Turkish Revolution Was Inevitable

Assuming that the catastrophe might have been staved off for a year or two, there is not the slightest doubt that the apple was steadily ripening, and in any case would have fallen into the lap of the well-prepared party of Young Turkey.

Continuing The Turkish Revolution of 1908,
Today we begin the third part of the series with our selection from Article in The Great Events by Famous Historians, Vol. 20 by Arminius Vambery published in 1914. The selection is presented in 2 easy 5-minute installments. For works benefiting from the latest research see the “More information” section at the bottom of these pages.

Arminius Vambery (1832-1913) was a Hungarian scholar of Balkan and Ottoman history.

Previously in The Turkish Revolution of 1908.

Time: 1908
Place: Istanbul

It was at the very outset of the recent events in the Near East that the public opinion of Europe betrayed an uncommon degree of ignorance and want of experience in political and social matters in connection with the problem before us. To begin with, the great surprise caused by the success of the Young Turkey party is quite incomprehensible. It was in 1864 that I met by chance a few young Turkish gentlemen, engaged upon editing a revolutionary paper, called Mukhbir, i. e., “The Correspondent”, directed against the then almighty Aali Pashi, whose absolutist tendencies had long ago raised the anger of the younger Turkish generation, who were brought by a smattering of Western political views into collision with the ruling spirit at the Sublime Porte. As time advanced the opposition grew stronger and stronger, and the object of their attack were not only single high dignitaries, but their criticism extended also to the precincts of the imperial palace, whose officials were accused of all kinds of vices and misdeeds, and particularly of leading astray the sacred person of the Padishah, whom, at that time, nobody ventured to assail. It is very natural that after the death of Sultan Abdul Aziz, and during the terribly absolutist and ruinous rule of Sultan Abdul Hamid, the number of the Young Turkish party should have attained excessive dimensions and embraced not only the easily inflammable young members of the Turkish society, but even many of the Efendis and Pashas of a riper age ; nay, ladies and young girls took part in secret societies, and as an occasional contributor to Turkish revolutionary I have got letters in my possession in which ladies render thanks for my sympathies shown to their nation and encourage me to further participation in their cause. Considering the very faint knowledge the Yildiz camarilla could acquire in spite of the host of dearly paid spies and delators, we must not wonder at all that the Western world remained in utter darkness with regard to the part played by Young Turkey in the Ottoman Empire. The number of Turkish revolutionary papers had grown up like mushrooms; their editors expelled from one place took refuge in another. London, Paris, Brussels, Geneva, Athens, Alexandria, and Cairo were successfully used, and the publications of the revolutionary committees, being looked upon as literary dainties, went off quickly in Turkey. Turkish, being a language with which but a limited number of Orientalists are conversant, was not within easy reach of our politicians and publicists, and the proceedings of Young Turkey remained for a long time shrouded in mystery. Of course, single explosions of the carefully laid mines could not be prevented, and the quiet outbreak of discontent in Kastamuni, Erzerum, Bitlis, and a few other places may be well looked upon as the forerunners of the military rising in Macedonia. In fact, the proper commencement of the Turkish revolution dates from the time when the meeting of the “Committee of Union and Progress” declared itself to have left the field of mere theory and entered the arena of political activity, which is equivalent to saying: We are now strong enough to come out publicly and to fight, if necessary, for the sacred principles of Right and Liberty.

Now, to speak candidly, I am far from pretending that the firm decision and the strong will of the Young Turkish party would have become master of the situation if Sultan Abdul Hamid had had sufficient means to clothe, feed, and pay his army regularly, and if his soldiers had not looked with envy upon the gendarmery under the command of European officers. No! To go about hungry, naked, barefoot, and unpaid is a sacrifice too onerous even for the most patriotic man, and I am ready to admit that zealous and patriotic officers, like Enver and Niazi, would hardly have succeeded in their very risky undertaking if the aforesaid privations and sufferings of the soldiers had not acted in their favor. But at the same time I cannot help saying that the state of affairs created by the horrible and abominable doings of the Yildiz clique could not have gone on for any length of time. The straw which broke the back of the Turkish camel was ready at hand, and, assuming that the catastrophe might have been staved off for a year or two, there is not the slightest doubt that the apple was steadily ripening, and in any case would have fallen into the lap of the well-prepared party of Young Turkey.

Such being the case, as proved by evident facts, I do not see the reason of the great surprise which the recent events in Turkey have created in Europe. The collapse of the Hamidian rule was, as the result of a long misrule, unavoidable, and in the face of this phenomenon we have no reason to wonder at the unanimity manifested in the movement; we must not be struck by the fact that the whole went off without bloodshed, and that the revolution was accomplished in a peaceful and quiet manner hitherto unheard of. We may reasonably ask ourselves: Whose blood should have been shed? There was no opposition, since the whole nation indiscriminately belonged to the Young Turkey party; no social or religious objection could have been raised, since the teachings of the Koran clearly prohibit the application of despotic and autocratic measures and no government is legal if it proceeds without taking counsel with public opinion, which we call Parliament. The Koran says: “V’ amruhum shura bainu hum,” i. e., “the Prophet commanded they must take counsel”. Further it is said: “Any obnoxious measure taken after consultation is preferable to a salutary measure taken arbitrarily.” There is besides the standard principle “Kulli islam nurr,” i. e., all Muslims are free, and one must be intentionally blind to pretend that Constitution and Parliament do not suit the social and moral conditions of the Muslims, and that there is no hope for a successful introduction of these Western institutions among Muslim peoples.

Edwin Pears begins here. A. Rustem Bey begins here.

More information here and here, and below.