The twentieth century features numerous phenomena remarkable for Turkish history. Such wars as the Trablusgarp （Turco-ltalian） War （1911）, the Balkan War （1912-1913）, World War I （1914-1918）, and National War ...The twentieth century features numerous phenomena remarkable for Turkish history. Such wars as the Trablusgarp （Turco-ltalian） War （1911）, the Balkan War （1912-1913）, World War I （1914-1918）, and National War of Independence （1919-1922） caused traumas that remain vivid in the minds of Turkish people and at the time devastated their psychological well-being and social lives. However, military and social disappointment caused by the Balkan War played an important part in invigorating and motivating soldiers to fight in the Battle of Gallipoli, which cleansed the taint caused by the Balkan defeat and reminded Turkish soldiers of their glorious past. The current study attempts to reveal how the shame caused by the Balkan defeat disappeared in the trenches at the Battle of Gallipoli. To this end, wartime writings, memoirs, and diaries were analyzed and evaluated. The primary concern of this study is comparison of how these two battles featured in the memoirs and/or reports or columns written by officers, soldiers, and intellectuals who participated in and witnessed the two wars.展开更多
The idea that WWI was a global conflict is generally accepted by the scholarly community. The Great War, as it is otherwise called, deserves to be remembered not only by the European nations but also by the rest of th...The idea that WWI was a global conflict is generally accepted by the scholarly community. The Great War, as it is otherwise called, deserves to be remembered not only by the European nations but also by the rest of the world countries whose destinies were shaped by it or because of it. It would not be wrong to suggest that the WWI, as far as the Ottomans were concerned, was a history of European armies in non-European military stages. The historiography of World War I is often limited to English sources seemingly due to the negligence of Ottoman sources, but most probably caused by the language barrier[s] and/or the Eurocentric approach to history. Or in Erikson＇s words, the ＂resultant historiography tends to tell the story from an overwhelmingly European perspective, which in many ways reflected what the European Powers perceived rather than what actually occurred＂ （Erickson, 2008, p. 10）. It is my opinion that the wider use of Ottoman archives and Turkish narratives would provide a more balanced analysis and that a holistic understanding of the events that unfolded requires special attention to the Ottoman perspective. This paper suggests an analysis of the Dardanelles conflict from a strategic perspective, with special reference to British and Ottoman policies and their part played in the transition from peace to war; the ensuing political turmoil that led to an open conflict between Britain and the Ottoman Empire.展开更多
文摘The twentieth century features numerous phenomena remarkable for Turkish history. Such wars as the Trablusgarp （Turco-ltalian） War （1911）, the Balkan War （1912-1913）, World War I （1914-1918）, and National War of Independence （1919-1922） caused traumas that remain vivid in the minds of Turkish people and at the time devastated their psychological well-being and social lives. However, military and social disappointment caused by the Balkan War played an important part in invigorating and motivating soldiers to fight in the Battle of Gallipoli, which cleansed the taint caused by the Balkan defeat and reminded Turkish soldiers of their glorious past. The current study attempts to reveal how the shame caused by the Balkan defeat disappeared in the trenches at the Battle of Gallipoli. To this end, wartime writings, memoirs, and diaries were analyzed and evaluated. The primary concern of this study is comparison of how these two battles featured in the memoirs and/or reports or columns written by officers, soldiers, and intellectuals who participated in and witnessed the two wars.
文摘The idea that WWI was a global conflict is generally accepted by the scholarly community. The Great War, as it is otherwise called, deserves to be remembered not only by the European nations but also by the rest of the world countries whose destinies were shaped by it or because of it. It would not be wrong to suggest that the WWI, as far as the Ottomans were concerned, was a history of European armies in non-European military stages. The historiography of World War I is often limited to English sources seemingly due to the negligence of Ottoman sources, but most probably caused by the language barrier[s] and/or the Eurocentric approach to history. Or in Erikson＇s words, the ＂resultant historiography tends to tell the story from an overwhelmingly European perspective, which in many ways reflected what the European Powers perceived rather than what actually occurred＂ （Erickson, 2008, p. 10）. It is my opinion that the wider use of Ottoman archives and Turkish narratives would provide a more balanced analysis and that a holistic understanding of the events that unfolded requires special attention to the Ottoman perspective. This paper suggests an analysis of the Dardanelles conflict from a strategic perspective, with special reference to British and Ottoman policies and their part played in the transition from peace to war; the ensuing political turmoil that led to an open conflict between Britain and the Ottoman Empire.
