In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

prefaCe Nor need we be perturbed by the platitude that movements are started by minorities. All effective movements have few leaders and a multitude of followers; but this does not mean that the multitude is not essential to their success. Numbers count in history . . . What seems to me essential is to recognize in the great man an outstanding individual who is at once a product and an agent of the historical process, at once the representative and the creator of social forces which change the shape of the world and the thoughts of men. e. h. Carr, What Is hIstory? aDDressinG His CamBriDGe university audience in 1961 on the topic “What Is History?” the eminent historian E. H. Carr was concerned to stress the dynamic relationship of the individual, society as a whole, and the unfolding of events. Carr cautioned against situating “great men outside history” as “individuals who imposed themselves on history in virtue of their greatness.” Certainly, over the course of the twentieth century many leaders rose to fame and propagated the myth that as great men they were the primary motivating forces in their nations’ histories. Nevertheless the truth underlying Carr’s premise has been borne out in the Middle East as much as anywhere, for here the legacies of great men have collapsed and history has been rewritten to situate them in the context of the “multitude” who were essential to their success in the first place. Social history, therefore, has become well established alongside the ever-present histories of politics and ideas. If there is one exception, it is to be found in the history of the Republic of Turkey and its founding president, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk (1881–1938). It is no exaggeration to suggest that few, if any, countries were so dominated by one man during the twentieth century. Now, more than seven decades after his death, it would appear that “Atatürk” is still alive and well in the twenty-first century: he is at the center of national identity in Turkey. Beyond its borders, Turkey’s international image remains indissolubly associated with Atatürk, and rarely does one come across contemporary commentary on Turkey which does not at least make passing reference to his revolutionary commitment to “secularize” the former heartland of the Islamic Ottoman Empire. xii how happy to Call oneself a turk Within Turkey itself, Atatürk presides as the silent yet ever present “immortal leader” (ebedî şef), as he was anointed soon after his death in 1938. The Anıtkabir (Atatürk’s mausoleum) looms above the capital , Ankara, and is an extremely popular site of pilgrimage. Portraits of Atatürk as well as the texts of his famous speeches adorn the walls of shops, schools, and public buildings; the Turkish lira (TL) bears his image; and towns and cities throughout the country pride themselves on magnificent statues portraying him as determined and indomitable. Every year at 9:05 a.m. on November 10, nationwide ceremonies commemorate the moment of Atatürk’s death; and at times of political crisis Turks frequently take to the streets bearing images of the “Father of the Turk” and declaring their commitment to follow in the “path of Atatürk” with the words “Atatürk’ün yolundayız.” Mustafa Kemal Atatürk is also at the heart of the accepted historical narrative of the “Turkish nation,” an account that he himself took an active role in shaping. Quite remarkably, even today this narrative—the term “Kemalist mythology” would not be going too far—prevails both in Turkey and beyond. In it, the person of Atatürk is a near-messianic figure who emerged to prominence following the defeat of the Ottoman Empire in World War I, just as the nation entered its darkest hour, with British, French, Italian, Greek, and Armenian occupation of Anatolia , the nation’s homeland (vatan). Atatürk was the one man capable of uniting a people exhausted and devastated by years of war and of inspiring them to make the ultimate sacrifice of laying down their lives for the future of the nation. Subsequent to this he was the man who had the courage to throw off the burden of the corrupt Ottoman dynasty so that the Turkish people might finally be master of their own state and achieve their full potential as a nation deserving of membership in the civilized world. Thus Atatürk was not only the savior but also the creator or author of the...

Share