Silence in Official Representations of History: Implications for National Identity and Intergroup Relations

Abstract

Dominant representations of history evolve through differential exercise of power to enable memory of collective triumphs and silence memory of collective misdeeds. We examined silence regarding minorities in official constructions of history and the implications of this silence for national identity and intergroup relations in Turkey. A content analysis of official constructions of history inscribed in Turkish national university admissions exams (Study 1) revealed an emphasis on celebratory events, silence about ethnic and religious minorities, and a construction of national identity in ethno-cultural (e.g., as “Turk” and “Muslim”) rather than civic terms (e.g., in terms of citizenship). An investigation with Turkish participants (Study 2) revealed that denial of historical information regarding minority populations documented in sources outside the national curriculum was associated with greater endorsement of ethno-cultural constructions of identity and less support for minority rights and freedom of expression. We discuss the liberatory potential of alternative forms of historical knowledge to promote more inclusive models of identification and improve intergroup relations.

Abstract

Background

Social scientists have long emphasized how collective memory both shapes and serves interests of collective identity. In one direction, representations of history, which we define as repositories of collective memory embedded in cultural tools such as official memorials, museums, and commemorative holidays, provide a basis for national identity. Different representations of history afford particular constructions of national identity. For instance, celebratory representations of history promote nation-glorifying forms of identification, while critical representations of history challenge such forms of nation-glorifying identification. In the other direction, representations of history are not mere reflections of objectively recorded events. Instead, these representations carry the identity interests of their producers, and people engage with these representations of history in ways that serve their identity needs. For example, people with strong collective identification have the tendency to recall few instances of collective misdeeds, to prefer celebratory portrayals of the past over more critical portrayals, and to interpret events in ways that defend against identity threats. Past research suggests that dominant representations of history across diverse national settings often emphasize collective triumphs and silence collective misdeeds.

Why was this study done?

Previous researchers have noted the extent to which silencing of critical history has been pervasive in Turkey (as one example among many). The present research examined silence regarding minorities in official constructions of history and the implications of this silence for national identity and intergroup relations in Turkey. We first focused on how official accounts of history emphasize or omit mention of diverse populations in Turkish history. We then investigated the relationship between different conceptions of national identity, silence about historical events related to minorities, and support for current policies that may threaten a particular understanding of national identity.

What did the researchers do and find?

In our first study, we conducted a content analysis of history sections of Turkish national university examinations. Our analyses revealed an emphasis on celebratory events (e.g., triumph and military). These representations made no mention of the diversity of peoples who historically inhabited the lands of present-day Turkey. Moreover, they made no mention of minorities in contemporary Turkish society. Exams tended to silence positive contributions of minorities or negative treatment of minorities. In rare cases where they did mention minorities, they depicted minority groups in negative terms (e.g., as harming the state). In other words, official representations of Turkish history depicted in national exams not only omitted instances of past wrongdoing, but also implied a construction of national identity in ways that homogenized contemporary Turkish society and portrayed minority groups as a threat to national unity. In our second study, we examined how silencing of minority-related historical information relates to national identity and support for identity-relevant policy. We conducted a survey among participants in Turkey. The survey included a history quiz consisting of items from national history exams along with items pertaining to critical history documented in sources outside the national curriculum, a measure assessing conceptions of national identity, support for minority rights, and support for freedom of expression. Findings revealed that denial of historical information regarding minority populations documented in sources outside the national curriculum was associated with less inclusive conceptions of national identity and less support for minority rights and freedom of expression.

What do these findings mean?

The present studies suggest that identity-defensive silence and denial about historical treatment of minorities was evident both in cultural products and in individual action. One important contribution of the present research is to illustrate the role of denial of critical historical information for support of progressive politics.

This research suggests that silence has important implications for intergroup relations and social justice. Historical accounts that acknowledge past misdeeds not only counteract tendencies of denial and forgetting, but may also enable new understandings of national identity that affirm the common humanity of diverse peoples and mobilize action toward democratic innovation.