ATATÜRK'S UNDERSTANDING OF HISTORY

SUMMARY

Immediately after the National Struggle, Atatürk embarked on radical reform movements. The studies were about content rather than form. He wanted the Turkish Nation to take its rightful place among the nations of the world. On the one hand, the foundations of the newly established country were being built, on the other hand, he was making great efforts to improve the prestige and position of the country abroad. XX. At the beginning of the century, the West treated the entire Eastern world, naturally the Turks, as second-class people, and expressed this attitude at every opportunity. Knowing this situation closely, Mustafa Kemal wanted to oppose the accusations that sometimes reach the level of insult, to introduce the real identity of the Turkish Nation to the world, to get rid of the chronological history understanding that exists in the country, He decided to carry out intensive history studies in order to move to the understanding of social history. As a result of the studies, “Turkish History Thesis” was put forward. It was revealed that Turkish history is not limited to Islamic or Ottoman history, and that there is a pre-Islamic Turkish history full of successes as much as post-Islamic history. He stated that history is not just about chronology, and assigned Turkish historians the task of revealing the human side of history in line with a work plan that aims to reveal the culture and civilization of Turkish history. For this purpose, he founded the Turkish Historical Society in 1931. Drawing attention to both the national and universal aspects of history, he strongly emphasized the necessity of using history for friendship and peace among nations. His interest in history never waned until his death in 1938.

Entrance

XIX. Starting from the second half of the century, some Ottoman intellectuals were influenced by the idea of ​​nationalism. According to these intellectuals, the salvation of the state could only be achieved by bringing the Turks, the main group on which it was based, to the fore in every field. According to them, Turkism had to be adopted and put into practice. Because when compared to other nations under the rule of the state, only Turks who fulfilled the task assigned to them and ran from front to front were only Turks1. For this reason, the Turks2, who had been underestimated and not taken into account until then, should have come to the place they deserve in state institutions. Although these thoughts came to the fore from time to time, the Ottoman Empire could not find a full application area as long as it continued its existence. Turkish intellectuals had to make a new assessment. Because the state had lost a great deal of land, the much-anticipated jihad declaration did not work, it only caused the British to be a little alarmed. This development symbolized the end of the psychological superiority of the Ottoman Empire and its ruler, the caliph, in the Islamic world. The last Ottoman Parliament, which gathered under the pressure of the developing events and the Struggle for Independence in Anatolia, declared the places with the Turkish population as the "homeland" and the aim to be achieved as the "national borders". This attitude was an important political and intellectual transformation. The state, which saw itself as an empire until that day, determined a national border for itself and envisaged saving those lands and not advancing further. Thus, the last Ottoman assembly set the unitary state structure based on a single nation and bordered by Anatolia as its target. This target was put forward by Mustafa Kemal in 1918, but it was not implemented because it was not approved by the sultan Vahdettin4.

The reason that forced the Ottoman Parliament to take such a decision and to accept the borders of a national homeland was the work of Mustafa Kemal in Anatolia. Mustafa Kemal strongly emphasized two things in Amasya, which we can count as the beginning of the Independence Struggle: "nation" and "homeland". Nation and homeland meant the Turkish nation and the Turkish homeland, namely Anatolia. The issues that were emphasized in Amasya were also expressed with the same force and determination at the Erzurum and Sivas congresses5.

At the end of the Independence Struggle, which passed with great sacrifices, the borders accepted in the “National Pact” were reached and the establishment of the new Turkish State was announced to the whole world on 29 October 1923. The young republic has taken its place among the independent world states by clinching its success in the battlefields in Lausanne, as well as in the political arena. However, as Mustafa Kemal said, “the war was just beginning”. The country and the nation were waiting for service in every field. But more importantly, it was necessary to give the consciousness of the nation to the people who had lived as subjects until that time. For this, it was necessary to educate the people first and raise them to the level of modern life in the world. It was a very difficult experience to create a nation from people who were brought up in the imperial mentality. For this reason, Atatürk started to research and research the history that would help him the most while carrying out this experience. This was not the only reason why he turned to historical studies. European historians sometimes attacked the Turkish nation in a way that would insult the Turkish nation in their works, but they could not be given the necessary answers. Mustafa Kemal believed that historical studies were inevitable in order to reveal the groundlessness of these attacks as soon as possible.

A. Reasons for Atatürk to Do Historical Researches

1. Claims of Western Historians

a. Allegations that Turks Are From the Yellow Race

At the end of the new age in Europe, people in the world were classified as advanced and retarded. According to the claimants, the most intelligent race was the white race. Then came those who belonged to the yellow, black and red race. Researches on this subject started to claim that Turks belonged to the yellow race. The fact that the Turks were of the yellow race meant that they lacked intelligence. Since there was no serious anthropological study in our country until the Republican years, there were no scientists to respond to this claim. Some local writers using the works of Western historians also argued that the Turks belonged to the yellow race. Afet Inan's account on the subject is as follows: “In 1928, in one of the French geography books, It was written that the Turkish race belonged to the yellow race and was a second kind of human type according to the European mentality. I showed it to him. Is that so? I said. “No, no, let's get busy on this. You work," they said. In order to reject all these misunderstandings and accusations, extensive research has begun to determine the racial group to which the Turkish race belongs7. Atatürk announced the first results of his intensive history research in his speech at the Turkish Hearths Congress in 1930. The Turkish History Research Society was established on April 15, 1931, just after that8. In 1937, Afet Inan made the most comprehensive head measurement on this subject and proved that the Turkish race belongs to the white race9. However, despite the studies and the refutation of the theses of Western historians,

b. Negative Thoughts About Turks

Anthropological claims did not suffice to explain that Turks were far from civilized development. Adam Smith, who was admired and appreciated by Western historians and politicians, filled the void left by anthropology. Smith claimed that human history passed through four stages: hunting, animal husbandry, agriculture and trade. He noted that Black African and North American Indians were in the hunting stage, Central Asian peoples were in the nomadic stage, and most of the Eastern world was in the farming stage. He acknowledged that only Western Europe is in the fourth and final stage. As a result of Smith's claims, it was accepted that all parts of the world other than Europe were devoid of civilization. The West took action to civilize the rest of the world and colonized the world in exchange for civilization. Allegedly, the Turks were either included in the second or third group. For this reason, it was necessary to bring and teach civilization to the Turks and the Ottomans, who were the Turkish State. With this idea, the West advanced until the 1920s, but could not achieve the desired success against the Turkish nation. With Braudel's on-the-spot determination, only Turkey was left out of the common destiny. The sudden and brilliant reaction of Mustafa Kemal both ensured independence and set an example for other Islamic countries11.

In addition to the above claims, some psychological factors have also led to negative judgments about Turks. Some travelers who visited the Ottoman lands talked about the evil and barbarism of the Turks. These thoughts of theirs cost their nation and caused the Turks to be perceived as “barbarian, ignorant, vulgar” people in Western public opinion12. For example, XVIII. The French traveler Volney, who visited Egypt at the end of the century, did not see any harm in writing openly that Egypt and the Egyptians should be saved from the tyrant and cruel Turks13. According to Cahen, the reason for this hatred was that the Ottomans fought with Europe more than any other eastern nation and threatened Christianity. Cahen's determination is stated in the preface of the high school history textbooks prepared in the first years of the Republic. At the beginning of the work, it is stated that "with the feeling of enmity caused by the Islam-Christian lawsuits that lasted for more than 1000 years, the long-suffering historians fought to show the history of the Turks, who for centuries, who were the pious people of Islam, as consisting of blood and fire adventures", and the negative results of the long struggle were mentioned14. As a result of this long and grueling struggle, everything related to Turkishness has become a tyrannical, evil and disgusting concept that oppresses Christians in the eyes of Europe15. The thought of the western intellectual in the new and recent times XX. It hasn't changed in a century. Postcards16 printed in France during the Balkan wars, reflecting the crusader mentality, are just like the thoughts of the British when they came to Dardanelles to fight in the previous century17. The Turk, who has represented the dynamism of Islam for centuries, equated with aggression. On the other hand, the entire Christian world has been fed with hatred and vengeful suggestions. According to them, “Turk is a low-class person who has forcibly subjugated Christian nations, lacks all kinds of civilized qualities and abilities, grass does not grow where his horse lands; It is an enemy of civilization, a source of evil, and has no place among civilized nations.” British Prime Minister Gladstone could not help himself from saying, "There is only one way to remove the evils of the Turks because of the world, and that is to remove their own bodies from the face of the world." The attitude taken towards the Turkish nation after the First World War was the result of these thoughts that have been nourished for centuries18. He is a low-class man, deprived of all kinds of civilized qualities and abilities, who has forcibly subjugated Christian nations, grass does not grow where his horse treads; It is an enemy of civilization, a source of evil, and has no place among civilized nations.” British Prime Minister Gladstone could not help himself from saying, "There is only one way to remove the evils of the Turks because of the world, and that is to remove their own bodies from the face of the world." The attitude taken towards the Turkish nation after the First World War was the result of these thoughts that have been nourished for centuries18. He is a low-class man, deprived of all kinds of civilized qualities and abilities, who has forcibly subjugated Christian nations, grass does not grow where his horse treads; It is an enemy of civilization, a source of evil, and has no place among civilized nations.” British Prime Minister Gladstone could not help himself from saying, "There is only one way to remove the evils of the Turks because of the world, and that is to remove their own bodies from the face of the world." The attitude taken towards the Turkish nation after the First World War was the result of these thoughts that have been nourished for centuries18. He could not help himself from saying, "There is only one way to remove the evils of the Turks because of the world, and that is to remove their own bodies from the face of the world." The attitude taken towards the Turkish nation after the First World War was the result of these thoughts that have been nourished for centuries18. He could not help himself from saying, "There is only one way to remove the evils of the Turks because of the world, and that is to remove their own bodies from the face of the world." The attitude taken towards the Turkish nation after the First World War was the result of these thoughts that have been nourished for centuries18.

In addition to these claims, XX. Until the end of the first half of the century, western researchers did not think of Turks and Mongols differently from each other. The reason why Western researchers accept Turks and Mongols as members of the same race is that they see both nations as members of the yellow race. As a result of this thought, all the massacres carried out by the Mongols were attributed to the Turks. Turks are shown as blood-drinking people who are enemies of civilization. Although the Turks were the nation that was most affected and suffered by the Mongolian massacres, they were put in a position to murder their own nation by the Westerners. However, the West was neither exposed to these massacres nor faced with the Mongols. They have only done nothing but be frightened by the terrible news from the east. Because the Mongols never went beyond Central Europe. Mustafa Kemal wanted a response to these allegations and attacks. Therefore, the first issue that the historians of the Republican period focused on was to prove that the Turks and the Mongols were separate races19.

c. Claims on Anatolia

The origin of the claims on Anatolia started with the opening of the Anatolian gates to the Turks in 1071. The Turks had first captured Anatolia, then Thrace, the Balkans and all of Central Europe. The fears, which started with the conquest of Istanbul by the Turks, reached its peak with the siege of Vienna. For the West, the Turks had become a force that had to be stopped. The West took this opportunity in 1683. He caught it with the Vienna rout. The victory of 1683 was not an ordinary military success against the Turks. The success achieved against the Turks constituted the most important link of the Eastern Question, one of which has survived to the present day. According to the plan prepared within the scope of the Eastern Question, the Turks will be expelled first from Europe and then from the Balkans, and ancient Byzantium will be re-established by taking Istanbul, Later, the Turks would be expelled from all Anatolia and sent to Central Asia where they came from. This plan has been tried to be realized at every opportunity and has been put into practice without compromise20.

Part of the Eastern Question is the establishment of the Greek State. The newly established state immediately began to claim rights over Anatolia and Istanbul. The Greeks used history in their claims on Anatolia and claimed to be the cultural heirs of ancient Greece and Byzantium. The Greeks were also supported by research in the West. Since there is no institution investigating ancient Anatolian civilizations in Turkey, the claims of the Greeks could not be adequately answered. For this reason, from the first years of the Republic, ancient Anatolian civilizations have been researched and important successes have been achieved.

The second nation that claimed rights over Anatolia after the Greeks was the Armenians. The Armenians claimed that the Eastern Anatolia Region was their land, and they put forward some historical evidences to prove this21.

Both the Greeks and the Armenians wanted to put the final point with the Treaty of Sèvres in order to reach their goals. However, they could not achieve their goals with the Turkish nation's struggle for independence. On the contrary, it was made accepted by the whole world in Lausanne that Anatolia was and will remain the Turkish homeland22.

2. The Necessity of Creating a National Consciousness and National History

Republican Turkey had a national border. However, it was not possible to talk about a national mentality in most of the people. In the Ottoman Empire, the concept of millet corresponded to religious communities and did not have any ethnic meaning. It was necessary to give a national identity to a nation that had just emerged from the wars, lived within the empire until then and defined itself by religion before its nationality, and to explain that Anatolia was a homeland and that the conquering understanding of the past was abandoned. This new situation was best explained to the public using history. Therefore, history has undertaken the function of making and adopting a unitary structure based on the Turkish national basis. In order to understand how difficult this function is, it is sufficient to look at what the intellectuals of the period understood from the concepts of empire and nation-state. Regarding the subject, Falih Rıfkı wrote: “When they took Belgrade from us, the enemy delegates also wanted the town of Nis. The Ottoman delegate stood up and said: “What is the need, let's give you Istanbul too. For our fathers, Nis was that close to Istanbul. We thought that if we left Vardar, Tripoli, Crete and Medina, the Turkish nation would not survive.” While he is thinking about the shrinking of the state, he uses harsher expressions about national consciousness and nationalism. He states that even the Arabs attained the Arab consciousness before the Turks, but the Turks still lack this consciousness. His thoughts on the Ottoman Empire are as follows: “The art of empires is to embroider colonies and nationalities. The Ottoman Empire, from Thrace to Erzurum, tilted its huge body on its side, He was a milker who delivered the udders to the mouths of colonies and nationalities, and was now sucked with milk mixed with his blood.23” As can be seen, he complains that that state is a kind of colony. The same determination is valid for the Balkans as well. XX. At the beginning of the century, many Turks were caught in the wind of Albanian nationalism and described themselves as Albanian24. The late Ottoman intellectuals, who witnessed these developments in person, considered it necessary to give the consciousness of nationalism to the people. Because all minorities affiliated to the state had achieved their independence by reaching national consciousness. Turks, on the other hand, defined themselves as Muslims and did not mention their nationality. It was urgently necessary to demolish this ummatist mentality and create a Turkish identity25. 23” As can be seen, he complains that that state is a kind of colony. The same determination is valid for the Balkans as well. XX. At the beginning of the century, many Turks were caught in the wind of Albanian nationalism and described themselves as Albanian24. The late Ottoman intellectuals, who witnessed these developments in person, considered it necessary to give the consciousness of nationalism to the people. Because all minorities affiliated to the state had achieved their independence by reaching national consciousness. Turks, on the other hand, defined themselves as Muslims and did not mention their nationality. It was urgently necessary to demolish this ummatist mentality and create a Turkish identity25. 23” As can be seen, he complains that that state is a kind of colony. The same determination is valid for the Balkans as well. XX. At the beginning of the century, many Turks were caught in the wind of Albanian nationalism and described themselves as Albanian24. The late Ottoman intellectuals, who witnessed these developments in person, considered it necessary to give the consciousness of nationalism to the people. Because all minorities affiliated to the state had achieved their independence by reaching national consciousness. Turks, on the other hand, defined themselves as Muslims and did not mention their nationality. It was urgently necessary to demolish this ummatist mentality and create a Turkish identity25. The late Ottoman intellectuals, who witnessed these developments in person, considered it necessary to give the consciousness of nationalism to the people. Because all minorities affiliated to the state had achieved their independence by reaching national consciousness. Turks, on the other hand, defined themselves as Muslims and did not mention their nationality. It was urgently necessary to demolish this ummatist mentality and create a Turkish identity25. The late Ottoman intellectuals, who witnessed these developments in person, considered it necessary to give the consciousness of nationalism to the people. Because all minorities affiliated to the state had achieved their independence by reaching national consciousness. Turks, on the other hand, defined themselves as Muslims and did not mention their nationality. It was urgently necessary to demolish this ummatist mentality and create a Turkish identity25.

3. Inadequacy of Pre-Republican History Studies

Before the Republic, historiography consisted of daily records of cases, and it is not possible to come across any comments or criticisms in this type of literature. A cause-effect relationship was not established between the events described, no comments were made, the events were not criticized, and the sources used were not shown. The works were written in the narrator-story style26. Both chroniclers, who are salaried civil servants of the state, and private history writers did not go beyond these patterns. In addition to the official historical records, the works dealing with only one expedition or event were also written with the same method. In almost all of these works, every decision made by the administrators was praised and sometimes sad events were ignored by the authors27.

It is possible to consider pre-Republican historians in two groups. Those in the first group glorified the people they accepted as benefactors, so they ignored many negative events and did not include them in their works. The writers in the second group consisted of people who lost the political struggles between the elites. Those in this group have written biased and dark tales of political decay in order to reopen the path to power for themselves or at least to break the power of those who have won the political struggle. For this reason, what was written often had to be questioned28.

In addition to the lack of methods used by the authors and their personal weaknesses, it is not possible to find any record of Turkish history in most of the works written. The works either started with Osman, the first sultan of the Ottoman dynasty, or Ottoman history was written as a part of Islamic history29.

The absence of any section on pre-Islamic Turkish history in these works has led to the impression that Turkish history is limited to Ottoman history. When it comes to the first years of the Republic, there was almost no information about the pre-Islamic Turkish history. In addition, there was no national consciousness in the written histories, but rather the basis of the ummah. Considering this great lack of historiography, Mustafa Kemal believed in the necessity of starting a national history-writing process. For this reason, he directed his attention to the pre-Islamic Turkish history, and by putting forward the Turkish History Thesis, important developments were achieved in this regard30.

B. Atatürk's Understanding of History

1. History Research Program

Mustafa Kemal's interest in history goes back to his school years, according to his own words. History is the first word of his work “Arıburnu Battles Report”, which includes the tasks he has undertaken on the Çanakkale front. He stated that he wrote his work to convey accurate information to future generations. He often resorted to the testimony of history in order to explain his reforms to the public and to the assembly, and by this means he convinced his opponents. His interest in history and the value he gave was concretely revealed when he was given an honorary professorship. When he was presented with the Honorary Professorship of Literature in 1923 by the decision of the Istanbul Darülfünun Literature Madrasah Mudarrisler Council, he stated that he was more interested in history than literature and wanted his professorship certificate to belong to history31.

Atatürk wanted answers to the following questions both in order to help bring the facts to light in an area of ​​his interest and to counter the attacks on the Turks32.

1- Who were the oldest indigenous peoples of Turkey?33

2- How was the first civilization established in Turkey or by whom?

3- What is the place of Turks in world history and world civilization?34

4- It is a historical legend that the Turks, as a tribe, established a state in Anatolia. In that case, it is necessary to find another explanation for the establishment of this state.

5- What is the real identity of Islamic history? What was the role of the Turks in the history of Islam?35

In the preface of the 1st Turkish History Congress, it was emphasized that Turkish historians were working on the outlines drawn by him, and answers were sought for the above questions in the congress. As a result, the Turkish history thesis emerged. The Turkish history thesis, the results of which are the subject of debate even today, still maintains its feature as the most important claim in the Republic of Turkey. Atatürk closely followed the work done and ensured that historians benefit from all the opportunities of the state. He was particularly interested in the excavations and the finds of the excavations, which required a great deal of money and effort36.

Mustafa Kemal also showed Turkish historians how to work. The plan Atatürk gave to the Turkish Historical Society is as follows: “Turkish and Turkish history will be examined in chronological order, and the political and military dominance of the states established by the Turkish nation in various geographical regions will be determined. Later, the dates of these states will be revealed on the basis of the following scheme37”.

1- State Life

   a- The form of the state, the constitution on which it is based, the rights and duties of the head of state.

   b- Parliamentary election laws, rights and powers.

   c- Formation of government and legal powers of the council of ministers.

   d- The operating order of administrative systems and institutions.

   Principles of e-Army organization.

   f- Judicial organs and operating style.

   g- Financial system.

2- Economic Life

   a- Production, agriculture and wood products. b- All kinds of industries.

   c- Roads and means of transport.

   d- Domestic and foreign trade.

3- Intellectual Life

   a- Religious beliefs and organizations.

   b- Family order.

   c- Customs and customs.

   d- All branches of positive sciences.

   e Fine arts.

In addition to these subjects, he suggested that those working on every subject should carry out studies under the title of "Services of Turks to Civilization". The questions he dictated to Afet Inan while he was preparing for his meetings with Turkish historians in Yalova in 1930 are questions that not only Turkish but also world historians should answer. Atatürk also guided historians by working on the answers to these questions. The main questions were38:

1- What should be the important lessons of attention and adjustment that people can take from history? Can you give a historical point of view that will help explain one of today's events?

2- What are the causes of historical events? Which of these do you think is the most important?

3- What can be the basis of where and how people came from, which can befit the general view of humanity today?

4- What does civilization mean?

5- What race are the people who first did and spread these works in the whole world and humanity? Where is the homeland of this breed?

Like other branches of science, history should have a research method. All kinds of findings and documents were the basis of that method. As long as the date was documented, it could be correct. As a matter of fact, he read the first edition of the Turkish History's Main Hatları, which he ordered to be written, after it was completed, and he did not like it, especially because documents and reliable sources were not used sufficiently. He sent the work back to the researchers to be rewritten and requested that experts in the field write each subject. The work was rewritten by making use of documents and resources, and only then did Atatürk's appreciation be gained. He did not give credit to those who were superficially interested in history. For this reason, he wanted every event to be written as it was. With the efforts of Nutuk to rely on documents, he personally put his belief that history should be based on documents into practice. There have been attempts to print and write such great histories before him in history. However, none of them could produce a work of Atatürk's caliber. Because they did not respect the document at the desired rate39. His words guiding Turkish historians on this subject are embodied expressions of his thoughts40:

“It is better to confess one's inability to produce any work, than to be honored in one's own soul by creating a summed-up work. While we are writing history, we are men who look for the owner of acts and events. And if we can't find them, let's not hesitate to admit the unknown and our ignorance at this point. Let's not create a port. This is not our profession. We are men who always seek the truth and who are quite daring to believe that we find it as we find it”. “First of all, rely on the documents that you will carefully and carefully choose yourself. Before anything and anyone else, use your own initiative and national filter in your research on these documents.” “History cannot be fictitious. In making history, we should try to find real events. If we can't find them, let's not hesitate to admit the obscurity and our ignorance from this point of view.” “Making history, It is as important as making history. If the writer does not remain faithful to the creator, the unchanging truth becomes surprising.

”As you can see, the first point that Atatürk puts emphasis on is the correct writing of history based on documents. The second point he points out is that the historian uses his own initiative when using the document and looks at the event from a national perspective. The last point is that if the relevant document cannot be found, one should not hesitate to openly admit it41.

2. Atatürk's Understanding of History

a. Universal Understanding of History

According to Atatürk, history should ensure the unification within the human culture, which has been derived from the same root for thousands of years, on the condition that people protect their personal freedoms and the characteristics and independence of nations. In order for all humanity to rise, this feeling had to find consciousness in all humanity. History should reveal brotherhood, not enmity between nations. He stated the following while working on the Balkan Pact with the members of the Balkan nations:

“Whatever the social and political appearances of the Balkan Nations, it should not be forgotten that they are their common ancestors from close ancestry from Central Asia. The masses of people who came and settled in the Balkans for thousands of years like the waves of the sea with the Northern and Southern roads of the Black Sea, although they had different names, in reality are nothing but sister tribes that emerged from a single cradle42”.

With these words, Atatürk was referring to the common past of all nations, namely the Turkish History Thesis. He believed that when this idea was taken as a basis, all the people in the world, who were separated from each other by various natural, social and religious factors, and who were hostile to each other, could come together and peace could be established. The ideas he put forward are very clear universal messages for the brotherhood of all nations and the establishment of world peace. His understanding of history also opposes Europe's self-centered, self-centered obsession that belittles non-European cultures.

b. Understanding of National History

The most important problem that the Republic of Turkey had to deal with was making the people aware of their national identity and self. For this purpose, intensive historical research has been started. The use of history for this purpose was put forward by the French positivist writer Seignobos, who had a great influence on the first historians of the Republican era. Seignobos XIX. In a conference he gave at the beginning of the century, he emphasized that history education was very effective as a tool in political education. According to him, history should be taught in the form of civics and history teachers should undertake the mission of educating future generations, citizens of the future. For this reason, national history was written to guide the people. National historiography is loaded with values. It is for a desired future. In Gökalp's words, it is the “conscience of the nation”. While the first historians of the republic were working, they never ignored the goal of creating a national conscience and giving the nation a national identity43. Minister of National Education Esat Bey, who made the opening speech of the 1st Turkish history congress, clearly expressed what the founders of the Republic expected from history education. He accepted history as the basis of all social sciences and emphasized the necessity of writing history in a way that would reveal the existence and identity of the Turkish nation and its services to world civilization. In addition, he presented a statement on the "glorious past of the Turks" in the direction above. Fuat Köprülü, on the other hand, described the historical studies as “an activity to recreate our national history, which started with the guidance and encouragement of Gazi”44.

First, the studies of western historians were examined. Among them, the thesis presented by the French Léon Cahun at the I. Congress of Orientalists in 1873, "In the prehistoric age of Central Asia, there was an inland sea in Central Asia and when this inland sea dried up, the Turks migrated and civilized the rest of the world", Atatürk and the study He did not go unnoticed by his friends. Research has been started on this subject immediately. Thus, the Western knowledge that the Turks did not contribute anything to civilization was tried to be resisted with the thesis of a Westerner45.

The second and more important event that attracted the attention of Atatürk and Turkish historians was the Orkhon Inscriptions. After the discovery of the Orkhon Inscriptions in 1887-1888, Wilhelm Thomsen deciphered the writings in 1896 and found an area that Turkish historians could use as a response to the westerners. The discovery of these inscriptions and their well-known recognition in Turkey drew the attention of Turkish researchers to the Turkish history of Central Asia. With the Turks' conversion to Islam, pre-Islamic Turkish history was almost forgotten. All of the work was done by Westerners. They, too, had written history only on the basis of their own truth. However, the Orkhon Inscriptions were accepted as proof that the situation was not as the Europeans claimed. These inscriptions gave the Turks the good news of a field that they did not know very well and that needed to be researched and a glorious past. When the glorious Turkish past in Central Asia was brought to light, a good answer would have been given to the negativities claimed by the West46. For this purpose, intensive historical researches started47 and Turkish history thesis emerged48. At the end of the studies, it has been proven that the Turks also have a history to brag about49. In fact, the flags of 16 of the previously established Turkish states were taken to the presidential fort, emphasizing that the Republic of Turkey is the representative of this state tradition50.

As someone who had spent half his life in wars and had personally witnessed the highest civility of the Turk, it was impossible for Atatürk to believe in the barbarism of the Turks and that he was the enemy of civilization. Because the soldier commanded by him, sometimes at the expense of his own life, extended a helping hand to the enemy he was fighting at the front51. It could not be expected that a nation that was able to look at its enemies with compassion, even at the front, would be barbaric. Turkish history was full of examples of such events52. It was necessary to introduce the marital characteristics of the Turk, which is a historical reality and which he believed in, to the world. This could only be possible by revealing historical facts. It is possible to follow this thought concretely in his speeches and statements. According to him53:

“Our ancestors, who founded great states, also had great and comprehensive civilizations. It is our duty to seek this, to examine it, to inform the Turkishness and the world.” “As Turkish children get to know their ancestors, they will find the strength to do bigger things.” “If a nation is great, it becomes greater by knowing itself.” “As the successes of Turkish talent and power in history come to light, all Turkish children will be able to find the source of action they need at that time. From this date on, Turkish children will gain the idea of ​​independence, they will think about those great achievements, they will learn about the men who worked wonders, they will think that they are of the same blood, and they will not bow to anyone with this ability.” “O Turkish Nation! You are the honor of humanity not only in heroism and warfare, but also in thought and civilization. History, The civilizations you have built are full of sena and sighs. Even though the political and social factors that meant his presence have blocked his way for several centuries and made his march slow, his ten thousand-year-old intellectual and cultural heritage lives on in his soul as a virgin and inexhaustible power. History, which carries the memories of thousands and thousands of years in its memory, shows you the position you deserve in the ranks of civilization with its finger. Walk up there and rise! This is both a right and a duty for you.”

Mustafa Kemal's view of national history is also in two parts. The first is the Turkist, that is, the aim that aims to reveal the civilized qualities of the Turkish nation and its services to humanity, which we tried to explain above. The second is the studies carried out to prove that the first natives of Anatolia and the founders of Anatolian civilization, which were put forward to respond to the claims on Anatolia, which we can call the Anatolian theory, were Turks. For this purpose, studies were conducted to reveal the relations and kinship of the Sumerians and Etruscans54 with the Turks, and surprising results were obtained55. By evaluating the results of the research, the claims of the Greeks and Armenians that Anatolia was their own land were answered56. The results of the studies in 1932 I. It was presented to local scientists at the Turkish History Congress and received support from local researchers and history teachers who attended the congress as invited57. II in 1937. In the Turkish History Congress, the contributions of the Turks to the world civilization and the findings that Anatolia is the ancient Turkish homeland were presented to the examination of world historians and led to important discussions58.

Conclusion

As a realist statesman, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk was aware of the difficulties he faced and the resources at his disposal. He has very well determined that the development and nationalization process cannot be completed without a Turkish renaissance. For this reason, he emphasized in many of his statements that the foundation of the newly established Republic of Turkey is culture. The basic element of the revolutions has always been culture. The writing, hat and dress revolutions formed the preliminary preparations for the society that was aimed to be created. Immediately after these revolutions, scientific institutions began to be established to realize the Turkish renaissance. For example, the establishment of the Faculty of Language and History, Geography before the Faculty of Medicine is the clearest indicator of the importance Mustafa Kemal gave to social sciences. For this reason, he devoted most of his time to social science studies. He was also involved in these studies. In the field of social sciences, Mustafa Kemal was more interested in language and history studies. Among his works, his interest in history and the value he gave were of particular importance.

Atatürk always saw history as a guide and expressed these ideas with the following words59: “History is a beautiful mirror. People, especially the tribes that are not perfect in morality, cannot avoid being subject to sensitive feelings even in the face of the greatest sacredness. In the great hadith that have passed into history, the actions, operations and actions of those who were the agents and agents in these events show their moral characteristics.” “The important lessons of attention and intimacy that people can take from history; In my opinion, there should be the results of the examination of the causes and factors that have been effective in the formation of states, generally of political institutions, in changing the nature of these institutions and in their abrogation and negation.” "History; It can never deny the blood, rights and existence of a nation.”

With his understanding of history, he not only contributed to world peace, but also led to the emergence of his greatest work, the Turkish national existence. He introduced the Turkish national existence and identity to the whole world and made it accepted. He not only read and benefited from historical information, but also equipped himself with the knowledge of history to find and correct the errors and deficiencies of the research results of historians60. He proved concretely the value he gave to history by establishing the Turkish Historical Society, whose mission is to conduct historical research. He not only established this institution, but also provided the necessary financing for his future existence61.

1 Büşra Ersanlı Behar, Power and History in Turkey, Formation of the "Official History" Thesis (1929-1937), Istanbul 1996, pp.60-72; The Balkan Wars had a great impact on the spread of Turkism in the country. Nuri Doğan, Textbooks and Socialization (1876-1918), Istanbul 1994, p.88-92.

2 Bernard Lewis, The Birth of Modern Turkey, Translated by Metin Kıratlı, Ankara 1991, p.1; Philip Mansel, The City The World Desires Constantinople 1453-1924, Translated by Şerif Erol, Istanbul 1996, p.6; Turhan Ilgaz, "The Unconscious Ottoman", Thinking Politics, P.7-8, Ankara 1999, p.85-86; For the synthesis of the discussion focused on the Turkish-Ottoman relationship, see Nejat Göyünç, “About the Ottoman State-On the occasion of the 700th Anniversary of its Foundation-”, Cogito, P.19, Istanbul 1999, pp.86-90.

3 For detailed information on the subject, see Yusuf Akçura, Üç Tarz-ı Politics, Ankara 1991, pp.33-36; For a brief analysis, see; Etienne Copeaux, From Turkish History Thesis to Turkish-Islamic Synthesis in History Textbooks (1931-1993), Translated by Ali Berktay, Istanbul 1998, 25-26.

4 For the declaration of Jihad and developments, see Mete Tunçay, Jihad and Deportation, Istanbul 1991, 10-55; For Mustafa Kemal's thoughts, see Philip Mansel, The Glory of the Sultans, Translated by Nigar Alemdar, Istanbul 1998, p.113, 119; Memoirs of Hafız İbrahim Demiralay and Documents Related to the National Struggle in Isparta, Editors Bayram Kodaman-Hasan Babacan, Isparta 1998, p.7; Yusuf Hikmet Bayur, History of Turkish Revolution, C.III, K.3, Ankara 1991, pp.398-416.

5 For the developments and details of the period, see Nutuk, pp.19-225; Hamza Eroğlu, History of Turkish Revolution, Istanbul 1982, pp.177-202.

6 Afet Inan, “Ataturk and the History Thesis”, Belleten, C.III, P.10, Ankara 1939, p.244; Halil Berktay, Republican Ideology and Fuat Köprülü, Istanbul 1983, 14-16.

7 Enver Ziya Karal, “Atatürk's Turkish History Thesis”, Kemalism, C.II, Istanbul 1988, pp.158-159; The evaluations on the subject in the work titled Main Lines of Turkish History, which was written by the order of Atatürk himself in order to answer these allegations, are as follows: “The season of slanderous claims and slanders that the Turks did not reach civilization by living with the aim and effort to seize the lands of others only through war has passed. The time has come to realize how inhuman and uncivilized it is to instill feelings of hatred and enmity in one part of humanity against the other, with these primordial considerations and indoctrination brought about by the Christian causes in the Age. Those who have adopted the motto of trying to introduce the Turks with some violent acts that have only been seen in the history of every nation, Isn't it enough to remember only the last general war and the fighting styles of the German and French nations in its various phases, leaving all the past aside so that they can see how unjust and ruthless they are in their actions? It is a shame that the cynical indoctrination, which is based on Christian fanaticism against the Turks and has been carried out for centuries, has been introduced into the spirit of science that should remain pure and neutral. " As can be seen, it has been started to be defended against Western attacks with extremely carefully thought-out ideas. Main Lines of Turkish History-Methal Section-, Ankara 1931, pp.69-70. Is it not enough to remember only the fighting styles of the German and French nations during the last general war and its various phases? It is a shame that the cynical indoctrination, which is based on Christian fanaticism against the Turks and has been carried out for centuries, has been introduced into the spirit of science that should remain pure and neutral. " As can be seen, it has been started to be defended against Western attacks with extremely carefully thought-out ideas. Main Lines of Turkish History-Methal Section-, Ankara 1931, pp.69-70. Is it not enough to remember only the fighting styles of the German and French nations during the last general war and its various phases? It is a shame that the cynical indoctrination, which is based on Christian fanaticism against the Turks and has been carried out for centuries, has been introduced into the spirit of science that should remain pure and neutral. " As can be seen, it has been started to be defended against Western attacks with extremely carefully thought-out ideas. Main Lines of Turkish History-Methal Section-, Ankara 1931, pp.69-70.

8 Feridun Akozan, “Atatürk, Art and Artisan (Artist)”, Kemalism, C.II, Istanbul 1988, p.146.

9 In this study, head measurements of 40,000 Turks were made. Copeaux, ibid, p.35, Evaluating the anthropological measurement results and the value of this material, Jönev University Professor of Anthropology, Pittard, stated that 60,000 people were measured. He states the following about the study; “Atatürk has earned the gratitude of science by ordering these researches. And anthropologists will always bless his memory.”, Eugéne Pittard, “Honoring Atatürk's Memory”, Belleten, C.III, S.10, Ankara 1939, p.189. For similar anthropological measurements and results, see Şevket Aziz Kansu, “Anthropometric Studies on Turkish Girls and Boys”, Belleten, C.III, S.9, Ankara 1939, pp.69-79; Şevket Aziz Kansu, “An Anthropological Study on the Racial History of Anatolia [1], Belleten, C.III, P.9, Ankara 1939, pp.127-131.

10 The French historian Claude Cahen, who made one of the most extensive researches on the Anatolian Seljuks, could not help showing in quotation marks in the first sentence of his work that he finished in 1968, that the Turks belonged to the yellow race. The first paragraph of the book is exactly as follows: “It is thought that the Turks came from a branch called the Ural-Altaic and whose borders are not known with certainty. It is possible that they are members of a race called the "yellow" race, which includes some, perhaps all, of the American Indians." Claude Cahen, Turks in Anatolia Before the Ottomans, Translated by Yıldız Moran, Istanbul 1984, p.21; Cahen changed this approach in the slightly modified final version of the same work. However, this time, he used the phrase “We should not think of Turks as completely nomads” in the first work (work above, p.23). On the first page of the newly written (1988) French copy of the work, he did not hesitate to emphasize that the Turks were nomadic for some reason this time. (“A reference to Adam Smith's theory?”). Claude Cahen, ibid, Translated by Erol Memberpazarcı, Istanbul 2000, p.1.

11 Josep Fontana, Reinterpretation of Europe, Translated by Nurettin Elhuseyni, Istanbul 1995, pp.147-148; Fernand Braudel, The Grammar of Civilizations, Translated by Mehmet Ali Kılıçbay, Ankara 1996, p.115.

12 Zafer Gölen, “About the Travelogue of Baron de Tott”, Bilge, P.17, Ankara 1998, pp.69-71; Zafer Gölen, “The Formation of Turkish Thought in Europe”, Dönence, P.3, Isparta 1998, pp.9-13.

13 Volney, Ruins, Translated by Kazim Akses, Istanbul 1946, p.7.

14 Date III, Ankara 1941, sV (This is the 3rd edition of the work. It was first accepted as a textbook by the decision of the Ministry of Education Education and Training Committee, dated 12-VI-1932 and numbered 11.)

15 Cahen, supra, p.14; For detailed information on the results of this long and exhausting struggle, see Onur Bilge Kula, Turkish Image in German Culture, CI,II,III. Kula reveals in the historical process how and under what conditions the Turkish image was formed in the minds of Western intellectuals, clergy and people of this long historical encounter, and how Turkish hostility was treated as a motif. Kula revealed the facts that Cahen was afraid to express openly. The West could never digest the conquest of Istanbul and the fact that Anatolia was in the hands of the Turks. According to them, the Turks should go back to where they came from, namely Central Asia. Karal, Atatürk's Turkish History Thesis, p.159.

16 In this period, the West's hostility to Turks reached such advanced dimensions that almost every means and means were used to make Turkish hostility. For detailed information on the subject, see Kerem Topuz, “Postcard Caricature, Abdulhamid and Turkey's Image”, Tombak, P.23, Istanbul 1998, pp.43-52.

17 Alan Moorehead, Canakkale Impassable, Translated by Gunay Salman, Istanbul 1972, p. 52-63.

18 Bekir Sıtkı Baykal, “Atatürk and History”, Belleten, C.XXXV, p.140, Ankara 1971, pp.536-537.

19 For detailed information on the Mongols and westerners' view of the Mongols, see Robert Marshall, The Rising Power from the East, The Mongols, Translated by Füsun Doruker, Istanbul 1996, 139 p.; W. Bruce Lincoln, The Wild West, Siberia and the Russians, Translated by Mehmet Harmancı, Istanbul 1996, pp.3-24.

20 For detailed information, see Bayram Kodaman, Sultan II. Abdulhamid Era Eastern Anatolia Policy, Ankara 1987, pp. 1-3, 105-107; Arslan Topçubaşı, The Question of the West and the East, Ankara 2000, 274 p.

21 The second and most controversial claim of Armenians is that they were systematically massacred. These allegations were sometimes expressed in political and sometimes historical platforms, and the Republic of Turkey was disturbed. Even Bernard Lewis, who is known not to agree with the Armenian allegations today, is very thought-provoking to use the phrase Armenian massacre, and it is a good example of how the Western public opinion was misled by the Armenians and how the idea of ​​massacre was placed in people's subconscious. Lewis, supra, p.200.

22 Despite this fact, Western writers still continue to maintain their claims that Anatolia is not a Turkish homeland. For example, Copeaux; almost as if he wants to remind the reader that Anatolia is an ancient Greek land and that the Turks massacred the Armenians in a systematic way from the beginning to the end of his work. In the book, which consists of 313 pages of text, the first information on the subject starts on page 7, is repeated on average every 15 pages of the book and ends on page 311. When the work is analyzed in detail, the author gives the impression that he was disturbed by the developments in the field of history in the Republican period. Because it is in an attitude that invites the reader to re-discuss the concepts that are in the memory of the Turkish nation and are accepted. The work was criticized and the intentional comments were answered by Erdoğan Merçil. Erdoğan Merçil, “Etienne Copeaux (Trans. Berktay, Ali): In History Textbooks (1931-1993 Turkish History Thesis to Turkish-Islamic Synthesis”, Belleten, CLXIII, p.236, Ankara 1999, p.279-291.

23 When Atay asked some people whether they were Turkish or not, the answer he got was "estağfurullah". He also stated that he did not encounter a Turkified Araba in the south of Damascus, and he also stated that he did not come across a non-Arabized Turk. Falih Rıfkı Atay, Zeytindagi, Istanbul 1981, pp.8, 39-41; Ortaylı states that the assessment that Turkish nationalism is the most delayed nationalism is a very premeditated conclusion. He is of the opinion that Turkishness has been delayed due to necessity and cautiously as long as the state exists. İlber Ortaylı, “Ottoman Identity”, Cogito, P.19; Istanbul 1999, p.81; Oktay Gökdemir-İbrahim Bozkurt, “700. On Debates of the Year and the Ottoman Empire”, Thinking Politics, P.7-8, Ankara 1999, p.93.

24 For policies that distance the people of the region from being Turkish and approach Albanian nationalism, see Yavuz Bülent Bakiler, From Skopje to Kosovo, Ankara 1996, p.101.

25 History III, sV, Doğan, supra, pp.50-51, 86.

26 Anonymous Ottoman Chronicle (1299-1512), by Necdet Öztürk, Istanbul 2000, pp.XXIV-XXV; Behar, supra, p.41-46. Ottoman historiography, especially XIX. entered into a breakthrough in the second half of the century. Cevdet Pasha's Tarih-i Devlet-i Aliyye and Mustafa Nuri Pasha's Netayic-ül Vukuat were written outside the classical writing style. However, it is not possible to claim that these works changed the Ottoman people's understanding of history. Behar, supra, 53-58; Bayaram Kodaman, “Atatürk's Understanding of History”, Historical-Intellectual Foundations of the Republic and Atatürk, Isparta 1999, p.88; For the analysis of the history of Cevdet Pasha, see Christoph K. Neumann, Tool History Purpose The Political Meaning of the Tanzimat History of Cevdet, Translated by Meltem Arun, Istanbul 2000, 248 p.

27 For detailed information on the subject, see Şehabettin Tekindağ, “Ottoman Historiography”, Belleten, C.XXXV, p.140, Ankara 1971, pp.655-663; Nicolas Vantin, “Why Would An Ottoman Turk Tell About His Travel?”, Cogito, P.19, Istanbul 1999, pp.162-165.

28 Rifa'at Ali Abou-el-haj, The Nature of the Modern State-16. The Ottoman Empire from the 18th Century to the 18th Century-, Translated by Oktay Özel-Canay Şahin, Ankara 2000, pp.58-62; Donald Quataert, Ottoman Manufacturing Sector in the Age of Industrial Revolution, Translated by Tansel Güney, Istanbul 1999, p.28.

29 For example, Künhü'l-âhbar by the well-known Ottoman historian Mustafa Ali of Gallipoli is one such work. Only the 4th volume of the 4-volume work is devoted to Ottoman history, and the first 3 volumes include the history of Islam. Cornell H. Fleischer, Historian Mustafa Âli, Translated by Ayla Ortaç, Istanbul 1996, pp.253-254; Lütfi Pasha's Tevârih-i Âl-i Osman, on the other hand, started with Sultan Osman and reached the period when Lütfi Pasha lived, namely the time of Sultan Süleyman. In the work, there is no section about the pre-Osman Gazi. Lütfi Pasha, Tevârih-i Âl-i Osman, Istanbul 1341, p.7; This summer continued until the Republican era. For example, in a 2-volume Ottoman history written in 1891, it is seen that the old format was used exactly. A brief summary of the history of Islam was made in the first 64 pages of the work, The remaining part is written in such a way that the actions of each sultan are explained separately. Abdurrahman Şeref, History-i Devlet-i Osmaniyye, CI, Istanbul 1315, 350 p.; C.II, 1318, 423 p.

30 Big, Atatürk's Understanding of History, pp.87-89; Berktay, supra, p.15.

31 Afet Inan, “The Turkish Historical Society is 40 Years Old”, Belleten, C.XXXV, P.140, Ankara 1971, p.519; Mustafa Kemal, Arıburnu Battles Report, Ankara 1990, p.3; Baikal, agm, pp.532-534; Şemsettin Günaltay, “A Memoir About Atatürk's Historiography and Honorary Professorship”, Belleten, C.III, S.10, Ankara 1939, pp.273-274.

32 Unaydın, supra, p.57.

33 Mustafa Kemal was more interested in the Hittites in this regard. He underlined that there may be a connection between the Hittites and the Turks and that this issue should be investigated. If the kinship between the Hittites and the Turks could be established scientifically, the claims on Anatolia would automatically disappear. Because the oldest people of Anatolia would be the Turks. Inan, Ataturk and History Thesis, pp.244-245; Lewis stated that Atatürk's Anatolian theory, which started with the political aim of identifying the people living in Anatolia with Anatolia, brought to light important real elements. Lewis, supra, p.3.

34 Since it is one of the studies on the contribution of Turks to world history other than the theory of migration, the study, which we will give below, is quite interesting. Professor Aster, the owner of the study, claimed that the source of inspiration for all Western philosophers was the East, that is, Central Asia, and therefore the Turks were the originators of philosophy in the world. For this well-edited and processed article, see Ernst Fon Aster, “Turks in the History of Philosophy”, Belleten, C.II, P.5/6, Ankara 1938, pp.89-98.

35 We witness that the work on this issue has started immediately and results have been obtained. Süheyl Ünver, “The Position of Turkish Physicians in Islamic Medicine and Avicenna's Turkishness”, Belleten, CI, S.1, Ankara 1937, pp.271-278; In his article, Ünver openly stated that he was uncomfortable with the Westerners' ascribing everything that exists in Islamic civilization to Arabs and Iranians, and that Turks contributed to Islam and world civilization at least as much as Arabs and Iranians. In the continuation of the article, the virtues of the Turks and their contributions to science were expressed and this claim was sought to be supported with the identity of Ibn Sina.

36 I. Turkish History Congress Conferences-Discussions, sV; All the excavations carried out at that time were accomplished with his patronage and financial support. The last thing he was interested in before he died was history. While he was lying in his bed, he asked Afet Inan for the excavated finds from the Thracian mounds and examined the finds. Again, the last book he saw was the 5/6th edition of Belleten, the publication organ of the Turkish Historical Society. number has been. Inan, Ataturk and History Thesis, pp.243-244; Atatürk found and named the journal Belleten himself. Uluğ İldemir, “Atatürk and Belleten”, Belleten, C.III, P.10, Ankara 1939, pp.355-356.

37 Afet Inan, “Ataturk and History”, Kemalism, C.II, Istanbul 1988, pp.152-154.

38 Afet Inan, Memories and Documents About Ataturk, Ankara 1984, p.274.

39 İsmail Hakkı Uzunçarşılı, “Memories of Atatürk's Relevance and Views While Written Turkish History”, Belleten, C.III, S.10, Ankara 1939, pp.349-350; Inan, Ataturk and History, p.155; For example, for the works of Caesar and Charlemagne, see Hasan Cemil Çambel, “Atatürk and History”, Belleten, C.III, p.10, Ankara 1939, pp.269-270.

40 Karal, Atatürk's Turkish History Thesis, p.163; Âkil Aksan, Ataturk Says, Ankara 1986, p.115.

41 For Atatürk's sensitivity and developments regarding the fact that the researches of Turkish historians are based on documents, see İsmail Hakkı Uzunçarşılı, “Documentation in the New Turkish History”, Belleten, C.II, S.7/8, Ankara 1938, pp.367-371.

42 Çambel, agm, p.271; The basis of historical thought was “Peace at home, peace in the world”. Unaydın, supra, p.59; Karal, Atatürk's Turkish History Thesis, p.164.

43 Behar, supra, p. 32-33, 76-77; It is clear that Mustafa Kemal, who had himself written a book on Civil Knowledge, was aware of this conference and Seignobos' thoughts. See, Disaster (Believe), Civil Information for Citizens, CI, Istanbul 1931, 287 p.; Recep (Peker), Civil Information for Citizens, C.II, Istanbul 1931, 291 p.

44 I. Turkish History Congress, pp.5-13, 47.

45 Afet İnan, without any hesitation, stated that it was certain that the Turks had civilized the world, and his claim was met with applause by the attendees of the 1st Turkish History Congress. I. Turkish History Congress, p.36; The references made by Turkish historians to French historians to prove their arguments cannot be underestimated. It is possible to observe this intensity especially in the minutes of the 1st Turkish History Congress. For example, Afet Inan used another French André Berthelot's work “L'Asie Ancien, Central et sud-Orientale d'aprees Ptoleme” to support his claims regarding the great migration from Central Asia. For detailed information, see; I. Turkish History Congress, p.3 et al.; Outline of Turkish History, pp.77-87; Behar, supra, p.64.

46 For detailed information and studies on the effects of the Orkhon Inscriptions on the Turkish public, see Copeaux, supra, pp.18-22; The following is stated in the Outline of Turkish History about the past of Turkish history: “The aim of this work is to remind the Great Turkish Nation, whose services and efforts in the establishment of the first civilizations were denied, of its honorable past based on historical truths. Let's also add that an eleven-thousand-year-old past that raises his chest and raises his forehead will not give the Turkish nation an empty and unnecessary pride, and it does not honor to be separated from the forefront for a few centuries, which has been seen and can be seen in the history of every nation." Outline of Turkish History, p.73.

47 For the intensity of historical research and the value Atatürk attached to these studies, see Ruşen Eşref Ünaydın, Atatürk History and Language Institutions; Memories, Ankara 1954, 51-52.

48 For the criticisms and answers to the Turkish history thesis, see; Şemsettin Günaltay, “The Nature of the Controversies Regarding the Turkish History Thesis and the Final Victory of the Thesis”, Belleten, C.II, S.7/8, Ankara 1938, pp.337-365; Falih Rıfkı states that there are some excesses in both history and language theses, but that Atatürk aimed to reach the truth by trying the extremes, and unfortunately, he did not live long enough to finalize his work. Falih Rıfkı Atay, Çankaya, Istanbul 1984, p.479.

49 Despite the fact that the theory of migration of Turks from Central Asia could not be proven on the basis of strong data and despite all the criticisms, it is quite significant that a map of migration routes is presented at the very beginning of a study on Central Asia in 1998. This attitude is also a good example of how this view, which was accepted to us in the 1930s for the reasons mentioned above, was accepted by Turkish researchers and the nation. Nihat Kaşıkcı-Hasan Yılmaz, Migration Geography of Central Asia-Anatolia, From Tian Shan to Manzikert, Ankara 1998, p.17.

50 Topçubaşı, supra, p.176.

51 The USA of the period after the wars of 17 April. Ambassador Lewis Einstein also tells about this issue that the Turks acted extraordinarily brave and rescued the British sailors who had fallen into the sea, and then continued: “The people they had killed without a care a minute ago, they were surprising the next minute with their kindness. As soon as the first British captive submarines were taken to the hospital in Çanakkale, shivering in their wet clothes, the Turkish wounded in the hospital began to treat them as guests. They persistently gave whatever they had to these soldiers and offered sweets.” Alan Moorehead, Çanakkale Impassable, Translated by Gunay Salman, Istanbul 1972, pp.136-137

52 The people treated the Crusader soldier who disappeared around Antalya during the Crusades so well that the Crusaders who came to destroy the Turks became Muslims. On this event, in some western sources, “O mercy! You are more cruel than any treason!” The high human aspect of the Turk has been expressed as much as the expression. Osman Turan, History of the Turkish World Domination Concept, Istanbul Undated, 5th Edition, p.305.

53 Kemalism, CI, Istanbul 1988, p.358; Outline of Turkish History, p.74.

54 Wilhelm Brandenstein, “Language Studies of the Earliest History of Etruscans and Tyrrhens”, Belleten, CI, P.3-4, Ankara 1937, pp.677-713. The author has openly claimed that the linguistic similarities between Etruscan and Turkish cannot be a coincidence, and that the basis of this similarity can be based on living in the same geography. Brandenstein, supra, p.711.

55 Copeaux, supra, p.17; Studies on this subject attract attention even today and surprising results can be obtained. Polat Kaya, “Etruscan/Turkish Connection ChapterII The Etruscan Orator Inscription”, Turkish World Studies, P.118, Istanbul 1999, pp.115-120.

56 Finding an article on the Central Asian origin of Turks in the very first issue of Belleten, the publication organ of the Turkish Historical Society, in order to prove the asserted claims, can give us some information about the importance given to the studies. Reşit Tankul, “The Alpine Word and the Home of the Alpine Race”, Belleten, CI, S.1, Ankara 1937, pp.26-41.

57 For the content of the papers and discussions in the Congress, see I. Turkish History Congress, 629 p.; For the analysis, see Behar, supra, pp.119-160; Big, supra, p.94-95. The minutes of the conference, which were turned into a book right after the congress, were sent as gifts to all history teachers and school libraries in the country with the circular of the Ministry of National Education dated 450/12 and 19/2/933. This approach is very important in terms of showing the importance that young Turkish administrators attach to history and what they expect from history. For example, the congress minutes were sent to Burdur High School and the history teacher with the package dated 18/2/933 and numbered 429. (Handwritten record on the cover of the work titled I. Turkish History Congress sent to Burdur High School).

58 When Atatürk put forward the Turkish history thesis, he was accused of racism and imperialism. However, since his understanding of history was developed to defend international brotherhood and peace, these claims were not respected. Karal, Atatürk's Turkish History Thesis, p.164; For the analysis of the congress, see Behar, supra, p.161-194; Big, supra, p.94-95. 59 Kemalism, CI, p.360.

60 F. Öymen, “Atatürk Created the Power of Confidence in the Heart of the Turkish Nation and in the Spirit of the Turkish Nation”, Belleten, C.III, S.10, Ankara 1939, pp.281-283; For the additions and corrections he made on the Turkish History Ana Hatları in his own handwriting, see Belleten, C.III, S.10, Ankara 1939, Plate.LXXXII-XCI.

61 Atatürk donated half of the income of his shares in İşbank to the Turkish Historical Society with his will on September 5, 1938. With this behavior, he transferred the importance he attached to historical research and his belief in the survival of the Turkish Historical Society to future generations. Turkish Historical Society Publication Catalogue, Ankara 1998, sV; Mazhar Leventoğlu, Atatürk's Testament, Istanbul 1968, pp.100-101; Behar, supra, p.96.

Dr. Zafer Gölen

*Burdur Education Faculty History Department Lecturer

Source: ATATÜRK ARAŞTIRMA MERKEZİ DERGİSİ, Sayı 52, Cilt: XVIII, Mart 2002