Enver

Assoc. Prof. Dr.

As is widely known, Freemasonry originated in Europe before the fourteenth century as an organization of construction workers in lodges, resembling the guild system in the Ottoman Empire. Operative Freemasonry, initially composed of craftsmen, underwent a significant transformation in the seventeenth century, evolving into what is known as Speculative Freemasonry. This shift occurred with the inclusion of individuals from diverse professions seeking to escape the constraints of the feudal system. From that point onward, Freemasonry integrated an ‘esoteric’ dimension to its beliefs and became a hub for bourgeois revolutionary activity. Anti-church and anti-monarch movements in various regions began to organize primarily within Masonic lodges.Freemasonry entered Ottoman lands in the eighteenth century and expanded to different cities and regions, closely tied to foreign obediences. Notably, over time, several prominent Ottoman figures - including sultans, princes, and sheikhulislams - became initiates. Particularly after the Crimean War and up until the Second Constitutional Monarchy period, the number and influence of Masonic lodges across the empire increased significantly.&nbsp;Masonic lodges, which steadily grew and strengthened within Ottoman society, played a key role in the Committee of Union and Progress (CUP), the driving force behind the Second Constitutional Monarchy. Many influential CUP members were Freemasons. This cadre eventually founded the first Ottoman Supreme Council and the Ottoman Grand Lodge. Following the dissolution of the CUP after the First World War, the Ottoman Grand Lodge and Supreme Council were restructured with new members in 1919.With the establishment of the Republic of Türkiye, Freemasonry adapted to the new political framework. Some prominent founders of the Republic were Freemasons, enabling the organization to sustain itself during the early Republican years. However, as the one party regime consolidated its power, it sought to control the social foundations&nbsp;of the revolution exclusively and disallowed competing organizations. Civil organizations, including Freemasonry, faced increasing pressure. Anti-Masonic rhetoric, led by Interior Minister Mahmut Esat Bozkurt, heightened concerns within Masonic circles about the possibility of being banned. In response, to preserve certain legal rights and the Supreme Council’s existence, Turkish Freemasonry voluntarily declared itself dissolved, or in Masonic terms, “fell asleep.”As mentioned earlier, Turkish Freemasonry “fell asleep” during the Republican period and reawakened after the death of Atatürk, resuming its activities. However, prior to this, the Grand Lodge had been established by the Supreme Council of Türkiye, which originated during the Ottoman era. This led to the creation of a hierarchical structure between the two institutions of Turkish Freemasonry, which, contrary to general Masonic practices, should have been independent of each other. From its inception, the Grand Lodge operated in a subordinate and dependent position to the Supreme Council of Türkiye, a situation that conflicted with the universal principles of Anglo-Saxon Freemasonry. This distorted organizational framework was subsequently inherited by the Freemasonry of the Republican period.After 1948, the Supreme Council once again assumed leadership of Turkish Freemasonry. Contrary to universal Masonic traditions, it extended its authority to the symbolic lodges, operating in the first three degrees of Freemasonry - Apprentice, Journeyman, and Master - and played a decisive role in the establishment of the Grand Lodge. However, general Masonic practices dictate the opposite: the Grand Lodge should be established as an independent and autonomous Masonic authority, free from external influence, and should have exclusive authority over symbolic lodges. This divergence from tradition rendered the Masonic organization in Türkiye “irregular” in the eyes of Anglo-Saxon Freemasonry.After its reawakening, the primary objective of Turkish Freemasons was to rectify this situation and achieve recognition by Anglo-Saxon Freemasonry, which held considerable global influence and served as an umbrella organization for world Freemasonry. The year 1965 marked a significant period of both intensified recognition efforts and undesirable political controversies for Turkish Freemasonry. Among the most notable incidents was the case of prominent Turkish politician Süleyman Demirel, who, amid allegations of being a Freemason, arranged for a falsified document to be issued by the Grand Lodge declaring that he was not a Freemason, despite evidence to the contrary.This controversy fractured the longstanding hierarchy between the Supreme Council and the Grand Lodge, leading to intense debates and eventually a split within Turkish Freemasonry. The division resulted in the formation of two separate obediences, each with its own Supreme Council and Grand Lodge. One group pursued recognition by Anglo-Saxon Freemasonry and ultimately succeeded. The other aligned itself with French Freemasonry, continuing the Ottoman-era tradition of Supreme Council dominance. Today, the two organizations do not recognize each other and consider one another “irregular” in the Masonic sense.

According to Masonic Sources, the Events of Dissolution and Division Experienced by the Masons of Türkiye During the Republican Period

Nesrin

Ramazan

Prof. Dr.

History of American Chamber of Commerce for The Levant (1911-1914)

Muhammet

Mekteb-i Bahriye (The Naval Academy) played a vital role in aligning the military maritime education of the Ottoman Empire with a structured school discipline framework. It was instrumental in training the qualified personnel required for the state’s navy and maritime administration. Students who were educated at the Mekteb-i Bahriye became qualified naval officers and served at various levels of the state, primarily within the navy. This article examines the activities of the Mekteb-i Bahriye during the reign of Abdulhamid II, focusing on the Mekâtib-i Askeriye-i Bahriye (Naval Military Schools) Regulation. By the early 1900s, the academy had accumulated over a century of experience in military maritime education, which provided the basis for analyzing its internal operational structure. In addition to exploring the theoretical framework of the academy’s administration, this study aims to reveal the extent to which the regulation was implemented in practice using archival documents from the period.In addition to serving as educational institutions, schools are integral parts of society, consisting of individuals whose backgrounds reflect the socio-cultural dynamics of their time. Documents such as student petitions submitted during school applications, grade slips, and notebooks containing information about the school provide valuable information about various aspects of Ottoman society. These records help clarify which regions of the Ottoman Empire the students came from, which schools they previously attended, and the professions of their fathers, thus shedding light on the broader social context of the period. Within the framework of the article, the human resources of the Mekteb-i Bahriye were evaluated under the guidance of archival records.The primary sources for this article are archival materials found in the Presidential Ottoman Archives. These include documents related to the Mekteb-i Bahriye (The Naval Academy) transferred from the Naval History Archive to the Ottoman Archives. These are complemented by naval annals, period documents, memoirs, and previously written theses and articles on the subject.&nbsp;This article examines the status of the Mekteb-i Bahriye during the reign of Abdülhamid II, from the end of the 19th century to the beginning of the 20th century, within the framework of the Mekâtib-i Askeriye-i Bahriye (Naval Military Schools) Regulation and archive documents of the period. The following questions are addressed within the boundaries of this review:&nbsp;• How did the Mekteb-i Bahriye function at the beginning of the 20th century? • What were the practical applications of the instructions in the Mekâtib-i Askeriye-i Bahriye Regulation? • Which courses were included in the academy’s curriculum? • What were the profiles of the teachers teaching at the Mekteb-i Bahriye and what were the expectations from them? • From which schools did the accepted students graduate? • Which regions of the Ottoman Empire did the students represent? • What were the professions of the students’ fathers? Were applications to the Mekteb-i Bahriye limited to the children of naval personnel, or did they also include children of individuals from other professions?The findings demonstrate that the implementation of the Mekâtib-i Askeriye-i Bahriye Regulation during Abdülhamid II’s reign is well-documented through archival materials. The courses offered at the academy reflected advancements in maritime technology of the period. A significant proportion of the instructors were graduates of the Mekteb-i Bahriye, and they were expected not only to teach but also to produce scholarly works on maritime education and translate relevant foreign texts. The students admitted to the academy came from Istanbul and its surrounding regions, as well as various parts of the Ottoman Empire. Analysis of available records indicates that applicants came from diverse professional backgrounds, as reflected in the occupations of their fathers. Overall, the Mekteb-i Bahriye provided its graduates, educated within the Ottoman educational system, with opportunities to pursue careers in the navy and serve at different levels of the state apparatus.

Education and Training at the Mekteb-i Bahriye (Naval Academy) During the Reign of Abdülhamid II in Light of the Naval Military Schools Regulations

Mehmet

It is well-documented that the military, economic, social, and political conditions of nations involved in war are often adversely impacted. Such circumstances frequently lead to domestic insecurity and chaos. The First World War, one of the most extensive and global conflicts in human history, inflicted significant and destructive effects on both states and societies.For the Ottoman Empire, which was compelled to join this war, the consequences were materially and morally devastating for Turkish society. The empire mobilized all its resources, both material and spiritual, to sustain its war effort. However, alongside the deteriorating economy, there was also a noticeable decline in social cohesion and stability. Institutions across various sectors, including education and training, were profoundly affected by the challenges and disruptions brought about by the war.With the declaration of mobilization at the onset of the First World War, a significant number of schoolteachers were conscripted for military service. Additionally, the widespread poverty and social chaos caused by the war prevented many students from attending school, further disrupting education processes. As with civilian educational institutions, schools providing military training were profoundly impacted by the war. One significant measure implemented was the early graduation of senior students in military schools, allowing them to be deployed to the battlefield as quickly as possible.This article explores the impact of the First World War on the Turkish Naval School (Bahriye Mektebi), which provided military maritime education in the Ottoman Empire. Drawing primarily on archival documents, the study examines the effects of the four year conflict on the institution. Additionally, the article analyzes how the Ottoman Empire’s alliance with Germany influenced the education and training processes at the Turkish Naval School.Based on our research, it was determined that education at the Turkish Naval School continued relatively uninterrupted during the First World War, despite some minor challenges. British experts, who had been appointed to reform the Turkish Naval School in the years preceding the war, returned to their country when the conflict began. In their place, officers from Germany, the Ottoman Empire’s wartime ally, were assigned to the school.Prior to the war, English had been the mandatory foreign language taught at the Naval School; however, with the onset of the war, it was replaced by German. Additionally, naval officers graduating from the school, who had previously undertaken maritime internships and specialized training in England, France, and Germany, were sent exclusively to Germany during the war.The study investigates the influence of the Ottoman Empire’s alliance with Germany on the educational processes at the Turkish Naval School, analyzing the institution’s experience during the war within the broader context of Turkish military education history. Drawing primarily on archival documents, the research examines the four-year impact of the war on the Naval School, highlighting the resilience of its institutional structure despite the psychological strain experienced by both teachers and students.The Minister of Naval Affairs, Cemal Pasha, played a particularly influential role during this period, providing support and fostering the development of the Naval School. To provide a comprehensive framework, the study also includes a comparative analysis of the school’s situation before and after the war. In this context, the developments at the Naval School during the war are analyzed as part of the history of Turkish military education.

Education in the Shadow of War: Turkish Naval School during the First World War

Lale

Understanding the Ottoman palace harem requires an analysis that accounts for temporal shifts, local dynamics, and the human factor. During the classical period, the presence of concubines from various geographies within the palace harem symbolized the ruler’s power, prestige, and wealth, serving as an extension of the dynasty’s authority. Studies focusing on the 18th century reveal that most court concubines were identified as the daughters of fathers listed as slaves, while their mothers’ identities were often obscure. These women were frequently recorded as binti Abdullah, and details about their mothers and siblings, who might have served as their heirs, are rarely mentioned. This lack of familial connection underscores how the ties of concubines with their biological families were severed, with their sense of belonging being redefined through the palace hierarchy rather than through familial bonds. A 1908 document examined in this study offers valuable insights into the evolving structure of the Ottoman palace harem. This document highlights detailed and specific information about the concubines, reflecting a broader transformation within the institution. Among these changes was the phenomenon of voluntary captivity practiced by Circassian tribes, which contributed to the shifting dynamics of the harem. Unlike the rootless concubines of earlier periods, these women were often the daughters of families rooted in the aristocratic traditions of the Caucasian tribes, bringing with them a distinct sense of identity and prestige. This study sheds light on the transition of the harem institution, emphasizing the role of these aristocratic women in redefining its social and cultural dimensions.In the Hanedan Defteri (Imperial Family Register), where the names of Mehmed Reşad’s family members are recorded, the Sultan’s wives are listed after the names of his father and mother. They are identified as Başkadın Kâmres (Kamures), Second Lady Mihrengiz, Third Lady Nazperver, and İkbâl Dilfirib Hanımefendi. Notably, the term menkûha, meaning “married wife”, is used in reference to the kadınefendis. This terminology suggests that Mehmed Reşad’s wives were not concubines but formally wedded spouses. This distinction reflects the broader societal perception of women and&nbsp;family being promoted during the Second Constitutional Era, as evidenced in palace practices.In traditional Ottoman court life, the valide sultan derived her legitimacy in the harem through her son, the reigning sultan. However, during Sultan Mehmed Reşad’s reign, which began when he ascended the throne at the age of 65, legitimacy within the harem was derived directly from the elderly sultan himself, as there was no valide sultan. It is essential to underline that Mehmed Reşad’s reign marked a period devoid of a valide sultan, traditionally regarded as the “sultan of the harem.” This unique circumstance highlights Mehmed Reşad’s harem as a historical first. During this period, the kadınefendis, from the Başkadınefendi (Chief consort) to the other consorts, played significant roles in various ceremonial functions. These included hosting guests within the harem and participating in representation activities in social life. What sets this era apart in the context of harem life is the visibility of Mehmed Reşad’s wives in settings outside the confines of the harem.&nbsp;On March 21, 1910, during the visit of Bulgarian King Ferdinand and Queen Eleonora to Istanbul, the queen was hosted by Başkadınefendi Kâmres. Similarly, during the visit of Emperor Karl of Austria-Hungary and Empress Zita, the Empress expressed a desire to see the harem, and Sultan Mehmed Reşad introduced his wives to her. These events illustrate the kadınefendis’ role in representing the palace, as seen in their acts of hospitality and participation in religious ceremonies, such as the visit to the Hırka-i Saâdet.In the absence of a valide sultan, the women of the harem assumed roles and responsibilities in social life, particularly in representing the palace. Within the context of patriotism and nationalism, the Hilal-i Ahmer Society (Red Crescent Society) provided a platform for Ottoman women to participate in public activities. In 1912, Başkadınefendi Kâmres served as the honorary president of the Ladies’ Branch of the Ottoman Hilal-i Ahmer Society. She awarded diplomas to 28 women who successfully completed a course organized by the society. This event marked a significant first, as Başkadınefendi Kâmres not only attended the ceremony but also delivered a prepared speech, highlighting her role in fulfilling a representative duty entrusted to her.&nbsp;Similarly, Nazperver Kadınefendi played a prominent role in the Mamulât-ı Dâhiliye İstihlâkı Kadınlar Cemiyeti (Domestic Products Consumption Women’s Society), serving as its patron and as the honorary president of the Muâvenet-i Askeriye (Military Aid) Commission within the organization. She also presided over the abovementioned&nbsp;&nbsp;society’s first meeting. The society aimed to align production with the public’s needs in accordance with zevk-i milli (national taste) and public opinion, supporting the national economy and promoting national fashion. Beyond their philanthropic efforts, these women also contributed economically to the state’s ability to finance the war through their active engagement in such initiatives.Başikbâl Dilfirib Hanımefendi’s presidency of the Society for the Protection of Children further illustrates the roles of harem women in the Constitutional Monarchy. Their involvement in such organizations demonstrates not only their representative responsibilities on behalf of the palace but also their expanding sphere of influence within social life during this transformative period.

The Status of Sultan Mehmed Reşad’s Kadınefendis in the Harem: Hierarchy and Palace Representation

Yusuf

Halil Edhem Bey was born in Istanbul on June 24, 1861, as the middle son of Grand Vizier İbrahim Ethem Pasha. His education, which began in Istanbul, continued in several European countries, reflecting a diverse and rigorous academic journey that he completed with notable success.Halil Edhem Bey’s educational trajectory can be summarized as follows: After attending Kaptan İbrahim Pasha Secondary School following his primary education, he moved to Berlin when his father was appointed ambassador. In Berlin, he spent one year learning German before completing his secondary education at Real Schule, where he studied for four years. Following this, he traveled to Switzerland and attended the University of Zurich, studying natural sciences for one year. At the request of his father, Halil Edhem Bey enrolled at the Vienna Polytechnic School, where he pursued studies in natural sciences and chemistry. However, he returned to Switzerland the same year to continue his education at the University of Bern, where he ultimately earned a Doctor of Philosophy degree in 1885.After returning to Istanbul, Halil Edhem Bey began his career in public service with several key appointments. On August 13, 1885, he was appointed General Director of Military Factories. Subsequently, on September 7, 1887, he assumed the role of geology lecturer at the Mekteb-i Mülkiye-i Şahane (School of Civil Service). By the order of Sultan Abdülhamid II, he was appointed as a clerk in the Translation Office of the Erkan-ı Harbiye-i Umumiyye (General Staff) Department on December 11, 1889. His academic and administrative contributions extended further when, on July 25, 1892, he was sent to represent the empire at the Human Sciences and Antiquities Congresses held in Moscow. Later that year, on December 11, 1892, he was appointed as the Deputy Director of the Müze-i Hümayun (Imperial Museum).Halil Edhem Bey’s tenure as Istanbul’s City Mayor began under unusual circumstances. Hazım Bey, the incumbent Şehremini (Mayor), was unable to continue his duties due to illness and the likelihood of an extended treatment period. While on a research trip in Konya in his capacity as Deputy Director of the Müze-i Hümayun, Halil Edhem Bey received a telegram from Ferit Pasha of Avlonyalı, the Minister of Internal Affairs, notifying him of his appointment as the new Şehremini. He was instructed to return to Istanbul immediately, and on August 2, 1909, he officially assumed office.During his tenure as Istanbul’s City Mayor, Halil Edhem Bey prioritized public health, taking measures to combat epidemics and imposing deterrent penalties on individuals and institutions that endangered public well-being. He also oversaw the renovation and improvement of the city’s hospitals and worked to address issues related to urban transportation, reflecting his commitment to improving the living standards of Istanbul’s residents.Halil Edhem Bey’s tenure as Istanbul’s Şehremini coincided with a period of significant economic hardship, which created numerous challenges. To address the financial imbalance in the Şehremaneti’s income and expenditures, he sought to borrow funds. However, high interest rates and the reluctance of the government to endorse borrowing further exacerbated the economic crisis. As a result, several planned projects could not be realized, including increasing the revenues of the Şehremaneti, rehabilitating streams, relocating milk and dairy shops and cow stables outside the city, and constructing a dock between Kadıköy and Haydarpaşa. These financial constraints culminated in Halil Edhem Bey’s resignation on February 3, 1910, after which Tevfik Bey was appointed to replace him. The economic difficulties faced by the Şehremaneti played a decisive role in his decision to step down.Following his resignation, Halil Edhem Bey was appointed Director General of Museums in 1910, a position he held for 21 years. In 1931, he was elected as a Member of Parliament (MP) for Istanbul. His contributions extended into the intellectual and cultural realms, particularly through his involvement in the preparatory work for the book Outlines of Turkish History, initiated at the request of Atatürk. For this book, he authored the chapter titled Anatolian Seljuks Period Architecture and Decorative Arts. In 1932, Halil Edhem Bey presented a paper on the care and protection of ancient artifacts at the First Turkish History Congress held at Dolmabahçe Palace in Istanbul. A founding member of the Turkish Historical Society, he became its second president in 1933 following the death of Sâmih Rifat Bey. Subsequently, in 1938, Halil Edhem Bey became the first president of the Turkish Historical Society.Halil Edhem Bey passed away on November 18, 1938, while serving as an MP for Istanbul. Following his death, Kazım Karabekir was elected to fill the vacant Istanbul parliamentary seat in a vote held by the Grand National Assembly of Türkiye on December 5, 1938.

Halil Edhem (Eldem) Bey’s Tenure as Mayor of Istanbul and His Activities

Assist. Prof. Dr.

Mustafa Kemal Pasha’s journey through Western Anatolia, beginning in Ankara and culminating in the Economic Congress held in İzmir, with stops in Eskişehir, Bilecik, and a press conference in İzmit, served as a de facto public opinion survey. This journey, lasting approximately just over a month from January 14 to February 17, 1923, marked Mustafa Kemal Pasha’s first major domestic tour, providing him with direct contact with the public. By the time of this Western Anatolian tour, the War of Independence had concluded, and the country had been freed from occupation. Meanwhile, peace ne gotiations were ongoing at the Lausanne Conference. Alongside the Lausanne discussi ons, other pressing issues on the national agenda included debates surrounding the Caliphate and the establishment of the People’s Party, planned to be based in Ankara.&nbsp;Following the War of Independence, Mustafa Kemal Pasha sought to assess the con dition of the army and directly engage with the public regarding his political agenda. As part of this plan, a meeting with the chief writers of İstanbul newspapers was organized in İzmit, which Mustafa Kemal Pasha intended to attend personally. During the early stages of his journey, Mustafa Kemal Pasha received tragic news upon his arrival in Eskişehir. His mother, Zübeyde Hanım, had passed away in İzmir.&nbsp;Despite this personal loss, he chose not to alter his travel itinerary. Along his route, large crowds participated in welcome ceremonies, with stops at various train stations. At each station, Mustafa Kemal Pasha disembarked to meet with military officers, off11ici al delegations, and local personnel, while also greeting the public. In Bilecik and Vezirhan, the ceremonies were significant, but upon his arrival at Osmaneli station, he encountered a uniquely emotional event. Schoolchildren holding flags recited poems in his honor, and a young child delivered a poignant poem dedicated to Zübeyde Hanım. This act of remembrance carried deep meaning, as Mustafa Kemal Pasha’s mother had passed away just days earlier.&nbsp;Due to his pre-planned journey, Mustafa Kemal Pasha was unable to attend his mot her’s funeral, though he ensured she was laid to rest with due respect. During his tra vels, people aware of his loss expressed their condolences at every stop, providing com fort and solidarity in his time of grief.&nbsp;In İzmit, Mustafa Kemal Pasha held a meeting with the editors of İstanbul’s leading newspapers, delivering an extensive speech in the cinema hall. During this meeting, he addressed critical questions concerning the future of the Ankara Government, the Lausanne Conference, the Caliphate, and the People’s Party. Mustafa Kemal Pasha responded to each question with precision, providing subtle indications of the impen ding republican regime- which had not yet been officially proposed- and the eventual abolition of the Caliphate. The following day, he met with the public of İzmit, allowing them to ask any questions they wished. He then delivered a conference lasting seven hours in the same cinema hall.After departing İzmit, Mustafa Kemal Pasha traveled to Bursa via Bilecik, where he addressed the city’s residents in the Şark Cinema Hall. There, he gave another compre hensive speech, addressing questions raised during his journey. Following his time in Bursa, he continued to İzmir where he attended the Economic Congress, which marked the final stage of his Western Anatolian tour.&nbsp;This study seeks to illuminate the details of Mustafa Kemal Pasha’s Western Anatolian journey and analyze his speeches during this critical period. It concludes that this journey offered Mustafa Kemal Pasha a unique opportunity to directly gauge public opinion regarding the reforms he intended to implement. From this perspective, Mustafa Kemal Pasha’s Western Anatolian journey can be regarded as a significant step toward the eventual declaration of the Republic and the sweeping reforms that followed.

Observations and Insights on Mustafa Kemal Pasha’s Western Anatolian Travels to Eskişehir, İzmit, Bilecik, and Bursa  (January 1923)

Mustafa

The post-World War I conjuncture created a natural basis for an alliance between Bolshevik Russia and Türkiye, as both faced common adversaries. The nationalist leaders of the Turkish National Struggle sought to establish contact with the Bolsheviks to counter the pressure imposed by the Entente Powers and pursued opportunities for an alliance. Similarly, the Bolsheviks, who initially faced attempts by the Entente States to crush them through civil war and subsequently through economic and political blockades, recognized the strategic need to cooperate with Turkish nationalists against a common enemy to secure their southern borders. Despite this shared fate, several factors hindered closer relations between the two sides. Foremost among these was the inability of either side to fully consolidate domestic political control in the early stages. In Russia, the Bolsheviks contended with both Tsarist supporters and the Mensheviks. In Türkiye, the Grand National Assembly, established to address the perceived incapacity of the Istanbul governments and the Ottoman dynasty under occupation, had to assert its authority across the country. This involved a challenging struggle against traditional power centers, occupying forces, and rebellion movements instigated by these external pressures. This power vacuum on both sides disrupted land connections between Türkiye and Russia, hindering direct contact between the parties due to ongoing occupations.Another significant factor that delayed the development of Ankara-Moscow relations was the emergence of various political actors, particularly due to the vacuum of authority in Türkiye. In the context of relations with the Bolsheviks, the key actors who rose to &nbsp;prominence immediately after the signing of the Armistice of Mudros included the Unionists, Mustafa Suphi’s team, and the Green Army. Among these, the Unionists were the first to engage with the Bolsheviks. Two days after the signing of the Armistice, Enver, Cemal, and Talat Pashas fled Istanbul on a German submarine, eventually reaching Odessa and later Germany, where they initiated contact with the Bolsheviks. These interactions were facilitated by the Karakol Society, a covert organization established by Unionists in Istanbul. In early 1920, this society dispatched Baha Sait Bey to Baku to strengthen ties with the Bolsheviks. The second influential actor in relations with the Bolsheviks was Mustafa Suphi and his team. Having taken refuge in Russia as a political exile in 1914, Suphi wholeheartedly embraced Bolshevik principles and actively sought to disseminate Bolshevism in Anatolia during the post-war period. A third actor emerging in Bolshevik relations from May 1920 onward was the supporters of the Green Army. The Green Army Society, composed of individuals who interpreted Bolshevism through an Islamic lens, continued its activities until the end of 1920. The presence of these prominent actors in Bolshevik relations from the Armistice of Mondros to the end of 1920 fostered mutual distrust between Ankara and Moscow, negatively impacting the development of relations. Consequently, Mustafa Kemal Pasha and the Ankara government adopted a cautious approach, simultaneously seeking Bolshevik support and eliminating these uncontrolled actors.This study seeks to examine the various actors who emerged as key figures in relations with the Bolsheviks during the National Struggle, operating independently of the official initiatives undertaken by the Ankara government. Additionally, it aims to uncover the impact of these actors, who engaged with the Bolsheviks outside Ankara’s influence, on the Turkish press of the period. In this context, the study conducts a comprehensive analysis of the publications from several newspapers and magazines that addressed Bolshevism and relations with the Bolsheviks during the National Struggle. These include Hâkimiyet-i Milliye, İrâde-i Milliye, İzmir’e Doğru, Açıksöz, Anadolu’da Yenigün, İstikbâl, Albayrak, and Öğüt, as well as Sebilürreşad, which were published in various regions of Anatolia. Furthermore, the perspectives of Alemdar and Peyâm-ı Sabah, both known for their opposition to the National Struggle, on Bolshevism and relations with the Bolsheviks are briefly explored. Through an analysis of news articles and commentaries in these publications, the study reveals the nature of the media’s portrayal of relations with the Bolsheviks, highlighting how specific actors influenced these narratives.

Bolshevik Tendencies and Sources in the Turkish Press during the National Struggle Period

Firdes

The Lausanne Peace Treaty, regarded as the diplomatic triumph of the Turkish War of Independence, was signed on July 24, 1923, by the Turkish delegation led by İsmet Pasha. Over time, it became a symbol of the Republic’s foundation, with its anniversaries celebrated nationwide as “Lausanne Day”. These commemorations, viewed as a source of ideological motivation for the Republican regime, were marked with great enthusiasm throughout the 1920s.Following the death of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk on November 10, 1938, İsmet İnönü was elected President of the Republic. İnönü, widely regarded as the architect of the Lausanne victory, became closely associated with the treaty, encapsulated in the popular slogan “Lausanne is İnönü”.After the Second World War, Türkiye’s democratization efforts led to the transition to a multi-party political system. The Democratic Party (DP), established as a major opposition force, won the general elections in 1950, ending the single-party rule of the Republican People’s Party (CHP). During the DP era, celebrations of national holidays, including Lausanne Day, diminished in enthusiasm due to evolving domestic and international dynamics. A deliberate effort was made during this period to disassociate Lausanne from İnönü and to reframe it as a collective achievement of the entire nation, similar to the War of Independence. This shift in narrative was largely driven by the political climate, as İnönü, now leader of the opposition as Chairman of the CHP, remained a prominent figure in Turkish politics.Despite remaining closely associated with İnönü after the May 27 coup, no official celebrations of the Lausanne Peace Treaty were held. The post-coup efforts to normalize Turkish politics brought about a shift in the perception of Lausanne. Until the 1970s, the treaty was primarily remembered through limited celebrations organized by associations, as well as İnönü’s statements and speeches reflecting his memories of Lausanne.By the mid-1970s, Türkiye faced significant challenges in its foreign policy, coinciding with a period of escalating domestic turmoil. Key issues such as the Cyprus conflict, disputes over the Aegean islands, and the continental shelf came to the forefront. Greece’s increasingly assertive actions, including the militarization of islands near Türkiye, highlighted the enduring relevance of international agreements like the Lausanne Peace Treaty.&nbsp;During this period of heightened tensions, Lausanne was reinstated in political discourse as a cornerstone of Türkiye’s security and a safeguard for maintaining the status quo. No longer confined to being a symbolic national achievement commemorated on anniversaries, the treaty evolved into a practical instrument for addressing Türkiye’s foreign policy challenges and ensuring stability in the region.For Türkiye, the Lausanne Peace Treaty has served not only as a resolution to foreign policy challenges but also as a critical foundation for strengthening its participation and representation on various international platforms. Unlike the racist ideologies prevalent in many Western nations of its time, Lausanne established a modern Republic of Türkiye grounded in respect for minority rights. In this context, Türkiye’s adherence to the principles outlined under the “minority rights” section of the Copenhagen Criteria introduced in 1993 for aspiring EU member states- represented a step it had already taken decades earlier. This historical alignment was regarded as a significant achievement by Turkish politicians.In 1996, while assessing the Copenhagen Criteria, Bülent Ecevit emphasized that the inclusion of “minority rights” in these standards posed no issue for Türkiye. Referring to the provisions of the Lausanne Treaty, he underscored that Türkiye does not engage in racial discrimination and, therefore, does not define minorities based on racial categories.In conclusion, the Lausanne Peace Treaty, which marked Türkiye’s acceptance as an independent state within the international community, has been subject to varied&nbsp;&nbsp;interpretations and critiques, particularly concerning the status quo it established. However, it continues to stand as a cornerstone of Turkish foreign policy and remains one of its most pivotal arguments in international relations.

The Perception of Lausanne in Turkish Politics between Two Coups (1960-1980)

Murat

Following Britain and France’s declaration of war on Germany in early September 1939, the Turkish government implemented the complete withdrawal of Turkish students from Germany and France and a partial withdrawal from other European countries. However, misled by the initially stagnant progress of the war, the government soon permitted many of these students to return to their respective countries of study. Neither Germany’s offensives against Denmark and Norway nor the anticipation of attacks on the Netherlands and Belgium prompted the Turkish government to revise its policies regarding Turkish students in Europe. By May 10, 1940, when Germany launched its invasion of Belgium, 81 Turkish students were residing in the country. In the days following the offensive, approximately half of these students managed to cross into France under challenging conditions, while the remaining students were unable to do so.Based on reports from the Turkish Ambassador to Brussels, Nebil Batı-who departed Belgium three days after the German attack and relocated to Paris-the Turkish government initially announced that all Turkish students in Belgium had successfully crossed into France. However, it soon became evident that this was inaccurate. The government subsequently began publishing lists in the press detailing the names of students who had reached France and those who remained in Belgium. Newspapers also published the names of students who returned to Türkiye from Europe during this period. Ambassador Nebil Batı’s expedited departure from Belgium, leaving behind dozens of Turkish students, drew significant criticism. The students’ families and&nbsp;&nbsp;journalist Zekeriya Sertel, writing in the Tan newspaper, publicly criticized the ambassador’s actions, highlighting the perceived abandonment of Turkish citizens in a critical situation.While Allied forces attempted to halt the German advance in northern France, the Turkish government allowed Turkish students to decide independently whether to remain in France to continue their studies or return to Türkiye. Beginning in June, a significant number of Turkish students opted to return. However, as the German zone of occupation expanded-culminating in the fall of Paris-Turkish students in France gradually lost the opportunity to return home. In the subsequent weeks, under the guidance of the Turkish Embassy, these students began moving from one city to another within the territories controlled by the Vichy Government.It was not until late July that the Turkish government formally decided to repatriate all Turkish students from Belgium and France. Following this decision, the Turkish Embassy in Berlin intervened on behalf of the students in Belgium, negotiating with the German government to facilitate their return through Germany. By July 1940, the Turkish students in Belgium began their journey back to Türkiye via Germany.By mid-October 1940, 59 of the 81 Turkish students studying in Belgium had returned to Türkiye. Of the remaining students, seven were in France and Portugal, while 15 stayed in Belgium. All 15 students in Belgium were pursuing their studies independently, without the sponsorship of Turkish official institutions. In the following period, three of these 15 students chose to return to Türkiye, while the remaining 12 disregarded government warnings and refused to leave Belgium. Most of the students who returned to Türkiye due to the war, particularly those studying in Belgium on behalf of Turkish official institutions, were sent to the United States in 1940 to continue their education.The Turkish government’s approach to Turkish students in Europe during the war was marked by inconsistency and irrationality. Initially, the government repatriated students from Germany and France. However, it subsequently sent most of them back to their respective countries of study and, during the most severe phases of the war in mid May 1940, dispatched an additional 32 Naval Construction Engineering students to Britain. At the same time, in accordance with a prior government decision, over 30 students traveled to Paris-and some to Britain- even though it was the end of the school year. These students, who undertook perilous journeys to France and Britain, were almost immediately recalled upon arrival.This contradictory policy likely stemmed from the Turkish government’s misplaced confidence in its alliance with Britain and France, formalized in the treaty of October 19, 1939. Ankara officials appeared to believe that the First World War scenario would repeat itself, with German forces failing to penetrate the French interior. Additionally, the psychological difficulty of reversing a prior decision to send students back to their schools likely complicated the implementation of a second withdrawal.

Between War and Diploma: The German Invasion of Belgium in World War II and Turkish Students

Metin

From Friends to Foes: Romanian Diplomats in Türkiye during the Early Years of the Communist Regime (1947–1949)

Yakup

Merve

Öğretim Görevlisi

Resolution or Interest Oriented Policy?  International Influence on the Cyprus Conflict  Between 1960-1974

Haluk

Academic studies have examined the relationship between coup periods and businesspeople from various perspectives. Most of these studies, authored primarily by economists, have focused on the statistical analysis of the long-term relationship between coups, economic growth, and stability. The literature on this subject highlights the following key points, which this article will consider:- Coups may arise from economic crises, leading to expectations of economic recovery following the coup. In such cases, the economic policies implemented by the coup regime, the groups it supports, and the actors it includes in the decision-making process become critical.- A coup that strategically guides the transition to new economic policies has a direct impact on the restructuring and prioritization of economic sectors, subsequently shaping the nature of competition among businesspeople.&nbsp;-The organizational nature of a coup-whether carried out hierarchically within the chain of command or through collaboration among various military factions significantly influences the direction of economic policies and the dynamics of competition between business groups.Meanwhile, the literature on the subject has predominantly relied on research methods utilizing long-term economic data, leading to the conclusion that the effects of military regimes must be evaluated in conjunction with the policies and practices implemented during normal non-coup periods. Compared to regions such as Latin America, the Far East, and even Europe, the relatively short duration of coup periods in Türkiye requires a focused analysis specific to these transitional phases. This study primarily examines the long-term impacts of decisions made and relationships established during these interregnum periods. Additionally, it explores how interim regimes have influenced competition among sectoral groups and organizations, as well as the behavioral tendencies of businesspeople-topics that have been insufficiently explored in the existing literature.As noted, Türkiye has not experienced prolonged military regimes, with coups instead serving as interim periods aimed at political, social, and economic restoration. However, the strategic policies and institutional changes implemented during interim regimes have had lasting consequences. In Türkiye, coups occurred during periods of significant economic policy shifts, bringing about changes among businesspeople that profoundly influenced sectoral priorities and positioning. For instance, Türkiye adopted an import-substitution industrialization policy following the 1960 coup, while the coup of September 12, 1980, laid the political and socioeconomic groundwork for implementing the January 24, 1980 decisions that facilitated the transition to neoliberal policies. Regulations introduced during the 1960 and 1971 coups significantly affected the representation and authority structures of businesspeople, further deepening divides between industrialist groups and commercial or agricultural groups within the Union of Chambers, the umbrella organization for businesspeople. These developments fostered closer relationships between large industrialists, the military, and the bureaucracy. The Turkish Industry and Business Association (TÜSİAD), representing the country’s leading business elites, has consistently advocated for the formation of national consensus governments involving centrist parties during democratic periods. TÜSİAD also supported the appointment of technocrats and bureaucrats in governance. In 1979, TÜSİAD became a prominent voice of opposition to Bülent Ecevit’s government, using classified advertisements as part of its counter-propaganda. Similarly, in late 1995, TÜSİAD published newspaper advertisements titled “Çağrı” (Call) to oppose a potential coalition government led by the Welfare Party (RP), openly endorsing a coalition of centrist parties. Meanwhile, commercial and agricultural groups, perceiving themselves as marginalized during the interim regimes, distanced themselves from coup administrations under the umbrella of chamber organizations. Instead, they prioritized cultivating close relationships with center-right political parties, believing this approach would better safeguard their sectoral interests. Meanwhile, commercial and agricultural groups, believing that they had been punished during the interim regimes, distanced themselves from the coup administrations under the umbrella of chamber organizations and gave importance to developing close relations with center-right political parties, as they thought doing so would allow them to protect their sectoral positions more easily.The divergence observed during the interim regime periods played a crucial role in fostering confrontational tendencies among worker organizations representing various sectors. The punitive and reward policies implemented during these periods further exacerbated the divisions between different business groups, with confrontational&nbsp;&nbsp;attitudes persisting even under democratic conditions. Interim regimes in Türkiye have significantly influenced numerous areas, including the formation of business organizations, the regulation of competition among business groups, and the shaping of legal frameworks. These interventions disrupted the natural consolidation of business politics-state relations, as third-party actors frequently intervened. Consequently, this dynamic reinforced confrontational tendencies in both business and political spheres. Moreover, this type of relationship enabled political authorities in Türkiye to more easily implement selective policies targeting business groups during democratic periods.

Interim Regimes and Businesspeople in Türkiye

Efforts to establish a modern university (Dârülfünûn) in Türkiye began in the 19th century. Initiated at an intellectual level in 1846, these efforts culminated in the establishment of Dârülfünûn in 1863. However, this initial attempt was short-lived. A subsequent effort in 1870 proved more successful but ultimately came to an end in 1873. During this three-year university experiment, one of the limited courses offered was Literature, taught by the renowned educator Selim Sabit Efendi. His role as the instructor for this course, delivered over three years, represents the foundational moment for what would later become the Department of Turkish Language and Literature. Selim Sabit Efendi is thus considered the department’s first lecturer.&nbsp;After a 27-year hiatus, Istanbul University was reestablished in 1900 under the name Dârülfünûn-ı Şâhane during the reign of Sultan Abdülhamid II. Unlike the earlier attempts, this iteration of Dârülfünûn marked the beginning of a continuous and uninterrupted educational journey. One of its faculties was the Faculty of Literature, where the Ottoman Literature course, taught by Mehmed Ata Bey until 1908, became a cornerstone of the curriculum.The transformative changes following the proclamation of the Second Constitutional Monarchy significantly influenced the Faculty of Literature. During this period, the Literature course evolved into an independent department and was further subdivided into four areas: Ottoman Literature, Turkish Literature, History of Literature, and Linguistics. Renowned poets and writers of the era, including Mehmet Akif Ersoy, Rıza Tevfik Bölükbaşı, Faik Reşad Bey, Halit Ziya Uşaklıgil, Ahmet Hikmet Müftüoğlu, Ali Ekrem Bolayır, Yahya Kemal Beyatlı, and Cenap Şahabeddin, were among those who taught in the department during this period.With the implementation of the 1912 regulation, further adjustments were made to the curriculum within the Department of Literature. The primary courses offered included Turkish Literature, History of Turkish Literature, Aesthetics, Arabic Literature, and Persian Literature.Viewing literary studies through a historical lens has been a foundational approach of the Department of Turkish Language and Literature at Istanbul University Faculty of Letters. Mehmet Fuat Köprülü was instrumental in establishing this approach on a scientific basis. His 1913 article, Method in the History of Turkish Literature, published in Bilgi magazine, drew from Gustave Lanson’s Méthodes de L’histoire Littéraire (Method in the History of Literature). This work marked a significant breakthrough not only in literary history but also in social sciences in Türkiye, introducing methodological rigor. That same year, Köprülü began teaching History of Turkish Literature courses in the department, a role he maintained for many years.The 1915-1916 academic year marked the introduction of the German university system at Istanbul University. The Faculty of Literature was reorganized into departments of Literature, Philosophy, History, and Geography, with additional lecturers recruited from Germany. Wilhelm Friedrich Carl Giese, a Ural-Altaic languages specialist from the Berlin School of Oriental Languages, became the department’s first foreign lecturer. Significant reforms included the introduction of structured curricula, the division of courses into theoretical and practical components, an increase in course offerings, and the requirement for students to prepare a graduation thesis (mütalaa name). Additionally, a doctorate program (icazet ruusu) and semester-based systems were introduced, aligning the university with modern academic practices.One challenge faced by students in the Department of Turkish Language and Literature during the Second Constitutional Monarchy period was the scarcity of textbooks. Lecture notes taken during courses were often converted into books, though these publications were insufficient to meet the growing needs. Students also published lecture notes from their instructors in response to this gap.Although the department primarily focused on Turkish Language and Literature, it also offered courses on the histories of Persian and Arabic literatures as well as French, English, and German literatures. In 1922, Türkiye’s first Doctor of Literature graduated from the department. Ali Nihat (Tarlan) Bey defended his thesis, “The Mesnevi of Leyla and Majnun in Islamic Literature,” on December 10, 1922, earning the title of “doctor.”The Republican period brought significant reforms to Istanbul University, particularly in 1933. The Department of Turkish Language and Literature was renamed Turkology. This reform involved the dismissal of some professors and the recruitment of new faculty, alongside a curriculum shift emphasizing language-based courses over literature-based ones.In 1939, the department introduced a second literature course, 19th Century History of Turkish Literature, taught by the esteemed poet and writer Ahmet Hamdi Tanpınar. The department’s first scientific journal, Journal of Turkish Language and Literature (TUDED), was launched in 1946 and still continues to be indexed nationally and internationally.Subsequent organizational changes occurred in 1981 under the Higher Education Law, replacing the certificate system with a “Main Department” structure. The main disciplines established were: • Department of Old Turkic • Department of Modern Turkish • Department of Classical Turkish Literature • Department of Modern Turkish Literature In 1996, the addition of the Department of Turkish Folk Literature increased the number of main disciplines to five.Currently, students complete compulsory courses in their first two semesters, followed by a combination of elective and required courses from the third semester onward. They can also enroll in courses from other departments within the faculty to align with their interests. Student clubs, supported by the department, play a vital role in fostering students’ academic and social development.As of 2016, Prof. Dr. Ali Şükrü Çoruk has served as the Head of the Department of Turkish Language and Literature. By 2024, the department boasts a total of 34 faculty members, including 10 professors, 5 associate professors, 14 doctoral faculty members, and 5 research&nbsp;

İstanbul University Faculty of Literature History of Turkish Language and Literature Department

Gunel

Russia-Armenia Relations on the Context of Humanitarian Cooperation (1991-2023)

Prof.

@JOURNAL_BOX_CURRENT

@JOURNAL_BOX_EARLYVIEW

Yasin

Assoc. Prof.

Cyprus has for many years attracted international attention due to its strategic location. The island came under Ottoman rule in 1571. In 1878, British forces took over the island from the Ottoman administration, in exchange for protection against Russian attacks. In response to the entry of the Ottoman Empire into the First World War on the side of Germany, Britain added the island unilaterally to its own territory on 5 November 1914. During the negotiations in Lausanne, the Turkish side accepted that Cyprus belonged to Britain. The declaration of the establishment of the Turkish Republic of Cyprus took place on 16 August 1960, with both Turkish and Greek Cypriots taking part in the administration of the country. However, the Republic of Cyprus was not able to continue for long. Clashes resumed on the island after Makarios attempted to restrict the rights acquired by the Cypriot Turks in the 1960 constitution.Following the collapse of the Republic of Cyprus in December 1963, Turkish Cypriots established their own administration on the island. First, a separate Turkish administration called “General Committee” was established in 1964. Then, in November 1967, the Provisional Turkish Cypriot Administration was established. Thus, Turkish Cypriots tried to ensure their security in a more organized way. Britain did not support the steps taken by the Turkish Cypriots on the island. After Turkey’s 1974 military intervention, the Autonomous Turkish Cypriot Administration was established in October 1974 in the north of the island. On February 13, 1975, the founding of the Turkish Federated State of Cyprus (TFSC) was announced.Against this background, this study deals with the response of the British parliament to the declaration of the establishment of the TFSC by Turkish Cypriots in 1975. One of the countries that reacted strongly to the Turkish military intervention on the island in 1974 was Britain. The announcement of the establishment of the TFSC also provoked a strong reaction from Britain. In the statements made by the British government, the establishment of the TFSC was declared to be an “undesired development”. This study examines the approach of British MPs to the TFSC through discussions in the House of Commons.The first result of the study shows that British MPs did not support the announcement of the establishment of the TFSC. British MPs reacted to this and they questioned whether the British government knew about this announcement beforehand. British MPs also sought an answer to the question of why the government had not taken any steps to prevent the establishment of the TFSC. British government officials emphasized in their statements that they did not know that the founding of the TFSC would be announced. In addition, they expressed with certainty that the newly established Turkish administration would not be recognized by Britain. Another point that the study draws attention to was that because Ankara supported the TFSC, some MPs wanted the British government to “punish” Turkey. Moreover, one member of parliament wanted the British government to work for the suspension of Turkeys’ UN membership. However, British government officials stated that they did not support such a proposal.Some MPs expressed in the British parliament that Britain, which is one of the guarantor states in Cyprus, should take more initiative in seeking a resolution to the Cyprus problem. In response to this proposal, government officials pointed out the necessity to continue negotiations between the Turkish and Greek Cypriots for peace in Cyprus. British deputies expressed that there would be no results from long-standing inter-communal talks. They argued that the British government should follow a more active policy for peace in Cyprus. Government officials disagreed with these suggestions and stated that Britain could not act alone. Other guarantor states in Cyprus would have to agree together on a solution. Thus, the government did not take into consideration the active policy proposal for a solution to the Cyprus problem. Finally, another issue that came up after the announcement of the establishment of the TFSC was the situation of British citizens on the island. Some MPs proposed to open an official representative office within the boundaries of the TFSC for British citizens. However, British government officials opposed this proposal.&nbsp;As a result, MPs in the British parliament did not accept the announcement of the TFSC. Furthermore, there were deputies who said that the Turks should not be declared solely responsible for the Cyprus problem. However, this view did not cause any change in the policy of the British government and the TFSC was not recognized by the British government.

The Reaction of the British Parliament to the Establishment of the Turkish Federated State of Cyprus (1975)

THE PERCEPTION OF BISMARCK IN THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE: THE CASE SPECIFIC TO ABDULHAMID II

İsmail

At the end of the Second World War, a fast decolonization process started in the British Empire. This situation re-triggered the sovereignty debate in Cyprus. Repre-sentatives of the Greek Cypriots had been trying to make Cyprus a territory of Gree-ce for many years. Enosis, which meant the annexation of the island to Greece, was a strong feeling among Greek Cypriots. They also wanted to take advantage of the decolonization process. However, Great Britain did not favor the annexation of the island to Greece due to its interests in the Middle East. Great Britain favored making a more libertarian constitution on the island instead of enosis. The Greek Cypriots responded to this approach of the British government by declaring that they would never step back from the enosis.Enosis was not only prevented by Britain’s interests in the Middle East. Tur-kish Cypriots were also strongly opposed to enosis. Because Turks living on other islands, especially in Crete, had to leave their homeland due to Greek pressure, they were concerned the same outcome would happen on their own. That is why the Tur-kish Cypriots defended the continuation of the British rule on the island, or it should have been given to Turkey, which was the former owner of the island. On the other hand, Turkey was also against enosis because Turkey saw the enosis as an instrument of the expansionist politics of Greece. Despite the Turkish Cypriots’ and Turkey’s objections, Greek Cypriots insisted on demanding Enosis.The date of 18 October 1950 was a turning point for enosis because of Maka-rios III, whose original name was Mikhail Christodoulos Mouskos, was elected as archbishop. Makarios was ready to use all the facilities of the church for enosis. Eno-sis was a historical task, a national and religious issue for him. For that reason, he regarded leading the struggle for enosis as a great honor. According to Makarios, there were two ways to achieve enosis: diplomacy or armed struggle. He applied all the diplomatic methods he knew between 1950 and 1955. In this context, he organi-zed demonstrations in Athens and Nicosia; directed the public opinion, sought sup-port from the Greek lobby in the USA; and pressured the British administration.&nbsp;&nbsp;All the diplomatic initiatives of Makarios and Greece failed to persuade Bri-tain for enosis. Therefore, Greece applied to the United Nations to obtain the right of self-determination for Cyprus on August 16, 1954. However, the United Nations rejected Greece’s application. In the same period, besides diplomatic initiatives, an armed terrorist organization was established to carry out terrorist acts on the island, but this organization declined to take any action until the United Nations made its decision on Cyprus. The name of this&nbsp;organization was EOKA. It was founded under the leadership of retired Colonel Grivas and Makarios, and its aim was to carry out enosis through terrorist attacks.&nbsp;&nbsp;The establishment activities of EOKA began secretly in 1951, and had comp-leted all preparations by 1 April 1955. EOKA carried out all its activities on the is-land mostly through youth organizations such as PEON and OHEN. The Cyprus Church provided financial support to EOKA. Thanks to this financial support, the necessary weapons could be purchased. In order to become a member of EOKA, it was necessary to be Greek, a supporter of enosis and not be a communist. Therefore, EOKA was a pan-helenic fascist organization whose purpose was limited to enosis. Consequently, EOKA cannot be described as an organization that is fighting against colonialism to gain independency for its own folk because it wanted only enosis, not national independence. It was clear that EOKA’s motivation to resort to armed struggle against the British colonial administration was never independence.

EOKA: From Thought to Action

Instructor

TURKISH PRISONERS SENT TO INDIA BY THE BRITISH IN THE FIRST WORLD WAR

@JOURNAL_BOX_FEATURED

Hüseyin

Assist. Prof.

This study’s purpose is to provide information about Ali Saib Bey, who was in service in various provincial offices in the Ottoman State for many years and was the author of the annex which constitutes the main subject of the article. On the other hand, another purpose of the study was to determine the issues and recommendations stated in the annex and reveal whether these recommendations were realized through archive documents.The civil service life of a public servant who served in the Ottoman provinces for many years will be examined in this study. Many issues such as his duties, assignments, and rewards taken by this officer in the provinces will be revealed in this section. In addition, the presentation of the annex that Ali Saib Bey wrote was also important in terms of showing what problems he had in Shkoder, which would come out shortly after the Ottoman Empire, and what recommendations were put forward to overcome these problems. The question of whether these recommendations were taken into consideration were examined through documents in the Presidential Ottoman Archives. It is thought that the findings obtained within the framework of this annex, which reveal the central-provincial relations and have not been studied before, will contribute to the history of this territory.The first step in the method followed during the study was to collect data about the civil service life of Ali Saib Efendi, the owner of the annex. Later, it was evaluated in accordance with the original partition by making content analysis of the annex. And then, the documents obtained as a result of the review carried out in the Presidential Ottoman Archive on the subjects mentioned in the annex were compared. The studies conducted on the related territory were utilized for the data related to Shkoder. In this respect, the main source of the study was the annex of Ali Saib Bey and the documents obtained in the Presidential Ottoman Archive.Ali Saib Bey, the son of a soldier father, started his career as a correspondence clerk in Malatya sanjak at a very young age and served in many parts of the country. Ali Saib Efendi, who came to Shkoder with his position as a provincial letter officer on February 1, 1909, also served as deputy governor of Shkoder during this duty. Ali Saib Bey, who briefly summarized his civil service life in this way, wrote an annex dated October 29, 1911 that formed the subject of this study. Initially, he transferred the geographical borders and population information of the province. In the section titled political and social situation and urgent needs of Shkoder, he emphasized the issue of Malesori, for which he was also assigned. One of the important determinations he made was that it was the most important problem of the people in this place to be in ignorance and misery. Also, the efforts of Austria and Italy to influence here are another issue that was mentioned in the annex. It was understood from the statements of Ali Saib Bey that they took the hearts of the people through the great investments they made in the region and that even some of the Muslims in the Malesori region left their religions for this reason. It was a remarkable determination that the people in Malesori and Shkoder took refuge in the patronage of Montenegro, which was their enemy. An important determination in this section was that the Ottoman ambassador in Çetine was acting as if he were supporting Montenegro. After this section, Ali Saib Bey gave information about the law that he defined as “not fit for civilization and humanity” under the title of Dukakin Law. The next title was education. In the annex stating that Shkoder was not at the desired level in education, it was worth noting that many of the teachers with insufficient salaries did not know Ottoman Turkish. The most important recommendation in this section was that an industrial school should be opened there. Under the title of Public Works, it mentioned that the situation of the roads was very bad and that it was necessary to do something as soon as possible. Another point mentioned in this section was that foreign engineers and conductors did not want to go to their places owing to various excuses. Under the public order title, it determined that the coast of Shkoder Lake, up to Boyana and Drac, was open to smuggling and that it was a necessity to set up observation towers in suitable places on the coast, and he emphasized the necessity of installing a telephone line between them. In the title on agriculture, he stated that agriculture was done in the old way due to the financial deficiencies of the people. Therefore, he emphasized that it was necessary to increase the capital of the agricultural bank there and to open the branch of the bank in some towns. Opening a sample field on which Ali Saib Bey was standing was one of the recommendations put into practice. Another important determination in this section is that Shkoder was very rich in terms of forest but it was not utilized properly. Under the heading of civil service, some significant opinions were given about administrative arrangements that needed to be made by giving the current administrative division of Shkoder. The most noteworthy of these was the proposal to assign the Muslims or Christians in Shkoder, who could speak the local language, as the head of the district. Under the heading of officers to be assigned to Shkoder, it was requested that the unqualified ones be taken from there and replaced by experienced officers, and that the salaries and liabilities of the officers who would work there should be made regularly. The most striking point in the headline of politics to be implemented in Shkoder was that almost all of the people across the province had an attitude towards the government and that the people of the territory should not behave violently as a result of their nature, but it would not also result in being too soft. The only thing to do was to meet in the middle. It was another recommendation that mobile doctors should be assigned there and that these doctors should constantly treat people who were sick in the villages and mountains and make the state propaganda. Finally, it was recommended that the loyalty of the people to the state should be provided through the Muslim and Christian opinion leaders and that the financial support should be provided to poor people as much as possible.The annex written by an officer who worked in different parts of the Ottoman Empire as the correspondence clerk of Shkoder was an important document in order to understand center-provincial relations. There were some recommendations by Ali Saib Bey that were realized as well as those that could not be realized due to financial difficulties. As a result, thinking about how to manage Shkoder better and how to handle the current problems, Ali Saib Bey explained these issues in detail. However, neither this annex nor the efforts of the Ottoman State yielded any results, and Shkoder came out of the hands of the Ottomans as a result of the Balkan Wars.

A Public Official in the Ottoman Province, Ali Saib Bey and His Annex on Shkoder Province

Davud

The Ottoman Empire, which joined the First World War on the side of the Central Powers, had to fight actively on many fronts due to its strategic and geopolitical position. These fronts stretched from the Caucasus to Iraq, from the Suez Canal to the Dardanelles. In addition, Ottoman forces also operated in areas that were not actively involved in conflict, taking active or passive defensive measures. The Ottoman Empire’s Deputy Commander-In-Chief in Thrace carried out military operations in case of a military landing by the Allied forces and as such took various measures in the Black Sea, Marmara, western Anatolia and around Iskenderun.&nbsp;The Ottoman Empire’s Western Anatolian coasts being under the threat of the British and French Navy , and having the assistance of the Allied Forces to carry out air operations with aircraft carriers wherever they wanted, led to the deployment of aviation units by the Ottoman Commander-in-Chief in the relevant regions.The Ottoman Empire entered the First World War with six aircraft at the beginning of the war. After some time, the Ottoman Empire was in active at the front with 1500 personnel and 450 aircraft which were received from its ally Germany. At the beginning of the war, the Ottoman Deputy Commander-in-chief sent two aircraft to the Dardanelles and one plane to Izmir, taking into account the strategic and geopolitical situation of the Dardanelles and Izmir region. Over time, air troops were deployed in the region with aircraft from Germany and the amount of aircraft was increased.At the beginning of the First World War, measures were taken by sending planes around Çanakkale and Izmir, and in 1915, also to the Dardanelles Front battles began with the offensive of the Allied Forces. On March 18, 1915, the Allies did not succeed in their naval operation, followed by a landing on the Gallipoli peninsula on April 25, 1915. However, the Entente forces withdrew from the region at the beginning of 1916, failing to achieve any success as a result of the joint defence of the Turkish land, air and naval forces.After the victory of the Turkish forces in the Dardanelles, the Allied forces carried out operations until the end of the war in the western Anatolia region with the air and&nbsp;naval forces they had gathered in the islands . The Allied tactical operation was aimed at maintaining the control of the Straits and preventing entry and exit from there. Consequently, the region was constantly supervised by both sea and air elements due to its strategic importance. In addition, from time to time western Anatolian coasts, cities and ports were harassed and bombed by Allied naval and air elements.The activity of the Allied forces was marked by the formation of 1st and 6th divisions in and around Çanakkale, which included the Western Anatolia region, and 5th and 12th divisions around Izmir, in order to follow, explore, monitor and report the situation to the command levels as quickly as possible. The possibility and expectation that the Entente forces would make a landing over Gallipoli or Izmir after the battles of the Dardanelles made the formation of the air defense forces mandatory in addition to the precautionary measures of the Ottoman State. The aim was to secure the capital Istanbul with air troops from the relevant regions in the Dardanelles and to advance against the Allied Air Forces. It was also intended to preempt possible landings into the region with the air forces in Izmir.The Aegean Sea and the islands were monitored by the units and platoons established, and from time to time the allied bases there were bombed. Air battles took place with the aircraft of the Allied forces. From the point of view of the opposing forces, the strategic importance of the Ottoman territory led to Allied aircraft carrying out aerial attacks on Istanbul and Izmir from time to time. Although these aerial attacks did not affect the outcome of the war, they played their part in terms of psychological effects. The Allied elements demonstrated effectiveness, particularly by bombing strategic public institutions, air bases and warships.The headquarters of the British Air Force in the Mediterranean was assembled and directed at a command post in Malta. The air operations against Istanbul and Izmir were carried out by the air units based at Mondros, under the command of Colonel Gordon. After the battles of the Dardanelles, 34 French and British aircraft based on the islands in the Aegean Sea operated on Western Anatolia. French aircraft served in Bozcaada, and a Greek aircraft station that was under the supervision of the Greek Ministry of War, was located in Mondros. Meanwhile, a base between Thasoz and Lesbos served the Entente aircraft. All these squadrons were managed under the command of the commander at Mondros.Turkish coasts were blockaded from 1915. French naval forces were completely under the control of Beirut, Iskenderun, and the Antalya coasts. The French, assisting their naval forces, began to conduct aerial reconnaissance from the Egyptian ports and the small islands of Ruad and Meis between Cyprus and Syria. Upon the increase of enemy activities in the Aegean Sea and Izmir region, the 5th Airborne Division was assigned the task of reconnaissance and control against the Entente activities in the region. In this context, flights were made from the islands of Chios, Sisam, Rhodes, Lesbos and Kösten (Uzunada), and mobility in the region was monitored.&nbsp;From all academic studies carried out on behalf of the history of aviation thus far, it can be seen based on archival documents that no studies have been conducted on the topic of the air operations carried out in the western Anatolia region after the Gallipoli victory. Having remedied this with this study, aviation activities realized in the said region have now been examined in the light of archival documents.

Aviation Activities in Western Anatolia Following the Victory at Gallipoli (1915-1918)

@JOURNAL_BOX_MOSTREAD

Recent Period Turkish Studies - Yakın Dönem Türkiye Araştırmaları is the official publication of Istanbul University Institute of Ataturk’s Principles and Reforms. It is an open access, peer-reviewed,and regionally concentrated international journal  that targets audiences primarily in historically related regions in the neighbourhood of Turkiye; such as Balkans, Eastern Europe, Eastern Mediterrenean, Central Asia, and Middle East,   The journal has been published biannually  in June and December. It was founded in 2002.  As of 2024, the print version has been stopped. The journal has become an online-only publication.

The journal publishes original articles and studies from the disciplines of history, History of the Republic of Turkey, Atatürk’s Principles and History of Turkish Reforms, Ottoman History, sociology, literature, art history, law, political science and economics within the framework of Modern Turkish and World History. The objective of the journal is to contribute to science by publishing research articles and reviews in Turkish, English, German and French.

The journal publishes, research articles and reviews evaluating and criticizing the studied subjects and presenting new and remarkable opinions on the basis of a rich bibliography. Translations related to the field and texts of unpublished papers that were previously presented at a scientific congress; introductory letters about treatises, personalities and scientific activities about the Turkish National Struggle and Republic of Turkey are included in the journal as well.

All expenses of the journal are covered by the Istanbul University. Processing and publication are free of charge with the journal. There is no article processing charges or submission fees for any submitted or accepted articles.

ResearchBib

Scopus

Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI)

EBSCO

ERIH PLUS

İslâm Araştırmaları Merkezi (İSAM)

TR Dizin

DOAJ

SOBIAD

Gale Cengage

@METRIC_VOLUMES

@METRIC_ISSUES

@METRIC_ARTICLES

@METRIC_OPENACCESS

Recent Period Turkish Studies

RPTS

@INFO_TAB_ABOUT

Editor in Chief

Co Editor in Chief

Editorial Management Board Member

Book Review Editor

Editorial Assistant

Language Editor

Editorial Board Member

@INFO_TAB_BOARDS

Recent Period Turkish Studies – Yakın Dönem Türkiye Araştırmaları is a scientific, open-access and peer-reviewed journal published biannually (June &amp; December). The journal publishes original articles and studies from the disciplines of  history, History of the Republic of Turkey, Atatürk’s Principles and History of Turkish Reforms, Ottoman History, sociology, literature, art history, law, political science and economics within the framework of Modern Turkish and World History. Thus it serves as a bridge between the world of science and academicians at the national and international levels.The objective of the journal is to contribute to science by publishing research articles and reviews in Turkish, English, German and French.Recent Period Turkish Studies – Yakın Dönem Türkiye Araştırmaları has a scope that covers the disciplines of  history, History of the Republic of Turkey, Atatürk’s Principles and History of Turkish Reforms, Ottoman History, sociology, literature, art history, law, political science and economics within the framework of Modern Turkish and World History. The journal publishes, research articles and reviews evaluating and criticizing the studied subjects and presenting new and remarkable opinions on the basis of a rich bibliography. Translations related to the field and texts of unpublished papers that were previously presented at a scientific congress; introductory letters about treatises, personalities and scientific activities about the Turkish National Campaign and Republic of Turkey are included in the journal as well.

Aim & Scope

<ul type="disc"> <li>Web of Science – Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI)</li> <li>TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM TR Index</li> <li>DOAJ</li> <li>ERIH PLUS</li> <li>EBSCO Central &amp; Eastern European Academic Source</li> <li>Research Bible (ResearchBib)</li> <li>İslâm Araştırmaları Merkezi (İSAM)</li> <li>Sosyal Bilimler Atıf Dizini (SOBIAD)</li> <li>Scopus</li> <li>Gale Cengage</li></ul>

Indexing and Abstracting

The journal is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and pays regard to Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing published by the <a href="https://publicationethics.org/" target="_blank">Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)</a>, the <a href="https://doaj.org/apply/transparency/#principles-of-transparency-and-best-practice-in-scholarly-publishing" target="_blank">Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)</a>, the <a href="https://oaspa.org/" target="_blank">Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA)</a>, and the <a href="https://www.wame.org/" target="_blank">World Association of Medical Editors (WAME)</a> on <a href="https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines-new/principles-transparency-and-best-practice-scholarly-publishing" target="_blank">https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines-new/principles-transparency-and-best-practice-scholarly-publishing</a> The subjects covered in the manuscripts submitted to the Journal for publication must be in accordance with the aim and scope of the Journal. Only those manuscripts approved by every individual author and that were not published before in or sent to another journal, are accepted for evaluation.Changing the name of an author (omission, addition or order) in papers submitted to the Journal requires written permission of all declared authors.Plagiarism, duplication, fraud authorship/denied authorship, research/data fabrication, salami slicing/salami publication, breaching of copyrights, prevailing conflict of interest are unethical behaviors. All manuscripts not in accordance with the accepted ethical standards will be removed from the publication. This also contains any possible malpractice discovered after the publication. Plagiarism Submitted manuscripts that pass preliminary control are scanned for plagiarism using iThenticate software. If plagiarism/self-plagiarism will be found authors will be informed. Editors may resubmit manuscript for similarity check at any peer-review or production stage if required. High similarity scores may lead to rejection of a manuscript before and even after acceptance. Depending on the type of article and the percentage of similarity score taken from each article, the overall similarity score is generally expected to be less than 15 or 20%. Double Blind Peer-Review After plagiarism check, the eligible ones are evaluated by the editors-in-chief for their originality, methodology, the importance of the subject covered and compliance with the journal scope. The editor provides a fair double-blind peer review of the submitted articles and hands over the papers matching the formal rules to at least two national/international referees for evaluation and gives green light for publication upon modification by the authors in accordance with the referees’ claims.

Policies

The journal is an open access journal and all content is freely available without charge to the user or his/her institution. Except for commercial purposes, users are allowed to read, download, copy, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles in this journal without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This is in accordance with the <a href="https://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/read" target="_blank">BOAI</a> definition of open access.The open access articles in the journal are licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (<a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/deed.en" target="_blank">CC BY-NC 4.0</a>) license.

All expenses of the journal are covered by the Istanbul University. Processing and publication are free of charge with the journal. There is no article processing charges or submission fees for any submitted or accepted articles.

Authors publishing with the journal retain the copyright to their work licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International license (<a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/" target="_blank">CC BY-NC 4.0</a>) (<a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/" target="_blank">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/</a> ) and grant the Publisher non-exclusive commercial right to publish the work. CC BY-NC 4.0 license permits unrestricted, non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Editor should consider publishing correction if minor errors that do not effect the results, interpretations and conclusions of the published paper are detected. Editor should consider retraction if major errors and/or misconduction that invalidate results and conclusions are detected.Editor should consider issuing an expression of concern if there is evidence of research or publication misconduct by the authors; there is evidence that the findings are not reliable and institutions of the authors do not investigate the case or the possible investigation seems to be unfair or nonconclusive. The guidelines of <a href="https://publicationethics.org/resources/flowcharts/complete-set-english" target="_blank">COPE</a> and <a href="https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/" target="_blank">ICJME</a> are taken into consideration regarding correction, retractions or expression of concern.RetractionJournal follows <a href="https://publicationethics.org/sites/default/files/retraction-guidelines-cope.pdf" target="_blank">COPE’s Retraction Guidelines</a> in case of retraction. The editor has the right to retract an article if: <ul><li>There is clear evidence that the findings are unreliable; either as a result of a major error (e.g. miscalculation or experimental error), or as a result of fabrication (e.g. of data) or falsification (e.g. image manipulation).</li><li>It contains plagiarised content. </li><li>It has been published elsewhere without proper attribution. </li><li>It contains material or data without authorisation for use.</li><li>There is copyright infringement or there is some other serious legal issue.</li><li>It reports unethical research. </li><li>There is evidence that the peer-review process is compromised or manipulated.</li><li>The author(s) failed to disclose a significant competing interest (also known as a conflict of interest) that, in the opinion of the editor, would have unduly influenced the interpretation of the work or the recommendations of the editors and peer reviewers.</li></ul>In case of retraction the following steps are followed:<ul><li>Retraction notice including article title is published in a subsequent issue of the journal. The retraction notice is paginated and listed in the table of contents. </li><li>A link is provided between the retraction notice and the original article in the electronic version. </li><li>The online article is preceded by a page containing the retraction notice; the reader can then proceed to the article itself.</li><li>The original article remains unchanged, except for a watermark on the .pdf on each page stating that it has been &#34;retracted”.</li></ul>Article Removal for Legal ReasonsIn the following circumstances, except the metadata (title and authors), the text of the article is removed and a page informing that the article has been removed for legal reasons replaces the article. <ul><li>The article is found to be defamatory or to infringe the legal rights of others, and retraction is not deemed to be an adequate solution.</li><li>The article has been, or is reasonably likely to be the subject of a court order.</li><li>There is a significant risk to public health. </li></ul>

To guarantee that all papers published in the journal are maintained and permanently accessible, articles are stored in Dergipark which serves as a  national archival web site and at the same time permits LOCKSS to  collect, preserve, and serve the content.Additionally, authors are encouraged to self-archive the final PDF version of their articles in open electronic archives with  that conform to standards of Open Archives Initiative (<a href="https://www.openarchives.org/" target="_blank">https://www.openarchives.org/</a>). Authors should provide a link from the deposited version to the URL of IUPress journal website.

Recent Period Turkish Studies- Yakın Dönem Türkiye Araştırmaları is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and pays regard to Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing published by the <a href="https://publicationethics.org/" target="_blank">Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)</a>, the <a href="https://doaj.org/apply/transparency/#principles-of-transparency-and-best-practice-in-scholarly-publishing" target="_blank">Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)</a>, the <a href="https://oaspa.org/" target="_blank">Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA)</a>, and the <a href="https://www.wame.org/" target="_blank">World Association of Medical Editors (WAME)</a> on <a href="https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines-new/principles-transparency-and-best-practice-scholarly-publishing" target="_blank">https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines-new/principles-transparency-and-best-practice-scholarly-publishing</a>All submissions must be original, unpublished (including as full text in conference proceedings), and not under the review of any other publication synchronously. Authors must ensure that submitted work is original. They must certify that the manuscript has not previously been published elsewhere or is not currently being considered for publication elsewhere, in any language. Applicable copyright laws and conventions must be followed. Copyright material (e.g. tables, figures or extensive quotations) must be reproduced only with appropriate permission and acknowledgement. Any work or words of other authors, contributors, or sources must be appropriately credited and referenced.Each manuscript is reviewed by one of the editors and at least two referees under double-blind peer review process. Plagiarism, duplication, fraud authorship/denied authorship, research/data fabrication, salami slicing/salami publication, breaching of copyrights, prevailing conflict of interest are unnethical behaviors.All manuscripts not in accordance with the accepted ethical standards will be removed from the publication. This also contains any possible malpractice discovered after the publication. In accordance with the code of conduct we will report any cases of suspected plagiarism or duplicate publishing.

Ethics

Recent Period Turkish Studies- Yakın Dönem Türkiye Araştırmaları adheres to the highest standards in research ethics and follows the principles of international research ethics as defined below. The authors are responsible for the compliance of the manuscripts with the ethical rules.<ul><li>Principles of integrity, quality and transparency should be sustained in designing the research, reviewing the design and conducting the research.</li><li>The research team and participants should be fully informed about the aim, methods, possible uses and requirements of the research and risks of participation in research.</li><li>The confidentiality of the information provided by the research participants and the confidentiality of the respondents should be ensured. The research should be designed to protect the autonomy and dignity of the participants.</li><li>Research participants should participate in the research voluntarily, not under any coercion.</li><li>Any possible harm to participants must be avoided. The research should be planned in such a way that the participants are not at risk.</li><li>The independence of research must be clear; and any conflict of interest or must be disclosed.</li><li>In experimental studies with human subjects, written informed consent of the participants who decide to participate in the research must be obtained. In the case of children and those under wardship or with confirmed insanity, legal custodian’s assent must be obtained.</li><li>If the study is to be carried out in any institution or organization, approval must be obtained from this institution or organization.</li><li>In studies with human subject, it must be noted in the method’s section of the manuscript that the informed consent of the participants and ethics committee approval from the institution where the study has been conducted have been obtained.</li></ul>

It is authors’ responsibility to ensure that the article is in accordance with scientific and ethical standards and rules. And authors must ensure that submitted work is original. They must certify that the manuscript has not previously been published elsewhere or is not currently being considered for publication elsewhere, in any language. Applicable copyright laws and conventions must be followed. Copyright material (e.g. tables, figures or extensive quotations) must be reproduced only with appropriate permission and acknowledgement. Any work or words of other authors, contributors, or sources must be appropriately credited and referenced.All the authors of a submitted manuscript must have direct scientific and academic contribution to the manuscript. The author(s) of the original research articles is defined as a person who is significantly involved in “conceptualization and design of the study”, “collecting the data”, “analyzing the data”, “writing the manuscript”, “reviewing the manuscript with a critical perspective” and “planning/conducting the study of the manuscript and/or revising it”. Fund raising, data collection or supervision of the research group are not sufficient roles to be accepted as an author. The author(s) must meet all these criteria described above. The order of names in the author list of an article must be a co-decision and it must be indicated in the <a href="https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/0DA91259FA4F4088A8E8E118F732E651" target="_blank">Copyright Agreement Form.</a> The individuals who do not meet the authorship criteria but contributed to the study must take place in the acknowledgement section. Individuals providing technical support, assisting writing, providing a general support, providing material or financial support are examples to be indicated in acknowledgement section.All authors must disclose all issues concerning financial relationship, conflict of interest, and competing interest that may potentially influence the results of the research or scientific judgment.When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published paper, it is the author’s obligation to promptly cooperate with the Editor-in-Chief to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes.

Editor evaluates manuscripts for their scientific content without regard to ethnic origin, gender, sexual orientation, citizenship, religious belief or political philosophy of the authors. Editor provides a fair double-blind peer review of the submitted articles for publication and ensures that all the information related to submitted manuscripts is kept as confidential before publishing.Editor is responsible for the content and overall quality of the publication and must publish errata pages or make corrections when needed.Editor does not allow any conflicts of interest between the authors, editors and reviewers. Only editor has the full authority to assign a reviewer and is responsible for final decision for publication of the manuscripts in the Journal.Reviewers’ judgments must be objective. Reviewers must ensure that all the information related to submitted manuscripts is kept as confidential and must report to the Editor if they are aware of copyright infringement and plagiarism on the author’s side.A reviewer who feels unqualified to review the topic of a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editor and excuse himself from the review process.The editor informs the reviewers that the manuscripts are confidential information and that this is a privileged interaction. The reviewers and editorial board cannot discuss the manuscripts with other persons. Unless the authors and editor permit, the reviews of referees cannot be published or disclosed. The anonymity of the referees is important. In particular situations, the editor may share the review of one reviewer with other reviewers to clarify a particular point.

Only those manuscripts approved by its every individual author and that were not published before in or sent to another journal, are accepted for evaluation.Submitted manuscripts that pass preliminary control are scanned for plagiarism using iThenticate software. After plagiarism check, the eligible ones are evaluated by editor-in-chief for their originality, methodology, the importance of the subject covered and compliance with the journal scope.The editor hands over the papers matching the formal rules to at least two national/international referees for double-blind peer review evaluation and gives green light for publication upon modification by the authors in accordance with the referees’ claims.

Peer Review

Editor-in-Chief evaluates manuscripts for their scientific content without regard to ethnic origin, gender, citizenship, religious belief or political philosophy of the authors. He/She provides a fair double-blind peer review of the submitted articles for publication and ensures that all the information related to submitted manuscripts is kept as confidential before publishing.Editor-in-Chief is responsible for the contents and overall quality of the publication. He/She must publish errata pages or make corrections when needed.Editor-in-Chief does not allow any conflicts of interest between the authors, editors and reviewers. Only he has the full authority to assign a reviewer and is responsible for final decision for publication of the manuscripts in the journal.Reviewers must have no conflict of interest with respect to the research, the authors and/or the research funders. Their judgments must be objective.Reviewers must ensure that all the information related to submitted manuscripts is kept as confidential and must report to the editor if they are aware of copyright infringement and plagiarism on the author’s side.A reviewer who feels unqualified to review the topic of a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.The editor informs the reviewers that the manuscripts are confidential information and that this is a privileged interaction. The reviewers and editorial board cannot discuss the manuscripts with other persons. The anonymity of the referees must be ensured. In particular situations, the editor may share the review of one reviewer with other reviewers to clarify a particular point.

Only those manuscripts approved by its every individual author and that were not published before in or sent to another journal, are accepted for evaluation.Submitted manuscripts that pass preliminary control are scanned for plagiarism using iThenticate software. After plagiarism check, the eligible ones are evaluated by Editor-in-Chief for their originality, methodology, the importance of the subject covered and compliance with the journal scope. Editor-inChief evaluates manuscripts for their scientific content without regard to ethnic origin, gender, citizenship, religious belief or political philosophy of the authors and ensures a fair double-blind peer review of the selected manuscripts.The selected manuscripts are sent to at least two national/international external referees for evaluation and publication decision is given by Editor-in-Chief upon modification by the authors in accordance with the referees’ claims.Editor-in-Chief does not allow any conflicts of interest between the authors, editors and reviewers and is responsible for final decision for publication of the manuscripts in the journal.Reviewers’ judgments must be objective. Reviewers’ comments on the following aspects are expected while conducting the review.- Does the manuscript contain new and significant information?- Does the abstract clearly and accurately describe the content of the manuscript?- Is the problem significant and concisely stated? - Are the methods described comprehensively? - Are the interpretations and consclusions justified by the results?- Is adequate references made to other Works in the field?- Is the language acceptable?Reviewers must ensure that all the information related to submitted manuscripts is kept as confidential and must report to the editor if they are aware of copyright infringement and plagiarism on the author’s side.A reviewer who feels unqualified to review the topic of a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.The editor informs the reviewers that the manuscripts are confidential information and that this is a privileged interaction. The reviewers and editorial board cannot discuss the manuscripts with other persons. The anonymity of the referees is important.

All correspondence will be sent to the first-named author unless otherwise specified. Article is to be submitted online via <a href="https://dergipark.org.tr/login" target="_blank">https://dergipark.org.tr/login</a> that can be accessed at <a href="http://rpts.istanbul.edu.tr" target="_blank">http://rpts.istanbul.edu.tr</a>. It must be accompanied by a title page specifying the article category (i.e. research article, review etc.) and including information about the essay (see the Submission Checklist), and a cover letter. Articles should be prepared in Microsoft Word 2003 and upper versions. In addition, Copyright Agreement Form that has to be signed by all authors must be submitted. The <a href="https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/5F6D4670B67C4790A572D04B335EB2C3" target="_blank">Cover Page</a> and <a href="https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/5027B8C00BB74DE99856B11550661D9D" target="_blank">Copyright Agreement Form</a> must be completed in full. 1. Studies should be in A4 paper standards: having 4 cm margin from left and 2.5 cm margins from right, bottom and top, Times New Roman font style in 12 font size, line spacing of 1.5 and “justify align” format. If there are footnotes, they must remain within these limits and be written in 10 font size. Before and after paragraphs, 6 point space should be left. 2. The headings of sections and subsections of the article should be in 14 font size. Before and after headings, 6 point space should be left. 3. Headings and subheadings should not be in the last line of a page; in such a case they should be on the next page. The first line of a paragraph should not be the last line of a page and the last line of a paragraph should not be the first line of page. 4. Abbreviations, table, figure and symbol list, preface, abstract, references list, appendix and explanations of tables and captions of figures should be written in 1 line spacing. 5. The author/authors’ names and information should not be included in the text of the article, and all information about the author/authors should be indicated on the Cover Page that will be uploaded to the system along with the Full Text and Copyright Form. The Cover Page should include the title of the article, the author or authors’ affiliations and titles, the addresses where they can be reached, mobile, business and fax numbers, ORCID and e-mail addresses.6. Before the introduction part, there should be an abstract of 100-200 words both in Turkish and in English. An extended abstract in English between 600-800 words, summarizing the scope, the purpose, the results of the study and the methodology used is to be included following the abstracts. Underneath the abstracts, 5 keywords that inform the reader about the content of the study should be specified in Turkish and in English. 7. The article should contain mainly these components: Title, abstract and keywords in the language of the article; English title, abstract and keywords; extended abstract in English, main sections of article, references and tables and figures. 8. Tables, graphs and figures can be given with a number and a defining title if and only if it is necessary to follow the idea of the article. Otherwise, data that can be given in the text, such as demographic characteristics, should not be expressed in separate tables. 9. All responsibility for the articles/writings published in the journal and the opinions expressed belong to the authors; Istanbul University Institute of Ataturk’s Principles and Revolution History does not assume any responsibility. 10. In line with the editorial board and referee reports, authors may be asked to make some corrections on the text.

Author Guidelines

Citations (Reference, Cross Reference)In the article, quotations from other sources are either quoted exactly or summarized or interpreted by the author’s own words, provided that the essence is not changed. In both cases, the cited source (including text, table, figure etc.) must be referenced. The following principles are applied in this regard:a. Information taken exactly from the source (quotation) is shown in double quotes (“.....”). Quotations made by the author by changing the format, not the essence of the information in the source, are shown without double quotes. In both types of citations, reference is made to the relevant source and each citation is given a consecutive number in the form of footnotes on the bottom of the page.b. In the article, the whole of the information quoted from the source can be given, but for example, only certain parts of the information in the form of sentences, paragraphs or pages can also be given. In this case, the omitted places are indicated with three dots (…) to show that certain words, various sentences, paragraphs and pages are omitted in the sentences.c. If the information in other sources is quoted verbatim, inaccuracies such as letters, sentences, dates, places, etc. in the sources are also repeated, including punctuation marks and translation errors. If the author of the article wants to give correction of inaccuracies in the source text, then the correct information is indicated in a parenthesis immediately after the incorrect information.d. Exact quotations from the sources are given within the text of the article, if they are not longer than one sentence. In longer quotations, at least double-spaced space is left between the first and last lines of the quotation and the text of the article, so that the quotation and the text are distinguished. For such citations, a smaller font size than the font used in the article text is used.Rules about Reference FootnotesIn the reference footnotes, if a reference is made to the relevant source for the first time, the full bibliography of the work (author’s name, surname, name of the work, translator/editor/compiler information, if any, place of publication, publisher and date) should be given. Namely:Salahi Ramazan Sonyel, Türk Kurtuluş Savaşı ve Dış Politika I, Türk Tarih Kurumu Yayınları, Ankara, 1973, s. 10.Erol Güngör, Kültür Değişmesi ve Milliyetçilik, 2. Baskı, Ötüken Yayınları, İstanbul, 1984, s. 24.If a second or more reference is made to the same source in reference footnotes, the above information is abbreviated accordingly:Erol Güngör, Kültür Değişmesi …, s. 35.Reference to the author’s article/book chapter in the edited book:First reference:Hüseyin Bağcı, “Demokrat Parti’nin Ortadoğu Politikası”, Türk Dış Politikasının Analizi, der. Faruk Söylemezoğlu, Der Yayınları, İstanbul, 1994, s. 93-94.Next references:Hüseyin Bağcı, “Demokrat Parti’nin Ortadoğu Politikası”, s. 98.Reference to the article in the periodical:First reference:Fahrettin Kırzıoğlu, “Mustafa Kemal Paşa-Erzurum İlişkileri (1919-1920)”, Atatürk Araştırma Merkezi Dergisi, VII/20, 1991, s. 223-266.Mustafa Budak, “Ermeni Meselesi Açısından Başbakanlık Osmanlı Arşivi’nin Önemi”, Yakın Dönem Türkiye Araştırmaları Dergisi, C. 17, S. 34, 2018, s. 209.Next references:Fahrettin Kırzıoğlu, “Mustafa Kemal Paşa-Erzurum İlişkileri (1919-1920)”, s. 225.Articles and news in newspapers should be displayed as follows:“Hükümet-i Osmaniyye’nin Sulh Konferansına Teklifâtını Hâvi Muhtıra”, İkdam, 3 Mart 1335 (1919), s. 1.“DP Kongresi Saat 10’da Açıldı”, Vakit, 15 Ekim 1955, s. 1-2.“İnönü ve Gülek’in Menderes’e Geçmiş Olsun Telgrafları”, Ulus, 19 Şubat 1959, s. 1-2.Reference to archival documents:Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Cumhurbaşkanlığı Devlet Arşivleri Başkanlığı Osmanlı Arşivi (BOA), Bab-ı Âlî Evrak Odası (BEO), 3733/236781 (Sadaret’ten Harbiye Nezareti’ne gönderilen 1 Teşrîn-i Sânî 1326 [14 Kasım 1910] tarihli tezkire).Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Cumhurbaşkanlığı Devlet Arşivleri Başkanlığı Cumhuriyet Arşivi (BCA), 030-01-37/222-1 (6-7 Eylül olaylarında zarar görenlere maddi destekler hakkında).The names of the same archives and fonds should be written with their codes in the second and subsequent citations:BOA, BEO, 3733/236781.Reference to the electronic/internet source:TBMM, Süreli Yayınlar, III. Menderes Hükümeti, (Çevrimiçi), <a href="http://www.tbmm.gov.tr">www.tbmm.gov.tr</a>, 8 Aralık 2013.Ayhan Kamel, “İkinci Dünya Savaşı’nın Bitiminden Günümüze Kadar Türk-Rus İlişkileri”, (Çevrimiçi), <a href="http://www.dispolitika.org.tr">www.dispolitika.org.tr</a>, 7 Aralık 2013.John N. Berry, “Educate Library Leaders”, Library Journal, February 15, 1998 (Çevrimiçi), http//www.epnet.com/ehost, 3 Nisan 2019.BibliographyIn the bibliography, books and articles should be shown as follows:Satan, Ali: Türk ve İngiliz Belgelerinde Halifeliğin Kaldırılması, Yazıgen Yayıncılık, İstanbul, 2017.Türkmen, Zekeriya: “Mustafa Kemal Paşa ve Yıldırım Orduları Grup Komutanlığı”, Atatürk Araştırma Merkezi Dergisi, C. XVI, S. 47, Temmuz 2000, s. 395-419.Appendix/AppendicesThe appendix section of the article contains text-related pictures, tables, forms, lists of survey questions, copies of important documents, photographs, maps, etc. For such a single material, only one annex is included, and for more than one material, if deemed necessary, multiple annexes are included. If the appendices are to be distinguished from each other, they shall be numbered consecutively as “Appendix-1”, “Appendix-2”, and so on. It is recommended that each number be followed by a title indicating the content of the each appendix. A title describing the contents of the appendix is recommended to be put next to each number.If the information in the appendix is conveyed from other sources, references to these sources must be indicated in the footnote.

<a href="https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/ABBFA2BDDD2C43E88F6C9575E40F6CDC" target="_blank">Title Page</a><a href="https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/0DA91259FA4F4088A8E8E118F732E651" target="_blank">Copyright Agreement Form</a><a href="https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/FFA980E737EA432B8AD4235E301677F0" target="_blank">Author Form</a>

Ensure that the following items are present:● Cover letter to the editorü  The category of the manuscriptü  Confirming that “the paper is not under consideration for publication in another journal”.ü  Including disclosure of any commercial or financial involvement.ü  Confirming that last control for fluent English was done.ü  Confirming that journal policies detailed in Information for Authors have been reviewed.ü Confirming that the references cited in the text and listed in the references section are in line with notes and bibliography system.<a href="https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/0DA91259FA4F4088A8E8E118F732E651" target="_blank">Copyright Agreement Form</a><a href="https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/FFA980E737EA432B8AD4235E301677F0" target="_blank">Author Form</a>Permission of previous published material if used in the present manuscript<a href="https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/3CA9A768A43843E38B57F329D7244835" target="_blank">Title page</a>ü  The category of the manuscriptü  The title of the manuscript both in Turkish and in Englishü  All authors’ names and affiliations (institution, faculty/department, city, country),ü  e-mail addressesü  Corresponding author’s email address, full postal address, telephone and fax numberü  ORCIDs of all authors.● Main Manuscript Documentü  The title of the manuscript both in Turkish in Englishü  Abstracts (100-200 words) both in the language of article and in Englishü  Key words: 5 words both in the language of article and in Englishü  Extended Abstract (600-800 words) in English for the articles which are not in Englishü  Acknowledgement (if exists)ü  Referencesü  Acknowledgements, grant supports, conflicts of interest should be indicatedü  All tables, illustrations (figures) (including title, description, footnotes)

Editor-in-ChiefName: Prof. Dr. Mustafa BUDAK E-mail: mustafa.budak@istanbul.edu.tr Phone: (0212) 440 00 00 (Dahili: 11950) Address: İstanbul Üniversitesi Atatürk İlkeleri ve İnkılap Tarihi Enstitüsü, Süleymaniye Mah. Besim Ömer Paşa Cad. No: 19 Kat: 4 Fatih - İstanbulEditorName: Asst. Prof. Dr. Hayrünisa ALP E-mail: hyralp@istanbul.edu.tr Phone: (0212) 440 00 00 (Dahili: 11956) Address: İstanbul Üniversitesi Atatürk İlkeleri ve İnkılap Tarihi Enstitüsü, Süleymaniye Mah. Besim Ömer Paşa Cad. No: 19 Kat: 4 Fatih - İstanbulEditorName: Asst. Prof. Dr. Yakup AHBAB E-mail: yakupahbab@hotmail.com Phone: (0212) 440 00 00 (Dahili: 10627) Address: İstanbul Üniversitesi Atatürk İlkeleri ve İnkılap Tarihi Enstitüsü, Süleymaniye Mah. Besim Ömer Paşa Cad. No: 19 Kat: 4 Fatih - İstanbulJournal ContactName: Assoc. Prof. Dr. Önder KOCATÜRK E-mail: onder.kocaturk@istanbul.edu.tr Phone: 1) 05362689505 2) 02163189780 3) 0212440 00 00 (Dahili: 10443) Address: İstanbul Üniversitesi Atatürk İlkeleri ve İnkılap Tarihi Enstitüsü, Süleymaniye Mah. Besim Ömer Paşa Cad. No: 19 Kat: 4 Fatih - İstanbulJournal ContactName: Res. Assist. Duygu SAYGIN E-mail: duygu.saygin@istanbul.edu.tr Phone: (0212) 440 00 00 (Dahili: 10437) Address: İstanbul Üniversitesi Atatürk İlkeleri ve İnkılap Tarihi Enstitüsü, Süleymaniye Mah. Besim Ömer Paşa Cad. No: 19 Kat: 4 Fatih - İstanbulJournal ContactName: Res. Assist. Umut DERE E-mail: umutdere@istanbul.edu.tr Phone: (0212) 440 00 00 (Dahili: 11955) Address: İstanbul Üniversitesi Atatürk İlkeleri ve İnkılap Tarihi Enstitüsü, Süleymaniye Mah. Besim Ömer Paşa Cad. No: 19 Kat: 4 Fatih - İstanbul

Issue Type	Regular
Editor(s)	Mustafa Budak
Cover (PDF)
Full Text (PDF)
Front Pages (PDF)