History

Turkish nationalism became an element of the Ottoman political scene in the late nineteenth century. Although its roots can be traced back to the Hamidian period (1876–1909), Turkish nationalism emerged as one of the most important political ideologies during the Constitutional Regime. Wars that the Ottoman State participated in from 1911 to the end of the empire in 1918 resulted in population and land losses. Especially, following the Balkan Wars, most of the lands that were
populated by non-Muslim and non-Turkish subjects were lost. Within this context, Turkish nationalism came to be seen as the most dominant ideological tool intended to save the Empire. This article argues that Turkish nationalism emerged as a reactive ideology that addressed Ottomanism and Islamism, which were the two other dominant state ideologies during the late Ottoman State, due to the changing political context. In this article, Türk Yurdu, a well-known and influential periodical, is used as the primary source of reference to demonstrate the basic features of
Turkish nationalism in its infancy.
Keywords: Turkish Nationalism; Türk Yurdu; The Balkan Wars; The Ottoman Empire

Second Constitutional Era (1908-1918) was a period within which great
changes occurred in the Ottoman Empire. On the one hand, it was a part of the
modernization process that began in late eighteenth century; on the other hand, it was
the last period of the Empire that had its own dynamics. This study is to examine
changes and continuities in a locality, the Sivas Province, during the Second
Constitutional Regime.
The Sivas Province was one of the largest and most populated Anatolian
provinces. It located in the middle of Anatolia therefore it had a geopolitical
importance. Moreover, it was one of the six Eastern Provinces with a considerable
Armenian population. Sivas had the biggest Armenian and Greek population among
these provinces. Thus, both geopolitical importance and population characteristics
make the province an appropriate place to examine change and continuity during the
Second Constitutional Regime.
In this study, transformation of the province is examined over some topics
such as demographic characteristics, political life, administrative, educational and
economic structures. The research about these topics indicates that three main
dynamics of the Second Constitutional Regime were influential on developments in
the Sivas case. These dynamics are war, population movements especially the
Armenian Deportation and nationalism. These dynamics also determined
implementation of the modernization policies in the Sivas Province during the Constitutional Regime. Therefore, transformation/change of the province is
examined over these dynamics.
Keywords: The Sivas Province, Modernization, First World War, Armenian
Deportation, Nationalism.

During the First World War, a primary domestic political aim for all belligerent countries was to preserve the socio-economic status quo in order to provide appropriate conditions for the survival of the state. Therefore, war governments paid particular attention to the maintenance of internal order. While doing this, the central authority of governments became paramount and this situation had remarkable repercussions on state–society relations. This article examines the wartime public order policies of the Ottoman government specifically concerning the Ottoman Greeks (Rum) and Armenians living in Istanbul. During the Great War, these non-Muslim elements were officially regarded as ‘suspects’, in other words, as ‘potential political criminals’ threatening the internal order of the capital. To control the Ottoman Greeks and Armenians, the war government implemented a number of policing strategies that consisted of deportation of individuals and groups, strict control on travel, and close surveillance of ‘suspects’.

The Great War (1914-1918) was the first total war in the history of world, requiring the belligerent states to mobilize all their economic, military and civil resources. Because this long-lasting war brought about profound changes in state-society relations, the capital cities, being the administrative, political and socio-economic centers of the belligerent states, represent valuable subjects of analysis to examine these changes. Although there already is a broad literature on European capitals during the Great War, the number of academic studies on wartime Istanbul is surprisingly limited. This article aims to address this lacuna by studying the criminal policy followed in Istanbul during the Great War. The analysis will be limited to the two most widespread crime categories, profiteering and theft, both closely related to the worsening economic conditions but met with different official attitudes. Amnesties were important components of the wartime criminal policy. On one hand, through amnesties and other legal arrangements, a great number of convicts were conscripted to specific units of the army. On the other, when amnesties released convicts back into Istanbul society, a vicious circle of crime emerged in the city. As a result, wartime criminal policy caused remarkable changes in state-society relations in the Ottoman capital. The overall analysis shows that state making and war making emerged as two interconnected processes in which criminal policy played a crucial role.

Istanbul's Great War: Public Order, Crime and Punishment in the Ottoman Capital, 1914-1918 is a study of the social and economic life in an imperial capital at a time when the first total war of history swept through Europe, hitting the entire Ottoman Empire up to its borderlands in the Arab Peninsula. The book focuses on the impact of wartime conditions on life in a city of nearly a million citizens, with a specific emphasis on public order, crime and punishment. The author, Deniz Dölek-Sever, takes us through a six-chapter panorama of four years of hardship in the Ottoman capital during the war, analyzing various aspects of public order, crime and punishment as experienced daily by both Muslim and non-Muslim inhabitants of Istanbul, and as perceived by the state. In doing so, her study uncovers inner workings of state officials’ policies on public order and crime. Tracing instruments of surveillance and control and various crime categories, and making extensive use of primary sources, the work provides a unique understanding of public order and crime, as well as practices of punishment in a period when the Committee of Union and Progress reigned over the political life of the Ottoman Empire. Istanbul's Great War is an attempt to bring a fresh approach to the current literature on wartime Ottoman Empire.

This article surveys propaganda on the Ottoman home front during the Great War by focusing on the role of official and semi-official bodies, the means they used, and the ideological content to which they referred. Propaganda, mainly made by the Committee of Union and Progress, the ruling party in the Ottoman Empire during the Great War, addressed soldiers, young men who would be conscripted, as well as Muslim-Turkish women. During the first two years of the war, propaganda had the capacity to mobilize the targeted groups; however, from 1917, it began to lose its impact on Ottoman society due to worsening socioeconomic conditions.

When the Ottoman Empire entered the First World War, the process of modern state formation in the Ottoman Empire had already become evident through the emergence of an array of institutional and administrative structures. The war further contributed to that trend. On the one hand, the ruling party in the Ottoman Empire, the Committee of Union and Progress (hereafter CUP), benefited from several features of the modern state apparatus for its wartime policies. On the other hand, necessities of warfare and security led to further consolidation of the modern state in the Ottoman Empire. This paper takes a glimpse at such emerging state practices by paying special attention to travel regulations. The main argument of the paper is that travel regulations not only became a tool for social control in the hands of the state but also allowed the CUP government to be much more authoritarian. I will discuss this argument through a detailed analysis of the establishment of new institutions alongside with the much stricter implementation of surveillance policies. Despite lack of qualified personnel, in July 1915, a new security branch named Inspectorship of Security was founded under the Ministry of Interior. Furthermore, a new office called the Travel Office was established in the same year under the General Directorate of Security. The establishment of these institutions was remarkable for two reasons. First, due to the war conditions, the CUP government felt compelled to control the movements of its citizens as well as foreigners travelling to and inside the Ottoman Empire in a more systematic manner. Next, since all issues about travel would be under the control of these institutions, it was once more a centralization attempt in line with modern statecraft. In addition to the foundation of these institutions, the CUP government made a number of regulations about travel documents and passports in March 1915. The provisional laws regulating travel documents and passports conferred broad authority to the internal security forces under the Ministry of Interior to make binding decisions about 'illegal' acts of travelers. Furthermore, in 1917, the government promulgated a decree for the maintenance of public order. The first article of the decree stated that people who wanted to be tenants at bedsitters, hotels, apartment buildings etc., had to present a proper notification of identity to landlords, and landlords would in turn share this information with the security forces. The notifications of landlords, travel documents and passports would provide the war government detailed information about the population. Furthermore, provisional laws of travel documents and passports, and the decree on preparation of notifications about the newcomers had a number of articles concerning punitive sanctions. The government and the security forces implemented these articles in a resolute manner during the Great War. This paper is based on the documents of the Prime Ministry Ottoman Archives, Istanbul, and especially on the documents of the General Directorate of Security. In addition, it is based on legal codes about travel that were promulgated during the Great War.

Specifying what is criminal and delinquent is a consequence of a political process within which rules, regulations and laws are produced. Therefore, the punishment policies imposed by the modern states are closely related to how "crime" is perceived in a particular context. This paper focuses on perception of crime and practices of punishment of the Committee of Union and Progress (hereafter CUP), the ruling party in the Ottoman State during the First World War. In short, the context within which policies on crime and punishment are produced is the war context.

This article surveys propaganda on the Ottoman home front during the Great War by focusing on the role of official and semi-official bodies, the means they used, and the ideological content to which they referred. Propaganda, mainly made by the Committee of Union and Progress, the ruling party in the Ottoman Empire during the Great War, addressed soldiers, young men who would be conscripted, as well as Muslim-Turkish women. During the first two years of the war, propaganda had the capacity to mobilize the targeted groups; however, from 1917, it began to lose its impact on Ottoman society due to worsening socioeconomic conditions.

On dokuzuncu yüzyıl sonlarında Anadolu’da artan hayvan hırsızlığı vakalarının en sık görüldüğü vilayetlerden biri Kastamonu’ydu. Hayvan emeğine dayalı tarımsal faaliyetin temel geçim kaynağı olduğu bu mütevazi vilayetin sakinleri açısından hayvan hırsızlığı, sıradan adi bir suç olmanın ötesindeydi. 1890’lardan 1907’ye kadar yoğun şekilde devam eden hayvan hırsızlığı, bölge halkını ziraat yapamaz ve hayvancılıktan elde ettiği temel ihtiyaçlarını karşılayamaz hale getirdi. Bu koşullar altında daha fazla yaşamak istemeyen köylülerden bir kısmı başka bölgelere göç etmeyi düşünmeye başladı. Hayvan hırsızlığının hangi nedenlerden dolayı vilayetin belli bölgelerinde ve özellikle 1890-1907 tarihleri arasında yaygın bir suç haline geldiği ve niçin uzun yıllar boyunca engellenemediği, bu çalışmanın cevaplandırmaya çalıştığı temel araştırma sorularıdır. Bu soruları yanıtlamak için yapılan analiz, araştırmanın üç temel bulgusunu destekleyen verileri içermektedir. Hayvanların Osmanlı toplumundaki belirleyici rolünden yola çıkan bu makale, öncelikle geç dönem Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’nda, hayvanların tarihsel bir aktör olarak değerlendirilmesi gerektiği iddiasını taşımaktadır. Bu çalışma, öte yandan, hayvan hırsızlığı suçunu analiz ederken demografik, sosyoekonomik ve çevresel faktörleri içeren çok katmanlı nedenselliği ortaya koymanın önemine işaret etmektedir. Son olarak, bu suçun engellenmesi için uygulamaya konulan genel hukukî tedbirlerin yerel ölçekteki karşılığının saptanmasıyla, Osmanlı modernleşmesinin hukukî boyutunun farklı bir bakış açısıyla değerlendirilmesini önermektedir. Araştırma, Osmanlı Arşivi belgelerine, Kastamonu isimli vilayet gazetesine, vilayet salnamelerine ve 1890’lardan itibaren yayınlanmış olan çeşitli rapor ve kitaplara dayanmaktadır.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Hayvan hırsızlığı, Kastamonu vilayeti, demografi, çevresel faktörler, hukukî düzenlemeler

Animal theft cases increased in Anatolia during the late nineteenth century. Kastamonu was one of the Anatolian provinces where this crime was most frequent. For the residents of this modest province, where agricultural activity based on animal labor was the primary source of livelihood, animal theft was more than just a petty crime. The theft of animals, which continued intensely from the 1890s to 1907, made the region’s people unable to do agriculture and meet their basic needs from animal husbandry. Some villagers no longer desiring to live under these conditions considered migrating to other regions. There are two research questions that this study aims to answer: first, why animal theft became common in particular areas of Kastamonu, especially between 1890 and 1907; and second, why animal theft, which had disastrous effects on the region's people, emerged as a crime that spread over the years. The analysis conducted to answer these questions involves the data supporting the three main findings of the study. Based on the vital role of animals in Ottoman society, this article argues that animals should be considered a historical actor in the late Ottoman Empire. It also points out the importance of multi-layered causality, including demographic, socioeconomic, and environmental factors while analyzing animal theft. Finally, it proposes to examine the legal dimension of the Ottoman modernization from a unique perspective by determining the local repercussions of the general legal measures put into practice to prevent this crime. The research is based on Ottoman archival documents, the official newspaper of the province named Kastamonu, the provincial yearbooks, and various reports and books published since the 1890s.
Keywords: Animal theft, Kastamonu province, demography, environmental factors, legal regulations.

In the nineteenth century, the transformation of wild animals into commodities traded internationally presented a radical change in human-animal relations. Modern zoos, circuses, and traveling menageries that emerged in the process became the principal institutions of this change. Beginning in the 1880s, state officials of the Ottoman Empire tried to establish a zoo in Istanbul, considering its educational potential and contribution to the empire’s modern image. Although the project did not materialize, the intention to display exotic animal species in public places made the Ottoman lands a profitable market for European circuses and traveling menageries. This article analyses the shifts in the use of captive wild animals for visual purposes in the Ottoman Empire over time, with a focus on modern practices, and examines the cultural and historical background that facilitated the adoption of capitalist patterns of animal exhibitions and spectacles.

İnsan ile insan olmayan hayvan arasındaki ilişkiden bahsederken aslında farklı dönemlerde ve farklı hayvan türleriyle kurulan çoklu ilişki biçimlerinden bahsetmiş oluyoruz. Bu bildiri öncelikle insan-hayvan ilişkilerini doğru bir biçimde çözümleyebilmek için bu ilişkilerin tarihsel bağlamını dikkate almanın son derece önemli olduğunu öne sürmektedir. Diğer bir deyişle insan-hayvan ilişkisinin tarihselleştirilmesinin üzerinde durmaktadır. Hayvan tarihi araştırmaları, Avrupa ve Kuzey Amerika başta olmak üzere dünyanın çeşitli yerlerinde tarih yazımı içerisinde sağlam bir yer edinmiş olmasına rağmen Türkiye’deki tarih yazımında henüz yeni gelişen bir alandır. Oysaki hayvanların insan dışı varlıklar (nonhuman beings) olarak geçmişinden bahsetmek ve bu geçmişi hayvanların ana aktör olduğu bir anlatıyla yeniden inşa etmek eleştirel hayvan çalışmalarının bütünlüklü bir şekilde gelişebilmesi için son derece önemlidir. Bu nedenle hayvan tarihi esas olarak eleştirel hayvan çalışmaları ile son derece güçlü bağları olan bir araştırma alanı olarak da değerlendirilmelidir. Bildirinin ikinci argümanı buradan hareketle ortaya çıkmıştır: tarih metodolojisi açısından kimi tarihçiler için problemli görülen teorik yaklaşımların ve kavramsallaştırmaların tarih araştırmalarında kullanılmasının, hayvan tarihi söz konusu olduğunda son derece faydalı ve neredeyse kaçınılmaz olması. Bildiri, bu argümanı desteklemek üzere insan-hayvan ilişkisinin kavramsallaştırmasında biyopolitikanın nasıl bir rol oynayabileceği üzerinde duracaktır. Son olarak da insan-hayvan ilişkisinin tarihselleştirilmesi ve kavramsallaştırılmasının bir örneği olarak on dokuzuncu yüzyıl sonu ve yirminci yüzyıl başında Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’nda hayvan hırsızlığının engellenmesine dair hukuki düzenlemeler mercek altına alınacaktır.

During the nineteenth century, animals were gradually removed from the daily life of humans in urban centers by reference to issues of "hygiene" and "being unfunctional". Despite this change, the situation of animals in the Ottoman countryside had its particularities. As the Ottoman Empire had not achieved infrastructural modernization up to the final decades of its existence, interactions with animals in Anatolia continued to have a premodern character in the twentieth century. In other words, livestock remained the most valuable asset for people in Ottoman Anatolia at that time. Official correspondence between the administrative center and localities related to measures of animal theft prevention during the late nineteenth century and early twentiethcentury Ottoman Empire shows that this crime became a prominent factor affecting the lives of people in Anatolia. The present paper examines the legal regulations enacted to prevent animal theft in the late Ottoman Empire. Law has traditionally been a sphere under state monopoly with regard to regulating human-animal relations. Therefore, a detailed study of regulations on animal theft can illuminate several questions regarding the legal aspect of human-animal relations in the late Ottoman Empire. The present paper proceeds on two main axes. One is examining the measures for the spatial and physical control of animals to prevent animal theft. The other is evaluating the transformation of criminal law in the late Ottoman Empire based on the changing nature of punishments for the stealing of animals. This paper is based on Ottoman archival documents, the Penal Code of 1858, and other legal regulations related to animal theft.

In the nineteenth century, the transformation of wild animals into commodities traded internationally presented a radical change in human-animal relations. Modern zoos, circuses, and traveling menageries that emerged in the process became the principal institutions of this change. Beginning in the 1880s, state officials of the Ottoman Empire tried to establish a zoo in Istanbul, considering its educational potential and contribution to the empire’s modern image. Although the project did not materialize, the intention to display exotic animal species in public places made the Ottoman lands a profitable market for European circuses and traveling menageries. This article analyses the shifts in the use of captive wild animals for visual purposes in the Ottoman Empire over time, with a focus on modern practices, and examines the cultural and historical background that facilitated the adoption of capitalist patterns of animal exhibitions and spectacles.

The history of animals is a recently developing field in Ottoman studies that seeks to move away from an anthropocentric view and place the nonhuman animal as an agency at the center of historical explanation. Paradoxically, animal historians must rely on primary sources produced by humans, and it seems difficult to draw conclusions centered on nonhuman animals from these sources. This paper consists of two main parts that deal specifically with critical animal studies in Ottoman historiography. First, I will discuss the main themes and objectives of the history of animals in order to illustrate the various forms of relationships between humans and nonhuman animals, including livestock, working animals, nonhuman companions, and captive wild animals. It is obvious that any historical research that focuses on one of these categories will require the use of different primary sources in different ways. Second, to illustrate the points discussed in the first part, I will critically examine some primary sources, including archival documents and newspaper articles about captive wild animals.

The nineteenth century was a period of radical change in the relationship between humans and nonhuman animals. In this century, the Ottoman Empire also began to modernize in a variety of areas. Law was one of these fields. In this paper, I examine various legal texts and regulations that were introduced to prevent the theft of animals through a biopolitical analysis, considering the key role of legal regulations in reconstructing human-animal relations in the Anthropocene.
    From the 1870s onwards, the increasing cases of animal theft in various parts of the Ottoman country prompted both the central and local governments to take several legal measures to prevent this crime. Starting with a proclamation (ilanname) issued in 1872, the legal regulations did not lead to a decrease in thefts over the years. Therefore, a provisional law (geçici kanun) was issued in 1913, which provided for quite radical measures. In addition to these general measures, local legal regulations were also enacted in some provinces and sanjaks where cases of animal theft were frequent. When we analyze all these legal texts and regulations from the perspective of animal history by using the conceptual framework of biopolitics, we draw conclusions not only about the changing dynamics of the human-animal relationship in the nineteenth century, but also about the ways in which the state governed the animal and human species. To illustrate these conclusions, I evaluate legal regulations from two perspectives: as a means of information gathering, control and order; and as a means of discipline and punishment.
    In addition to secondary sources on biopolitics, this study is mainly based on Ottoman primary sources, including correspondence between the center and local governments, legal texts, and parliamentary records.