Cpt. Robert Hofmann, Austrian Artillery Officer and Artist with the Ottomans in World War I

2021 ◽  
Vol 88 (3) ◽  
pp. 493-523
Author(s):  
Kent F. Schull

This article investigates the life, artwork, and experiences of Cpt. Robert Hofmann, an Austrian artillery officer and artist who fought with the Ottomans in the Levant from 1917 to 1919 during World War I and its immediate aftermath.  His experiences and artwork provide powerful and vivid insight into the life, times, and situations of war in the Middle East.  Unlike those of most of his European compatriots fighting with the Ottomans, his work and perspectives were from a distinctly non-Orientalist perspective as he sketched the flora and fauna, cityscapes, landscapes, and people he encountered while in the Ottoman Empire, particularly in the Levant.  His attention to detail and captivation by the everyday and mundane without an imperialist or Orientalist gaze begs explanation, particularly since he was a classically trained artist from the Imperial Academy of Fine Arts in Vienna.  This article asserts that the combination of his own marginalized identity as an assimilated Jewish soldier, his gifted artistic talent, attention to detail, and his direct and sustained experience in the Middle East enabled him to develop a deep sense of empathy and appreciation for the peoples, places, and environments of the Middle East. This enabled him to transcend the bigotry and dehumanizing views of non-Western peoples so prevalent among his compatriots and European powers of the time.

Author(s):  
S. S. Shchevelev

The article examines the initial period of the mandate administration of Iraq by Great Britain, the anti-British uprising of 1920. The chronological framework covers the period from May 1916 to October 1921 and includes an analysis of events in the Middle East from May 1916, when the secret agreement on the division of the territories of the Ottoman Empire after the end of World War I (the Sykes-Picot agreement) was concluded before the proclamation of Faisal as king of Iraq and from the formation of the country՚s government. This period is a key one in the Iraqi-British relations at the turn of the 10-20s of the ХХ century. The author focuses on the Anglo-French negotiations during the First World War, on the eve and during the Paris Peace Conference on the division of the territory of the Ottoman Empire and the ownership of the territories in the Arab zone. During these negotiations, it was decided to transfer the mandates for Syria (with Lebanon) to the France, and Palestine and Mesopotamia (Iraq) to Great Britain. The British in Iraq immediately faced strong opposition from both Sunnis and Shiites, resulting in an anti-English uprising in 1920. The author describes the causes, course and consequences of this uprising.


2001 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 383-409 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hakan Özoğlu

The era culminating in World War I saw a transition from multinational empires to nation-states. Large empires such as the Austro-Hungarian and the Ottoman searched for ways to cope with the decline of their political control, while peoples in these empires shifted their political loyalties to nation-states. The Ottoman Empire offers a favorable canvas for studying new nationalisms that resulted in many successful and unsuccessful attempts to form nation-states. As an example of successful attempts, Arab nationalism has received the attention that it deserves in the field of Middle Eastern studies.1 Students have engaged in many complex debates on different aspects of Arab nationalism, enjoying a wealth of hard data. Studies on Kurdish nationalism, however, are still in their infancy. Only a very few scholars have addressed the issue in a scholarly manner.2 We still have an inadequate understanding of the nature of early Kurdish nationalism and its consequences for the Middle East in general and Turkish studies in particular. Partly because of the subject's political sensitivity, many scholars shy away from it. However, a consideration of Kurdish nationalism as an example of unsuccessful attempts to form a nation-state can contribute greatly to the study of nationalism in the Middle East.


2002 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 59-85 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vahakn N. Dadrian

The wartime fate of the Ottoman Empire's Armenian minority continues to be controversial. The debate in the main revolves around the causes and nature of that fate. Some historians have alleged that what is involved is centrally organized mass murder—or, to use contemporary terminology, genocide. This school of thought maintains that the Ottoman authorities were waiting for a suitable opportunity to undertake the wholesale liquidation of the empire's Armenian population, and the outbreak of World War I provided that opportunity. The Committee of Union and Progress (CUP, or Unionists), who controlled the Ottoman government, they argue further, did in fact undertake this liquidation under cover of the war.1 Others, however, dispute these assertions, especially that of genocidal intent. This group maintains that Armenian acts of disloyalty, subversion, and insurrection in wartime forced the central government to order, for purposes of relocation, the deportation of large sections of the Armenian population. According to this argument, apart from those who were killed in “intercommunal” clashes—that is, a “civil war”—the bulk of the Armenian losses resulted from the severe hardships associated with poorly administered measures of deportations, including exhaustion, sickness, starvation, and epidemics. In other words, this school of thought holds that the Ottoman Empire, in the throes of an existential war, had no choice but to protect itself by resorting to drastic methods; therefore, the tragic fate of the Armenians must be understood in the context of the dire conditions of World War I.2 These views are encapsulated in the formula that the noted Middle East historian Bernard Lewis has used—namely, the desperate conditions of “an embattled empire.”3


1969 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark A. Larson

Despite the oft- used phrase, history does not repeat itself. What history does do, however, is offer us lessons. If we do not learn history’s lessons, we will repeat the mistakes of history thereby making it appear that history is indeed repeating itself. Nowhere is this more clear than in the Middle East. To find historical lessons in the Middle East, one should begin by studying the events of World War I. It was during World War I that the composition of the Middle East changed from the indirectly ruled Ottoman Empire, to the collection of nation states that we know today. It is quite fashionable to blame Britain for the outcome of, and all future problems with, this new Middle East. It has become more fashionable to transform the blame in the present age to the United States. In this paper, I will analyze British involvement in the Middle East; beginning with the contradictory wartime agreements that Britain made which would eventually change the shape of the Middle East. I will argue that the problems in the Middle East cannot be blamed solely, or even mostly, on the British or on the Western power who had inherited this blame, the United States. In conclusion, I will develop lessons of history from this period of British involvement in the Middle East; lessons that the United States has yet to learn.


2016 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 72
Author(s):  
İrfan Karakoç

<p>Cenap Şahabettin (1871-1934) is generally accepted as a part of the Servet-i Fünûn literary movement which was popular between 1896 and 1901 in the Ottoman Empire. He is well-known as a poet but he had written prose as well. He worked for the Ottoman government as a high ranking executive in Arabic countries and wrote several books during his mission and ensuing travels. <em>Hac Yolunda</em> (On the way to Mecca), <em>Âfâk-ı Irak</em> (Horizons of Iraq) are his travel books. He also published two travel notes under the titles of “Suriye Mektupları” (Letters from Syria) and <em>Beyrut, Filistin ve Nablus İzlenimleri 1918</em> (Impressions from Beirut, Palestine and Nablus 1918). This article focuses mainly on the abovementioned works of the writer. All the works were written between 1896 and 1918, and this period in the history was quite an important one for the Middle East and the Ottoman Empire where significant historical events occurred. The Ottoman Empire was coming to an end, the World War I was effecting every aspect of life and Middle East was taking a new shape. Subject matter of this work, as a result of the period, bound to mention modernity, identity policies, and nation building discourses and practices. These works are important since they provide enough information to find out the writer’s attitude towards the local Arabs, his approach to the common, conventional prejudices, and his own newly created biases. Edward Said’s Orientalism, Ussama Makdisi’s “Rethinking Ottoman Imperialism: Modernity, Violence and the Cultural Logic of Ottoman Reform” and “Ottoman Orientalism” and Selim Deringil’s <em>The Well-Protected Domains: Ideology and the Legitimation of Power in the Ottoman Empire 1876-1909</em> are the main works that used to examine the texts in hand in details.</p><p> </p><p><strong>Özet</strong></p><p>Edebiyat tarihçileri tarafından Servet-i Fünûn dönemi edebiyatı (1896-1901) içerisinde değerlendirilen, düzyazı eserleri olmakla birlikte daha çok şairliğiyle tanınan Cenap Şahabettin (1871-1934), Osmanlı yönetimi altındaki Arap ülkelerinde uzun yıllar yönetici olarak çalışmıştır. Bu görevlerinin ve daha sonra yaptığı seyahatlerin ürünü olarak da <em>Hac Yolunda </em>adlı kitabı<em>, Âfâk-ı Irak</em>, “Suriye Mektupları” ve son olarak ise Beyrut, <em>Filistin ve Nablus İzlenimleri 1918</em> adıyla bir araya getirilen seyahat notlarını yayımlamıştır.</p><p>Bu çalışma, Cenap Şahabettin’in adı geçen eserlerini odağa almayı amaçlamaktadır. Kuşkusuz bu eserlerin anlatı mekânı Orta Doğu’dur ve yazılar 1896-1918 gibi bölge ve dünya siyaseti için çok önemli tarihler arasında üretilmiştir. Konu Osmanlı’nın son yılları, I. Dünya Savaşı, Orta Doğu gibi hem siyasal hem de tarihsel mekânları içerdiğinden ilk akla gelen konular elbette modernleşme, kimlik politikaları ve uluslaşma süreci söylem ve pratikleri olacaktır. İşte bu bağlamdan hareketle, önemli bir Osmanlı şairinin kimlik algısını belirlemek, bölge insanına özellikle de Arap halklarına bakışını, üretilmiş imgelere yaklaşımını görmek, kendi ürettiği imgeleri yorumlamak açısından belirtilen eserler ve yazılar büyük değer taşımaktadır. Bu metinler, özellikle Edward Said’in  <em>Şarkiyatçılık: Batının Şark Anlayışları</em> adlı kitabı, Ussama Makdisi’nin “Rethinking Ottoman Imperialism: Modernity, Violence and the Cultural Logic of Ottoman Reform” ile “Ottoman Orientalism” yazıları ve Selim Deringil’in <em>İktidarın Sembolleri ve İdeoloji: II. Abdülhamid Dönemi (1876-1909)</em> adlı çalışması temel alınarak yorumlanacaktır.</p>


Author(s):  
Adeed Dawisha

With each day that passed after the 2003 invasion, the United States seemed to sink deeper in the treacherous quicksand of Iraq's social discord, floundering in the face of deep ethno-sectarian divisions that have impeded the creation of a viable state and the molding of a unified Iraqi identity. Yet as this book shows in this superb political history, the story of a fragile and socially fractured Iraq did not begin with the American-led invasion—it is as old as Iraq itself. The book traces the history of the Iraqi state from its inception in 1921 following the collapse of the Ottoman Empire and up to the present day. It demonstrates how from the very beginning Iraq's ruling elites sought to unify this ethnically diverse and politically explosive society by developing state governance, fostering democratic institutions, and forging a national identity. The author, who was born and raised in Iraq, gives rare insight into this culturally rich but chronically divided nation, drawing on a wealth of Arabic and Western sources to describe the fortunes and calamities of a state that was assembled by the British in the wake of World War I and which today faces what may be the most serious threat to survival that it has ever known. Featuring the author's insightful new afterword on recent political developments, Iraq is required reading for anyone seeking to make sense of what's going on in Iraq today, and why it has been so difficult to create a viable government there.


Author(s):  
Odile Moreau

This chapter explores movement and circulation across the Mediterranean and seeks to contribute to a history of proto-nationalism in the Maghrib and the Middle East at a particular moment prior to World War I. The discussion is particularly concerned with the interface of two Mediterranean spaces: the Middle East (Egypt, Ottoman Empire) and North Africa (Morocco), where the latter is viewed as a case study where resistance movements sought external allies as a way of compensating for their internal weakness. Applying methods developed by Subaltern Studies, and linking macro-historical approaches, namely of a translocal movement in the Muslim Mediterranean, it explores how the Egypt-based society, al-Ittihad al-Maghribi, through its agent, Aref Taher, used the press as an instrument for political propaganda, promoting its Pan-Islamic programme and its goal of uniting North Africa.


2014 ◽  
Vol 46 (4) ◽  
pp. 791-793
Author(s):  
Dina Rizk Khoury

I write this piece as Iraq, following Syria, descends into a civil war that is undermining the post–World War I state system and reconfiguring regional and transnational networks of mobilization and instrumentalizations of violence and identity formation. That the Middle East has come to this moment is not an inevitable product of the artificiality of national borders and the precariousness of the state system. It is important to avoid this linear narrative of inevitability, with its attendant formulations of the Middle East as a repository of a large number of absences, and instead to locate the current wars in a specific historical time: the late and post–Cold War eras, marked by the agendas of the Washington Consensus and the globalization of neoliberal discourses; the privatization of the developmental and welfare state; the institutional devolution and multiplication of security services; and the entrenchment of new forms of colonial violence and rule in Israel and Palestine and on a global scale. The conveners of this roundtable have asked us to reflect on the technopolitics of war in the context of this particular moment and in light of the pervasiveness of new governmentalities of war. What I will do in this short piece is reflect on the heuristic and methodological possibilities of the study of war as a form of governance, or what I call the “government of war,” in light of my own research and writing on Iraq.


2021 ◽  
Vol 88 (3) ◽  
pp. 525-568
Author(s):  
Johann Strauss

This article examines the functions and the significance of picture postcards during World War I, with particular reference to the war in the Ottoman Lands and the Balkans, or involving the Turkish Army in Galicia. After the principal types of Kriegspostkarten – sentimental, humorous, propaganda, and artistic postcards (Künstlerpostkarten) – have been presented, the different theatres of war (Balkans, Galicia, Middle East) and their characteristic features as they are reflected on postcards are dealt with. The piece also includes aspects such as the influence of Orientalism, the problem of fake views, and the significance and the impact of photographic postcards, portraits, and photo cards. The role of postcards in book illustrations is demonstrated using a typical example (F. C. Endres, Die Türkei (1916)). The specific features of a collection of postcards left by a German soldier who served in Turkey, Syria, and Iraq during World War I will be presented at the end of this article.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document