Yusuf

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

Mustafa

Instructor

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

Erol

PROBLEMS IN TURKISH TOURISM IN THE AFTERMATH OF THE SECOND WORLD WAR (1945-1949)

Nilüfer

Öğretim Görevlisi

YUNAN ORDUSU’NUN İZMİR VE AYDIN’I İŞGALİ ESNASINDA YAŞANAN AŞIRILIKLARIN TEKRARLANMAMASI İÇİN BAŞBAKAN VENİZELOS’UN GENERAL NİDER’E GÖNDERDİĞİ TELGRAF

Dilek

1914 YILINA AİT “ASTİR” ALMANAĞINDA YER ALAN KARAMANLI YAZAR “EVANGELİNOS MİSAİLİDİS”E DAİR YAZI

Cezmi

Prof. Dr.

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.

Mason Kaynaklarına Göre Cumhuriyet Döneminde Türkiye Masonlarının Yaşadığı Fesih ve Bölünme Hadiseleri

Nesrin

Ramazan

Levant Amerikan Ticaret Odası Tarihi (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.

II. Abdülhamid Döneminde Mekâtib-i  Askeriye-i Bahriye Talimatnâmesi Işığında Mekteb-i Bahriye’de Eğitim ve Öğretim

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.

Savaşın Gölgesinde Eğitim: Birinci Dünya Harbi Sürecinde Bahriye Mektebi

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.

Hiyerarşi ve Sarayın Temsili Bağlamında Sultan Mehmed Reşad’ın Kadınefendilerinin Haremdeki Konumları

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.

İstanbul’da Şehremini Halil Edhem (Eldem) Bey Dönemi ve Faaliyetleri

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.

Mustafa Kemal Paşa’nın Batı Anadolu’da  Eskişehir, İzmit, Bilecik ve Bursa Seyahatlerine (Ocak 1923) Dair İzlenimler ve Bazı Tespitler

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.

Millî Mücadele Dönemi Türk Basınında Görülen Bolşevik Eğilimleri ve Kaynakları

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.

İki Darbe Arası Dönem Türk Siyasetinde Lozan Algısı (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.

Savaş ve Diploma Arasında: II. Dünya Savaşı’nda Belçika’nın Almanlar Tarafından İstilası ve Türk Öğrenciler

Metin

Dostluktan Düşmanlığa: Komünist Rejimin İlk Yıllarında Türkiye’deki Rumen Diplomatlar (1947-1949)

Yakup

Merve

Çözüm ya da Çıkar Odaklı Politika mı? Kıbrıs Çatışması  Üzerinde 1960-1974 Yılları Arasındaki Uluslararası Etki

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.

Türkiye’de Ara Rejimler ve İşinsanları

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 Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Türk Dili ve Edebiyatı Bölümünün Tarihçesi

Gunel

Rusya-Ermenistan İnsani İş Birliği (1991-2023)

@JOURNAL_BOX_CURRENT

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.

Kıbrıs Türk Federe Devleti’nin (1975) Kuruluş İlanına İngiliz Parlamentosunun Tepkisi

II. ABDÜLHAMİD ÖZELİNDE OSMANLI’DA BİSMARCK ALGISI

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.

Düşünceden Eyleme EOKA

BİRİNCİ DÜNYA SAVAŞI’NDA İNGİLİZLERCE HİNDİSTAN’A GÖNDERİLEN TÜRK ESİRLERİ

@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.

Osmanlı Taşrasında Bir Kamu Görevlisi, Ali Saib Bey ve İşkodra Vilayetine Dair Layihası

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.

Çanakkale Zaferi’nden Sonra Batı Anadolu’da Havacılık Faaliyetleri (1915-1918)

@JOURNAL_BOX_MOSTREAD

Yakın Dönem Türkiye Araştırmaları-Recent Period Turkish Studies, İstanbul Üniversitesi Atatürk İlkeleri ve İnkılap Tarihi Enstitüsü’nün yayınıdır. Açık-erişimli, bilimsel, hakemli ve bölgesel odaklı uluslararası bir dergidir; öncelikle Türkiye’nin tarihsel olarak ilişkili olduğu bölgeler olan Balkanlar, Doğu Avrupa, Doğu Akdeniz, Orta Asya ve Orta Doğu’dan akademisyenleri, okurları ve yazarları hedefler. Yılda iki defa Haziran ve Aralık aylarında yayınlanır. Derginin başlangıç tarihi 2002’dir. 2024 itibariyle basılı versiyon durdurulmuştur. Dergi sadece online olarak yayınlanmaktadır.

Dergi, yakın dönem Türk ve Dünya Tarihini ilgilendiren tarih, Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Tarihi, Atatürk İlkeleri ve İnkılap Tarihi, Osmanlı Tarihi, sosyoloji, edebiyat, sanat tarihi, hukuk, siyaset bilimi, iktisat disiplinlerinden özgün araştırmalara dayanan çalışmaları yayınlanmaktadır . Derginin amacı Türkçe, İngilizce, Almanca ve Fransızca araştırma, inceleme, derleme yazıları yayınlamak suretiyle bilime katkı sağlamaktır. 

Dergi odaklandığı alanlarda boşluğu dolduracak özgün araştırmalara dayanan makaleler; incelenen konuları zengin bir kaynakçaya dayanarak değerlendiren, eleştiren ve bu konuda yeni ve dikkate değer görüşler ortaya koyan araştırma, inceleme ve derleme yazıları yayınlar.

Alanla ilgili çevirilere ve durumun belirtilmesi koşulu ile daha önce bir bilimsel kongrede sunulmuş ancak yayınlanmamış bildirilerin metinlere; Milli Mücadele ve Türkiye Cumhuriyeti ile ilgili eser, şahsiyet ve ilmi faaliyetlerin tanıtım yazılarına da dergide yer verilir.

Derginin tüm giderleri İstanbul Üniversitesi tarafından karşılanmaktadır. Dergide makale yayını ve makale süreçlerinin yürütülmesi ücrete tabi değildir. Dergiye gönderilen ya da yayın için kabul edilen makaleler için işlemleme ücreti ya da gönderim ücreti alınmaz.

Prof.

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

Yakın Dönem Türkiye Araştırmaları

@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

Yakın Dönem Türkiye Araştırmaları-Recent Period Turkish Studies, yılda iki defa yayınlanan (Aralık-Haziran) bilimsel, açık erişimli ve hakemli bir dergidir. Dergi, yakın dönem Türk ve Dünya Tarihini ilgilendiren tarih, Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Tarihi, Atatürk İlkeleri ve İnkılap Tarihi, Osmanlı Tarihi, sosyoloji, edebiyat, sanat tarihi, hukuk, siyaset bilimi, iktisat disiplinlerinden özgün araştırmalara dayanan çalışmaları yayınlanmakta, bu sayede ulusal ve uluslararası düzeyde bilim dünyası ile akademisyenler arasında bir köprü görevi görmektedir.Yakın Dönem Türkiye Araştırmaları-Recent Period Turkish Studies dergisinin amacı Türkçe, İngilizce, Almanca ve Fransızca araştırma makaleleri ve inceleme yazıları yayınlamak suretiyle bilime katkı sağlamaktır.Yakın Dönem Türkiye Araştırmaları-Recent Period Turkish Studies dergisinin kapsamını yakın dönem Türk ve Dünya Tarihini ilgilendiren tarih, Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Tarihi, Atatürk İlkeleri ve İnkılap Tarihi, Osmanlı Tarihi, sosyoloji, edebiyat, sanat tarihi, hukuk, siyaset bilimi, iktisat disiplinleri oluşturur. Dergi odaklandığı alanlarda boşluğu dolduracak özgün araştırmalara dayanan makaleler; incelenen konuları zengin bir kaynakçaya dayanarak değerlendiren, eleştiren ve bu konuda yeni ve dikkate değer görüşler ortaya koyan araştırma, inceleme ve derleme yazıları yayınlar. Alanla ilgili çeviriler ve durumun belirtilmesi koşulu ile daha önce bir bilimsel kongrede sunulmuş ancak yayınlanmamış bildirilerin metinleri; Milli Mücadele ve Türkiye Cumhuriyeti ile ilgili eser, şahsiyet ve ilmi faaliyetlerin tanıtım yazıları da dergide yayınlanır.

Amaç ve Kapsam

<ul type="disc"> <li>Web of Science – Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI)</li> <li>TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM TR Dizin</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>

Dizinler

Dergi yayın etiğinde en yüksek standartlara bağlıdır ve <a href="https://publicationethics.org/" target="_blank">Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)</a>, <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>, <a href="https://oaspa.org/" target="_blank">Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA)</a> ve <a href="https://www.wame.org/" target="_blank">World Association of Medical Editors (WAME)</a> tarafından yayınlanan etik yayıncılık ilkelerini benimser; Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing başlığı altında ifade edilen ilkeler için: <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> Gönderilen makaleler derginin amaç ve kapsamına uygun olmalıdır. Orijinal, yayınlanmamış ve başka bir dergide değerlendirme sürecinde olmayan, her bir yazar tarafından içeriği ve gönderimi onaylanmış yazılar değerlendirmeye kabul edilir. Makale yayınlanmak üzere Dergiye gönderildikten sonra yazarlardan hiçbirinin ismi, tüm yazarların yazılı izni olmadan yazar listesinden silinemez ve yeni bir isim yazar olarak eklenemez ve yazar sırası değiştirilemez.İntihal, duplikasyon, sahte yazarlık/inkar edilen yazarlık, araştrma/veri fabrikasyonu, makale dilimleme, dilimleyerek yayın, telif hakları ihlali ve çıkar çatışmasının gizlenmesi, etik dışı davranışlar olarak kabul edilir. Kabul edilen etik standartlara uygun olmayan tüm makaleler yayından çıkarılır. Buna yayından sonra tespit edilen olası kuraldışı, uygunsuzluklar içeren makaleler de dahildir.İntihal Ön kontrolden geçirilen makaleler, iThenticate yazılımı kullanılarak intihal için taranır. İntihal/kendi kendine intihal tespit edilirse yazarlar bilgilendirilir. Editörler, gerekli olması halinde makaleyi değerlendirme ya da üretim sürecinin çeşitli aşamalarında intihal kontrolüne tabi tutabilirler. Yüksek benzerlik oranları, bir makalenin kabul edilmeden önce ve hatta kabul edildikten sonra reddedilmesine neden olabilir. Makalenin türüne bağlı olarak, bunun oranın %15 veya %20'den az olması beklenir.Çift Kör Hakemlikİntihal kontrolünden sonra, uygun olan makaleler baş editör tarafından orijinallik, metodoloji, işlenen konunun önemi ve dergi kapsamı ile uyumluluğu açısından değerlendirilir. Editör, makalelerin adil bir şekilde çift taraflı kör hakemlikten geçmesini sağlar ve makale biçimsel esaslara uygun ise, gelen yazıyı yurtiçinden ve /veya yurtdışından en az iki hakemin değerlendirmesine sunar, hakemler gerek gördüğü takdirde yazıda istenen değişiklikler yazarlar tarafından yapıldıktan sonra yayınlanmasına onay verir.

Politikalar

Dergi açık erişimlidir ve derginin tüm içeriği okura ya da okurun dahil olduğu kuruma ücretsiz olarak sunulur. Okurlar, ticari amaç haricinde, yayıncı ya da yazardan izin almadan dergi makalelerinin tam metnini okuyabilir, indirebilir, kopyalayabilir, arayabilir ve link sağlayabilir. Bu <a href="https://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/translations/turkish-translation" target="_blank">BOAI</a> açık erişim tanımıyla uyumludur. Derginin açık erişimli makaleleri Creative Commons Atıf-GayrıTicari 4.0 Uluslararası (<a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/deed.tr" target="_blank">CC BY-NC 4.0</a>) olarak lisanslıdır.

Derginin tüm giderleri İstanbul Üniversitesi tarafından karşılanmaktadır. Dergide makale yayını ve makale süreçlerinin yürütülmesi ücrete tabi değildir. Dergiye gönderilen ya da yayın için kabul edilen makaleler için işlemleme ücreti ya da gönderim ücreti alınmaz.

Yazarlar dergide yayınlanan çalışmalarının telif hakkına sahiptirler ve çalışmaları  Creative Commons Atıf-GayrıTicari 4.0 Uluslararası (<a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/deed.tr" target="_blank">CC BY-NC 4.0</a>) olarak lisanslıdır. CC BY-NC 4.0 lisansı, eserin ticari kullanım dışında her boyut ve formatta paylaşılmasına, kopyalanmasına, çoğaltılmasına ve orijinal esere uygun şekilde atıfta bulunmak kaydıyla yeniden düzenleme, dönüştürme ve eserin üzerine inşa etme dâhil adapte edilmesine izin verir.

Editörler, yayınlanan makalede, bulguları, yorumları ve sonuçları etkilemeyen küçük hatalar tespit edilirse düzeltme yayınlamayı düşünebilirler. Editörler, bulguları ve sonuçları geçersiz kılan büyük hatalar / ihlaller söz konusu olduğunda, makaleyi geri çekmeyi düşünmelidir. Yazarlar tarafından araştırma veya yayını kötüye kullanmaya yönelik olasılık söz konusu ise; bulguların güvenilir olmadığına ve yazarların kurumlarının olayı soruşturmadığına dair kanıtlar var veya olası soruşturma haksız veya sonuçsuz görünüyor ise, editörler endişe ifadesi yayınlamayı düşünmelidir. Düzeltme, geri çekme veya endişe ifadesi ile ilgili olarak <a href="https://publicationethics.org/resources/flowcharts/complete-set-english" target="_blank">COPE</a> ve <a href="https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/" target="_blank">ICJME</a> yönergeleri dikkate alınır.Geri ÇekmeDergi geri çekme durumunda <a href="https://publicationethics.org/sites/default/files/retraction-guidelines-cope.pdf" target="_blank">COPE Retraction Guidelines</a>’ı izler. Editör, aşağıdaki durumlarda bir makaleyi geri çekme hakkına sahiptir: <ul><li>Büyük bir hata (örn. yanlış hesaplama veya deneysel hata), uydurma öğeler  (örn. veri) veya tahrifat (örn. görüntü manipülasyonu) gibi bulguların güvenilmez olduğu sonucunu çıkarmaya dair açık kanıtlar varsa; </li><li>İçerikte intihal varsa; </li><li>Uygun atıf yapılmadan başka bir yerde yayınlanmışsa;</li><li>Kullanım izni olmayan materyal veya veri içeriyorsa;</li><li>Telif hakkı ihlali veya başka bir ciddi yasal sorun varsa;</li><li>Etik olmayan araştırma içeriyorsa; </li><li>Hakem değerlendirme sürecinin bozulduğuna veya manipüle edildiğine dair kanıt varsa;</li><li>Yazar(lar), editörün görüşüne göre, çalışmanın yorumlanmasını veya editörlerin ve hakemlerin tavsiyelerini önemli derecede etkileyebilecek, kritik bir çıkar çatışmasını açıklamamış ise.</li></ul>Geri çekme durumunda aşağıdaki adımlar izlenir:<ul><li>Makale başlığını da içeren geri çekme bildirimi derginin bir sonraki sayısında yayınlanır. Geri çekme bildirimi  içindekiler tablosunda sayfa nosu verilerek listelenir. </li><li>Elektronik versiyonda geri çekme bildirimi ile orijinal makale arasında link sağlanır. </li><li>Online makaleden önce geri çekme bildirimini içeren sayfa gelir; okuyucu daha sonra makalenin kendisine geçebilir.</li><li>Orijinal makale, her sayfadaki .pdf üzerinde “geri çekildiğini” belirten bir filigran dışında değişmeden kalır.</li></ul>Yasal Nedenlerle Makalenin KaldırılmasıAşağıdaki durumlarda, üst veriler (başlık ve yazarlar) hariç olmak üzere, makale metni kaldırılır ve makalenin yasal nedenlerle kaldırıldığını bildiren bir sayfa makalenin yerini alır. <ul><li>Makalenin karalayıcı içerik ihtiva ettiği veya başkalarının yasal haklarını ihlal ettiği tespit edilir ve geri çekmenin yeterli bir çözüm olmadığı düşünülürse;</li><li>Makale bir mahkeme kararına konu olmuşsa veya olacağına dair makul bir neden varsa;</li><li>Kamu sağlığı açısından önemli bir risk söz konusu ise;  </li></ul>

Dergide yayınlanan tüm yazıların korunmasını ve kalıcı olarak erişilebilir olmasını sağlamak için makaleler, ulusal bir arşiv sitesi olarak hizmet veren ve aynı zamanda LOCKSS'in içeriği toplamasına, korumasına ve sunmasına izin veren Dergipark'ta saklanmaktadır.Ek olarak, yazarların kendilerinin makalelerinin son PDF sürümünü Open Archives Initiative (<a href="https://www.openarchives.org/" target="_blank">https://www.openarchives.org/</a>) standartlarına uygun açık elektronik arşivlerde arşivlemeleri önerilir. Yazarlar, yayınladıkları arşiv versiyonundan, İ.Ü. Yayınevinin dergi web sitesinin URL'sine bağlantı sağlamalıdır.

<div style="text-align: left;">Yakın Dönem Türkiye Araştırmaları- Recent Period Turkish Studies, yayın etiğinde en yüksek standartlara bağlıdır ve <a href="https://publicationethics.org/" target="_blank">Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)</a>, <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>, <a href="https://oaspa.org/" target="_blank">Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA)</a> ve <a href="https://www.wame.org/" target="_blank">World Association of Medical Editors (WAME)</a> tarafından yayınlanan etik yayıncılık ilkelerini benimser; Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing başlığı altında ifade edilen ilkeler için adres: <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></div>Gönderilen tüm makaleler orijinal, yayınlanmamış ve başka bir dergide değerlendirme sürecinde olmamalıdır. Yazar makalenin orijinal olduğu, daha önce başka bir yerde yayınlanmadığı ve başka bir yerde, başka bir dilde yayınlanmak üzere değerlendirmede olmadığını beyan etmelidir. Uygulamadaki telif kanunları ve anlaşmaları gözetilmelidir. Telife bağlı materyaller (örneğin tablolar, şekiller veya büyük alıntılar) gerekli izin ve teşekkürle kullanılmalıdır. Başka yazarların, katkıda bulunanların çalışmaları ya da yararlanılan kaynaklar uygun biçimde kullanılmalı ve referanslarda belirtilmelidir. Her bir makale editörlerden biri ve en az iki hakem tarafından çift kör değerlendirmeden geçirilir. İntihal, duplikasyon, sahte yazarlık/inkar edilen yazarlık, araştırma/veri fabrikasyonu, makale dilimleme, dilimleyerek yayın, telif hakları ihlali ve çıkar çatışmasının gizlenmesi, etik dışı davranışlar olarak kabul edilir.Kabul edilen etik standartlara uygun olmayan tüm makaleler yayından çıkarılır. Buna yayından sonra tespit edilen olası kuraldışı, uygunsuzluklar içeren makaleler de dahildir.

Etik

Yakın Dönem Türkiye Araştırmaları- Recent Period Turkish Studies araştırma etiğinde en yüksek standartları gözetir ve aşağıda tanımlanan uluslararası araştırma etiği ilkelerini benimser. Makalelerin etik kurallara uygunluğu yazarların sorumluluğundadır.<ul><li style="text-align: left;">Araştırmanın tasarlanması, tasarımın gözden geçirilmesi ve araştırmanın yürütülmesinde, bütünlük, kalite ve şeffaflık ilkeleri sağlanmalıdır.</li><li style="text-align: left;">Araştırma ekibi ve katılımcılar, araştırmanın amacı, yöntemleri ve öngörülen olası kullanımları; araştırmaya katılımın gerektirdikleri ve varsa riskleri hakkında tam olarak bilgilendirilmelidir.</li><li style="text-align: left;">Araştırma katılımcılarının sağladığı bilgilerin gizliliği ve yanıt verenlerin gizliliği sağlanmalıdır. Araştırma katılımcıların özerkliğini ve saygınlığını koruyacak şekilde tasarlanmalıdır.</li><li style="text-align: left;">Araştırma katılımcıları gönüllü olarak araştırmada yer almalı, herhangi bir zorlama altında olmamalıdırlar.</li><li style="text-align: left;">Katılımcıların zarar görmesinden kaçınılmalıdır. Araştırma, katılımcıları riske sokmayacak şekilde planlanmalıdır.</li><li style="text-align: left;">Araştırma bağımsızlığıyla ilgili açık ve net olunmalı; çıkar çatışması varsa belirtilmelidir.</li><li style="text-align: left;">İnsan denekler ile yapılan deneysel çalışmalarda, araştırmaya katılmaya karar veren katılımcıların yazılı bilgilendirilmiş onayı alınmalıdır. Çocukların ve vesayet altındakilerin veya tasdiklenmiş akıl hastalığı bulunanların yasal vasisinin onayı alınmalıdır.</li><li style="text-align: left;">Çalışma herhangi bir kurum ya da kuruluşta gerçekleştirilecekse bu kurum ya da kuruluştan çalışma yapılacağına dair onay alınmalıdır.</li><li style="text-align: left;">İnsan öğesi bulunan çalışmalarda, “yöntem” bölümünde katılımcılardan “bilgilendirilmiş onam” alındığının ve çalışmanın yapıldığı kurumdan etik kurul onayı alındığı belirtilmesi gerekir.</li></ul>

Makalelerin bilimsel ve etik kurallara uygunluğu yazarların sorumluluğundadır. Yazar makalenin orijinal olduğu, daha önce başka bir yerde yayınlanmadığı ve başka bir yerde, başka bir dilde yayınlanmak üzere değerlendirmede olmadığı konusunda teminat sağlamalıdır. Uygulamadaki telif kanunları ve anlaşmaları gözetilmelidir. Telife bağlı materyaller (örneğin tablolar, şekiller veya büyük alıntılar) gerekli izin ve teşekkürle kullanılmalıdır. Başka yazarların, katkıda bulunanların çalışmaları ya da yararlanılan kaynaklar uygun biçimde kullanılmalı ve referanslarda belirtilmelidir. Gönderilen makalede tüm yazarların akademik ve bilimsel olarak doğrudan katkısı olmalıdır, bu bağlamda “yazar” yayınlanan bir araştırmanın kavramsallaştırılmasına ve dizaynına, verilerin elde edilmesine, analizine ya da yorumlanmasına belirgin katkı yapan, yazının yazılması ya da bunun içerik açısından eleştirel biçimde gözden geçirilmesinde görev yapan birisi olarak görülür. Yazar olabilmenin diğer koşulları ise, makaledeki çalışmayı planlamak veya icra etmek ve / veya revize etmektir. Fon sağlanması, veri toplanması ya da araştırma grubunun genel süpervizyonu tek başına yazarlık hakkı kazandırmaz. Yazar olarak gösterilen tüm bireyler sayılan tüm ölçütleri karşılamalıdır ve yukarıdaki ölçütleri karşılayan her birey yazar olarak gösterilebilir. Yazarların isim sıralaması ortak verilen bir karar olmalıdır. Tüm yazarlar yazar sıralamasını <a href="https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/50820B6B44BF4741BF802244D5C926E7" target="_blank">Telif Hakkı Anlaşması Formunda</a> imzalı olarak belirtmek zorundadırlar.Yazarlık için yeterli ölçütleri karşılamayan ancak çalışmaya katkısı olan tüm bireyler “teşekkür / bilgiler” kısmında sıralanmalıdır. Bunlara örnek olarak ise sadece teknik destek sağlayan, yazıma yardımcı olan ya da sadece genel bir destek sağlayan, finansal ve materyal desteği sunan kişiler verilebilir.Bütün yazarlar, araştırmanın sonuçlarını ya da bilimsel değerlendirmeyi etkileyebilme potansiyeli olan finansal ilişkiler, çıkar çatışması ve çıkar rekabetini beyan etmelidirler. Bir yazar kendi yayınlanmış yazısında belirgin bir hata ya da yanlışlık tespit ederse, bu yanlışlıklara ilişkin düzeltme ya da geri çekme için editör ile hemen temasa geçme ve işbirliği yapma sorumluluğunu taşır.

Baş editör, makaleleri, yazarların etnik kökeninden, cinsiyetinden, uyruğundan, dini inancından ve siyasi felsefesinden bağımsız olarak değerlendirirler. Yayına gönderilen makalelerin adil bir şekilde çift taraflı kör hakem değerlendirmesinden geçmelerini sağlar. Gönderilen makalelere ilişkin tüm bilginin, makale yayınlanana kadar gizli kalacağını garanti eder. Baş editör içerik ve yayının toplam kalitesinden sorumludur. Gereğinde hata sayfası yayınlamalı ya da düzeltme yapmalıdır. Baş editör; yazarlar, editörler ve hakemler arasında çıkar çatışmasına izin vermez. Hakem atama konusunda tam yetkiye sahiptir ve dergide yayınlanacak makalelerle ilgili nihai kararı vermekle yükümlüdür.Hakemler, araştırma, yazarlar ve/veya araştırmaya fon sağlayanlarla çıkar çatışması içinde olmamalıdır. Hakemler değerlendirmelerinin sonucunda tarafsız bir yargıya varmalıdırlar. Gönderilmiş yazılara ilişkin tüm bilginin gizli tutulmasını sağlamalı ve yazar tarafında herhangi bir telif hakkı ihlali ve intihal fark ederlerse editöre raporlamalıdırlar. Hakem, makale konusu hakkında kendini vasıflı hissetmiyor ya da zamanında geri dönüş sağlaması mümkün görünmüyorsa, editöre bu durumu bildirmeli ve hakem sürecine kendisini dahil etmemesini istemelidir.Değerlendirme sürecinde editör hakemlere gözden geçirme için gönderilen makalelerin, yazarların özel mülkü olduğunu ve bunun imtiyazlı bir iletişim olduğunu açıkça belirtir. Hakemler ve yayın kurulu üyeleri başka kişilerle makaleleri tartışamazlar. Hakemlerin kimliğinin gizli kalmasına özen gösterilmelidir. Bazı durumlarda editörün kararıyla, ilgili hakemlerin makaleye ait yorumları aynı makaleyi yorumlayan diğer hakemlere gönderilerek hakemlerin bu süreçte aydınlatılması sağlanabilir.

Daha önce yayınlanmamış ya da yayınlanmak üzere başka bir dergide halen değerlendirmede olmayan ve her bir yazar tarafından onaylanan makaleler değerlendirilmek üzere kabul edilir. Gönderilen ve ön kontrolü geçen makaleler iThenticate yazılımı kullanılarak intihal için taranır. İntihal kontrolünden sonra, uygun olan makaleler baş editör tarafından orijinallik, metodoloji, işlenen konunun önemi ve dergi kapsamı ile uyumluluğu açısından değerlendirilir.Seçilen makaleler en az iki ulusal/uluslararası hakeme çift taraflı kör hakemlik ile değerlendirmeye gönderilir; yayın kararı, hakemlerin talepleri doğrultusunda yazarların gerçekleştirdiği düzenlemelerin ve hakem sürecinin sonrasında baş editör tarafından verilir.

Hakemlik Hakkında

Baş editör, makaleleri, yazarların etnik kökeninden, cinsiyetinden, uyruğundan, dini inancından ve siyasi felsefesinden bağımsız olarak değerlendirir. Yayına gönderilen makalelerin adil bir şekilde çift taraflı kör hakem değerlendirmesinden geçmelerini sağlar. Gönderilen makalelere ilişkin tüm bilginin, makale yayınlanana kadar gizli kalacağını garanti eder. Baş editör içerik ve yayının toplam kalitesinden sorumludur. Gereğinde hata sayfası yayınlamalı ya da düzeltme yapmalıdır.Baş editör; yazarlar, editörler ve hakemler arasında çıkar çatışmasına izin vermez. Hakem atama konusunda tam yetkiye sahiptir ve dergide yayınlanacak makalelerle ilgili nihai kararı vermekle yükümlüdür.Hakemlerin araştırmayla ilgili, yazarlarla ve/veya araştırmanın finansal destekçileriyle çıkar çatışmaları olmamalıdır. Değerlendirmelerinin sonucunda tarafsız bir yargıya varmalıdırlar. Gönderilmiş yazılara ilişkin tüm bilginin gizli tutulmasını sağlamalı ve yazar tarafında herhangi bir telif hakkı ihlali ve intihal fark ederlerse editöre raporlamalıdırlar.Hakem, makale konusu hakkında kendini vasıflı hissetmiyor ya da zamanında geri dönüş sağlaması mümkün görünmüyorsa, editöre bu durumu bildirmeli ve hakem sürecine kendisini dahil etmemesini istemelidir.Değerlendirme sürecinde editör hakemlere gözden geçirme için gönderilen makalelerin, yazarların özel mülkü olduğunu ve bunun imtiyazlı bir iletişim olduğunu açıkça belirtir. Hakemler ve yayın kurulu üyeleri başka kişilerle makaleleri tartışamazlar. Hakemlerin kimliğinin gizli kalmasına özen gösterilmelidir. Bazı durumlarda editörün kararıyla, ilgili hakemlerin makaleye ait yorumları aynı makaleyi yorumlayan diğer hakemlere gönderilerek hakemlerin bu süreçte aydınlatılması sağlanabilir.

Daha önce yayınlanmamış ya da yayınlanmak üzere başka bir dergide halen değerlendirmede olmayan ve her bir yazar tarafından onaylanan makaleler değerlendirilmek üzere kabul edilir. Gönderilen ve ön kontrolü geçen makaleler iThenticate yazılımı kullanılarak intihal için taranır. İntihal kontrolünden sonra, uygun olan makaleler baş editör tarafından orijinallik, metodoloji, işlenen konunun önemi ve dergi kapsamı ile uyumluluğu açısından değerlendirilir. Baş editör, makaleleri, yazarların etnik kökeninden, cinsiyetinden, uyruğundan, dini inancından ve siyasi felsefesinden bağımsız olarak değerlendirir. Yayına gönderilen makalelerin adil bir şekilde çift taraflı kör hakem değerlendirmesinden geçmelerini sağlar.Seçilen makaleler en az iki ulusal/uluslararası hakeme değerlendirmeye gönderilir; yayın kararı, hakemlerin talepleri doğrultusunda yazarların gerçekleştirdiği düzenlemelerin ve hakem sürecinin sonrasında baş editör tarafından verilir.Hakemlerin değerlendirmeleri objektif olmalıdır. Hakem süreci sırasında hakemlerin aşağıdaki hususları dikkate alarak değerlendirmelerini yapmaları beklenir.-Makale yeni ve önemli bir bilgi içeriyor mu?-Öz, makalenin içeriğini net ve düzgün bir şekilde tanımlıyor mu?-Yöntem bütünlüklü ve anlaşılır şekilde tanımlanmış mı?-Yapılan yorum ve varılan sonuçlar bulgularla kanıtlanıyor mu?-Alandaki diğer çalışmalara yeterli referans verilmiş mi?-Dil kalitesi yeterli mi?Hakemler, gönderilen makalelere ilişkin tüm bilginin, makale yayınlanana kadar gizli kalmasını sağlamalı ve yazar tarafında herhangi bir telif hakkı ihlali ve intihal fark ederlerse editöre raporlamalıdırlar. Hakem, makale konusu hakkında kendini vasıflı hissetmiyor ya da zamanında geri dönüş sağlaması mümkün görünmüyorsa, editöre bu durumu bildirmeli ve hakem sürecine kendisini dahil etmemesini istemelidir.Değerlendirme sürecinde editör hakemlere gözden geçirme için gönderilen makalelerin, yazarların özel mülkü olduğunu ve bunun imtiyazlı bir iletişim olduğunu açıkça belirtir. Hakemler ve yayın kurulu üyeleri başka kişilerle makaleleri tartışamazlar. Hakemlerin kimliğinin gizli kalmasına özen gösterilmelidir.

Aksi belirtilmedikçe gönderilen yazılarla ilgili tüm yazışmalar ilk yazarla yapılacaktır. Makale gönderimi online olarak ve <a href="http://rpts.istanbul.edu.tr" target="_blank">http://rpts.istanbul.edu.tr</a> adresinden erişilen <a href="http://dergipark.gov.tr/login" target="_blank">http://dergipark.gov.tr/login</a> üzerinden yapılmalıdır. Gönderilen yazılar, makale türünü belirten ve makaleyle ilgili detayları içeren (bkz: Son Kontrol Listesi) kapak sayfası; editöre mektup, yazının elektronik formunu içeren Microsoft Word 2003 ve üzerindeki versiyonları ile yazılmış elektronik dosya ve tüm yazarların imzaladığı Telif Hakkı Anlaşması Formu eklenerek gönderilmelidir. <a href="https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/766744E809F149E2BA81FA92CBBCE72A" target="_blank">Kapak Sayfası</a> ve <a href="https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/3AFB3D1E49CB441B8A3231E89A543986" target="_blank">Telif Hakkı Anlaşması Formu</a> eksiksiz doldurulmalıdır. 1. Çalışmalar, A4 boyutunda, sol taraftan 4 cm, üst, alt ve sağ taraftan 2,5 cm. boşluk bırakılarak, 12 punto Times New Roman harf karakterleriyle ve 1,5 satır aralık ölçüsü ile ve iki yana yaslı olarak hazırlanmalıdır. Dipnotlar var ise, bu sınırlar içinde kalmalıdır ve 10 punto ile yazılmalıdır. Paragraflardan önce ve sonra 6 punto boşluk bırakılmalıdır. 2. Makalenin çeşitli, kısım, bölüm, altbölümlerinin başlıkları 14 punto ile yazılmalıdır. Başlıklardan önce ve sonra 6 punto boşluk bırakılmalıdır. 3. Başlık ve alt başlıklar sayfanın son satırı olarak yazılmamalıdır; sonraki sayfada yer almalıdır. Bir paragrafın ilk satırı sayfanın son satırı, paragrafın son satırı sayfanın ilk satırı olarak yazılmamalıdır. 4. Kısaltmalar, tablo, şekil ve sembol listeleri, önsöz, özetler, kaynaklar, ekler, metin içindeki tablo ve şekillerin isim ve açıklamaları ve dipnotlar 1 satır aralık ölçüsü ile yazılmalıdır. 5. Yazar/yazarların adları ve bilgileri çalışma metninde yer almamalı, yazara/yazarlara dair tüm bilgiler makale dosyası ve Telif Hakkı Anlaşması Formu ile birlikte sisteme yüklenecek olan Kapak Sayfasında belirtilmelidir. Kapak sayfasında, makalenin başlığı, yazar veya yazarların bağlı bulundukları kurum ve unvanları, kendilerine ulaşılabilecek adresler, cep, iş ve faks numaraları, ORCID ve e-posta adresleri yer almalıdır. 6. Giriş bölümünden önce 100-200 kelimelik çalışmanın kapsamını, amacını, ulaşılan sonuçları ve kullanılan yöntemi kaydeden Türkçe ve İngilizce öz ile 600-800 kelimelik İngilizce genişletilmiş özet yer almalıdır. Çalışmanın İngilizce başlığı İngilizce özün üzerinde yer almalıdır. İngilizce ve Türkçe özlerin altında çalışmanın içeriğini temsil eden, 5 adet Türkçe, 5 adet İngilizce anahtar kelime yer almalıdır. 7. Çalışmaların başlıca şu unsurları içermesi gerekmektedir: Makale dilinde başlık, öz ve anahtar kelimeler; İngilizce başlık, öz ve anahtar kelimeler; İngilizce genişletilmiş özet, ana metin bölümleri, kaynaklar, tablolar ve şekiller. 8. Çalışmalarda tablo, grafik ve şekil gibi göstergeler ancak çalışmanın takip edilebilmesi açısından gereklilik arz ettiği durumlarda, numaralandırılarak, tanımlayıcı bir başlık ile birlikte verilmelidir. Demografik özellikler gibi metin içinde verilebilecek veriler, ayrıca tablolar ile ifade edilmemelidir. 9. Dergide yayınlanan yazıların tüm sorumluluğu ve belirtilen görüşler yazarlara aittir; İstanbul Üniversitesi Atatürk İlkeleri ve İnkılap Tarihi Enstitüsü bir sorumluluk yüklenmez. 10. Yayın kurulu ve hakem raporları doğrultusunda yazarlardan, metin üzerinde bazı düzeltmeler yapmaları istenebilir.

Yazım Kuralları

Atıflar (Referans, Gönderme) Makalede, başka kaynaklardan yapılan alıntılar,  ya aynen aktarılır veya özü değiştirilmemek kaydıyla kaynak çalışmayı yapanın kendi cümleleriyle özetlenerek yahut yorumlanarak verilir. Her iki durumda da alıntı yapılan kaynağa (metin, tablo, şekil ve benzeri dahil) mutlaka atıfta bulunulmalıdır. Bu konuda aşağıdaki ilkeler uygulanır: a. Kaynaktan aynen alınan bilgiler (alıntı), çift tırnak içinde (“.....”) gösterilirler. Makaleyi hazırlayanın, kaynaktaki bilginin özünü değil, biçimini değiştirerek yaptığı alıntılar ise,  çift tırnak arasına alınmadan gösterilirler. Her iki alıntı türünde de ilgili kaynağa mutlaka atıf yapılır ve atıfların her birine, sayfa altı dipnot şeklinde birbirini izleyen numara verilir. b. Makalede, kaynaktan aynen aktarılan bilgilerin tamamı verilebileceği gibi, örneğin cümle, paragraf veya sayfalar halindeki bilgilerin sadece belli kısımları da verilebilir. Bu durumda, cümlelerde belli kelimelerin, çeşitli cümlelerin, paragraf ve sayfaların atlanarak verildiğini göstermek üzere, atlanan yerler üç nokta (...) ile belirtilir. c. Başka kaynaklardaki bilgilerin aynen aktarılması durumunda, kaynaklarda noktalama işaretleri ve çeviri yanlışları dahil olmak üzere harf, cümle, tarih, yer vb. gibi yanlışlıklar da tekrarlanır. Makale yazarı, kaynak metindeki yanlışlıkları düzelterek vermek isterse, o zaman doğru bilgi, yanlış bilgiden hemen sonra bir parantez içinde gösterilir. d. Kaynaklardan aynen yapılan alıntılar, bir cümleyi aşmayacak uzunluktaysa, makale metni içinde verilirler. Daha uzun alıntılarda,  alıntının ilk ve son satırları ile makale metni arasında en az çift aralıklı boşluk bırakılarak, alıntı ile metnin ayırt edilmesi sağlanır.  Bu tür alıntılar için, makale metninde kullanılan puntodan daha küçük punto kullanılır.Referans Dipnotları İle İlgili KurallarReferans dipnotlarında, ilgili kaynağa ilk kez referans veriliyorsa, eserin tam künyesi (yazar adı soyadı, eser adı, varsa çeviren/editör/derleyen bilgisi, yayınlandığı yer, yayınevi ve tarih) verilmelidir. Şöyle ki: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.Eğer referans dipnotlarında, aynı kaynağa ikinci veya daha fazla atıfta bulunuluyorsa, yukarıdaki bilgiler uygun şekilde kısaltılarak verilir:Erol Güngör, Kültür Değişmesi …,  s. 35.Editörlü kitapta yazarın makalesine/kitap bölümüne referans:İlk referans:Hüseyin Bağcı, “Demokrat Parti’nin Ortadoğu Politikası”, Türk Dış Politikasının Analizi, der. Faruk Söylemezoğlu, Der Yayınları, İstanbul, 1994, s. 93-94.Sonraki referanslar:Hüseyin Bağcı, “Demokrat Parti’nin Ortadoğu Politikası”, s. 98.Süreli yayında makaleye referans:                                        İlk referans: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.Sonraki referanslar:Fahrettin Kırzıoğlu, “Mustafa Kemal Paşa-Erzurum İlişkileri (1919-1920)”,  s. 225.Gazetelerdeki makale ve haber yazıları aşağıdaki gibi gösterilmelidir:“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.Arşiv belgelerine referans: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).Aynı arşiv ve fon isimleri, ikinci ve sonraki atıflarda kodlarıyla yazılmalıdır: BOA, BEO, 3733/236781.Elektronik/internet kaynağa referans: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, &#34;Educate Library Leaders,” Library Journal, February 15, 1998 (Çevrimiçi), http//www.epnet.com/ehost, 3 Nisan 2019.KaynakçaKaynakçada kitap ve makaleler aşağıdaki şekilde gösterilmelidir: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.Ek/EklerMakalenin ek kısmında, metinle ilgili resimler, tablolar, formlar, anket sorularının listeleri, önemli belgelerin kopyaları, fotoğraf, harita vb. gibi malzemeler bulunur. Bu tür tek bir malzeme için sadece bir ek, birden çok malzeme için de gerekli görülürse, birden çok ek yer alır. Ekler, birbirinden ayırt edilmesi gerekecek sayıda ise Ek-1, Ek-2 vb. şekilde birbirini izleyecek biçimde numaralanır. Her numaranın karşısına, Ek’in içeriğini belirten bir başlığın konulması önerilir.Ek’te yer alan bilgiler, başka kaynaklardan aktarıldığı takdirde, bu kaynaklara ilişkin referanslar dipnotta mutlaka belirtilmelidir.

<a href="https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/7095F8015B8849A6ACB95630DDDB7854" target="_blank">Kapak Sayfası</a><a href="https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/50820B6B44BF4741BF802244D5C926E7" target="_blank">Telif Hakkı Anlaşması Formu</a><a href="https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/3C1E8159CCCB4F4DA235DF62FB6B6C38" target="">Yazar Formu</a>

Aşağıdaki listede eksik olmadığından emin olun:● Editöre mektup<ul><li>Makalenin türü</li><li>Başka bir dergiye gönderilmemiş olduğu bilgisi</li><li>Sponsor veya ticari bir firma ile ilişkisi (varsa belirtiniz)</li><li>Kaynakların derginin kullandığı referans sistemine uygun düzenlendiği</li><li>İngilizce yönünden kontrolünün yapıldığı</li><li>Yazarlara Bilgide detaylı olarak anlatılan dergi politikalarının gözden geçirildiği</li></ul><a href="https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/7786EC0A4CD041C680BFF8CC6931373A" target="_blank">Telif Hakkı Anlaşması Formu</a><a href="https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/3C1E8159CCCB4F4DA235DF62FB6B6C38" target="_blank">Yazar Formu</a>Daha önce basılmış materyal (yazı-resim-tablo) kullanılmış ise izin belgesi<a href="https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/F42D157D554641E59A6C3DFBCE4E96A0" target="_blank">Kapak sayfası</a><ul><li>Makalenin kategorisi</li><li>Makale dilinde ve İngilizce başlık</li><li>Yazarların ismi soyadı, unvanları ve bağlı oldukları kurumlar (üniversite ve fakülte bilgisinden sonra şehir ve ülke bilgisi de yer almalıdır), e-posta adresleri</li><li>Sorumlu yazarın e-posta adresi, açık yazışma adresi, iş telefonu, GSM, faks nosu</li><li>Tüm yazarların ORCID’leri</li></ul>● Makale ana metni<ul><li>Makale dilinde ve İngilizce başlık</li><li>Özetler: 100-200 kelime makale dilinde ve 100-200 kelime İngilizce</li><li>Anahtar Kelimeler: 5 adet makale dilinde ve 5 adet İngilizce</li><li>İngilizce olmayan makaleler için İngilizce genişletilmiş Özet (Extended Abstract) 600-800 kelime</li><li>Makale ana metin bölümleri</li><li>Teşekkür (varsa belirtiniz)</li><li>Finansal Destek (varsa belirtiniz)</li><li>Çıkar Çatışması (varsa belirtiniz)</li><li>Son notlar (varsa belirtiniz)</li><li>Kaynaklar</li><li>Tablolar-Resimler, Şekiller (başlık, tanım ve alt yazılarıyla)</li></ul>

Başeditör Ad: Prof. Dr. Mustafa BUDAK E-posta: mustafa.budak@istanbul.edu.tr Telefon: (0212) 440 00 00 (Dahili: 11950) Adres: İstanbul Üniversitesi Atatürk İlkeleri ve İnkılap Tarihi Enstitüsü, Süleymaniye Mah. Besim Ömer Paşa Cad. No: 19 Kat: 4 Fatih - İstanbulEditörAd: Dr. Öğr. Üyesi Hayrünisa ALP E-posta: hyralp@istanbul.edu.tr Telefon: (0212) 440 00 00 (Dahili: 11956) Adres: İstanbul Üniversitesi Atatürk İlkeleri ve İnkılap Tarihi Enstitüsü, Süleymaniye Mah. Besim Ömer Paşa Cad. No: 19 Kat: 4 Fatih - İstanbulEditörAd: Dr. Öğr. Üyesi Yakup AHBAB E-posta: yakupahbab@hotmail.com Telefon: (0212) 440 00 00 (Dahili: 10627) Adres: İstanbul Üniversitesi Atatürk İlkeleri ve İnkılap Tarihi Enstitüsü, Süleymaniye Mah. Besim Ömer Paşa Cad. No: 19 Kat: 4 Fatih - İstanbulDergi İletişimAd: Doç. Dr. Önder KOCATÜRK E-posta: onder.kocaturk@istanbul.edu.tr Telefon: 1) 05362689505 2) 02163189780 3) 0212440 00 00 (Dahili: 10443) Adres: İstanbul Üniversitesi Atatürk İlkeleri ve İnkılap Tarihi Enstitüsü, Süleymaniye Mah. Besim Ömer Paşa Cad. No: 19 Kat: 4 Fatih - İstanbulDergi İletişimAd: Arş. Gör. Duygu SAYGIN E-posta: duygu.saygin@istanbul.edu.tr Telefon: (0212) 440 00 00 (Dahili: 10437) Adres: İstanbul Üniversitesi Atatürk İlkeleri ve İnkılap Tarihi Enstitüsü, Süleymaniye Mah. Besim Ömer Paşa Cad. No: 19 Kat: 4 Fatih - İstanbulDergi İletişimAd: Arş. Gör. Umut DERE E-posta: umutdere@istanbul.edu.tr Telefon: (0212) 440 00 00 (Dahili: 11955) Adres: İstanbul Üniversitesi Atatürk İlkeleri ve İnkılap Tarihi Enstitüsü, Süleymaniye Mah. Besim Ömer Paşa Cad. No: 19 Kat: 4 Fatih - İstanbul

Sayı Türü	Regular
Editör(ler)	Cezmi Eraslan
Kapak (PDF)
Tam Metin (PDF)
Ön Sayfalar (PDF)

Yakın Dönem Türkiye Araştırmaları

YTA

CİLT 15, SAYI 29, 2016

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

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

PROBLEMS IN TURKISH TOURISM IN THE AFTERMATH OF THE SECOND WORLD WAR (1945-1949)

YUNAN ORDUSU’NUN İZMİR VE AYDIN’I İŞGALİ ESNASINDA YAŞANAN AŞIRILIKLARIN TEKRARLANMAMASI İÇİN BAŞBAKAN VENİZELOS’UN GENERAL NİDER’E GÖNDERDİĞİ TELGRAF

1914 YILINA AİT “ASTİR” ALMANAĞINDA YER ALAN KARAMANLI YAZAR “EVANGELİNOS MİSAİLİDİS”E DAİR YAZI

BİLGİ

PAYLAŞ