The writing of biographies of the founder of modern Turkey, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, requires the writer to sort through stories of the great leader and attempt to determine what is fact and what is legend. Attempts to understand Atatürk’s early life is especially hard to for scholars, as they must rely on oral histories that at times contradict one another and the orators tendency to explain the latter actions of Atatürk as being based on his early life. In some cases there is a legitimate ability to say that one’s latter actions in life are influenced by their early life, such as Atatürk’s desire for his own farm being based on him spending part of his childhood on his uncle’s farm. There are also, however, cases in which there is no convincing evidence to show that the action was based in his childhood, although the connections are attempted, such the idea that he desired to lead his people to freedom from a young age. Part of the difficulty of defining fact from legend derives from the fact that Atatürk in his latter life was the source of much of the legend of himself.
In order to create a scholarly biography of a man like Atatürk that at least attempts to show his true life the author must engage in extensive research that relies on oral history from many sources, as well as written record and then compare the stories to best attempt to arrive at the truth. In Atatürk: The Biography of the Founder of Modern Turkey, Andrew Mango attempts to separate fact from fiction. Mango gives an overall look at Atatürk’s life, but does not focus too much on his early years, as the reliable sources for these years are limited. The author does not entirely avoid adding possible legends to his narrative, but does ensure that the reader knows that parts of Atatürk’s life are uncertain and allows the reader to make their own decision of rather to accept one possible legend over the other as the fact. In contrast to the way Mango approaches different legends that cannot be proved fact or fiction, the authors of To Set Them Free: The Early Years of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk just show what they believe is most likely true without backing up their evidence with any sort of named sources.
One example of how the authors of the biographies looked at deal differently with the possible legends is seen in the story of Mustafa acquiring his second name, Kemal. The most common legend of acquiring Kemal is that his mathematics teacher, also named Mustafa, gave him the name in order to distinguish between the two. (1) This story is accepted by as fact by authors of To Set Them Free with out even considering other possibilities or citing sources for their quoting Atatürk as saying, “he
Another issue relating to writer biographies, especially on early life and rise to power, of legends such as Atatürk is finding the point in which his ideas for his latter important actions were formulated. It seems that sometimes biography authors, as well as those that knew the man and contributed to biographies on him, try to place the formulation of latter actions out of historical context into a period in Atatürk’s life, where he did not likely think of them. One main example of this is the authors of To Set Them Free attempt to find the point in which he himself determined that he was to be a leader of his people. The authors offer the unsubstantiated idea that he dreamed “of his own future as the leader of his people.” (5) According to them he was already “laying the groundwork for leadership, the kind of leadership that would make Turkey a new, free nation, with its eyes toward Europe and America rather than toward the Orient” (6) when he was in military school as a young man. In contrast Mango approaches the subject in a way that shows that Atatürk wanted change in government, but the idea to lead it can much latter in life. Mango attributes the beginning of Atatürk’s desire for national recognition and later leadership to his attempt to receive recognition from the Ottoman leaders for having “saved the capital” (7) with his achievements at Gallipoli some 20 years after he finished military school. Mango also suggests that Atatürk was willing to work with the Ottoman government and leave the Sultan as a constitutional monarchy, but latter abandoned this idea when the Ottomans refused to accept his Grand National Assembly as the representational part of the government. Thus is appears likely that Atatürk’s desire for a free and independent nation came before his desire to lead that nation.
In Atatürk’s mind a free and independent nation meant that it was free of international influence within its borders and was recognized among the civilized nations as one of them. The idea that Turkey should be free of foreign control in respect to its economy, as well as government can be traced back to his earlier years with little doubt unlike other aspects of his latter actions. One of his earliest criticisms of foreign influence is his disgust at the Ottoman government turning over the army to a German military mission. (8) In this case he did not blame the Germans for coming in, but rather the Ottomans for allowing their army to become controlled by foreigners. After World War I, this desire to have the country free of foreign influence became even more important, as the Allies moved to occupy Turkey and partition the country. (9) It is this point in time that To Set Them Free suggests that Atatürk found himself in the position to achieve his dream and “save his nation for his people.” (10) Mango seems to agree with this being the time where Atatürk begins to emerge “as the future leader of Turkish resistance,” (11) however he also makes it clear that he was still willing to some extent work with the Sultan in his goal and was still not very well known, especially outside Turkey.
The fact that part of the legend of Atatürk that attributes to his greatness begins with before his role in the Turkish War of Independence in hindsight may make some believe that he was well known for these early actions now considered great at the historical point in time when they were carried out. One of the early accomplishments he is now credited with is “subduing the Druse revolt” (12) in Syria in 1907. This accomplishment is briefly discussed in To Set Them Free, which does acknowledge that Enver instead of Atatürk gained fame for this in 1907, but at the same time makes the unsubstantiated claim that Atatürk already wanted national leadership. (13) While it is well known nowadays that Atatürk was an important military officer that proved himself during World War I in Gallipoli, he did not gain much recognition for his success “in holding the important hill of Conk Bayiri” (14) until much latter. At the time the well-known military hero was Enver and he “had no wish to see potential rivals build up a popular following.” (15) It was Enver at the time the one who appeared to be the most capable and most likely revolutionary to free the nation from foreign occupation and partition. Mango’s book does not entirely make clear how important Atatürk’s part in Gallipoli really was, however he hints that their were possible others of importance that were overlooked when he mentions that it is “the popular perception of Mustafa Kemal as the victor of Gallipoli and the saviour of Istanbul.” (16) Atatürk’s role does appear to be significant and deserving of the recognition it has received in modern Turkish history, however it is also possible that the development of his legend as resulted in other important figures having their roles downplayed or entirely forgotten from the collective memory. Although his military greatness is an aspect of his overall greatness, Atatürk was consider great also for his latter contributions to Turkey as a nation.
After his rise to power and the successful reclaiming of all of Turkey from foreign hands Atatürk influenced his government to carry out reforms that civilized the country from within. By Atatürk’s definition a civilized nation very much resembled a western nation, but that did not mean abandoning Turkish culture. In contrast that meant more clearly defining Turkish culture and making it more pure. In his efforts to civilize Turkey he focused on “adopting the Latin script” (17) in place of Arabic script for the Turkish language. His focus on language also involved purifying it by making words borrowed from other language more Turkish and emphasizing the use of pure Turkish words. Other reforms included the adoption of international numerals in place of Arabic numerals, (18) adoption of the “international Christian era, and the twenty-four hour clock.” (19) These were several aspects of his reforms that brought his nation to become recognized as one of the “respected member[s] of the community of civilized nations.” (20) Another aspect was his efforts to secularize the nation, thus achieving a separation of church and state as existed among much of the western world.
One of the earliest and most important reforms undertaken by Atatürk and his government in the direction of secularizing the nation was to abolish religious schools. Atatürk believed that the religious schools were a waste of time and were a place “where people who neither know nor can teach are uselessly occupied.” (21) Atatürk’s dislike for the religious schools can adequately be traced back to his childhood when he had unsatisfactory experiences in religious schools. His dislike for his early school experiences is described in detail in To Set Them Free, however the authors fail to make this possible connection even when they bring up the abolishment of religious schools in the afterword. Upon reaching school age his mother had insisted and his father allowed Atatürk to attend a traditional religious school where his classmates and him “recited in union various prayers from the Koran, all in Arabic, a language still meaningless to them.” (22) Another experience in his childhood was attending a Greek Orthodox school where he yet again did not understand the language, this time Greek, that he was being taught in. (23) Atatürk believed that the nation needed knowledge in order to catch up with the civilized nations of the Western world. This acquisition of knowledge could not be offered if the students were unable to truly understand what they were learning. In his thinking “the old, religious knowledge was useless in the new age.” (24) This new form of secular education was not to be exclusive to men, as was the custom of the religious schools, but rather women were to be given the opportunity to learn as well.
Women’s rights under Atatürk’s new republic were not limited to just granting them access to a modern secular education. As expressed in To Set Them Free reform movements led to “the unveiling and emancipation of women (including the abolition of polygamy).” (25) The authors of this text do not give any more consideration to the women reforms. This may be due to the books focus on Atatürk’s early life and limited overview of his latter life, however it seems that it is one of the points that it could legitimately try to connect Atatürk’s early life with that of his latter actions. To Set Them Free portrays Atatürk’s early life as being spent in the company of women such as his sister, his mother, and his grandmother. It is likely these experiences contributed to his belief that women should be allowed to be if not equal with men at least closer to equality than they were under the Ottoman Muslim state. Atatürk continued to believe that “women’s most important duty was to be good mothers and to shoulder the difficult task of training their children in accordance with modern needs. To do this they had to be better educated than the men.” (26) Thus Mango explains the importance of women’s right to education, while showing that to some extent women were to remain in their same roles.
Atatürk’s secular reform furthered women rights, but at the same time insured the continued patriarchy that was part of Muslim, as well as civilized custom. Under these new reforms divorce could no longer be ended “at the husband’s discretion.” (27) It also changed inheritance laws. Under Muslim law women received have a man share, but under the new secular laws they received equal shares of inheritance. (28) Similar to law in several European countries, men still “retained a privileged position as heads of household: women could not take outside work or travel abroad without the permission of the chef de famille.” (29) While these new women’s rights laws forbad certain religious customs, such as polygamous marriage, the customs and following of Muslim law still continued to some extent in rural Turkey. It was however this precedent of women’s rights, which has been attributed to part of Atatürk’s greatness, that led Turkey to become closer to the civilized nations in respect to their treatment of women.
In the collective memory of Turkey and through the portrayal of his legends partially defined by him, Atatürk has become seen as a great leader responsible for bringing Turkey into the modern age as a civilized nation. It was not that he did not have faults, as he did. He was a heavy drinker, which led to frequent illness and eventually his death, but he was also very open about his habit. It is not his faults that are remembered, but rather the things attributed to his greatness that light is shed upon. Atatürk became the leader of modern Turkey after it was deemed that the Ottoman sultan could no longer keep the country free of foreign occupation. His early military success first in Syria and then in Gallipoli during World War I did not bring him immediate recognition, but in hindsight they have become recognized as great achievements of his. Atatürk’s other achievements live on in modern Turkey as seen in his civilized and secularized reforms. Turkey retains the language that he had a hand in creating with its Latin script and more pure Turkish vocabulary. On this both authors of To Set Them Free and Mango agree that he was as his last name suggests the Father of the Turks in much the same way Americans think of George Washington as the Founding Father of America.
Endnotes
1. Andrew Mango, Atatürk: The Biography of the Founder of Modern Turkey (New York: Overlook Press, 2002), 36.
2. Barbara K. Walker, Filiz Erol, and Mine Erol, To Set Them Free: The Early Years of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk (New Hampshire: Tompson & Rutter Inc., 1981), 71.
3. Mango, 37.
4. Ibid.
5. Walker, 80.
6. Ibid., 78.
7. Mango., 157.
8. Ibid., 127.
9. Ibid., 189.
10. Walker, 86.
11. Mango, 202.
12. Walker, 83.
13. Ibid.
14. Mango, 147.
15. Ibid., 156.
16. Ibid., 159.
17. Ibid., 464.
18. Ibid.
19. Ibid., 437.
20. Ibid., 526.
21. Ibid., 374.
22. Walker, 27.
23. Ibid., 33.
24. Mango, 413.
25. Walker, 91.
26. Mango, 381.
27. Ibid., 437.
28. Ibid.
29. Ibid.
