The Young Turk Revolution : July 1908 to April 1909

324 Pages·2006·6.15 MB·English

-
THE YOUNG TURK REVOLUTION JULY
1908 TO APRIL 19098 ITS IMMEDIATE EFFECTS
by
Tachat Ramavarma Ravindranathan
0. S., Utah S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y , 1965
A THESIS SUBMITTLD IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF
THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTER OF ARTS
i n the Department
o f
H i s t o r y
@
TACH AT RAMAVARMA RAV INDRANATHAN 1970
n
SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY
July, 1970
EXAMINING COMMITTEE APPROVAL
-
Allan Cunningham
, \ Senior Supervisor
I
William Cleveland
Examining Committee
Hanna Kassis
Examining Committee
Name: Tachat Ramavarma Ravindranathan
Degree: Master of Arts
Title of Thesis: The Young Turk Revolution - July 1908 to April 1909:
Its Immediate Effects
ABSTRACT
I t is almost half a century since t h e Ottoman Empire
was turned i n t o a republic as a consequence of t h e Young
Turk Revolution of 1908, That t h e Young Turks should seek
t o modernize an archaic state was understandable and highly
commended, but t h e i r dismissal of t h e Caliph himself was t h e
most revolutionary act. However, t h e d i f f i c u l t i e s o f dis-
mantling a theocracy have only come t o l i g h t s i n c e 1908, and
t h e following study o f f e r s r e l a t i v e l y l i t t l e on t h e deposition
of Abdulhamid I1 as no one a t t h e time forsaw t h i s p o s s i b i l i t y
much before it a c t u a l l y happened, and even less d i d anyone
think of its concequonces. The g r e a t motive force i n t h e
revolution was t h e Committee of Union and Proaress, a p o l i t i c a l
organization dominated by t h e army o f f i c e r s and t h e progenitor
of modern Turkish Republic. If t h e C.U.P. retained much of
its shadowy character i n t h i s t h e s i s t h a t is because there is
still very great confusion as t o t h e e a r l y membership and
a c t i v i t i e s o f t h e Party and t h e Committee. Consequently, it
is a good deal easier t o say what happened than t o say who was
responsible f o r t h e revolution. A s t h e t h e s i s t i t l e indicates,
t h e emphasis o f t h i s study is upon t h e reactions, a t home and
abroad, t o a series of half-understood events which neverthe-
less transformed an ancient Empire, Recause t h i s upheaval took
place i n 1908-1909 it produced anxious reactions a t t h e c o u r t s
- iv-
o f the great powers and the Balkan capitals. Succeeding
chapters deal w i t h one o r the other o f these questions, and
the thesis culminates i n the deposition o f Sultan Abdulhamid,
an evont which by no means was conclusive i n the summnr of
1908. Students of the origins o f the F i r s t World War may
well decide that the revolution o f 1908, which took the new
Turkey on t o the German side, was the very evont which released
a l l the accumulated tensions of the Balkan Peninsula. If the
thesis reveals t o the reader some of t h i s significance, and
i f i t further reveals the degree of research s t i l l remain t o
be done, i t w i l l have served a useful purpose.

PREFACE
This study is an e f f o r t t o i n t e r p r e t a c r u c i a l phase of
modern Turkish history, namely, t h e chaotic but hopeful period
between July 1908 and April 1939, During these nine months,
t h e i l l - f a t e d constitution o f 1876 was revived and t h e period
ended i n t h e deposition cf Sultan Abdulhamid. The period
signified t h e end of one epoch and t h e beginning o f another,
when foreign and domestic observers awaited anxiously t o f i n d
o u t whether Turkey was f i n a l l y ready t o e n t e r t h e modern world
as a constitutional s t a t e , Little work has been done on t h i s
critical period s o far by other h i s t o r i a n s and, hence, t h e
reason f o r selecting t h e present topic f o r study.
In t h e wake o f t h e Young Turk Revolution, a number of
books and articles were published, mainly by j o u r n a l i s t s and
t r a v e l l e r s , A large proportion of these books were o f a colour-
f u l nature, paying more a t t e n t i o n t o t h e aura and mystique o f
t h e East, with l i t t l e analysis o r interprstation of t h e revolu-
tion. Certainly, a number o f books, such as McCullough's
The F a l l of Abdulhamid, and Ramsay's Revolution i n Constanti-
nople and Turkey, published before World War I, are of g r e a t
significance and these are attempts t o understand t h e events
of 1908-1909, despite t h e f a c t t h a t they are more i n t h e nature
of personal observations and not d e f i n i t i v e history. Also by
piecing together a l l t h e scattered articles t h a t were published
immediately a f t o r the revolution, a d i l i g e n t historian may be
able t o draw a r e a l i s t i c picture o f the Young Turk Revolution.
In the Enqlish speaking world, Ernest Ramsaur's The Younn Turks:
Prelude t o the Revolution o f 1908 established a new landmark
i n the study o f the Young Turk movement. The book published
i n 1957, stopped with the granting of the Constitution in
July,1908 and t h i s was followed, i n 1962, by Serif Mardin's
Genesis of Younq Ottoman Thouqht, a highly illuminating work
on the i n t e l l e c t u a l origins o f the Young Turk movement. Feroz
Ahmad, i n h i s study, The Younq Turks: The Committee of Union
and Proqress i n Turkish P o l i t i c s 1908-1914, has made a valiant
effort t o f i l l the gap by taking up the story from where Rarnsaur
had l e f t o f f . I n the present study, I have attempted t o analyse
and interpret the basic issues and problems that confronted the
new regime a f t e r Abdulhamid restored the Constitution on July 24,
1908, As a result, i t was f e l t necessary t o include a chapter
each on the Bulgarian declaration o f independence and the Austrian
annexation of Bosnia-Herzegovina, both o f which were o f great
importance t o Turkey i n 1908-9 as they threatened the very exis-
tence o f the Ottoman Empire. The former incident i s discussed
scantily i n most h i s t o r i c a l studies and the l a t t e r always i n i t s
wider European perspective. Hence, i t was found essential t o
focus the two issues i n t h e i r Turkish context, thus f i l l i n g the
gap l e f t by Ahmad and others, no doubt due t o the very nature of
their studios.
I have not dealt with the quostion o f Crete as i t would
have posed innumerable problems and distorted the structube o f
the thesis. I n the same f a t e f u l week o f October 1908, when
Bulgaria declared independence and Austria seized Bosnia-
Herzegovina, the Cretans voted for union with the mainland
Greeks and set up a provisional government t o assume authority
i n the name o f King George. But no formal recognition was
given by the powers o r Turkey and the question was not resolved
before 1912. Consequently, i t i s d i f f i c u l t t o f i t the question
i n t o the July 1908-April 1909 framework and s t i l l expect a
satisfactory interpretation o f the dispute, whereas the Bul-
garian and Bosnian questions were resolved i n early 1909.
moreover, no r e a l i s t i c explanation o f the Cretan dispute i s
possible without an adequate discussion o f the Creek war o f
independence o f 1829 and a l l the subsequent problems i n Turko-
Greek relations. This i s beyond the scope o f the present study.
As the outcome of the Young Turk Revolution was f i r s t
decided i n the towns of Macedonia and then the capital,
Salonica and Constantinople i n i t i a l l y played a f a r greater
r o l e than the r e s t of the Empire put together. Hence, t h i s
study, unavoidably, i s biased i n favour o f developments i n
the Balkans and the capital. This i n no way implies that the
revolution d i d not have i t s wider repercussions i n Anatolia
and the Asiatic provinces o f the Ottoman Empire. I n Chapter
"1, an effort has been made t o describe in some d e t a i l the
effects of t h e revolution i n thoso areas, Nonetheless, con-
siderable d i f f i c u l t i e s were encountered i n dealing with t h e
impact o f t h e revolution i n Anatolia and t h e Arab lands,
primarily because of t h e paucity of material and a general
lack of adequate information. Consequently, t h e demarcation
o f power i n the Asiatic provinces between t h e C.U.P. and the
Porte is never clear and t h e diplomatic despatches, more o f t e n
than not, throw l i t t l e l i g h t on t h e subject. The issue is
further confounded by t h e absence of secondary sources dealing
with t h e impact of t h e revolution i n those areas,
In completing Chapter VI, my own ignorance of Turkish
and Arabic contributed t o t h e d i f f i c u l t i e s as I was largely
dependent on t h e British Foreign Office documents f o r informa-
tion,
CONTENTS
CHAPTER PAGE
. . . .
I ORIGINS OF THE YOUNG TURK REVOLUTION , 1
. . . . . .
II OUTBREAK OF THE REVOLT , , , , , , 52
- -
111 ImMEDIATE REACTION D. O.M E.S T.IC AN.D .F OR.E IG.N . . .
TO THE REVOLUTION , , 84
IV CRISIS I N DIPLONACY: TURKEY AND THE . . .
ANNEXATION OF BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA , 131
.
V CRISIS I N DIPLOmACY: TURKEY AND THE
BULGARIAN DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE , , 169
. . . . . . .
V I THE SEARCH FOR A NEW ORDER , , , 220
V II THE APRIL mUTINY AND THE DEPOSITION OF
ABDULHAMID , , 266
w w w w w w
GLOSSARY w . w w w w * * * . . * ~ w , ~ e , , , , , . 3 0 3
.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 306
w w w w w