Istanbul S Great War

From the Treaty of Versailles to the 2018 centenary and beyond, the history of the First World War has been continually written and rewritten, studied and contested, producing a rich historiography shaped by the social and cultural circumstances of its creation. Writing the Great War provides a groundbreaking survey of this vast body of work, assembling contributions on a variety of national and regional historiographies from some of the most prominent scholars in the field. By analyzing perceptions of the war in contexts ranging from Nazi Germany to India’s struggle for independence, this is an illuminating collective study of the complex interplay of memory and history.

The Ottoman Empire was one of the main belligerent Powers in the First World War which ended the long nineteenth century and ushered in the modern era. Indeed, it would not be wrong to say that the Empire was among the major six Powers that fought over four years. The Ottomans fought at no less than twelve fronts in a vast geography extending from European theaters like Galicia to Mespotamia and the Canal. The war at the Caucasus and the abortive Allied landing on the Gallipoli Peninsula directly affected the causes of the October Revolution in 1917. The Ottoman Empire sued for armistice only ten days before Germany did so. Moreover, the results of the Ottoman engagement deeply affected the shape of the modern Middle East in a singular way. However, the role of the Ottoman Empire in the First World War has only rarely been studied in a scholarly fashion. Years of neglect ended up with the overbearing and simplistic notion that the Ottoman leadership was already pro-German and there was no way for the Entente Powers to stop them from aligning with Germany. As amply demonstrated in this study, this was not the case at all. All those crises that preceded the outbreak of the First World War, beginning from the Annexation Crisis of 1908, to the Libyan and Balkan Wars up to the Liman von Sanders Crisis just months away from August 1914, directly involved the Ottomans. Given the long history of Russo-Turkish wars, there was no way for the Ottomans to lightly discount the imminent danger they found themselves squarely facing in August 1914. Their fear that Tsarist Russia would not miss the opportunity arising in the midst of the great upheaval to settle once and for all the issue of Constantinople and the Straits, the crux of the age old Eastern Question was the dominant factor in their mind. The present study is a diplomatic history of the crises years from 1908 to the entry of the Ottoman Empire to the Great War at the end of October 1914. CONTENTS PREFACE CHAPTER 1. THE YOUNG TURK REVOLUTION AND EUROPE CHAPTER 2. THE ANNEXATION OF BOSNIA-HERZEGOVINA AND THE EUROPEAN CRISIS CHAPTER 3. THE BALKAN WARS AS THE HARBINGER OF THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE’S DEMISE CHAPTER 4. THE RETURN OF CONSTANTINOPLE AND THE STRAITS TO INTERNATIONAL POLITICS AND THE LIMAN VON SANDERS CRISIS CHAPTER 5. TOWARDS JULY 1914 CHAPTER 6. THE ALLIANCE WITH GERMANY CHAPTER 7. AUGUST 1914: THE FINAL THROW CHAPTER 8. THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE’S ENTRY INTO THE FIRST WORLD WAR CHAPTER 9. SAZONOV’S DIPLOMACY ON CONSTANTINOPLE AND THE STRAITS CHAPTER 10. GALLIPOLI AS THE CLIMAX OF TURKEY’S STRUGGLE FOR SURVIVAL CHAPTER 11. INCIPIENT AWARENESS: BRINGING IN THE LOST NEXUS

Nearly fourteen million people died during the First World War. But why, and for what reason? Already many contemporaries saw the Great War as a "pointless carnage" (Pope Benedict XV, 1917). Was there a point, at least in the eyes of the political and military decision makers? How did they justify the losses, and why did they not try to end the war earlier? In this volume twelve international specialists analyses and compares the hopes and expectations of the political and military leaders of the main belligerent countries and of their respective societies. It shows that the war aims adopted during the First World War were not, for the most part, the cause of the conflict, but a reaction to it, an attempt to give the tragedy a purpose - even if the consequence was to oblige the belligerents to go on fighting until victory. The volume tries to explain why - and for what - the contemporaries thought that they had to fight the Great War.

Traditionally, in general studies of the First World War, the Middle East is an arena of combat that has been portrayed in romanticised terms, in stark contrast to the mud, blood, and presumed futility of the Western Front. Battles fought in Egypt, Palestine, Mesopotamia, and Arabia offered a different narrative on the Great War, one in which the agency of individual figures was less neutered by heavy artillery. As with the historiography of the Western Front, which has been the focus of sustained inquiry since the mid-1960s, such assumptions about the Middle East have come under revision in the last two decades – a reflection of an emerging ‘global turn’ in the history of the First World War. The ‘sideshow’ theatres of the Great War – Africa, the Middle East, Eastern Europe, and the Pacific – have come under much greater scrutiny from historians. The fifteen chapters in this volume cover a broad range of perspectives on the First World War in the Middle East, from strategic planning issues wrestled with by statesmen through to the experience of religious communities trying to survive in war zones. The chapter authors look at their specific topics through a global lens, relating their areas of research to wider arguments on the history of the First World War.

This is a comprehensive new operational military history of the Ottoman army during the First World War. Drawing from archives, official military histories, personal war narratives and sizable Turkish secondary literature, it tells the incredible story of the Ottoman army’s struggle from the mountains of the Caucasus to the deserts of Arabia and the bloody shores of Gallipoli. The Ottoman army, by opening new fronts, diverted and kept sizeable units of British, Russian and French forces away from the main theatres and even sent reinforcements to Austro-Hungary and Bulgaria. Against all odds the Ottoman army ultimately achieved some striking successes, not only on the battlefield, but in their total mobilization of the empire’s meagre human and economic resources. However, even by the terrible standards of the First World War, these achievements came at a terrible price in casualties and, ultimately, loss of territory. Thus, instead of improving the integrity and security of the empire, the war effectively dismantled it and created situations and problems hitherto undreamed of by a besieged Ottoman leadership. In a unique account, Uyar revises our understanding of the war in the Middle East.

During the phases of mobile warfare, the ethnically and religiously very heterogeneous population in the border regions of the multi-ethnic empires suffered in particular. Even if the real military situation in the course of the war hardly gave cause for concern, the image of disloyal ethnic and national minorities was widespread. This was particularly the case when ethnic groups lived on both sides of the border and social and political tensions had already established themselves along ethnic or religious lines of conflict before the war. Displacements, deportations and mass violence were the result. The genocide of the Armenian population is the most extreme example of this development. This anthology examines the border regions of the Ottoman, Russian and Habsburg empires during the First World War with regard to radical population policy and genocidal violence from a comparative perspective in order to draw a more precise picture of escalating and deescalating factors.

This volume offers a comprehensive account of the wars before the Great War and their role in undermining international instability.

Dark tourism involves travel to historical sites associated with death and tragedy. While the main attraction of such sites is their historical value, visitors may also seek to understand other’s pain or achieve educational goals. Dark tourism helps enhance society's capacity to understand and learn from the past. Dark Gastronomy, on the other hand, explores the culinary traditions under dark times such as wars, battles, disasters, epidemics, genocides, famines, and unusual mass deaths. With the guidance of Dark Gastronomy in Times of Tribulation, readers can better understand the role of gastronomy in dark times, such as which foods were accessible and what menus were served to prisoners. This book will appeal to scholars and professionals in history, tourism, sociology, gastronomy, and related fields, as well as those curious about the topic. This book is also ideal for graduate and undergraduate students, human resources consulting companies, university libraries, research institutions, tourism associations, and culinary professionals.