"The Family, Feminism, and the State during the

"The Family, Feminism, and the State during the

Zafer Toprak, "The Family, Feminism, and the State during the Young Turk Period,
1908-1918," in Première Rencontre Internationale sur l'Empire Ottoman et la
Turquie Moderne, İstanbul-Paris, Éditions ISIS, 1991, s. 441-452.
The Family, Feminism, and the State during the Young Turk Period,
1908-1918
Zafer Toprak
In considering the family in an historical context, one has to take into consideration
the interaction between families and the social structures in which they are
imbedded. The family as part of the diversity of social milieus, affects the latter
while these, in turn contribute to mutations in domestic organization. It may be
argued that the dynamics of this interrelation originate in large part within social
1
structures. The processes of social change induce modifications in the constitution
of the family more often than the latter stimulates the former. Fundamental
changes in the organization of society may bring about, in the long run, basic
changes in the structure of domestic units, as in the cases of the French Revolution
or of the Soviet one. In both instances, family life shifted from the private into the
purview of the public realm.
Although the idea of the family as the germ-cell of the state has only limited
justification from an actual historical point of view, one observes that the
"bourgeois family" and its accompanying way of life emerge in the politico-social
discourse of the nineteenth century as the main pillar of "bourgeois society". In
fact, a host of sociologists in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries even
tended to see the state as the sum total of families in an organicist way. In the
solidarist milieus of France of that period, from which Ottoman-Turkish learned
men deduced their social models, domestic organization and domestic ethics
occupied paramount importance.
The family has always been described as one of the basic values to which the
"bourgeoisie" pays great homage. This has been especially true in years of crisis.
State-family interplay gathered particular momentum in the inter-war years of the
twenties and thirties. The authoritarian regimes of the continent led the way in this
context. The prosperity of the nation in these countries required the well-being of
the family. The emphasis on state and statism in the first half of the twentieth century
did in fact enlarge the realms of the government in most countries. State policies
very often encompassed domestic units of the society, and the private milieu of
family life was brought into the fold of the state through numerous governmental
measures.
The interaction between family and state was one of the main concerns of
governments during the Young Turk period (1908-1918) and again in the Singleparty era (1923-1946) of Republican Turkey. Sociology as a newcomer to Ottoman
intellectual life influenced the making of the Turkish nation-state and provided for
its ideologues clues about the social prerequisites of a new society. "New Life" (Yeni
Hayat), as formulated by ideologues of the Committee on Union and Progress, the
Unionists, as we shall call them, required radical changes in the cultural norms
and social structures of Ottoman society. Women and family in particular were
brought onto the agenda of the new regime as main items of concern during this
period. At the same time political and social changes in late Ottoman society
brought about alterations in the structure of the family, especially in Istanbul and the
major metropolitan centers of the Empire. The rising constitutionalism of the pre2
World War I years challenged to some degree the old Ottoman family structure, as
the libertarian atmosphere of the period led to a metamorphosis in the concept of
family in Turkish society.
In the early years of the Young Turk period, a new ideological framework was
developed in line with the emerging nationalism of the time. According to this new
outlook, patriarchalism had to be replaced by partnership within the family because
the tenets of the 1908 revolution required "liberty, equality and fraternity". The
nuclear family based on partnership was seen as the model family, one that would
emerge from and also lead to the emancipation of women. Indeed, feminism and
the "New Family" (Yeni Aile) or the "National Family" (Milli Aile), as the
Unionists put it, went hand in hand during the Young Turk period.[1]
Sociology, or sociologism became a basic tool for the Unionists to understand the
milieu within which societies evolved. They assigned to it the paramount task of
discovering the hierarchy of social groups. This was indispensable for their nonconflictual, consensual model of society, one in which the various collectivities
and their norms had to be in harmony.[2] The family as a solidarity group in a
sociological sense was one of the main concerns of the Unionist solidarists. The
history of the Turkish family, made its debut during that time in the writings of
Ziya Gökalp, the founder of Turkish sociology. He devoted more than a dozen
scholarly articles, mainly in Yeni Mecmua and Milli Tetebbu'lar Mecmuası, to
the historical evolution of the Turkish family.[3] Halim Sabit was another social
historian who dealt with the same topic in his "History of the Family".[4]
Gökalp highlights three kinds of social groups: family groups, occupational
groups, and political groups. As independent and self-sufficient collectivities,
political groups occupy the most important place in this classification. Family
groups and occupational groups are integrated within political groups. Political
groups are seen as social organisms, having a life of their own. Family groups are the
cells and occupational groups are the organs of this organism. Therefore, family
groups and occupational groups are called secondary groups. Social solidarity, for
Gökalp, is the cement of a non-conflictual, consensual society. The collective
conscience, the basis of solidarity in a Durkheimian sense requires common norms,
including national-patriotic, occupational, familial, civil-individual, and
international moralities. National-patriotic morality means for Gökalp among
other things a commitment to human rights and to feminism. As for family
morality, or the morality of the "cell", which is a part of his "Moral Turkism"
(Ahlâki Türkçülük), equality and liberty should be the main criteria. Family
morality, based on old Turkish cultural values, concerns such norms such as those
3
relating to communal property in land, to democracy in the "conjugal family" as
opposed to the autocracy of the "patriarchal family", to the inviolability of
residence, to the equality of men and women, and to monogamy. As was true with
most of the other latecomers to nationalism, the Turks also had to rely on their
ancient past as an ideological underpinning to the future. Young Turk ideologues
argued that Turks used to enjoy higher standards in the pre-Islamic period and
that the ancient family structure and sexual morality of the Turks had disappeared
over the centuries. They believed that the status of Turkish women had declined
as a result of the encounter with Iranian and Byzantine civilizations. And they
argued that under those circumstances Turks had been unable to live up to their
ancient endogenous egalitarian principles. The condition of Turkish women in
particular worsened rapidly under alien influence. They were made to wear the veil
and were kept in seclusion. Their education was neglected and their legal status
within marriage deteriorated.
According to Gökalp, with the coming of Turkish nationalism, the revival of and
return to old Turkish precepts would be inevitable. Gökalp promoted the idea of
the nuclear family based on egalitarian principles, one upholding the components
of national morality as he saw it, as the most appropriate for modern Turkish
society. The cell of the social organism and the building-block of the nationstate that needed to be reconstructed was, he argued, the nuclear family. In
Gökalp's teaching feminism has an especially important place: it is the motor force
lying behind the nuclear family. In his emphasis on Turkish national culture rather
than on Islamic sources of social morality, he retrospectively by-passes the Islamic
period in order to acquaint himself with and build upon the mythological sagas of
Central Asian Turks. Feminism, in his view, originates with the Central Asian
Turks. The status of women in the Turkish Central Asian past was equal to that of
men. The Khan and the Hatun had equal rights in executive authority and a decree
of the Khan alone would not be obeyed without the consent of the Hatun. Only a
decree issued in the names of both had legitimacy. An ambassador could be given an
audience only when the Khan was seated with the Hatun on his left. Laws and
customs required the Hatun's presence at political councils, religious ceremonies, and
assemblies for war and peace.
In Gökalp's account, monogamy also was the rule among the ancient Turks.
Although women called "kuma", a type of concubine, could be part of the old
Turkish household, they did not enjoy the rights and privileges of actual wives.
Houses belonged equally to husbands and wives, and the custody of children could
be assigned to the mother as well as to the father. After embracing Islam, the
Turks kept their old customs for a considerable time. In fact Ibn Batuta, who
4
travelled widely in the Turkish world, described in his writing the equality of men
and women among Turks unfettered by outside influences. This view was
supported by late nineteenth and early twentieth century ethnographic research read
by Gökalp and his colleagues.
Although the ancient Turkish family is his ideal model, Gökalp does in fact also
appreciate early Islamic advances in family life. He writes that in the ancient preIslamic Arab family the birth of a girl was regarded as a dishonor for the father
and that female infanticide was common. Arabs could then marry any number of
women and divorce them at their will. With the coming of Islam, female infanticide
was outlawed. The number of wives was limited to four and even this upper limit
was legitimate only if the husband could ensure equal treatment for all. Islamic law
considered marriage as a contract for which the consent of parties was needed.
Women were protected in case of divorce through the payment of dowry and an
indemnity. Unless there was a major cause such as misconduct or dishonesty,
divorce was not approved by Islamic family law. Although Islam required the
obedience of wives to their husbands, it was at the same time an obligation of the
husband to treat his wife or wives decently. In fact, according to Gökalp, when
compared to the pre-Islamic period in Arabia, Islam brought about considerable
reforms in family life.
According to Gökalp feminism originated with the Turks. He considers democracy
and feminism to be the foundation-stones of ancient Turkish life. He argues that
modern Turkish nationalists must adopt feminism and restore the dignity of
womanhood and the family. In this endeavor, Gökalp directs Turkish nationalists to
turn to the tolerance of their ancient past for inspiration. Feminism in nineteenth
and twentieth century Turkey developed with the rise of nationalism. Turkish
nationalists considered themselves to be both populists and feminists. Turkish
nationalist ideology regarded the emancipation of women as one of the most
important prerequisites of the larger social revolution (ictimaî inkılâb) which was
brought to the agenda of the Unionists following the 19O8 (Young Turk) political
revolution.
The Young Turk period was a time of rising aspirations for women. Seclusion
and veiling were challenged. Ottoman women became increasingly more
integrated into public life. Fashionable women began to substitute a thin veil
for the traditional covering.[5] A few years later the veil no longer covered the
face but was thrown off to one side and the fabric was no longer always black.
During World War I, many women simply wore a scarf and no veil. Discrimination
in education was lifted with the coming to power of a number of enlightened
5
ministers of the time.[6] And women were allowed to attend schools of higher
education. In 1914 a university for women (İnas Darülfununu) was founded.[7] It
provided a three-year course in literature, mathematics, and natural sciences. In
January 1918, segregation between the sexes at the university ended as women
attended the same lectures as men.[8] This change was confirmed by a decree
issued in September 1921 by the Board of Administration of university. Coeducation was first initiated in the science and literature departments; later, during
1921-1922, the Faculty of Law began to admit female students; and in 1922-1923,
the Medical School followed suit. In 1917 a commercial college was opened
exclusively for women [9] as well as a fine arts school and a school of music. In
1918 several Muslim women joined the Istanbul theater school for the first
time. [10]
The Young Turk period also witnessed the burgeoning of a host of women's
associations.[11] Most of them had philanthropic aims.[12] As wars followed
one upon the other, women's associations provided social services for the needy,
raised funds for the Red Crescent, nursed the wounded, and collected garments for
soldiers. The Women's Section of the Red Crescent Society (Osmanlı Hilal-i Ahmer
Cemiyeti Kadınlar Heyet-i Merkezisi)[13], the Society for Aid to Needy Soldiers'
Families (Muhtac Asker Ailelerine Muavenet Cemiyeti) and the Ottoman Women's
Committee for the National Defense (Mudafaa-i Milliyye Osmanlı Hanımlar
Heyeti)[14] were the leading philanthropic societies.
Apart from these philanthropic associations, there were others with feminist goals.
Their motto was the betterment of the conditions of women. They aimed at
educating women, creating business opportunities for them, modernizing their way
of living and their dress, teaching them the arts, etc. There was even an attempt to
establish a teachers' union. The Women's Section of the Union and Progress (Ittihat
ve Terakki Kadınlar Şubesi), the Society for the Protection of Women (Kadınları
Esirgeme Derneği), the Society for the Elevation of Women (Teali-i Nisvan
Cemiyeti), [15] the Society for Defense of Women's Rights (Müdafaa-i Hukuk-ı
Nisvan Cemiyeti), and The Ottoman Islamic Association for the Employment of
Women (Osmanlı Kadınlari Çalıştırma Cemiyet-i İslamiyesi)[16] were among the
major feminist organizations of the time. The Society for the Elevation of Women
was founded in 19O8 by Halide Edip, the most eminent female writer of the
period. This society was in close contact with the British suffragette movement [17]
and provided educational facilities for its members [18]. The Society for the Defense
of Women's Rights was the most radical of the women's associations of the time. Its
main concern was the economic emancipation of women by finding them decent jobs
in the public sector as well as in factories[19] The first Ottoman woman to work in
6
an office was Bedra Osman Hanim, a member of the Society for the Defense of
Women's Rights. Her first attempt at getting employment at the Telephone Company
of Istanbul was a failure. But thanks to a campaign carried out by the Society, and
to public opinion created by the Kadınlar Dünyasi (Women's World ) - a publication
of the same society - the company felt itself obliged to employ female telephone
operators. This was the beginning. Others followed suit. But the most radical change
came with World War I. The war and the human losses at the fronts created a labor
vacuum. [20] Due to a shortage in manpower, women were invited to enter
professions hitherto regarded as the exclusive domain of men.
They were employed as national governmental and municipal clerks, as factory
workers, as street cleaners, and even as barbers in many districts of Istanbul.[21]
Women from the outskirts of Istanbul brought their products to the city to
market them. There was even a bazaar in Galata, earmarked exclusively for
women merchants.[22] The First Army in Istanbul initiated Women Workers'
Brigades and trained them for support services.[23] The Fourth Army in Syria under
the command of Cemal Paşa organized a Women's Battalion to provide farmhands for agricultural production in the Çukurova Region.[24] By the end of World
War I, large numbers of women had been integrated into the social and economic
life of the country. The poverty-stricken, isolated Ottoman women had no choice
but to seek employment to survive as their men, who had hitherto provided for the
household, were called to arms.[25]
Parallel to the changes in the status of women, economic and social disorder
inflicted by the Balkan Wars and World War I brought about a moral crisis and
the loosening of old family ties.[26] The number of Muslim prostitutes increased
rapidly during this period.[27] Syphilis was quite widespread. The Unionist
government had to adopt a liberal code providing medical care to prostitutes.
Medical surveillance became obligatory. The maintenance of the brothels was put
under the control of the municipal government and the general directorate of
police.[28] A by-law legalized prostitution for the first time in Ottoman
history.[29]
It was such circumstances that the family became a political issue for the Unionist
government. In fact, the idea of a "National Family", immune to all the malaises
of the epoch, occupied the forefront of the social concerns of the period. The "New
Family" or the "National Family", as it was known, sponsored by the Unionists, was
in essence the companionate nuclear family. The Unionists welcomed the
replacement of large patriarchal families by small monogamic ones. During this
period, marriage ceased being purely a religious affair. The new family law
7
enacted in 1917, encouraging monogamy, paved the way for a secular family
code.[30] At the same time, the Unionists put into effect a pro-natalist policy
following the rapid decline in population due to the successive wars. Stateengineered marriages were introduced. The Ottoman Islamic Association for the
Employment of Women established by Enver Paşa, published matchmaking
advertisements in the newspapers. The candidates whose names were listed in the
ads with detailed personal information about them were also introduced to one
another in the offices of the Association.[31] Theatrical wedding ceremonies were
staged in order to encourage would-be candidates.[32] Brides were provided with a
trousseau. A lump sum financial assistance, of up to fifty Ottoman liras, was
distributed to newly-wed couples. Bride and groom had their salaries increased by
20 per cent. In addition each new birth was awarded with another 20 per cent
salary increase.
Indeed, quasi-mandatory marriage became part of the official policy at the time.[33]
The Association fixed upper age limits in order to pressure people to marry early.
Women and men were expected to marry by 21 and 25 respectively. Those who
either could not find an eligible spouse or who refused the candidates provided
through the Association by that age had their salaries reduced by fifteen per cent and
lost their membership. The last sanction could result in unemployment, as jobs
were provided through the Association.
The "National Family" as the Unionists saw it, however, did not imply a bona fide
reproduction of the "European family" or the "modern family" of the West. In this
context, the Unionists made a distinction between culture which was indigenous
and civilization which could be international in scope. In their view, family
structure was part of the culture of a people and had to remain indigenous. Hence,
the Turkish "National Family" could not imitate the types of family in other nations.
Gökalp, the architect of the idea of the "National Family", cautioned the Unionists on
this point.
According to Gökalp, the Ottoman family as an institution had been undergoing
severe crises since the beginning of the Tanzimat period. Many Ottoman
intellectuals failed, he believed, to see the fundamental differences between the
progress of civilization and the growth of cultures. The westernizers, on the one
hand emphasizing the importance of progress, by-passed the existence of a
national culture. They blindly imitated Europeans in matters of the "National
Family" as they strove to acquire "modern", that is European family patterns.
Traditionalists, on the other hand, feared the disintegration of the traditional family
and the ensuing chaos in the relationship of the sexes that might result. Hence, they
8
opposed the modern family and the modern conception of womanhood.
Traditionalist writers, such as Mustafa Sabri, Mehmet Akif and Said Halim,
praised polygamy as well as seclusion and veiling of women. In their view,
classical patterns of sex differences provided for social unity and cohesion.
Proponents of the "National Family" rejected both of these "extremist" views. The
new Turkish family would be modernized by the introduction of new concepts from
European civilization. But this did not mean that the Turkish family would imitate
family patterns in various European countries. As with all social organisms,
Gökalp and his colleagues believed that the Turkish family too, would have to
pursue its own the path of evolution. Certain components of public society might
be borrowed from Europeans since Ottoman progress would inevitably follow
the lines of European civilization. But the same route could never be adopted for
the cultural course that the Turkish family would take. Turkish culture could grow
only from within by an inner logic and in accordance with changes taking place in
social structure and in civic and political organization.
Hence, the "National Family" idea put forward by the Unionists was conceived
of as a panacea for the salvation of Ottoman society. Unionist intellectuals in
search of national identity relied upon the family as the germ-cell of the nation-state
and family morality as the source of national solidarity. The Unionist intervention
into the private realm of the family was partly due to the concerns of the new
regime for the future of the state. The political revolution of 1908 could only
succeed, they believed if accompanied by a "social revolution" (ictimai inkılâb),
the foundation of which was the "New Life." The revolutionary discourse of the
Young Turks emphasizing egalitarian principles, paved the way for Ottoman
feminism. The Unionists attempted to hasten this transformation through the
adoption of a new family model. It is within such a context that the "National
Family", highlighting the status of women became the slogan of the Young Turk
ideologues.
The Young Turk ideologues believed that it was necessary for the state to intervene
on behalf of the revolution in order to clear the ground for a new type of social
organization. This necessitated a new family morality that would be in harmony
with the public morality of the nation-state. The sociological discourse of Ziya
Gökalp and his colleagues was oriented toward laying the conceptual framework
for that social organization. The interconnections drawn between the "New Life,"
the "National Family," and feminism during the Young Turk decade were
manifestations of the social organizational component of Unionist ideology.
9
In sum, during the Young Turk Period a new conception of womanhood and
familial living was introduced in the Ottoman Empire. Ottoman society did, in
this respect, undergo a radical transformation, a change occasioned both by the
intellectual environment of Young Turk family ideology and Ottoman feminism, as
well as by the social and demographic changes of the war era.
REFERENCES
1. Among the many books and booklets on Ottoman feminism and the family, are
the following: Halil Hamid, İslamiyette Feminizm yahud Alem-i Nisvanda
Musavat-ı Tamme, Dersaadet: Keteon Matbaası, 1328; Baha Tevfik (from Odette
Lacquerre), Feminizm - Alem-i Nisvan (Teceddüd-i İlmi ve Felsefi
Kütüphanesi), Dersaadet: n.d. (with a chapter on Islam and Feminism "İslamiyet ve Feminizm"); Ahmed Rıza, Vazife ve Mes'uliyet 3. cüz: Kadın,
(published by the Union and Progress Party in Paris), 1324; Halil Hamid, Dünkü,
Bügünkü, Yarınkı Kadın,İstanbul: Necm-i İstikbal Matbaasi, 1334; Kasım Emin'den
Zeki Magamez, Hürriyet-i Nisvan, Istanbul: Matbaa-i Hayriye ve Şürekasi,
1329/1331; Ahmed Mümtaz, Mevki-i Nisvan Hakkında Nazariyyat ve Hakâyik,
Istanbul: Mürettibin-i Osmaniye Matbaası, 1325; Celal Nuri, Kadınlarımız,
İstanbul: Matbaa-i İctihad, 1331; Salahaddin Asım, Türk Kadınlığının Tereddisi
yahud Karılaşmak, İstanbul: Resimli Kitap Matbaası, n.d; Kadınlarımızın
İctimaları, İstanbul:Tanin Matbaası, 1329; Ahmed Cevad, Bizde Kadın,
Dersaadet: Kader Matbaası, 1328; Erkeklerle Kadın Arasında Musavat Olabilir
mi? İstanbul: 1333: Fatma Aliye, Nisvan-i İslam., İstanbul, 1309; Nazım,
İslamHanımlari ve Alem-i İslamiyette Hayat-i Aile, Istanbul: 1318.
2. Taha Parla, The Social and Political Thought of Ziya Gökalp1876-1924, Leiden:
E.J.Brill, 1985, pp. 59-62.
3. Basically "Aile Ahlâkı -1- Semiye," Yeni Mecmua, vol. 1, no. 10, 13 Eylül 1333,
pp. 181-186; "-2- Ocak", Ibid., no. 11, 20 Eylül 1333, pp. 201-206; "-3- Konak,"
Ibid., no. 12, 27 Eylül 1333, pp. 221-223; Ibid., no 13, 4 Teşrin-i evvel
1333, pp. 241-245; Ibid., no 14, 11 Teşrin-i evvel 1333, pp. 261-265; Ibid, no
15, 18 Teşrin-i evvel 1333, pp. 301-304; "-4- Konaktan Yuvaya," Ibid., no. 17, 1
Teşrin-i sani 1333, pp. 321-324; "Gevşek Yuva," Ibid., 8 Teşrin-i sani 1333, pp. 341343; "Şövalye Aşkı ve Feminizm," Ibid., no. 19, 15 Teşrin-i sani 1333, pp. 361364; "Asri Aile ve Milli Aile," Ibid., no. 21, 29 Teşrin-i sani 1333, pp. 381-383;
"Düğün Adetleri," Ibid., no. 21, 29 Teşrin-i sani 1333, pp. 421-424; "Türk
Ailesinin Temelleri," Ibid., no. 23, 13 Kanun-ı evvel 1333, pp. 441-444; "Eski
10
Türklerde Ictimai Teşkilat", Milli Tetebbu'lar Mecmuası, no. 3, 7 Ağustos 1331, pp.
388-456.
4. Halim Sabit, "Aile Tarihi - Islamiyetten Evvel ve Sonra -1-", Yeni Mecmua, no
23, 13 Kanun-ı evvel 1917, pp. 453-456; "-2-", Ibid, no. 24, 20 Kanun-i evvel
1917, pp. 461-464; -3-", 27, 10 Kanun-ı sani 1918, pp. 13-15; "-4-", Ibid, no. 29,
24 Kanun-ı sani 1918, pp. 48-54.
5. Osman Ergin, "Kadın Hayatında İnkılab: Kadının örtüyü atması ve tedrisi, idari
ve teşrii hayata atılması," Türkiye Maarif Tarihi, vol. 5, Istanbul, 1977, pp. 187919O6.
6. Hasan Ali Koçer, "Turkiye'de Kadın Eğitimi," Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim
Fakültesi Dergisi, vol. 5, no. 1-2 (1972): also in Eğitim Sorunlarımız Üzerine
İncelemeler ve Düşünceler, Ankara: 1974, pp. 1-64.
7. The idea of a university for women was put forward in 19O8 by Seniha
Nezahet, "Hanımlara Mahsus bir Darülfunun," Aşiyan, vol. 1, no.13, 27 Teşrin-i
sani 1324, pp. 419-426.
8. M. "Şu'un: Darülfünun ve Kadın Meselesi." Türk Yurdu, 7,no. 2, 16 Kanun-i sani
1334, p. 66.
9. "Hanımlara Ticaret Dersleri," Iktisadiyyat Mecmuası, no. 65, 27 Eylül 1333, p.
8.
10. For the activities of women in Anatolia, see: "Kastamonu
Osmanlı
Hanımlar İş Yurdu," Türk Yurdu, vol. 11, no.9, 22 Kanun-ı evvel 1332, p.
152; "Anadolu Türk Kadınlarının Faaliyeti," Türk Yurdu, vol.9. no.4, 22 Tesrini evvel 1331, p.63; "Niğde Hanımlarının Cemiyeti," Türk Yurdu, vol. 9.
no.9, 31 Kanun-ı evvel 1331, p. 142.
11. For Ottoman women's associations in general, see: Ruşen Zeki, "Bizde
Hareket-i Nisvan," Nevsal-i Milli. Dersaadet: 1330, pp. 343-352 and T.Y "Türk
Alemi: Türk Kadınlarınlarında Iktisadi Terakkiyat," Türk Yurdu, vol. 6, no.10,
10 Temmuz 1330, pp. 2392-2393. The World War I era is covered in, Lebib
Selim, "Türk Kadınının Harb-i Umumideki Faaliyeti," Türk Yurdu, 5, vol 9, no. 3,
8 Teşrin-i evvel 331, pp. 40-42; Ibid., no.4, 22 Teşrin-i evvel 1331, pp. 55-57;
Ibid., no.5, 5 Teşrin-i sani 1331, pp. 70-74.
11
12. Şişli Cemiyet-i Hayriye-i Nisvaniyye'nin Nutuk Sureti, Dersaadet: Hanri
Zelic ve Şurekâsı Matbaası, 1332, pp. 1-10.
13. Osmanlı Hilal-i Ahmer Cemiyeti Hanımlar Heyet-iMerkeziyesi, İstanbul:
Ahmed İhsan ve Şurekâsı Matbaası, 1330; Doktor Besim Omer, Hanimefendilere
Hilal-i Ahmere dair Konferans, Istanbul: Ahmed İhsan ve Şurekâsı Matbaası, 1330.
14. For the conferences organized by the Ottoman Women's Committee for
the National Defence, see: Kadınlarımızın Ictimaları (Darülfünun Konferans
Salonunda) Müdafaa-i Milliye Kitaplari, lstanbul: Tanin Matbaasi, 1329. The
female orators at the conferences were Fatma Aliye, Gülsüm Kemalova, Fehime
Nuzhet, Nakiye, Zühre, Firdevs, Naciye, and Halide Edib.
15. On the activities of the Society for the Elevation of Women see, "Haftalık
Havadis: Kadınlarımız için," Halka Doğru, no. 29-30, 23 Teşrin-i evvel 1329, p. 235.
16. For the regulations of the association see, Kadınları Çalıştırma Cemiyet-i
İslamiyesi - Nizammname, Dersaadet: Matbaa-ı Askeriyye, 1332. For the activities
see, "Kadınları Çalıştırma Cemiyet-i İslamiyesi", Iktisadiyyat Mecmuası, no. 23, 28
Temmuz 1332, p.7; "Kadınları Çalıştırma Cemiyet-i İslamiyesi Hakkında,"
Ibid., no. 27, 1 Eylül 1332, p.7; and; Ibid., no. 55 10 Mayıs 1333, s. 7.17.
"Kadınlar Kongresi ve Osmanli Kadınlari," Yeni Gazete, 22 Haziran 1909, p.4;
"Beynelmilel Kadınlar Kongresi ve Hakem Usulu," Ibid., 24 Haziran 1909, p.3.
18. "Beyanname: Teali-i Nisvan'dan Sevgili Milletlerine," Tanin, 11 Teşrin-i evvel
1911.
19. For Ottoman women in industry see, İbrahim Pertev. "Memleketimizde
İşçilik ve Kadın," Sanayi, no. 34, 15 Haziran 1334, p. 91.
20. The demographic problem is treated in "Nüfus Meselesi," Dersaadet Ticaret
Odası Gazetesi, no. 1237, 7 Mayıs 1332, p. 105-106.
21. See, "Kadınların Muharebeden İstifadeleri," Sabah, 13 Teşrin-i evvel 1917, p.3;
"Kadınlarımızdan da Amele," Sanayi, no. 11, 31 Mart 1333, p. 32; "Izmir'de Kadın
Tanzifat Amelesi," İktisadiyyat Mecmuasi, no. 55, 10 Mayıs 1333, p. 7; "İktisadi
Haberler: Şehremaneti'nde Kadın Memurlar," Ibid., no. 53, 26 Nisan 1333, p. 7.
22. "Kadın Tüccarlar Pazarında," Vakit, 11 Kanun-ı sani 1918,p. 2.
12
23. On the Women Workers Brigades see, "Birinci Kadın İşçi Taburu," Vakit, 11
Şubat 1918, p. 1. For the call to the Brigades, see: "Kadınları Çalıştırma
Cemiyeti'nden," Vakit, 8 Şubat 1918, p. 2.
24. For the Women's Battalion in Syria see, "L'agriculture et les femmes,"
Iktisadiyyat Mecmuasi, no. 54, 3 Mayıs 1333, s. 4. "....S.E. Djemal pacha,
commandant en chef de la 4me armée, a décidé la création de bataillons de
femmes pour le service agricole. Ces bataillons seront envoyés à Adana, Bekaa et
Bissan.
On donnera à ces femmes tout ce qui leur faut pour assurer la subsistance de leurs
familles. Voila un nouveau pas dans la voie du progrès féminin du encore a S.E.
Djemal pacha."
25. This situation is best described in a pessimistic way in a poem of Yaşar Nezihe,
entitled "The Need for Bread and Coal" "Ekmek ve Kömür Ihtiyaci," Nazikter, no.
20. 15 Şubat 1919.
26. See, for example, "25 Kişilik Hırsız Kadınlar Şebekesi," Vakit, 7 Eylül 1918,
s. 2.
27. For the situation with regard to prostitution see, Mustafa Galib, Fahişeler
Hayatı ve Redaet-i Ahlâkiyye, Dersaadet: Mahmud Bey Matbaasi, 1338. The
number of registered Muslim prostitutes during the Armistice was 774. The Ottoman
Greeks were second with 691. The number of Armenian, Jewish and Russian
prostitutes were 194, 124 and 171 respectively.
28. For the by-laws and the regulations on venereal diseases and brothels see:
Takvim-i Vakayi (no. 2328) and Polis Mecmuası (no. 66). The main points are
summarized in Halim Tevfik Alyot, Türkiye'de Zabıta (Tarihi Gelişim ve
Bugünkü Durum), Ankara: Kanaat Basımevi, 1947, pp. 570-587.
29. The social problems of the Second Constitutional Period are best described in
the novels and stories of the time. Huseyin Rahmi Gurpinar's novels can be
consulted for the moral decadence and disintigration of Ottoman society. See, for
example, Hakka Sığındik; Billur Kalp; Tebessüm-i Elem; Gönül bir
Yeldeğirmenidir, Toraman, Cehennemlik, Muhabbet Tılsımı, Ben Deli miyim?,
Kokotlar Mektebi, Utanmaz Adam, etc.
30. Ziyaeddin Fahri, Essai sur la transformation du code familial en Turquie.
Paris: Editions Berger-Levrault, 1936, pp. 49-54.
13
31. For the comments on the ads, see: Kazım Şinasi, "Izdivac İlanlari," Yeni
Mecmua, vol. 2, no. 38, 4 Nisan 1918, pp. 237-238; "İlk Izdivac Talepleri," Vakit,
21 Mart 1918, p. 1.
32. For wedding ceremonies see, "Kadınları Çalıstırma Cemiyeti Vasitasiyla
Akdedilen ilk Izdivac," Vakit, 16 Mart 1918, p. 1.
33. For the procedures see, "Türklük Şu'unu: Kadınları Çalıştırma Cemiyet-i
İslamiyesi'nin Muhim bir Kararı," Türk Yurdu, vol. 13, no.9, 20 Kanun-ı evvel
1333, p. 142.
14