Historical Context: The Timing of the Attacks

  • Gül Özateşler


Although in the Bayramiç case, there were periods during which Gypsyness was unimportant, there were also moments when it gained a “master status” and those labeled as such became more Gypsy. In these contexts, the stigma became more functional. Our case displays not only how the stigma can be used to control power relations in a society, but also when and why it gained that function.


Historical Context Rapid Urbanization Total Investment Transportation Sector Forestry Sector 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 3.
    Mübeccel B. Kıray, Ereğli: Agir Sanayiden Once Bir Sahil Kasabasi (Ereğli: A coastal town before heavy industry) (Ankara: Devlet Planlama Teskilati, 1964).Google Scholar
  2. For later works, see Peter Benedict, Fatma Mansur and Erol Tumertekin, eds. Turkey: Geographic and Social Perspectives (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1974);Google Scholar
  3. Peter Benedict, Ula: An Anatolian Town (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1974);Google Scholar
  4. Paul J. Magnarella, Tradition and Change in a Turkish Town (Rochester: Schenkman Books, 1974);Google Scholar
  5. Fatma Mansur, Bodrum: A Town in the Aegean (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1972).Google Scholar
  6. 5.
    Peter Benedict, “The Changing Role of Provincial Towns: A Case Study from Southwestern Turkey,” in Turkey: Geographic and Social Perspectives, edited by P. Benedict, F. Mansur and E. Tumertekin (Leiden: Brill, 1974), 243.Google Scholar
  7. 9.
    In the 1876 Cezair-I Bahr-I Sefid Salnamesi, no Jews or Armenians were recorded. The Jews might have come later; see Rıfat Bali, 1934 Trakya Olayları (Istanbul: Kitabevi Press, 2008).Google Scholar
  8. 14.
    Erik-Jan Zurcher, “From Empire to Republic—Problems of Transition, Continuity and Change,” in Turkey in the Twentieth Century, edited by Erik-Jan Zürcher (Berlin: Klaus Schwarz, 2008), 15–30. Still, the religion of Gypsies can be questioned in the town as in the common suspicions about Gypsies in Turkey. The old Gypsies had traditionally occupied the craftwork and entertainment service while the newcomers from the population exchange had gone into the trade and petty labor.Google Scholar
  9. 15.
    See Kemal H. Karpat, Turkey’s Politics: The Transition to a Multi-Party System (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1959).Google Scholar
  10. 17.
    Şaban Tezcan, “Çanakkale’de Şehirleşme” (Urbanization in Çanakkale), in Çanakkale Savaşları Tarihi (Çanakkale War History) Vol. 4, edited by Mustafa Demir (Istanbul: Değişim Yayınları, 2008), 3333–3367.Google Scholar
  11. 20.
    Barlas Tolan, Türkiye’de Iller Itibariyle Sosyo-Ekonomik Gelişmislik Endeksi (Socio-economic development index according to cities in Turkey) (Ankara: T.C. Başbakanlık Devlet Planlama Teskilatı Müşteşarlığı SPD Arşltırma şubesi Toplum Yapısı Araştırmaları Birimi, 1972), Table G 10.Google Scholar
  12. 22.
    There were 76 tractors in 1968, Republic of Turkey, Köy Isleri ve Kooperatifler Bakanlığı, Köy Envanter Etüdlerine Göre Çanakkale (Çanakkale according to village inventory etudes) (Ankara: 1968), 62.Google Scholar
  13. 24.
    Yücel Çağlar, Türkiye’de Ormancılık Politikası (Forestry policy in Turkey) (Ankara: Çağ Matbaası, 1979). Çağlar harshly criticized the government of the second planning era (1967–1972). He evaluated the politics of the government as a way of destructing forestry, especially using the debates on the law regarding the determination of forestry land in 1967 and the constitutional change regarding forestry crimes in 1970. He asserted that the illegal cutting of trees had increased in the years of these debates. While in 1968, a total of 7540 hectares of forest area was burnt, in 1969 it increased to 16,364 and in 1970 to 15,019.Google Scholar
  14. 31.
    See Tekeli and İlkin, Cumhuriyetin Harcı, 369–370, for the background and implication of this policy. For the American influence on highway policy in details, see Robert S. Lehman, “Building Roads and a Highway Administration in Turkey,” in Hands Across Frontiers, edited by Howard M. Teaf and Peter G. Franck (New York: Cornell University Press, Ithaca, 1955), 363–410. On page 383, see the increase in the investments in road between 1947 and 1953 from 12,057,000 dollars to 49,752,000 dollars.Google Scholar
  15. Z. Yehuda Hershlag, Turkey, The Challenge of Growth (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1968).Google Scholar
  16. 32.
    Muhteşem Kaynak, “Ulaştırma Sektörü” (Transportation Sector). In Türkiye Ekonomisi “Sektörel Gelismeler” (Turkey’s economy “Sector Developments”), edited by Çelik Aruoba and Cem Alpar (Ankara: Türkiye Ekonomi Kurumu, 1992), 77–88. For the international highway transportation, Kaynak draws attention to TIR convention. In 1967, seven international transportation firms had entered Turkey’s market and in 1969 the import of 140 towing vehicles with the credits of Word Bank increased the number of the firms to 28 and in 1970 with 302 machine to 85.Google Scholar
  17. 35.
    Muzaffer Sencer, Türkiye’de Köylülüğün Maddi Temelleri (Material bases of villagehood in Turkey), (Istanbul: Ant Yayınları, Ocak 1971), 69. Industry was also improving. Between 1950 and 1959, the demand for automobiles was met by the imports from Europe and the States. The montage industry emerged in the country in 1954. Between 1955 and 1964, companies involved in automotive industry increased from 2 to 12. In 1964, by a law, the montage industry was directed toward producing. The foundation of the automobile manufacturing like Tofas and Renault started in 1968 and 1969.Google Scholar
  18. 36.
    Ismet Ergun, Türkiye Ekonomik Kalkınmasında Ulaştırma Sektörü (Transportation sector in Turkey’s economic development) (Ankara: Hacettepe Üniversitesi Iktisadi ve Idari Bilimler Fakultesi Yayınları, No: 10, 1985), 81. The figures include the total of state, city, and village roads.Google Scholar
  19. 37.
    John Kolars, “System of Change in Turkish Village Agriculture,” in Turkey: Geographic and Social Perspectives, edited by P. Benedict, F. Mansur and E. Tumertekin (Leiden: Brill, 1974), 222.Google Scholar
  20. 39.
    Yasa, Memduh. Cumhuriyet Donemi Türkiye Ekonomisi 1923–1978 (Turkish economy in the Republican era 1923–1978), (Istanbul: Akbank Kültür Yayını, 1980), Table 5 on 295.Google Scholar
  21. 46.
    John M. Cook, The Troad: An Archeological and Topographical Study (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1973), 305.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Gül Özateşler 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gül Özateşler

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations