1926 Baku Turkology Congress

1926 Baku Turkology Congress (First Turkology Congress), held between 26 February and 6 March 1926 in Baku, the capital of Azerbaijan, was an international gathering where the linguistic, historical, literary, and cultural issues of the Turkic world were addressed on a scientific platform. The congress, convened under the claim of promoting cultural integration and modernization of Turkic peoples within the borders of the Soviet Union, is particularly notable for its efforts toward alphabet unification and the creation of a common written language among Turkic peoples.

Although organized with the support of Moscow within the borders of the Soviet Union, this congress, which holds a significant place in Turkology history, had an impact across the entire Turkic world.

^{Some of the Delegates Attending the Baku Turkology Congress, Including M. Fuad Köprülü (}TRT Avaz⁾

The 1926 Baku Turkology Congress (First Baku Turkology Congress) is recognized as an international scientific gathering that marked a turning point in the cultural and political history of the Turkic peoples. The national awakening and enlightenment process, which began in the early 20th century under the influence of the Jadidism movement, found institutional expression through this congress. Held within the borders of the Soviet Union, the congress is regarded as one of the foundational pillars of cultural and political rapprochement among Turkic peoples, particularly through linguistic convergence.

The initiative for convening the congress was heavily influenced by the educational reforms and the idea of linguistic unity pioneered by Ismail Bey Gasprinski. The intellectual legacy of pioneers of Turkism such as Hüseyinzade Ali Bey also provided the ideological foundation for the congress.

^{Hüseyinzade Ali Bey (}TRT Avaz⁾

The Soviet authorities initially supported the congress to enhance their influence over Turkic peoples and to institutionalize Soviet Turkology. The primary objectives of the congress were to unify scattered Turkological research, resolve the alphabet issue, and reframe the cultural ties among Turkic peoples on a scientific basis.

^{Ismailiyeh Palace, Venue of the Congress (Today the Azerbaijan National Academy of Sciences) (Photo: Duygu Şahinler)}

A large number of scholars participated in the congress from various republics of the Soviet Union, Europe, and Türkiye. The Republic of Türkiye attached great importance to the congress and, upon the special instructions of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, sent a delegation headed by Fuad Köprülü.

A total of 131 delegates participated, 93 of whom were Turkic, from various regions of the Soviet Union, Türkiye, and Europe. Among the participants were leading scholars of the era.

From Azerbaijan: 6,

From Nakhchivan: 1,

From Georgia: 1,

From Armenia: 1,

From Ajaristan: 1,

Turkestan: 4,

From Crimea: 3,

From Tatarstan: 6,

From Bashkortostan: 3,

Kazakhstan: 3,

From Uzbekistan: 6,

From Turkmenistan: 4,

From Kyrgyzstan: 2,

From the Oyrot Region: 1,

From Yakutia: 3,

From the Kalmyk Region: 1,

From Chuvashia: 2,

From Eastern Turkestan: 1,

From Abkhazia: 1,

From Khakassia: 1,

From Karachay: 1,

From the North Caucasian Turkmen Region: 1,

From the Academy of Sciences: 3,

From the Society of Oriental Scholars: 2,

From Tashkent University: 1,

From Leningrad University: 1,

From the North Caucasus Executive Committee Council of Peoples: 2,

From the Ufa People’s Education Commissariat: 1,

From the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic Council of Peoples: 4,

From the Central Executive Committee of the USSR: 1,

Two delegates were invited from Southern Azerbaijan.

Additionally, 3 individuals were personally invited from Türkiye,

2 from Azerbaijan,

2 from Armenia,

2 from Crimea,

2 from Tatarstan,

2 from Bashkortostan,

4 from Uzbekistan,

2 from North Caucasus,

1 from Leningrad,

2 from Moscow,

1 from Ukraine,

2 from Dagestan,

2 from Transcaucasia,

2 from Germany,

1 from Hungary.^【1】

Some of the leading scholars who attended the congress include:^【2】

• Azerbaijan: From Baku, the main organizers of the congress, Crimean scholar Prof. Dr. Bekir Çobanzade and Prof. Dr. Nikolay Ivanovich Ashmarin; Samed Agamalıoğlu, Ruhulla Ahundov, Mirza Ahmed Mammadzade, Ferhad Agazade, Hasan Sabri Ayvazov, Selman Mümtaz, and Hanefi Zeynallı participated.

• Türkiye: A seven-member delegation led by Fuad Köprülü, representing the Republic of Türkiye, included Hüseyinzade Ali Bey, İsmail Hikmet Ertaylan, Sami Rıfat, Fuat Raif, and Necip Asım.

• Kazan Tatars: Ayaz Kasimovich Maksudov, Aziz Ubeydullin, and Alimcan Şeref participated.

• Bashkortostan: Alimcan İbrahimov participated.

• Kazakhstan: Ildes Omarov, Ahmed Baytursun, and Nazir Turakulov participated.

• Turkmenistan: Bekki Berdiyev participated.

• Kyrgyzstan: Kasim Tınıstanov participated.

• Russia: Renowned Russian orientalists and Turkologists such as Vasily Vladimirovich Barthold, Sergey Oldenburg, Aleksandr Samoylovich, Nicholas Poppe, Sergey Rudenko, and Ahatanhel Krymski participated.

• Europe: Western Turkologists including Wilhelm Thomsen, Theodor Menzel, Georg Jacob, Lajos Ligeti, Gyula Mészáros, and Gyula Németh were also present at the congress.

Theodor Menzel of the German delegation proposed that the congress be dedicated in honor of Wilhelm Radloff; in response, the Turkish delegates suggested honoring Ismail Bey Gasprinski. Both proposals were accepted, and the congress was dedicated to both figures.^【3】

At the congress, 17 sessions were held and 38 papers presented under headings including Turkic history, Turkic ethnography, genetic relationships among Turkic languages, Turkic languages, orthography, alphabet, literary language and its history, pedagogy, geography, and culture.^【4】

The most heated debate at the congress concerned the change of alphabet. Most participants argued that the Arabic script was inadequate for representing the phonetic structure of Turkic languages. Some groups, such as the Tatarstan delegation, opposed this view. Nevertheless, the proposal to adopt a new Latin-based alphabet gained overwhelming support at the congress.

^{First Turkic Alphabet Adapted to the Latin Script After the Congress (}TRT Avaz⁾

At the 1926 Baku Turkology Congress, scholars discussing terminology grouped into four main perspectives: those favoring Arabic-Persian, European-Russian, Turkic language sources, and a democratic approach. As a result of the debates, the prevailing view was that Turkic dialects should be prioritized in terminology creation, with other sources consulted only when insufficient.^【5】

During this process, Prof. Dr. Bekir Çobanzade argued for the creation of a rich and common literary language capable of encompassing the intellectual structure of Turkic peoples and presented a technical roadmap for this goal. His proposals — establishing a common communication language, identifying root sources for enriching vocabulary, and implementing a three-stage educational reform based on a systematic foundation — were not only debated at the Baku Congress but were also adopted as its most fundamental decisions.^【6】

Çobanzade viewed the common language not merely as a romantic ideal but as a technical process to be constructed through education and science. The core principles of his views were as follows:

• Rejection of Imposing a Single Dialect: Çobanzade did not believe that one existing dialect should be imposed on others. Instead, a new and rich language should be developed, drawing from all Turkic dialects. He cited Kaşgarlı Mahmut’s Divânü-Lugat-it Türk as evidence of the historical roots and fundamental principles of linguistic proximity among Turkic dialects.

• Common Terminology as a Prerequisite: He insisted that a common literary language could only be established after creating a system of “common terminology.” He argued that linguistic unity was impossible without standardization of scientific and technical terms.

• Natural Mixing as a Foundation: Drawing from examples in Crimea and Central Asia, he noted that due to historical migrations, trade, and empires, Turkic tribes had long understood each other’s dialects (through dialect mixing) and that a pure separation was unrealistic. This natural mixing provided a ready foundation for a common language.

Çobanzade stated that the vocabulary of the common language should be drawn from three main sources:

• General Turkic Base: Words common to all dialects or differing only by minor phonetic variations should form the foundation.

• Arabic-Persian Base: Arabic and Persian words commonly used and accepted by the people across Turkic dialects should not be eliminated but preserved as tools of common understanding.

• European Base: European-origin terms should be used for scientific concepts, theories, and international terminology. For example, if a Greek-derived word is adopted, it must be used identically across all dialects.

Çobanzade proposed a three-stage educational plan for the development of the common language:

• In primary schools, local dialects and national terminology should be used.

• In secondary schools, general Turkic terminology should be standardized.

• In tertiary institutions (universities), the general Turkic base should be integrated with the international terminology system.

Although overshadowed by debates on language and alphabet, significant papers were presented on history, literature, ethnography, folklore, and museology. Participants emphasized the need to collect orally transmitted cultural products, epics, and ethnographic data using scientific methods. However, these proposals did not gain the same prominence as those on language and alphabet. The congress also facilitated an exchange of ideas on scientific methodologies for Turkological research.

Atatürk placed great importance on Türkiye’s relationship with the Turkic world and advocated maintaining spiritual bridges on issues such as language and history.^【7】 The Republic of Türkiye attached great importance to the congress and sent a delegation upon Atatürk’s instructions. The Turkish delegation closely followed the debates on alphabet reform, and this process helped lay the groundwork for the 1928 Alphabet Reform in Türkiye.

The most concrete and far-reaching outcome of the congress was the decision to adopt the Latin alphabet. Azerbaijan’s experience since 1922 in implementing the Latin script served as a model. After heated debates, it was decided that all Turkic peoples should transition to the Latin alphabet on the grounds that the Arabic script was inadequate for representing the phonetic structure of Turkic languages. This decision was a strategic step aimed at strengthening cultural ties among Turkic states and communities.

One of the recommendations in the final declaration was the establishment of Turkology centers in various locations. These centers would collect and microfilm all sources and manuscripts related to Turkology. Furthermore, all centers would maintain communication with each other and support Turkic scholars.^【8】

As a result of the first congress in Baku, it was decided that the second congress would be held in Samarkand two years later.^【9】

^{First Publication in Azerbaijan Using the Latin Alphabet: Yeni Yol Newspaper (Nerimanoğlu et al., p.485)}

The congress served as a rare “platform for reconciliation” for global Turkology circles. Until then, Western (European) Turkology and Eastern (Soviet/Russian and Turkic) Turkology had developed in isolation. The congress provided an opportunity for these different schools to meet, recognize each other, and discuss scientific methodologies.

The congress is regarded as a “turning point” for the future of the peoples of Turkistan (Central Asian Turkic communities). The decisions made, particularly the transition to the Latin alphabet, directly influenced the cultural destiny and position of these peoples within the Soviet system. The congress was one of the critical historical events that determined the direction of modernization in the Turkistan region.

Although it was decided at the Baku Turkology Congress that a second congress would be held in Samarkand two years later, this decision was not implemented. Instead, Orthography Conferences were held in Ak-Mechet in 1927, Samarkand in 1928, and Almaty in 1930, where orthographic issues of Crimean Tatar, Uzbek, and Kazakh Turkic dialects were discussed. These conferences addressed matters related to the transition to the Latin alphabet as decided in 1926.

^{Applause for the Adoption of the New Alphabet at the Turkology Congress (from Yeni Yol Newspaper, Nerimanoğlu, p.494.)}

Due to political repression known as “Repressiya” in the Soviet Union, work on these initiatives halted. In 1932, the process was continued in Ankara with the Turkish Language Congress.

The process of common alphabet and cultural unity initiated by the 1926 Baku Congress suffered a definitive rupture with the 1936 Ashgabat Turkmenology Congress, which completely reversed previous policies. Despite the decision made in Baku to adopt the Latin alphabet, this congress resolved that all Turkic communities within the Soviet Union should switch to the Cyrillic alphabet. Other topics discussed included spelling rules, translation of Marxist-Leninist classics, and their dissemination.^【10】

After a 50-year interval, Soviet Turkology congresses were held in Ashgabat in 1988, in Tashkent in 1980, and in Almaty in 1976 during the dissolution of the Soviet Union. These meetings focused on Soviet-era Turkological research.

The decision to adopt the Latin alphabet at Baku directly influenced the alphabet debates and reform process in the Republic of Türkiye. The adoption of Latin letters by Azerbaijan and other Turkic communities facilitated support for the Alphabet Reform in Türkiye among Turkish nationalist intellectuals and organizations such as the Turkish Hearth.^【11】

The congress became a site of apparent cooperation but underlying “secret competition” between the Soviet Union and the Republic of Türkiye. The Soviet regime sought to strengthen its influence over Turkic peoples within its borders and retain them under the umbrella of “Soviet Turkology,” rather than under Türkiye’s cultural sphere. Türkiye, on the other hand, participated in the congress to strengthen the cultural foundations of its newly founded republic and preserve spiritual ties with Turkic peoples abroad. This transformed the congress from a purely scientific meeting into a stage for strategic maneuvers by the two states.^【12】

Following the Baku Congress, the process of ending Turkological cooperation between Türkiye and Russia began. Russia began eliminating and arresting Turkic intellectuals and Turkologists who supported the Latin alphabet transition at the congress. After Türkiye adopted the Latin alphabet in 1928, by the 1930s the decision to transition Turkic communities under Soviet rule to the Latin alphabet was entirely abandoned.^【13】

^{Organizing Committee of the Turkology Congress (from Yeni Yol Newspaper, Nerimanoğlu, p.494.)}

Although the congress began as a scientific event, it ultimately turned into a tragedy for its participants. In the mid-1930s, under Stalin’s regime, the Soviet authorities came to view the cultural rapprochement they had initially supported as a threat. By the late 1930s, the Repression (Purge) period began.

Many intellectuals who attended the congress, including Bekir Çobanzade, Ahmed Baytursun, Kasim Tınıstanov, Selman Mümtaz, and Hanefi Zeynallı, were executed or exiled between 1937 and 1938 after being labeled “Pan-Turkists,” “spies,” and “enemies of the people.” Their works were banned and destroyed. In these cases, merely having attended the congress was considered sufficient grounds for accusation. The repression became so severe that even non-Turkic scholars such as Aleksandr Samoylovich and Rudolfovich Zilfeld were executed on the grounds of being “Pan-Turkists.”

In the aftermath of the congress, the accusation of Pan-Turkism became the primary justification for political repression and purges against Turkic intellectuals. Academic research on the Turkic language, history, and folklore was equated with opposition to the regime. Not only researchers but also historical epics such as Dede Korkut, Manas, and Alpamysh, and their characters, became targets of ideological condemnation. Intellectuals who studied or published these works were sentenced to imprisonment, exile, or execution as “system opponents” and “enemies of the people.”^【14】

The decision made at the Baku Congress to adopt a Latin-based common alphabet, though interrupted by political repression and the “Repressiya” period, was revived nearly a century later. The culmination of the work of the Turkic World Common Alphabet Commission — the consensus on a 34-letter Common Turkic Alphabet representing the distinct phonemes of Turkic languages — is the most concrete manifestation of the seeds planted in 1926.^【15】

The 12th Summit of the Organization of Turkic States, held in Gebele, Azerbaijan, marked a historical milestone in the realization of the “common written language and alphabet” ideal first laid out at the 1926 Baku Turkology Congress, but left incomplete by historical ruptures, now implemented through the most concrete and institutionalized steps.^【16】 In accordance with the decisions of 1926, this ideal was realized through the experimental publication of Abay Kunanbay’s Kara Sözler' and Kyrgyz writer Cengiz Aytmatov’s White Ship in the common alphabet. These publications represent the first concrete steps toward the goal of enabling Turkic peoples to read each other’s classics “without translation.”^【17】

The 1926 Baku Turkology Congress was the first comprehensive scientific initiative aiming for alphabet and terminology unity among Turkic-speaking peoples, culminating in the adoption of a Latin-based alphabet. The theoretical framework developed by Bekir Çobanzade and other delegates was interrupted in the 1930s by changing Soviet policies and the purges of intellectuals (Repressiya); the Latin alphabet was replaced by the Cyrillic alphabet and policies of fragmentation. Today, the 34-letter Common Turkic Alphabet project, led by the Turkish Academy of Sciences and related institutions, draws largely on the decisions and methodologies of this congress.

On the centenary of the First Baku Turkology Congress, held in Baku in 1926 and recognized as a historical turning point for the scientific, cultural, and linguistic unity of the Turkic world, the Turkology Congress 2026 aims to establish a lasting foundation for scientific cooperation among Turkic world academies.

During the 80th anniversary events of the Azerbaijan National Academy of Sciences, a Memorandum of Understanding was signed between TÜBA and AMEA to implement the congress. TÜBA President Prof. Dr. Muzaffer Şeker emphasized that this partnership represents a highly valuable collaboration strengthening the scientific and cultural solidarity of the Turkic world. As a concrete example of this historical continuity, TDK President Prof. Dr. Osman Mert attended the “From Yesterday to Today: The First Turkology Congress” program held on 30 September 2025 in the same hall where the 1926 congress took place, organized jointly by TDK and AMEA. The congress, opened by Prof. Dr. İsa Habibbeyli, comprehensively addressed the century-long journey of the common alphabet ideal and its contemporary relevance.

Prof. Dr. Mert’s assessment, titled “The Issue of a Common Alphabet in the Turkic World from the 1926 Baku First Turkology Congress to the Present,” interpreted the 2024 consensus within the Organization of Turkic States on the 34-letter “Common Turkic Alphabet” as evidence that the 99-year-old ideal is finally being realized; while recalling that more than 80 of the 131 delegates who attended the congress were executed by Stalin’s regime between 1937 and 1938, he honored these distinguished figures with gratitude and remembrance.

The Turkology Congress 2026, planned by TÜBA and AMEA, will be a comprehensive program aimed at reevaluating the past, present, and future of Turkology on a scientific basis; integrating the legacy of the First Baku Turkology Congress with contemporary scientific understanding to promote joint projects, publications, and exchange programs for young researchers; and addressing new dimensions of the common alphabet issue such as digital ecosystems, artificial intelligence, and terminology unity.