Sue L Posted 2 October , 2018 Share Posted 2 October , 2018 Hi Should I refer to TURKEY or THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE when talking about the country during WW1? For example, which of these did Britain and France declare war on in Nov 1914?? Thanks Sue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seaJane Posted 2 October , 2018 Share Posted 2 October , 2018 This is what Wikipedia entry for Ottoman entry into World War I, followed by the entry on Turkey, says (not that it's necessarily right, and this is an area in which Wikipedia is rather vulnerable to political editing) - 1. "Russia's allies, Britain and France, then declared war on the Ottoman Empire on 5 November 1914." 2. "Following the war, the conglomeration of territories and peoples that formerly comprised the Ottoman Empire was partitioned into several new states. The Turkish War of Independence, initiated by Mustafa Kemal Atatürk and his colleagues against occupying Allies, resulted in the abolition of monarchy in 1922 and the establishment of the Republic of Turkey in 1923, with Atatürk as its first president." sJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emrezmen Posted 2 October , 2018 Share Posted 2 October , 2018 (edited) The name "Turkey" was in use during WW1 (actually its origin dates back to 12th century. Maybe older). You can see it especially in personal correspondences between high-ranking officials, BUT it wasn't "official" name of the country. Although I'm not an authority, I can easily say that the "Ottoman Empire" would be a more appropriate naming. Today, we generally use the term "Ottoman Empire/State" in Turkey while talking about that period. The terms "Turk" and "Turkey" became "official" in 1923-24 (actually the term 'State of Turkey' was first used in Constitution of 1921 but there wasn't a proper country in that time). The same goes for defining the citizenship. We should use the term "Ottoman" rather than "Turkish" while referring to, for example, soldiers. Edited 2 October , 2018 by emrezmen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 3 October , 2018 Share Posted 3 October , 2018 Mate, What I found interesting is the continued use of the word "Constantinople" not Istanbul, even in Ottoman works, when the former is correct. S.B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gilly100 Posted 3 October , 2018 Share Posted 3 October , 2018 Former or latter Steve. I'm confused🤔 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 3 October , 2018 Share Posted 3 October , 2018 OK Latter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sue L Posted 4 October , 2018 Author Share Posted 4 October , 2018 Thanks everyone. I had seen the Wikipedia entry mentioned above but I always prefer to get things on that site confirmed by the experts on this one! Sue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Filsell Posted 5 October , 2018 Share Posted 5 October , 2018 Both are equally acceptable. As an author wrote in the preface of a recent book, "In this work I refer both th the Otoman Empire, its proper name, as well as the more commonly used name of Turkey. He also uses the term Turks for that empire's Arab and Circassian troops. I don't see either as an issue - if it was some of the more disputatious users of the forum would have had a ding dong over it before. Thought. Have they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sue L Posted 6 October , 2018 Author Share Posted 6 October , 2018 That's a great suggestions David - thanks Love the word "disputatious" too! Sue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heid the Ba Posted 6 October , 2018 Share Posted 6 October , 2018 Istanbul or Constantinople can depend on which alphabet you are writing it in, so both can be correct during the Great War. It is a long time since I looked at this but my recollection is that it was only standardised post-war as Istanbul. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michaeldr Posted 6 October , 2018 Share Posted 6 October , 2018 The Turks themselves seem to be comfortable with both see their use here Turkish conf on WW1 documents.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sue L Posted 6 October , 2018 Author Share Posted 6 October , 2018 thanks again to everyone who has replied to this question Sue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Clifton Posted 6 October , 2018 Share Posted 6 October , 2018 As I recall, the author of the Official History for the Mesopotamia campaign resolved a similar dispute further south with the rather pithy sentence "The name of the country was, and is, Iraq." What people call their countries and what other people call them is an ongoing issue, e.g. Burma/Myanmar. Ron Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 7 November , 2018 Share Posted 7 November , 2018 "Turkey" and "Ottoman" are different states. Some historians have used his name instead of turkey Ottomans, Turkey was founded on 29.10.1923. The Ottoman Empire, was destroyed in the supporter that had Turkey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Kirkland Posted 7 November , 2018 Share Posted 7 November , 2018 On 03/10/2018 at 01:36, stevebecker said: Mate, What I found interesting is the continued use of the word "Constantinople" not Istanbul, even in Ottoman works, when the former is correct. S.B Lanarkshire yeomanry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now