Hans-Lukas Kieser , Kerem Öktem and Maurus Reinkowski (eds): World War I and the End of the Ottomans: From the Balkan Wars to the Armenian Genocide. xvi, 304 pp. London: I.B. Tauris, 2015. £62. ISBN 978 1 78453 246 8.

2016 ◽  
Vol 79 (3) ◽  
pp. 652-654
Author(s):  
Andrew Patrick
PMLA ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 131 (5) ◽  
pp. 1515-1518
Author(s):  
Hülya Adak

Since 2001, I Have Been Teaching Courses in Cultural Studies, European and Turkish Literature, Modern Drama, and Gender and sexuality studies at Sabancı University in Istanbul. During my fifteen years of teaching undergraduate and graduate students, the Armenian genocide was a particularly challenging theme to bring into the classroom. Even at Sabancı University, one of the rare liberal universities in Turkey to offer courses that challenge Turkish national myths, most students, including those who graduated from “liberal” high schools, had received a nationalist education and came to college either not knowing anything about the Armenian genocide or denying it altogether. Denial of the Armenian genocide is still pervasive in Turkey; 1915 is identified in history textbooks as the year of the Battle of Gallipoli, the most important Ottoman victory against the British and French naval forces during World War I. For most of the twentieth century and up until 2005, when the seminal Ottoman Armenians Conference opened a public discussion of the topic, silence regarding the deportation and genocide of the Ottoman Armenians prevailed. If denialist myths in Turkey acknowledge the deaths of the Ottoman Armenians, they justify such deaths as “retaliation” for the deaths of Turkish Muslims during the Balkan Wars of 1912 and 1913 or equate the massacres of Armenians with Turkish casualties of war from the same period. For instance, Talat Paşa, the mastermind behind the deportations and massacres of roughly one million Armenians in 1915-16, argues in his memoirs that an equal number of Turks were killed by Armenians during World War I and in its aftermath (51-56).


2013 ◽  
Vol 55 (3) ◽  
pp. 522-553 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lerna Ekmekcioglu

AbstractThis article explores a forcible, wartime transfer of women and minors from one ethnic group to another, and its partial reversal after the war. I analyze the historical conditions that enabled the original transfer, and then the circumstances that shaped the reverse transfer. The setting is Istanbul during and immediately after World War I, and the protagonists are various influential agents connected to the Ottoman Turkish state and to the Armenian Patriarchate. The absence and subsequent involvement of European Great Powers determines the broader, shifting context. The narrative follows the bodies of women and children, who were the subjects of the protagonists' discourses and the objects of their policies. This is the first in-depth study to connect these two processes involved: the wartime integration of Armenian women and children into Muslim settings, and postwar Armenian attempts to rescue, reintegrate, and redistribute them. I explain why and how the Armenian vorpahavak (gathering of orphans and widows) worked as it did, and situate it comparatively with similar events. I highlight its uniqueness, and the theoretical possibilities that it offers toward understanding why and how women, children, and reproduction matter to collectivities in crisis.


2021 ◽  
pp. 81-106
Author(s):  
Emily Greble

The Balkan Wars of 1912–1913 and World War I shattered the social fabric of Ottoman Europe and led to a radical revision of the region’s political boundaries. How did experiences of successive traumas—expulsions, famine, disease, massacres, and new occupation regimes—shape Muslims’ understandings of the European project and their experiences within it? This chapter analyzes this catastrophic era from diverse Muslim perspectives. It reveals how many Muslims found legal promises of political equality and rights ambiguous and intangible, and instead sought to define their own terms of political belonging. They wanted autonomy, confessional sovereignty, and the protection of Islamic institutions and property.


2008 ◽  
Vol 34-35 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 219-244
Author(s):  
Martin Ivanov

This article aims at a reconstruction of reliable estimates of Bulgarian GNP growth. The main methodological point of reference is a work published in the 1940s by a contemporary Bulgarian economist, Asen Chakalov. Given the sophistication of Chakalov’s estimates and the desirability of chaining new data onto his estimate for 1924, the article’s methodology consists in the first instance in replicating his figure for 1924 on the basis of original sources and then using these same sources to create a series of properly documented estimates for the years between 1892 and 1924. To provide a meaningful comparison over the long run between 1892 and 1945, we must allow for price changes, population change, and the impact of territorial redistribution in the course of the Balkan Wars and World War I. The results are striking. For 1924 a reassuring match with Chakalov’s estimate is achieved. The new GNP series indicates that the Bulgarian economy did not achieve staggering results during the period in review—an average of 0.93% on a yearly basis. True, there were sub-periods in which the GNP was growing a bit faster (2.76% between 1899 and 1905, and 2.16% during 1905-1911); however, this is both a misleading (due to the low base of the crisis of 1899) and an unsustainable conclusion. Inserting the population factor into the picture makes the situation even more dismal. In per capita terms Bulgaria achieved a negative growth rate of –0.32% annually. The economy fell behind the population increase, which turned out to be a serious obstacle for switching over to a higher gear.


2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 136-141
Author(s):  
Strahinja Babić ◽  
Aleksandra Marjanović ◽  
Gordana Stanković-Babić ◽  
Nevena Babić ◽  
Rade Babić

Dr. Eva Haljecka, a Jew of Polish origin, was born on 1869 in Poland, died on 1949 in Yugoslavia, Belgrade, was the first woman surgeon and gynecologist-obstetrician in Serbia and Yugoslavia. Carried out on 1910 the first caesarean section in Niš. She was a duty manager in district hospital in Niš in three occasions - during the Balkan wars, in the World War I and after the World War I. Dr. Eva Haljecka was the first woman doctor of that time in Serbia who seek the full equality beetween male and female doctors and she was awarded for that. German newspaper Illustrirte Zeitung wrote about her and also about other women doctors - Draga Ljočić, Darinka Maletić-Banković, Marija Vučetić-Prita and Ljubica Đurić. Dr. Eva Haljecka accepted Serbia as a new homeland and made it for her all that he could.


2015 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 94-106
Author(s):  
Билјана [Biljana] Ристовска-Јосифовска [Ristovska-Josifovska]

The Balkan wars and the projections about Macedonia (Macedonian view) The main focus of this paper is the time just before and during the Balkan Wars (1912– 1913), analyzed through the public writings of the Macedonian emigrants in Russia. We focus on their attitude, opinions and interpretations of the political events, as well as the reactions to the decisions of the great powers – as an expression of the Macedonian view to the Balkan Wars and the projections about Macedonia. In this context it is interesting to see whether they concern the national question and how they articulate the opinions on reception of the results of the Balkan Wars.The attention of the Macedonians was pointed almost exclusively to the national problem and the Balkan Wars, even after the beginning of the World War I. They were engaged in find­ing a solution for the Macedonian national question and the realization of the idea for national state. At the same time they were displaying in the Russian public their understanding of the political events and their attitude: warning about the possible partition, demanding a support for foundation of a Macedonian state and protesting against the partition.But, besides the organized intellectuals in emigration, the Macedonian national question remained at the margins of the interests of the great powers of Europe or has been used as a tool for solving other political questions. The appeals of the Macedonian intellectuals were not enough influential and Macedonia entered in World War I with all the consequences: the confirmation of the borders from the separation and the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. This very difficult and complicated period lasted up to the foundation of the national state in World War II at the territory of today’s Republic of Macedonia. Wojny bałkańskie i wizje Macedonii (perspektywa macedońska) W artykule – na podstawie analizy publicznych wystąpień macedońskich emigrantów w Rosji, ich poglądów politycznych, opinii i interpretacji wydarzeń politycznych, jak również reakcji na decyzje wielkich mocarstw – podjęto zagadnienia związane z okresem wojen bał­kańskich 1912–1913 i ukazano macedońską perspektywę kwestii macedońskiej. Zaprezento­wano też ważne problemy odnoszące się do sposobu traktowania spraw narodowych i sposobu artykułowania stanowisk wobec następstw tych wojen.Uwaga Macedończyków, nawet po wybuchu I wojny światowej, kierowała się niemal wyłącznie na kwestie narodowe i wojny bałkańskie. Ich zaangażowanie sprowadzało się do poszukiwania rozwiązań spraw narodu macedońskiego i prób urzeczywistnienia idei wła­snego państwa. Środowiska emigrantów prezentowały przed rosyjską opinią publiczną swoje rozumienie zachodzących wydarzeń politycznych, by zapobiec podziałowi terytorium, a jed­nocześnie poszukiwać wsparcia dla koncepcji utworzenia państwa macedońskiego.Macedońska kwestia narodowa, podejmowana przez pozostającą na emigracji inteligencję macedońską, pozostawała na marginesie zainteresowań wielkich mocarstw europejskich lub była wykorzystywana instrumentalnie do rozwiązywania innych problemów politycznych. Apele intelektualistów macedońskich nie wywarły wpływu na sytuację międzynarodową. Macedończycy przystąpili do I wojny światowej z wszystkimi tego konsekwencjami – za­twierdzonymi granicami podzielonego terytorium. Ten trudny i skomplikowany okres trwał aż do utworzenia państwa narodowego w czasie II wojny światowej na obszarze obecnej Re­publiki Macedonii.


Author(s):  
Nikolay Aretov ◽  
Nadiia Boiko

Related notions of war and revolution are not something primordial and constant. They are constructed and constantly changing. The paper traces some aspects of these processes in the mentality of the 19th and early 20th century Bulgarians, with attention to their Balkan context. The lack of the own state for a long period of time (1396–1878) determined the initial negative image of the war. For the Bulgarians of the late 18th and early 19th centuries a war was something definitely negative, as it brings death, troubles, and disasters; it was also something alien or external as only few of them were recruited in the Ottoman army. The wars between Russia and Ottoman Empire generated some hopes for independence among certain elite groups of society (although not so much among common people). The Greek War for Independence (started in 1821) and other uprisings in European dominions of Turkey had their impact on Bulgarians. The idea of revolution grew in the 1860s and 1870s within the group of radicals, mainly the alumni of Russian Universities and high schools. Literature played a serious role in this process, and April uprising (1876), not without some debates, was represented as ‘revolution’ in the last decades of the 19th century. The two notions were mixed after the Russian-Turkish Liberation War (1877–78), especially in later interpretations. The newly established Principality of Bulgaria lived in constant threat (real or imagined) of Ottoman invasion and soon got drawn into the war with Serbia (1885) which contributed to creating the fully positive image of a patriotic war. This image persisted during the First (1912–1913) and Second (1913) Balkan wars, called in Bulgaria ‘inter-allied’. The defeat motivated to shift the image of war from something patriotic to something making the ordinary people suffer. This was a gradual change catalyzed by the World War I (1914–18) that made the previous image problematic. The notion of revolution that was previously associated only with the past (1876, 1878) also shifted and became associated in some leftist minds with the future as well. First and still shy anti-war humanitarian ideas appeared; the last poems of Dimcho Debelianov (1887–1916), who died in the war, were the most representative examples of this trend.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document