Alternate Turkish Capitals

Isaac Beach

Banned
I've a question that's pretty straight forward. Following the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire after the Great War, presuming Turkey still moves it's capital from Istanbul, is Ankara assured to be the capital or may alternate cities take that position? Ankara makes sense; defensible, centralised, deep in the country's center.
But in 1927 (the earliest statistic I could find) the population was only 75'000 and I suspect it's succeeding growth has a lot to do with it being the capital, as is natural. Bursa was a similar population, at 61'400. Comparatively, according to a much earlier census for Izmir in 1892, the population was about 250'000 and I suspect that would be somewhat larger in the 1910s and 20s.

So, proposing that Turkey doesn't need to worry about Greece occupying Smyrna or the Straits becoming internationalised following WWI, but still intends to move their capital, perhaps in a Central Powers victory scenario where they still lose the bulk of the Middle East, where would they move their capital?
 

Isaac Beach

Banned
I'm lead to believe you can't bump without content now. So to elaborate, I think yes. The reason I'm asking is for a map wherein Turkey is one half to a 'United Kingdom of Turkey and Tripolitania'. In that instance, where connectivity across the Mediterranean is essential, İzmir would take on an especial position, perhaps capital material.
 
Gokbay

Gokbay

HowAboutThisForAName said:
I've a question that's pretty straight forward. Following the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire after the Great War, presuming Turkey still moves it's capital from Istanbul, is Ankara assured to be the capital or may alternate cities take that position? Ankara makes sense; defensible, centralised, deep in the country's center.
But in 1927 (the earliest statistic I could find) the population was only 75'000 and I suspect it's succeeding growth has a lot to do with it being the capital, as is natural. Bursa was a similar population, at 61'400. Comparatively, according to a much earlier census for Izmir in 1892, the population was about 250'000 and I suspect that would be somewhat larger in the 1910s and 20s.

So, proposing that Turkey doesn't need to worry about Greece occupying Smyrna or the Straits becoming internationalised following WWI, but still intends to move their capital, perhaps in a Central Powers victory scenario where they still lose the bulk of the Middle East, where would they move their capital?
Click to expand...


As a Turk I can say that yes that is exactly the reason why Ankara was decided to become the new capital: defensible, deep in the country's centre and fitting the new image of thw Turkish Republic more; a not too large Anatolian Town, Turkish and Agriculture based not the Elitist, Cosmopolitan and far away on the one side of the country Istanbul. A humble Anatolian capital for an Anatolian Republic liberated by the blood of Anatolia. Eskişehir, Kütahya or Manisa might work too they are Anatolian and they might be slightly larger than Ankara then. Sivas can also work it was where the second congress to decide on the country's path to freedom took place after all.


In a Central Power victory where the bulk of the Middle East still lost, I personally don't see a change of the capital.

Btw unrelated but I want to say it; So a Turkish politician/writer during early Republic times once said that the best thing about Ankara was the return voyage to Istanbul.
 
Last edited:

Mikestone8

Istr reading that c1920 both Brusa (Bursa) and Konya were discussed as possible capitals, but nothing came of it - presumably because Ankara was a better location from which to resist the Greek invasion.

In Nationality and the War, Toynbee suggested Smyrna as the natural capital of his "New Anatolia".
 
Gokbay

Gokbay

Stenz said:
Oh right, but wouldn’t that weaken the Sultan’s authority?
Click to expand...

You make it seem like he has any authority. The Sultan during/before WW1 didn't even want to join the war for example Union and Progress (the leading political party at the time) and its leadership (most famously Enver Pasha) wanted to join the war and Ottoman Empire joined the war.
 

Deleted member 94680

Gokbay said:
You make it seem like he has any authority. The Sultan during/before WW1 didn't even want to join the war for example Union and Progress (the leading political party at the time) and its leadership (most famously Enver Pasha) wanted to join the war and Ottoman Empire joined the war.
Click to expand...

Yes, but the Sultan was also Caliph. Living in an International City, occupied by the WAllies, will make him appear a puppet. This surely is a recipe for future discontent or a further attempt at overthrow.

The scenario with Sèvres enforced will have the CUP overthrown anyway. If the CUP is gone and the GNA is defeated, then the Turkish Government is Şefik Pasha’s “Forces of Order” who are loyal to the Sultan, no?
 
Gokbay

Gokbay

Stenz said:
Living in an International City, occupied by the WAllies, will make him appear a puppet.
Click to expand...

He is a puppet. And leaving the capital could be seen as a weakness. "He is not afraid of them WAllies" could be a justification for staying in the capital.
 

Deleted member 94680

Does anyone know how the International Zone be administered? Would it be WAllied representatives only, a corpus separatum or would it simply be a city (capital city?) of *Ottoman State that would hold the headquarters of the various WAllied bodies?
 

Deleted member 109224

Bursa was the original capital of the Ottoman Empire so I think it'd work fairly well.
 
Gokbay

Gokbay

Jackson Lennock said:
Bursa was the original capital of the Ottoman Empire so I think it'd work fairly well.
Click to expand...

Technically Söğüt-Bilecik was the first capital of the Ottoman Empire but the actual body of the state was founded after Bursa became the capital so your point stands.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top