felt in the field of mythology, an important and untouched field in

Turkey. Surely, there are experts who carry out scientific works in this field of study under

his guidance. However, one of the first people who realized the importance and the absence

4
of the field is Halikarnas Balıkçısı and he has also brought much scientific information, which

remained hidden so many times, to light with his serious scientific researches. Kabaağaçlı has

not only made contributions to the Turkish history, culture and literature but also to world

history and literature with his distinctive ideas and researches. The importance of his works

arises from this feature. Especially, his scientific ideas put forward comparatively broke a

new ground in Turkey and opened the way for comparative studies. He also represented the

first example of this field. Given the insufficiency of studies and initiatives in this field, the

works and efforts of Halikarnas Balıkçısı, who understand the importance of comparative

mythology even in his times and carried out sample studies, and also broke new grounds in

many areas, cannot be ignored.

This paper aims to reveal the contributions of Halikarnas Balıkçısı to Anatolian

mythology, especially comparative mythology and draw attention to its importance for

Turkish and world culture. To this end, instead of all of his works, his five works in which

Anatolian myths were discussed will be used as a field of basic research area in order to

determine the boundaries of this study. These books are Hey Koca Yurt (You Big Country),

Anadolu Tanrıları (Anatolian Gods), Anadolu Efsaneleri (Anatolian Legends), Merhaba

Anadolu (Hello Anatolia) and Anadolu’nun Sesi (The Voice of Anatolia).

Ilknur Hatice Önal cites Mümtekin Ökmen’s thoughts about mythology in the works

of Halikarnas Balıkçısı in her research and review book named Halikarnas Balıkçısı as

follows:

Halikarnas Balıkçısı was an authority on scientific point of view in terms of

mythology. He was the only name especially in the field of comparative

mythology. He was the only expert on comparative mythology. Halikarnas

Balıkçısı indicates in his works on mythology that the place of Anatolia in the

history of civilization is very important. He was focused on this issue in all his

5
 works. He connects that to Anatolia’s being the homeland of scientific thought.

Thales who is the first representative of scientific thought is from Miletus. He is

the first person who explains a natural event as a natural phenomenon instead of

explaining as an act of God. Father of the positive science is Tales. On this basis,

Halikarnas Balıkçısı put forward that modern science was first started in Anatolia.

According to him science has completely degenerated after it has passed to

Greece (Önal 1997: 200-201).

Halikarnas Balıkçısı has clearly revealed in his scientific studies that Anatolia is a

cradle of civilizations and cultural mosaic. Mythology takes place in the centre of scientific,

historical and artistic realities that he has presented due to the fact that myths are the mirror of

all values. There is a parallel between myths and development of cultures and their interaction

with other cultures. Each of the mythological elements has occurred as a result of the

requirements seen in the society. Therefore, they also include many cultural, scientific,

artistic, social and political aspects of their community. For this reason Halikarnas Balıkçısı

has tried to realize his mythological analysis by drawing attention to especially scientific and

artistic development of Anatolia.

What has canalized Halikarnas Balıkçısı to Anatolian civilizations and to the

comparative mythology studies is the “Blue Anatolianism” (Mavi Anadoluculuk) movement

founded by him. The movement of “Blue Anatolianism”, which argues that Anatolia is the

origin of humanism and see Anatolian civilizations as the source, and accept that there is a

historical and cultural link between Anatolian territories and Hellenic world, was developed

by Cevat Şakir Kabaağaçlı, Azra Erhat, Vedat Günyol, Sabahattin Eyüboğlu and İsmet Zeki

Eyüboğlu (Çebin 2012: 30). According to their opinion the origin of many of the world’s

myths and in particular a large number of Greek myths was Anatolia. İsmet Zeki Eyüboğlu,

6
the most recent representatives of the movement, expresses the view of this movement to

Anatolia, mythology and history of civilization as follows:

The opinion, which argues that Anatolia is a creation area of people who have

been living over here from ancient times to the present, all products of thought, art

assets haven’t come from abroad and not brought but go back to the most ancient

times is a new idea. Today this opinion is called Blue Vision (Mavi Görüş) or

Blue Anatolia (Mavi Anadolu). Blue Anatolia, the Blue Vision is a movement of

thought seeing the history of Anatolia as a whole, connecting present of Anatolia

with its oldest ages, believing that there is an unbreakable cultural bound between

them and defending its reality (Eyüboğlu 1973: 385).

This idea was pioneered by Halikarnas Balıkçısı. “Blue Anatolianism” which argues

that Anatolia is the cradle of many civilizations and have an effective place in world

mythology also argues that Turkey’s historical origins cannot be thought separate from the

legacy of Anatolian civilizations and this lands on which it lives.

The influence of the “Blue Anatolianism”, which carries social and political

characteristics, on Kabaağaçlı’s mythological analysis is important. Kabaağaçlı, a

contemporary historian, makes a detailed table of ancient times by blending his information

about the civilization history with his studies on Anatolian and Greek mythologies so as to

prove these arguments. Myths don’t take part alone in this table created by Halikarnas

Balıkçısı. As Mümtekin Ökmen pointed out, the myth criticism approach seen in the works of

Kabaağaçlı reveals itself not only with texts and legends but also with many important

elements such as cultural structure, history, development on positive sciences, and artistic

development of related civilizations. This situation increases the scientific value of Halikarnas

Balıkçı’s studies.

7
 Halikarnas Balıkçısı who sees the “Classic Aegean civilization as a touchstone in the

formation of the Anatolian culture” (Yazıcı 1988: V) was an Anatolian expert and enthusiast.

He advocates the thesis arguing that the culture regarded as Greek mythology and accepted as

the origin of Europe, in fact, belongs to Anatolia which had been the cradle of much more

deep-rooted civilizations. While describing those in his works, he talks about the fact that

values fostered by the Anatolian civilizations have been ignored by the West. Beşir

Ayvazoğlu evaluates Kabaağaçlı’s perspective to Anatolian and Hellenic civilizations as

following:

Halikarnas Balıkçısı knows that Ottoman enemies united under the Hellenism

flag. For this reason, he wrote his books Anadolu’nun Sesi (1971) and Hey Koca

Yurt (1972) in order to prove that civilizations attributed to Greeks have no

concern with them and they directly belong to Ionia (Ayvazoğlu 1987: 85).

Halikarnas Balıkçısı presents his thoughts of the Mediterranean civilization and

Anatolia, and mythological information which he handled in a comparative manner. He wrote

almost all of his mythological investigations to prove and express the importance of ancient

civilizations developed in Anatolia and the Mediterranean that he described as “the sixth

continent”. Aynur Koçak, who has carried out a review on the Mediterranean in the works of

Halikarnas Balıkçısı, evaluates the Mediterranean of the author as follows:

Halikarnas describes the Mediterranean as the sacred and central place. The

beginning moment had been over here and the Mediterranean has always been

such young and fresh. Here, the author’s Mediterranean winks to present from the

world of myth which always remains ‘young’ and ‘live’ (Koçak 2011: 51).

Halikarnas Balıkçısı argues that Hellenic history does not reflect the truth about the

ancient mythology in Hey Koca Yurt, which is one of his most important books in which he

sublimated Anatolian people and Anatolian civilization against Western civilization and
8
Hellenic civilization clamed as the origin of Western. He starts to prove his thesis defending

the idea that “The Expedition of the Argonauts” narrative, one of the great pieces of Greek

mythology, is devoid of reality. This narrative written by Alexandrian Apollonius Rhodius at

the third century BC is the story of Greek hero Jason’s voyage with sailors he collected from

all over the Hellenic mainland to take Golden Fleece and their return (Kabaağaçlı 2001: 24-

26). This story is also included in the accepted Hellenic history. Halikarnas Balıkçısı argues

that the story does not reflect the realities as follows;

Argonauts called by Sinope while passing through the few places in the Black

Sea. This Sinope had been accepted as homeland and named as Sinope by

Miletus people when it was an empty and small gulf coast at least two or three

centuries before Argonauts came to the Black Sea. This shows that the legend of

Argonauts is trumpery hooey built on the arrival of Miletus to the Black Sea

(Kabaağaçlı 2001: 24).

With these words, the author expresses that the spread of Miletus people, the first

marine civilization, to Black Sea fuelled the fire of jealousy in Hellenic mainland and they

attempted to cover up the spread of Miletus with such a tale (Kabaağaçlı 2001: 26).

Halikarnas Balıkçısı claims that this story is not true as it was impossible to carry out those

with sailors gathered from all over Hellenic mainland both in terms of naval history and

technically and he criticizes its being accepted as a real historic event. He also argues that

Hellenic history beginning with this legend aims the spread of Hellenic civilization and

anything not Hellenic before Christ are despised by Western.

Halikarnas Balıkçısı who expresses the injustice done to Anatolia in this respect

advocates that Greek civilization is the follower of Anatolia, not the pioneer. He tries to

prove that and his other arguments in this direction by comparing Hellen myths and myths of

9
civilization lived in Anatolia. One of his most important comparative mythology assessments

is the comparison he made between Sumerian Epic of Gilgamesh and Homer’s Odyssey and

Iliad. The world’s first epic legend is the Epic of Gilgamesh written by Sumerians 4000 years

before Christ (Kabaağaçlı 2001: 167). Halikarnas Balıkçısı indicates that Homer narrated

Odyssey and Iliad inspired by the Epic of Gilgamesh. He detects great similarities especially

between Odyssey and Gilgamesh. Heroes set out on a long journey of quest and gain

experience in the events they received. Kabaağaçlı indicates that goddess Siduri in

Gilgamesh is reflected in Odyssey as the goddess Circe. Circe is the daughter of Sun God like

Siduri and just like Siduri he also explains his philosophy of life to the epic hero. While

Gilgamesh asks Siduri for help to cross the sea, Odyssey asks Circe for help to cross the

ocean (Kabaağaçlı 2001: 174-177).

Halikarnas Balıkçısı reveals similarities between the Iliad and Gilgamesh. Both

Gilgamesh’s and Achilles’s mothers are goddesses and their fathers are the mortal human

beings. Ninsun, mother of Gilgamesh, climbs a Sumerian Ziggurat, a man- made mountain of

Olympos, to beg God Shamash. Thesis, mother of Achilles, climbs to the top of Mount

Olympos to beg Zeus (Kabaağaçlı 2001: 173).

Halikarnas Balıkçısı does not stop stating these similarities. As with all his ideas and

arguments, he also accounts for this issue by determining a concrete basis for it. The author

explains how Homer has been influenced by the Epic of Gilgamesh as follows:

The Epic of Gilgamesh was translated to the Hurrian language by Hurians, the

neighbours of Hittites. This was less before 2000 BC. Then the Epic of Gilgamesh

was translated to the Hittite language. Hittites were also penetrated to all parts of

Anatolia. Is it possible for Anatolian Homer not to have heard of these myths?

Moreover, those told in Iliad and especially in Odyssey prove that Homer knew

the epic of Gilgamesh very well (Kabaağaçlı 2001: 168).

10
 Another thing that Halikarnas Balikcisi detected about the interactions between Greek

mythology and Anatolian civilizations is the effect of Anatolia on the formation of all Greek

mythology. Here Halikarnas Balıkçısı not only refers to the example of the interactions that

occur between legends but also to the effect of Anatolia by Homer on the complete formation

of Greek mythology. Considering the emergence of the Greek gods, it seems that these gods

were created by Homer. Homer, the first and most important source of Greek mythology

narrated the legends of Greek gods and assigned their duties. Homer, who made such an

important contribution to Greek mythology and at the same time to all Hellenic culture, is an

Anatolian. In his book of essays, Anadolu’nun Sesi (The Voice of Anatolia) he tells Homer as

followings:

Mythology tells you which society worshiped to which gods. And the descent of

the society from the gods worshiped. Greeks worshipped the Twelve Olympian

Gods as a whole, Zeus (God of Gods) in particular. Olympian God means the God

of mountain. There are more than twenty Mount Olympus in Anatolia. Herodotus

states that ‘Homer assigned the names, tasks and habits of Greek Gods’. Whole

these Gods are from Anatolia. Perhaps their origin could be Sumer and

Mesopotamia (Kabaağaçlı 2008: 35).

Homer, who assigned the names, task and habits of Greek Gods is a minstrel born in

Izmir. Homer doesn’t mention of his being Greek or Hellene. He mentions Anatolian Trojans,

Achaeans, Myrmidonians, Argos and Danaans (Kabaağaçlı 2001: 322). Moreover, the

language of Homer in Iliad and Odyssey is the Ionic dialect. Halikarnas Balıkçısı specifies

that migration of Hellenic consciousness from Anatolia to Greece began to take place at the

sixth century BC. Homer’s works began to pass to the Greek peninsula and to be read in

festivals in this period. These works, enshrined in Athens, spread all over the Hellenic

mainland over time and the Hellenic religion was established with Olympian gods. The fact

11
that Greek gods was written by Homer proves Anatolia’s great role in not only the creation of

Greek mythology but also in the creation of Hellenic consciousness which has a great

importance for Western civilization. Homer was in the consciousness of being an Anatolian

while creating his works and therefore we see these gods’ reflections in Anatolia.

The author mentions another Anatolian poet Hesiod’s effect on the formation of the

gods in Anadolu Tanrıları. He reveals that the effect of Anatolian civilizations is inevitable

through these minstrels with the words of “Homer and Hesiod didn’t create these gods out of

nothing.” (Kabaağaçlı 2005: 26). The claim of the author was also supported by the works of

archaeologists. One of these is archaeologist Prof. Dr. Fahri Işık who is known with his

studies on Anatolian civilizations and excavation in Patara region. Işık also emphasised the

effects of Anatolia on Hellen and Europe and set about proving them. Işık gives place to the

expressions supporting Halikarnas Balıkçısı’s opinions about Homer and Hesiod in his book

“Doğa Ana Kubaba” (Mother Nature Kubaba) in which he revealed the fact that goddesses

thought to be Olympian are “Anatolian Sisters” with scientific data.

Those who founded the Hellenic pantheon with Homer and Anatolian immigrant

Hesiodos, wrote the history with Hekataios and Heredotus, sowed the seeds of

nature science with Thales and Pythagoras, briefly the firsts who formed the

‘picture’ of contemporary thought and science are also rooted to the east coast and

ground the Western civilization in Anatolian territories (Işık 1999: VIII).

Halikarnas Balıkçısı tells of Apollo the most among Homer’s those gods that he

claimed to be Anatolian. Apollo is a god born with the intercourse of Zeus and Leto, the

goddess of night and he is considered as one of the most important gods in Greek mythology.

Appollo, the twin brother of Artemis, is also the god of the light and the sun. Apollo is the

arrow shooter and the guide of nine fairies of fine arts. But in spite of being accepted as “the

most Greek of the Greek Gods”, the word Apollo is not in Greek. Halikarnas Balıkçısı tries to

12
explain both from linguistic aspects and from legends that Apollo is of Anatolian origin. He

mentions Apollo in his “Anadolu’nun Sesi” as follows:

Apollon whose even name is not Greek is an Anatolian god. Homer calls him as

Lykegenes (born in Lycia). Hellenes and Westerners were obliged to accept that

he is not Greek but Anatolian despite all their efforts to prove that he is Greek.

Apollo in the Iliad is the enemy of Akas, to wit, Hellenes. He is on Troy’s side.

He is the one who ruined the Hellene army; moreover, he is the killer of Achilles,

the protagonist of Hellenes. Homeric Saga is also like this. (...) Latin poet Horace

says for Apollo “You born in Lycia and you’re the guardian of Patara”

(Kabaağaçlı 2008: 36).

The other concrete mainstay that Halikarnas Balıkçısı presented to support his claim

about Apollo’s being Anatolian is the fact that the four largest temples of Apollo is in

Western Anatolia, along the Aegean coast, in Greneum, Claros, Didymea and Patara

(Kabaağaçlı 2001: 24). Excavations were carried out in Patara, one of these regions that the

author mentioned, years after Halikarnas Balıkçısı and it is seen that he was right. Fahri Işık,

who led the excavations that began in 1988, attributes the different and attractive aspects of

Patara to Apollo (Işık 1991: 40). Patara excavations clearly demonstrate that Lycia accepted

as an asset of Greek culture is an Anatolian civilization. According to Fahri Işık “Lycians are

a native Anatolian nation; a nation protects themselves resistantly throughout the history

despite the never-ending efforts to ‘Grecize’ since Ancient Times…”(Işık 1991: 37).

The other god among Greek Gods that Halikarnas Balıkçısı focused on carefully is

Dionysus, the god of wine. Dionysus is the latest god entered to Olympus and the one who

came to Greek mythology outside and his name is Bacchus in Anatolia. According to

Halikarnas Balıkçısı, Bacchus is not only the god of wine although he is known as the god of

wine. As Kabaağaçlı pointed out with the picture of a Hitite relief in Ivriz among the pictures

13
of sculptures and reliefs he presented in his book Hey Koca Yurt, Bacchus has a bunch of

grapes in one hand and a bunch of barley or wheat in the other. Halikarnas Balıkçısı says that

human beings produced beer before wine. But he also stresses that wine has passed to

Hellenic mainland from Anatolia. Because the wild grape vines would grow only in southern

Anatolia and northern Syria at those times (Kabaağaçlı 2001: 185). The God Bacchus has

been the representative of an exultant enthusiasm and this enthusiasm has spread rapidly with

him, passed to Hellenic mainland at seventh BC and Bacchus has been an Olympian God.

In his book Anadolu Efsaneleri, the first step of the author’s deep mythological

investigations, and in which dozens of myths such as Amazons, Bosphorus, Trojan War,

Mount Ida, the first beauty contest of world, Aigeus King of Athens, Symyrna, Tantalus,

Niobe, Gordion, Cybele, Hermes, Midas, Dionysus, Heracles, Eros, Nymphs are narrated,

Cevat Şakir evaluates these myths and reveals that some of them is contrary to historical facts.

His comparative studies and claims on Anatolian civilizations are essentially in his later

works like Hey Koca Yurt and Anatolian Gods. However, it is also seen in the author’s

beginning work, Anadolu Efsaneleri, that Kabaağaçlı traces the myths within the light of the

science of comparative mythology in a wide region from Syria, Palestine to Egypt as well as

every civilization in Anatolia.

Halikarnas Balıkçısı presents the interaction of cultures through the names of gods and

goddess. He states that the same gods and goddess may be encountered with different names

in the regions such as Anatolia, Syria, Palestine, Mesopotamia which have been in cultural

interaction throughout history. The most important one among them is the mother goddesses

such as Cybele, Demeter, Ishtar that woman have revered as a symbol of fertility and

prolificacy.

Cybele is the major goddess of the matriarchal society in Anatolia and the mother of

life and fertility, all mankind and nature. Balıkçı states that the main centre of the cult of

14
Cybele is at Pessinus around Sakarya River (Kabaağaçlı 2010: 95). However, what

Kabaağaçlı added to those already known information is the alteration of the Mother Goddess

between regions. According to him:

Goddesses were called with different names as their worshippers spoke different

languages. Every nation would call their mother goddess with a different name.

For example Aphrodite, Hera, Rhea, Cybele, Athena, Leto, Artemis, Hepa (later,

it converted into Eve (Havva) in Palestine), Isis and others were all the same

goddess, despite the fact that they all have different names. Minor differences

have appeared on this goddess as the time goes by. Such as “The Goddess of the

Earth”, “The Goddess of Mountain”, and “The Goddess of Creatures” (Kabaağaçlı

2001: 73).

The author deals with the alteration of the goddess names listed above more detailed in

the topic of “Eve, Mother God” in his book Hey Koca Yurt. According to Halikarnas

Balıkçısı; the goddess named Semele in Phrygia is called with the names Cybele and Hepa in

the Central Anatolia becomes Lat in Lycia. Hepa takes the name of Hebe when she passes to

Western Anatolia. Anatolian immigrant Pulasaties took Heve off to Jerusalem and Heve

transforms to Eve in here. The mother goddess Eve is married with Adamos, an important

character in Jerusalem (Kabaağaçlı 2001: 196).

The Information that Kabaağaçlı reached from the starting point of Cybele is not

limited with only these. He makes quite an interesting observation about the sacred place

Kaaba that is extremely significant for Muslims. Anatolian goddess Cybele was taken off to

Mecca and placed in there long before Prophet Muhammad. Cybele is named as Hibel or

Kibel in here. Today Muslims from all over the world directs to this place “Kaaba” calling it

“qibla (kıble)” and perform five time prayer a day. The word “qibla (kıble) comes from the

name of the Mother Goddess Cybele. Halikarnas Balıkçısı also exposes the provision of

15
Cybele in Greek mythology. He indicates that Artemis, the goddess known as an Olympian

Greek goddess but in fact, worshipped in Ephesus, Anatolia, is a sort of Cybele which hasn’t

transformed into an Olympian goddess of Greece (Kabaağaçlı 2001: 10-11).

The author detected that a mother goddess had existed in Anatolia before Cybele in his

study on mother goddesses. He reaches to this information with the statements from Old

Testament of Bible and the Torah. “Japheth” is married with a goddess named “Asia” in the

Old Testament. They have sons named Gomer, Madai, Javan, Tubal, Meshech and Tiras.

According to him some civilizations emerged in Anatolia were based on these sons of Mother

Goddess Asia. Gomer was the “Cimmerians” that came to Anatolia, Madai was the

“Madaians”, Javan was “Ions”, Tubal was the “Tibarenians”, Meshech was the “Moshians”,

and Tiras was the “Etruscans”. According to Halikarnas Balikcisi, Asia, the first mother

goddess which appeared in history, might be an earlier name of Cybele, the Great Mother of

Anatolia (Kabaağaçlı 2010: 15).

Another remarkable determination he put forward when comparing the mother

goddess of civilizations focuses on the origins of the Virgin Mary. This subject takes place in

Merhaba Anadolu as follows: “Mother Goddess had many names. ‘Marian’, ‘Mirin’,

‘Aymari’, and ‘Mariyamne’ are important among these in terms of the origin of the name

Izmir (Smyrna). The las t transforms to ‘Mary’ arriving at Syria.” (Kabaağaçlı 2010: 40).

Halikarnas Balıkçısı who expresses the linguistic variation of the Mother Mary takes indicates

in Anadolu Efsaneleri that Mother Mary has been declared as “the Mother of God” by giving

birth to Jesus just like Cybele who has been “the Mother of God” by giving birth to Zeus.

As can be seen in the analysis on Mother Eve, Mary, Cybele and Kaaba, Halikarnas

Balıkçısı has determined mythological marks within the Abrahamic religions widely believed

today. For example, another god, Attis that the author discussed comparatively is not only

16
subjected to comparisons including only mythical beliefs but also the traces of the Abrahamic

scriptures such as the Torah and the Psalm. The original name of this god which is

encountered with the name Attis in Phrygia is Tammuz, the Sumerian god of spring who

awakens in the spring and dies in the fall. Palestinian Jews worship him with the name

“Adon” which means “our lord”. Adon is seen as Adonis in Hellenic mainland (Kabaağaçlı

2001: 33). Kabaağaçlı states that Attis, whose variation in different regions was given, takes

place in the Torah and the Psalm as Adonai:

The death and resurrection of Attis each year symbolizes the revival and fading of

plants according to seasons. After arrived in Syria Attis has become Adon

meaning ‘our lord’ in Hebrew language. Even the Torah and Psalm call the only

God Adonai. Greeks transformed this word to Adonis and assigned him as the

lover of Aphrodite by transforming Astarte or Astoreth, the lover of Adon, to

Aphrodite. But Adon was killed by a bear towards winter each year. Therefore,

pork meat considered cursed and accepted as taboo that is forbidden (Kabaağaçlı

2006: 97).

The fact that the Torah and the Psalm calls the only God Adonai and the connection with

mythology and comparison created by Kabaağaçlı is a salient determination with regards to

the origin of religious.

Halikarnas Balıkçısı detected such connections that set an example for the relationship

between religion and mythology also with religious rituals. One of these detections relates to

the origins of Hıdrellez, Nowruz, and Easter celebrations. Kabaağaçlı ground these

ceremonies on the celebrations occurred due to the resurgence of the gods of spring Adonis,

Attis and Tammuz.

The importance that Halikarnas Balıkçısı gave to the linguistic and ethnological

analysis in his comparative analysis is remarkable in these examples. Since, inseparable

17
relations could be seen between linguistics, etymology and comparative mythology. As

outlined by George William “The very foundations of Comparative Mythology rest on the

laws brought to light by the science of language; and without the guidance of etymology the

analysis and classification of myths would be impossible...” (Cox 1883: 310). These theorical

data related to the field of comparative mythology clearly reveals that the studies observed in

Halikarnas Balıkçısı’s works set an example for the studies of comparative mythology.

Halikarnas Balıkçısı does not make these comparisons in contemplation of the benefit

of any race specifically. He has always disapproved the racist ideas and argued that the

civilization can only develop with cultural interactions. In order to demonstrate these

interactions, Kabaağaçlı directed to the comparative mythology studies as the mythologies are

have always been the most significant tools of this interaction. His fascination with Anatolia

is due to the fact that this region is the cradle of many civilizations. This love is not intended

to glorify any nation. Kabaağaçlı who emphasizes that the comparisons should not be

influenced by national thoughts and borders gives place to the following warnings in Anadolu

Tanrıları:

While solving these things that have influenced each other in a complex way, one

shouldn’t be under the influence of contemporary national borders. Once upon a

time, the region starting from Cilicia in the east and stretching away to

Pepoponnesus of Greece covering Lydya, Caria, Lycia and the Rhodes Island was

in the air of same culture. The Archipelago and the sea of southern Anatolia

coasts hasn’t been an obstacle for these people who were the great sailors of the

world, contrary it was an auxiliary means bringing them together (Kabaağaçlı

2005: 79).

With these words, the author underlines once again that Anatolia is a cradle of

civilizations and people in this region have always been in a continuous interaction. It is

18
distressing that the opinions of an author with these thoughts have been an instrument to racist

discourses or criticized in this respect. If such a situation had been of concern, this would

tarnish the objectivity of Halikarnas Balıkçısı’s studies. However, the author’s perception on

the concept of civilization leaves no room for these concerns. According to Kabaağaçlı

“civilization is such a product that race or the other cannot be planted its seeds solely. The

humane civilization has never been the monopoly of a single race.” (Kabaağaçlı 2008: 16).

Halikarnas Balıkçısı who emphasized the importance of cultural interaction criticises the West

civilizations that sees the faculties of civilizations only within the Hellenic culture and ignores

all civilization signs that existed before Christ but haven’t belonged to Hellenism. One of the

reasons that directed Halikarnas Balıkçısı to mythological analysis is this injustice that

Anatolia has been exposed to.

Fahri Işık states that Turks plays a role in this injustice that Anatolia has been exposed

to and in stableness seen in the table created by the West and lists mistakes that were made.

He also draws attention to the injustice that Halikarnas Balıkçısı and his fellows suffered in as

the following;

We have a share in the stableness primarily as we couldn’t have seen the people

of Ancient Anatolia close to us like one of us and have externalized them by

seeing as strangers; as we couldn’t have taken the lesson of embracing the whole

Anatolia “with its history” from Fatih the conqueror’s and Mustafa Kemal

Atatürk’s embracing Hector. Furthermore, we have a share as we couldn’t have

internalized the culture of “protection of monuments as your own property”

started with Osman Hamdi and became the culture policy of the state with Ataturk

and couldn’t have spread it in society; as we don’t know Homer, one of us, who

is taught from primary school in the contemporary world as “the first author of the

West”, as we don’t know the Epic of Ilias, a product of this land, the most widely

19
 read book after Bible as “the first book of the West”; as we have never

remembered Hesiod of Kymeli, a second biggest poet of Aegean Antiquity

created the Hellenic religion and god hierarchy, and his Theogonia; as we have

been teaching Thales, the father of free thought and science, Protagoras and

Anaxagoras, the philosophers who were abused and exiled in –the apple of the

Westerner’s eye- Athens of the Golden Age by being accused of “demolishing the

divine order” based on the mythos and being “irreligion”, and due to the mental

concept they had brought to the philosophy of nature, as “the Greek philosophers”

as “the whole world knows so”; as we charged Cevat Şakir, Sabahattin Eyuboğlu

and Azra Erhat, who searched the Anatolia reality in these tradition by

questioning and advising to embrace the heritage a the land called “birth place of

the Europe and the cradle of Western civilization”, with “scientific nationalism”

in a shameful language as “Anatolianists”; and as we accepted the manner not

even dreaming of associating the concept of “nationalism” with the “Pan-

Hellenic” obsession, that have directed the ancient science under its custody for

two hundred years, as the “contemporary” requirement of the “humanist” thought

(Işık 2009: 57-58).

As Fahri Işık pointed out, the Hellenic Western is not only responsible for not getting

Anatolia’s and ancient civilizations’, having lived here for thousands of years, the values they

deserved. We have a great share in this mistake as people who live on these territories and

don’t know the value of the cultural heritage.

Halikarnas Balıkçısı has observed Anatolia, which he admires, increasing his

admiration for each examination, with regard to its cultural, scientific and social but

especially mythological aspects on the need to reveal these neglected truths required for

humanity to elevate the civilization really being aware of its history. He has also been the

20
first person who draws attention to the importance of Anatolia while he was amongst the

number of people who studied on this region. The comparisons Halikarnas Balıkçısı carried

out between the Anatolia and Hellenic mainland based on mythology, aesthetics, and science

haven’t been performed by the Western nations adopting Hellenic culture. According to the

author, this is because the dread of the West about the East enlightenment. They don’t want

any comparison with the “Utopian Hellenic mainland” created by European authors such as

Goethe, Byron, Shelley, Keats and Hugo. Thus the origins of the Europe will continue to be

“the most robust origin”. Kabaağaçlı attributes the neglecting of the ancient civilization of

Anatolia to these reasons (Kabaağaçlı 2001: 116).

CONCLUSION

All in all, with reference to the author’s books examined -Hey Koca Yurt, Anadolu

Tanrıları, Anadolu Efsaneleri, Merhaba Anadolu, and Anadolu’nun Sesi- it can be said that

myths are on the basis of the works of Halikarnas Balıkçısı. Mythology is an indispensable

scientific field of research for him. After long years of research, Halikarnas Balıkçısı has

been the defender of these archaic territories and has revealed the hidden information. He

makes use of archaeological data, sculptures, reliefs and paintings, historical facts, and

intellectual history both in mythological and scientific determinations. He also presents the

archaeological findings visually which form the basis of his ideas and he interprets them with

myths. Halikarnas Balıkçısı doesn’t accept that the myths belong to one civilization. He

underlines that cultures constantly interact with each other and therefore civilization cannot be

monopolized by a single nation. Kabaağaçlı, who often mentions humanity in his works,

points out the real humanism which is required for the whole humanity and formed with

coalescence of cultures.

What makes Halikarnas Balıkçısı different for the mythological studies in Turkey is

his works in the field of comparative mythology. These works makes him different in that no
21
any productive studies and attempts can be seen in this field of study in Turkey other than his

works. However, Anatolia, the largest and the most important nature open-air museum, is a

unique source of wealth for comparative mythology studies.

22
1
Pen name of Cevat Şakir Kabaağalı exclusively used in his writings. Halicarnassus is the ancient name of Bodrum, a town
in Turkey. Kabaağaçlı, who lived long times in Bodrum, used the pen name “Halikarnas Balıkçısı” which means “The
Fisherman of Halicarnassus”. Hereafter, we will use his pen name “Halikarnas Balıkçısı” in this paper.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Aktulum, Kubilay. Metinlerarasılık- Göstergelerarasılık. Ankara: Kanguru Publications,

2011.

Arif, Ahmed. “Anadolu”. Hasretinden Prangalar Eskittim. İstanbul: Cem Publications, t.y.

Ayvazoğlu, Beşir. Geçmişi Yeniden Kurmak. İstanbul: Kubbealtı Publications, 1987.

Campbell, Joseph. Primitive Mythology. New York: Penguin Books, 1979.

Cengiz, Gülsüm. Kadınlar İçin Söylenmiştir, Anadolu’da Kadınların Şiirli Tarihi. İstanbul:

Evrensel Publications, 2011.

Cochrane, Ev. “Indra: A Case Study In Comparative Mythology”. Aeon Journal 2 (1991): 49-

76
Cox, George William. An Introduction to the Science of Comparative Mythology and

Folklore, London: Kegan Paul Trench Co., 1883.

Çebin, Burcu Yılmaz. İkinci Yeni Şiirinde Mitik Unsurlar. MA thesis. Eskişehir: Eskişehir

Osmangazi Üniversitesi, 2012.

Eliade, Mircea. Mitlerin Özellikleri. Çev. Sema Rifat. İstanbul: Om Publications, 2001.

Eyüboğlu, İsmet Zeki. Tanrı Yaratan Toprak Anadolu. İstanbul: Sinan Publications, 1994.

Işık, Fahri. Doğa Ana Kubaba Tanrıçalarının Ege’de Buluşması, Suna-İnan Kıraç Akdeniz

Medeniyetleri Araştırma Enstitüsü Monografi Dizisi I, İstanbul: yy, 1999.

. “Patara. Dünü, Bugünü ve Geleceği”. Türk Arkeoloji Dergisi 29 (1991): 35-49

. “Anadolu-İon Uygarlığı, ‘Kolonizasyon’ ve ‘Doğu Hellen’ Kavramlarına Eleştirisel Bir Bakış”.

Anadolu/Anatolia:35 (2009): 53-86

Kabaağaçlı, Cevat Şakir. Anadolu Efsaneleri. Ankara: Bilgi Publications, 2006.

. Anadolu’nun Sesi. Ankara: Bilgi Publications, 2008.

. Anadolu Tanrıları. Ankara: Bilgi Publications, 2005.

. Hey Koca Yurt. Ankara: Bilgi Publications, 2001.

. Merhaba Anadolu. Ankara: Bilgi Publications, 2010.

Koçak, Aynur. “Mitolojik Simgeler Ekseninde Halikarnas Balıkçısı’nın Akdeniz’i”.

Frankofoni: 23 (2011): 47-55.

Önal, H. İlknur. Halikarnas Balıkçısı, Cevat Şakir Kabaağaçlı, Hayatı-Kişiliği-Eserleri.

Ankara: Kültür Bakanlığı Publications, 1997.

Yazıcı, Nermin. Halikarnas Balıkçısı’nın Eserlerinde Tabiat. MA thesis. Ankara: Hacettepe

Üniversitesi, 1998.