Hubbry Logo
NutukNutukMain
Open search
Nutuk
Community hub
Nutuk
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Nutuk
Nutuk
Nutuk
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
Nutuk
Mustafa Kemal Atatürk presenting the Nutuk at the second congress of the Republican People's Party in 1927.
The حاكميت ملتكدر Hâkimiyet Milletindir ("Sovereignty Belongs to the Nation").
Date15–20 October 1927
Duration36 hours 33 minutes
VenueGrand National Assembly’s General Assembly Hall, Ankara
TypePolitical speech
ThemeTurkish War of Independence; founding of the Republic of Turkey
SpeakerMustafa Kemal Atatürk
LanguageOttoman Turkish
OccasionSecond congress of the Republican People's Party (CHP)
This article is part of
a series about
Mustafa Kemal Atatürk
Personal
1st President of Turkey
Kemalism
Legacy

Nutuk (Ottoman Turkish: نطق‎, lit. "The Speech") is a historic speech delivered by Ghazi Mustafa Kemal from 15 to 20 October 1927, at the second congress of the Republican People's Party (CHP) in Ankara. The speech details the events between the beginning of the Turkish War of Independence on 19 May 1919 and the foundation of the Republic of Turkey in 1923. Spanning six days, the speech took a total of 36 hours and 33 minutes to be read by Atatürk.

The text is considered a foundational document of Kemalism and the official historiography of the Turkish Republic's establishment.[1] In it, Atatürk presents his perspective on the collapse of the Ottoman Empire and the political, social, and military struggles that led to the creation of a new nation-state. It established a definitive narrative of the national struggle, solidified Atatürk's position as its leader, and served as a political and ideological guide for the new republic.

While revered in Turkey as a primary source for the nation's founding, Nutuk has also been the subject of critical historical analysis for its role in constructing a singular national narrative, its silencing of alternative perspectives, and its omission of certain events, most notably the Armenian genocide.[2]

Background and writing process

[edit]

Atatürk began preparing the text for Nutuk in Ankara in early 1927. The writing process was intensive, with Atatürk reportedly working for up to 35–40 hours without a break. According to his valet, Cemal Granda, he once dictated the speech for 48 hours continuously.[3] A significant portion of the work was done at the Çankaya Mansion, with final edits completed at Dolmabahçe Palace in Istanbul.

While Atatürk was the principal author, he consulted with friends and colleagues, reading drafts to them and incorporating their feedback. He meticulously gathered and organized official documents, telegrams, letters, and reports from the 1919–1927 period to support his narrative. The original manuscript of the speech was later entrusted to the General Staff's Harp Tarihi Dairesi (War History Department).[4]

Atatürk's stated purpose was to provide a first-hand historical account of the Turkish nation's struggle for future generations. However, the speech also served several other functions: to provide a political accounting to the nation and his party, to settle scores with his political opponents, and to establish a foundational ideology for the future of the Republic.[5]

Delivery

[edit]

Atatürk delivered the Nutuk from 15 to 20 October 1927, during the Second Grand Congress of the Republican People's Party, held in the Grand National Assembly's General Assembly Hall in Ankara. The audience included CHP delegates, government officials, high-ranking military officers, foreign diplomats, and members of the press.

The speech was delivered over six days, with Atatürk speaking for several hours each day, totaling 36 hours and 33 minutes. He began by stating his intention to give an account of the events of the preceding years:

Gentlemen, I feel it is my duty to give an account to our nation of our actions and deeds which have been continuing for years... I am of the opinion that the speech and statement which will touch upon a period of nine years full of events will be long. However, since the matter is a necessary duty, I hope you will excuse me.[6]

The speech concluded on the evening of 20 October with his address to the Turkish youth. The conclusion was met with a lengthy standing ovation, and according to contemporary accounts, Atatürk himself was moved to tears.[7] Following the speech, a motion by delegate Necip Asım Bey to formally thank Atatürk and approve the Nutuk was passed unanimously by the congress.

Content and themes

[edit]

The Nutuk is structured chronologically, covering the period from Atatürk's landing in Samsun on 19 May 1919 to the state of the Republic in 1927.

Part I: The National Struggle (1919–1920)

[edit]

Atatürk begins by painting a bleak picture of the Ottoman Empire's state at the end of World War I, describing it as defeated, its army surrendered, and its people exhausted. He portrays the Sultan, Vahdeddin, and his government under Damat Ferit Pasha as degenerate, incompetent, and concerned only with their own survival.

Gentlemen, I landed at Samsun on the 19th May, 1919. This was the position at that time: The group of powers, of which the Ottoman Empire was one, had been defeated in the Great War. The Ottoman Army had surrendered in all directions and an armistice with harsh terms had been signed... The Entente Powers did not consider it necessary to respect the terms of the armistice. On various pretexts, their men-of-war and troops remained at İstanbul. The Vilayet of Adana was occupied by the French; Urfa, Maraş, and Antep by the English. In Antalya and Konya were Italians, while at Merzifon and Samsun there were English troops... At last, on 15 May... the Greek Army, with the consent of the Entente Powers, had landed at İzmir.[8]

He outlines the three main proposals for salvation circulating at the time: demanding protection from Britain, accepting an American mandate, or allowing for regional resistance. He rejects all three, arguing that the foundations of the Ottoman Empire were shattered and that the only viable solution was the creation of a new, independent Turkish state based on national sovereignty.

In these circumstances, one resolution alone was possible, namely, to create a New Turkish State, the sovereignty and independence of which would be unreservedly recognised.[9]

This section details the organization of the national movement, including the Amasya Circular, the Erzurum Congress, and the Sivas Congress, establishing the principles of the struggle.

Part II: The Grand National Assembly and the War of Independence (1920–1923)

[edit]

This part covers the establishment of the Grand National Assembly (GNA) in Ankara on 23 April 1920, which Atatürk presents as the sole legitimate representative of the nation's will. He details the internal and external challenges faced by the new government, including internal rebellions (which he attributes to the Istanbul government and foreign powers) and the military campaigns of the War of Independence on the Eastern, Southern, and Western fronts.

Key events covered include the major battles of the Greco-Turkish War, such as the First and Second Battles of İnönü, the Battle of Sakarya, and the Great Offensive. He explains his military strategy, including his famous directive at the Battle of Sakarya:

There is no line of defense, but a surface of defense. That surface is the entire homeland. Not an inch of the homeland can be abandoned until it is soaked with the blood of its citizens.[10]

The section culminates with the military victory, the Armistice of Mudanya, and the beginning of the Lausanne peace negotiations. It also covers the abolition of the Sultanate on 1 November 1922, a pivotal moment he describes as the nation reclaiming its sovereignty by force.

Part III: The Republic and its reforms (1923–1927)

[edit]

The final part of the speech focuses on the post-war period, beginning with the Lausanne Conference and the international recognition of Turkish sovereignty. Atatürk details the proclamation of the Republic on 29 October 1923, and the abolition of the Caliphate in March 1924. He justifies these radical reforms as necessary steps to create a modern, secular, and national state. The speech concludes with his Address to Turkish Youth, entrusting them with the duty of protecting the Republic's independence and integrity.

Editions and translations

[edit]

The copyright for Nutuk was donated by Atatürk to the Türk Tayyare Cemiyeti (Turkish Aeroplane Society).

  • 1927: The first edition was published in the Ottoman Turkish alphabet in two volumes: the first contained the speech, and the second contained supporting documents. A limited luxury edition was also printed.
  • 1934: The first edition in the new Latin-based Turkish alphabet was published by the Ministry of National Education in three volumes.
  • 1938: A single-volume edition was published by the Ministry of Culture.
  • 1963: The Turkish Language Association (TDK) published a version "simplified" into modern Turkish under the title Söylev.

The speech has been translated into numerous languages, including German (1928), French (1929), English (1929), and Russian (1929–34). Many publishing houses in Turkey and abroad continue to print editions of the work.

Reception and historical significance

[edit]

The Nutuk is widely regarded as one of the most important texts in the history of modern Turkey. It serves as the primary official source for the study of the Turkish War of Independence and the founding of the Republic.

Foundational role in the Republic

[edit]

According to historian Hakan Uzun, Nutuk embodies the core values of the Turkish nation as envisioned by Atatürk, emphasizing national unity, sovereignty, and independence. It established the official state narrative, or Kemalist historiography, which framed the national struggle as a heroic epic led by Atatürk against foreign invaders and domestic traitors (the Ottoman dynasty and its collaborators).[11] The speech became a central text in Turkish education and civic life, and its concepts of republicanism, democracy, and secularism were presented as the "most precious treasures" of the Turkish people.[12]

Appraisals in scholarship and education

[edit]

Academic work on political rhetoric regularly cites Nutuk as a classic case of nation-building discourse. Morin and Lee describe the text as “a paradigmatic example of constitutive nationalism” that helped articulate a modern Turkish identity in the immediate post-Ottoman period.[13]

Linguists have also focused on its prose. Zeynep Korkmaz calls the language “measured and natural” for its time and regards the speech as a model of early-Republican Turkish.[14] Historian Yusuf Akçura characterised it as “the founding narrative (kuruluş destanı) of the Republic”, emphasising both its historical content and literary form.[15] Biographer Şevket Süreyya Aydemir argued that the work should be read “not merely as memoir but as a primary political document of lasting importance”.[16]

In Turkish secondary-school history and civics courses Nutuk has been required or recommended reading since the 1930s, and abridged editions aimed at younger readers remain in print.[17] Translations into French, German, English and Russian appeared between 1928 and 1934, giving the speech an early international readership and prompting comparative studies.[18]

Critical analysis and controversies

[edit]

While foundational, Nutuk has also been a subject of critical analysis for its subjective nature and its role in consolidating a single-party state.

Several key figures of the War of Independence who later became political opponents of Atatürk, such as Kâzım Karabekir, Rauf Orbay, and Halide Edib Adıvar, contested the narrative presented in Nutuk. They argued that the speech minimized their roles and contributions while exaggerating Atatürk's, and that it unfairly portrayed them as misguided or even treasonous. Halide Edib, for example, took issue with how her support for an American mandate was depicted, arguing it was a pragmatic consideration in a desperate time—a view she claimed Atatürk himself had not initially opposed.[19]

Historians and sociologists have debated the speech’s canonical status and its omissions within Turkish national historiography. Sociologist Fatma Müge Göçek describes the speech as having been "adopted as the official Turkish national narrative and became sacralized by the state". She argues that laws protecting Atatürk's memory have made it difficult for Turkish historians to analyze the speech critically. Göçek points out that by beginning the national story in 1919, the text "remov[es] in the process the demise of the Armenians in 1915 through state violence to the realm of Republican prehistory".[20]

Some scholars have highlighted the speech's role in justifying the establishment of a single-party autocracy. Historian Marc David Baer writes that the speech's themes include "silence, denial... general amnesia about past violence (unless presenting Turks as the real victims), identifying with the perpetrators, [and] never questioning the great prophetic and infallible leader (Atatürk)".[21] British historian Perry Anderson noted the speech's monumental scale as a tool of autocratic rule, stating it "dwarfed any address by Khrushchev or Castro... a record in the annals of autocracy".[22]

References

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Nutuk

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Nutuk, known in English as The Speech or The Great Speech, is a comprehensive historical address delivered by Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, the founder and first president of the Republic of Turkey, from 15 to 20 October 1927 at the Second Grand Congress of the Republican People's Party (CHP) in Ankara. Spanning six days and approximately 36 hours in duration, the speech provides Atatürk's firsthand narrative of the Turkish War of Independence, beginning with the occupation of Smyrna (Izmir) on 15 May 1919 and extending through the founding of the republic in 1923 to the consolidation of CHP dominance by 1927. In Nutuk, Atatürk meticulously documents key events, military strategies, and political maneuvers that led to the defeat of Allied occupation forces and the abolition of the Ottoman sultanate, while defending his decisions against critics including former allies like the Committee of Union and Progress remnants and liberal opponents. The address also articulates the core tenets of Kemalism—republicanism, nationalism, populism, statism, secularism, and revolutionism—positioning them as guiding principles for Turkey's modernization and sovereignty, and it implicitly justifies the establishment of single-party rule under the CHP amid post-war instability. Published as a book shortly after delivery, Nutuk has endured as a seminal text in Turkish historiography, mandatory in education and military training, shaping national narratives of resilience and reform, though its selective emphasis on Atatürk's role has drawn scholarly scrutiny for omitting inconvenient details such as internal factional violence and the suppression of multiparty experiments like the Progressive Republican Party in 1924. Despite such critiques from academic analyses, which highlight its rhetorical construction of a unified national myth, Nutuk remains unchallenged as the authoritative source on Turkey's foundational era in official discourse.

Historical and Political Context

Ottoman Collapse and Post-WWI Turmoil

The Ottoman Empire's entry into World War I on the side of the Central Powers in 1914 exposed its military weaknesses, resulting in catastrophic losses across multiple fronts, including over 700,000 combat deaths and millions more from disease, famine, and forced migrations, which eroded its capacity to sustain prolonged warfare. These defeats, compounded by logistical failures and inadequate resources, culminated in the empire's effective military collapse by late 1918. On October 30, 1918, the Ottoman delegation signed the aboard in Mudros harbor, formally ending hostilities effective the following day at noon. The agreement's 27 articles mandated the demobilization of Ottoman forces, surrender of warships, evacuation of forts, and Allied occupation of strategic points such as the , , and key rail junctions if security was threatened, provisions that enabled rapid Allied interventions in Anatolia and Thrace. Article 7's broad authorization for occupations justified British, French, Italian, and Greek forces seizing ports like Izmir (Smyrna) in May 1919, exacerbating internal disorder. The armistice facilitated partition schemes, formalized in the signed on , , which allocated western to Greek administration, including zones around and extending inland, while out Armenian and Kurdish entities in the east and internationalizing . The treaty also imposed minority regimes that prioritized non-Turkish communities, granting extraterritorial and provisions favoring , , and others, effectively dismantling Ottoman over core territories. Greek forces, advancing under Allied sanction, occupied Smyrna and pushed toward by mid-, intensifying ethnic conflicts and displacement. Internally, the Committee of Union and Progress (CUP), the dominant political faction since 1908, dissolved itself at its final congress in November 1918, with leaders like Talat Pasha fleeing abroad on a German U-boat amid war crimes accusations and regime collapse. Sultan Mehmed VI, ascending in July 1918, pursued accommodation with the Allies to salvage remnants of authority, authorizing the Mudros signature and later the Sèvres treaty while seeking material aid against emerging nationalists, actions that fragmented Ottoman governance and alienated reformist elements. This collaboration extended to dissolving the nationalist-leaning parliament in March 1920 under Allied pressure following their occupation of Istanbul.

Rise of the National Resistance

The Greek forces' landing at Smyrna on May 15, 1919, authorized by the Allied occupation authorities, precipitated widespread local uprisings in western Anatolia, where Ottoman Muslim populations faced massacres, expulsions, and property seizures by Greek troops and local ethnic Greek and Armenian militias. In response, irregular volunteer units termed Kuva-yi Milliye—comprising demobilized soldiers, civilians, and provincial gendarmes—emerged spontaneously to conduct guerrilla operations, prioritizing territorial defense over coordinated strategy amid the Ottoman government's impotence. This resistance manifested decentrally across Anatolia, with independent groups forming in regions like Aydın, Manisa, and Balıkesir to counter Aegean incursions, while in the east, Kâzım Karabekir's XV Army Corps, numbering around 18,000 men by mid-1919, autonomously repelled Democratic Republic of Armenia advances toward Erzurum and Kars without directives from Istanbul. Religious authorities, including local ulema, bolstered these efforts by issuing fatwas portraying the conflicts as legitimate jihad against non-Muslim invaders, thereby legitimizing armed self-defense and rallying conservative rural populations through mosque networks. Mustafa Kemal Pasha's disembarkation at on , 1919, as Army inspector—formally to disband irregulars and supervise deportations—shifted toward galvanizing these fragmented elements; he resigned his commission on after organizing the Circular (June 22), which called for provincial assemblies to safeguard national will. The Congress (–, 1919), attended by 56 delegates from eastern vilayets, resolved the homeland's indivisibility and rejected minority privileges, while the Congress (–11, 1919), unifying western representatives, formed a nine-man executive to coordinate defenses, marking nascent centralization without supplanting local agency. These multifaceted initiatives—blending martial remnants, communal solidarity, and clerical endorsement—preserved resistance viability against superior occupiers, as demonstrated by the First Battle of İnönü (January 6–11, 1921), where approximately 10,000 Turkish regulars under İsmet Pasha, succeeding Kuva-yi Milliye irregulars, inflicted 400 casualties on a 12,000-strong Greek column and forced its retreat, affirming the efficacy of evolving national forces.

Republican Politics Leading to 1927

Following the proclamation of the of Turkey on , the , led by , maintained unchallenged dominance as the sole legal political , reflecting the consolidation of power from the into a centralized republican framework. This one-party structure faced initial internal fissures, as former allies questioned the distribution of and the of the , prompting efforts to suppress emerging . In November 1924, a short-lived opposition emerged with the founding of the Progressive Republican Party (Terakkiperver Cumhuriyet Fırkası, PRP) by Kazım Karabekir, Rauf Orbay, and other ex-comrades from the Committee of Union and Progress (CUP) era, who advocated for greater decentralization and criticized the CHP's monopolization of power. The PRP, with only about 29 members in parliament, was dissolved by cabinet decree on June 5, 1925, amid accusations of ties to unrest and an assassination attempt on Mustafa Kemal in Izmir on June 14, 1925, effectively reverting Turkey to a single-party state. The Sheikh Said rebellion, erupting on February 13, 1925, in the Piran village of Diyarbakır province, intensified these dynamics; framed by the government as an Islamist-Kurdish challenge to secular reforms, it involved thousands of insurgents under Sheikh Said, a Naqshbandi leader, and led to the enactment of the Law for the Maintenance of Order on March 4, 1925, empowering extraordinary tribunals. These Independence Tribunals conducted swift trials, executing Sheikh Said and over 600 others by mid-1925, while suppressing liberal and regional dissent under the guise of national security, thereby eliminating organized opposition. Concurrently, critiques from figures like Karabekir, who through unpublished memoirs and public stance challenged Mustafa Kemal's singular narrative of leadership during the 1919–1922 wars, fueled perceptions of revisionism among ex-allies, exacerbating tensions within the elite. Rumors of CUP revival, linked to plots like the 1926 Izmir conspiracy involving former CUP affiliates, further justified purges, as authorities portrayed opposition as reactionary threats to republican stability. These pressures—opposition dissolution, rebellion suppression, and narrative disputes—necessitated a comprehensive defense of Mustafa Kemal's actions to unify the CHP cadre and preempt challenges to the regime's legitimacy by 1927.

Preparation and Composition

Motivations for Delivery

The İzmir assassination attempt of June 1926, in which plotters including former independence war commanders like Kâzım Karabekir and Rauf Orbay were implicated and tried, heightened political tensions and prompted Atatürk to counter personal attacks on his wartime decisions and leadership. The trials, which resulted in executions and imprisonments of alleged conspirators, exposed factionalism among early republican elites, including disputes over the suppression of the Progressive Republican Party in 1925 and criticisms of Atatürk's centralizing reforms. Nutuk addressed these by preemptively defending Atatürk's actions against emerging revisionist narratives from ex-allies, who questioned events like the 1920 assembly dissolutions and military strategies. Ideologically, the speech aimed to forge a monolithic national history amid risks of multi-party revival, following the 1924 opposition party's brief existence and the 1926 purges that dismantled conservative and liberal challengers. By presenting a detailed, document-backed account at the Republican People's Party (CHP) congress, Atatürk sought to align party cadres with his vision, suppressing internal dissent and preventing fragmented interpretations of the independence struggle that could undermine republican sovereignty. Pragmatically, Nutuk functioned as a disciplinary mechanism during the CHP's second congress (October 15–20, 1927), where delegates faced loyalty tests amid post-plot scrutiny; contemporary analyses note its role in enforcing ideological conformity, as evidenced by congress resolutions endorsing Atatürk's uncontested authority and the speech's subsequent publication as official doctrine. This consolidation preempted broader factionalism, prioritizing empirical recounting over hagiography to legitimize one-party rule through claimed historical fidelity.

Writing Process and Source Materials

Mustafa Kemal Atatürk composed Nutuk over a period spanning roughly two years, from to , amid political consolidation following the suppression of internal opposition, including the . He worked in relative at Çankaya Mansion, dedicating intensive sessions—often late into the night—to drafting and revising the text, which reportedly caused physical strain evidenced by his use of wet handkerchiefs to soothe fatigued eyes. This prolonged preparation allowed for meticulous but reflected a controlled narrative environment insulated from external input. Atatürk relied primarily on his personal records as source materials, including diaries, outgoing telegrams, and minutes from official meetings and assemblies he attended or led. Assistants such as Ruşen Eşref Ünaydın contributed by helping compile and cross-reference these documents, with Ünaydın later involved in presenting evidentiary appendices during delivery. However, the selection process prioritized materials aligning with Atatürk's perspective, systematically downplaying or omitting contradictory evidence, such as the documented contributions of religious leaders and ulema to mobilizing support during the national resistance, thereby limiting the account's objectivity in favor of a centralized, secular interpretation of events. The resulting text was a fully prepared manuscript, not an extemporaneous oration, enabling precise control over phrasing and chronology across its 36-hour delivery. To bolster evidentiary claims, Nutuk incorporated appendices featuring reproduced telegrams, session protocols, and custom-drawn maps of military campaigns, serving as direct substantiation rather than interpretive summaries. This format underscored the work's reliance on archived primaries while highlighting inherent selectivity in curation.

Delivery and Immediate Context

The CHP Congress Event

The second congress of the convened in from October 15 to 20, , providing the platform for Mustafa Kemal's delivery of Nutuk. This gathering marked a key internal reorganization of the party, which had operated as the sole legal political entity since the dissolution of the Progressive Republican Party in June following the . The congress atmosphere reflected the consolidated of the regime, with proceedings focused on affirming party unity and leadership directives amid the absence of competing political voices. Attendance comprised party delegates from across Turkey, convened in a setting designed to ensure orderly deliberation without external disruption. The event's logistical framework prioritized controlled access, aligning with the broader context of single-party governance that limited public political discourse to state-sanctioned channels. Media reporting on the congress was confined largely to outlets aligned with the government, such as newspapers disseminating official narratives of the proceedings. This structure underscored the event's role in reinforcing the CHP's monopoly on political organization post-1923 republican establishment.

Presentation Format and Contemporary Reactions

The Nutuk was delivered by Mustafa Kemal Atatürk at the second congress of the Halk Partisi (CHP) in , spanning six days from October 15 to 20, 1927, for a total duration of 36 hours and 33 minutes. Sessions occurred daily, with lengths ranging from 5 hours 32 minutes on the first day to 6 hours 24 minutes on the fourth and fifth days. Atatürk presented the prepared text orally, establishing a definitive narrative of events without interruption for questions during delivery. Immediate reactions among included and affirmations of following the speech's conclusion. Telegrams expressing and support arrived from across the , signaling broad endorsement within CHP circles and affiliated groups. The single-party framework precluded organized or at the event, as the congress served primarily to consolidate leadership and reorganize internal structures. Contemporary press coverage in state-aligned outlets highlighted themes of national cohesion and praised the speech's in reinforcing Republican principles. In contrast, the Istanbul-based İkdam newspaper offered a skeptical assessment, critiquing elements of the congress proceedings and the speech's implications amid prior tensions over reforms like the capital's relocation. No widespread public opposition surfaced in available records, reflecting the controlled media environment of the era.

Content Structure and Summary

Part I: Initiation of the National Struggle (1919–1920)

In Nutuk, Mustafa Kemal recounts his departure from on the evening of May 16, 1919, aboard the steamer SS , as part of an official mission appointed by the Ottoman government to inspect and disband irregular forces in amid post-World War I under the . He arrived in on May 19, 1919, describing the regional , including Allied occupations of key ports— by British, French, and Italian forces since late 1918, Smyrna (İzmir) by on May 15, 1919—and local disorders exploited by Armenian and Greek separatist groups backed by Allied powers. As the Ninth Army Inspector, he initially complied with orders to suppress banditry but soon prioritized organizing civilian and military resistance through local Defense of Rights Societies, merging existing groups like the Trabzon Committee into a unified network to coordinate against partition threats outlined in Allied plans such as the Sykes-Picot Agreement and Greek territorial claims. By late May 1919, relocated to Havza and then , convening and leaders including and ; on , they issued the Amasya Circular, asserting that "the of the is indivisible" and that "the nation's will be by the nation's own resolve and ," as the Ottoman in was deemed incapable of under Allied influence. The document rejected foreign mandates, called for a national congress in Sivas by mid-September to unify provincial representatives, and urged resistance to occupations, marking the first public call for self-determination outside Istanbul's control; it was distributed secretly to avoid Ottoman censorship, galvanizing provincial governors and officers to form representative committees. Facing Ottoman orders to return and amid British surveillance, resigned his military post on July 8, 1919, and proceeded to , where the Eastern Provinces convened from July 23 to August 7, 1919, with 56 delegates adopting resolutions affirming national unity, rejecting partition or capitulations, and establishing a Representative to act as a provisional executive; was elected its president and military commander. The congress decisions, including vows to defend borders per the 1918 National Oath (Misak-ı Milli) and oppose Wilsonian principles favoring minorities, laid groundwork for organized resistance, with local forces numbering around 20,000 irregulars by summer's end, though poorly armed and uncoordinated against Allied garrisons exceeding 100,000 troops regionally. The Sivas Congress followed from 1, 1919, expanding representation to about 40 delegates, ratifying Erzurum's resolutions, and formalizing the Representative Committee as the central authority for national struggle, again electing Mustafa Kemal president and appointing liaisons like Ali Fuat Cebesoy to army commands. Nutuk emphasizes these gatherings' role in transitioning from ad hoc societies—totaling over 400 branches by fall 1919—to a structured movement advocating a constitutional assembly in Anatolia, as Istanbul's parliament was suspended by Allies in ; this phase saw initial mobilizations, including volunteer bands clashing with Greek forces near Aydın, but prioritized political unification over premature military action amid Ottoman Sultan Mehmed VI's collaboration with occupiers.

Part II: Assembly, Wars, and Victory (1920–1923)

In Nutuk, Mustafa Kemal details the establishment of the on April 23, 1920, in as the legitimate embodiment of , convened amid Allied occupation of Istanbul and the Ottoman government's capitulation to foreign demands. Delegates numbering 115 from across and eastern gathered despite logistical challenges, including incomplete elections in occupied regions, to form a unicameral body asserting authority over both legislative and executive functions. On April 24, 1920, the Assembly elected Kemal as its president, a role combining parliamentary speakership with de facto executive leadership, enabling centralized decision-making for the national resistance. This structure created a period of dual governance, with the GNA in Ankara issuing fatwas from supportive clerics, enacting laws like the 1920 constitutional amendment vesting sovereignty unconditionally in the nation, and mobilizing resources independently of the Istanbul Sultanate, which Kemal depicts as infiltrated by pro-Allied elements and unable to resist partition under the Treaty of Sèvres. The Assembly authorized the formation of a regular national army by April 1920, absorbing irregular forces while suppressing rebellious bands, such as those led by , to consolidate military command under İsmet Pasha and Fevzi Pasha. By early 1921, this enabled defensive victories at the (January 6–11, 1921) and (March 23–April 1, 1921), halting Greek advances and boosting morale, though followed by setbacks in the Battle of Kütahya-Eskişehir (July 10–24, 1921), where Turkish forces retreated strategically to draw invaders deeper into Anatolia. The to the Battle of Sakarya (August 23–September 13, 1921), portrayed as a grueling 22-day defensive stand involving over 100,000 troops against a Greek force of approximately 120,000, fought along the Sakarya River near Polatlı, just 80 kilometers from . Kemal emphasizes tactical decisions, such as adopting a "line of defense is the casemate" doctrine—dispersing forces into fortified positions rather than linear trenches—and personal oversight from a forward command post, resulting in Greek exhaustion and withdrawal after suffering 20,000 casualties while Turks endured 5,700 deaths and 18,000 wounded. This "battle of poverty," reliant on irregular reinforcements and civilian support, marked a strategic turning point, compelling Greece to abandon offensive ambitions and earning Kemal the title "Gazi" from the Assembly on September 19, 1921. Following a year of stalemate, Nutuk recounts the Great Offensive launched on August 26, 1922, from Afyonkarahisar, involving 200,000 Turkish soldiers in a surprise breakthrough against Greek lines held by 225,000 troops depleted by attrition and supply issues. The initial captured key heights like Tınaztepe and Kalecik Sivrisi within hours, leading to the encirclement and at the , where Turkish forces under Kemal's command advanced 400 kilometers in two weeks, liberating İzmir on September 9, 1922, and prompting Greek capitulation. Pursuit operations continued until the Chanak Crisis prompted Allied intervention, culminating in the Armistice of Mudanya signed on October 11, 1922, between Turkish delegates led by İsmet Pasha and representatives of Britain, France, and Italy, which stipulated Greek withdrawal from eastern Thrace without Turkish occupation and Allied evacuation of the Istanbul zone, effectively nullifying Sèvres militarily. Diplomatic efforts transitioned to the Lausanne Conference, opening November 20, 1922, where Kemal credits the GNA delegation—headed by İsmet Pasha—with rejecting capitulatory rights, securing recognition of Turkish borders approximating Ottoman pre-war extents (except minor losses like the Aegean islands to Greece and Mosul to Britain), and affirming full sovereignty without reparations or minority protections beyond basic guarantees. The Treaty of Lausanne, signed July 24, 1923, by Turkey and the Allied powers, replaced the 1920 Sèvres Treaty, formalized demilitarization of the Straits under Turkish control pending future agreement, and addressed population exchanges, with 1.2 million Greeks repatriated from Turkey and 400,000 Muslims from Greece. Nutuk frames this as vindication of armed resistance over negotiation, achieved through unyielding positions that leveraged military gains to avert renewed partition.

Part III: Republican Establishment and Reforms (1923–1927)

In Nutuk, narrates the period following the as one of deliberate to secure national , portraying the of the Republic on 29 October 1923 as the culmination of popular will expressed through the Grand National Assembly, replacing monarchical remnants with a deriving from the . He describes maneuvering against entrenched interests, including the abolition of the sultanate in November 1922 as a prerequisite, to establish republican governance amid internal divisions. Atatürk justifies the abolition of the caliphate on 3 March 1924 as essential to relieve Turkey of an "irrational mission" that burdened the nation with unrealistic Islamic leadership claims, arguing it preserved resources for domestic progress rather than sustaining a defunct imperial role. He frames this alongside the closure of religious orders (tekkes and zaviyes) and abolition of religious titles and ranks, presenting them as measures to eradicate and foster rational , enacted through assembly laws to centralize against provincial and clerical challenges. Nutuk depicts early multi-party experiments, such as the founding of the Progressive Republican Party in June 1924, as undermined by reactionary elements seeking to restore caliphal influence, culminating in the Sheikh Said rebellion from February to April 1925, which Atatürk attributes to coordinated opposition exploiting ethnic and religious sentiments in eastern provinces. He defends the enactment of the Law for the Maintenance of Order on 4 March 1925 and reactivation of Independence Tribunals as necessary countermeasures, leading to the party's dissolution in June 1925 and suppression of unrest to prevent fragmentation of the nascent republic. Key legislative reforms highlighted include the November 1925, which mandated replacement of the fez with Western-style hats to symbolize alignment with "civilized" norms and rejection of backwardness, implemented under powers to enforce modernization despite resistance. Atatürk emphasizes centralization efforts against provincialism, such as unifying education and legal systems, while noting delays in broader social changes like women's political —limited to preparatory steps amid priorities for stability—portraying these as phased steps toward secular self-reliance. Overall, Part III underscores reforms as defenses of sovereignty, countering both internal reactionaries and external influences through unyielding national unity. Nutuk concludes with the renowned Gençliğe Hitabe ("Address to the Youth"), entrusting the Turkish youth with the perpetual defense of Turkish independence and the Republic against internal and external threats, even in the most adverse conditions. The text reads: "Ey Türk gençliği! Birinci vazifen, Türk istiklâlini, Türk Cumhuriyetini, ilelebet muhafaza ve müdafaa etmektir. Mevcudiyetinin ve istikbalinin yegâne temeli budur. Bu temel, senin en kıymetli hazinendir. İstikbalde dahi seni bu hazineden mahrum etmek isteyecek dahili ve harici bedhahların olacaktır. Bir gün, istiklâl ve Cumhuriyet'i müdafaa mecburiyetine düşersen, vazifeye atılmak için içinde bulunacağun vaziyetin imkân ve şeraitini düşünmeyeceksin! Bu imkân ve şerait, çok namüsait bir mahiyette tezahür edebilir. İstiklâl ve Cumhuriyetine kastedecek düşmanlar, bütün dünyada emsali görülmemiş bir galibiyetin mümessili olabilirler. Cebren ve hile ile aziz vatanın bütün kaleleri zapt edilmiş, bütün tersanelerine girilmiş, bütün orduları dağıtılmış ve memleketin her köşesi bilfiil işgal edilmiş olabilir. Bütün bu şeraitten daha elim ve daha vahim olmak üzere, memleketin dahilinde iktidara sahip olanlar gaflet ve dalâlet ve hatta hıyanet içinde bulunabilirler. Hatta bu iktidar sahipleri şahsi menfaatlerini, müstevlilerin siyasi emelleriyle tevhit edebilirler. Millet, fakrüzaruret içinde harap ve bitap düşmüş olabilir. Ey Türk istikbalinin evlâdı! İşte, bu ahval ve şerait içinde dahi vazifen, Türk istiklâl ve Cumhuriyetini kurtarmaktır! Muhtaç olduğun kudret, damarlarındaki asil kanda mevcuttur!"

Core Themes and Rhetorical Strategies

Nationalism, Sovereignty, and Anti-Imperialism

Atatürk frames the occupation of Ottoman territories following and the terms of the , signed on , , as an existential peril to Turkish national existence, depicting the proposed of —allocating western to , eastern areas to , and international zones around the —as a calculated imperial scheme to liquidate Turkish and identity. This portrayal casts the ensuing irregular warfare conducted by volunteer militias, known as Kuva-yi Milliye, from May 1919 onward, as a legitimate and indispensable response, rooted in the imperative of self-preservation against formalized partition rather than mere rebellion against Ottoman authority. Pivotal to Nutuk's anti-imperialist ethos is the elevation of milli irade (national will) as the foundational sovereign force, asserted by Atatürk to embody the collective determination of the Turkish populace and thereby invalidate the sultan-caliph's legitimacy, whom he accuses of complicity in capitulation via the Armistice of Mudros on October 30, 1918, and subsequent Allied dictates. This principle, invoked repeatedly to rationalize the Grand National Assembly's establishment on April 23, 1920, as the true repository of authority, overrides traditional Islamic or monarchical hierarchies in favor of popular consensus manifested through resistance congresses and armed struggle. While Nutuk attributes Allied evacuations primarily to the galvanizing effect of national unity and resolve, empirical military developments reveal a more causal role for battlefield outcomes: the Turkish forces' rout of the Greek army at the on August 30, 1922, shattered the invading expeditionary effort, prompting the on October 11, 1922, and compelling Allied recognition of Ankara's control, with full withdrawal from Istanbul completed by early October 1923 following the on July 24, 1923. These reversals, driven by logistical overextension among Allied powers wary of renewed large-scale commitments post-World War I, underscore that rhetorical appeals to sovereignty, though instrumental in mobilization, intersected with tangible victories to enforce imperial retreat, rather than ideological fervor alone dictating geopolitical concessions.

Secularism, Modernization, and Internal Reforms

In Nutuk, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk articulates secularism (laiklik) as a foundational principle for the Turkish Republic, insisting on the strict separation of religious authority from to prevent theocratic interference in national affairs. He critiques the Ottoman system's fusion of and politics, portraying it as a hindrance to rational progress and , and justifies the as essential to liberate Turkey from supranational Islamic claims that subordinated national interests. This stance reflects a causal rejection of religious dogma as incompatible with modern statecraft, emphasizing instead empirical governance and scientific reasoning over clerical influence. Atatürk frames internal rebellions, such as the Sheikh Said uprising of February 1925, as manifestations of reactionary forces clinging to feudal and religious structures, which sought to restore Ottoman-Islamic hierarchies and undermine republican reforms. He depicts these events not merely as isolated unrest but as symptoms of deeper tensions between entrenched traditionalism and the imperative for secular national unity, necessitating decisive suppression to safeguard modernization efforts. The Unification of Education Law enacted on March 3, 1924, exemplifies this approach, centralizing all schooling under state control and closing approximately 479 medreses (religious seminaries) to eliminate parallel Islamic educational networks, thereby fostering a unified, secular curriculum aligned with Western scientific standards. Conservative resistance, rooted in Ottoman-Islamic legacies, persisted through clerical opposition and localized revolts, creating ongoing that Atatürk attributes to outdated loyalties incompatible with republican Nutuk advocates adopting Western institutional models to overhaul legal, educational, and economic frameworks, positioning these as pragmatic necessities for Turkey's to contemporary . The , modeled on the and promulgated on February 17, 1926, replaced Sharia-derived laws with secular provisions emphasizing individual rights, in inheritance and marriage, and contractual obligations, thereby severing ties to religious jurisprudence. Educational reforms promoted literacy and technical via state-directed programs, while economic initiatives shifted toward centralized and industrialization, drawing on European precedents to counter agrarian feudalism. These measures, Atatürk argues, engendered causal progress by dismantling Ottoman vestiges, though they provoked resistance from traditionalist factions whose suppression ensured reform continuity.

Leadership Narrative and Treatment of Opponents

In Nutuk, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk constructs a narrative that centralizes personal agency in the founding of the Turkish Republic, portraying his arrival in Samsun on May 19, 1919, as the decisive initiation of the national resistance against imperial partition. This self-positioning emphasizes his singular vision and actions, such as issuing unifying telegrams to provincial leaders, while framing the broader movement as deriving legitimacy from his "conscience" and the "benevolence of the nation" rather than collective or institutional origins. The rhetoric minimizes the roles of key allies, subordinating figures like İsmet İnönü—who played critical parts in military victories such as halting Greek advances in January 1921—to secondary status in the historical account. Contributions from religious leaders and other nationalists, including those with ties to the Committee of Union and Progress (CUP), are similarly downplayed or omitted, aligning with a secular narrative that prioritizes Atatürk's reforms over prior collaborative efforts. This selectivity omits , such as initial alliances with monarchist or CUP elements during the early resistance, presenting a streamlined from Atatürk's initiative to republican triumph. Atatürk depicts opponents through adversarial lenses, vilifying the Sultan as a "degenerate " and ists as "" who conspired with foreign powers to undermine . CUP loyalists and liberals, including those associated with early opposition groups like the , face accusations of betrayal, with figures such as Rauf Orbay labeled as "doubters" and "incompetents" for diverging from the Kemalist path. To substantiate these claims, Nutuk incorporates documents like telegrams and orders, purportedly proving disloyalty, though the elides nuances of shared goals among factions. This treatment employs mythic dichotomies of internal enemies versus national saviors, justifying purges and centralization by casting dissent as existential threats rather than legitimate alternatives. While documents lend evidentiary weight, the narrative's rhetorical framing prioritizes causal attribution to Atatürk's foresight, sidelining evidence of multifaceted alliances that sustained the struggle prior to republican consolidation.

Publication and Dissemination

Initial Editions and Domestic Availability

The first edition of Nutuk appeared in , shortly after Mustafa Kemal Atatürk delivered the speech, with printing managed by the Türk Tayyare Cemiyeti following his donation of copyrights to the organization. Issued in Ottoman Turkish script, it comprised two volumes: the primary text of the speech (titled Nutuk / Mustafa Kemal Tarafından, 543 pages) and a companion volume of supporting documents (Nutuk / Muhteviyata Ait Vesaik, 303 pages). This edition included maps and appendices to substantiate claims, with the core narrative remaining largely unrevised in subsequent domestic printings. Initial print runs totaled approximately 50,000 copies in the "ilk elli bin" batch, followed by additional batches reaching up to for the "halk " variant, facilitating broad domestic dissemination through state-affiliated channels. Distribution prioritized accessibility within Turkey, with proceeds supporting aviation while state oversight ensured controlled availability to align with historical framing, limiting private reproductions or interpretive variants. Reprints in early transitioned toward preparations, though Ottoman editions persisted for institutional use amid literacy transitions. Appendices in later initial-series volumes expanded to incorporate further evidentiary materials, such as additional wartime telegrams and decrees, without altering the speech's rhetorical structure. By the early 1930s, Nutuk functioned as a foundational text in military academies, underscoring state-directed ideological reinforcement through mandatory study of its accounts.

Translations, Adaptations, and Global Reach

The initial foreign translations of Nutuk emerged soon after its 1927 publication, with versions in French, German, and an early English rendering appearing by , facilitating prompt international dissemination among European audiences interested in Turkey's founding narrative. The English edition, published in Leipzig by K.F. Koehler, represented an abridged adaptation aimed at Western readers but was later critiqued for inaccuracies in conveying Atatürk's full rhetorical intent. An official English translation followed in 1963, issued by the Turkish Ministry of Education (sometimes attributed to the Turkish Historical Society), which sought to standardize the text for global scholarly use despite noted unreliability in phrasing. Subsequent editions in the 2010s and beyond incorporated annotations and revisions for contemporary accessibility, including a 2010 Turkish publication by with modernized language and contextual notes, and a 2020 English edition by the Atatürk Research Center featuring corrected Ottoman Turkish alignments to prior translations. These efforts reflect ongoing state-linked efforts to refine interpretations while preserving the original's ideological core. Russian translations, serialized between 1929 and 1934, extended reach into Soviet spheres, though adaptations there emphasized anti-imperial themes over secular reforms. Nutuk's global footprint expanded digitally from the early 2000s, with ebooks, apps, and online archives enabling broader non-Turkish access, such as the 2016 Kindle edition and a 2025 mobile app offering searchable text. Official versions, overseen by institutions like the Atatürk Research Center, maintain control over content fidelity, limiting unauthorized variants and ensuring alignment with republican historiography. In non-Western contexts, the text has influenced nationalist discourses selectively; for instance, Arab intellectuals have referenced it in debates on post-colonial sovereignty, often critiquing its secularism as diverging from Islamic governance models prevalent in the region. This variance underscores interpretive divergences, where Nutuk's emphasis on modernization clashes with traditionalist views in parts of the Muslim world.

Political and Cultural Impact

Foundation of Republican Ideology

Nutuk, delivered by Mustafa Kemal Atatürk over six days from October 15 to 20, 1927, at the Republican People's Party (CHP) congress in Ankara, systematically outlined the principles of republican governance, national sovereignty, and secular reform as imperatives derived from the Turkish War of Independence. The speech framed the establishment of the Grand National Assembly in 1920 as the origin of legitimate authority, rejecting monarchical and caliphal systems in favor of popular will exercised through elected representation. This narrative positioned republicanism not as an imported ideal but as a causal necessity for defeating imperial partitions and internal reactionary forces, thereby embedding it as the ideological cornerstone of the new state. The ideological tenets articulated in Nutuk directly informed the formalization of Kemalism's Six Arrows—republicanism, , , , , and revolutionism—in the CHP's 1931 party program, which adopted the arrows as its emblem to symbolize these interconnected directives for national reconstruction. Atatürk's emphasis in the speech on unified national will over class or sectarian divisions prefigured populism and , while critiques of religious clericalism anticipated laicism's role in subordinating faith to state-directed modernization. and revolutionism echoed Nutuk's advocacy for centralized economic intervention and ongoing societal overhaul to achieve Western-aligned progress, with these principles operationalized in policies like the 1930s etatist economic plans that expanded state ownership of industry from 15% of GDP in 1927 to over 30% by 1938. By constructing an official historical account that portrayed political opponents as collaborators with external enemies or relics of Ottoman decay, Nutuk provided retrospective justification for suppressing dissent, enabling the entrenchment of CHP one-party dominance through the 1930s. The speech's exclusion of rival narratives, such as those from liberal or conservative factions within the independence movement, rationalized measures like the 1925 Takrir-i Sükûn Kanunu (Law for the Maintenance of Order), which curtailed press freedoms and opposition organizing, with over 1,000 arrests reported in its aftermath. This framing sustained single-party rule until multiparty experiments in 1946, as Nutuk's authority as the republic's foundational text deterred challenges to Kemalist orthodoxy. Nutuk's logic of secular sovereignty manifested in the April 10, 1928, constitutional amendment to the 1924 charter, which excised Article 2's declaration of Islam as the state religion, aligning governance explicitly with laicist principles to preclude theocratic encroachments highlighted in the speech's accounts of religious-led revolts like the 1925 Sheikh Said uprising. This removal, passed by a 219-0 vote in the assembly, facilitated subsequent reforms such as the 1928 abolition of the caliphate's remnants and the 1937 explicit insertion of secularism into the constitution, reflecting Nutuk's causal insistence on disentangling religion from political power to safeguard republican institutions.

Integration into Education and State Narrative

Following its publication, Nutuk was systematically integrated into the Turkish education system as a of history and instruction, particularly emphasizing the events from 1919 to 1923 during the War of Independence. Abridged editions tailored for secondary school students and younger readers were developed, excerpts into curricula to convey the Kemalist interpretation of national founding. This incorporation served to indoctrinate successive generations with the speech's of sovereignty and reform, forming the basis for historiography in school textbooks and mandatory courses on the Turkish Revolution. In the state narrative, Nutuk assumed a quasi-sacral status, frequently characterized as a "sacred text" or "holy book" that enshrined Mustafa Kemal Atatürk as the singular architect of the Republic while establishing the canonical version of early republican history. State-controlled media and public ceremonies reinforced its authority, linking it to annual commemorations of pivotal dates outlined in the speech, such as the convening of the Grand National Assembly on April 23, 1920, through official events and broadcasts that perpetuated its role in civic rituals until the shift to multi-party politics. The text's institutional prominence endured beyond the single-party era, with persistent inclusion in educational materials and state observances, though the Democrat Party's electoral victory in 1950 introduced dilutions via partial reversals of strict Kemalist policies, including moderated enforcement of secular mandates that indirectly tempered Nutuk's unchallenged propagation. Empirical data from curriculum persistence and ceremonial records indicate ongoing centrality, albeit with contested interpretations amid rising political pluralism.

Scholarly Reception and Critical Debates

Affirmative Kemalist Perspectives

Kemalist scholars regard Nutuk as an authoritative eyewitness account of the 7, authored by its central figure, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, who drew upon contemporaneous primary sources including military telegrams, official minutes, and correspondence to construct a document-based narrative rather than mere reminiscence. This approach, they argue, ensures empirical reliability, with the speech's appended volumes of vesikalar (documents) providing verifiable evidence for key decisions and events, such as the Amasya Circular of June 22, 1919, and the Erzurum Congress resolutions of July-August 1919. As a foundational text for Kemalist historiography, Nutuk influenced the Turkish History Thesis of the 1930s, which posited ancient Turkish migrations from Central Asia as progenitors of global civilizations, countering Eurocentric narratives prevalent in interwar academia and aligning with Atatürk's evaluations of Turkish historical agency outlined in the speech. Proponents credit it with establishing a unified interpretive framework that integrated the War of Independence into a broader continuum of Turkish state-building, thereby legitimizing the Republican regime's secular and nationalist reforms. Contemporary Kemalist defenders, such as historian Sinan Meydan, praise Nutuk for its unifying role in post-1923 Turkey, where it disseminated a cohesive story of triumph over imperial partition—evidenced by its rapid integration into state propaganda and education, reaching an estimated 100,000 copies printed by 1930—to foster national cohesion amid regional loyalties and opposition factions. They maintain its to sources withstands , citing the speech's exclusion of unverifiable anecdotes in favor of over 200 appended documents, which modern archival cross-verifications have largely upheld as authentic.

Assessments of Factual Accuracy and Selectivity

Scholars have noted that Nutuk exhibits significant selectivity in its historical sourcing, prioritizing Atatürk's personal directives and nationalistic framing while omitting key religious dimensions of the . For instance, the narrative downplays the role of Islamic religious authority in mobilizing resistance, such as the fatwas issued by nationalist-aligned clerics against the Sultan's collaboration with Allied powers, instead emphasizing secular national will and pre-Islamic Anatolian roots to align with emerging Republican ideology. This omission serves to retroactively construct a purely modernist origin story, causal analysis reveals, as religious invocations like jihad were initially central to rallying support in 1919–1920 before being sidelined post-victory. Further discrepancies arise when Nutuk's account is cross-referenced with archival records, particularly in diplomatic episodes like the Lausanne Conference of 1922–1923. The speech attributes negotiation successes primarily to Atatürk's strategic foresight and Turkish resolve, understating contingent external factors such as Soviet material aid and diplomatic pressure on the Allies, which bolstered Turkey's position amid post-World War I realignments. Archival evidence from Soviet-Turkish treaties (e.g., the 1921 Treaty of Moscow) indicates these alliances provided critical leverage, yet Nutuk frames outcomes as deriving almost solely from internal leadership acumen, exaggerating prescience over reactive adaptation to geopolitical causality. Rhetorically, Nutuk functions less as an impartial chronicle than a mythic construct, wherein Atatürk embodies the "I-nation"—a transcendent self-narrative fusing personal agency with the nation's essence, rendering history subservient to ideological eternity rather than empirical sequence. This solipsistic structure, as analyzed in rhetorical scholarship, privileges visionary "dreams" of sovereignty over verifiable contingencies, fostering a selective memory that elevates heroic individualism while eliding collaborative or oppositional inputs, thus prioritizing constitutive nation-building over factual exhaustiveness. Such elements underscore Nutuk's role in establishing authoritative Kemalist historiography, where evidentiary gaps are bridged by prophetic rhetoric rather than archival pluralism.

Alternative Viewpoints and Counter-Narratives

Kâzım Karabekir, a key military commander during the , authored İstiklal Harbimiz in the early 1930s as a detailed counter-narrative to Nutuk, explicitly challenging Atatürk's account by documenting alternative interpretations of events, leadership decisions, and personal contributions while alleging elements of self-aggrandizement in the latter's presentation. The work drew on Karabekir's personal archives and frontline experiences, portraying a more collaborative effort among independence leaders rather than centering Atatürk as the singular architect, and it faced immediate suppression by the government, with copies confiscated until republished in 1960. Conservative and Islamist perspectives highlight Nutuk's selective emphasis on secular, rationalist mobilization, which they argue downplays the pivotal role of Islamic religious appeals—such as fatwas from the Şeyhülislam and mobilization via mosques and ulema—in rallying Anatolian resistance against Allied occupation from 1919 onward. These critics contend that by framing the struggle primarily in ethno-nationalist terms, Nutuk contributed to the post-1923 secular reforms that marginalized religious institutions, effectively erasing their historical agency in the empire's survival efforts. From Kurdish and minority viewpoints, Nutuk's narrative of unified "Turkish" nationhood embodies an inherent Turkification bias, glossing over the distinct participation of Kurdish tribal forces in battles like Sakarya (1921) and the subsequent suppression of regional autonomy demands, which were recast as reactionary threats rather than legitimate ethnic pluralism. Scholars note that this framing aligned with early Republican policies denying Kurdish identity as a separate ethnic category, instead subsuming it under a homogenized Turkish-Islamic synthesis enforced through assimilation measures by the 1930s. Liberal analysts critique Nutuk for retroactively legitimizing authoritarian consolidation, such as the 1925 dissolution of opposition parties like the Progressive Republican Party and the exile or execution of rivals, by portraying dissent as treasonous collaboration with imperial powers rather than ideological pluralism. This rhetorical strategy, they argue, entrenched one-party dominance until 1946, prioritizing state-centric revolution over multiparty checks that might have tempered centralizing tendencies evident in the 1926 penal code revisions targeting political adversaries. Recent scholarship in the 2020s examines Nutuk as a mechanism for constructing a republican origin myth that deliberately severs ties to Ottoman imperial structures, minimizing continuities in administrative practices, legal codes, and multi-ethnic governance to justify the 1924 constitution's unitary state model. Analyses portray this selectivity as fostering a form of historical amnesia regarding Ottoman legacies, including fiscal inheritances and provincial alliances, thereby enabling policies that prioritized Anatolian Turkish core over peripheral Ottoman-era diversity.

References

  1. http://www.ataturkresearchcenter.org/nutuk.html
  2. https://www.ktb.gov.tr/EN-103908/biography-of-ataturk.html
  3. https://scalar.usc.edu/works/usm-open-source-history-text-the-world-at-war-world-history-1914-1945/media/document%2814%29.pdf
  4. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1131&context=commstudiespapers
  5. https://belleten.gov.tr/eng/full-text/1733/eng
  6. https://krex.k-state.edu/items/caa75699-4af0-432c-82ac-78caee12cde3
  7. https://encyclopedia.1914-1918-online.net/article/war-losses-ottoman-empiremiddle-east/
  8. https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/october-30/ottoman-empire-signs-treaty-with-allies
  9. https://germanhistorydocs.ghi-dc.org/pdf/eng/armistice_turk_eng.pdf
  10. https://encyclopedia.1914-1918-online.net/article/mudros-armistice-of/
  11. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/341447175_Treaty_of_Sevres
  12. https://encyclopedia.1914-1918-online.net/article/governments-parliaments-and-parties-ottoman-empiremiddle-east/
  13. https://worldhistoryedu.com/mehmed-vi-last-ottoman-sultan/
  14. https://origins.osu.edu/milestones/may-2019-greco-turkish-war-smyrna-sakarya-kemal-ottoman
  15. https://eprints.lse.ac.uk/117297/1/JMEH2.pdf
  16. https://research-repository.st-andrews.ac.uk/bitstream/handle/10023/31918/Thesis-Mark-Bhaskar-complete-version.pdf?sequence=4&isAllowed=y
  17. https://www.ktb.gov.tr/EN-103930/1919.html
  18. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4283142
  19. https://brill.com/display/book/9789004492141/B9789004492141_s008.pdf
  20. https://encyclopedia.1914-1918-online.net/article/kemal-mustafa-ataturk/
  21. https://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/how-the-turkish-republic-was-established-148033
  22. https://psi424.cankaya.edu.tr/uploads/files/Shaw%2C%2520Ott%2520Emp%2520Mod%2520Turkey%25202-2.pdf
  23. https://history-maps.com/story/Turkish-War-of-Independence/event/First-Battle-of-Inonu
  24. https://realtimehistory.net/blogs/news/new-great-war-episode-turning-point-in-the-greco-turkish-war-battles-of-sakarya-and-i%25CC%2587nonu
  25. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14683849.2017.1397516
  26. https://www.dpceonline.it/index.php/dpceonline/article/download/2053/2179/3247
  27. https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation?paperid=79886
  28. https://www.jstor.org/stable/jj.13760046
  29. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/340226575_Sheikh_Said_Rebellion_1925_The_Controversy_between_Nationalist_Religious_Motivations
  30. https://www.dailysabah.com/portrait/2018/03/31/kazim-karabekir-primary-opponent-of-ataturk
  31. https://cdr.lib.unc.edu/downloads/pr76f879t?locale=en
  32. https://www.historytoday.com/archive/turkeys-first-coup-1926-plot-assassinate-ataturk
  33. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/world-politics/article/army-and-the-founding-of-the-turkish-republic/CE94D0B2B141BDB5BFA57A4AE2ACA782
  34. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/11738223.pdf
  35. https://www.academia.edu/1842689/_The_1927_Republican_People_s_Party_Congress_and_Mustafa_Kemal_s_Great_Speech_From_the_Perspective_of_%C4%B0kdam_Newspaper_
  36. https://krex.k-state.edu/server/api/core/bitstreams/4a492807-f15b-43bc-b31a-ae3052247fa8/content
  37. http://www.aydin.edu.tr/en-us/arastirma/arastirmamerkezleri/atam/Pages/Nutuk.aspx
  38. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/3861918
  39. https://www.academia.edu/1842689/_The_1927_Republican_People_s_Party_Congress_and_Mustafa_Kemal_s_Great_Speech_From_the_Perspective_of_%25C4%25B0kdam_Newspaper_
  40. https://identityhunters.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/mustafa-kemal-ataturk-15-20-october-1927-excerpts-from-the-speech-at-the-convention-of-peoples-party-of-republic.pdf
  41. https://en.chp.org.tr/chp-tarihi
  42. https://etd.lib.metu.edu.tr/upload/12614557/index.pdf
  43. https://www.dailysabah.com/opinion/op-ed/why-may-19-1919-marks-a-historic-turning-point-for-turkiye
  44. https://blog.turkishairlines.com/en/on-the-85th-anniversary-of-mustafa-kemal-ataturks-death-cities-where-he-left-his-mark/
  45. https://www.universitypressscholarship.com/view/10.23943/princeton/9780691172743.001.0001/upso-9780691172743-chapter-009
  46. https://www.bjk.com.tr/en/cms/ataturk_ve_bjk/15/
  47. https://www.scribd.com/document/804447241/The-Speech-Nutuk-English-Edition-Mustafa-Kemal-Ataturk
  48. https://cdn.tbmm.gov.tr/TbmmWeb/Yayinlar/Dosya/56c8022b-b5e2-4402-9770-018672b83200.pdf
  49. https://ataturk.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/%25F0%259F%2587%25B9%25F0%259F%2587%25B7-Ataturkculuk-Dersleri-9-Ataturkun-Mektuplari-ve-Konusmalari.pdf
  50. https://ojs.maynoothuniversity.ie/index.php/jmhds/article/download/69/61/228
  51. https://brill.com/abstract/journals/ijmh/44/1/article-p71_004.xml
  52. https://www.aa.com.tr/en/turkiye/turkiye-remembers-great-offensive-one-of-the-greatest-military-victories-in-history/2672307
  53. https://www.dailysabah.com/turkey/2018/08/27/96-years-since-the-start-of-great-offensive
  54. https://www.ismetinonu.org.tr/en/mudanya-armistice-treaty-and-ismet-pasha/
  55. https://tc-america.org/issues-information/turkish-history/the-treaty-of-lausanne-116.htm
  56. https://www.jstor.org/stable/jj.32448785
  57. http://www.historymuse.net/readings/Kemal1927SPEECH.htm
  58. https://tdk.gov.tr/genel/ataturkun-genclige-hitabesi/
  59. https://research.sabanciuniv.edu/42454/1/10337691.pdf
  60. https://www.academia.edu/23198298/The_Rhetoric_of_Turkish_Nationalism_an_analysis_of_Mustafa_Kemals_Nutuk
  61. https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/9781399502870-005/pdf
  62. https://encyclopedia.1914-1918-online.net/article/occupation-during-and-after-the-war-ottoman-empire/
  63. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/3370130
  64. https://homes.izmirekonomi.edu.tr/aakan/establishment%2520of%2520Kemalist%2520secularism%2520in%2520Turkey.pdf
  65. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID1364684_code1231778.pdf?abstractid=1364684&mirid=1
  66. https://staibabussalamsula.ac.id/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Democracy_Islam_and_Secularism_in_Turkey_Ahmet_T_Kuru__Alfred.pdf
  67. https://british-association-comparative-law.org/2024/02/23/the-turkish-civil-code-and-code-of-obligations-of-1926-and-the-charm-of-swiss-civil-law-by-michal-tutaj/
  68. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/1172721
  69. https://repositories.lib.utexas.edu/bitstreams/12d1b9d5-46d1-4ef7-8525-fbca1078b9d9/download
  70. https://dolmabahceokullari.com.tr/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/nutuk.pdf
  71. https://www.sanatkitabevi.com.tr/tr/?sku=22142
  72. https://www.nadirkitap.com/nutuk-osmanlica-10-adet-haritalariyla-beraber-1927-ilk-baski-ilk-elli-bin-mustafa-kemal-ataturk-kitap6841284.html
  73. https://kho.msu.edu.tr/hakkinda/harbiyeli_ataturk/nutuk/1/1.html
  74. https://www.brill.com/downloadpdf/display/book/9789004492103/B9789004492103_s004.pdf
  75. https://www.abebooks.com/book-search/title/speech/author/mustafa-kemal/
  76. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15362426.2019.1618057
  77. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1570835
  78. https://www.goodreads.com/work/editions/769513-nutuk
  79. https://books.google.com/books/about/The_Speech_Nutuk_English_Edition.html?id=D8rKDwAAQBAJ
  80. https://atam.gov.tr/en/library/presentation/
  81. https://www.amazon.com/Nutuk-Great-Speech-Mustafa-Ataturk-ebook/dp/B01JPE7R5M
  82. https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.nutukk.modernutuk.nutukmodern&hl=en_US
  83. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27108355
  84. https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1057/9780230612457_4
  85. https://research.sabanciuniv.edu/35188/1/UgurDerin_10059875.pdf
  86. https://www.isres.org/books/chapters/REMOVAL%2520OF%2520THE%2520STATEMENT%2520%25E2%2580%259CTHE%2520STATE%25E2%2580%2599S%2520RELIGION%2520IS%2520ISLAM%25E2%2580%259D%2520FROM%2520THE%2520CONSTITUTION%2520IN%25201928_20-05-2019.pdf
  87. https://ojs.zrc-sazu.si/traditiones/article/download/1520/1265/0
  88. https://www.academia.edu/1181722/Teaching_a_State_Required_Course_the_History_of_the_Turkish_Revolution
  89. https://research.sabanciuniv.edu/5301/1/R%25C4%25B1za_Nur.pdf
  90. https://dash.harvard.edu/bitstreams/291d2649-230e-45ab-8a94-95e6771355ca/download
  91. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv9zckn9.12
  92. https://www.odatv.com/guncel/milete-hesap-vermenin-simgesi-nutuk-98-yasinda-i-nutuk-nedir-neden-onemli-98-yilda-ataturkun-alti-gunluk-konusmasi-120119203
  93. https://isteataturk.com/g/icerik/Ataturkun-Tarih-Anlayisi/1534
  94. https://www.drkemalkocak.com/ataturk-ve-turk-tarih-tezi/
  95. https://www.academia.edu/5081816/_T%25C3%25BCrk_Tarih_Tezi_%25C3%259Czerine_Bir_De%25C4%259Ferlendirme
  96. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/849232
  97. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/372089752_The_Conflicting_Soviet_Responses_to_the_Lausanne_Process_1922-1924
  98. https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2018/6/11/why-ataturks-legacy-is-debated-80-years-after-his-death
  99. https://5pillarsuk.com/2020/11/11/ataturk-the-man-who-tried-to-turn-turkey-away-from-islam/
  100. https://www.nomos-elibrary.de/document/download/pdf/uuid/ade5af33-5fd1-32cc-a276-a3570dcf2982
  101. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1201398.pdf
  102. https://psi203.cankaya.edu.tr/uploads/files/Adanir%2C%2520Kemalist%2520Authoritarianism.pdf
  103. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/review-of-politics/article/ataturk-and-after-three-perspectives-on-political-change-in-turkey/58549ACE2B425E53FA19BF7E094E8D8F
  104. https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/784D83C662617BF5EAF53A8B920C1240/S0010417523000506a.pdf/a-country-of-white-lilies-inter-imperial-nation-making-and-development-from-the-russian-empires-periphery-to-post-ottoman-turkey.pdf
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.