A Forgotten Diplomatic Front of World War I: Ethiopia

Belleten ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 71 (261) ◽  
pp. 757-768
Author(s):  
Kenan Tepedelen
Keyword(s):  
World War I ◽  
Ottoman Empire ◽  
Addis Ababa ◽  
World War ◽  
German Empire ◽  
Coup D'etat ◽  
Ethiopian Orthodox ◽  
History Of ◽  
Ethiopian Government ◽  
The Russian Empire

The First World War that caused the collapse of four Empires: the German Empire, the Austro-Hungarian Empire, the Russian Empire and the Ottoman Empire, is being remembered today as a pitiless conflict that caused the death of 8.700.000 soldiers and civilians and the rendering destitute of at least quite as many. Those who study the WWI tend to focus their attention upon the large battles that took place during the 1914-18 period but few realise the enormous struggle for influence over Ethiopia - the then only independent country, other than Liberia, on the African Continent - that took place between the Entente and the Central Powers and the intensity of diplomatic efforts made to draw Ethiopia into one camp or the other. The appointment of Ahmed Mazhar Bey, a previous director of the Translation Department at the Bâb-ı Ali (Sublime Porte) as Consul General of the Ottoman Empire in the eastern Ethiopian city of Harar and the subsequent transfer of the Consulate General to the Ethiopian capital Addis Ababa in 1914, led to important developments in the history of Ethiopia. Mazhar Bey who would demonstrate soon his skills of visionary in his position, was quick to realise the strategic advantages that would accrue from the alignment of Ethiopia to the ranks of the Central Empires. The Turkish Consul General's efforts towards this end were met favourably by Lidj Iyassou, the young de facto Emperor of Ethiopia, who, besides his sympathy for Islam, had developed a personal friendship with Mazhar Bey. The possible entry of Ethiopia to the war on the side of the Central Powers caused the Ambassadors of the Entente Powers (Great Britain, France and Italy) in Addis Ababa to take action and on September 10th 1916, the British, French and Italian Ministers made a joint "demarche" vis-avis the Ethiopian Government. The fruits of the Entente Powers' undertaking were soon to be harvested. The Archbishop of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church Abouna Matheos would, on the 27th September 1916, declare Prince Lidj Iyassou both deposed and excommunicated. Thus, the Addis Ababa "Coup d'Etat" of 27th September 1916, was going to change the course of the history of modern Ethiopia.

scholarly journals Manufacturing Germans: Singer Manufacturing Company and American Capitalism in the Russian Imagination during World War I

2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 301-323 ◽  
Author(s):  
BENJAMIN SAWYER
Keyword(s):  
World War I ◽  
Business Model ◽  
International Business ◽  
World War ◽  
History Of Capitalism ◽  
American Capitalism ◽  
History Of ◽  
National Affiliation ◽  
Central Argument ◽  
The Russian Empire

Just months after the outbreak of World War I, rumors spread throughout the Russian Empire that Singer Manufacturing Company’s wholly owned Russian subsidiary, Kompaniia Zinger, was a German company that was actively engaged in espionage on behalf of the German military. Even though these rumors were untrue, they unleashed a wave of actions against the company that Singer’s officials were unable to stop, ultimately leading to tremendous losses for the firm. The central argument of this article is that the power of the accusations of Singer’s German ties rested far more on the nature of the company’s business model than on the national affiliation of its personnel or evidence of espionage. In the context of World War I–era Russia, many Russians took Singer’s operations not as those of an international capitalist enterprise, but rather as evidence of the company’s questionable foreign character. This perspective helps us to understand why Singer’s management had such difficulty shaking the accusations of its German ties; if what was suspicious about the company was the very foundation of its business model, then its continued operation meant that it necessarily exhibited characteristics that reinforced the basis for said suspicion. These findings have implications for international business history, the history of late-Tsarist Russia, and the history of capitalism.

scholarly journals EDITORIAL FOREWORD

2015 ◽  
Vol 47 (2) ◽  
pp. 215-218
Author(s):  
Akram Khater ◽  
Jeffrey Culang
Keyword(s):  
World War I ◽  
Ottoman Empire ◽  
Political Power ◽  
16Th Century ◽  
World War ◽  
Cultural Encounter ◽  
History Of ◽  
Arabic Speaking ◽  
Constitutional Revolution ◽  
Editorial Foreword

This issue opens with two articles that explore “Ottoman Belonging” during two significant moments bookending the Ottoman past. The first of these moments is the Ottoman Empire's incorporation of Arab lands after its defeat of the Mamluk Sultanate in 1515–17; the second is the emergence of Ottoman imperial citizenship in the period between the 1908 Constitutional Revolution and World War I, which precipitated the empire's collapse. Helen Pfeifer's article, “Encounter after the Conquest: Scholarly Gatherings in 16th-Century Ottoman Damascus,” traces the intellectual component of the Ottoman Empire's absorption of formerly Mamluk subjects after rapidly conquering an immense territory stretching from Damascus to Cairo to Mecca. As Western European states expanded to control new territories and peoples, the Turkish-speaking Ottomans from the central lands (Rumis) had new encounters of their own—with the Arabic-speaking inhabitants of Egypt, Greater Syria, and the Hijaz. The conquest transferred the seat of political power in the Islamicate world from Cairo to Istanbul. Yet, as Pfeifer discusses, the Ottomans understood that their newly acquired political power had no parallel in cultural and religious domains, where prestige belonged predominantly to Arab scholars. Focusing on majālis (sing. majlis), or scholarly gatherings, in Damascus, Pfeifer traces “one of the greatest instances of knowledge transmission and cultural encounter in the history of the Ottoman Empire,” through which this asymmetry was overcome. By facilitating the circulation of books and ideas, she argues, scholarly gatherings—two depictions of which are featured on the issue’s cover—gave rise to an “empire-wide learned culture as binding as any political or administrative ingredient of the Ottoman imperial glue.”

scholarly journals Ethnic Cleansing and Its Alternatives in Wartime: A Comparison of the Austro-Hungarian, Ottoman, and Russian Empires

2017 ◽  
Vol 41 (4) ◽  
pp. 169-201 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Zeynep Bulutgil
Keyword(s):  
World War I ◽  
Ottoman Empire ◽  
Minority Groups ◽  
Russian Empire ◽  
Ethnic Violence ◽  
Ethnic Cleansing ◽  
Political Organizations ◽  
World War ◽  
South Caucasus ◽  
The Russian Empire

According to the extant literature, state leaders pursue mass ethnic violence against minority groups in wartime if they believe that those groups are collaborating with an enemy. Treating the wartime leadership of a combatant state as a coherent unit, however, is misleading. Even in war, leaders differ in the degree to which they prioritize goals such as maintaining or expanding the territory of the state, and on whether they believe that minority collaboration with the enemy influences their ability to achieve those goals. Also, how leaders react to wartime threats from minority groups depends largely on the role that political organizations based on non-ethnic cleavages play in society. Depending on those cleavages, wartime minority collaboration may result in limited deportations and killings, ethnic cleansing, or minimal violence. A comparison of the policies of three multinational empires toward ethnic minority collaborators during World War I—the Austro-Hungarian Empire and Italians, the Ottoman Empire and Armenians, and the Russian Empire and Muslims in the South Caucasus—illustrates this finding.

scholarly journals Rights and obligations of prisoners of war in the World War I and their observance in Lebedyn District of Kharkiv Province

2020 ◽  
pp. 7-14
Author(s):  
N.V. Lobko
Keyword(s):  
World War I ◽  
International Law ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Prisoners Of War ◽  
World War ◽  
Stage Of Development ◽  
The World ◽  
History Of ◽  
State Archives ◽  
The Russian Empire

History of World War I that due to its global consequences started a new stage of development of European civilization still draws attention of many researchers. One of the most interesting topics for researchers is the topic of war imprisonment during the World War I. Stay of prisoners of war in the territory of Ukraine is a scantily studied issue. The objects of this study are prisoners of war who were in Lebedyn district of Kharkiv province during the World War I (1914–1918). The subject of the research is the legal status of prisoners of war, the protection of their rights and the observance of their duties. The author analyzed norms of international law and Russian legislation for regulation conditions of war imprisonment during the period of war. Using materials of Lebedyn District of Kharkiv Province, being deposited in the archives of Sumy Region, the author examines the legal status of prisoners of war, the protection of their rights and the observance of their duties. The position of prisoners of war during the World War I on Ukrainian lands as part of the Russian Empire was determined by the norms of international law and Russian legislation for regulation conditions of war imprisonment during the period of war. Using the archival sources kept in funds of the State Archives of Sumy Region, it was found that the rights of prisoners of war were generally ensured on the territory of the Lebedyn District of Kharkiv Province. However, there were not a few cases when Austrian and German prisoners suffered from hunger, domestic inconvenience and abuse by employers. There were also repeated violations of their duties by prisoners of war. The most common violations were refusal to work, leaving the workplace.

The Underdevelopment of Development Literature: The Case of Dependency Theory

1979 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 247-288 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tony Smith
Keyword(s):  
Latin America ◽  
World War I ◽  
Ottoman Empire ◽  
Academic Writing ◽  
International System ◽  
Dependency Theory ◽  
World War ◽  
The North ◽  
History Of ◽  
Development Literature

As a vehicle for the growing association of southern nationalists and Marxists, dependency theory is an important part of the history of our times, something much more than a school of academic writing. Whatever the varieties of analysis existing within this school (and there are many), a major historiographie shortcoming is common to most of its literature: having grasped the Hegelian insight that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts, dependencistas exaggerate the point, making the mistake of refusing any autonomy, any specificity to the parts (southern countries) independently of their membership in the whole (the imperialist system established by the North). A better approach to the study of the place of the South in the international system is to emphasize the variety of state structures present there with their different abilities to mobilize forces internally and translate this into international rank. Southern advances are more substantial than many realize; the essay concludes that southerners should pay more attention to the real room for initiative and maneuver they have, but which dependency theory systematically overlooks. Most of the illustrative examples concern India, the Ottoman Empire, and Latin America before World War I.

The Lost Sanjaq

2008 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 217-251 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Nicolaus
Keyword(s):  
World War I ◽  
Russian Empire ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
World War ◽  
Northern Iraq ◽  
History Of ◽  
Sacred Image ◽  
The Russian Empire ◽  
East Anatolia ◽  
Detailed Picture

AbstractThe seven sanjaqs, or sacred images of Malak Tawus, are the most concrete expression of Yezidism and considered the holiest of the holy ritual objects of that religion. Only a handful of non-Yezidis have ever seen one, and very little is known about them. The latter holds, in particular, true with regard to the so-called Moskovi-sanjaq. Before World War I it was sent to the Russian Empire (East Anatolia and the Transcaucasus) every year, but was reported lost in 1914.Based on numerous interviews with Yezidis in Armenia, as well as on official correspondence between British, Iraqi, and Soviet authorities, the first part of the article reconstructs the odyssey of the Moskovi-sanjaq and the seven priests (qewwals) carrying it. It confirms that after 16 years of wandering through the Transcaucasus, five of the seven qewwals were eventually able to return via Odessa and London to the Yezidi heartland in Northern Iraq, but concludes that the Moskovi-sanjaq was ultimately lost in Georgia—confiscated by the Soviet authorities.The second part of the paper describes the history of a second sanjaq, which the author discovered in a village near Yerevan, secretly kept and protected from the prying eyes of non-Yezidis by a sheikhly family. Although all tales and myths, explaining how this second sanjaq arrived in Armenia, are examined and analysed, the origin of that sacred image remains mysterious. The article further paints a detailed picture of the cult, which evolved around the sacred image in Armenia as well as of the—sometimes savage—fights over its possession and the struggle of the keepers of the sanjaq with the Soviet authorities. In addition to interviews with eyewitnesses, the author bases his findings on court decisions and minutes of the councils of Yezidi elders, as well as information found at Yezidi graveyards.

scholarly journals During the first World War Germany and Austria –Hungary prisoners of the Aulie Ata county

2020 ◽  
pp. 83-90 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Apendiyev
Keyword(s):  
World War I ◽  
Living Will ◽  
Russian Empire ◽  
First World War ◽  
Prisoners Of War ◽  
World War ◽  
The First World War ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Russian Empire ◽  
First World

The First World War was the largest event in the history of mankind, which had a significant impact on the fate of many peoples, including states. One of the main factors was the capture of troops and individuals on the front of the war between warring states and the flight of soldiers as a result of the war. During the war, neighboring states, political allies captured each other's armies and citizens. The capture of citizens of each other took place between the Entente and the central powers. The Russian Empire, which was part of the Entente and was considered the main participant in the war, detained people from the central powers. Citizens of the central powers captured during the war were sent to all regions of the Russian Empire, which also extended to the steppe and Turkestan provinces. Based on this, the Turkestan Territory was considered one of the key regions of the Russian Empire, in which Europeans were accepted. In the era of the empire, European prisoners lived in the Aulie ata district of the Turkestan governor general in the SyrDarya region. Representatives of European nationality have lived in the region since the end of the nineteenth century, and this continued during the years of the First World War. During World War I, the Aulie atа district was considered one of the districts where European prisoners and refugees were received. Although the number of prisoners of war from the central powers (Germany, Austria-Hungary) in the Ayulie atа district is small, traces of political prisoners of war still remain from these states. The article discusses the history of prisoners of war deported to Aulie ata district during the war years. The socio-political status of the citizens of Germany and Austria-Hungary who arrived in Aulie atа County, their life is studied. The nationality and surname of the captives will be determined, and their standard of living will be determined.

scholarly journals DURING THE FIRST WORLD WAR GERMANY AND AUSTRIA – HUNGARY PRISONERS OF THE AULIEATA COUNTY

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (383) ◽  
pp. 218-225 ◽  
Author(s):  
Apendiyev T.А. ◽  
Abdukadyrov N.М.
Keyword(s):  
World War I ◽  
Living Will ◽  
Russian Empire ◽  
First World War ◽  
Prisoners Of War ◽  
World War ◽  
The First World War ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Russian Empire ◽  
First World

The First World War was the largest event in the history of mankind, which had a significant impact on the fate of many peoples, including states. One of the main factors was the capture of troops and individuals on the front of the war between warring states and the flight of soldiers as a result of the war. During the war, neighboring states, political allies captured each other's armies and citizens. The capture of citizens of each other took place between the Entente and the central powers. The Russian Empire, which was part of the Entente and was considered the main participant in the war, detained people from the central powers. Citizens of the central powers captured during the war were sent to all regions of the Russian Empire, which also extended to the steppe and Turkestan provinces. Based on this, the Turkestan Territory was considered one of the key regions of the Russian Empire, in which Europeans were accepted. In the era of the empire, European prisoners lived in the Aulieata district of the Turkestan governor general in the SyrDarya region. Representatives of European nationality have lived in the region since the end of the nineteenth century, and this continued during the years of the First World War. During World War I, the Aulieatа district was considered one of the districts where European prisoners and refugees were received. Although the number of prisoners of war from the central powers (Germany, Austria-Hungary) in the Aulieatа district is small, traces of political prisoners of war still remain from these states. The article discusses the history of prisoners of war deported to Aulieata district during the war years. The socio-political status of the citizens of Germany and Austria-Hungary who arrived in Aulieatа County, their life is studied. The nationality and surname of the captives will be determined, and their standard of living will be determined.

The First Postcolonial Nation in Europe? The End of the German Empire

2018 ◽  
pp. 101-122
Author(s):  
Andreas Eckert
Keyword(s):  
World War I ◽  
Third World ◽  
The Other ◽  
World War ◽  
German Empire ◽  
The Third ◽  
German Colonialism ◽  
Imperial Expansion ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Third World

Contrasting the ‘early’ decolonization imposed on defeated Germany after World War I with the subsequent creation of a Nazi Empire, dismantled after years of war and occupation, this chapter examines what made Germany’s twentieth century colonialism and its aftermath so different. It briefly points out why historians and politicians have ignored or downplayed Germany’s colonial past. It then looks at the variety of ways in which colonialism shaped interwar Germany and also discusses to what extent the Nazi Empire needs to be placed within the history of German colonialism, broadly defined. It also analyses how Germany shaped and was shaped by the end of the other European empires and the emergence of the ‘Third World’. In addition to the obvious consideration of ideological motivation, it also investigates the depth of popular support for imperial expansion and the ways in which Germany’s loss of empire has been articulated and understood.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document