1.4. Theoretical Tools
1.4.3. Qualitative Network Analysis
The network approach fulfills a double purpose for this study. First of all, it matters as an underlying theoretical assumption: Network analysis departs from the notion that social relations and identity are interrelated:
Networks provide material, social and emotional resources and map out different options for decisions about self. Reducing complex social realities to meaningful structures, networks help actors to position
103 Fulbrook & Rublack, “In Relation,” p. 266.
themselves and make sense of the world.104 From the 1970s onward, network structures have increasingly been understood and described as complex, dynamic and ever-changing entities. Jeremy Boissevain suggested to approach actors as entrepreneurs who act within and manipulate network structures to their individual benefit. According to Boissevain’s model, network structures describe options individuals perceive, interact with and modify at given points in time.105 In a similar vein, Dietmar Rothermund conceptualized networks as dynamic results of ongoing negotiations between individuals.106
Roman Loimeier and Stefan Reichmuth pointed out the general use of the network approach for the study of Islamic societies.107 A number of researchers have since picked up on their suggestions and fruitfully applied network approaches to Middle Eastern history, among them Thomas Eich108 and Jan-Peter Hartung109 in their studies on the ego-networks of individual protagonists, Bekim Agai in his study on the
104 „Identitätsarbeit braucht soziale Netzwerke, da diese materielle, emotionale und soziale Ressourcen zur Verfügung stellen, Optionen für Identitätsentwürfe und –projekte eröffnen und die Komplexität der sozialen Welt durch die Vermittlung von Relevanzstrukturen reduzieren,“ Heiner Keupp (ed.), Identitätskonstruktionen. Das Patchwork der Identitäten in der Spätmoderne (Reinbeck bei Hamburg: Rowohlt, 2002 [1999]), p. 169.
105 Jeremy Boissevain, Friends of Friends. Networks, Manipulators, and Coalitions (Oxford:
Blackwell, 1974), pp. 4-21. Boissevain departs from the earlier model of structural-functionalist network analysis, which did not account for dynamics within network structures and the interactions between actors and their options within the network.
106 Dietmar Rothermund, „Globalgeschichte als Interaktionsgeschichte. Von der außereuropäischen Geschichte zur Globalgeschichte,” in: Birgit Schäbler (ed.), Area Studies und die Welt. Weltregionen und die neue Globalgeschichte (Wien: Mandelbaum Verlag, 2007), p. 199.
107 Roman Loimeier & Stefan Reichmuth, „Zur Dynamik Religiös-Politischer Netzwerke in Muslimischen Gesellschaften.“ In: Die Welt des Islams 36.2 (1996), pp. 145-185.
108 Thomas Eich, Abū-l-Hudā aṣ-Ṣayyādī. Eine Studie zur Instrumentalisierung sufischer Netzwerke und genealogischer Kontroversen im spätosmanischen Reich (Berlin: Klaus Schwarz, 2003).
109 Jan-Peter Hartung, Viele Wege und Ein Ziel. Leben und Wirken von Sayyid Abū l-Ḥasan ʿAlī Al-Ḥasanī Nadwī (1914-1999) (Würzburg: Ergon, 2004).
network structures through which the Gülen movement operates,110 and Henning Sievert with a focus on relations between center and periphery.111 With regard to the history of the late Ottoman Empire and the transition period from empire to nation states, Michael Meeker112 and Reşat Kasaba113 have argued for general continuity in network structures between late Ottoman and post-imperial times. Hakan Özoğlu brought forward a similar argument for the specific case of Ottoman-Kurdish notables who became engaged with Ottoman-Kurdish nationalism in the late 19th century. He found that in their commitment to the new common cause, they drew extensively on existing imperial network structures.114
Second, a qualitative network approach constitutes a methodological choice, suggesting a particular type of data collection and analysis.
Relations between individuals can be mapped out, described and interpreted. Patters and connections will emerge that ask for further explanation. In addition, network structures change over time – how and why they do so is also part of the questions I ask. One central advantage of a network perspective is that patterns and relevant links emerge from the data instead of being preconceived. This brings a relative openness to the analysis, which is useful for investigation of a time period marked by ruptures and transition like the one experienced by members of the Bedirhani family after the breakdown of the Ottoman Empire. Network structures are understood here as a pool of potential connections that
110 Bekim Agai, Zwischen Netzwerk und Diskurs: das Bildungsnetzwerk um Fethullah Gülen (geb. 1938) : die flexible Umsetzung modernen islamischen Gedankenguts (Schenefeld: EB-Verlag, 2004).
111 Henning Sievert, Zwischen Arabischer Provinz und Hoher Pforte. Beziehungen, Bildung und Politik des osmanischen Bürokraten Rāġib Meḥmed Paşa (st. 1763) (Würzburg: Ergon, 2008).
112 Meeker, A Nation of Empire.
113 Reşat Kasaba, “Dreams of Empire, Dreams of Nations,” in: Joseph W. Esherick (ed.), Empire to Nation. Historical Perspectives on the Making of the Modern World (Lanham:
Rowman & Littlefield, 2006), pp. 198-228.
114 Özoğlu, Kurdish Notables, pp. 87-117.
can be mobilized and deemphasized and thus indicate options and potentialities available to a person at a given point in time. A qualitative network approach alone, however, is not sufficient for the analysis of elements of continuity and change in the collective historical trajectory of the Bedirhani family. Therefore, an analysis of collective and – in selected case studies like that of Kamuran Bedirhan in chapter 5 – also individual ego-networks is cross-read with changing descriptions of the self which are taken from a variety of ego-documents authored by members of the Bedirhani family at different times. The qualitative network analysis is meant to meaningfully supplement the textual analysis, thereby helping to put assumptions and hypotheses about Ottoman-Kurdish identity on firmer ground. Qualitative network analysis of historical situations comes with a number of limitations:
Networks are snapshots of social worlds at given points in time, they are not fixed. As the density of source material on the Bedirhani family varies, information on network structures is often sparse. Combined with other data about personal trajectories and historical context, however, a focus on networks adds an element of surprise to the analysis, as networks often cut across preconceived corporate identities like ethnicity, religion or class and point to interesting or unexpected connections.