Ataturk's Message to Anzac Mothers

I now caught in a deep mess, for I realize the importance that “And the band Played Waltzing Matilda” had on a large portion of the Australian people, bringing back memories for those who had all but forgotten the meaning of the war. But in my research I have discovered that there was a message from a man named Kemal Ataturk, who was a commanding officer in the Turkish Army during the Gallipoli campaign. The message was more of an open ended letter to the mothers of ANZAC soldiers who fought in Turkey, and serves as some form of reconciliation between Turkey and Australia. The “Message” was delivered on behalf of Ataturk by the Minister of the Interior Sukru Kaya, on the anniversary of Cannackle Victory March 18, 1934. I am now stuck between choosing one of these topics to write about, for both of them would serve as excellent sources that would generate many different questions and answers to those questions. Both have historical importance and both have played a part in the Australian culture. After doing some preliminary research, it seems that Kemal Ataturk is known for a lot more than just his message to Anzac mothers, and I feel that there is a lot more to discover about him and his message then there is with Eric Bogles song.

Scholarly source #1

Author: Ahmet Vakur Gokdenizler, Ambassador to Turkey in Embassy at Canberra. Ahmet wrote on this subject to show that the ties between Australia and Turkey, although previously bloody, is still a respectable relationship.

Thesis: Ahmet's thesis is purely to inform people more about Ataturk's message, breaking it down for them to understand what he meant. He also includes that Ataturk sent a message to an Australian Newspaper on Anzac day.

Evidence: Ahmet uses Ataturk's message directly in order to break it down little by little and explain each part of it individually.

Purpose: Ahmet's title for this article is “Info Notes” which tells the reader that this is purely for people's knowledge on the topic of Ataturk's message.

Evaluation: I am very happy that I found this source first, for it was easy to understand and broke Ataturk's message down to the core, which made me realize there is a lot of good content that can be generated from this artifact.

Scholarly source #2

Author: Paul Daley, an Australian Newspaper reporter who writes for The Guardian, and who writes mostly about Australian Culture and National Identity. The fact he writes for a newspaper could shape the way this source is written, but is scholarly none of the less.

Thesis: That it might be possible Ataturk’s words were not actually his. He writes about the history between the two countries and that of Kemal Ataturk, then begins discussing how many researchers think doubt that Ataturk ever said those words to the Australian people.

Evidence: Daley attaches many documents and links, some in Turkish, some in english, which all show that it is possible that Ataturk’s message isn’t actually his at all.

Purpose: Daley is trying to discover if this “myth” of Ataturk’s words is actually true or not.

Evaluation: I am going to have to read into it much more, but as of now it seems like this could be something that i could ask a lot of questions about, for example, if the message is true, why are people trying to dismantle it and make it seem like they are not his words?

Scholarly source #3

Author: Anthony Pym, a Distinguished professor of translation at Rovira i Virgili University in Spain. His main goal is to try to find the inconsistencies with translations, and tries to find the true words that were meant to be said from those translations.

Thesis: “An ethics of cross-cultural communication might legitimize the transcendence of this text as an appeal to historical resolution based on the commonness of human suffering.”

Evidence: Pym’s evidence either comes directly from conversations he has had with other scholars around the world, or from historical “fragments” that he finds during his research.

Purpose: Really I think Pym is trying to find the truth in what was said to the Australians from Ataturk. He states that the phrase in Ataturk’s message “There is no difference between the Johnnies and the Mehmets to us” is of huge controversy for a real meaning that people can agree on, partially because of nationalism.

Evaluation: I have not read the full article yet as it is a whopping 19 pages of very dense prose, but I have a lot of faith that this will bring me a lot of useful information.

Scholarly source #4

Author: Bill Gammage, Australian Academic Historian.

Thesis: Australia Breached the Lausanne peace treaty and its obligations to surrender control of the Anzac Cemetery to the Turkish.

Evidence: Gammage sites a number of academic sources, including documents, interviews and books.

Purpose: Gammage write this article to discover what happened in the creation of the Anzac cemetery in Turkey, in which Kemal Ataturk played a large role.

Evaluation: Another interesting source that could generate a lot more research questions, and might open up another discussion that I can use in my research paper.