THE LAST SULTAN OF THREE CONTİNENTS: A REVİEW OF THE PERİOD OF ABDÜLHAMİD II – 5 | İlim ve Medeniyet

6. Second Constitutional Era and Dethronement of Abdülhamid II

     In the beginning of 20th century; Young Turks, that was composed of literate young who were against the dominance of Abdülhamid II and aimed the proclamation of constitutionalism, started to be influential in Ottoman Empire. Young Turks gathered around the Committee of Union and Progress; this committee force to the Sultan to declare constitutionalism. In 23 July 1908, Abdülhamid II brought into force “Kanun-ı Esasi” as a result of impellent of commissioned officers who became together in Macedonia. With this event second constitutional era started; this means the assembly was opened and the sovereignty of Abdülhamid was over. In 27 April 1909, as a result of three accusations, which are (1) causing “31 Mart Vakası”, (2)falsifying the Quran and (3) wasting public purse, Sultan Abdülhamid II was dethroned by decision of the Ottoman Assembly.[1]

7. Conclusion

     When Abdülhamid II became Sultan, the empire was not the same empire that rules three continent powerfully, dominates the world diplomacy by itself and establishes just and welfare among society. When Abdülhamid II came to power, the education affairs were irregular, schools were deficient, security was weak and the subjects were careless. Monetary power was with Rums, Armenians, Jewish and Westerners. The empire had to take military and political precautions against Great Powers, that had improved in a short time and had imperialistic policy, to protect its independency. In addition, corruption and bribery had rose to maximum and bureaucracy had become functionless.

Abdülhamid II had taken the power after the Treaty of Berlin of 1878 that caused huge land loss and war indemnity. On the one hand, Abdülhamid II was really rigid against oppositions; yet on the other hand when consider the events that happened after the dethronement of the Sultan, the rigid management of Abdülhamid II would be justified; after proclamation of constitutionalism of 1908, Austria-Hungary Empire invaded Bosnia-Herzegovina and in the same day Bulgaria declared its independence. After one day, Crete announced that it united with Greece. In addition, after ten years from Abdülhamid II the empire collapsed because of unsuccessful foreign policies. Consequently; when consider the term of the Committee of Union and Progress, if the CUP had governed the empire after the Treaty of Berlin instead of Abdülhamid II, the tragedy of 1918 would have come true 30 years before.

 

References;

– Ahmad, Feroz. The Making of Modern Turkey. London: Routledge, 1993.

– Akşin, Sina. “Birinci Meşrutiyet Meclis-i Mebusan.” Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi 25 (1970): 19-39.

– Alkan, Necmettin. ” II. Abdülhamid Devrinde İstihdam Edilen İlk Alman Askeri Heyetinin Komutanı Otto Von Kaehler ve Her İki Tarafın Beklentileri.” Tarih Dergisi 43 (2006): 135-165.

– Ayaz, Erhan. “6-7 Eylül Olaylarının Türk Gazetelerindeki Yansılamaları.” Social Science 2 (2015): 82-92.

– Berkes, Niyazi. Türkiye’de Çağdaşlaşma. İstanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları, 2002.

– Beyhan, Mehmet Ali. “Abdülhamid Döneminde Hafiyye Teşkilatı ve Jurnaller” İlmi Araştırmalar 8 (1999): 65-83.

–  Blunt, Wilfrid Scawen. The Future of Islam. London, 1882.

– Buzpınar, Ş. Tufan. “Osmanlı Hilafet Meselesi: Bir Literatür Değerlendirmesi.” Türkiye Araştırmaları Literatür Dergisi. 1 (2004): 113-131.

– Deringil, Selim. The Well-protected Domains: Ideology and the Legitimation of Power in the Ottoman Empire. London: I.B.Tauris & Co Ltd, 1999.

– Güler, İlhami. Dine Yeni Yaklaşımlar. Edited by Hasan Onat. Eskişehir: Anadolu Üniversitesi, 2005.

– İnalcık, Halil. “Turkey Between Europe and the Middle East.” Journal of International Affairs 3 (1998): 1-7.

– Karagöz, Mehmet. “Osmanlı Devletinde Islahat Haraketleri ve Batı Medeniyetine Giriş Gayretleri (1700-1838).” Osmanlı Tarihi Araştırma ve Uygulama Merkezi Dergisi 6 (1995): 173-194.

– Keçeciler, Zeynep (dir. and pro.). Üç Kıtanın Son Hükümdarı. TRT Belgesel Programlar Müdürlüğü. Ankara: 2009.

– Kissinger, Henry. Diplomacy. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1994.

– Küçük, Cevdet. “Şark Meselesi Hakkında Önemli Bir Vesika.” Tarih Journal 32 (1979): 607-638.

– Küçük, Cevdet. “II. Abdülhamid”. TDV İslam Ansiklopedisi (DİA). I (1988): 216-224.

– Numani, Şibli. Anadolu-Suriye-Mısır Seyahatnamesi. Trans. Yusuf Karaca. İstanbul: Risale, 2002.

– Oğuz, Ahmet. “Türk Demokrasi Tarihinde Muhalefet Geleneğinin Oluşması Açısından Sultan II. Abdülhamid ve Dönemi.” Nevsehir University Journal of Social Sciences 2 (2013): 109-120.

– Öke, Mim Kemal Bülent. “Şark Meselesi ve 2. Abdülhamid’in Garp Politikaları (1876-1909).” Osmanlı Araştırmaları 3 (1982): 247-276.

– Özbek, Nadir. “Modernite, Tarih ve İdeoloji: II. Abdülhamid Dönemi Tarihçiliği Üzerine Bir Değerlendirme.” Türkiye Araştırmaları Literatür Dergisi 1 (2004): 71-90.

– Özgüldür, Yavuz, and Serdar Özgüldür. “1876 Anayası’nın Hazırlanmasında Mithat Paşa’nın Rolü ve Fonksiyonu.” Osmanlı Tarihi Araştırma ve Uygulama Merkezi Dergisi 5 (1994): 311-348.

– Sabuncuzade, Luis Alberi. Sultan 2. Abdülhamid’in Hal Tercümesi. Prepared by Mahir Aydın. İstanbul: Kitabevi ,1997.

– Saygılı, Hasip. “Hüseyin Hilmi Paşa’nın Rumeli Müfettişliği Döneminde (1902-1908) Rus Diplomatik Misyonlarının Bulgar Komitacılar İle İlişkiler.” İstanbul Gelişim Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi 2 (2014): 197-226.

– Shaw J.S., E.K. Shaw. History of the Ottoman Empire and Modern Turkey,v.2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.

– Şeber, Nurdan İpek. “Namlunun Ucundaki Padişah: II.Abdülhamid’e Karşı Planlanan Suikastler.” Türkiye Mecmuası 22 (2012): 31-59

– Voll, J. Obert. İslam Süreklilik ve Değişim. Trans. Cemil Aydın. İstanbul: Yöneliş, 1991.

–  Zürcher, Eric Jan. Turkey: A Modern History, 3rd Edition. London: I. B. Tauris, 2004.

 

 

 

 

[1] Küçük, “II. Abdülhamid,” p. 222.