51

 LATE OTTOMAN MUSLIM WOMEN OF LETTERS

VIS-À-VIS THE GENDERED DISCOURSE OF

“THE NEW OTTOMAN MUSLIM WOMAN”

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT…………………………………………………………………………….. iii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS…………………………………………………..………….. vii

Chapters

1 INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………...……… 1

2 TRANSFORMATIONS IN THE LATE OTTOMAN EMPIRE AND THE NEW FEMALE IDENTITY QUESTION……………………..…………………………... 8

2.1 Dynamics of the Question of the New Female Identity…………….…...… 16

3 RESEARCH AND LITERATURE………………………………………………... 23

3.1 Gender, Women's Writing and Historiography…………..……………….. 23

3.1.1 Inclusiveness and Diversity……………………………………… 29

3.2 Working with the Late Ottoman Muslim Women of Letters……………… 33

3.2.1 Identification …………………………………………….……… 33

3.2.2 Sources…………………………………………………………... 37

3.3 Brief History of the Scholarship of the Late Ottoman Muslim Women of Letters …………………………………..…………………….…………... 45

4 OTTOMAN MUSLIM WOMEN OF LETTERS.………………………..………... 58

4.1 Emergence of Women’s Public Writing in the 19th- Century Historical Context……………………………………………………………..……... 58

4.2 Literary Tradition of Ottoman Muslim Women………………………..… 93

5 “THE NEW WOMAN” ……..……………………………………………............ 116

5.1 Configurations Between Progress and Traditions.……………………… 116

5.2 To Write or Not to Be: Public Writing as an Act of Identity Negotiation…………………………………………………………........ 134

6 WOMEN’S CHANGED PROXIMITIES TO CONTEMPORARY IDEAS,

IDENTITIES AND PROJECTS …...........................................……………….… 161

vi

6.1 The Codes of Modesty…………………………………….…………….. 161

6.2 The Peripheries of Femininity………………………………….……….. 182

7 CONCLUSION: WRITING HER SELF………………………………...…….… 203

Appendices

A: FIGURES…………………………………………………………………………... 211

B: SELECTED ARCHIVAL DOCUMENTS..…………….………………………..… 220

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY……………………………………………………..… 222

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I want to thank Prof. Peter Sluglett for accepting me as his Ph.D. student, for introducing me to Middle Eastern history studies, for his kindness, and for his support of my academic pursuits.

I owe my sincere gratitude to Dr. Roberta Micallef who first introduced me to a variety of work by Middle Eastern women writers, as well as major theories and discussions in feminism studies. On innumerable occasions, when I was her teaching assistant at the University of Utah, or if I was participating in conferences, meetings and projects, she guided and encouraged my work. She educated me in how to articulate arguments, and to be direct and critical in academic work. Throughout the dissertation period, her generous help, her patience, her confidence in me and my project, and most important of all, her friendship, kept me going through the most demanding stages of this process. She taught me a lot about being a good teacher and mentor.

I was honored by Prof. Peter Von Sivers’ attentive reading of the present study, and am thankful for his constructive feedback, as a historian, during the critical phases of it. Prof. Vincent Cheng’s meticulous rereading of my writing for its language; his thoughtful suggestions, shaped the way I handled and presented the material, and expanded my view. I am indebted to Dr. Hülya Adak for her appreciative and instructive comments about the scope of this study, and her enthusiasm and valuable insights. The very different areas of

viii

interest of the members of my Ph.D. committee contributed to the interdisciplinary grounds of this work.

At the University of Washington many years ago, I was fortunate to have had Dr. Selim Kuru as my advisor when I was new to graduate studies and life in the US. I greatly admire his intellect, curiosity, professionalism, and character. He set an example for many of us by always investing extra time and energy into his students’ scholarly advancement.

I would like to also express my thanks to Prof. Hatice Aynur, Dr. Deniz Aktan Küçük, Dr. Yunus Uğur, Dr. Himmet Taşkömür, Dr. Vildan Coşkun, and my colleagues at the Association for the Teaching of Turkish as A Foreign Language (YADOT Eğitim Derneği), for their friendship, encouragement and support, and to Gail Godbey for helping me get through the editing and proofreading process. Prof. Zehra Toska ignited my interest in Ottoman women’s studies as an undergraduate student at Boğaziçi University. She sent us, her Turkish literature students, to the newly established Women’s Library in Istanbul for a course project, and it was there that I first came across Ottoman women’s writings.

Elif Ekin Akşit, Ayfer Karakaya-Stump, Elizabeth Frierson, Deniz Kandiyoti and Fatmagül Berktay’s works inspired me with their fresh perspectives to the study of the women in the past.

I am also grateful to Dr. Nathan Devir, and others at the Middle East Center, the Graduate School and the Marriott Library, who always were there to provide assistance on professional and technical matters.

I greatly appreciate the funding from the Center for Values Education (DEM), which made it possible for me to dedicate uninterrupted time to the writing of this dissertation.

ix

My dear husband, Dr. Mehmet Ali Doğan, has been a true friend, and has offered his support in countless ways. During the summers of 2015 and 2016, which were the most intense periods of my writing, he helped me obtain much-needed books from the Harvard and Duke University libraries, in addition to taking care of our beloved son, Galip. His presence has always comforted me.

I cannot begin to express my gratitude and love to my parents, my parents-in-law, and my sisters and brother, for their unconditional support and encouragement.

I would also like to dedicate this work in loving memory to my dear father-in-law, Kazım Naci Doğan, a keen writer and journalist, and an idealistic, honest person, whom we lost two days before my dissertation defense. We miss him immensely.

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

The growing scholarship on Ottoman women writers, poets and journalists relies predominantly on research describing women's journals, newspapers1 and organizations,2 the study of women's contributions to the feminist3 and nationalist cause and literature, the publication and study of their memoirs, travel narratives and autobiographies,4 fiction5 and nonfiction works6 and manuscripts, theses, articles and monographs on individual writers,7

1 Ayşe Zeren Enis, Everyday Lives of Ottoman Muslim Women: Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete (Newspaper for Ladies) (1895-1908) (İstanbul: Libra Kitap, 2013).

2 Serpil Çakır, “Osmanlı Kadın Dernekleri,” Toplum ve Bilim (Spring 1991): 139-57.

3 Serpil Çakır, “Kadınlığın İlk Tarihi Şikayeti: Beyaz Konferanslar [The first historical complaint of womanhood: White Conferences],” Tarih-Toplum, no. 231 (Mar. 2003): 40–47.

4 Nigar binti Osman, Hayatımın Hikayesi, [ed. her sons] (Istanbul: Ekin Basımevi, 1959); Leyla Saz, dAnılar: 19. Yüzyılda Saray Haremi (Istanbul: Cumhuriyet Kitapları, 2000); Hülya Adak, “An Epic for Peace: Introduction to the Reprint,” in Memoirs of Halidé Edib (Piscataway, N.J.: Gorgias Press, 2004); Roberta Micallef, “Identities in Motion- Reading Two Ottoman Travel Narratives as Life Writing,” Journal of Women's History 25, no. 2 (Summer 2013): 85-110.

5 Serhan Alkan İspirli, ed. Leyla Hanım (Saz) Solmuş Çiçekler: İnceleme-Metin (Ankara: Salkımsöğüt Yay., 2008).

6 Şefika Kurnaz, “Emine Semiye ile Nigar Hanım’ın Mektuplaşmaları,” Turkish Studies 2, no. 4 (Fall 2007): 631-46; 7 Serpil Çakır, “Ulviye Mevlan Civelek (1893-1964),” in A Biographical Dictionary of Women's Movements and Feminisms: Central, Eastern, and South Eastern Europe, 19th and 20th Centuries, eds. Francisca de Haan et al. (Budapest; New York: Central European University Press, 2006), 336-69; Şefika Kurnaz, Osmanlı Kadın Hareketinde Bir Öncü Emine Semiye: Hayatı, Eserleri, Fikirleri (Istanbul: Timaş, 2008).

2

and general thematic explorations such as education, nationalism, polygamy and fashion in their writings.8 Biographical anthologies, specialized encyclopedias and similar works9 introduce basic information about listed women writers. But a collective and concentrated look into the late Ottoman Muslim women’s literary existence in the public sphere, to gain insights into its dynamics and effects, is lacking in contemporary literature.10

Late 19th- and early 20th- century Ottoman women were situated at the confluence of significant transformations brought about by Ottoman modernization. Ottoman society, eager to exploit the advantages of modernization in everyday life and experiment with any novelties, sought to configure the balance between the old and the new through female identity. At a time of rapid social transformations, the ideal Ottoman Muslim woman was projected in the public discourse as the representative of the new, progressive nation and its transmitter to the next generation, while at the same time preserving the established

8 Tülay Keskin, “Feminist /Nationalist Discourse in the First Year of the Ottoman Revolutionary Press (1908-1909): Readings from the Magazines of Demet, Mehasin and Kadın (Salonica)” (master's thesis, Bilkent University, 2003).

9 Murat Uraz, Kadın Şair ve Muharrirlerimiz (Istanbul: Tefeyyüz Kitabevi, 1940).

10 Two of the few such concentrated studies which limit their scope with specific periodicals are Ayşenur Kurtoğlu's article on the female contributors and readers of the first women's periodical Terakki-i Muhadderat (Women's Progress), and Ayfer Karakaya-Stump's article which draws attention to the diverse group of women writing in the periodical Kadın. See Ayşenur Kurtoğlu, “Osmanlı Kadınlarının Gazeteleri ile İlk Tanışıklıkları,” İslamiyat III, no. 2 (Apr.-June 2000): 87-96; Ayfer Karakaya-Stump, “Debating Progress in a 'Serious Newspaper for Muslim Women': The Periodical Kadın of the Post-revolutionary Salonica, 1908-1909,” British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies 30, no. 2 (Nov. 2003): 155-81. Elif İkbal Mahir Metinsoy’s article is another such work, which evaluates the debates of women’s studying, employment and clothing among Ottoman Muslim female writers in the post-WWI period. See Elif İkbal Mahir Metinsoy, “The Limits of Feminism in Muslim-Turkish Women Writers of the Armistice Period (1918-1923),” in A Social History of Late Ottoman Women: New Perspectives, eds. Duygu Köksal and Anastasia Falierou (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2013): 85-108. Again, Hülya Argunşah’s following published presentation explores women of letters’ close relations to their biological and “cultural” fathers and their role in helping them to construct their new identities, as displayed in their fiction works. Hülya Argunşah, “İlk Kadın Yazarlarda Toplumsal Kimliğin Yapılandırılması Sürecinde Babanın Keşfi,” in 21. Yüzyılın Eşiğinde Kadınlar: Değişim ve Güçlenme, Uluslararası Multidisipliner Kadın Kongresi, Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi, Oct. 13-16, 2009 [International Multidisciplinary Congress on Women], vol. 2, ed. Füsun Çoban Döşkaya (Izmir: 9 Eylül University, 2011), 389-402.

3

cultural identity. Women of letters took part in the intellectual and literary public arena that came into being after the development of journalistic press and printing, and were both subjects and objects of this identity discourse. Yet, the discourse was conditioned by women of letters’ varying proximities to ideas, identities and projects that were Islamic, feminine, modern, or nationalistic. They were revealed in their positions on a variety of issues in both print media and in their personal works. I argue that the different ways in which they positioned themselves with regard to modesty, femininity and literary identity continuously unsettled the attempted boundaries and representations of the new Ottoman womanhood, which was situated conveniently in between tradition and modernity. Recalling Gilbert and Gubar’s statement in The Madwoman in the Attic that the one veiled plot in most of 19th- century women’s literature is, in some sense, “a story of the woman writer's quest for her own story; it is the story, in other words, of the woman's quest for self-definition,”11 this study, as a matter of course, will also help demonstrate cases where Ottoman women writers sought to build their own public identities.

Any study today about women writers in the late Ottoman Empire requires a more informed conceptual framework than the one used up until now. What I am proposing and what is novel in this dissertation is a (re)conceptualization of the understanding of the Ottoman Muslim women of letters in the late 19th and early 20th centuries by generating a more inclusive picture of their intellectual existence in history in terms of reputation and ideology, and based on a (re)examination of primary sources: Ottoman Muslim women of letters writing mainly in Istanbul, Salonica12 and Europe, in Ottoman Turkish and English,

11 Sandra M. Gilbert and Susan Gubar, The Madwoman in the Attic: The Woman Writer and the Nineteenth-Century Literary Imagination (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1984), 76.

4

between 1869-1923,13 are the subjects of this study. Those women who produced skillful writing to a degree that it was known by others through seeing, hearing and reading, who regulary or irregularly contributed to journals, who had works independently published or not, will be accommodated within the general profile of the women of letters, which has not been the prevalent tendency in the existing scholarship and ignored such contributions or pushed them into the background. While my research does not exclude any race, class or political inclination among them, it largely focuses on Muslim prose writers.14 It approaches writing Ottoman women as a community but does not posit a collective identity above any individual identity. On the contrary, the value of the research, and another angle of the scholarship, can be found in its demonstration of “Ottoman Muslim women of letters” as a diverse group of agents in terms of their backgrounds and ideologies, and as a category that assigns equal value to varying personalities and perspectives. It serves to disclose their critical public agency as a collective in disturbing supra-identity projects that targeted their own selves as literate, urban women. Late Ottoman women’s public narratives arose curiosity in this connection with regard to the extents and parameters of Ottoman women’s alliances and conflicts with the dominant religious, gendered or

12 According to Hasan Duman's Union Catalogue, between 1828-1928 in Ottoman and Turkish Republican territories, the overwhelming majority of Arabic-script periodicals (1162 out of 1809), which included Ottoman Turkish ones, were published in Istanbul. Between 1876-1908, which covers the Sultan Abdulhamid II period, Salonica generated the most periodicals after Istanbul. See Hasan Duman, Union Catalogue of the Periodicals in Arabic Script in the Libraries of Istanbul (İstanbul Kütüphanelerindeki Arap Harfli Süreli Yayınlar Toplu Kataloğu 1828-1928) (Istanbul: Research Center for Islamic History, Art and Culture, 1986), XVII, 529-30.

13 A reader’s letter from the 85th issue of the periodical Terakki in 1869 is the earliest example encountered so far of Ottoman Muslim women's nontraditional, public writing. “Bir Hanım Tarafından Aldığımız Varakanın Suretidir,” Terakki, no. 85 (Feb. 17, 1869): 3. The year 1923 (Oct. 29) signifies the establishment of the Turkish Republic and the official end of the Ottoman Empire.

14 There were numerous prominent non-Muslim Ottoman women of letters in this time period such as Ottoman Armenian Elbis Gesaratsian, Srpuhi Dussap, Marie Beylerian, and Zabel Yesayian, and Ottoman Greek personalities Eufrosyne (Marou) Samartzidou and Demetra Vaka Brown.

5

contemporary approaches of the period to survive and thrive as female writers and as members of a modernizing, Muslim, urban community. The discussion will speak accordingly to the general issue of subjectivity as well as the loci of re/formation, disturbance or instability of prevailing discourses and representations.

The study of women in the late 19th- and early 20th- century Ottoman era offers a great vantage point from which to investigate the shifts that have defined Ottoman modernity and to shed light on the gendered nature of developmental efforts. In the next chapter of this dissertation, I will outline the history of the late Ottoman Empire’s political developments, reforms and changes in socio-economic contexts, and account for the emergence of concerns about the preservation of the Ottoman Empire and Ottoman identity which was projected onto the new female identity. Again, Chapter 3, Research and Literature, points to the importance of women’s writing and of gender analysis in influencing the workings of mainstream historiography. It explains the claims of inclusiveness and diversity of the dissertation in studying Muslim women of letters, elaborates on the problem of being able to identify the subject, surveys the types of sources, and provides an overview of the development of its related scholarship. The subsequent section aims to familiarize the reader with the group of writers in question. It discusses the educational and artistic training of Ottoman women whose participation in public writing grew in the late 19th century as a result of the expansion of public schools and the public press, as well as women’s interests in various literary genres. In the main body of this work, in Chapter 5 and Chapter 6, first of all, I pursue the discourse of “the new Ottoman woman” in contemporary male and female writings. In the next sections, where I investigate women of letters’ experiences and motives for being present in the public domain as writers, and

6

their diverse views on women’s outdoor attire, women’s engagements related to school, entertainment, employment, domestic work and participation in politics with alternating references to the requirements of progress and conservation of indigenous values, I aim to bring out women’s collective agency in destabilizing the two main elements of the proposed identity of the new Ottoman woman in past discourse: modesty and femininity.

I am predominantly interested in the study in women’s prose that began with the appearance of the first women's letter to a regular journal (Terakki, 1869) until the official end of the Empire (1923). Fictional prose took the form of stories, novels and plays; and nonfiction and semifictional prose works were memoirs, letters, instructional and informative books, articles, personal anecdotes and critical pieces on various issues. Poetry was a traditional sign of cultural refinement and a highly developed practice in Ottoman literary history and women produced both prose and poetry extensively in the late Ottoman period as opposed to the dominance of poetry in the previous centuries.15 Fatma Aliye, a leading female writer, called the time in which she lived a time when prose was more needed than poetry,16 identifying and promoting an emerging shift in the literary practice as well as in its uses. I will mention women’s poetry briefly in the reviews of the history of the scholarship, women’s education, and women’s literary tradition in order to present a full picture of their literary background and activity.

Women’s history studies present a suitable foundation on which to inquire about not only modernity projects that are centered around women, but also the patterns in

15 About how and to what ends Ottoman women practiced divan (court) poetry, see Kemal Silay, “Singing His Words: Ottoman Women Poets and the Power of Patriarchy,” in Women in the Ottoman Empire: Middle Eastern Women in the Early Modern Era, ed. Madeline C. Zilfi (Leiden: Brill, 1997), 197-213.

16 “nazımdan ziyade nesre lüzum gösteren bir devir” See F. Samime İnceoğlu and Zeynep Süslü Berktaş, eds. Fazıl ve Feylesof Kızım Fatma Aliye'ye Mektuplar (Istanbul: Klasik, 2011), 9.

7

historiographical traditions. Recent literature on the late Ottoman women's press and associations have already enabled us to critically rethink these historiographical practices. Contributing to new directions in the scholarship on Ottoman female writers, this project’s findings will deepen what we know thus far from the different ways of silencing and avoiding acknowledgement both in history and in the writing of it. It will help flesh out the social context of women’s involvement in the late Ottoman and early Republican intellectual and literary histories. It will help better identify the broader trends of nationalism, feminism, journalism and Occidentalism with regard to those involved in, and exposed to, them. It will also facilitate a deeper and more informed assessment of problems regarding representations of female identity today.

CHAPTER 2

TRANSFORMATIONS IN THE LATE OTTOMAN EMPIRE

AND THE NEW FEMALE IDENTITY QUESTION

The historical context of the late Ottoman Empire engendered a discourse on the salvation of the nation through progress and preservation of cultural identity. This discourse involved the dynamics for the cultivation of a new female identity that is both modern and indigenous. In this section, I will first lay out the historical context which made it possible for various groups and ideologies to emerge, and how they affected the Empire’s social and political climate.

The Balkan and Middle Eastern societies of the late Ottoman era began to a socio-cultural-economic structural transformation shortly before the massive European influence in the 19th century took hold as a response to the emergence of new groups and estates with new and divergent demands. From the 18th century on, relations between the government and these considerably altered societies constituted the central dynamics of the Ottoman internal transformation. A Muslim class of landlords with local connections in military (Janissary) and in education (ulama) called âyân emerged in the 18th century as a challenge to the bureaucratic order. The ayan sought autonomy in the provinces. Defeats in the 1768-74 and 1787-92 wars with the Russians were a major factor in weakening the authority of

the central government and enabling ayans to assume power as acting rulers in various provinces, such as Syria, Iraq, Arabia and North Africa. The late 18th and early 19th century

9

saw attempts at reforms in the military and in the government; the Nizam-ı Cedid (New Order) movement not only meant to counter Western military power resulting from its advance in technology and industry but also to assert authority over the ayan and their connections in military and education. The attempt was halted by the Janissary revolt in 1807. The ayan from the town of Rusçuk (Ruse) intervened with his army; the new sultan, Mahmud II, was brought to the throne and was forced to declare the rights of the ayan and protect their interests in return for their obedience and protection of the central authority (Sened-i İttifak, 1808). Karpat argues also that such revolts of the ayan during a critical period of social transformation in the Balkans, as well as the fact that the government at times sided with the Christian population indirectly against the threat of the ayan, facilitated the rise of modern national states in the Balkans.17

The socio-economic foundations of the Ottoman state and the Muslim bureaucratic elite, namely the military and scholars, began to be undermined by another group at the beginning of the 18th century. The industrial revolution and the resulting technological advancement in the West, together with the intensification of communication and expansion of trade, gradually made Mediterranean regions economically dependent on France and Britain, thus making the Ottoman state an importer of manufactured items. Its exports decreased, which had consisted mostly of agricultural products and raw material. In the course of events, a predominantly non-Muslim group of Ottoman merchants, craftsmen and food producers, who had conflicting interests with the Ottoman bureaucracy and with the ayan, gained power. For example, Southeastern Europe was initially impacted

17 Kemal H. Karpat, “The Transformation of the Ottoman State, 1789-1908,” International Journal of Middle East Studies 3, no. 3 (July 1972): 251, 253.

10

by the expanded trade with the West and the Ottoman economic safeguards in the 18th century, which resulted in a developed economy and a powerful regional group of traders and manufacturers. They sponsored intellectual and nationalist educations in the Christian community and became active revolutionary leaders against the Ottoman bureaucracy. Together with the clergy and the military men, they played a critical role in acquiring political independence from the Empire on the basis of ethnic and religious associations. In predominantly Muslim regions, a new middle class of merchants, as well as intellectuals and clergy members, which emerged from among Christian groups, mostly Greek, Armenian and Arab, gradually dominated the urban area. The Muslim-Turkish populations of these communities did not have such a middle class. Bureaucratic-military people who dealt with administration and manufacturing were the sole city leaders but they did not possess true economic power.18 The power of the ayan, who were from prominent Muslim families, depended on their land holdings in the countryside to sustain their status, and they often tried to seize land belonging to Christian peasants; they lost their power gradually after the annihilation of the land system (tımar) and the abolishment of the Janissaries by Mahmud II (r. 1808-1839). The urban merchant groups, on the other hand, maintained strong economic control based on free trade and private property, while their ties to the Ottoman administration weakened. The Ottoman state was stricken economically with Britain’s Commercial Convention of 1838 and further deepened with the deprivation of its major economic base in the Black Sea when both peace treaties and regional land loss opened it to Russian trade.

18 For a different evaluation of the economic power of the Muslim middle-class, see Carter Vaughn Findley, Turkey, Islam, Nationalism, and Modernity (New Haven & London: Yale University Press, 2010), 120-21.

11

New middle class groups with various occupations, and with demands placed upon the government, arose as a result of internal and external developments and interplay between them; this transformed the Ottoman social structure and challenged the traditional order which indicated a need for a new political system. Subsequent reforms in the Ottoman social and political system based on the principle of centralization owed not only to these forces in society but also to new concepts and principles of government and education. The founding of the new Nizam-ı Cedid army, which dismantled the land ownership and the power of the ayan, abolished the Janissary establishment with a powerful new army, was meant to control rebellious elements. The opening of embassies in European cities, the establishment of modern schools, and providing teachers from France, created, initially, a small group of men familiar with Western languages and modern science, who were groomed for government services. Further centralization efforts in the first half of the 19th century, such as the formation of a fiscal entity to collect revenues, the establishment of a directorate of religious endowments (Evkaf) to administer these funds, a religious opinion office (Bab-ı Meşihat), the Translation Bureau (Tercüme Odası) and various other specialized divisions (judiciary, agriculture, public work, trade and industry, etc.), as well as the reorganization of the police and the army, helped modernize the bureaucratic structure and the emergence of a new class of Ottoman government officials and intelligentsia who played a significant role in the politics of the Empire for decades to come. Intending to preserve its sovereignty and territorial integrity, the state also took measures against the separation of non-Muslim communities in the Empire and sought their loyalties. The Tanzimat edict of 1839 guaranteed the security of life and property for all Ottoman subjects, and the Islahat edict of 1856, prepared together with the French and

12

Austrian authorities, intended to establish equality among Muslim and non-Muslim communities with regulations in many areas such as employment, the tax code, military service and education, thereby restructuring the millet (ethnic-religious communities) system. These edicts had limited implementation because of a lack of legal and institutional basis, but in the long run, they empowered the Ottoman Christian populace.

Besides intelligentsia, the local notables emerged as another group with political influence. They became representatives of their community in municipal councils as part of the integration process of the Tanzimat period. Karpat argues that the public chose to follow these communal leaders rather than the central bureaucracy since it oppressed the propertied groups in commerce and agriculture even more than the councilmen.19 The Land Code (1858) and its amendments required individuals to register the lands they owned with the government or leased from the state, and also formal deeds were issued to individuals for the cultivation of unoccupied lands. Changes in property rights and estate formation led the urban notables, who were merchants, scholars or tribal leaders, to also develop private property, which solidified their rise as a new middle class power. This upper-echelon social group generated important intellectual figures after 1880 who were influential in the ideological formation and the socio-political culture of the late Ottoman period, who were joined by a group of urban Muslim women in their progressivist, nationalist efforts to reform the state and the society, with implications for improving women’s conditions and their increased roles.

The Muslim-Turkish intelligentsia of the mid-19th century, on the other hand, grew out of the modern government institutions that were products of the administrative reforms,

19 Karpat, “The Transformation of the Ottoman State,” 263.

13

and they were part of the new bureaucratic structure on different levels. The celebrated female litterateurs and publishers of the early period of women’s public writing were from these families. They voiced opposition to some of the Tanzimat reforms introduced by the high-level bureaucratic intelligentsia under foreign influence that granted power to the central administration and local councilmen, and destroyed the established socio-cultural structure in the Empire rather than reform it. Karpat stresses that the transformation of the Ottoman political system was a response to the economic stimuli which created new Muslim and non-Muslim social power groups as seen above, and “[a]ny attempt to reconcile society and government functionally and ideologically was bound to undermine the complex socio-ethnic and religious system of balances on which the traditional Ottoman state stood.”20 The new representative bodies in provincial councils had brought to light the lack of a systematized and efficient relationship between the central authority and the affluent middle classes, and the need for a balance between these forces. Some Muslim thinkers and statesmen contemplated ways to overcome the new circumstances the Ottomans faced and formulated a more indigenous and liberal ideology of governing. Called “the Young Ottomans” and led by Namık Kemal, Ziya Paşa and İbrahim Şinasi, they advocated the adaptation of modern governmental institutions and a constitutional system (Meşrutiyet) based on not Western but Ottoman and Islamic political traditions. They also proposed a nationalistic ideology around a rhetoric of the Empire as a fatherland, and equal citizenship, in order to appeal to the loyalties of various ethnic-religious populations and strengthen the state. The Constitution (Kanun-i Esasî) and the Parliament (Meclis-i Mebusan) of 1876 were born in the hands of this group, and was supported by

20 Ibid., 243-44.

14

high-level bureaucrats, as an attempt to integrate the representatives of the changed social and political structure into the system, to enable control over the throne’s authority, and to prevent further foreign intervention in Ottoman politics. Niyazi Berkes indicates that the first constitution reassured the Islamic aspect of the Ottoman state and diverted from Tanzimat’s headway into secularization.21 The deputies from the countryside in the first Ottoman parliament demanded liberties and regulations in various matters regarding economic, social and political life, and criticized the abuses of local officials and the incompetencies of ministers. The confrontations and the external wars quickly brought to an end the first parliamentary experiment. The constitution was suspended and the sultan’s authority was re-consolidated through the controlling of the bureaucratic intelligentsia in the Abdulhamid II period (1876-1909). His rule extended the Tanzimat reforms in many respects while seeking to reverse cultural Westernization with Islamization.22 When the Ottoman Empire lost most of its territory populated by Christians in south-east Europe, the Ottomanist ideology of a multiethnic state was abandoned and a pan-Islamic one was propounded by the Hamidian state to assure the unity of the remaining Ottoman subjects around a single religious identity. Islamism was also deemed the most competent hold of resistance against Western intrusion and imperialism in Muslim lands.

Political mobilization, as well as cultural and social transformations, continued during the Abdulhamid II era. An increase in the population of Muslim inhabitants in provincial towns due to migrants seeking jobs or displacement from former Ottoman lands

21 Niyazi Berkes, The Development of Secularism in Turkey (Montreal: McGill University Press, 1964), 247.

22 Donald Quataert, “Overview of the Nineteenth Century,” in An Economic and Social History of the Ottoman Empire. 1300-1914, eds. Halil İnalcık and Donald Quataert (Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1994), 766.

15

in the Balkans and Caucasus, and the formation and expansion of a modernized educational system with technical, professional, military and mid-level state schools in cities, spawned groups of people and new intellectuals who, during this process, had been alienated from traditional values, communities and authorities. The emerging intelligentsia, who were mainly descendants of the new middle-class Muslim families discussed before, filled the highest administrative offices owing to their civil and military training and specializations, and thus, formed the late Ottoman political elite. An altered form of the nationalist ideology of the Young Ottomans established itself among this group when the structural context, namely their background and education, coupled with the conditions of the period, led them to assume a patriotic allegiance to the Ottoman state, rather than to the sultan.23 The secret organization of the Young Turks named Union and Progress (İttihad ve Terakki) emerged in 1889 with dedication to the survival of the nation of Turks as a cultural-political unit,24 and embraced a scientific view of progress, constitutionalism against absolutism, and freedoms and social equality. Organized abroad, backed by town notables, and led by military staff officers, the Young Turks carried out the revolution of 1908 to restore the Constitution and resume the Parliament. Further social and political transformations and the dissolution of the Empire after World War I prepared the foundation of the Republic of Turkey in 1923. All these developments, together with other events of vital importance including loss of land in wars, economic hardships and ascendance of separatist movements

23 Fatma Müge Göçek, “Ethnic Segmentation, Western Education, and Political Outcomes: Nineteenth-Century Ottoman Society,” Poetics Today 14, no. 3 (Autumn, 1993): 530.

24 The Young Turks’ commitment to Turkism evolved in time from a vague interpretation of Ottomanism to a cultural identity of Muslim Turkishness for political unification and prospects of modernity. See M. Şükrü Hanioğlu, A Brief History of the Ottoman Empire (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2008), 188.

16

rooted in religious and ethnic allegiances, made the last century of the Empire the most fateful period in its history. In the next part, I will discuss the intellectual concerns about Ottoman identity, which was triggered by social and political transformations and the modernizing reforms of this period, and how the reconstruction of the female identity, which struck a critical balance between the progress and traditions, were related to these

concerns.

2.1 Dynamics of the Question of the New Female Identity

The Ottoman reforms, which had prevailed for over a century in the Empire, were due to pressing needs and demands for progress and European influence. They influenced the restructuring of Ottoman life in many ways through social organization and collective values, as well as through the secularization of institutions, life styles, and intellectual and literary pursuits. During this process, Ottoman authorities, writers and intellectuals, concerned about the survival of the Ottoman state, were concerned about the preservation of cultural identity too.

The military, educational institutions and communication were the first areas to be subject to structural reformation. The need for trained manpower, books, new schools, technologies and institutional models brought the Ottomans closer to Europe by way of learning its languages, installing ambassadors, traveling and studying abroad, and inviting foreign experts and advisors. It should be noted that language learning, mainly French, led to greater familiarity with European history, literature, philosophy and cultures among state officials, and trainees and graduates of new institutions. These were people of both the old and the new worlds, who had been reared to respect their own culture, but were at the same time committed to a modern country that followed the Western example. Yet,

17

Westernization carried with it ideas and practices that were inimical to the traditional Ottoman and Muslim ways, and many still viewed Europeans as adversaries of the Ottoman state and way of life.25 A confrontation between the old and the new practices, beliefs, models, institutions and laws, some of which coexisted for a period, created a duality in social, political, military, literary and cultural life, where compromise and rejection were constantly negotiated in order to attain a true degree of modernization without emulating Western culture and losing Ottoman roots. Various interpretations sought to fashion the change in a way that would generate a controlled and favorable social transformation by reconciling indigenous values and the requirements of civilization. The Young Ottomans’ political philosophy was a product of such an attempt. They had found the early 19th- century Westernizing and secularizing policies to be superficial as well as alarming for the state’s survival, but, in turn, supported modern, liberal, participatory values based on the revitalization of the great Ottoman civilization and Islamic heritage.

Changes in the social, political arrangement of the Empire and efforts to build a modern Ottoman subjecthood prompted modernized public educational institutions for the and the need for informed, competent and professional individuals to serve the state and the nation. It was perceived as the key to successful reform and progress. Moreover, public education is one of the bases of power of the state authority, besides the army and bureaucracy, in centralized, modernizing states. A Midwifery Seminary (Ebe Mektebi), opened at the Medical School in 1842-43, was one of the first examples of the Empire’s consideration of its women subjects and the addressing of the scientific knowledge they

25 Justin McCarthy, The Ottoman Turks: An Introductory History to 1923 (London; New York: Longman, 1997), 288, 294.

18

had to gain, commensurate with their gender, towards the advancement of the nation. Changes made in the Land Law in 1847 allowing women to inherit land from their fathers26 and the opening of girls’ secondary schools (İnas Rüşdiye) in 1858 are among the subsequent attempts to redefine women’s civic rights and responsibilities in a modernizing state. Together with the development of communication, the independent press and journalism after 1860, intellectuals, state officials and litterateurs found a venue in which to disseminate their ideas about the reforms and cultural change. Namık Kemal, in his article “A Proposal on the Education of Women” (1867) published in Tasvir-i Efkâr, underlined the significance of educating the female public, the bearers of the nation’s children who were left ignorant and excluded from any social contribution.27 The extended discourse criticized customs and traditions and attempted to form a sympathetic public opinion on the redefinition of women’s status in domestic and social spheres, alongside conservative objections, and was nurtured by the the nationalist concerns about development. Women joined the general discussion through the letters they sent to periodicals and essays they published in the late 1860s. The debate was carried out throughout the last decades of the Empire against the backdrop of negotiations between modernity, religion, culture and progress. Views on women’s studying, working, veiling, writing, educating, travelling, voting, entertaining, marrying and divorcing have in fact become one of the most revealing sources concerning the Ottomans’ anxiety about preserving its identity while achieving progress, and it was reflected in the increasing

26 S. Gül Akyılmaz, “Osmanlı Miras Hukukunda Kadının Statüsü,” (The Position of Women in Ottoman Inheritance Law) Gazi Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi 11, no. 1-2 (2007): 491.

27 [Namık Kemal]. “Terbiye-i nisvan hakkında bir layihadır” Tasvir-i Efkâr, no. 457 (4 Şevval

1283 [/1867]): [1-2].

19

number of periodicals addressing a female audience, and nonfiction books concerning women after the 1870s.28 Women were viewed “not only as delineators of national identity but also as embodiments of authenticity and transmitters of national culture and community values to future generations.”29

Fatmagül Berktay indicates in her article “The Accordance Point of the East and the West: Constructing the Female Image”30 that the restlessness that arises from separations and ruptures in critical historical times in most societies is projected onto gender, and particularly the construction of female identity, emblematically. Ottoman intellectuals of the late 19th and early 20th centuries had to cope with a feeling of displacement originating from the ongoing change in their familiar world as well as a paranoia created by the lack of a secure port to harbor when needed, which was embodied by a powerful, valid, dependable tradition. Constructing a new profile of the Ottoman woman under the supervision of the modernizing authority, and the reproduction of the current patriarchal ideology, functioned as a foothold, similar to the experience of their Western counterparts, and assured that certain things remain the same even under changed circumstances. Since the cultural and political tradition is not as strong as it once was, and the premodern sovereignty patterns do not exist, the modern, capable, patriarchal

28 For a bibliography of works concerning women published in the late Ottoman Empire, see Recep Dikici, “Osmanlı Âlim ve Ediplerinin Kadınlar Hakkındaki Eski Harfli Eserleri Üzerine Bir Bibliyografya Denemesi,” Selçuk Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, no. 33 (2015): 217-30. For statistics and some examples, also see also İrvin Cemil Schick, “Print Capitalism and Women's Sexual Agency,” Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East 31, no. 1 (2011).

29 Marella Bodur, “Modernity, Social Movements and Democracy: Feminist Movements in Post-1980 Turkey” (PhD diss., Carleton University, 2005), 102.

30 Fatmagül Berktay, “Doğu ile Batı’nın Birleştiği Yer: Kadın İmgesinin Kurgulanışı,” in Modern Türkiye’de Siyasi Düşünce, vol. III: Modernleşme ve Batıcılık (Istanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 2002), 275-85.

20

individual configured new dynamics for power with the facilitation of a nationalist project in which women’s subjugation to the new setting was deemed critical. Regulating the practice and the discourse of the changing female identity was critical for the stability of the established male identity because the change in women’s status, especially in the public sphere, and the rise of a cultivated, cognizant and present female figure with her own subjectivity, problematized in turn the reading of the male identity and its familiar spheres of sovereignty. Cynthia Enloe argued that “nationalism typically has sprung from masculinized memory, masculinized humiliation and masculinized hope.”31 With its gendered nature, it desired to discipline women’s bodies and behaviors. The analyses pertaining to Ottoman/Turkish intellectuals’ confrontation and handling of the social and cultural transformation surrounding them and their search for a new identity at the axis of Islam, modernity and cultural tradition needs to scrutinize such power relations by employing categories such as gender in research for a more reflective outcome. Let us consider the perpetuation of the longstanding and widespread association of women with emotionality and men with rationality; this attributes to the male gender the subjectified position whereas the female, in the objectified position, requires control and stabilization. This particular dichotomy, bolstered by the late Ottoman intellectual, works to secure the agency of the male authority while it places women at the center of politics as a symbolic element. A fundamental feature of modernity is the reconstruction of gender roles and relations in building communities and articulating identities, but the relevant historical analyses and theories thus far do not sufficiently reveal the continuities in ideologies,

31 Cynthia Enloe, Bananas, Beaches & Bases: Making Feminist Sense of International Politics (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1990), 44.

21

cultures and attitudes that are focal to the reproduction of familiar dynamics in this reconstruction.32

Modernity here refers to a condition that summarizes various transformations of social life and divergence from some of the traditional obligations, resulting from the rise of a market society and the nation-state.33 In the Empire, modernization significantly reinterpreted the social roles of urban Muslim women in a more inclusive and pragmatic way, whose public appearance was traditionally limited to the conditions of necessity, and expanded the legitimate domains in which they could establish a presence outside of the home environment, such as teaching, working, schooling, writing, and solidarity activities. On the other hand, the boundaries and the actuality of this new existence were not settled or complete, and were continuously contested and inspected within the power dynamics of its specific context. On that note, women’s public writing in the late Ottoman period in particular owned a potent position with regard to large-scale assertions of women’s agency in characterizations of the new female identity directly and indirectly, and with representations of this identity embodied in the writer’s self. The woman writer interposed to reverse the passive, object positioning of women in the constructions of the new Ottoman womanhood by various authorities, and contended against a systematic regulation of the discourse, even if at times she reflected the patriarchal authority. Central to my thesis is that the late Ottoman Muslim women of letters’ interpretations of proper proximities to

32 Berktay, “Doğu ile Batı’nın Birleştiği Yer,” 276-77; Fatmagül Berktay, “Osmanlı’dan Cumhuriyet’e Feminizm,” Modern Türkiye’de Siyasi Düşünce, vol. I: Cumhuriyet’e Devreden Düşünce Mirası: Tanzimat ve Meşrutiyet’in Birikimi (Istanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 2001), 352.

33 Reşat Kasaba, “Kemalist Certainties and Modern Ambiguities,” Rethinking Modernity and National Identity in Turkey, eds. Sibel Bozdoğan and Reşat Kasaba (Seattle and London: University of Washington Press, 1997), 19.

22

Islamic, modern, gendered, national and cultural ideas, identities and projects of their time in the literary arena, as well as their resulting public profiles, worked towards unsettling the images and the norms of idealized Ottoman Muslim womanhood, which was positioned between the modern and the traditional.

CHAPTER 3

RESEARCH AND LITERATURE

3.1 Gender, Women's Writing and Historiography

Ottoman women began to appear as historical subjects particularly in practices of literary, imperial and architectural histories in the 1970s and 1980s. Groundbreaking works by scholars such as Keddie (1978), Quataert (1991), Pierce (1993), Bates (1993), Zilfi (1997) and Faroqhi (2002) helped to highlight historical dynamics outside of the statecraft, and constituted an effective criticism of the exclusion of women's experiences from the history. Decades of digging in archives, publishing and teaching by scholars of women's history have effectively worked against the marginalization of these historical actors and their experiences by making them more visible, and destabilized certain areas and teachings in the existing Ottoman historical narrative. The identifiable growth of specialized studies post-1990 of late Ottoman women of letters, intellectuals, activists and artists, and its new sources and angles, have changed general perceptions about the late history of the women of Turkey to be a history of being saved, and altered the understanding of a monolithic late Ottoman milieu. Yet, the scholarship has not progressed enough to affect the workings of the established historiographical canon. Even if the new data were acknowledged and granted legitimacy, they could easily be separated or dismissed, as feminist scholar Joan

24

Scott demonstrated in her seminal article.34 Ottoman Muslim male writers’, journalists’, activists’ and intellectuals’ perspectives still dominate our understanding and the teaching of this era today, even when it relates to the issue of women.

It is partly because transmitting the past has so long been in the hands of male academicians, publishers and critics, most of whom always find good reasons not to include women in the canon, such as their lack of mastery or objectivity.35 If we saw history through the lenses of women, if their perspectives were to be prioritized, it would be completely different.36 Women's writing brings women's perspectives to the interpretation of social conditions, interactions and developments; thus, it transforms the way reality is conceptualized, discussed and presented. Another reason for the relatively marginal status of high quality work in Ottoman women's studies in the historiography of the period, I believe, is the continued tendencies of corrective or compensatory history and suspending implementation of the category of “gender” extensively in historiographical practice.37 Gender denotes socially constructed ideas about appropriate roles for different sexes. As a category of analysis in history, it allows the researcher to see that the experiences of both women and men were shaped by their gender because their status and interests in family and society were different from each other. My inquiry into the late Ottoman Muslim

34 Joan W. Scott, “Gender: A Useful Category of Historical Analysis,” The American Historical Review 91, no. 5 (Dec. 1986): 1055.

35 Marie Florine Bruneau, “Learned and Literary Women in Late Imperial China and Early Modern Europe,” Late Imperial China 13, no.1 (June 1992), 165.

36 Gerda Lerner, The Majority Finds its Past: Placing Women in History (Chapel Hill: UNC Press, 2005).

37 A lot of academicians do employ gender analysis in their studies of the late Ottoman women such as Elif Ekin Akşit, Çimen-Günay Erkol, Hülya Adak, Tülay Gençtürk Demircioğlu, Ayşe Durakbaşa, Ayşenur Baykan, using texts written by men and women.

25

women of letters implies first that women constitute a group, however diverse, that shares a common position of gender. Approaching them as a collective by way of a conceptualization of gender in historical terms reveals certain values and conventions that affected the conditions where their texts emerged from, that shaped their experiences as public negotiators, their interactions with contemporary actors, and their areas of influence. Their work can only be understood by acknowledging such dynamics of their public existence and production. Elaine Showalter has suggested that “women writers participate in a quite different literary subculture from that inhabited by male writers, a subculture which has its own distinctive literary traditions, even though it defines itself in relation to the ‘main’, male-dominated, literary culture.”38 Indication of a shared milieu among writing women in the literary sphere, by way of a taking account of a feminine culture within every masculine culture, as feminist historians do in their research, seeks not only to bring out their subjectivity but also their collective agency in history.39 This collectivity, as I see it, creates an agency that takes part in the contests of power and the making of knowledge; thus, it deserves attention in its potential to exercise influence on the disciplinary paradigms of traditional historiography.

European female critics of the 70s and 80s made important contributions to the discussion about women’s writing which continue to influence the conversation about this topic today. Viewing the political assertion of any type of singular identities as totalitarian, famous French critic Julia Kristeva challenged assumptions of the notion of a feminine

38 Elaine Showalter, A Literature of Their Own: British Women Novelists from Brontë to Lessing (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1977).

39 See Joan Scott, “Women’s History,” New Perspectives on History Writing, ed. Peter Burke (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1991), 50, 55-56; Fatmagül Berktay, “Kendine Ait Bir Tarih,” (A History of Her Own) Tarih ve Toplum, no. 183 (Mar. 1999): 53.

26

language/writing (écriture féminine) as well as that language and culture are essentially patriarchal.40 Luce Irigaray supported the strategic use of categories historically employed to oppress women to ultimately disprove a female subject/subordinate position and bring on true intersubjectivity between genders; the process of mimesis or mimicry.41 Judith Butler, on the other hand, borrows de Beauvoir's division of sex/gender42 but goes one step further to establish that sex, like gender, is a discursively produced category and not natural. For her, without a critique of the construction of sex, feminist endeavors to undermine gender ideology will be ineffective because the binary opposition of man/woman perpetuates oppressive gender polarization.43 Beyond all these problematics and contemporary issues of the fluidity of identity, the most significant aspect of the implementation of gender as a relevant category in women’s studies is that it refuses to devalue the typical everyday experiences of women and to eliminate the subjectivity of their social positioning. Toril Moi rightly indicates that no theories of origination about gender (Beauvoir, Butler) will change the fact that in a sexist society, human beings that are conceived as “women” constitute “the other” in their relations with the masculine norms and are provoked by their gender, which places them in a dilemma between

40 See Julia Kristeva, “Women's Time,” trans. Alice Jardine and Harry Blake, Signs 7, no: 1 (Autumn, 1981): 13-35); Julia Kristeva, “Oscillation between Power and Denial,” in New French Feminisms: An Anthology, eds. Elaine Marks and Isabelle de Courtivron (Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 1980), 165-67.

41 See Luce Irigarary, This Sex Which Is Not One, trans. Catherine Porter (New York: Cornell University Press, 1985).

42 In the opening of the Book II of The Second Sex from 1949, Simone de Beauvoir states: “One is not born, but rather becomes a woman.” Simone de Beauvoir, The Second Sex, trans. Borde and Malovany-Chevallier (Random House: Alfred A. Knopf, 2009).

43 Judith Butler, “Conclusion: From Parody to Politics,” in Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity (New York, London: Routledge, 1990), 142-49.

27

embracing their femaleness and refusing gendered frameworks, as illustrated in the expressions “I am not a woman writer” or “I am the female president of Harvard.”44 The frames of analysis provided here are relevant in every context, whether European or Ottoman, where the female body is subject to social construction. What a researcher in history can do is point out these constructions and provocations through employing the category of gender, which will help discredit not only the workings but also the outcome of the established historiography, as it goes beyond practices of descriptive and complementary social studies. My analysis of women’s writings explains how women operated from within a gendered discourse regarding their proper and ideal public appearances, as they participated in public debates and disclosed their interactions with other groups of power in the social hierarchy, such as family members and male counterparts, and how they in turn destabilized the components of this discourse, in modesty and femininity, by offering diversity through their expressed forms.

The characteristics of the group I am working on, female, Ottoman, Muslim, and writer, condition but do not standardize the historical existence and experiences of its individuals. Besides, these are not the only dimensions of their identity. The female body is subject to social construction (gender) and group associations (Muslim women, women writers, modern women), but it also simultaneously asserts its own subjectivity against the odds, encompassing other attributes and personal experiences. This research project’s indication of varying intellectual tendencies among writing women also examines this individual subjectivity. It counters in general the discursive premises of modernity about a

44 Toril Moi, “’I am Not a Woman Writer’: About Women, Literature and Feminist Theory Today,” Feminist Theory 9, no. 3 (Dec. 2008): 259-71.

28

unified female subject and allows the researcher to give meaning to varying presentations of selves and positions on issues. Accordingly, it disclaims any group identity that is uniform. “Subjectivity and group identity are fundamental aspects of political action, of contestation against the dominant.”45 It is the extents of the intellectual subjectivity of the women of letters and their resulting collective agency in intervening in the gendered configurations of the late Ottoman, urban, Muslim women’s identity that this research project is investigating.

According to feminist theories of women’s writing, women's act of writing went against socially constructed ideas about gender-appropriate behavior. A woman of letters often found herself in an essentially male venture and was confronted about her femaleness, good manners, and merits, as well as enduring hostility from others. This is evidenced in her practices of writing anonymously, pseudonymously, by posing as a man, destroying her work, putting it only into private circulation, or apologizing for it. Women who did not go through these motions were often defined as mad, freakish or off-base.46 In historiography, their works were either not canonized or looked down upon, as will be seen below. Bruneau indicates in her article on the literary women of Europe and China that “the exceptions to this pattern of neglect were the writers who displayed feminine grace and vulnerability, or whose work mirrored back to men the image they had fabricated of women.”47 Was this also the case for some late Ottoman women? Traditionally, historians

45 Minority critics argue that it is necessary to retain the notion of a female subject because the dimension of agency is crucial to the minority person. See Elaine Showalter, “Feminism and Literature,” in An Introduction to Post-Colonial Theory, ed. Peter Childs (London; New York: Prentice Hall, 1997), 195.

46 Sandra M. Gilbert and Susan Gubar, The Madwoman in the Attic: The Woman Writer and the Nineteenth-Century Literary Imagination (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1984), 63.

47 Bruneau, “Learned and Literary Women,” 165.

29

explained the absence of women in history via the public/private differentiation, in which men's public lives were well-documented whereas women's lives behind doors were not.48 Constrictions on gendered appearances are discerned by women’s movements as among the tightest, oldest, most categorical restrictions on public access. Michelle Rosaldo’s hypothesis, that neither biology nor reproductive functions but the denial of access to the public realm was the basic reinforcement of women’s secondary status, became a classic claim of feminist theory.49 Whether or not deliberately political, any female writing, which usurps women’s traditional gender roles, potentially functions as a counterbalance to the gendered perspectives in the discursive public sphere by expanding the range of expression. Thereby it denotes evident participation in the narration of history. Its exclusion from the canon, accordingly, is largely political. Studying women writers with gender dynamics in mind will open up alternative historical accounts in terms of its figures, their experiences,

productions and perspectives.

3.1.1. Inclusiveness and Diversity

Studies of late Ottoman era women of letters initially helped to recover prominent or exceptional female authors of the time and refocus their work on the historical narrative. However, writing did not develop into a concentrated activity, let alone a professional activity, for most Ottoman women of letters, whom I believe to have included: Nigar binti Osman, Fatma Aliye, Selma Rıza, Hadice Nakiyye, Suat Derviş, Nezihe Muhiddin, Şukufe

48 Nancy Micklewright, “Public and Private for Ottoman Women of the Nineteenth Century,” in Women, Patronage, and Self-Representation in Islamic Societies, ed. D. Fairchild Ruggles (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2000), 155.

49 Michelle Zimbalist Rosaldo, “Women, Culture, and Society: A Theoretical Overview,” in Woman, Culture & Society, eds. Michelle Zimbalist Rosaldo and Louise Lamphere (Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1974): 23-35.

30

Nihal, Yaşar Nezihe, Emine Semiye, Halide Edib, Hamiyet Zehra, Fatma Fahrün(n)isa, Güzide Sabri, Halide Nusret, Hamiyet Zehra, Hayriye Melek Hunç, İsmet Hakkı, Leyla Saz, Makbule Leman, Müfide Ferit, Ruhsan Nevvare, Sabiha Zekeriya, Gülistan İsmet, Ayşe Zekiye, Ulviye Mevlan and Aziz Haydar. Some were also translators, teachers, activists, journalists and poets. A significant portion of what is classified as women's writing in late Ottoman times were contributions of ordinary readers to periodicals. Most women who began writing after 1890, thanks to advances in education for girls and the expansion of women's press, were not publicly identified figures and/or did not author books but published letters, articles, poems, plays and stories in periodicals, which are not collected.50 In a period when public writing among Muslim women was a novel practice and appealed to a relatively small group for various reasons, every contribution is worth exploring. I approach women's writing mainly as an element that configures women’s positioning in life and their visibility, and mediates their negotiations with authority figures (husband, father, society, state) and identity propositions. This research seeks to bring value to the literary presence of lesser-known women by breaking the habit of studying the “great” figures, and to shed light on the former’s experiences and contributions, which is an imperative for creating a more complete account of female writing of the period.

In the 1990s in Turkey, a scholarly movement that set out to reassess the late Ottoman period led to the disclosure of a women's movement in the Empire, kindling a new outlook and prolific insights in areas such as history and literature. Nevertheless, the tendency to look at the Ottoman and Republican periods using popular feminist designations of the late 20th century has occasionally deflected attention from women’s

50 For example, Fatma Fuad, Seniha Vicdan, Ayşe (Aişe) İsmet, Fatma Servet, İsmet Hakkı.

31

diverse profiles and interpretations of their environment. Ottoman women writers not disputing traditional gender roles have tended to be overlooked by scholars, or were interpreted in line with the researchers’ predispositions, as they did not concur with expected conclusions about a shared, progressive view among the women of letters, particularly regarding women’s roles and demands.51 The diversity among Ottoman Muslim women regarding their opinions on the status of women in society is astonishing. Girls leaving home to go to university, to work, or to theaters and picnics were being criticized in women’s journals by both male and female writers. These behaviors were described as “erkekleşme” (becoming manlike) in an article by Nezihe Rikkat; she disapproved of it not just because it was offensive in its imitations of Western women, but also because it threatened the natural balance of the family and the integrity of Ottoman women to be good mothers, daughters and wives.52 Another female writer, Keçecizade İkbal, declared that women’s Islamic covering, or rather their natural disposition, was a reason why they couldn’t work and study like men.53 Also, Habibe claimed in the journal Kadın (Woman) that such behaviors were not among the legitimate rights of women.54 In Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete (Ladies’ Own Newspaper), Fatma Fahrünnisa advised women to be cautious about reading novels and going to theaters to see plays because such entertainment violated Islamic ethics and customs, and might distract women from real life

51 See the early works of Serpil Çakır, Aynur Demirdirek, Şirin Tekeli.

52 See Nezihe Rikkat, “Musahabe: Erkekleşme,” Türk Kadını, no. 13 (28 Teşrinisani 1334 [1918]): 194-95; Refika Zati, “Bir Feryad,” Genç Kadın, no. 7 (27 Mart 1335 [/1910]): 97-99.

53 Keçecizade İkbal, “Biz de Adam Olacağız,” İkdam, no. 5126 (19 Ağustos 1324 [/1908]): 1.

54 Müteveffa Hacı Mustafa Bey Halilesi Habibe, “Bir İki Söz,” Kadın, no. 24 (23 Mart 1325 [/1909]): 9–10.

32

and their responsibilities, as was observed in the West.55 Most reactions to these views came from young girls, students and teachers at new schools like Darülfünun. These responses differed from those like Mutia Sabri, who conversely sought more public respect for working women that supported their husbands or their families,56 to others that demanded equal rights with men in education and work, like İsmet Hakkı. İsmet Hakkı argued that the only reason men were superior was because they had more access to knowledge than women; she also warned women against the use of “the weapon of anti-feminism” against themselves.57 Failing to assign equal value to varying personalities and perspectives will undermine the attempts to address the problem of women being overlooked in history, to say the least.

Despite new perspectives, methods and sources, canonical readings of the late Ottoman period, the action of placing ideological associations as a foundation continues to inform present-day scholarship and sideline other interpretations.58 Common identification of Ottoman women of letters with the labeling of intellectual currents such as feminism,59

55 Fatma Fahrünnisa, “Romanlar ve Tiyatrolar,” Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete, no. 16 (12 Teşrinievvel 1311 [/1895]: 2-3.

56 Mutia Sabri, “Nezihe Rikkat Hanımefendi’ye,” Türk Kadını, no. 14 (12 Kanunievvel 1334 [1918]): 214.

57 İsmet Hakkı, “Kısm-ı İlmi: Kadınlarımız ve Maarif,” Demet, no.2 (24 Eylül 1324 [/1908]): 25-26. Feminism denoted extremism for some women.

58 Ayfer Karakaya-Stump indicates that such ideological trends carried in itself a variety of issues and different shades of opinions that were as expressed in periodicals. See Ayfer Karakaya-Stump, “Debating Progress in a 'Serious Newspaper for Muslim Women': The Periodical Kadın of the Post-revolutionary Salonica, 1908-1909,” British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies 30, no. 2 (Nov. 2003): 156-57.

59 For example, Ayşe Durakbaşa calls women writing in favor of women's educational and social rights in a moderate, conservative way “Ottoman feminists” [Osmanlı feministleri]. See Ayşe Durakbaşa, Halide Edip: Türk Modernleşmesi ve feminizm (Istanbul: İletişim, 2000), 103-4.

33

Turkism60 or Ottomanism61 in literature, without sufficient contextualization and in a rather undifferentiated manner, not only dismisses the idea of the autonomous intellectual activity of each writer and the diverse affiliations among them but also risks presumptions about the unexplored material. “Approaches conditioned by these existing models obstructed the generation of new questions within the framework of Ottoman women's history, which could potentially stimulate a fresh look into the social and cultural history of the late Ottoman Empire as a whole.”62 The incorporation of marginalized voices and understudied texts into the study of the late Ottoman women of letters and allowing women to have self-representation by more closely examining their writings, interpersonal exchanges, and activities will complicate canonical approaches and provide access to varying subjectivities, as well as further our knowledge of Ottoman women’s literary participation.

3.2 Working with the Late Ottoman Women of Letters

3.2.1 Identification

The first handicap facing the researcher working on Muslim women of letters in the late Ottoman Empire period is the invisibility of female writers and lack of sufficient information about them. Many women’s periodicals, mostly the earlier publications, carried entries which were either unsigned or signed anonymously, such as “A Lady, “A Woman Familiar with Literature”, “A Lady from Üsküdar”, “Free Woman”, “The New

60 For example, Tülay Keskin, “Feminist/Nationalist Discourse in the First year of the Ottoman Revolutionary Press (1908-1909): Readings From the Magazines of Demet, Mehasin and Kadın (Salonica),” (master’s thesis, Bilkent University, 2003), 27.

61 For ex. Ömer Delikgöz and Nazmi Ziya Şehit, “Impact of Women Letters to the Modernization and Individualization Process of Ottoman Women,” in Women’s Memory: The Problem of Sources, eds. Birsen Talay Keşoğlu and D. Fatma Türe (Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2011).

62 Karakaya-Stump, “Debating Progress,” 157.

34

Fitnat”. Unsigned entries may have largely been written by the editor. Some reasons women wrote without disclosing themselves could have been hesitations that derived from a lack of precedents, as well as personal experience. The prominent writer Fatma Aliye signed her first work, Meram (1890), one of the first novels translated by a woman, not with her real name, but as “Bir Kadın” (A Woman). Following this successful work, she used the pseudonym “Mütercime-i Meram” (the Meram Translator). The first novel she wrote together with Ahmet Mithat, Hayal ve Hakikat, had the name “A Woman and Ahmet Mithat” (Bir Kadın ve Ahmet Mithat). A few decades earlier, female writers in France and England adopted male pen names for their published novels. Women in Turkey gave more of a clear indication of their gender in their writing. One of the few cases of women taking male pseudonyms is Cahit Uçuk (Cahide Üçok). A few writers with male pen names that enjoyed a short publicity run were suspected by scholars to have belonged to female writers because of the content and style of their literary output, such as Sadi's piece in Mütalaa, which contained a strong tone against the men who underestimated women's potential and simultaneously pointed at Emine Semiye's achievements as a writer.63 Another reason women writers concealed their identities in the earlier periods of women’s public writing was to protect themselves from the public possibly accusing them of violating gendered societal codes regarding privacy and decency. The second issue of the women's periodical İnsaniyet (Humanity, 1883) published a letter from “Mektepli Bir Kız” (A Schoolgirl). The sender shares that she was advised by her father not to use her name in letters to a general newspaper as he wanted to protect her; she also reported that the paper assigned a “weird” male name to these letters. She also mentions that she had seen a poem written by a noble

63 See Sadi, “Takdir, teşekkür,” Mütalaa, no. 33 (11 Mart 1312 [1313] [/1896]): 1.

35

lady in the newspaper Tercümân-ı Hakikat with a footnote that read “taken from a person”, showing the editors couldn't resist publishing such a beautiful piece of art.64 Pseudonymous female writings, if recurrent, and not exhibiting patterns leading the reader to suspect that it is a woman’s writing, will be included in this study.

Male writers using female pen names in some of their writings was a rare practice in the late Ottoman period, but not absent. As aforementioned, men founded, managed, and contributed to most of women's periodicals using their own names. Again, most novels written by men addressed the female reader, containing novel-reading female characters.65 Thus, men had already reached the female audience in different ways. Nevertheless, especially after the Young Turk revolution in 1908, some male writers published with female signatures. For instance Ahmet Rasim is known to have used two different female pseudonyms, Elif Rasime and Leyla Feride; similarly, Celâl Nuri used Afife Fikret, and Ahmed Vâlâ Nureddin used Hadice Süreyya as pseudonyms.66 Tahsin Nahid published his first poems as T. Nahide in the journal Çocuk Bahçesi (Children's Garden) published in Salonica in 1905.67 Articles undersigned as Seniha Hikmet in the journal Kadın (Woman) belonged to the editor Enis Avni (Aka Gündüz), Ergun writes.68 The famous literary figure Ömer Seyfettin published his poems in Kadın as “Perviz”. Uzemâ İrâdet, Makbûle

64 Mektepli Bir Kız, “Hazine-i Evrak Müesseseliğinedir Bu Mektup,” İnsaniyet, no.2 (Rebiyülahir 1300 [/1883]): 49-53.

65 Nurdan Gürbilek, “Erkek Yazar, Kadın Okur,” in Kadınlar Dile Düşünce: Edebiyat ve Toplumsal Cinsiyet, eds. Sibel Irzık and Jale Parla (Istanbul: İletişim, 2004), 289-93.

66 Murat Uraz, Kadın Şair ve Muharrirlerimiz (Istanbul: Tefeyyüz Kitabevi, 1940), 11.

67 Nurullah Çetin, “Tahsin Nahit ve Şiiri,” A. Ü. Dil ve Tarih-Coğrafya Fakültesi Dergisi 36, no. 1-2 (1993): 24.

68 Sadeddin Nüzhet Ergun, Aka Gündüz: Hayatı ve Eserleri (Istanbul: Cumhuriyet Kitaphanesi, 1937), 13.

36

Süreyya, and Rafiza Hasnâ, who had sent one or two pieces to Kadın are also suspected to have been males.69 The motive of these literati who were working for the progressivist social and cultural reforms of İttihad ve Terakki Cemiyeti (Association of the Union and Progress) was largely to take part in the blossoming women's movement next to the women of letters who also worked towards the same ideals, and contribute more effectively to the creation of the idealized new woman by posing an example of one. It was a manipulative, indirect way to convey nationalistic views to the female readership, when compared to pieces that were signed by men addressing women. The practice was criticized by both male and female authors and editors but it continued.70 It further complicated the ability to rightfully identify women writers and accordingly, to classify the material they produced. Anonymous and female-pen-named male articles in women's periodicals are known to have inspired and encouraged others to start writing, such as the case of Yaşar Nezihe.71 These articles could stimulate research in journalism, ideology, education and literacy. Yet, they could not be included in the category of female writing.

69 Fatma Kılıç, “Maskeli Erkekler; Gölgelenen Kaynaklar; II. Meşrutiyet Dönemi Kadın Dergilerinde Jön Türkler'in Ağzından Feminist Söylevler,” in Kadın Belleğini Oluşturmada Kaynak Sorunu: Kadın Eserleri Kütüphanesi ve Bilgi Merkezi Vakfı 20. Yıl Sempozyumu, 17-19 Nisan 2009, Kadir Has Üniversitesi (Istanbul: Kadın Eserleri Kütüphanesi ve Bilgi Merkezi Vakfı: T. C. Kadir Has Üniversitesi, 2009), 440.

70 Mehmet Emin, “Maskeli Erkekler,” Kadın, no. 29 (18 Mayıs 1325 /1909): 10. The article addresses the pen name Cavide Peyker implying that she is a he, and such manipulations do not help the new generation of female writers. See also the second issue of Demet for an editor's critique of the use of female pseudonyms by men in other newspapers: Fazıl Ahmet and Celâl Sâhir, “Kariâtımıza,” Demet, no. 2 (24 Eylül 1324 /[1908]): 17. Fatma Kılıç also mentioned in her article that the Unionist female author Zekiye condemned the practice of male authors taking fake pen names (Zekiye, “Hakiki Bir Teessür,” Mahâsin, no. 8 (Temmuz 1325/ [1909]): 553-54.), and considering her correspondence with Seniha Hikmet in Kadın, she possibly didn't know that Seniha Hikmet was in fact male. See Fatma Kılıç, “Maskeli Erkekler,” 440.

71 Yaşar Nezihe is mentioned to have seen a sharqi (poetry written to be performed in classical music) of Leyla Feride’s (in fact, Ahmet Rasim) in the newspaper Malumat; this inspired Yaşar Nezihe to write and publish with her own pseudonyms. “Yaşar Nezihe Hanım,” in Nevsal-i Milli, ed. T. Z. (Dersaadet: Asar-ı Müfide Kitabhanesi, 1330 [/1914]): 220-21.

37

Most ladies used only a first name or their initials72 when writing, like Safiye Hanım, Belkıs, Nigar, Leyla, Samiha, Bintülhavva, and İ. R. Some wrote often and were known in their circles as Nigar, Ayşe Zekiye, and Yaşar Nezihe, who used the pen names Mahmure, Malume and Mehcure, and some other writers could be identified through family and/or civic connections, such as Arife of the journal Şükûfezar. In some cases, it is a challenge to identify them because of the limited amount of information, if any, that can be inferred from their own and others' writings about who they were. In cases where the signature bears a family name (usually the husband's or the father's), such as Selma Rıza, Abdülhak Mihrünnisa and Ulviye Mevlan, research about the male relative has often helped in capturing some information about the female writer as well. A complication would be, though, that identical names appeared in different journals. The name Hamide, for instance, was encountered in women's journals from 1870 to 1918. A writer’s name that bears a specific location will aid in distinguishing that writer from others with the same name, such as “Üsküplü Hamide” (Hamide from Skopje). Unless research proves otherwise, the same names appearing in different places at proximate times cannot be assumed to be either the same or a different person. My efforts will focus on writings if they sufficiently reveal patterns that those pieces were written by women.

3.2.2 Sources

In this section, I present sources that can be utilized in research dealing in general with the lives and thoughts of the late Ottoman Muslim women of letters. While information about Ottoman female poets could traditionally be found in the biographical

72 There were no surnames in the Ottoman era.

38

dictionary of poets (şuara tezkire) before the expansion of the press, printing, new literary genres, and public education later emerged to present a range of information concerning the late 19th- and early 20th- century women of letters. Considering the relative invisibility of women in the public sphere when compared to men, and the insufficient data covering their private lives, all related sources come to bear substantial importance.

1) Their own narrative is the best venue in which to learn more about women's lives and the details of their intellectual activity; this could be found in their memoirs, diaries, interviews, travel writings, personal correspondence with acquaintances and relatives and other personal papers, as well as in literature, articles and public letters in journals and newspapers. Those that convey women’s perspectives and positions regarding the themes and conditions explored here constitute the primary material for this research. 2) The official documents from the institutions they were involved in are included here, like schools and associations. 3) Writings of people who knew them or knew about them, in the form of memoirs, articles in Ottoman and Republican-era literary journals, books of varying genres, and official documents of family members, like daughters, fathers and sons, are another set of resources. 4) Lastly are biographical document collections, and dictionary and encyclopedia entries.

There are a number of narrative sources of a personal nature written by the Ottoman Muslim women of letters in English and Turkish; Leyla Saz, Müfide Ferit, Nigar binti Osman, Nezihe Muhiddin, Fatma Aliye, Halide Edib, Selma Ekrem, Sabiha Sertel, Halide Nusret and Zeyneb Hanım’s memoirs, diaries or letters are among them.73 Some were

73 Other memoirs from late Ottoman-era women like Leyla Açba, Naciye Neyyal, Safiye Ünüvar, Naciye Sultan, Mediha Kayra, Pakize Mislimelek Hanım, Emine Fuad Togay and Şadiye Osmanoğlu, who did not surface in Ottoman literary circles.

39

written after the Republic was established. These are to a great extent available now in print. They provide first-hand information about the authors' background and family structure, family members, their education, their experiences with reading and writing, and current events; these all disclose important data about the people they knew and political figures as well. Thirteen volumes of the nineteen-volume journal/diary of the famous poet Nigar binti Osman were acquired by the Aşiyan Museum in Istanbul in 1959. It has been subject to study but the manuscript has not yet been reproduced. It has been reported that some parts were destroyed by Nigar, and, later, by her sons after her death.74 We now have correspondence of a few female writers such as Emine Semiye, Halide Edib, Nigar binti Osman, Fitnat, İhsan (Raif), Fatma Aliye, Selma Rıza and Muazzez Tahsin Berkand. The personal papers of Fatma Aliye Hanım were gathered and are now available at the Atatürk Library in Istanbul under the name “Fatma Aliye Hanım Evrakı Kataloğu”. The Women's Library and Information Center in Istanbul assembled the personal documents of 22 Ottoman female writers.75 The Taha Toros Repository, which was digitalized by Istanbul Şehir University, has in its archives the personal writings of well-known literary figures such as Nazım Hikmet, Ahmet Rıza and Taha Toros, as well as documents and writings of and about Ottoman women.76 Hikmet Münir’s interview with novelist Güzide Sabri, Fatih Kerimi's with Fatma Aliye, Nigar binti Osman and Halide Edib, Ruşen Eşref’s with Halide

74 As diaries include more personal and private information, it is possible that the author's family felt uneasy about its content. However, if recorded in the diaries, Nigar's closeness to the Sultan and dislike of the Young Turks could have put her in danger after the Young Turks gained political power. Thus, she may have destroyed certain related parts of the diary herself. See Nazan Bekiroğlu's interview with Taha Toros in Nazan Bekiroğlu, Şair Nigar Hanım (Istanbul: İletişim, 1998), 19.

75 It includes names such as Fatma Aliye Hanım, Asiye Hatun, Fitnat Hanım, and Nigar binti Osman.

76 Such as Müfide Ferit, Selma Rıza, Şukufe Nihal, Halide Edib, Nigar binti Osman, Fatma Fahrünnisa, and Emine Semiye.

40

Edib and Nigar binti Osman, and Enver Naci's with Muazzez Tahsin Berkand are quite revealing because these directed, face-to-face questions allow these figures to express what is not found in their writings.77 The only autobiography of an Ottoman Muslim woman of letters is a mix of biography and autobiography: Ahmet Mithat’s Fatma Aliye Yahut bir Muharrire-i Osmaniyenin Neşeti (Fatma Aliye or the Birth of an Ottoman Woman Writer, 1893).

Serial publications of the late Ottoman period are primary sources of material for this study next to women’s independent works. They gather together diverse contributors, genres, topics, opinions and concerns in the same venue. Additionally, they span the period of time Ottoman women wrote for the public, and contain countless unstudied pieces by even the most well-known of writers. Information we can extract about the woman writer through women's periodicals as well as from regular periodicals such as Şehbal, Tanin, Resimli Roman Mecmuası, Rübab, Dersaadet, Tercümân-ı Hakikat, Malumat Gazetesi, Musavver Fen ve Edebiyat Mecmuası, Felsefe Mecmuası, İnkılap, Hazine-i Evrak, Hazine-i Fünûn, and Sebilürreşad may include, outside of her perspectives on a variety of issues, her name, age, organizational memberships, ideological affiliations and activities, literary interests and endeavors, friends' groups, educational background, health condition, and daily experiences, directly or indirectly. They are derived from not only her own writings, but also from other contributors' mentionings of her.78 Several women's periodicals are

77 Hikmet Münir, “Değerli Bir Kadın Romancı: Güzide Sabri..,” Yedigün [7 gün], no. 271 (May 17, 1938): 7-8, 21; Ruşen Eşref, Diyorlar Ki…, ed. Şemsettin Kutlu (Istanbul: M.E.B. Kültür Yayınları, 1972); Neriman Malkoç, “Kadın Ediplerimizle Ropörtajlar: Halide Nusret Zorlutuna,” Yeni İstanbul, Nov. 4, 1954; Fatih Kerimi, İstanbul Mektupları (Istanbul: Çağrı Yayınları, 2001); Enver Naci, “Türk Edebiyatında Kadın Romancılar: Muazzez Tahsin Berkand,” Yarım Ay, no. 130 (Apr. 1, 1941): 15, 19.

41

available in the Latin alphabet, fully or partially, by the Women's Library and Information Center in Istanbul; they are Aile, Hanım, Genç Kadın, Kadın, Türk Kadını, Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete, Kadın Yolu and Kadınlar Dünyası. Ottoman and Republican-era79 periodicals offer important data on the female writer and can be accessed either in print or in digital format in libraries in Turkey, such as the National Library (Milli Kütüphane), Atatürk Library (Atatürk Kitaplığı), the Women's Library and Information Center (Kadın Eserleri Kütüphanesi), the Beyazıt State Library Hakkı Tarık Us Collection (Beyazıt Devlet Kütüphanesi Hakkı Tarık Us Koleksiyonu) and Atatürk University Seyfettin Özege Rare Book Collection (Atatürk Üniversitesi Seyfettin Özege Nadir Eserler Dermesi). Periodicals are important social historiography sources, but their unprecedented public nature should be noted while using them for a gendered group in the late Ottoman period. In this regard, it would be interesting to see how various female writers shaped themselves in this setting throughout different eras. Ottoman women of letters were in contact with foreigners through travels, schooling, correspondence and friendship, and foreign periodicals in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, including The New York Times, The Chautauquan, The Independent, and Forum80 published pieces about them and their works, and so these sources can also be utilized in studies about late Ottoman-era women.

78 See the pieces published about Ottoman Armenian and foreign poets and writers in Demet journal. For example, Lugufet Fuat, “Osmanlı Meşahir Nisvanı: madam Zabel Yesayan,” Demet, no.6 (22 Teşrinievvel 1324 [/1908]): 82-83.

79 For example see Cumhuriyet's piece on the death of Fatma Aliye in M. Turhan Tan, “Unutulurak Ölen Bir Edib,” Cumhuriyet, July 13, 1936.

80 For instance, an article from 1905 about women in Turkey provides a commentary on contemporary female writers such as Nigar binti Osman, Fatma Aliye, Emine Semiye, Halide Edib, and Abdulhak’s sister. See Mary Mills Patrick, “Women in Turkey,” Forum (1886-1930) 37, no. 1 (July 1905): 115; or, for a commentary on Zeyneb Hanoum's newly published book “A Turkish Woman's European Impressions” see “Talk About Books,” The Chautauquan; A Weekly Newsmagazine (1880-1914) 72, no. 5 (Oct. 4, 1913): 106.

42

Ottoman women's literary texts, especially novels and stories, present rich material in which to delve into. They express feelings, thoughts, experiences and opinions which are otherwise not registered. The novels of idealist Ottoman writers, such as Fatma Aliye, debated the reasons for societal decay by criticizing established customs and ignorance. Fatma Aliye believed that the novel had to be imbued with a sense of social responsibility.81 A letter from her daughter to the historian Carter Findley in 1990 mentioned that Fatma Aliye had written novels in order to promote the idea of gender equality, while remaining loyal to the tradition, seeking a hardly possible reconciliation.82 Inquiry into the fiction of other Ottoman female novelists in the early 20th century, such as Halide Edib and Güzide Sabri, allows comparative evaluations regarding changes, continuations and dissimilarities in female writers’ motives in employing literature, with considerations of different time periods.

Primary data regarding the schools that the women of letters attended (Darülmuallimat, Darülfünun, the American College for Girls [later Istanbul Women's College], İnas Rüşdiye, and İdadis) and other details about their educations are available through the Prime Ministerial Ottoman Archives (Başbakanlık Osmanlı Arşivi [BOA]),83 published City Yearbooks (such as Salnâme-i Vilâyet-i Hüdâvendigâr), State Yearbooks (Salnâme-i Devlet-i Âliyye-i Osmâniye), the Yearbooks of the Ministry of Public

81 Hülya Yıldız, “Literature as Public Sphere: Gender and Sexuality in Ottoman Novels and Journals” (PhD diss., The University of Texas at Austin, 2008), 32.

82 See Carter Vaughn Findley, “Fatma Aliye: First Ottoman Novelist, Pioneer Feminist,” in Collection Turcica: Histoire économique et sociale de l'Empire ottoman et de la Turquie (1326-1960), Actes du sixième congrès international tenu à Aix-en-Provence du ler au 4 juillet 1992, ed. Daniel Panzac (Paris: Peeters, 1995), 793-94.

83 Yıldız Perakende Evrakı, Yıldız Esas Evrakı Defterleri and Maarif Nezareti Defterleri.

43

Education (Salnâme-i Nezâret-i Maarif-i Umûmiye), the records of private and public schools such as Darülfünun (Istanbul University Archives) and official school publications such as the Istanbul Darülmuallimat Publication (İstanbul Kız Muallim Mektebi Yayını). They provide concrete information regarding women's formal training such as courses, teachers, age groups, classmates and alumnae, and may help to elucidate the writers' varying qualifications, early social setting, and exposure to debates and indoctrination. Memoirs and other writings by Ottoman school directors and educators also provide specialized details about the attendees of schools, their acceptance process, families, and may reveal group or personal portraits too.84 Accounts of those involved in these women's lives such as teachers, mentors,85 husbands,86 students and assistants,87 friends and acquaintances88 and siblings89 can serve as additional sources of information, though they could be the main source.

84 For instance, see Mary Mills Patrick, A Bosphorus Adventure: Istanbul (Constantinople Woman’s College) 1871-1924 (Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1934), 224-33. Patrick talks about the graduates of the American College for Girls in this part, including Gülistan İsmet, Halide Edib, and Selma Ekrem. Also see Mary Mills Patrick, Under Five Sultans (New York and London: The Century Co., 1929), 192-94.

85 For instance, see Rıza Tevfik, “İhsan Raif Hanımefendi,” Nevsal-i Milli, 237-39.

86 For instance, see Sermet Sami Uysal, Eşlerine Göre Ediplerimiz [Their Spouses Tell About Our Literati] (Istanbul: Timaş, 2010).

87 For instance, see Vedat Günyol, “Halide Ediple Bir Konuşma,” Yücel 15, no. 85-86-87 (Mar.-Apr.-May 1942): 3-4.

88 For instance, see Yahya Kemal, “Nigar Hanım Efendi,” in Nevsal-i Milli, ed. T. Z. (Dersaadet: Asar-ı Müfide Kitabhanesi, 1330 [/1914]): 4; Ercümend Ekrem Talu, “Tanıdıklarım: Nigâr Hanım,” Edebiyat Alemi, no. 9 (June 16, 1949): 1, 6; Yakup Kadri Karaosmanoğlu, Gençlik ve Edebiyat Hatıraları (Ankara: Bilgi Yayınevi, 1969); Abdülhak Şinasi Hisar, “Geçmiş Zaman Edipleri: Nigar Binti Osman I,” Türk Yurdu, no. 263 (Dec. 1956): 444-48.

89 For instance, see Yıldız Sertel, Annem: Sabiha Sertel Kimdi ve Neler Yazdı [Mom: Who Was Sabiha Sertel and What Did She Write] (Istanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları, 1993).

44

After 1908, some well-known women of letters founded and directed women's associations after 1908. For instance, Nezihe Muhiddin co-founded the Organization for the Protection of Ottoman and Turkish Women (Osmanlı ve Türk Kadınları Esirgeme Derneği), Hayriye Melek Hunç co-founded the Circassian Women's Organization for Mutual Support (Çerkes Kadınları Teavün Cemiyeti) and Ulviye Mevlan founded and directed the Ottoman Organization for the Defense of Women's Rights (Osmanlı Müdaafa-i Hukuk-u Nisvan Cemiyeti). A few of these organizations had official publications, such as periodicals, Constitutions (Nizamname) 90 and event reports. Examination of these sources can help attain information about the writers' public concerns and efforts.

Among the genres imported from the West, it came to be that biographical accounts did not become a popular genre in the Ottoman context, and so there are not many examples of them. In the case of women, Rana Tekcan claims that throughout the centuries authors and publishers thought that women who have, or could have, no other aim than being a good daughter, sister, wife, and, later, a good mother, have nothing in their “quiet” and “peaceful” lives to interest readers.91 Several late Ottoman biographical collections contain entries and brief information about some Ottoman poets and writers, such as Meşâhîru'n-Nisâ, Şair Hanımlarımız, Nevsal-i Nisvan and Nevsal-i Milli. Other available biographical sources are encyclopedias, dictionaries and literary survey books; the Encyclopedia of Literati from Tanzimat to the Present (Tanzimat'tan Bugüne Edebiyatçılar Ansiklopedisi), the Dictionary of Names in our Literature (Edebiyatımızda İsimler Sözlüğü), the Atatürk

90 For instance, Osmanlı Türk Hanımları Esirgeme Derneği Nizamnamesi (1913); Osmanlı Müdafaa-i Hukuk-u Nisvan Cemiyeti Programı (1913).

91 Rana Tekcan, “Sessiz Sedasız Yaşayanlar: Biyografide Kadın,” in Kadınlar Dile Düşünce: Edebiyat ve Toplumsal Cinsiyet, eds. Sibel Irzık and Jale Parla (Istanbul: İletişim, 2004), 147.

45

Encyclopedia (Atatürk Ansiklopedisi), the Tercüman Encyclopedia of Women (Tercüman Kadın Ansiklopedisi) are a few such publications. More recent collections are mentioned below.

3.3 Brief History of the Scholarship of the Late Ottoman

Muslim Women of Letters

Within the general context of the rise of women’s history studies in academia, it is in this section that I will discuss the development of scholarship regarding the late Ottoman women and their literary productions, in an effort to help position my own research within the history of its literature.

As a consequence of the second-wave feminist movement of the 1970s, coupled with a general revelation of cultural voids in historical writing by non-dominant/non-majority groups, scholars in the US launched an attack on the traditional ways of setting the canon in various disciplines, such as political science and sociology, that historically prioritized the male perspective and underrepresented women's presence and contributions as areas of scholarly interest. The female subject of the past became a central focus of feminist critical studies leading up to the formation of the field of women's history (“her-story”). Feminist research of women's literary traditions began to appear in the US in the early 1970s, and largely focused on the 19th century.92 Overlooked women writers and their writings were reclaimed and studied in their patriarchal context. Spacks' and Moers' pioneering works and subsequent publications indicated a rich tradition of female writing.93

92 See Helen Carr, “A History of Women's Wrtiting,” in A History of Feminist Literary Criticism, ed. Gill Plain and Susan Sellers (Cambridge, UK; New York: Cambridge University Press, 2007), 120-37.

93 Patricia Meyers Spacks, The Female Imagination (1975); Elle Moers, Literary Women (1976); Dale Spender, Mothers of the Novel (1986).

46

Spacks asserted that the “changing social conditions increase or diminish the opportunities for women’s action and expression, but a special female self-awareness emerges through literature in every period.”94 Moers' Literary Women, which studied American, French and English women writers from the 18th- to the early 20th centuries, described women's literature as a powerful undercurrent apart from the mainstream. Elaine Showalter's work on British women novelists published in 1977, A Literature of Their Own, established women’s writings as a topic of feminist literary criticism. She argued in her book that female literary history is constantly interrupted; even prominent women writers of their time end up vanishing from the records of history, leaving each generation of women writers “without a history, forced to rediscover the past anew, forging again and again the consciousness of their sex.”95 Barbara Smith criticized the white feminism of her contemporaries such as Showalter, and published landmark works on black women and black authors.96 A proliferation of case studies of women of the past offered not only a new window into history, i.e., women, but also a new history altogether, because it destabilized conventional disciplinary standards about the profile of the historical agent and what constitutes the historically significant. In an attempt to theorize the work done in women's studies for the reorganization of historical knowledge, gender was used as a category of analysis in history similar to race and class by the feminist historians. They looked to the

94 Spacks, The Female Imagination (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1975), 3.

95 Elaine Showalter, A Literature of Their Own: British Women Novelists from Brontë to Lessing (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1977), 12.

96 Gloria T. Hull, Patricia Bell Scott, and Barbara Smith, eds. All the Women Are White, All the Blacks Are Men, But Some of Us Are Brave: Black Women's Studies (New York: The Feminist Press at The City University of New York, 1982); Barbara Smith, ed. Home Girls: A Black Feminist Anthology (New York: Kitchen Table: Women of Color Press, 1983).

47

connection between the past history of both men and women and current historical practice forcing a critical examination of gender ideology in the existent historiography.97 By the 1980s, post-structuralist theory entered the field and more objections to the standardized concept of women and the ignorance related to their geography, sexual orientation, and religion led to alternative traditions in the discipline as well as to the expansion of literary canons. Exploration of multiple sexual identities led to a third-wave feminist shift in the 1990s.

How does the history of studies about Ottoman Muslim women of letters compare with these developments? Mehmet Zihni's biographical dictionary of famous Arab, Turkish and Persian women named Meşâhîru'n-Nisâ (Famous Women), which follows the tradition of the biographical dictionaries of poets (şuara tezkire, 16th-20th cc), is the first known concentrated work on women in Ottoman Turkish that contains information on Ottoman female literary figures, most of whom were poets.98 Later, Hacı Beyzade Ahmet Muhtar's Şair Hanımlarımız (Our Lady Poets), Nevsal-i Nisvân (Women's Annal), and Nazım İçsel's İslam Hanımları ve İslâmiyette Hayât-ı Aile (Muslim Ladies and Family Life in Islam) appeared.99 In the last years of the Empire, the prolific historian Ahmet Refik (Altınay) published a series of four books named Kadınlar Saltanatı (Women's Sultanate). It focused

97 Joan W. Scott, “Gender: A Useful Category of Historical Analysis,” The American Historical Review 91, no. 5 (Dec. 1986): 1055.

98 Mehmet Zihni, Meşâhîru'n-Nisâ, 2 vols. ([Istanbul]: Dâru't-Tibâati'l-Âmire, 1294-1295 [/1878-79]). The book includes names such as poets Emetullah Kadın, Sırri Hanım, Fitnat Hanım, Zeyneb Hatun, Ayşe Hubbi, Leyla Hanım, and novelist Zafer Hanım.

99 Nâzım [İçsel], İslâm Hanımları ve Âlem-i İslâmiyette Hayât-ı Aile (Istanbul: Kitabhane-i Cihan Sahibi Mihran, 1318 [/1901/1902/1903]); Hacı Beyzade Ahmet Muhtar, Şair Hanımlarımız (Istanbul: Matbaa-i Safa ve Enver, 1895); Avanzade Mehmet Süleyman, Nevsâl-i Nisvân (Istanbul: Yuvanaki Panayotidis Matbaası, 1315/1897).

48

on women's roles in the Ottoman palace and included correspondence written by royal Ottoman women, providing the first example of archive-based scholarship on Ottoman female writing.100 A few collections of female poets and authors were published in the 1930s and 40s, such as Murat Uraz's Kadın Şair ve Muharrirlerimiz (Our Female Poets and Writers) which gives brief information about the lives of the Ottoman writing women and provides examples of their work going back to earlier Ottoman times.101

Together with the opening of the Prime Ministerial Archives after WWII and the changing of the Turkish nationalist discourse parallel to the political situation in Turkey in the 1950s, the Ottoman past became more accessible to research and inquiry. Newly available documents provided a shift in the emphasis of historiography from the political, to more socio-economic, and opened up the way for previously marginalized social groups, such as women, to enter the historical narrative. Motivated to retrieve the estranged Ottoman past, and to incorporate it into the Turkish historical discourse, and in order to “set the record of history straight”, historians and researchers published extensively on Ottoman society and the workings of the palace. Some devoted much of their writings to the imperial dynasty, harem and its female members, in the interest of revealing to the public the more private aspects of the Ottoman dynasty and the sultan and to correct foreign and Kemalist misapprehensions about the harem.102 Çağatay Ulusoy published two books

100 Ahmet Refik Altınay, Kadınlar Saltanatı, vols. 1-2 (Istanbul: Kitabhane-i Askeri- İbrahim Hilmi, 1332 [/1913/4/5/6/7]), vols. 3-4 (Istanbul: Kitabhane-i Hilmi, 1923).

101 Taha Ay, Türk Kadın Şairleri (Turkish Female Poets) (Istanbul: Universum Matbaası, 1934); Murat Uraz, Kadın Şair ve Muharrirlerimiz (Istanbul: Tefeyyüz, 1941); Fazıl Yenisey, Bektaşi Kadın Şairlerimiz (İzmir: Pazar Neşriyat Yurdu, 1946).

102 See Ruth Barzilai-Lumbroso, “Turkish Men, Ottoman Women: Popular Turkish Historians and the Writing of Ottoman Women’s History” (PhD diss., University of California, 2007), 308.

49

and articles that documented letters written by the women of the imperial court. In his introduction in his book Haremden Mektuplar I (Letters from the Harem I), he wrote that the wives and daughters of the sultans received instruction in reading and writing in the harem, and 90 % of the letters in his book were written by the women themselves.103 He details how imperial women personalized their letters, how the certain vocabulary they used was a sign of their ethnic origins, and whether their handwriting was neat or not.104 Again, Leslie Pierce pointed out that the less-formal style in some of the diplomatic letters of Safiye Sultan, an Ottoman queen mother (valide sultan) in the late 16th century, may be an indication of the author's identity as herself, rather than a scribe.105 The memoirs of harem inhabitants Leyla Saz and Princess Cavidan in the early 20th century were valued as authentic, first-hand narratives about harem life, and they were republished in journals in Turkish with Latin script for the contemporary reader,106 with a general motivation to

103 Çağatay Ulusoy, Haremden Mektuplar I (Istanbul: Vakit Matbaası, 1956), 9; Çağatay Ulusoy, Osmanlı Sultanlarına Aşk Mektupları (Istanbul: Şaka Matbaası, 1950). On royal women's letters also see Lucienne Thys-Şenocak, Ottoman Women Builders: The Architectural Patronage of Hadice Turhan Sultan (Aldershot, England; Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2006), 56-65; Marina Lushchenko, “The Correspondence of Ottoman Women During the Early Modern Period (16th-18th Centuries): Overview on the Current State of Research, Problems, and Perspectives,” in Women’s Memory: The Problem of Sources, eds. Birsen Talay Keşoğlu and D. Fatma Türe (Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2011), 56-67; Jacques Perot, Antoine Ignace Melling, Frédéric Hitzel and Robert Anhegger, Hatice Sultan ile Melling Kalfa: Mektuplar, trans. Ela Güntekin (Istanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yurt Yayınları, 2001); S. A. Skilliter, “Three Letters From the Ottoman “Sultana” Safiye to Queen Elizabeth I.,” in Documents from Islamic Chanceries, ed. S. M. Stern (Oxford: Bruno Cassirer, 1965), 119-57, “The Letters of the Venetian ‘Sultana’ Nur Banu and Her Kira to Venice,” in Studia Turcologica Memoriae Alexii Bombaci Dicata, eds. Alessio Bobaci, Aldo Gallotta and Ugo Marazzi (Napoli: n.p., 1982), 515-36; Elżbieta Święcicka, “The Diplomatic Letters by Crimean Keräy Ladies to the Swedish Royal House,” Rocznik Orientalisticzny 55-56 (2003): 57-90.

104 Ulusoy, Haremden Mektuplar I, 82, 152. In one of the letters in the book, Bezmâlem Valide Sultan apologizes to her son Sultan Abdulmecid in1255/? for her illegible handwriting and explains that the ink and the paper were not well-matched. Letter dated 18 Ca Sene 12(65) [/1849].

105 Leslie P. Pierce, The Imperial Harem: Women and Sovereignty in the Ottoman Empire (New York, Oxford University Press, 1993), 228.

106 “Leyla Hanımefendinin Hatıraları,” Yeni Tarih Dergisi no. 13 (Jan. 1958): 380-82; H. Uçar, “Harem ve iç yüzü, Prenses Cavidan hanımın hatıraları,” Tarihin Sesi, no. 1 (Feb. 1956): 17-21, quoted in Ruth Barzilai-Lumbroso, “Turkish Men, Ottoman Women” 167-68, 268.

50

preserve and publicize Ottoman history. Articles re-presenting Ottoman female poets and writers appeared in popular journals.107 Women's writings were instrumentalized in the process. Generally, historians in the Ottoman period did not attend to women until the last quarter of the 20th century, despite the enduring and far-reaching rule of the Ottoman regime over the various populations in the Middle East.

A rising interest in the Ottoman past and the Middle East in international and Turkish academic circles merged with the publicity of women's issues created by an international feminist awakening, and prompted quite a number of important research projects about the women of the Empire in general, starting from the mid-1970s.108 Journals devoted special issues to the late Ottoman women.109 Compilations and examinations of women's periodicals, personal documents, publications, activities and associations of the late Ottoman period in the 1980s and the 1990s110 for the first time revealed an

107 For instance, see Tahsin Tunalı, “Avrupa'ya Ün Salan İlk Kadın Şair Nigar Hanım,” Hayat Tarih Mecmuası, no. 2 (Mar. 1965):16; Ferit Ragıb Tuncer, “Tarihte Kadın Yazarlarımız,” Önasya 4, no. 38 (Oct. 1968): 19-22.

108 Ronald C Jennings, “Women in Early 17th Century Ottoman Judicial Records: The Sharia Court of Anatolian Kayseri,” Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 18, no.1 (Jan. 1975): 53-114. (based on his PhD dissertation in 1972); Zehra Toska, “Çağdaş Kadının Kimliğinin Oluşumunda İlk Aşama Tanzimat Kadını,” Tarih ve Toplum, no. 124 (1994): 5-12; Fanny Davis, The Ottoman Lady: A Social History From 1718 to 1918 (New York: Greenwood, 1986); T. Toros, İlk Kadın Ressamlarımız (Istanbul: Akbank, 1988); Tarihimizde Vakıf Kuran Kadınlar: Hanım Sultan Vakfiyeleri/ Deeds of Trust of the Sultans' Womenfolk/Actes De Fondation De Sultane Hanım (Istanbul: İstanbul Araştırma Merkezi, 1990); Alan Duben and Cem Behar, Istanbul Households: Marriage, Family and Fertility 1880-1940 (Cambridge [England]; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1991); Sema Uğurcan, “Tanzimat Döneminde Kadının Statüsü,” in 150. Yılında Tanzimat, ed. Hakkı Dursun Yıldız (Ankara: Atatürk Kültür, Dil ve Tarih Yüksek Kurumu, TDK Yayınları, 1992); Leslie P. Pierce, The Imperial Harem; Cüneyd Okay, “İlk Kadın Yıllığı Nevsal-i Nisvân,” Toplumsal Tarih 4, no. 23 (Nov. 1995): 63-64; Madeline Zilfi, ed. Women in the Ottoman Empire: Middle Eastern Women in the Early Modern Era (Leiden: Brill, 1997).

109 For instance, see Tarih ve Toplum 31, no. 183 (Mar. 1999).

110 Aynur İlyasoğlu and Deniz İnsel, “Kadın Dergilerinin Evrimi,” (Evolution of Women’s Periodicals) in Türkiye’de Dergiler, Ansiklopediler (1849 – 1984) (Istanbul: Gelişim Yayınları, 1984); Zafer Toprak, “Halk Fırkası'ndan Önce Kurulan Parti Kadınlar Halk Fırkası,” Tarih ve Toplum 9, no. 51 (Mar. 1988): 30-31; Serpil Çakır, “Osmanlı Türk Kadınları Esirgeme Derneği,” Toplum ve Bilim, no. 45 (Spring 1989): 91-97, “Osmanlı Müdafaa-i Hukuk-u Nisvan Cemiyeti,” Tarih ve Toplum, no. 66 (June 1989): 16-21;

51

intellectually and socially active women's community, as well as an Ottoman women's movement (“Hareket-i Nisvan”), to the 20th- century audience, paving the way for the study of Muslim women writers. The establishment of the Women's Library and Information Center in 1990 in Istanbul and the subsequent collection of bibliographical data on Ottoman as well as Republican Turkish women with the help of academics and volunteers, particularly the Bibliography of Turkish Language Women's Periodicals in Old (Arabic) Letters in Istanbul Libraries (1869-1927),111 provided an impetus for the field, and specialized studies about the late Ottoman women of letters and their writing began to appear. Specifically, names were brought to light and concentrated on,112 personal accounts, literary and scholarly works were published in Latin script,113 biographical data Emel Aşa, “1928'e Kadar Türk Kadın Mecmuaları” (Istanbul Üniversitesi master’s thesis, 1989); Şefika Kurnaz, “Osmanlı Kadın Cemiyetleri,” Milli Eğitim, no. 86 (June 1989): 68-75; Şefika Kurnaz, Cumhuriyet Öncesinde Türk Kadını: (1839-1923) (Ankara: T.C. Başbakanlık Aile Araştırma Kurumu Başkanlığı, 1991); Serpil Çakır, “Osmanlı Kadın Dernekleri,” Toplum ve Bilim, no. 53 (Spring 1991): 139-57; Ruth Haerkötter, Mahâsin: Ein Beispiel für die osmanische Frauenpresse der Zweiten konstitutionellen Periode (Wiesbaden: O. Harrassowitz, 1992); Şefika Kurnaz, Balkan Harbinde Kadınlarımızın Konuşmaları (Istanbul: MEB, 1993); Atatürk Kitaplığı Fatma Aliye Hanım Evrakı Kataloğu-I, ed. Mübeccel Kızıltan and Tülay Gençtürk (Istanbul: İstanbul Büyükşehir Belediyesi Kültür İşleri Daire Başkanlığı Kütüphane ve Müzeler Müdürlüğü, 1993); Hatice Özen, Tarihsel Süreç İçinde Türk Kadın Gazete ve Dergileri (1868-1990) (Istanbul: Graphis, 1994); Serpil Çakır, Osmanlı Kadın Hareketi (The Ottoman Women's Movement) (Istanbul: Metis, 1994); Şefika Kurnaz, II. Meşrutiyet Döneminde Türk Kadını (Istanbul: M.E.B., 1996); Elizabeth Frierson, “Unimagined Communities: State, Press, and Gender in the Hamidian Era 1876-1909” (PhD diss., Princeton University, 1996); Aynur Demirdirek, “In Pursuit of the Ottoman Women's Movement,” in Deconstructing Images of the Turkish Woman, ed. Zehra F. Arat (New York: St. Martin's Press; 1998): 65-81.

111 Zehra Toska et al., İstanbul Kütüphanelerindeki Eski Harfli Türkçe Kadın Dergileri Bibliyografyası (1869-1927) (Istanbul: Metis, 1993).

112 Carter V. Findley, “Fatma Aliye: First Ottoman Woman Novelist, Pioneer Feminist,” in Collection Turcica: Histoire économique et sociale de l'Empire ottoman et de la Turquie (1326-1960), Actes du sixième congrès international tenu à Aix-en-Provence du ler au 4 juillet 1992 8, ed. Daniel Panzac (Paris: Peeters, 1995), 783-94; S. Çakır, “Kadın Tarihinden iki isim: Ulviye Mevlan ve Nezihe Muhittin,” (Ulviye Mevlan and Nezihe Muhittin: Two women from women’s history) Toplumsal Tarih, no. 46 (1997): 6–14; Emine Kocamanoğlu, “Eğitim hakkında görüşleri ve Ayşe Sıdıka Hanım,” Tarih ve Toplum 32, no. 189 (Sept. 1999): 51-55; Yaprak Zihnioğlu, “Fatma Aliye ve Emine Semiye,” Tarih ve Toplum 31, no.186 (June 1999): 4-11; Zafer Toprak, “Sabiha (Zekeriya) Sertel ve Türk Feminizmi,” Toplumsal Tarih, no. 51 (Mar. 1998): 7-14; Abdullah Uçman,”Bazı Kadın Mektupları,” Tarih ve Toplum 31, no. 183 (Mar. 1999): 40-46.

113 A 17th- century writing woman was discovered by Cemal Kafadar, Mütereddit Bir Mutasavvıf: Üsküplü Asiye Hatun'un Rüya Defteri (1641-1643), Topkapı Sarayı Müzesi Yıllığı, no. 5: (1992): 168-222; Mübeccel Kızıltan, Fatma Aliye Hanım: Yaşamı-Sanatı-Yapıtları ve Nisvan-ı İslam (1891) (Istanbul: Mutlu

52

were gathered,114 monographs were composed,115 and translations from and to European languages116 and reprints of long-out-of-print texts117 were made available. The new scholarship served to rescue the Ottoman Muslim female writer and activist from oblivion, and worked against the invalidation of her life and intellectual activity. It shook not only the mainstream discourse on recent history, which had asserted that the starting point of the liberation of women was the Republican reforms or the CUP (the Committee of Union and Progress) implementations after 1908,118 but also the established literary canon which accommodated almost solely male writing.

Yayıncılık, 1993); Zafer Hanım, Aşk-ı Vatan (1877), ed. Zehra Toska (Istanbul: Oğlak, 1994); Ahmet Mithat Efendi, Fatma Aliye: bir Osmanlı kadın yazarın doğuşu: biyografi (1895), ed. Bedia Ermat (Istanbul: Sel Yayıncılık, 1994); Fatma Aliye Hanım, Muhâdarât (1326), ed. Emel Aşa (Istanbul: Enderun Kitabevi, 1996); Selma Rıza, Uhuvvet “Kardeşlik”, ed. Nebil Fazıl Alsan (Ankara: T.C. Kültür Bakanlığı, 1999).

114 Mübeccel Kızıltan, “Divan Edebiyatı Özelliklerine Uyarak Şiir Yazan Kadın Şairler,” Sombahar, no. 21/22 (1994); Mehmet Aydın, Ne Yazıyor Bu Kadınlar: Osmanlıdan Günümüze Örnekleriyle Kadın Yazar ve Şairler (Kızılay/ Ankara: İlke Kitabevi Yayınları, 1995).

115 İnci Enginün, Halide Edib Adıvar (Ankara: Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı, 1986); Sema Uğurcan, Makbule Leman, hayatı, şahsiyeti, eserleri (Istanbul: MÜ Edebiyat Fakültesi, 1991); Abide Doğan, Güzide Sabri Aygün (Ankara: Kültür Bakanlığı Yayınları, 1993); Y. Mardin, Şair Şeref Hanım (Ankara, 1994); Nazan Bekiroğlu, Şair Nigar Hanım (Istanbul: İletişim, 1998).

116 Melek Hanım, Haremden Mahrem Hatıralar, (Trente ans dans les harems d'Orient, 1875) trans. İsmail Yerguz (Istanbul: Oğlak Yayıncılık ve Reklamcılık, 1996); Selma Ekrem, Peçeye İsyan, (Unveiled: The Autobiography of a Turkish Girl, 1930) trans. Gül Çağalı Güven (Istanbul: Anahtar Kitaplar Yayınevi, 1998).

117 M. Çağatay Uluçay, Osmanlı Sultanlarına Aşk Mektupları (1950), (Istanbul, Ufuk Kitapları, 2001); Ayşegül Baykan and Belma Ötüş-Baskett, Nezihe Muhittin ve Türk Kadını (1931) (Istanbul: İletişim, 1999); Leyla Saz, The Imperial Harem of the Sultans: Daily Life at the Çırağan Palace During the 19th Century: Memoirs of Leyla Saz (1925), trans. London Thomas (Istanbul: Peva Publications, 1994).

118 For Kemalist discourse on women's liberation see Cahit Çaka, Afet İnan (1962, 1968), Tezer Taşkıran (1973), Emel Doğramacı (1984, 1989), Necla Arat (1996). Some authors on the other hand such as Orhonlu point out at the CUP era for the first active implementation of ideas concerning women's rights in education and family (e.g., Family Law Enactment of 1917, 1922), with a seeming ignoring of the fundamental educational and legal (female slavery and rights of inheritence) reforms achieved in the previous era. See Cengiz Orhonlu, “Türkiye'de Kadın Haklarının Kazanılması Meselesi,” Türk Kültürü VI, no. 72 (Oct. 1968): 939.

I should note that a few of those, like Taşkıran's Cumhuriyetin 50. Yılında Türk Kadın Hakları (Turkish Women's Rights at the 50th Anniversary of the Republic), which contained small chapters on late Ottoman women so as to present a background for Republican reforms, provided original data which many subsequent scholars based their work on.

53

The academic focus on women that emerged in Turkey in the 1980s was often intertwined with feminist activism. Therefore much of the early scholarship on late Ottoman women was influenced by the feminist paradigm, as revealed in titles such as “An Account of the Ottoman Women’s Quest for Emancipation,” and “Freedom From the Hands that Belong to the Kitchen.”119 Documentation of women's memory evoked further debates on reinstating women as active agents in historiography, writing a feminist historiography, establishing a women's history, as well as the gendered aspects of historical transformations such as nation building, among scholars such as Deniz Kandiyoti, Serpil Çakır, Fatmagül Berktay, Ayşegül Baykan, Necla Akgökçe, Aynur İlyasoğlu, Ayşe Durakbaşa and Elif Ekin Akşit in the 2000s.120 It was the changing motives, involvements, affiliations and interests of the researchers before, and it was now students and publications that were shaping scholarship in terms of content and approach. The unearthing and the study of women in late Ottoman history continued in the 2000s through scholarly and

119 Aynur Demirdirek, Osmanlı Kadınlarının Hayat Hakkı Arayışlarının Hikayesi (An Account of Ottoman Women’s Quest for Emancipation) (Ankara: İmge, 1993); Ayşegül Yaraman, Elinin Hamuru ile Özgürlük (Freedom From the Hands that Belong to the Kitchen) (Istanbul: Milliyet, 1993).

120 Deniz Kandiyoti, “Identity and Its Discontents: Women and the Nation,” Millennium 20, no. 3 (Mar. 1991): 441, “End of Empire: Islam, Nationalism and Women in Turkey,” in Women, Islam and the State, ed. Deniz Kandiyoti (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1991); Ayşegül Baykan, “The Turkish Woman: An Adventure in Feminist Historiography,” Gender and History 6, no. 1 (1994): 101-16; Serpil Çakır, “Tarih İçindeki Görünürlükten Kadınların Tarihine: Türkiye’de Kadın Tarihi Yazmak,” (From Visiblity within History to Women's History: Writing Women's History in Turkey) in Kadın Araştırmalarında Yöntem, eds. Serpil Çakır and Necla Akgökçe (Istanbul: Sel, 1996), 222-29; Necla Akgökçe, “Ortak Geçmişi Birlikte Kurmak,” (Constructing the Common Past Together) Tarih Toplum, no. 185 (May 1999): 32-35; Ayşe Durakbaşa and Aynur İlyasoğlu, “Formation of Gender Identities in Republican Turkey and Women’s Narratives as Transmitters of ‘Herstory’ of Modernization,” Journal of Social History 35, no. 1 (Fall 2001): 195-203; F. Berktay, “Geleceği Yaratmak İçin Geçmişi Geri Almak,” (Reclaiming the Past to Create the Future) Cogito, no. 29 (Fall 2001): 270-83; Serpil Çakır, “Tarih Yazımında Kadın Deneyimlerine Ulaşma Yolları,” (The Ways to Reach Women’s Experience in Historiography) Toplumsal Tarih (Mar. 2002): 38-35; A. İlyasoğlu and N. Akgökçe, eds. Yerli Bir Feminizme Doğru (Towards a Local Feminism) (Istanbul: Sel, 2002): 15-37; Serpil Çakır, “Feminism and Feminist History-Writing in Turkey: The Discovery of Ottoman Feminism,” Aspasia 1 (Jan. 2007): 61-83. Elif Ekin Akşit, “Kadın Hareketi; Halide'nin Salih'i ve Hatıralar Kimin Tarihi?,” Tarih ve Toplum 36, no. 219 (Mar. 2002): 10-13.

54

popular work, and was concentrated on organizations, institutions and activities,121 related Ottoman publications like annals,122 books123 and magazines,124 female figures and their writings such as memoirs, travel narratives, poetry, novels, journal articles and

121 Nicole A.N.M. Van Os, “Ottoman Women's Organizations: Sources of the Past, Sources for the Future,” Islam and Christian-Muslim Relations 11, no. 3 (2000); Y.S. Karakışla, “Varolmamış Bir Osmanlı Kadın Örgütü: Sâde Giyinen Kadınlar Cemiyeti (1918),” (An Ottoman Women's Organization That Never Existed) Tarih ve Toplum 35, no. 207 (Mar. 2001): 30-35, “Osmânlı Hilâl-i Ahmer ve Terakkiperver Cemiyet-i Nisvâniyesi: Dolandırıcıların ‘Sahte’ Osmanlı Kadın Örgütü,” Tarih ve Toplum 37, no. 220 (Apr. 2002): 11-16, and Women, War and Work in the Ottoman Empire: Society for the Employment of Ottoman Muslim Women (1916-1923) (Istanbul: Ottoman Bank Archives and Research Centre, 2005); Mustafa Şanal, “Osmanlı İmparatorluğu'nda Kız Öğretmen Okulunda Görev Yapan Kadın İdareciler ve Öğretmenler İle Okuttukları Dersler,” Belleten 68, no. 253 (2004): 649-70.

122 Süheyla Yüksel, “İlk Osmanlı Kadın Yıllığı Nevsal-i Nisvân,” Kadın/Woman 2000 3, no. 2 (Dec. 2002): 105-16.

123 İsmail Güven and Ümit Akagündüz, “Osmanlı Devleti'nde Kadınlara Yönelik Tarih Öğretimi Çabaları ve Ali Seydi Bey'in Kızlara Mahsûs Târîh-i Osmânî Adlı Eseri,” OTAM, no. 26 (Fall 2009): 141-64.

124 Elizabeth B. Frierson, “Mirrors Out, Mirrors In: Domestication and Rejection of the Foreign in Late-Ottoman Women's Magazines (1875-1908),” in Women, Patronage, and Self-representation in Islamic Societies, ed. D. Fairchild Ruggles (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2000), 177-214; Ayfer Karakaya-Stump, “Debating Progress in a 'Serious Newspaper for Muslim Women': The Periodical Kadın of the Post-revolutionary Salonica, 1908-1909,” British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies 30, no. 2 (Nov. 2003): 155-81; Yavuz Selim Karakışla, “Osmanlı Kadın Dergilerinin “Feminist” Gözüyle Pierre Loti,” Toplumsal Tarih 13, no. 73 (Jan. 2000): 40-43; Y.S. Karakışla, “Osmanlı Mizahında Bir Kadın Sedası (1914): Leylâk,” Toplumsal Tarih 26, no. 151 (July 2006): 44-51; Yıldız Akpolat, Sosyoloji Araştırmaları:Osmanlı’da Kadın Dergileri ve Sosyoloji Dergileri (Studies in Sociology: Women’s and Sociology Journals in the Ottoman Empire) ([Istanbul]: Fenomen Yayıncılık, [2004]); Fatma Kılıç Denman, İkinci Meşrutiyet Döneminde Bir Jön Türk Dergisi: Kadın (Istanbul: Libra, 2009); Serpil Atamaz-Hazar, “Reconstructing the History of te Constitutional Era in Ottoman Turkey through Women's Periodicals,” Aspasia 5 (2011): 92-111; Meral Nayman Demir, ed. Osmanlı Hanımları Mutfakta: Osmanlıca Kadın Dergilerinde Yemek ve Mutfağa Dair Makaleler (Istanbul: RGK Kitapları, 2014); Elife Biçer-Deveci, “The Movement of Feminist Ideas: The Case of Kadınlar Dünyası,” in A Global Middle East: Mobility, Materiality, and Culture in the Modern Age, 1880-1940, eds. Cyrus Schayegh, Avner Wishnitzer and Liat Kozma (London: I.B. Tauris, 2015), 347-55.

55

correspondences,125 reprints,126 and translations.127 An impressive number of graduate students' theses128 have also come out in the field, both in English and Turkish, and

125 Abdullah Uçman, “Selma Rıza'nın Mektupları,” (Selma Rıza's Letters), Tarih ve Toplum 40, no. 235 (July 2003): 39-43; Nicole A.N.M. Van Os, “Halide Edib'in Florence Billings'e Yazdığı İngilizce Mektuplar “Bu da Ghejer...”,” Tarih ve Toplum 38, no. 234 (June 2003): 4-12; Jeannett Squires Okur, “Feminist Edebiyat Eleştirisi Açısından Selma Rıza’nın“Uhuvvet” Romanı Üzerine Bir İnceleme,” Folklor/Edebiyat IX, no. XXXVI (2003): 155-71; Karaca, Fehime Nüzhet Hanım; Hülya Argunşah, “Zeynep Hanım, Zeynep Hanım Özgürlük Peşinde Bir Osmanlı Kadını [A Turkish Woman’s European Impressions],” Kadın/Woman 2000 2, no. 2 (December 2001): 110-14; Fatmagül Berktay, “Suat Derviş (Saadet Baraner) (1905-1972),” in A Biographical Dictionary of Women's Movements and Feminisms in Central, Eastern, and South Eastern Europe: 19th and 20th Centuries, eds. Francisca de Haan et al. (Budapest; New York: Central European University Press, 2006), 109-13; Müjgan Cunbur, Osmanlı Dönemi Türk Kadın Şairleri (Ankara: Türk Kadınları Kültür Derneği Genel Merkezi Yayını, 2011); Fatma Aliye, İstila-yı islam, ed. Yunus Emre Uçan, (Ankara: Kesit Yayınları, 2012); Nuray Özdemir, Osmanlıdan Cumhuriyete Bir Cemiyet Kadını: Nakiye Elgün (Ankara: Phoenix Yayınevi, 2014); F. Rezan Hürmen, Münevver Bir Türk Hanımı Ressam Naciye Neyyal Hanımefendi'nin Mutlakiyet, Meşrutiyet ve Cumhuriyet Hatıraları (Istanbul: Pınar Yayınları, 2004); Hülya Adak, “Suffragettes of the empire, daughters of the Republic: Women auto/biographers narrate national history (1918-1935),” New Perspectives on Turkey, no. 36 (2007): 27-51; Leyla Açba, Bir Çerkes Prensesinin Saray Hatıraları (Palace Memoirs of a Circassian Princess), ed. Harun Açba (Leyla ile Mecnun Yay., 2004); Kadriye Kaymaz, Gölgedeki Kalem Emine Semiye (Istanbul: Küre Yayınları, 2009); Melike Karabacak, “A Political and Literary Woman in the Ottoman Empire: Gülistan İsmet,” (Osmanlı’da Politik ve Edebi Bir Kadın: Gülistan İsmet) in Perspectives on Ottoman Studies Papers from the 18th Symposium of the International Committee of Pre- Ottoman and Ottoman Studies (CIEPO) (Berlin, 2010), 955-71; Roberta Micallef, “From the House with Wisteria to Inside India Halide Edib's Journey to the Symbolic,” in On the Wonders of Land and Sea Persianate Travel Writing, eds. Roberta Micallef and Sunil Sharma (Boston, Mass.; Washington, D.C.; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2013): 151-70; Ayşe Durakbaşa, Halide Edib Türk Modernleşmesi ve Feminizm (Istanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 2000); Fatma Aliye Hanım, Hayattan Sahneler (Levâyih-i Hayât), ed. Tülay Gençtürk Demircioğlu (Istanbul: Boğaziçi Üniversitesi Yayınevi, 2002); Betül Coşkun, “Halide Nusret Zorlutuna'nın Romanlarını Kronotopik Okuma,” Turkish Studies 6, no. 1 (Winter 2011): 883-98; Şefika Kurnaz, “Emine Semiye'nin Ablası Fatma Aliye'ye Mektupları,” Türkbilig, no. 14 (2007): 131-42, and “Siyasal Tarihimizin İsimsiz Kahramanlarından: İttihatçı Seniye Hanım,” International Periodical For the Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic 2, no. 4 (Fall 2007): 624-30; Ülkü Eliuz, “Meşrutiyete Giden Süreçte Yeni Kadın İmgesi: Fatma Makbule Leman,” Bilig, no. 47 (Fall 2008): 177-92; Fatma Fahrunnisa Hanım, 1896 Baharında Bursa (Hüdavendigar Vilayetinde Kısmen Bir Cevelan, 1896), ed. Nezaket Özdemir (Bursa: Bursa Kültür Sanat ve Turizm Tic. A.Ş., 2010); Aynur Soydan Erdemir, “A Woman's Challenge: The Voice of Şukufe Nihal in the Modernisation of Turkey,” in Women, Education, and Agency, 1600-2000, eds. Jean Spence, Sarah Jane Aiston, Maureen M. Meikle (New York: Routledge, 2010): 126-46; Cevdet Kırpık, “Fatma Aliye Hanım and Historiography,” Bilig, no. 53 (Spring 2010): 139-66; Betül Mutlu, Asi ve Duygulu Bir Ses: Hayriye Melek Hunç (Ürün Yayınları, 2012); Betül Coşkun, “Savaşlar Çağında Yetişmiş Bir Kadın Yazar: Salime Servet Seyfi,” Turkish Studies 7, no. 2 (Spring 2012): 261-78; Çimen Günay-Erkol and Senem Timuroğlu Bozkurt, “Dreams Beyond Control: Women and Writing in the Ottoman Empire since Asiye Hatun's Diary,” Journal of Research in Gender Studies 4, no. 1 (2014): 364-75.

126 Halidé Edib, Memoirs of Halide Edib (1926) (Piscataway, N.J.: Gorgias Press, 2004); Zeyneb Hanoum, A Turkish Woman's European Impressions (1913) Piscataway, N.J.: (Gorgias Press, 2004); Malik-Khanam, Thirty Years in the Harem (1872) (Piscataway, N.J.: Gorgias, 2005); Demetra Vaka, Haremlik: some pages from the life of Turkish women (1909) (Piscataway, N.J.: Gorgias, 2004); Fahriye, Ev Kadını, ed. Leman Erdemli and Zeynep Vanlı (Istanbul: Koçbank Kültür Sanat, 2002).

56

extensive bibliographies accompany concentrated works on individual female writers. Several dictionaries and collections of biographies appeared in the field about women in literature.129 Müjgan Cunbur recently published an extensive work on Ottoman female poets (15th cc-1923) which contains some Ottoman prose writers as well.130 Mustafa Sever's (1993) and Mehmet Aydın's (1995) anthologies survey women poets and writers from Ottoman to modern times,131 but it needs updating, especially considering the amount of work that was generated in the field post-1990s. The Women Writers of Turkey project

127 Zeynep Hanım, Özgürlük Peşinde Bir Osmanlı Kadını, (A Turkish Woman's European Impressions, 1913) trans. Nuray Fincancıoğlu (Istanbul: Büke, 2001 ); Demetra Vaka, İstanbul'un Peçesiz Kadınları (The Unveiled Ladies of Stamboul, 1923), trans. Serpil Çağlayan (Istanbul: Kitap Yayınevi, 2003); Djavidan hanum (Cavidan Hanım), Harem hayatı: Prenses Cavidan Hanım’ın kaleminden Harem’in gizli dünyası, (Harem life, 1931) trans. Seda Hauser (Istanbul: İnkılap, 2009).

128 Vuslat Devrim Altınöz, “The Ottoman Women’s Movement: Women’s Press, Magazines, Journals, and Newspapers from 1875 to 1923” (master’s thesis, Miami University, 2003); Şahika Karaca, “Güzide Sabri Aygün Hayatı, Sanatı ve Türk Edebiyatındaki Yeri Üzerine Bir İnceleme-Araştırma” (master’s thesis, Erciyes Üniversitesi, 2004); Z. Erdemir, “Makbule Leman'ın Makes'i-Hayal Adlı Eserinin Günümüz Türkçesine Aktarılması ve İncelenmesi” (bachelor’s thesis, KATÜ, 2008); Mithat Kutlar, “Ulviye Mevlan: Yaşamı ve Düşünceleri” (master’s thesis, Ankara Üniversitesi, 2008); Ayşe Bozkurt, “The Issue of Education in Ottoman Women's Periodicals” (master’s thesis, Bogaziçi University, 2006); Abdullah Demir, “Fatma Aliye Hanım ve Teracim-i Ahval-i Felasifesi” (master’s thesis, Marmara Üniversitesi, 2002); Elçin Özkal, “Feminine Actuality During the Occupation Period: İnci (1919-1923)” (master’s thesis, Boğaziçi University, 2007); Esra Çon, “A Decolité Journal for Frappante Ottoman Turkish Women: Süs (1923-1924)” (master’s thesis, Boğaziçi University, 2007); Firdevs Canbaz, “Fatma Aliye Hanım'ın Romanlarında Kadın Sorunu” (master’s thesis, Bilkent University, 2005); Özlem Ezer, “Three Turkish Women Travellers (1913-1930): From the Represented to the Representing” (PhD diss., York University, 2010); Serpil-Atamaz-Hazar, ““The Hands That Rock the Cradle Will Rise”: Women, Gender, and Revolution in Ottoman Turkey (1908-1918)” (PhD diss., University of Arizona, 2010); Derya İner, “Halide Edib Adıvar's Role As a Social Reformer and Contributor to Public Debate on Constitutionalism, Status of Women, Educational Reform, Ottoman Minorities, and Nationalism During the Young Turk Era (1908-1918)” (PhD diss., University of Wisconsin-Madison, 2011); Tuba Yazıcıoğlu, “Tanzimat'tan Cumhuriyet'e Leyla Saz ve Eserlerinin Sosyolojik Analizi” (master’s thesis, Nevşehir Üniversitesi, 2011).

129 Nesrin Tağızade Karaca, Edebiyatımızın kadın kalemleri (Female pens of our literature) (Ankara: Vadi Yayınları, 2006); Hikmet Altınkaynak, Neriman Ağaoğlu and Zerrin Saral, Edebiyatımızda kadın yazarlar sözlüğü (Dictionary of female writers in our literature) (Ankara: Phoenix, 2013).

130 Müjgan Cunbur, Osmanlı Dönemi Türk Kadın Şairleri (Turkish Women Poets in Ottoman Period) (Ankara: Türk Kadınları Kültür Derneği Genel Merkezi Yayını, 2011).

131 Mustafa Sever, Divan'dan Günümüze Türk Kadın Şairleri Antolojisi (Cağaloğlu, Istanbul: Yön Yayıncılık, 1993); Mehmet Aydın, Ne Yazıyor Bu Kadınlar: Osmanlıdan Günümüze Örnekleriyle Kadın Yazar ve Şairler (Kızılay/ Ankara: İlke Kitabevi Yayınları, 1995).

57

has created an online bio-bibliographical database of women writers from Turkey, and has collected information on Ottoman and post-Ottoman women.132 It currently includes 211 names, and is a work in progress. Interest in Ottoman women writers has expanded in the last decade or so. Women writers from other backgrounds and geographies in the Ottoman Empire, such as Armenian, Greek and Arab women writers, who are not included in the scope of this study, have also begun to be written about.133

Most published studies are in article format, and deal with relatively narrow subject matter; not many assume a comprehensive, analytical or interdisciplinary approach. It is my contention that insights into the literary existence of the late Ottoman Muslim women of letters still needs to be developed. The topic requires a study in its own right, drawing upon previous contributions.

132 http://en.writersofturkey.net/

133 For instance, see Victoria Rowe, A History of Armenian Women’s Writing: 1880-1922 (London: Cambridge Scholars Press, 2003); Lerna Ekmekçioğlu and Melissa Bilal, eds. Bir Adalet Feryadı: Osmanlı’dan Türkiye’ye Beş Ermeni Feminist Yazar 1862-1933 (Istanbul: Aras Yayıncılık, 2010).

CHAPTER 4

OTTOMAN MUSLIM WOMEN OF LETTERS

4.1. Emergence of Women's Public Writing in the 19th- Century

Historical Context

Public writing in the 19th- century Ottoman Empire is related to, and characterized by, two important developments of the modernization process, with interrelated domestic dynamics and external factors: the expansion of education and development of the popular press. The increased availability of schooling for girls and the flourishing of a journalistic press that was oriented to more women pulled physically and discursively to the public sphere, and an accompanying propagation of cultured and capable women contributed to the evolution of a community of Muslim writing women in the Ottoman urban space.

Ottoman Muslim girls’ ability to read and write in Turkish was a primary condition for their participation in public writing. Advanced education in Arabic and Persian languages, as well as in the mystical tradition, were essential in creating divan (Ottoman court) poetry. Cultivation in other areas and disciplines, as well as access to Western-language texts, boosted intellectual formation and the skills necessary to produce informative and argumentative texts. I investigate below how, when, and where the women of letters of this period received such educational training, and how the impact of the new

public schools affected the emergence of women from different social backgrounds into the realm of public writing.

59

Sibyan schools (“mekteb”), funded by vaqfs (foundations), taught boys and girls how to read the Arabic alphabet (elifbâ), how to read and memorize the Qur'an, and how to be religiously moral, for a duration of three (later four) years starting at ages 5 or 6; these schools existed for centuries in the Ottoman Empire. Most Sibyan schools had courtly women or landlords and tradesmen as patrons.134 Private homes were opened to give preschool and primary school-aged girls and boys a basic education; for some of these efforts, state support was requested and acquired.135 Attending these schools was discretionary until an Imperial Edict issued in 1824 and another official record addressed to teachers in 1847-48 declared that it was mandatory for all Muslim children who were aged 7 and up. Afterwards, the 1869 Regulation of Public Education (Maarif-i Umumiye Nizamnamesi) stated that primary education was mandatory for all boys between the ages of 7-11 and all girls 6-10.136 In Istanbul and Bilad-ı Selase, the total number of Sibyan schools was 290 in 1877.137 In the traditional educational system, learning to read and write was subservient to the greater tasks of preparing Muslims for the afterlife through religious 134 In the late Ottoman period, out of 198 Sibyan schools, 47 were built by women and 59 by landlords and tradesmen (ağa and esnaf). See Osman Ergin, İstanbul mektepleri ve ilim, terbiye, ve sanʾat müesseseleri dolayısiyle Türkiye Maarif Tarihi (History of Turkish Education) vol. 1-2 (Istanbul: Eser Neşriyat ve Dağıtımı, 1977), 89.

135 A 1849 petition submitted by some women to the Ministry of Religious Foundations (Evkaf Nezareti) asks for state funds to convert a house into a school for children. The request was granted. See Yahya Akyüz, “Osmanlı'da “Kadın Öğretmenli Ev Sıbyan Mektepleri” (Amerikan ve Fransız Eğitim Tarihinden Benzer Örnekler),” Ankara Üniversitesi Osmanlı Tarihi Araştırma ve Uygulama Merkezi Dergisi, no. 15 (2004): 1-12.

136 Yahya Akyüz, Türk Eğitim Tarihi (Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi, 1982), 102, 106, 108.

137 Sâlnâme Sene 1294, ed. Maârif Nezareti Mektupçusu Halet Bey (Dersaadet: HaIiI Efendi Matbaası, 1294), quoted in Mehmet Ö. Alkan, “Osmanlı İmparatorluğu'nda Eğitim ve Eğitim İstatistikleri, 1839-1924,” in Osmanlı Devletinde Bilgi ve İstatistik, eds. Halil İnalcık and Şevket Pamuk (Ankara: T.C. Başbakanlık Devlet İstatistik Enstitüsü, 2000), 131. In 1913-14, there existed 2596 private primary schools in the Greek, Armenian and Jewish communities. See Akyüz, Türk Eğitim Tarihi, 180.

60

education and training students for Ottoman administrative positions.138 Schooling did not imply literacy at the primary level. Reading education was comprised of Qur'an reading, and the writing curriculum was based on learning calligraphic styles of Arabic-alphabet texts and copying them.139 Hence, according to the studies of educational history, the majority of Ottoman Muslim students in Sibyan schools did not quite learn Turkish reading and writing skills until they had reached a higher level of schooling, and even then it was not available for Muslim girls until mid-century. Girls from families that could afford it were privately tutored at home.

The 1869 Regulation called for the establishment of a three-layer educational system. All communities (millet) would subsidize their own schools,140 education would be provided according to the precepts of one's own religion, and Ottoman history would be taught in children's native languages at these schools. In the Abdulhamid II period (1876-), new state-run primary schools (Mekteb-i İptidâî) opened; and they attempted to establish a new primary education system, usûl-i cedîd(e) (“new method”), which was first proposed in 1872-73. The curriculum in these schools was expanded gradually to include Turkish grammar and vocabulary writing (Türkçe Lügat), script deciphering (for reading skills)

138 Benjamin C. Fortna, Learning to Read in the Late Ottoman Empire and the Early Turkish Republic (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011), 49-50.

139 Ergin, Türkiye Maarif Tarihi, 86, 465, 473-75; Yahya Akyüz, Türk Eğitim Tarihi, 100; Fatma Müge Göçek, “Shifting the Boundaries of Literacy: Introduction of Western-Style Education to the Ottoman Empire,” Literacy: Interdisciplinary conversations, ed. Deborah Keller-Cohen (Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press, 1994), 273.

140 Some of schools privately funded by Ottoman Christians and Jews had been in existence in the Ottoman Empire long before the initiation of public education practices by the state. The number of those schools rose dramatically during the 19th century. See Donald Quataert, “Overview of the Nineteenth Century,” in An Economic and Social History of the Ottoman Empire. 1300-1914, eds. Halil İnalcık and Donald Quataert (Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1994), 169.

61

(Kıraat),141 calligraphy (Hüsn-i Hat), basic mathematics, geography, and history. By 1883, nine such primary schools for girls existed in Istanbul.142 The total number of primary schools (old and new) that girls could attend reached 4,564 by 1913-14 with 587 being single-sex Girls' Primary Schools and 3977 being co-ed.143

Many women throughout the history of the Arab, Persian, and Turkic Islamic world pursued religious and literary training formally in madrasas, traditional Islamic centers of learning, and in royal courts. They served as Islamic scholars in their communities and a number of them were identified as literary figures.144 However, we have no solid information about the education of Muslim Ottoman women before the 15th century when the Ottoman court was established in Istanbul. Many royal ladies were instructed in the palace and some were known to have built madrasas in different cities in the Empire.145 Madrasas were prevalent in Ottoman society, but it was not common for women to enroll and formally study there to earn an ijazah (academic license) because they could not hold

141 Fortna, Learning to Read, 126.

142 Selçuk Akşin Somel, “Sources on the Education of Ottoman Women in the Prime Ministerial Ottoman Archive for the Period of Reforms in the Nineteenth and Early Twentieth Centuries,” in Beyond the Exotic: Women’s Histories in Islamic Societies, ed. Amira El-Azhary Sonbol (Syracuse, N.Y.: Syracuse University Press, 2005), 300.

143 Mustafa Ergün, “II. Meşrutiyet Devrinde Eğitim Hareketleri (1908-1914)” (PhD diss., Ankara University, 1978), 344-47. Sultan Mahmud I’s mother had asked those children attending the school at the foundation she built to be taught calligraphy. See Akyüz, Türk Eğitim Tarihi, 58.

144 For instance Safvetüddin Padishah Hatun (13th cc), Gülbadan Begum (16th cc), Sultan Raziyye (13th cc); see Fanny Davis, The Ottoman Lady: A Social History From 1718 to 1918 (New York: Greenwood, 1986. The Fatimid (10th 12th cc) institution of higher learning Dar al-Hikmah had reserved rooms for female students and the court at Cairo had arranged public lectures for women. Al-Sakhawi (15th cc), Ibn Hajar al-'Asqalani (15th cc), Ibn al-Imad (17th cc), Al-Tabbakh cite Muslim women scholars in their works. Mohammad Akram Nadwi's recent 40-volume work on muhaddithat (female scholars of hadith) names 8000 of them.

145 Halil İnalcık, “Learning, the Medrese, and the Ulema,” in The Ottoman Empire: The Classical Age 1300–1600 (New York: Praeger, 1973), 168-69.

62

official posts; occasionally, though, they could audit lectures and sessions. After the turn of the 16th century, Ottoman madrasas largely prepared men formally to be teachers and judges (in mosques and courts). The madrasa curriculum was, by and large, calligraphy, language, logic, theology, ethics and politics. Oral tradition was more important than the written one because learning occurred through the dialogues and systematic methods of disputations among the advanced students.146 By the 19th century, there were 170 madrasas in Istanbul alone, but we are not aware of anyone among the writing women of the late Ottoman period who was educated in one of these centers.

The first examples of Ottoman Muslim women's writing were poetry, the chief literary genre in Ottoman times. Divan poetry, the main element of classical Ottoman literature, was a sophisticated literary art and it dominated the high class for centuries. Ottoman Muslim female writers of divan poetry who were mentioned in biographical dictionaries as early as the 16th century, were mostly members of prominent families; they were the daughters, sisters or close relatives of qadis, that is to say, judges, madrasa teachers, scholars, poets, governors and judicial statesmen (kazasker). They operated in a network of poets and some lived in the enriching surroundings of the Imperial Palace, such as Tûtî and Hubbî. Most were privately educated in their homes by their fathers or relatives, and some fathers had their daughters tutored by eminent scholarly figures of their time. They studied Arabic, Persian, calligraphy, Islamic jurisprudence (fıqh) and some studied music and composing. We also know of some female poets, like Tevhide Hanım and Şeref Hanım, who raised and educated female members in their immediate family to be women

146 Fatma Müge Göçek, “Shifting the Boundaries of Literacy,” 272-73.

63

of letters and poets.147 Some Ottoman female poets, whether divan poets or folk poets, like Sırri Hanım, Cevheriye Banu Hanım, Adile Hanım and Fatma Kamile Hanım, Leyla Hanım, Şeref Hanım, Habibe Hanım, Maide Hanım, Münire Hanım, Hadice Nakiyye Hanım, Tevhide Hanım, and Mahşah Hanım, were affiliated with the Sunni-based Qadiri, Naqshi or Mawlawi148 sufi orders (tarikat). In one of her poems, Tevhide Hanım speaks about an honorable, knowledgeable Naqshi woman (Hacı Marziye Molla) who opens her tekke (dervish lodge) house every Monday for women to gather and listen to her preaching.149 Sufi orders allowed poets to nurture their poetry with mystic thought and offered a more liberated setting for poetry writing, as poetry expressing divine love (İlahi aşk) was a revered art in Sufi circles. Classical Ottoman literature took its main inspiration from the Persians. Mawlawi establishments attached to the dervish lodges acted as cultural centers where one could study Persian language and literature, and ritual dance and music.150 Along similar lines, other female poets who arose from the mystic tradition of Islam were members of the Alawaite and Bektashi orders.151 These poets were fed by the

147 Didem Havlioğlu, “On the Margins and Between the Lines: Otttoman Women Poets from the Fifteenth to the Twentieth Centuries,” Turkish Historical Review, no. 1 (2010): 49.

148 Sırri Hanım and Cevheriye Banu Hanım were Qadiri, Adile Hanım and Fatma Kamile Hanım were Naqshi, Leyla Hanım, Şeref Hanım, Habibe Hanım, Maide Hanım, Münire Hanım, Hadice Nakiyye Hanım, Tevhide Hanım and Mahşah Hanım were Mawlawi. Some joined more than one order.

149 Gürol Pehlivan, Bülent Bayram and Mehmed Veysi Dörtbudak, Osmanlı Taşrasında Kadın, Şair, Mevlevi Olmak: Tevhide Hanım ve Divanı (Manisa: Manisa Belediyesi Kültür Yayınları, 2006), 9.

150 Halil İnalcık, “Popular Culture and The Tarikats- Mystic Orders,” in Religion and Culture in the Ottoman Empire, vol. 4 of The Ottoman Empire: The Classical Age 1300-1600 (New York: Praeger Publishers, 1973), 201-2.

151 Hüsniye Bacı, Güzide Ana, Münire Bacı, Seher Abdal, Şeref Bacı, Nafia Hanım, Arife Bacı, İzmirli Emine (Beyza) Bacı, İkbal Bacı, Şehribanu Bacı, Useyle (Useyde?) Bacı, Hürmüz Hanım, Gülsüm Bacı, Rafia Bacı, Semiha Bacı, İpek Bacı, Çiçek Bacı, Sakine Bacı, Naciye Bacı, Öksüz (Orphan) Zeynep Bacı, Leyla Bacı, Şah Sultan, Hadice Bacı, Besime Bacı, Latife Bacı, Hayriye Bacı, Remziye Bacı, her older sister Necmiye Bacı and Zehra Bacı. See Fazıl Yenisey, Bektaşi Kadın Şairlerimiz (İzmir: Pazar Neşriyat Yurdu, 1946); Bahadır İbrahim, Alevi ve Sünni Tekkelerinde Kadın Dervişler (Istanbul: Su, 2005), 185-97;

64

teachings of their orders; some were raised in dervish lodges, and served followers and guided rituals there, and were highly revered as spiritual leaders (dede or ana) and even saints (eren or aziz). The general census in 1882 found that 2,375 people participated in a total of 260 dervish lodges in Istanbul alone, and of them, 1,184 were women.152

Owing to the efforts of centralization and westernization in the late 18th century, a new bureaucratic structure formed in the Empire,153 which generated a new, but familiar educational setting for girls that provided quality teaching in various subjects and nurtured their literary interests. Elite households (konak) of the Ottoman bureaucratic bourgeoisie reproduced the educational practices of the imperial harem (women's department of the palace), that saw girls being taught religious sciences, poetry and literature, music, ethics, reading and writing, and handicrafts by master teachers, mostly by older, educated females.154 Islamic dimensions predominated in all subjects. With the acceleration of Westernization in 19th- century Ottoman society, household education for female members included subjects such as Arabic, Persian and Ottoman languages and literatures, Western Çiğdem Aktaş, “Toplumsal Açıdan Erenlerin Ser Çeşmesi: Hacı Bektaş Veli,” Gazi Üniversitesi Türk Kültürü ve Hacı Bektaş Veli Araştırma Dergisi, no. 14 (2000); Müjgan Cunbur, Osmanlı Dönemi Türk Kadın Şairleri (Ankara: Türk Kadınları Kültür Derneği Genel Merkezi Yayını, 2011).

152 Ergin, Türkiye Maarif Tarihi, 240.

153 Changes that prepared the emergence of a new bureaucratic elite included the dissolution of the power of ayans (landowning notables) and of the connected local groups in the military (janissaries) and in teaching (ulama), the establishment of a Directorate of Vaqfs to governmentally administer these social institutions of Islam and use their revenue, and the reorganization of central administration with the establishment of modern institutions and offices for diplomatic training (Translation Bureau, 1833), religious opinion (Bab-ı Meşihat), army (1793), the police (Zaptiye Müşiriyeti, 1845), and of specialized governmental ministries and councils. For a brief history of the socio-political change in the last two centuries of the Ottoman Empire, see Kemal H. Karpat, “The Transformation of the Ottoman State, 1789-1908,” International Journal of Middle East Studies 3, no. 3 (July 1972): 243-81.

154 Elif Ekin Akşit, “Harem Education and Heterotopic Imagination,” Gender and Education 23, no. 3 (May 2011): 303. An example of older educated females who served as a private tutor is Hadice Nakıyye Hanım who tutored Selma Hanım, daughter of Ali Paşa and the daughters of Müşir Abdülhalim Paşa. See Müjgan Cunbur, Osmanlı Dönemi Türk Kadın Şairleri, 101.

65

music, arithmetic, drawing, geography and history. Later in the century, foreign governesses or male tutors taught them French, German and English, through which they gained access to Western thought and literature.155 The elite women of these households were raised between the traditional harem curriculum and a modern emphasis.156 The Poet Nigar b. Osman's upbringing exemplifies this upbringing. She was the daughter of the director of the School of War Studies. She started her early education at home with religion, learned the Qur'an and Turkish, and, between the ages of 7 to 11, stayed in a French boarding school where she learned French, Italian, piano, drawing and embroidery. Later, she carried on her studies in French, Turkish, piano and drawing with master teachers at home, and read Western and Turkish literature, becoming one of the most well-known women of letters in the period. A number of well-known female writers, poets and artists of the 19th century were raised in these relatively well-off households. Despite the variety in the curriculum and the quality of household education, and homes being depicted as learned and nurturing environments in various memoirs of the late 19th century, such as those of Halide Nusret's, Şevket Süreyya Aydemir's, Hüseyin Cahit Yalçın's and Halide Edib's, and in women's fiction with great deal of autobiographic traces, such as Şukufe Nihal's Yalnız Dönüyorum,157 state educationalists tend to denigrate the influence of the

155 Marmaduke Picktall, the Englishman who converted to Islam believed Ottoman women were often highly cultivated and familiar with the art and thought of Europe. With the Turk in Wartime (London, Toronto: J. Dent, 1914), 98-99.

156 Akşit comments that the novel Sinekli Bakkal by Halide Edib Adıvar provides the most elaborate discussion of households and their relation to education. The protagonist girl was torn between her religious grandparents and her revolutionary father. See Elif Ekin Akşit, “Girls’ Education and the Paradoxes of Modernity and Nationalism in the Late Ottoman Empire and the Early Turkish Republic” (PhD diss., Binghamton University, 2004), 93.

157 In the novel, the character speaks about her early education as follows: I have learned a lot from my father, and from those who participated in my father’s gatherings; The inspirations I gained from the readings and discussions in those gatherings accompanied me all my life. Şukufe Nihal Başar, Yalnız

66

home environment on introducing a child to reading158 and various other subjects and training. “[G]irls’ education is still a derivative of public education in the existing historiography.”159 Still, the number of educated women remained very limited until the opening of public schools for Muslim girls during the reforms of the Tanzimat (Reorganization) era.

Tanzimat, a period of reorganization (1839-1876), promised security for life and property and equality among all citizens, and sought modernization in the Empire in various areas of social and political life, which inevitably affected women’s educational opportunities. Familiarization with the West through travel and schooling, through interaction with ambassadors and ministers in Europe, European newspapers and press bureau translations, and through education in new Ottoman schools, the Ottoman (civil and military) bureaucratic intelligentsia of the 19th century developed an appreciation for Western inventions, ideas and policies. They became instrumental in creating reforms in various fields. Education was one of the most important aspects of Ottoman modernization. Girls’ education in particular was a concern for intellectuals and the modernizing statesmen; it was frequently being stressed in their writings and in the public press throughout the second half of the century that a nation needed its women to be knowledgeable to achieve progress, as they were the educators of the nation’s children.160

Dönüyorum (Istanbul: Kenan Basımevi, 1938), 41-42. According to Hülya Argunşah, Şukufe Nihal was one of those writers whose work highly reflects their biographies. See Hülya Argunşah, Bir Cumhuriyet Kadını Şükufe Nihal (Istanbul: Timaş, 2011), 22.

158 Fortna, Learning to Read, 44-45. See the same source for the learning memories of the mentioned names.

159 Akşit, “Girls’ Education” 93.

160 Namık Kemal, İbrahim Şinasi, Şemseddin Sami, Ziya Paşa, Münif Paşa, Saffet Paşa.

67

Several military and civil state schools that admitted male students had already been established in the Empire before any state schools existed for girls.161 The reason for a segregated education was the supposed view of the public against a mixed education as well as monetary limitations. Tanzimat attempts at modernization initiated state secondary schools, industrial schools and teachers' training schools for girls, which would be expanded under Abdulhamid II (1876-1909), and continued with the opening of state high schools (İdâdî and Sultânî) and eventually a university in the second Constitutional era (1908-1919). Access to formal education outside of the home, or the religious centers, meant increased literacy among Ottoman Muslim girls and women from different social backgrounds, and opened up new avenues for them, a contributing factor to the diversity of women of letters in terms of both their profiles and intellectual output. I will outline, in the following pages, the types of schools that became available to late Ottoman urban Muslim girls beyond the primary level, and also the distribution and curriculum of private, foreign and non-Muslim community schools, in order to be able to provide some insights into the writers in question, who, for the most part, received systematic education in these schools.

161 Imperial Academy of Naval Engineering (Mühendishâne-i Bahri-i Hümâyûn, 1773), Imperial Academy of Military Engineering (Mühendishâne-i Berri-i Hümâyûn, 1793), Medical School and Surgical School (Tıphâne-i Âmire ve Cerrahhâne-i Mamure, 1826/7), School of War Studies (Mekteb-i Ulûm-i Harbiye, 1834), School of Imperial Orchestra (Muzıka-i Hümâyûn Mektebi, 1834), secondary schools (Mekteb-i Rüşdi, 1838), School of Instruction (Mekteb-i Maarif-i Adliye, 1838), School of Literary Studies (Mekteb-i Ulûm-i Edebiye, 1839), and Secondary School Teachers' Training School (Darülmuallimin-i Rüşdi, 1848).

After the mid-century, other boys' schools followed: School of Administration (Mekteb-i Mülkiye, 1859, the first civil university), Sultani high school (Mekteb-i Sultani, 1868), Primary Schools' Teachers' Training School (Darülmuallimin-i Sıbyan, 1868), Industrial School (Sanayi Mektebi, 1868), civil high school (İdadî-i Mülkî, 1873), military middle schools (Rüşdi-i Askeri, 1875), and University (Darülfünün, 1863, 1870).

68

Until 1858, the only state educated girls were the girls of the palace in the Empire. That year, secondary schools for girls, İnas Rüşdiyeleri, the first of their kind, were opened by the Ministry of National Education founded a year earlier. They were to be the first stage of general secondary schools. The educational program included Ottoman, Arabic and Persian grammar, Ottoman punctuation and structure, reading and writing, sewing, music (extracurricular), drawing (to enhance embroidery studies), domestic sciences, Ottoman history, general history and geography.162 In 1877, there were ten İnas Rüşdiyes in Istanbul (Sultanahmed, Şehzade, Aksaray, İbrahimpaşa, Eski Alipaşa, Eyyüb, Üsküdar, Gülfem Hatun, Atpazarı), and four in Anatolia and Rumelia (Salonica, Yanya, Crete, Konya, Yedikule [Industrial Rüşdiye]).163 In 1906-7, the number of public and private İnas Rüşdiyes for Muslim and non-Muslim girls under the state's supervision reached 85, and by 1918, it was 116 both in and out of Istanbul.164 Gradually, İnas Rüşdiyes became the lower division of İnas İdadis (girls' high school). Literate, educated girls became increasingly present in Istanbul and in the other administrative provinces (vilayets and sancaks), as the availability of common, standard education for girls became more widespread.

162 Düstur (1. tertip), vol. 2 (1289 [/1872/3/4]), 189.

163 Alkan, “Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’nda Eğitim,” 132.

164 Şefika Kurnaz, II Meşrutiyet Döneminde Türk Kadını (Istanbul: MEB, 1996), 81-82. A girl named Vicdan writes to a newspaper in 1879 about the lack of a rüşdiye school in the Beşiktaş district and says her father taught her some math, geometry and geography and that she likes reading newspapers. “Many civil and military schools are opened for boys. Why not show some attention to the girls as well, improve and expand the inas rüşdiyes more, so the girls get education like boys? Aren’t the girls the children of this nation like boys are? There are two boys’ rüşdiyes in Beşiktaş, one military and one civil, but there are no inas rüşdiyes… Don’t the girls need to acquire knowledge of the sciences?” Tercüman-ı Hakikat 2, (newspaper for rüşdiye students) no. 8 (Zilhicce 1296 [/1879]): 1-2.

69

The first İnas İdadi, opened in Istanbul in 1880 during the Abdulhamid II period, was a private school where students had to pay tuition to study. The school closed down two years later due to insufficient enrollment.165 There was one private İnas İdadi in Manastır and three private nonsegregated İdadi schools in Istanbul, according to Educational Statistics from 1906-7. The number of non-Muslim Ottoman girls' private high school in the same period was twelve, and there were seventeen girls' high schools opened by foreigners.166 No public high schools for Muslim women were opened until 1911, though there were attempts to collect donations for it. The İnas İdadi that opened in 1911 in Aksaray became the first girls' public high school in the country, and was open to Muslims and non-Muslims. Students aged 10-15 were admitted to the lower division (rüşdiye) and ages 13-18 for the higher division in the İnas İdadis. After 1908, these schools were renamed İnas Sultanî, referring to the first modern high school opened in Galatasaray, Mekteb-i Sultanî. The curriculum offered French, German, English, music, mathematics, geography, geometry, natural sciences, drawing, handicrafts, cooking, tailoring, children's health and Turkish.167 İnas Sultanis, offering a decade-long education, prepared girls for the university, and others, with a 6-year education, were occupational Sultanis. By 1922, the number of these schools only increased to five, all being in Istanbul.

The Female Teachers' Training Schools, Darülmuallimat, particularly contributed to the development of a small body of cultivated, urban Muslim women, with a basic education in various subjects. The students and teachers of the school were visibly

165 Mahmud Cevad bin eş-Şeyh Nafi, Maarif-i Umumiye Nezareti Tarihçe-i Teşkilât ve İcraatı (Istanbul: Matbaa-i Amire, 1338 [/1922]), 192-96.

166 Şefika Kurnaz, II. Meşrutiyet Döneminde, 83.

167 Akyüz, Türk Eğitim Tarihi, 175.

70

interested in publishing and in being involved in public discussions in periodicals, proudly mentioning their school in their signatures. The first Darülmuallimat was established in 1870 in Ayasofya, Istanbul, to prepare females between the ages of 13-35 to work in girls' primary and secondary schools,168 in accordance with the 1869 Law for the Regulation of Public Education that teachers at girls' schools should be women. Fifty students enrolled in the first year. Before the first graduate class of the Darülmuallimat, mostly older Muslim male teachers and Ottoman Armenians, Jews and French nationals were assigned to teach in Muslim girls' schools. These instructors were gradually replaced by Darülmuallimat graduates, who were appointed as teachers for a five-year period if they received a scholarship while studying and served in return for it. The number of graduates in 1873 was seventeen, and six of them took teaching jobs in six different İnas Rüşdiyes in Istanbul, and for the first time, taught subjects other than embroidery and tailoring.169 Increasing numbers of female teachers in Rüşdiyes were conducive to attracting younger girls to schooling. Until the second Constitutional era (1908-09), there was only one Darülmuallimat but the number increased to ten with the opening of new schools in cities outside of Istanbul, such as İzmir, Ankara, Konya, Athens, Edirne, Eskişehir, Beirut, Aleppo and Bursa.170 The total number of students attending Darülmuallimats was 1,079 in the academic year 1916-17.171 In 1918, the Ministry of Education decided that the

168 Düstur (1. Tertip), vol. 2, 196.

169 Ergin, Türkiye Maarif Tarihi, 675; Cahit Yalçın Bilim, Tanzimat devrinde Türk eğitiminde çağdaşlaşma (1839–1876) (Eskişehir: Anadolu Üniversitesi Yayınları, 1984), 41.

170 Edhem Nejad, “Türkiye'de Kız Mektebleri ve Terbiyesi,” Türk Kadını, no. 11 (1334-35 [/1918-19]): 164.

171 İstanbul Kız Muallim Mektebi 1933-Dariilmuallimat 1870 (Istanbul: İstanbul Kız Muallim Mektebi Yayını, 1933), 56.

71

graduates of Darülmuallimat could teach in boys' primary schools as well. The curriculum developed eventually to include not only history, geography, arithmetic, grammar and punctuation, Turkish, Arabic and Persian, the Qur'an, religion and ethics, house work (cooking, laundry, ironing), home economics, calligraphy (sülüs, rık'a), drawing, music, embroidery and tailoring, but also pedagogy, civilization and law, piano, geometry, pyrography, gardening, physical sciences and health, physical education, spiritual studies, German, French, Froebel education and practice for pre-school, and gymnastics.172 By 1911, the school graduated 737 girls to become teachers.173 In 1913, Dârülmuallimât-ı Âliye (Higher Female Teachers' School) was opened to train female teachers for Dârülmuallimâts, İdadis and Sultanis. The Darülmuallimats' program was improved after 1913 but overall, the quality of education was indicated to be unsatisfactory,174 due to the overly restricted authority of the female principals,175 unqualified teachers and general disorganization. Yet, they were the highest educational institutions in existence until a Women’s Higher Education Institution opened in 1914; these graduates were the first group of Muslim women to professionally work for the state. 172 For more information, see Mustafa Şanal, “Osmanlı İmparatorluğu'nda Kız Öğretmen Okulunun (Darülmuallimat), Kuruluşu, Okutulan Dersler ve Kapatılışı (1870-1924),” Ankara Üniversitesi Osmanlı Tarihi Araştırma ve Uygulama Merkezi Dergisi, no. 26 (Fall 2009): 221-24.

173 Ergin, Türkiye Maarif Tarihi, 678.

174 Cemil Öztürk, Atatürk Devri Öğretmen Yetiştirme Politikası (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Basımevi, 1996), 16. Nezihe Muhiddin relays that she quit her education at the Darülmuallimat after six months because the school lacked discipline and order. See Ayşegül Baykan and Belma Ötüş-Baskett, Nezihe Muhittin ve Türk Kadını (1931) (Istanbul: İletişim, 1999), 89-90. Halide Edib complains about the unsatisfactory conditions of students, teachers and buildings of the Darülmuallimat. Halide Salih, “Maarif Nezareti Daire-i Aliyesine: Darülmuallimat,” Tanin, no. 56 (12 Eylül 1324 [/1908]): 4-6.

175 Yahya Akyüz, “Öğretmenlik Mesleği ve Osmanlı'da Kadın Öğretmen Yetiştirilmesi,” Tarih ve Toplum 33, no. 195 (Mar. 2000): 35.

72

There was only one higher education institution for girls in the Empire. İnas Darülfünun, which opened in 1914. Students were the graduates of Darülmuallimât-ı Âliye and the İdadis, and those who were published in the public press were associated more with their school, than their own names, similar to Darülmuallimat students. It indicates that where they attended school was a primary marker of their public identity. Three majors were offered at the girls’ university: Literature, Mathematics and Natural Sciences. 21 students graduated in 1917. One year later, girls started attending boys' classes at Darülfünun, claiming they received higher quality teaching there. The gradual de-segregation of Darülfünun after 1921 gave way to the dissolution of the İnas Darülfünun.176

Outside of the above mentioned Teachers' Training Schools, several technical, artistic and vocational schools were initiated; among them were the Midwifery Seminary (Ebe Mektebi, 1842-43), the Girls' Industrial Schools (İnas Sanayi Mektebi, 1865), the Motherhood School (Ana Mektebi, 1909), the Housewifery School (Ev Kadını Mektebi, 1912), Nursing Care Training (Hastabakıcılık ve Hemşirelik Kursu, 1912) and the Women’s Academy of Fine Arts (İnas Sanayi-i Nefise Mektebi, 1914). Women gained the right to attend the Conservatoire (Dârülelhân) in the same period. In 1916, three Muslim female students177 were sent to Europe by the government to study medicine, when the Faculty of Medicine in Istanbul was still operating with an all-male faculty and student body. In 1922, the first seven girls were enrolled in the Faculty of Medicine.

176 Coeducation at the Darülfünün was first allowed in the geography class in 1918-19. The Inas Darülfünün joined Darülfünün in 1920 but boys and girls attended school at different times of the day. After 1921, coeducation was realized gradually in various departments (arts and sciences, law, and medicine).

177 Safiye Hanım was sent to Germany, and Süeda and Suat Hanıms from Izmir were sent to Switzerland. See Milli Nevsal (Istanbul: Kanaat Matbaası ve Kitabhanesi, 1922), 260.

73

Girls' Industrial Schools provided primary education in the morning with Turkish, reading, writing, arithmetic, history, geography, the Qur'an, and later French, and in the afternoon, tailoring, embroidery, health and music. Most of the girls who came to study in these schools had no prior education. Girls who were not proficient in Turkish took extra intensive classes, along with their reading and writing courses.178 Their teachers consisted of the earlier graduates of the same schools, or of the Darülmuallimats, or were Ottoman Armenians, Jews and French nationals. The schools' popularity consistently increased over time. There were twelve Girls' Industrial Schools educating 1,537 girls in 1894-95.179

In addition to Ottoman state efforts, Ottoman private enterprises that addressed Muslim children was becoming more present in the educational arena too, through associations based mainly in the cities of Salonica, Izmir and Istanbul. The numbers show that they made a considerable contribution to the literacy levels of the female population. The Feyziye School (Feyziye Mektebi) was opened early on by a Turkish community in Salonica, and implemented modern standards in education and gave courses in science and languages. A girls’ division was opened in 1888-89, and consisted of primary and secondary levels. In 1907-8, the school was providing education for 260 female students.180 Some of the women writing in the late Ottoman/Turkish press with stronger feminist sentiments, such as Aziz Haydar and İsmet Hakkı, or with more explicit nationalist/revolutionist or populist agendas, such as Emine Semiye, Ayşe Zekiye or

178 Elif Ekin Akşit, “Girls' Education and the Paradoxes of Modernity,” 101.

179 Mehmet. Ö. Alkan, Education Statistics in Modernization from the Tanzimat to the Republic. Historical Statistic Series, no. 6 (Ankara: Prime Ministerial State Institute of Statistics, 2000), 37, 51, 53-62.

180 For a comprehensive overview of private Muslim schools in the Ottoman Empire, see Songül Keçeci Kurt, Yabancı Okullara Karşı Osmanlı Refleksi: Özel İslam Mektepleri (Istanbul: Yitik Hazine Yayınları, 2013).

74

Muazzez Tahsin were nurtured by the Salonica educational tradition, and by/or by journals or other contacts. In 1903, twenty-eight private schools in Istanbul were teaching 4500 students in primary and secondary divisions; some were nonsegregated, and admitted female students as well.181 The Ottoman State Yearbook (Devlet Salnâmesi) from 1327 (1909/10/11/12) shows thirty-eight private Rüşdi (secondary) schools founded by Muslims in Istanbul; fourteen were co-ed (muhtelit) and eight were for girls.182 The Council for the Establishment of Schools of the Ottoman Union (Osmanlı İttihat Mektebleri Heyet-i Tesisiyesi) was linked to the Committee of Union and Progress (CUP), the leading force of the second constitutional movement (1908) in the Empire, and established a number of schools for Ottoman children at various levels, in different parts of the Empire from 1910 onwards, such as the Makriköy Girls' Ottoman Union School (Makriköy İnas İttihad-ı Osmani Mektebi), the Ottoman Union and Progress Girls' Industrial School (Osmanlı İttihat ve Terakki İnas Sanayi Mektebi, 1911), and the School of Ottoman Union Code (Rehber-i İttihâd-ı Osmanî Mektebi)183 in Vaniköy, which was open to boys and girls. Exactly which families sent their children to these schools affiliated with the CUP, and whether these schools communicated certain ideas or ideals to students are yet to be explored in independent research. Another girls' industrial school opened in Istanbul in 1913 through the efforts of one lady, Enise: Beşiktaş İbtidai ve Rüşdi Kız Sanayi

181 Akyüz, Türk Eğitim Tarihi, 154, 179.

182 Salnâme-i Devlet-i Aliyye-i Osmaniye (Dersaadet: Selanik Matbaası, 1327), 362-63. Also see Songül Keçeci Kurt, “Osmanlı Devleti'nde Türklerin Açtığı Özel Mektepler,” Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi 9, no. 19 (2012): 105-23.

183 Mustafa Ergün, II. Meşrutiyet Devrinde Eğitim Hareketleri (1908-1914) (Ankara: Ocak Yayınları, 1996), 240.

75

Mektebi.184 The Garden of Wisdom Girls' School (Ravza-yi İrfan İnas Mektebi) was founded and directed by an Ottoman lady, Fatıma Zişan Hanım. Women of letters, educators and activists, organized around journals and associations, were constantly seeking funding to start more schools for girls, to improve the conditions of existing schools and to provide scholarship opportunities for female students.

Ottoman Muslim families had yet another option to educate their girls. Those who chose to and could afford it, or who couldn't find Muslim girls' schools in their neighborhood, sent them to foreign-run (mostly French and American) women's schools that offered quality instruction and a bilingual approach185 besides their household educations, as is the case of the following important literary and journalistic Muslim women from the late Ottoman period: Müfide Ferit from the Catholic school in Tripoli, Hayriye Melek Hunç from the Catholic school of Notre Dame de Sion in Istanbul, Halide Edib and Gülistan İsmet from the American Girls' College in Istanbul,186 Nigar Hanım from a French boarding school in Kadıköy and Muazzez Tahsin from the Soeurs de l’Assomption school in Kumkapı. These foreign schools that mostly addressed Armenian and Greek populations in the Empire, and the number of the schools that belonged to Ottoman communities, rose dramatically in the 19th century. In 1839, nineteen French Catholic girls' schools existed in Istanbul.187 In 1912-13, many more religious and fifty-two secular (seven of which were high school and college level) French schools existed in

184 Kurnaz, II. Meşrutiyet Döneminde, 100.

185 Yahya Akyüz, “Osmanlı Son Döneminde Kızların Eğitimi ve Öğretmen Faika Ünlüer'in Yetișmesi ve Meslek Hayatı,” Milli Eğitim Dergisi, no. 143 (n.d.): 12-32.

186 See Appendix A in this dissertation.

187 Akyüz, Türk Eğitim Tarihi, 121.

76

Istanbul.188 Including the American Girls' College which opened in Arnavutköy, Istanbul in 1871, a total of eighty-three American and fifty-two British Protestant schools existed in the country according to an 1894 Ottoman inventory.189 In one aspect, the rising number of such schools contributed to the general educational enterprise of the late Ottoman Empire. They served as an alternative for higher-class Muslim families, and they fulfilled the educational needs of non-Muslim communities in the Empire, which were responsible for teaching their primary and secondary level children. Graduates of these schools were better in Western languages and modern sciences than their counterparts who attended Ottoman state institutions. Other than that, Muslim graduates do not display any indications of alienation from an Ottoman-Muslim identity in their writings. On the contrary, most owned an Ottoman/Turkish nationalist spirit with progressivist ideals about their country and the condition of women, exhibiting moderate ties to an Islamic, or Western feminist, tradition. While a few women despised their education in these schools, most praised it.

Zürcher indicates that the number of schools and students in the Empire more than doubled between 1867 and 1895, but the ratio of students to the population still remained very low. It was much higher among the Christian communities in the Empire.190 The literacy rate in the Empire is estimated to have been 2-3% in the early 19th century, and had

188 Ergin, Türkiye Maarif Tarihi, 774-75.

189 Fatma Müge Göçek, “Shifting the Boundaries of Literacy,” 279.

190 Erik J. Zürcher, Turkey: A Modern History (London: Tauris, 2007), 78. The first educational institution for girls in the Ottoman territories is purported to have been opened by the Armenian Patrick Agop Nalyan in Kumpapı in 1741-45. See Selçuk Akşin Somel, Gayrimuslim Okulları Nasıl Azınlık Okullarına Dönüştü (Istanbul: Tarih Vakfı, 2013); Ergin, Türkiye Maarif Tarihi, 751.

77

increased to 10.6 % (17.4% for men and 4.7% for women) by 1927.191 Small financial budgets, lack of both personnel and probably public support192 in some areas, as well as the hastiness to open various schools at once, affected the quality and quantity of state educational institutions, particularly for girls. Nevertheless, the state-sponsored and private educational efforts persisted at varying levels, and middle-class Muslim girls, who did not have the private educational opportunities of the elite women, acquired access to systematic education and formal jobs in teaching, manufacturing and government offices mostly through their study and training in these schools. It may indicate a decline in the power of seniority among women, considering the previous forms of hierarchies with regard to girls' education within families and in the palace.193 Their emergence implied changes both in the number and in the profiles of literate, educated Muslim women in the public sphere by way of publishing, employment and philanthropy in the late 19th century in the Ottoman Empire. Coming from different social and educational backgrounds, their participation in public writing on various topics inevitably affected the inner dynamics and the stability of

191 Stanford J. Shaw and Ezel Kural Shaw, History of the Ottoman Empire and Modern Turkey: vol. 2: Reform, Revolution and Empire: The Rise of Modern Turkey 1808-1975 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977), 387; Kemal Karpat suggests much higher rates for the Empire and specifically for Istanbul. See Kemal Karpat, “Reinterpreting Ottoman History: A Note on the Condition of Education in 1874,” International Journal of Turkish Studies 2, no. 2 (Winter 1981-82): 94-95.

192 An article from 1882 entitled “Muallimelik” complains about the decreasing number of students in the Female Teachers' Training School and parents' negative disposition regarding girls’ learning more than the reading of the Qur'an. The original text: “Kızların öğrenimlerini sürdürebileceği bir okul olan Darülmuallimat'ta da 85 kadar öğrenci bulunuyor ve öğrenci sayısı gittikçe azalıyor. Bu durum neden ileri geliyor? Bize göre bu durumun nedeni ana babalardır. Çünkü biz kız 'elif be üstün be, elif be esre bi, elif be ötrü bü' dedi mi (harfleri okumaya, hecelemeye başlayınca), yahut Amme Cüzünden Eûzü Besmeleyi okudu mu (Kur'an okumaya geçince), artık sormayın, 'hafiz oldu gitti' diye kabul edilir! 'Artık kızımız çok şükür okumaya başladı, Allah nazardan saklasın, peh peh, peh! okuldan aldırmalı, evlilik zamanı geldi' denip zavallı kızlar hemen okuldan alınır.” (Çocuklara Kıraat, no. 7 (1 Cemaziyelevvel 1299 [/1882]), quoted in Akyüz, “Öğretmenlik Mesleği,” 35.

193 Elif Ekin Akşit, “Girls Education and the Paradoxes of Modernity,” 113.

78

the discourse shaping the new Ottoman womanhood by introducing diversity to its producers, as well as their perspectives and self-presentations.

The increase in literacy was a particularly important step towards the emergence of a relatively small community of Muslim women, who as a new breed, were reading, writing and publishing for a general audience. Women of letters who came from various social, political and educational backgrounds, including some higher-class women with household educations, were largely graduates or students of these Ottoman schools. Specifically: Sabiha Z. Sertel194 attended İnas Rüşdiye, Suat Derviş studied in Kadıköy Numune Rüşdiye and Bilgi Yurdu,195 Şukufe Nihal attended Darülfünun, Samiha Ayverdi went to Süleymaniye İnas İdadi (a private Turkish school), Firdevs Hanım studied at İnas İdadi, Ayşe Sıdıka was a student at the Zapyon Greek School, Fatma Servet, Ruhsan Nevvare (Hadiye Ebüzziya) and Hadice Nakiyye studied at Darülmuallimat, Halide Nusret studied at Erenköy İnas Sultani, and, Muazzez Tahsin Berkand went to Feyziye Mektebi. While such late Ottoman female writers as Halide Edib and Gülistan İsmet graduated from the foreign schools of the Empire, others including Sabiha Sertel, Suat Derviş, Emine Semiye and Müfide Ferit pursued a part of their education in foreign countries.196 On the other hand, for half a century, public education practices coexisted with household education.

194 Sabiha Sertel came from a working class family that migrated from Salonica to Istanbul in 1912.

195 An unofficial private institution opened in 1916 aiming to support girls’ and women’s education at different levels.

196 Sabiha Sertel attended İnas Rüşdiye in Salonica and later studied social work at New York School of Social Work (associated with Columbia University). She also attended the courses of well-known sociologists at Columbia University. Suat Derviş went to the Berlin School of Music and Berlin University Faculty of Letters during 1919-20. Emine Semiye, after her household education, studied psychology and sociology in Paris and Switzerland. Similarly, Müfide Ferit, following her household education in Arabic and Persian and studies in Italian and French Catholic schools in Trablus, went to Versailles High School in Paris and later graduated from École des Sciences Politiques.

79

Some women of letters like Fatma Kamile, Fatma Aliye, Güzide Sabri and Nezihe Muhiddin continued solely with private tuition. Household education of elite families had a rooted past; it was of a better quality and was more diverse than the education in state schools,197 and concordantly, it generated prolific literary figures. I will mention some effects that different kinds of education and training had on the literary output of late Ottoman Muslim women in Chapter 4.

A new dimension of Ottoman modernization in the 19th century was the dependence on communication as a means of mass indoctrination and political socialization for multiple actors. This, in conjunction with the establishment of the modern press, opened doors for educated women giving them a new, justifiable way of representing themselves before a wider, mixed gender audience. The expansion of print activity and women’s press in this period facilitated the emergence of women’s new identity as public writers. I will outline below the development of the modern public press and women’s periodicals in the Empire, and their role in generating public discourse and serving women’s literary expression.

Spectateur de l'Orient (later named Courrier de Smyrne), printed by Alexandre Blacque in modern-day Izmir in 1825, was the first publication in newspaper format. The first Turkish language newspaper was a Turkish-Arabic semiweekly published by Mehmed Ali Pasha in Egypt in 1828. The Ottoman government invited Blacque to arrange the

197 As İhsan Raif's mentor in poetry, the prominent political and literary figure Rıza Tevfik, indicated that not going to an official school and being educated privately helped her aptitude in poetry not to lie fallow. See Rıza Tevfik, “İhsan Raif Hanımefendi,” Nevsâl-i Milli (Istanbul: Asar-ı Müfide Kütüphanesi, 1330 [/1914]), 237. Halide Nusret was not sent to a girls’ primary school by her father while in Kirkuk as he thought the school would not provide a quality education. When they returned to Istanbul, her father wanted her to continue her Persian studies with private teachers. See Halide Nusret Zorlutuna, Bir Devrin Romanı, (Istanbul: Timaş, 2009), 73, 99.

80

publication of an official newspaper in Constantinople, to be printed in French, to defend the interests of the Empire; Moniteur Ottoman came out in 1831. Sultan Mahmud II ordered the establishment of a Turkish newspaper and Takvim-i Vekayi (Calendar of Events) came out in 1832 as the official publication of the government, providing information on its policies, laws and events. It was published in Turkish, Arabic and French and sent to a list of civil servants, professionals, intellectuals, foreign ambassadors and consuls. The Sultan advised that the paper should be edited in a popular style and the language should be able to address everybody.198 The first privately owned, Turkish language newspaper Ceride-i Havadis (Journal of Events, 1840) belonged to an Englishman, and it received financial support from the Ottoman government, and mainly published government news. Vakayî-i Tıbbiye (1849-51) was a monthly professional health journal, in Turkish, that also focused on popular topics in the physical sciences.

Women’s issues came to the forefront in the 19th century with the publication of the first private, independent newspapers published by a group of nationalist modern men of letters known as the Young Ottomans, who also contemplated the image of a “new Ottoman woman” for the first time. Ottomans who were trained in new Western-style (military) schools and appointed to the middle- and upper-rank bureaucratic positions had common knowledge about European civilization, modern codes of a state and were intimately acquainted with the policies of the Ottoman government. A group from within met to discuss how to answer the challenge of a European political and economic supremacy, and save the Empire from the dangers of ethnic-religious movements. They developed an

198 Ahmet Emin, The Development of Modern Turkey as Measured by its Press (New York: Columbia University, 1914), 31.

81

allegiance among themselves and gradually generated a political opposition to the absolutism, and superficiality of Tanzimat policies, and advocated principles of constitutional government and liberties, Ottomanism and Islamism. Young Ottomans were the first to use mass communication to voice criticisms of the Ottoman government and to introduce Western political concepts and modern literary genres to Turkey. Tecüman-ı Ahval (Interpreter of Situations, 1860), founded by İbrahim Şinasi and Agah Efendi, was a nonofficial, independent newspaper. Şinasi later left to publish his own newspaper, Tasvir-i Efkâr (Illustrated Ideas). It was devoted to scientific and social matters and particularly worked on the simplification of the language, as reaching literate middle and lower classes required a more accessible language. The prominent Young Ottoman Namık Kemal joined Şinasi's team at Tasvir-i Efkâr in 1862; he himself went on to publish one of the most influential newspapers of the Empire, İbret (Admonition, 1872). The Young Ottomans, who were also men of literature, produced other papers, journals, pamphlets and books in Turkey and in Europe, when they were in exile. In their writings, they broached women's issues among other matters, and introduced a liberal Ottoman view on women, criticizing ignorance, the old customs of marriage, women's idle roles in society and their lower position.199 The growing influence of Western ideas, the decline of the Empire, and a wider community of literate people in the Empire led an increasing number of Ottoman intellectuals200 to use the press and private print as a medium to indicate the necessity for

199 For instance, see Şinasi's Şair Evlenmesi (A Poet's Marriage, 1859) for the earliest-known example of criticism of arranged marriages as well as the first modern play in Turkish, and Namık Kemal's writings in Tasvir-i Efkâr such as “Terbiye-i nisvan hakkında bir layihadır” (A proposal on the education of women, 1867), and İbret 1872 articles, “Aile” (no. 56) and “Maarif” (no. 16).

200 For instance, Ahmet Mithat Efendi, Felsefe-i Zenan (1870); Şemseddin Sami, Kadınlar (1879); Fatma Aliye Hanım, Nisvan-ı İslam (1891), Abdullah Cevdet, Abdülhak Hamit, Süleyman Nazif.

82

improving women's status so as to advance Ottoman society, and to redefine how women needed to be in social and domestic spheres, as a means for outlining appropriate modernity for the Empire.201 The journals, with a manner of encyclopedical publishing, spoke of the importance of education for every Ottoman individual, man, woman and child, and tried to acquaint their readers with every branch of knowledge with articles on science, environment, education, arts, history, health, literature and economy and the advances made in the West. Newspapers and journals in particular played a central role in achieving regular contact with larger groups of people and disseminating news and ideas. Developments in the postal system improved the circulation of the press, which was followed by other mediums of modern communication such as telegraphy (1855) and the railway (1856). Even if relatively small in number, periodicals were found outside urban centers, where they were commonly read aloud at social gatherings.

Both publications in Turkish language, and those oriented to women, showed a steady increase in the late Ottoman period. Publishing was tightly controlled and had its share of instability during the reign of Abdulhamid II (1876-1909), but it progressed, especially with journals of science and literature. It peaked after the restoration of the Constitution in 1908. The official Yearbook for 1872 shows ten periodicals in Turkish and thirty other periodicals in other languages in the Empire. Four years later in 1876, in Constantinople, it was fourty-seven in total, thirteen being in Turkish language.202 There

201 For instance, an article from Terakki (Progress) newspaper reads: “In this progressive age, all advanced nations’ male and female citizens get higher degrees in science and art. Why are we not working for Ottoman women to go further from where they stand now? In France, women endeavor to get the right to vote and work in government institutions. They gained this courage only through education.” Tezer Taşkıran, Cumhuriyetin 50. Yılında Türk Kadın Hakları (Başbakanlık Kültür Müsteşarlığı: Cumhuriyetin 50. Yıldönümü Yayınları, 1973), 30.

83

were a total of 103 Turkish language newspapers and journals between 1879-1907,203 mostly in Istanbul and Salonica, and, between 1908 and 1918, 918 were published in the Empire.204 Muslim-Ottoman printing had produced 3,066 Turkish books by 1876-78 and more than 25,000 distinct titles half a century later, in 1928.205

Periodicals and print books that were oriented towards women followed an evolution similar to that of the press, which is also indicative of the publishers' and authors' interest in cultivating an educated female public, as well as an interest in women's issues. Close to 150 editions of nonfictional informative, educational and opinion books explicitly about women were published during 1875-1907 and this roughly doubled after 1908.206 Twelve Turkish periodicals have been identified in Istanbul libraries as women's journals and newspapers between 1869-1908, one published in Salonica, one in Crimea and ten in Istanbul; and a total of 22 women's periodicals were published between 1908-1923, in Istanbul.207 Privately published periodicals addressing women and children began to appear in the second half of the 19th century, and they played a major role in developing a

202 Salnâme-i Devlet-i Âliyye-i Osmâniye (Istanbul: Darü’t-Tıbaatü’l-Amire, 1289 [/1872]) and Ubicini et Courteille, Etat Présent de l’Empire Ottoman (Paris, J. Dumaine, 1876), quoted in Ahmet Emin, The Development of Modern Turkey, 40-41. Also, see Paul Fesch, Constantinople aux derniers jours d'Abdul-Hamid (Paris: Marcel Rivière, 1907): 34-36.

203 Selim Nüzhet, Türk Gazeteciliği (Istanbul: Devlet Maatbası, 1931), 84-92.

204 Zafer Toprak notes that in 1908-1909, 1910 and 1911 respectively, 353, 130 and 124 newspapers and journals were published. Zafer Toprak, “Fikir Dergiciliğinin Yüz Yılı,” in Türkiye’de Dergiler Ansiklopediler (1849-1984) (Istanbul: Gelişim Yayınları, 1984), 20. See also Hıfzı Topuz, II. Mahmut'tan Holdinglere Türk Basın Tarihi (Istanbul: Remzi Kitapevi, 2003), 84.

205 İrvin Cemil Schick, “Print Capitalism and Women's Sexual Agency,” Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East 31, no. 1 (2011): 197.

206 Schick, “Print Capitalism,” 207.

207 Zehra Toska et al., İstanbul Kütüphanelerindeki Eski Harfli Türkçe Kadın Dergileri Bibliyografyası (1869-1927) (Istanbul: Metis, 1993). Mekteb Müzesi (School Museum, 1913) and Leylak (Lilac, 1914) periodicals are not mentioned in this bibliography.

84

social and cultural context for women’s literary expression. Some were supplements to general-appeal journals, and some were founded as women's journals from the start. Kadınlar Dünyası, Şükûfezar, Parça Boğçası, and Siyanet were the periodicals that were founded or owned by women; others were owned by men. Both men and women contributed to these periodicals; however, Şukûfezar, and Kadınlar Dünyası were entirely, and Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete was mostly, authored by women. They appeared as monthly, weekly, daily and bimonthly publications.

The foundations of Ottoman Muslim women’s public writing can be traced back to the readers' letters (varaka) sent to periodicals such as Terakki (Progress). The senders of the letters were either identified as ladies by the editor because their names were not declared or known, or they used pseudonyms. An early example is a thank-you note to the publishers for the announcement of the first women's gazette.208Another letter, co-signed as “Üç Hanım” (Three Ladies) complained about the ill conditions of the women's-only spaces on the ferries despite their paying the same fare.209 Interestingly, periodicals also attracted illiterate, older-generation women as contributors and readers; an example is a letter that was sent to Terakki that criticized the practice of polygamy as if it was a religious obligation.210 Existence of such contributions indicates an urge among women to voice and communicate their concerns to the general public, and that the public press was a medium for this purpose.

208 “Bir Hanım Tarafından Aldığımız Varakanın Suretidir,” Terakki, no. 85 (Feb. 17, 1869): 3.

209 “Üç Hanım İmzasıyla Matbaamıza Vürud Eden Varakadır,” Terakki, no. 104 (Mar. 17, 1869): 3-4.

210 Bir Hanım, “Lakırdı Lakırdıyı Açar Ünvanıyla ve Bir Hanım İmzasıyla Matbaamıza Vürud Eden Varakadır,” Terakki, no. 83 (Feb. 13, 1869): 3-4.

85

Women used their first names in periodicals as early as the first issues of the first women's journal in Ottoman Turkish, Terakkî-i Muhadderât (Progress of Muslim Women, 1869),211 a weekly edition of the newspaper Terakkî (Progress). Beneath its logo, the journal declared that it welcomed informative contributions. In the third issue, the first signed entry is a reader letter from a woman named Belkıs, in which she indicates that the highly sophisticated language in the first issues of the journal was difficult to follow for many like her; she herself had to ask the help of her father, and requested that it be simplified on behalf of her female fellows.212 The articles dealt with a number of issues: women's lagging behind in education, the significance of being a literate mother, wife and houselady; and some accused men of depriving women of learning.213 Rabia's article in the fifth issue argued that women and men were created equal, and that women had the capacity to acquire knowledge and skills like men, and Western women were proof.214 She also mentioned wanting to regularly write for the journal in order to benefit those of her own sex. A female writer, named Adile, explained that she wrote because she wanted to both encourage other women who were also eager to publish their opinions, and to shame the men who kept their educations to themselves and not therefore benefit people.215 The writers primarily engaged in educating the female public in diverse issues such as children's

211 For a study of the contributing cadre of Terakkî-i Muhadderât, see Ayşenur Kurtoğlu, “Osmanlı Kadınlarının Gazeteleri ile İlk Tanışıklıkları,” İslamiyat 3, no. 2 (Apr.-June 2000): 87-96.

212 “Belkıs Hanım İmzasıyla Gelen Varakadır,” Terakkî-i Muhadderât, no. 3 (28 Haziran 1285 [/1869]): 3.

213 “Hayriye Hanım İmzası ile Vürud Eden Varakadır,” Terakkî-i Muhadderât, no. 5 (13 Temmuz 1285 [/1869]): 3-4; Kamile, “Varaka,” Terakki-i Muhadderat, no. 11 (24 Ağustos 1285 [/1869]): 3-4.

214 Rabia, “Birinci Mesele: Terbiyet-i Hazıramızın Vücub-ı Islahı,” Terakkî-i Muhadderât, no.5 (13 Temmuz 1285 [/1869]): 1-3.

215 Adile, “Varaka,” Terakki-i Muhadderat, no. 3 (28 Haziran 1285 [/1869]): 4.

86

care and education, married life, home management, history, geography, war, health, and current events in foreign countries. Translated excerpts from the Arabic and French press often appeared in the pages of the journal. Women readers praised their journal for awakening them about the significance of learning, and, in turn, expressed their gratitude to the founders for empowering them and taking them seriously. Letters and articles sent from places all over the Empire such as Trabzon, Ünye, Skopje (Üsküp), Shkodёr (İşkodra), Stara Zagora (Eski Zagra) and Sofia show not only the wide reach of the journal but also that many Muslim women were eager to take part in publishing, even if anonymously, as it was in many instances. Moreover, some letters were from illiterate senders; they disclosed that someone else had both read the journal to them and sent the letter, too.

A few subsequent women's periodicals by the late 1880s followed the same patterns with predominantly anonymous writing, with women rarely using their first names and a few male signatures showing up; Vakit yahud Mürebbî-i Muhadderât (Time or The Educator of Muslim Women, 1875), Âyine (Mirror, 1875), Aile (Family, 1880), Hanımlar (Ladies, 1882), and İnsaniyet (Humanity, 1882). Nevertheless, by addressing women specifically, these pioneering periodicals allowed the women they reached out to gain both awareness that they were equally important and competent members of society, and that they could publically identify themselves as members of a collective with common interests. Secondly, they provided a venue for women to exchange views, opinions and information regarding matters of shared concern (such as family and education) as well as topics of general interest, on a much larger scale than was ever possible before. Women's periodicals aided literate women to gradually overcome their reservations about writing

87

and to experiment with genres besides poetry, such as articles, short stories, news pieces and plays.216 They provided an important locus for women, who had up until then mostly figured into literary culture as the objects of writing (as readers) or the subject of writing (as characters), to emerge now as writing subjects.

The last decade of the 19th century found Ottoman women of letters become a more clearly visible cohort with an expanded group of female, as well as male, readers. A discursive environment created by nationalist considerations regarding the importance of learning for the modern individual and society, in addition to the late Ottoman educational undertaking explained above, the availability and accessibility of various print material including the foreign press, as well as the formation of a general sensitivity towards women-related issues created an increased level of literacy and intellectual formation among girls. It meant a wider number of females in the Empire who were interested in reading and participating in publishing217 in order to share opinion, build a literary identity and disseminate knowledge. Women's journalistic and individual print activity expanded accordingly during this time, and a growing number of female writers began to publish using their own names. Writing seemed to be the most novel and effective means to prove to the public, whether Ottoman or foreign, that their kind could be as capable and as knowledgeable as others and their inferiority was not inherent as claimed.218 Periodicals in

216 Among men and women, Ottoman prose did not develop to the degree that poetry did until the 19th century. A proliferation of publishing through print and journalistic press and increasing familiarity with Western literary models boosted the promotion of new genres in the Empire.

217 The students and the graduates of the Darülmuallimât (Female Teachers’ Training Schools), for instance, were frequent writers for women's periodicals. After the 1890s, these teachers came to represent in the press the educated Ottoman Muslim girls coming from the new public schools.

218 See the preface of the first journal owned by women which reads: “We are a group of people that are made fun of by men by being called long-haired and short-minded. We will strive to prove the opposite.”

88

general became the chief instrument for Ottoman Muslim women, who were figured as a subject of writing or at best readers until then, to gain their visibility and training as writing women. They prepared the scene in many ways for the succeeding generations of women who authored their own works. The following list illustrates the increasing role of periodicals in the emergence of Muslim women of letters as a group of agents in the discursive public field:

Şükûfezar (Flower Garden, 1883/86), Mürüvvet (Munificence, 1887), Parça Boğçası (Bundle of Clothes, 1889), Hanımlara Mahsus Malumât (Information for Ladies, 1895), Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete (Ladies’ Own Newspaper, 1895), Alem-i Nisvân (Women's World, 1906), Kadın [Salonica] (Woman, 1908), Mahâsin (Aesthetics, 1908), Demet (Bunch, 1908), Kadın [Istanbul] (Woman, 1911), Musavver Kadın (Illustrated Women's, 1911), Kadınlar Dünyası (Women's World, 1913), Erkekler Dünyası (Men's World, 1913), Mekteb Müzesi (School Museum, 1913), Kadınlık Hayatı (Life of Womanhood, 1ü913), Seyyale (Flow, 1914), Siyânet (Safeguarding, 1914), Kadınlar Alemi (Women's World, 1914), Hanımlar Alemi (Ladies' World, 1914), Kadınlık (Womanhood, 1914), Leylak (Lilac, 1914), Bilgi Yurdu Işığı (Light of the House of Knowledge, 1917), Türk Kadını (Turkish Woman, 1918), Genç Kadın (Young Woman, 1918), Genç Kadın (Young Woman, 1919), İnci/ Yeni İnci (Pearl/ New Pearl, 1919), Diyâne (Our Mother, 1920), Hanım (Lady, 1921), Süs (Adornment, 1923), and Ev Hocası (Private Tutor, 1923).219

Arife, “Mukaddime,” Şükûfezar, no. 1 (1301 [/1886]): 6. Similarly, the longest-running women's periodical, Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete (1895-1908), announced in its first issue that publishing women's works will show that Ottoman women had natural abilities. Again, defending Ottoman women against Émile Julliard, Fatma Aliye pointed out that Ottoman women not only read but even wrote novels. Fatma Aliye, “Nisvan-ı İslam ve Bir Fransız Muharriri,” Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete, no. 91 (5 Kanunievvel 1312 [/1896]): 5-6.

89

Most of these had a short run, but some, like Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete and Kadınlar Dünyası, had longer life spans; they published 612 and 208 issues, respectively. Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete continued for thirteen years and had a readership in Russia and Egypt as well. Its longevity proved that it was successful in increasing visibility of a contemporary community of Muslim women writers. The newspaper announced in its first issue that it aimed to equip women with knowledge, reflect the opinions of its contributing women, and by publishing their works, show that Ottoman women had natural abilities.220 Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete had a printing press which published books by some of its writers who gained substantial writing experience there and in other general-appeal periodicals like Tercümân-ı Hakîkat (Interpreter of the Truth) and Hazîne-i Fünûn (Treasure of Sciences). Those books included Nigâr binti Osman's Niran (1896), Makbule Leman's Ma’kes-i Hayâl (1897/8), and Fatma Aliye's Levâyih-i Hayât (1899), Terâcim-i Ahvâl-i Felâsife (1899) and Tedkîk-i Ecsâm (1899). Other contributors to Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete who published their own books were Emine Seher, Leyla Saz, Fatma Fahrünnisa, Hamiyet Zehra, Güzide Sabri and Keçeçizade İkbal.

After 1908, male writers were more present as contributors in such revolutionary periodicals as Kadın Salonica, Mahâsin, Demet, Kadın Istanbul, and Musavver Kadın. Women from non-Muslim Ottoman communities such as Loksandra Aslanidi,221 as well as non-Ottoman, foreign women of letters were attracted to the Muslim women’s press in the subsequent period with the emergence of feminist periodical Kadınlar Dünyası in 1913,

219 Based on Zehra Toska et al., İstanbul Kütüphanelerindeki Eski Harfli Türkçe Kadın Dergileri Bibliyografyası (1869-1927) (Istanbul: Metis, 1993).

220 “Tahdis-i Nimet, Tayin-i Meslek,” Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete, no. 1 (1311 [/1895]): 3.

221 For her letter to the women writers of Kadınlar Dünyası, see Loksandra Aslanidi, “Kadınlar Dünyası Muharrirlerine,” Kadınlar Dünyası, no. 62 (4 Haziran 1329 [/1913]): 4.

90

which was owned, operated and authored exclusively by women, and had a much longer lifespan than other similar journals (Parça Bohçası and Şükufezar). The journal’s headline announced on its front page that its pages were open to the works of all Ottoman women without discriminating against race or creed.222 Foreign women contributors, such as Grace Ellison, Odette Feldmann, Berthe de Launay, Berthe Dangeness, Amelie Frisch, Madam Dugue de la Fauconneire, Lucy Tomayon, Fahr-ül Benat Süleymanova, Lia Hurşi and Frieda Oscar, also contributed to the journal. The prolific writer Halide Edib started to publish stories, prose poems, letters and opinion pieces in general-appeal periodicals such as Resimli Kitap and Tanin after 1908. In Kadınlar Dünyası’s 33rd issue, an advertisement proudly informs its readers that Halide Hanımefendi was publishing her story “Bir Kadın İçin” (For a Woman) in a series in the “men’s” Tanin newspaper,223 which demonstrates another example of the periodicals' role in encouraging and promoting female writers as well as being communication between women. Also, women's periodicals often provided pieces about the lives, works and activities of famous women and female literary personalities from the past and the present, Muslim or non-Muslim. In the journal Demet (1908), for instance, Logofet Fuat introduced Madam Zabel Asador, Madam Duchabes Paşa and Madam Zabel Yesayan in the section, “Osmanlı Meşâhir-i Nisvânı” (Famous Ottoman Women); and Asaf Nefi introduced Madam de Sévigné, Madam Roland and Madam de Borde Valmor under “Kadın Muharrirler” (Women Writers).224 It served to reformulate the gendered representations of female identity before the Ottoman Muslim

222 The original: “Sehaifimiz cins ve mezheb tefrik etmeksizin Osmanlı hanımları asarına küşadedir.”

223 Kadınlar Dünyası, no. 33 (6 Mayıs 1329 [/1913]): 4.

224 Logofet Fuat, Demet, no. 1, 2, 6; Asaf Nefi, Demet, no. 3, 5, 7.

91

reading public by attempting to further establish writing as a justified and respectable public activity for women.

I will be looking at the evolution of Ottoman Muslim women’s identity as public writers in three chronological phases: In the early phase (1869- early 1880s), women were enthusiastic about writing as a new field, strived to write more beautifully each time, and enjoyed sharing every idea or piece of information with others through writing. The fact that women wrote to women's periodicals about personal experiences, observations and issues demonstrates that women embraced their publications as a collectively owned space. The next phase (late 1880s-1890s) is characterized by the first appearance, and a search for a literary and intellectual identification of well-known female figures in late Ottoman writing,225 and by the increasing number of middle class women who had entered the field of publishing. Lastly, in the 1900s-1910s, literary activity continued serving both the public good and personal advancement, but it merged with social and political activities. The Balkan Wars of 1912-13 impacted women's mobility in the public and many women, including renowned writers such as Nezihe Muhiddin, Emine Semiye, Ulviye Mevlan, Halide Edib, Fatma Aliye, Fehime Nüzhet and Nigâr binti Osman, were actively giving public speeches and working with charity and welfare organizations.226 These institutions

225 Makbule Leman published her first poem “Hazan” in 1884/5?, another poem in 1887, and a letter in 1888 in a general-appeal journal, Tercüman-ı Hakikat. Nigar binti Osman published in the women's journal Mürüvvet in 1887, the same year she published her book Efsus, and in 1889 published in Parça Boğçası women's journal. Fatma Aliye's first published work was a translation of Volonté by George Ohnet under Meram which appeared in 1890, and she continued publishing letters, informative pieces and translations in Tercüman-ı Hakikat in 1890, 1891, 1892, which was then followed by her first books Hayal ve Hakikat, Nisvan-ı İslam, Muhâdarât.

226 For a short history and historiography of the late Ottoman women's organizations, see Nicole A.N.M. Van Os, “Ottoman Women's Organizations: sources of the past, sources for future,” Islam and Christian-Muslim Relations 11, no. 3 (2000). For the list of organizations, also see Şefika Kurnaz, II. Meşrutiyet Döneminde Türk Kadını (Istanbul: M.E.B. Yayınları, 1996).

92

were founded to support soldiers, orphans, students, women, immigrants and the needy, as well as defend women's rights, support their studies and increase their social and economic participation, or through conferences and public speeches in support of nationalistic goals. Newly encountered in periodicals' pages in this period are announcements of women’s organizations, public speeches227 and mutual and group debates on specific issues among women writers or between female and male writers. In this period, more serialized literary works, such as novels and biographies, came out as individual works thereupon.228 Moreover, specialization in various topics229 and different genres in periodicals among women of letters are noticeable. Ottoman women’s writing intended for an international readership in European languages can be viewed as part of this general increase in women's publishing. Selma Ekrem's (Unveiled), Melek Hanım's (“How I Escaped from the Harem..” and Abdul Hamid's Daughter: The Tragedy of an Ottoman Princess) and Zeyneb Hanım's (A Turkish Women's European Impressions) works emerged into the forum of harem literature in the West. These developments in women’s writing and writing women’s public roles, their affiliations and contacts further revealed their varying self-representations and subjectivities, and the diversity of their concerns, perspectives and proximities to the predominant ideologies of the period, which will be explored in Chapter 5.

227 Darülfünun Konferans Salonu'nda Kadınlarımızın İçtimaları (Istanbul: Tanin Matbaası, 1329 [/1912/3/4]); P.B., “Beyaz Konferanslar,” (White Conferences; speeches by Fatma Nesibe Hanımefendi), ed. (müst.) Süleyman Bahri, Kadın, no. 14, 15, 16, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 (1327-1328/1911-12).

228 Halide Edib, “Raik'in Annesi,” Resimli Roman Mecmuası, no. 2 (1 Nisan 1325 [/1909]): 71-119; “Handan,” Tanin, no. 1213-1282 (1327 [/1912]); “Yeni Turan,” Senin (Tanin), no. 42/1435-52/1481 ([/1912]); Bir Kadın ve Ahmet Mithat, “Hayal ve Hakikat,” Tercüman-ı Hakikat (1891).

229 Such as family, attire, history, education, economy, philosophy.

93

4.2 Literary Tradition of Ottoman Muslim Women

For the most part, Ottoman women wrote poetry, the predominant literary genre between the 15th and the late 19th centuries. Women from every segment of society, with different religious practices, whether it was folk or court poetry, were influenced by the mystic thought cultivated in the dervish lodges (tekke) and generated poems dedicated to divine love. Female poets were vastly present particularly in folk literature, which relied heavily on oral culture rather than written, as it is in the Alawite-Bektashi poetic tradition. They were attracted to such poetic forms as the koşma (ballad), türkü (folk song) and mani (rhyming four-line stanza). In the Bektashi tradition, poetry known as the nefes (“breath [of spirit]”) genre is created to be chanted or recited (“şiir söylemek,” to sing or deliver poetry) in ritual settings. The fact that the general name for a wise, poetic utterance is “deme” or “deyiş” (saying) and that the verb denoting poetry production is “şiir düzmek” (to fix poetry), and not “şiir yazmak” (to write poetry), imply that poetry is primarily an oral venture in this particular culture. Moreover, some female poets of the Bektashi order such as Havva Bacı, Hürmüz Hanım230 and Emine Beyza Bacı, as well as many female folk poets who improvised such as Sünbüle Kadın, Âşık Emine, Şerife Soykan, and Aşık Ayşe Berk, were illiterate. Still, some were learned women and committed their poetry to writing, such as Afîfe Sultan Kadın Efendi (17th cc) and Zarifî Hanım (19th cc). The Bektashi and folk poets we are aware of today mostly lived in the 19th century, had been in or close to Istanbul, or had their poetry recorded or collected in mecmua and cönk books. Creating poetry in these traditions required more familiarity with their culture and literature

230 It has been relayed that Hürmüz Hanım's husband, Servet Baba, recorded her poetry but most of her work ended up getting lost during the Balkan Wars (1912-13). See Bahadır İbrahim, Alevi ve Sünni Tekkelerinde Kadın Dervişler (Istanbul: Su, 2005), 197.

94

than an execution of literacy; it provided women with relatively more freedom due to their informal and popular nature as it was embedded in the moral-spiritual values and belief practices of the local community in which it was produced.

More formal settings afforded less opportunity for women of letters. Only about 35 female divan (Ottoman court) poets are included in the biographical dictionaries of poets, as opposed to 400 male poets. Among them are Mihri, Zeynep Hatun, Hubbî 'Aişe, Tuti, Sıdkî, Anî Fatma, Zübeyde Fitnat, Safvet, Moralızade Leylâ, Adile Sultan, Sırri and Şeref. We only have in hand the poetry collections of eleven of them.231 Some of the genres and forms women commonly used in divan poetry232 were ghazel (praise of love), ilâhi (religious hymns), munâcaat (plea to God), naat (praise to the Prophet), and tarikh (choronogram). Women wrote qasida (eulogy to great personage) and mesnevis (lengthy narratives) as well; some were written by Hubbî 'Aişe, (Zübeyde) Fıtnat, Leylâ and Mihri, and some, like Leyla, composed sharqis (poetry written to be performed in classical music). Some of the divan poets, like Tevhide and Saniye, were also attracted to the poetic forms that were more common in folk literature, like koşma and destan (epic).

New poetic forms, themes, and imagery, as well as modern genres, which were introduced to Turkish literature in the second half of the 19th century from the West, began to to become more widely circulated following the birth of an independent public press with the initiative of Şinasi in 1860, and thus created more opportunities for the emergence of the voice of the new women. Women's published poetry of the time demonstrates that

231 Didem Havlioğlu, “On the Margins and Between the Lines: Ottoman Women Poets from the Fifteenth to the Twentieth Centuries,” Turkish Historical Review, no.1 (2010): 27-28.

232 For information about the forms of divan poetry, see E. J. W. Gibb, A History of Ottoman Poetry, vol. 1 (London: Luzac & Co., 1900), 70-103.

95

there were those who showed interest early on in novel approaches when writing poetry, such as Nigar binti Osman, while many like Leylâ (Saz), Mahşah, (Trabzonlu) Fitnat and Hadice İffet continued using the classical forms and themes of divan poetry in this period. At the turn of the century, parallel to the ideological needs of incipient Turkish nationalism, patterns of folk poetry, particularly a simplified expression and use of syllabic meter, gained popularity, indicating a trend towards a kind of “national poetry” and split from divan poetry. The lyric poet and composer İhsan Raif Hanım (1877-1926) pioneered the movement with her zealous use of plain Turkish, syllabic meter, and use of the forms of folk literature such as ninni, türkü, koşma, mani, not only on emotional topics, but also on national and everyday topics as well, before they gained precedence in literary circles.233 Nevertheless, when it comes to verse, compared to a great number of male poets in the Turkish literary tradition, there were only a few women who produced high-quality and exceptional poetry in writing, and that is both because the female poet lacked for centuries a hospitable social habitat that would allow her a name and fame publically, and because she strove to write from within a dominant poetry tradition (divan) that called for rather fixed metaphors and imagery of a masculine lover and his sensibility.234 Kemal Silay noted that borrowing from the canonized language of classical poetry, which was designed to express male desires and fantasies, was a way for the Ottoman female poet to negotiate her entrance into public writing, which in turn worked to destabilize gendered values.235

233 Mehmet Emin once mentioned two names who pursued national poetry in the stricter sense: İhsan Raif and Rıza Tevfik. See Ruşen Eşref, Diyorlar Ki…, ed. Şemsettin Kutlu (Istanbul: M.E.B. Kültür Yayınları, 1972), 146, 148. Also see Servet-i Fünun 59, no. 1548-74 (Apr. 15, 1926): 343-44; Kenan Akyüz, Batı Tesirinde Türk Şiiri Antolojisi (Istanbul: İnkılap, 1985), 589.

234 Nazan Bekiroğlu, “Osmanlıda Kadın Şairler,” Nazan Bekiroğlu (blog), accessed July 11, 2015, http://www.nazanbekiroglu.com/2000/01/02/osmanlida-kadin-sairler/.

96

Ottoman women's personal narratives in prose included diaries, memoirs and letters. Works of this nature are thought not to be common in premodern Ottoman literature in general as it presumably “required a strong sense of individuality which medieval (read “pre-Westernization” for the Near East) men and women lacked,” but there are many.236 Yet, the only such example by an Ottoman woman from this period before the 19th century is the dream-log of a 17th- century mystic woman from Skopje named Asiye Hatun. She recorded her dreams and daydreams in Turkish, in the form of letters to her şeyh (master in the dervish order) as she sought advice in becoming a better mystic. The pamphlet discovered by Cemal Kafadar in the Topkapi Palace Library is dated 1702/1703 by its copyist and contains the şeyh's letters of response as well.237 Nigar binti Osman's “journal” kept during 1887-1918 is another rare example of an Ottoman woman's daily recording of her personal experiences. It was partially published by her sons in 1959, long after her death, and seven of the nineteen total volumes are missing. Fatma Aliye's contributions to her own biography (Fatma Aliye yahut Bir Muharrire-i Osmaniyenin Neşeti, 1895) in the form of letters from different points of her life are told in the in the first person, and constitute another pre-Republic example of a personal narrative by an Ottoman female writer.

235 Kemal Silay, “Singing His Words: Ottoman Women Poets and the Power of Patriarchy,” in Women in the Ottoman Empire: Middle Eastern Women in the Early Modern Era, ed. Madeline C. Zilfi (Leiden: Brill, 1997), 212-13.

236 For examples of such autobiographical narratives, see Cemal Kafadar, “Self and Others: The Diary of a Dervish in Seventeenth Century Istanbul and First-Person Narratives in Ottoman Literature,” Studia Islamica, no. 69 (1989): 121-50. For instance, the diary entitled Sohbetname was written by a dervish, Seyyid Hasan, between 1661-65.

237 Cemal Kafadar, Kim var imiş biz burada yoğ iken: Dört Osmanlı: Yeniçeri, Tüccar, Derviş ve Hatun (Istanbul: Metis, 2009), 123-91.

97

Memoirs, diaries and other autobiographical narratives by the Ottomans can be traced back to the 16th century.238 Ottoman women's memoirs originated from the last generation of Ottoman women born amid a heavy social transformation period just before the founding of the Republic. They typically recorded not only the personal but also the collective memory that was taking shape around the author-subject. Leyla Saz's (1850-1936) recollections of her life was published in a series in the Vakit and İleri newspapers between 1920-21; they spanned six decades of her life and sought to transmit a detailed account of the people, the environment and the workings of the imperial palace in which she spent her early years in, paying attention to women, attire, marriage customs in Istanbul, and social and political life in Crete and Prizren, where she lived. A comparable work, Harem Life (1931) was written by Javidan Khanam (Hanım), one of the wives of Abbas Hilmi II, the governor of Egypt. The book presents a critical account of the historical evolution of the harem and transmits the author's experiences and observations of harem life in the imperial palaces of Istanbul and Egypt.239 Fatma Aliye's Nisvân-ı İslam (1891/2) recounts three of the author's meetings and conversations with her female European guests, which is seemingly more passive as an autobiographical narrative and was penned in order to correct Western misperceptions about the lives of women in the harem, Ottoman society and within the context of Islam. Such narratives significantly contribute to our knowledge of the lives of the Ottoman upper-class women.

238 Such as the captivity memoir of a courtier of Selim II dated 1570, Sultan Murad III's (r. 1574-1595) dream-log, and Gelibolulu Mustafa Ali's autobiographic essay of several pages in his Counsel for Sultans (1581).

239 Javidan Hanım's real name is Marianne May Török de Szendrö (1877-1968). She converted to Islam when she married the governor of Egypt. Her memoirs incorporate her diary as well.

98

At the turn of the century, nationalism influenced more female writers to become memorialists. The abundance of memoirs in the postrevolutionary era (1908) indicates the wish to form narratives that would make sense both for the writer and for giving an account of the period. The examples are many: Mediha Kayra’s personal notebook, completed in 1917/8, and published under the title Hoşça Kal Trabzon (Goodbye Trabzon) in 2005240; Halide Edib's Memoirs of Halide Edib (1926); Melek Hanım's essay “How I Escaped from the Harem” published in Strand Magazine in February 1926; Selma Ekrem's Unveiled (1930); Nezihe Muhiddin's Türk Kadını (1931); Sabiha Sertel's Roman Gibi (1969); and Halide Nusret Zorlutuna's Bir Devrin Romanı (1978). These women lived in the public eye, and for the most part, featured an “undomestic,” public self at the expense of the private self in their memoirs.241 Güzide Sabri's short essay, “Hatıratımdan Birkaç Yaprak” (A Few Leaves From My Memories), was included in her 1934 book Gecenin Esrarı; it stands more as a personal recounting that is reflective of the author's guarded literary manner.

Many Ottoman imperial women in the premodern period such as Hafsa Hatun, Hurrem, Ayşe Sultan, Hatice Sultan, Safiye, and Nurbanu were active correspondents. Their letters to the sultan and to others in and outside of the palace attested to an active participation in the workings of the state and the palace and disclosed the intimate dimensions of their lives and relationships in the 16th century. Changes in women's public education in the modern period gradually resulted in more nonelite, urban women writing their own personal and official letters. Petitions by women, for instance, in the late 19th and

240 Mediha Kayra, Hoşça Kal Trabzon, Bir Kız Çocuğunun Günlüğünden Birinci Dünya Savaşında Anadolu, ed. Cahit Kayra (Istanbul: Dünya, 2005).

241 Hülya Adak comments on the nonprivate nature of women's autobiographies of this period in her article “Suffragettes of the Empire, Daughters of the Republic: Women Auto/biographers Narrate National History (1918-1935),” New Perspectives on Turkey, no. 36 (2007): 27-51.

99

early 20th centuries came out less neat but more original, as they were handwritten by the women rather than by a professional petition-writer.242 Women's initial participation in public writing in the second half of the 19th century was achieved once again through letters which they sent to periodicals as readers and contributors, which allowed communication with a larger audience as well as allow them to solidify a public literary identity. More often than not, the female reader and writer wrote a public letter to get in contact with and directly address a specific writer in the press to thank him/her, criticize him/her, or deliver comments on an earlier writing.243 Ottoman women writers and poets of the modern period regularly penned personal letters to exchange information, news and advice on literary, intellectual, political, daily and personal matters with other literati of both sexes, as well as mentors, friends, and family. Some letters with suitable content were published publicly at the time, such as the exchange between Fatma Fahrünnisa and Emine Semiye where they discuss their own novels, in addition to Western novels, and they evaluate the purpose of fiction.244 Some other personal correspondence of late Ottoman female literati contain autobiographical data, such as Fatma Aliye's correspondence with her mentor Ahmet Mithat245; Emine Semiye's letters to her older sister Fatma Aliye and her correspondence with the writer and poet Nigar binti Osman246; Halide Edib's letters to her friend Florence

242 See Elif Ekin Akşit, “Girls’ Education and the Paradoxes of Modernity and Nationalism in the Late Ottoman Empire and the Early Turkish Republic” (PhD diss., Binghamton University, 2004), 113.

243 For instance, Binti Ahmed Remziye, “Mir-i Marifetperver,” Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete, no. 72 (18 Temmuz 1312 [/1896]): 2-3.

244 Emine Semiye, “Fazıla-i şehire ismetli Fatma Fahrunnisa Hanımefendi hazretlerine cevap,” Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete, no. 109 (17 Nisan 1313 [/1897]): 7.

245 F. Samime İnceoğlu and Zeynep Süslü Berktaş, eds. Fazıl ve Feylesof Kızım Fatma Aliye'ye Mektuplar (Istanbul, Klasik, 2011).

100

Billings247; the poet (Trabzonlu) Fitnat's letters to her relative, neighbor and lover, the prominent writer Ahmet Mithat248; Selma Rıza's letters to her friends, family and famous contemporaries249; and İhsan (Raif)'s letters to her teacher Rıza Tevfik's family.250 Zeyneb Hanım's letters to her British journalist friend Grace Ellison, written during her time in Europe (1906-12), relay anecdotes from her life back in Constantinople and share her experiences of the “West” in a comparative manner.251 Taha Toros also mentions Selma Rıza’s correspondence with the League of Nations in Geneva regarding the deteriorating social condition in Istanbul under the rule of occupying forces and asking them to take action.252

The letter form was also used in various literary genres in early modern Turkish literature, particularly the story and the novel. It facilitated the expression of the self in the “first person” and did it with less social pressure, as it seemed to allow the narrator to distance themselves from the author while owning direct speech. It also allowed for an indirect way of communicating messages. The late Ottoman woman writer commonly used

246 Şefika Kurnaz, “Emine Semiye'nin Ablası Fatma Aliye'ye Mektupları,” Türkbilig, no. 14 (2007): 131-42; Şefika Kurnaz, “Emine Semiye ile Nigar Hanım’ın Mektuplaşmaları,” Turkish Studies 2, no. 4 (Fall 2007): 631-46.

247 Nicole A.N.M. Van Os, “Halide Edib'in Florence Billings'e Yazdığı İngilizce Mektuplar “Bu da Ghejer...”,” Tarih ve Toplum 38, no. 234 (June 2003): 4-12.

248 Hakkı Tarık Us, Ahmet Mithat Efendi ile Şair Fitnat Hanım (Istanbul: Vakit Matbaası, 1948).

249 We have in hand her letters, some from Paris, to such people as Ebuzziya Tevfik, Samipaşazade Sezai, with whom she had familial affinity, Yakup Kadri, and her sister. See Abdullah Uçman, “Selma Rıza'nın Mektupları,” Tarih ve Toplum 40, no. 235 (July 2003): 39-43.

250 Abdullah Uçman, “Bazı Kadın Mektupları,” Tarih ve Toplum 31, no. 183 (Mar. 1999): 40-46.

251 Zeyneb Hanoum, A Turkish Woman’s European Impressions, ed. Grace Ellison (Philadelphia, J.B. Lippincott Co.; London: Seeley, Service and Co. Ltd., 1913).

252 Taha Toros, “A Woman Journalist Amongst the Young Turks /İlk Türk Kadın Gazeteci Selma Rıza,” Skylife (Feb. 1994): 66.

101

the letter form in this way. Emine Semiye's novel Bîkes, Halide Nusret's novel Küller, Nigar binti Osman's Safahât-ı Kalb, Fatma Aliye's Levâyih-i Hayât, which tells the stories of five women through letters sent to each other, Salime Servet's story “Bir Mektup,” and her novel Bir Hatıra-i Pejmurde, Sadiye Vesile's Milli Kadın Mektupları,253 and many other novels and independent stories254 employed this form.

While the post-WWI era Ottoman state realized several changes in the status of women regarding marriage and public attire, their being able to travel alone was still an issue of debate in the parliament. At times, late Ottoman women who were able to travel to other lands, in and outside of the Empire, recorded their observations in their personal or public letters or integrated them into their memoirs, such as Leyla Saz's account of Crete and Prizren did, and the second half of Halide Edib's memoirs dedicated to her time in Syria and the Arab lands. Lengthy and specialized editions of women's travel narratives published in Ottoman times are rare but exist: When Fatma Fahrünnisa's family did not consent to her wanting to go to Crete but allowed her to the city of Bursa, which is much closer, she went there with a group of friends and stayed for eleven days. Her description of Bursa was serialized in the periodical Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete (Ladies’ Own Newspaper) in 1896.255 Emine Semiye's notes of her trip to Salonica in the same 253 Sadiye Vesile, Milli Kadın Mektupları (Dersaadet: Cemiyyet Kütübhanesi, 1330 [/1911/2]).

254 For more information about the use of the letter form as a narrative style in Turkish literature and examples from women writers, see Emel Kefeli, Anlatım Tekniği Olarak Mektup (Istanbul: Kitabevi Yay., 2002); Betül Coşkun, “Kadınların İtiraf Vasıtası Olarak Mektup Hikayeler -Tanzimat'tan Cumhuriyet'e-,” A. Ü. Türkiyat Araştırmaları Enstitüsü Dergisi [TAED], no. 50 (2013): 119-36; and Ömer Çakır, “Türk Edebiyatında Mektup” (master's thesis, Gazi Üniversitesi, 2005).

255 Fatma Fahrünnisa, “Hüdâvendigâr Vilayetinde Kısmen Bir Cevelân,” Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete, no. 42-63 (Jan.-May 1896).

102

periodical256 were followed by her other travel writings, which indicates her attraction to the genre: ten letters of hers were published about her visit to the city of Veria (Karaferye) in which she described the city and its social, geographical and historical characteristics.257 Her extended narrative about a trip to the Serres Plateau in the summer of 1906 is included in her book of collected essays, Kalem Tecrübeleri.258 Nigar binti Osman sent a letter of appreciation to Emine Semiye upon initial publication about the Salonica trip and underlined the importance of such writings for those like herself who have never travelled.259

Ottoman translations in the classical period were mainly of Arabic and Persian manuscripts with literary and scientific content, and they often included analysis, summarization, responses and copying as well. A 16th- century Turkish translation of an Arabic work of Al-Dimashqi, included in İmâdu'l-Cihâd (The Pillar of Jihad), is argued to have belonged to the female poet Hubbî 'Aişe,260 and so it may constitute an example of women's translation activity in this period. Modern period translations into Turkish were

256 Semiye binti Cevdet, “Hemşire-i Keremkârım Efendim,” Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete, no. 69 (27 Haziran 1312 [/1896]); Emine Semiye binti Cevdet, Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete, no. 76, 88 (19 Ağustos 1312; 14 Tesrinisani 1312 [/1896]). The letters are addressed to her friend Nigar binti Osman and describe the places she has seen during her travel, and Salonica and its surroundings. For more information, see Şefika Kurnaz, “Emine Semiye ile Nigar Hanım'ın Mektuplaşmaları,” 631-46.

257 Emine Semiye, “Karaferye Mektupları,” Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete, no. 327-26 (1901-1903), later included in İktitaf (National Library, Yz. A 2693, A4581, 4582).

258 Emine Semiye, Kalem Tecrübeleri (National Library, Yz. A2685). 259 The original: “Selanik şehrinin ahval-i umumiyyesine dair inâyeten i’ta buyurulan malumat bizim gibi hiç seyahat etmemişler nezdinde ne kadar büyük bir ehemmiyetle telakki olunsa sezâdır.” Nigar binti Osman, “Vefaşiarım, Efendim, Hemşirem,” Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete, no. 69 (27 Haziran 1312 [/1896]): 3–4.

260 Müjgan Cunbur, “İmâdü’l-Cihâd ve XVI. Yüzyıl Kadın Şairlerinden Ayşe Hubbî Kadın,” IX. TTK: Kongreye Sunulan Bildiriler, vol. 2 (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Yayınları,1988), 901-913.

103

largely technical, scientific and medical works written in European languages, but this expanded into the areas of literature, politics, education and philosophy. Among the independent editions published by women: Azize Hanım's abridged translation of Notre-Dame de Paris as Garib Nine (1875); a translation of a book by Paul Féval entitled Paris Sevdaları, which anonymously belonged to “Bir Kız” (A Girl)261; Fatma Aliye's translation of Volonté by George Ohnet as Merâm (1889-90); Halide Edib's Mâder (published with Mahmud Esad’s revisions in 1896) from The Mother at Home; or, The Principles of Maternal Duty by John S. C. Abbott; and Zeyneb Sünbül's Bir Küçük Seyahat-nâme (1904) translated from the original by Bernardin de Saint-Pierre. In the meantime, articles, lecture notes, letters, stories, poetry and current news that appeared in European, American and non-Turkish Ottoman publications appeared in the pages of Ottoman Turkish periodicals, books and annals as translations or as commentary. Arife, the founder of the Şükûfezar journal, has a translated story in the fifth issue of this journal, “Neva Nehri Sahilinde Bir Yaz Gecesi” (1887). Nigar binti Osman translated pieces from Western poets and writers and included some in her own books, such as: “Tahattur Et” and “Bir Çiçeğe” by Alfred de Musset, “İki Hemşire” by Jeanne d'Estraime, “Davet” by Carlos Buriyo/Biryo, “Madam ile Doktor Beyninde” by Alber Laduka, “Prenses Rataci/Ratocki'nin Mektupları” (Letters of Princess Rataci), and “Armand'dan Kalamanis'e” (From Armand to Kalamanis).262

261 The translator is not mentioned in the manuscript (1307), and it is not known if she was a Muslim woman but it was recorded as “Bir Kız” (A Girl) in M. Seyfettin Özege, Eski Harflerle Basılmış Türkçe Eserler Kataloğu 3 (L – P) (Istanbul: Fatih Yayınevi, 1975), 1397; see Ayşe Banu Karadağ, “Tanzimat Dönemi'nden İkinci Meşrutiyet Dönemi'ne Kadın Çevirmenlerin Çeviri Tarihimizdeki “Dişil” İzleri,” Humanitas, no. 2 (Fall 2013): 109.

262 “Tahattur Et” is included in Efsus 1 (1887); “Bir Çiçeğe” is in the 2nd edition of Efsus 1 (1891); “İki Hemşire” and “Davet” are found in Niran (1896); “Madam ile Doktor Beyninde” and some of “Prenses Rataci'nin Mektupları” are included in Aks-i Seda (1899). See Nazan Bekiroğlu, Şair Nigar Hanım (Istanbul: İletişim, 1998), 310. Nigar binti Osman's translation “Armand'dan Kalamanis'e” was serialized in Hanımlara

104

Fatma Aliye's translations of the 18th- century mathematician Leonhard Euler’s letters to the German Princess, on the topics of physics and philosophy, were serialized in Tercümân-ı Hakikat in 1890. Muallime Nazmiye contributed to the Women's Annal (Nevsal-i Nisvân), with a translated piece entitled “Tulu'i-Şems.”263 Fatma Fahrünnisa's translated story “İlk Tecrübe” by S. Robe appeared in Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete (no. 97). “Şıklık Faciası” (A Fashion Disaster) was a translation of Gülistan İsmet (a graduate of the American College for Girls in Istanbul), and was also serialized in the same newspaper starting from the 151st issue. Another student from the same college, Fatıma Ünsiye, translated a Russian book, along with comments and additions, on the social life and education of Japanese children, Musavver Japon Çocukları.264 Halide Edib's 1911 book, Ta'lim ve Terbiye (Teaching and Education), was likewise also built largely upon the translation of H. H. Horne's 1906 book, The Psychological Principles of Education. Halide Edib also published, in Turkish, the first part of King Errant (1912) by Flora Annie Steel with the title “Babür Han” (1914-) for the journal Türk Yurdu.265 Rana bint-i Saffet's serialized translation, “Physiologie de la Femme,”266 appeared in the periodical Hanım Kızlara Mahsus (no. 9, 10, 18 and 39). Salime Servet translated the poems and stories of European and American writers that included W. R. Spencer, Lord Byron, Josephine Peabody, Butler, Lord Alfred Tennyson

Mahsus Gazete, no. 149, 150, 152, 155, 156, 160, 162, 168, 169, 173-179, 181 (29 Kanunisani 1313-24 Eylül 1314 [/1898]).

263 Avanzade Mehmed Süleyman, ed. Nevsal-i Nisvân (Dersaadet [Istanbul]: Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete Kütübhanesi, 1315/1897), 61-62.

264 Fatıma Ünsiye, Musavver Japon Çocukları (Dersaadet: Matbaa-i Hayriyye ve Şürekâsı, 1328/1330 [/1912/1914]). It was first serialized in İctihad, no. 30, 31, 32, 33, 37 (1327/1911).

265 Halide Edib translated other works such as Julius Caesar and Venedik Taciri.

266 Information on the original work is not found in the Turkish translation. The translation is probably from Édouard Lemoine's Physiologie de la Femme la Plus Malheureuse du Monde (1841).

105

and Thomas Hood. Her İntihar Kulübü ve Siraçenin Elması is from Robert Louis Stevenson, and “Yeni Sene” is a translation from Lord Alfred Tennyson.267 Besides these individuals, some translations appeared to be the work of organizations such as Marcel Prévost's Lettres à Françoise, which were serialized in Ottoman Turkish by Kırmızı Beyaz Kulübü (Red and White Club), an organization founded by women.268 Hadice Nakiyye Hanım translated Namık Kemal's play “Zavallı Çocuk” (Poor Boy) from Ottoman Turkish into Persian. On the whole, translations from Ottoman Turkish into other languages were limited by comparison.269

The general profile of Ottoman Muslim female translators as mostly upper class and privately educated with proficiency in more than one foreign language had changed by the early years of the Republic to include more graduates from secondary and higher-level public and private schools. These schools aimed to provide their students with literacy in French or English as well as Turkish, though, sufficient proficiency in a foreign language that enabled translation of scholarly or literary texts still seemed to require some private tutoring or specialized training. This is illustrated by the following examples: Semiha

267 Robert Louis Stevenson, İntihar Kulübü ve Siraçenin Elması, trans. Salime Servet Seyfi (Dersaadet, 1329); Salime Servet Seyfi, “İngiliz edebiyatı numunelerinden: Alfred Tennyson'dan mütercem: Yeni Sene,” Şehbal (1 Mart 1328 [/1912], 445.

268 Marcel Prévost, “Françoise'a Mektuplar,” mtc. [tran.] Kırmızı Beyaz Kulübü, Demet, no. 7 (29 Teşrinievvel 1324 [/1908]): 109-111.

269 There are other signatures of female translators such as the following but no further information was available about the translators' identities: Fatma Müzehher who had a moral story translated in the third issue in the Demet journal, “Esrarengiz Çekmece” (The Mysterious Drawer); Emine Bahire who published a translation of Nesibe Fazıla’s entitled “Bir Nutuk” (An Addressing) in the 6th issue; Zeyneb Nesibe who published “Henüz Uykudan Uyanmış Bir Çocuğun Münacatı” in the 61st issue of Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete; Hatice Aliye, who translated the serial “Güzellenmek” for the Hanım Kızlara Mahsus edition of Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete; Safiye Beran, who published “Müsavat: Kadın ile Erkek Arasında” (Equality: Between Women and Men) by Camille de Montejova in a series in Kadınlar Dünyası journal in 1913; and Mesadet Bedirhan, who translated Bert Danjen’s “Hayatını Yaşamak İçin Her Kadının Bilmesi Lazım Olan Şeyler.”

106

Cemal Hanım, a graduate of the Darülfünun Philosophy Department, who published an Ottoman Turkish edition of the Platonic dialogue Phédon entitled Fedon- Ruhun Bekası in 1928270; Sabiha Sertel, who translated, edited and published, along with her husband, children's literature, child pedagogy and children's education between 1926 and 1928271; and Muazzez Tahsin Berkand, who translated six novels into Turkish by the late 1930s.272

Cultivation of the new Ottoman woman was undertaken by both men and women of the period, after the educational evolution from tutoring to mass teaching in public schools and the public press; these were all a result of the state’s efforts to modernize, as well as the commitment of intellectuals. Besides taking charge of teaching in the new schools, women took part in producing nonfictional educational and instructive material too, such as textbooks and sourcebooks. Emine Semiye was asked to write a book teaching basic math to women and girls, upon which she produced Hulâsa-i İlm-i Hisâb at the beginning of her career.273 She also published in Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete a series of essays designed to be science lessons for Muslim women on such topics as chemistry, anatomy, physics and so on.274 The first-known Turkish textbook of pedagogy that adopted

270 Eflatun, Fedon- Ruhun Bekası, trans. Semiha Cemal Hanım (Istanbul: Kütübhane-i Sudi, 1928).

271 For the list of translations, see Ayşe Banu Karadağ, Eshabil Bozkurt and Nilüfer Alimen, “Çeviri ve Yönlendirme: Sabiha ve Zekeriya Sertel'in Çeviri Çocuk Edebiyatı Eserleri,” RumeliDE, no. 2 (Apr. 2015). Sertel was educated in Salonica public schools and later went to New York to study social work on a scholarship.

272 Ateşli Kalb (1939) from Magali, Safo (1940) from A. Daudet, İhtiyarlamayan Kadın: Jezabel (1943) from Irène Nemirovsky, Hemşireler (1944) from A. J. Cronin, Evleniyorum (1945) from J. Foldes, Meçhul Sevgili (1945) from Stefan Zweig.

273 Emine Semiye, Hulâsa-i İlm-i Hisâb (Dersaadet: Mahmud Bey Matbaası, 1309 [/1891/2]). Kadriye Kaymaz mentions the year 1887 as the first printing of the book; see Kadriye Kaymaz, Gölgedeki Kalem Emine Semiye (Istanbul: Küre Yayınları, 2009), 43, 201.

274 Emine Semiye, “Hanımlara dürûs-ı hikmet,” Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete, no. 102-5, 108, 111, 119, 123, 124 (Mar.-Aug. 1897).

107

modern principles was Ayşe Sıdıka Hanım's Usûl-i Ta'lîm ve Terbiye Dersleri (Lessons in Methods of Teaching and Education), which she wrote after five years of teaching at Darülmuallimat (Female Teachers' Training School).275 The teacher and poet Nakiyye published a dictionary of Persian language, Lügat-ı Farisiye.276 In order to help increase vocational training among Muslim females in the early 20th century, Behire Hakkı founded the first seamstress academy (Biçki Yurdu), and wrote two books on the theories and principles of tailoring for the lower and higher divisions of girls' schools.277 Fahriye prepared a book entitled Ev Kadını (Housewife) with information on how to cook and serve food, set dining places and tables, and manage cooks and maidservants.278 (Muallime) Kamer's Namaz Hacesi (Prayer Tutor) is a guidebook for daily prayers in Islam.279 Many other published essays by women involved idealistic and moralistic lessons about child rearing, relationships with husbands, public conduct, and attire, as well as informative content on personal care, health issues, entertainment, home management, women in politics, science, family life and foreign societies,280 and so on.

275 Ayşe Sıdıka, Usûl-i Ta'lîm ve Terbiye Dersleri (Istanbul: Âlem Matbaası, 1313 [/1895/6]).

276 Nakiyye, Lûgat-ı Farisiye (Istanbul: Mekteb-i Sanayi Matbaası, 1310 [/1892/3]). 277 Behire Hakkı, Biçki Nazariyat ve Kavâidinin Tedrisât-ı Âliyye Kısmı (Istanbul: Türk Kadınları Biçki Yurdu, 1329/1332 [/1913]); Behire Hakkı, Biçki Nazariyat ve Kavâidinin Tedrîsat-ı İbtidâiyye Kısmı (Istanbul: Türk Kadınları Biçki Yurdu, 1330/1332 [/1914]).

278 Fahriye, Ev Kadını, 2nd ed. (Istanbul: Mahmud Bey Matbaası, 1310 [/1892/3]), transliterated into Latin script by Leman Erdemli and Zeynep Vanlı in 2002.

279 Muallime Kamer, Namaz Hacesi (Dersaadet: Mahmud Bey Matbaası, 1309).

280 For instance, see Gülistan İsmet's serialized articles “Mucit Kadınlar,” (Women Inventors) Hanım Kızlara Mahsus, no. 8-219 (29 Nisan 1315 [/1899]) and “Kraliçe Victoria Hazretleri,” (Queen Victoria) no. 28/230, 30/232, 31/232, 33/235 (16 Eylül 1315-21 Teşrinievvel 1315 [/1899]).

108

As to the biographical writings by late Ottoman women, one prominent work is Fatma Aliye's Nâmdârân-ı Zenân-ı İslâmiyân, which introduces famous Muslim women in history of the Arab, Umayyad, Abbasid and Ottoman cultures.281 The author also published a work that dealt with scholars of philosophy, theology and science named Terâcim-i Ahvâl-i Felâsife, and, essays on the biographies of Lady Mary Wortley Montagu and Fatıma binti Abbas for Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete.282 At the turn of the century, Fatma Şadiye published a series of pamphlets about the women related to the Prophet Mohammad: his mother Hazret-i Âmine, his daughter Fatmatü’z-Zehrâ, and his wives Hazret-i Hadicetü’l-kübrâ, Hazret-i Âişetü's-sıddıka, Hazret-i Ümm-i Habibe, and Hazret-i Sevde bint-i Zem’a.283

Ottoman women also produced other works of scholarly content and analysis, such as Fatma Aliye's manuscripts on philosophy,284 history,285 Islam, the West and

281 Fatma Aliye, “Nâmdârân-ı Zenân-ı İslâmiyân,” Malumat 8, no. 188 (5 Safer 1317 [/1899]): 1368 - no. 273 (10 Şevval 1318 [/1901]): 669, published irregularly.

282 Fatma Aliye, “Madam Montagu,” Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete, no. 5 (27 Rebiyülevvel 1313 [/1895): 2-4, no. 6 (30 Rabiyülevvel 1313 [/1895]): 2; “Meşahir-i Nisvan-ı İslamiyeden Biri: Fatıma binti Abbas,” Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete, no. 8 (7 Rebiyülahir 1313 [/1895]): 3-4, no.9 (11 Rebiyülahir 1313 [/1895]): 2-3.

283 Fatma Şadiye, Valide-i muhtereme-i Hazret-i Fahr-i alem (s.a.s) Hazret-i Âmine (r. a.) (Istanbul: [Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete Matbaası], 1322); Zevce-i muhtereme-i Hazret-i Fahr-i alem (s.a.s) Ümm'ü'l-müminîn Hazret-i Âişetü's-sıddıka (r.a.) (Istanbul: [Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete Matbaası], 1322); Kerime-i muhtereme-i Hazret-i Fahr-i âlem (s.a.s.) Hazret-i Fatmatü’z-Zehrâ (Istanbul: [Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete Matbaası], 1321); Zevce-i muhtereme-i fahr-i âlem (s.a.s.) Ümmü’l-müminîn Hazret-i Hadicetü’l-kübrâ (Istanbul: [Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete Matbaası], 1322), Zevce-i muhtereme-i Hazret-i fahr-i âlem (s.a.s.) Ümmü’l-müminin Hazret-i Ümm-i Habibe (r.a.) (Istanbul: [Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete Matbaası], 1324) and Zevce-i muhtereme-i hazret-i fahrialem (s.a.s.) Hazret-i Sevde bint-i Zem’a (r.a.) ([Istanbul]: Kanaat Kitabhanesi, 1324).

284 Fatma Aliye, Tedkik-i Ecsam (Istanbul: Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete Matbaası, 1317 [/1899-1900/1/2]).

285 Fatma Aliye, Tarih-i Osmani'nin Bir Devre-i Mühimmesi: Kosova Zaferi ve Ankara Hezimeti (Dersaadet: Kanaat Matbaası, 1331 [/1912/3/4/5/6]); Ahmet Cevdet Paşa ve Zamanı (Dersaadet: Kanaat Matbaası, 1332 [/1913/4/5/6/7]).

109

Orientalists,286 polygamy,287 Halide Edib's works on literature,288 and works with religious appeal such as Emine Cavide's stories about women saints, Menâkıb-ı Veliyyâtü'n-Nisa (18th century).289 Hakikat is an unusual case of a book with legal content written by an Ottoman woman. The book was produced by Fatma Tiryal, a freed concubine who belonged to Zeyneb Hanım, the daughter of the governor of Egypt Mohammad Ali, and explains how Zeyneb Hanım's mansion in the Vezneciler district was confiscated by Halim Paşa.290 Besides being treated as women’s literature material, these need to be studied in connection with the particular discipline which they belonged to. Some published essays, as well as poetry, of the women of letters were gathered in books by their authors or researchers, such as Emine Semiye's Hürriyet Kokuları, Selanik Hatıraları and İktitaf, Şukufe Nihal's Şukufe Nihal Bütün Eserleri -4 and Şukufe Nihal Bütün Eserleri -5, and Nezihe Muhiddin's Nezihe Muhiddin Bütün Eserleri -4. Many essays by women dealt with issues that were more specific or current, or declared urgency especially after the 1908 change of rule and during war-time (1912-22), such as seclusion, concubinage, organizational activities, the need for more educational institutions and qualified teachers, contemporary women's roles and rights in various areas of social life, contribution and

286 Fatma Aliye, “İsti'lâ-yı İslâm,” Musavver Fen ve Edebiyat Mecmuası (29 Şevval 1317-17 Mayıs 1318 [/1900/1/2]; Tezâhür-i Hakîkat (Istanbul: Çizgi, 2015).

287 Fatma Aliye, Taaddüd-i Zevcât'a Zeyl (Konstantiniyye: Tahir Bey Matbaası, 1316 [1898/9/1900/1]).

288 Halide Edib, “Türkler ve Edebiyatları,” Mekteb Müzesi, no. 4-5 (15 Haziran-1 Temmuz 1329 [/1913]), “Türkler ve Edebiyatı,” no. 6-8 (1 Ağustos-15 Eylül 1329 [/1913]).

289 Emine Cavide, Menâkıb-ı Veliyyatü'n-Nisa (n.p.: n.p., n.d.). The manuscript is available at Atatürk University Seyfettin Özege Rare Book Collection and Atatürk Library in Istanbul.

290 Fatma Tiryal, Hakikat (n.p.: n.p., 12 Temmuz 1325 [/1909]). The manuscript is at the Atatürk Library in Istanbul.

110

support to women's periodicals, as well as more personal issues such as the death of a child, illness, a daily, or spiritual, experience. They demonstrate that women of letters were highly involved in social and political life, lobbied for state legislation that involved the well-being and status of females. They presented a range of concerns and proposals from women coming from various backgrounds and experiences, which mainstream historiography tends to represent in a uniform manner, categorizing them according to their ideology or prominence, and denying them a space for individual subjectivity.

One common literary activity of Ottoman women besides poetry and letters was the short story. New genres in Turkish literature such as the short story, novel and play291 initially appeared in serial publications in the Ottoman context because they spread rapidly in this venue, they encountered less trouble getting printed, and for new writers, they provided a ready-made audience. Ottoman women began to publish short stories in the 1890s: Makbule Leman's “Neşv ü Nema” (1891), “Tashih” (1895) and “İmtihan” (1896), Emine Vahide (Emine Semiye)'s “Bir Mütehassısenin Tefekküratı” (1895) and “Bir Gecelik Gelin” (1897), Nigar binti Osman's “Bahtiyar” and “Mehtâb” from her book Aks-i Sedâ (1899), P. Fahriye's “Hikaye Çantası” series, Güzide Osman (Sabri)'s “Küçük Meveddet” (1905), Fatma Şadiye's story-book Hikâyât-ı Nuşin (1907-8), and Salime Servet's “Kurumuş Çiçek” (1901) and “Ruzname-i Hayatımdan,” written in diary form, are among the earliest examples. Many other short stories that appeared before 1908 were published primarily in the periodical Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete.292 Salime Servet's “Kısm-

291 The Western genres of the short story, novel and play were introduced to the Ottomans in the 19th century but fictional narrative forms like the mesnevi had existed in Turkish literature for centuries. 292 For instance, Makbule's “Müteverrime 1,” İsmet's “Nafile Hanım” and “Eribe Hanım,” Sadiye's “Bora,” Binti Saffet Rana's “Ahretlik,” Saniye's “Otuz Yıl Fasılalı İki Muhabbet.”

111

ı Edebi 1,” “Kısm-ı Edebi 2,” “On Üç Sene Evvel,” “Soğan Ekmek,” “Türk Trablus'tan Nasıl Döner,” “Oğlumu Hududa Gönderdikten Sonra,” “Nida-yı Emvac” and “Kardeş Mektupları” reflect the experiences and feelings of mothers, wives, soldiers, veterans, and ordinary people living in a crumbling Empire amidst the backdrop of war; they are all inspired by the author's own life experiences and carry autobiographical details. Halide Edib's stories in Dağa Çıkan Kurt (1922) and İzmir'den Bursa'ya (1922) are similarly preoccupied with the conditions of Turkey during and after the war. Her early collection of stories is entitled Harap Mabedler (1911). “Çırpınışlar” (1909) and “Kadın Mektupları” (1911), both written by Hayriye Melek, criticized the custom of arranged marriages. Güzide Osman (Sabri)'s “Uful”, “Âmâ Kemani” (1918), “Heybeliada Mezarlığını Ziyaret” (1921), Halide Nusret's “Onların Günahı” (1919), Müfide Ferit's “Gonca Kalfa” (1923), and Şukufe Nihal's stories that were included in the Tevekkülün Cezası collection are among the later short stories by women of letters. There are many other female signatures with published stories in journals293 but many are not identifiable as Ottoman Muslim women of letters due to the lack of information about the authors.

The novel became another popular genre employed by late Ottoman women of letters to effectively relate women’s experiences, advocate old and new values, and configure social propositions. The first-known work is Zafer Hanım's Aşk-ı Vatan (1877/8). Fatma Aliye's Muhâdarât (1891/2), Ref'et, Udî, Levâyih-i Hayât and Enîn, Emine Semiye's Terbiye-i Etfale Ait Üç Hikâye (1895-96), Hiss-i Rekabet (1896), Bîkes (1897), Mükâfat-ı

293 For example, Fehamet Handan's “Karagün Bayramı”, “Binbaşının Güzel Hanımı”, “Aranıyor”, “Necibe'nin Yıldızlı Çarşafı”, “Paşalar” (1913), Mevhibe Fatma binti Mustafa's “Şukufe'nin Sergüzeşti” (1913), Bintülhalim Seyhan's “Ümid-i Âfil”, “İzah-ı Hakikat”, Suat Sait's “İnkisar-ı Garam”, “Cezmi'nin Hataları”, “Hatıranın Levhası”, Nefise Perran's “Rahmet”, Mediha Selahattin's “Gaye-i Aşk”, “Buse-i Garam”.

112

İlâhiye (1896-97), Sefalet (1897/8), Muallime (1899/1900/1) and Gayya Kuyusu (1920),294 Selma Rıza's Uhuvvet (1892/7), Fatma Fahrünnisa's Dilharab (1896-97) and Küçük Hikaye (1900), Nigar binti Osman's Safahat-ı Kalb (1898), Güzide Sabri's Münevver, Ölmüş Bir Kadının Evrak-ı Metrukesi (1905), Yaban Gülü (1920) and Nedret (1922), Halide Edib's Heyûlâ (1909), Raik’in Annesi (1909), Seviyye Talib (1910), Handan (1912), Yeni Turan (1912), Son Eseri (1919), Mev’ud Hüküm (1917-18)295 and Vurun Kahpeye (1923), Ayşe Zekiye's Bir Pederin Hatası (1903/09), Hayriye Melek Hunç's Zühre-i Elem, Nezihe Muhiddin's Şebab-ı Tebah (1911), Ulviye Macit's Şermende (1913),296 Melek Hanım's Abdul Hamid's Daughter: The Tragedy of an Ottoman Princess (1913, biographical fiction), Salime Servet's Bir Hatıra-i Pejmurde (1914), Müfide Ferit's Aydemir (1918), Suat Derviş's Kara Kitap (1920), Halide Nusret's Küller (1921) and Fahrünnisa Fahreddin's Talihsiz Bir Kadının Sergüzeşti (1922) were novels that were published independently or serially before the Republic. The serialization or writing of some novels by women was either left incomplete, such as with P. Fahriye Hanım's “Dilfikâr” (1901) and Halide Edib's Çingene Kızı (1899-1900) in Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete, Ayşe Hikmet's “Şule'nin Defteri” (1919-20) in the journal İnci (Pearl), or the identification of their authors could not be determined, as was the case with a number of writers. Oftentimes, in these novels, women addressed the loneliness and unhappiness experienced by contemporary Muslim urban women, particularly in relation to a male character or the lack of a female character in the

294 Serialized irregularly in 31 issues of Dersaadet, no. 1-60 (8 Temmuz-13 Eylül 1336 [/1920].

295 “Halide Edib was the sole representative of the new genre of Turkish fiction between 1908-1920” according to the prominent Turkish litterateur and literary historian Ahmed Hamdi Tanpınar. See Tanpınar, Edebiyat Üzerine Makaleleri, 6th ed. (Istanbul: Dergah Yayınları, 1977), 120.

296 Serialized in Kadınlar Dünyası, no. 49-87 (22 Mayıs 1329-29 Haziran 1329 [/1913]).

113

home environment, or with regard to the traditions that suppressed them. As opposed to the idealization of the vulnerable and devoted female characters in male-authored novels that existed up until the early 20th century,297 women novelists in general created more individualized and independent female main characters in their works. Fiction rendered an unequalled tool in framing and exposing social concerns as well as personal sensibilities.

Drama appears to be the literary genre Ottoman Muslim women took up last. They seem to have waited for the relatively free environment for publishing, which arrived through the proclamation of the second constitution in 1908 (Meşrutiyet), to take this step. Murat Uraz commented that it was difficult for Ottoman Muslim women who had newly emerged onto the literary scene to engage in this genre despite all of the negative views and prejudices.298 Even attending the theatre to see a play was criticized and deemed immoral and baleful in conservative circles. Moreover, the Hamidian rule was suspicious towards theatrical plays, for they could be suspected as means of anti-government propaganda, an act considered to be a threat to the unity of the state. Indeed, in 1883, Nigar binti Osman wrote Tesir-i Aşk as a three-act tragedy on romantic love, but the play was left unpublished, as was the case of Emine Semiye's Dilşad Sultan play/story from 1900. Ruhsan Nevvare is also noted as having written two comedies with Tahsin Nahid. One of them is Aşkımız (1907), which has not been printed, and the other, Sanatkârlar (1908), has also either not been printed or no copies survived.299 The first plays published by women

297 Compared to the other novelists at his time, Hüseyin Rahmi Gürpınar presented an inordinary approach in his novels in terms of female characters and gender representations.

298 Murat Uraz, Kadın Şair ve Muharrirlerimiz (Istanbul: Tefeyyüz, 1941), 422-24.

299 See Hale Nur Gümüş, “Tahsin Nahid ve Ruhsan Nevvare, Hayatları, Düzyazıları ve Ortak Eserleri Jön Türk” (master’s thesis, Yeditepe Üniversitesi, 2003), 61.

114

after the restoration of the constitution, like many other works of the time, condemned the Hamidian policies and applauded the revolution, such as Fehime Nüzhet's Bir Zalimin Encamı (1908-9) and Adalet Yerini Buldu, and Ruhsan Nevvare's Jöntürk, which was staged in 1908. Nigar binti Osman's play Girîve, which was staged in 1912,300 and Halide Edib's play Kenan Çobanları (1916) treated polygamy; and Mesadet Bedirhan's Hasbihal (1914) dealt with women's rights in the context of marriage and divorce. Halide Nusret wrote several unpublished plays in the early 1920s, such as Peçe ve Kafes (Veil and Lattice), which defended Muslim women's seclusion and covering, as a protest against their acting on stage, and Asıl Aşk (True Love),301 written with Neyyir Baha. Siyah Gölgeler, by Fahrünnisa Fahreddin, is another three-act play about a woman's estranged relationship with her husband. Mahşah Hanım is also noted to have written a play, Mün'im Şah Yahut Zafer.302

Among the most common themes in women's fictional works in Ottoman times addressed polygamy, marriage customs, concubinage, divorce, communication barriers between sexes, education, making money honorably, Western influence, poverty, ignorance, war, self-sacrifice and patriotism. Some of the Ottoman women of letters who produced their first works in the early 20th century continued to publish and became popular literary personalities in the Republican period (1923-), like Güzide Sabri and Halide Edib. Works written by Ottoman women after 1923 are not discussed here. Not many women

300 Ahmed Mithat, “Girîve,” Zekâ, no. 13 (20 Ağustos 1328 [/1912]): 223, quoted in Refik Ahmet Sevengil, Meşrutiyet Tiyatrosu (Istanbul: Milli Eğitim Basımevi, 1968), 101. No copies of the text were found in the libraries.

301 Halide Nusret Zorlutuna, Bir Devrin Romanı (Istanbul: Timaş, 2009), 146, 158.

302 Uraz, Kadın Şair ve Muharrirlerimiz, 96.

115

produced work in what was considered the more serious genres of nonfiction, primarily a consequence of the diverse, quality education that most of them had been deprived of. The 16th- century Ottoman female poet Hubbî 'Aişe asked: When a woman is effectively barred from the education that is necessary to produce a scholar, what is left for her to write but poetry?303 Indeed, before the late 19th century, the overwhelming majority of writing women were poets, who had training in, or familiarity with, the art of poetry. Only with the diversification of knowledge made more available to girls, and the extension of it to larger groups of women in the modern period, did women begin to show interest in prose and to generate alternative works.

303 Walter Andrews and Mehmet Kalpaklı, The Age of Beloveds: Love and the Beloved in Early-Modern Ottoman and European Culture and Society (Durham: Duke University Press, 2005), 213.

CHAPTER 5

“THE NEW WOMAN”

5.1 Configurations Between Progress and Traditions

The modernist, nationalist efforts of the bureaucratic and civil intelligentsia to reform the state and society in the late Ottoman Empire attempted to redefine the identity of urban, Muslim women by giving them expanded roles and responsibilities at home and in civic life. Women, they advocated, the bearers’ of the nation’s children and the other half of the community, had to be liberated from ignorance and idleness, and be integrated into society more effectively. Yet, efforts to measure up to the requirements of a “contemporary civilization” created a general anxiety about the preservation of indigenous values. In an attempt to maintain Ottoman cultural integrity, varying ideological approaches in this discourse sought to accommodate, in their projected identity of the new urban Muslim woman, the familiar cultural forms, with particular regard to gendered roles and appearances. Accordingly, the new public institutions and venues, such as schools and periodicals, sought to reinforce in practice and discourse women’s modesty and domesticity as areas of cultural authenticity, along with the promotion of their education and contribution to society, thereby configuring a new womanhood between progress and traditions. Such regulation of the new female identity would ensure the protection of the gendered order by regenerating the power dynamics between men and women in the new society, and it attempted to counteract women’s autonomy and individuality, as typically

117

experienced by many communities in and outside of the Ottoman Empire undergoing collective missions of civilizing and identity-building.304 Women of letters’ employment of the prominent discourse of “the new Ottoman woman” in their public writing next to the men of letters served their Islamic, nationalistic and feminist considerations, as I will demonstrate in this unit. On the other hand, it made it possible for them to renegotiate the definitions and question the readings of prevailing assertions on women’s proper roles and conduct in varied contexts, which will be elaborated on in subsequent units.

The expansion of printing, public schools, modern economic interactions, and ethnic self-identification boosted a modern public sphere in the Ottoman capital of Istanbul post-1890. It consisted of three sectors: the state apparatus, private society, and the press.305 The literary arena functioned as a major venue for discursive practices where narrations and debates framed the new, modern Ottoman identities, beliefs, values, ideologies and issues took place with the involvement of a range of actors and targets from different segments of society and the state, and evolved concurrently. Early public writings, essays and stories propounded a generation of young, cultured, virtuous women who would make good wives, mothers and citizens. They would uphold matrimony and family life and benefit the children of the nation in particular tasks and professions. Such a female profile was promoted, and the need for it was justified with references to the principles of Islam and progress, rather than of Western civilization and culture, but models were found in

304 For a take on the female identity in the 19th- century Ottoman Greek nationalist rhetoric, see Anastasia Falierou, “Enlightened Mothers and Scientific Housewives: Discussing Women’s Social Roles in Eurydice (Evridiki) (1870-1873),” A Social History of Late Ottoman Women: New Perspectives, eds. Duygu Köksal and Anastasia Falierou (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2013): 201-24.

305 Elizabeth B. Frierson, “Gender, Consumption and Patriotism: The Emergence of an Ottoman Public Sphere,” in Public Islam and the Common Good, ed. Armando Salvatore and Dale F. Eickelman (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2004), 102, 104.

118

both Islamic history and contemporary Western countries. In “Maarif” (Education, 1872), an article by the Young Ottoman Namık Kemal, an ideal country was described where its schools have more female teachers than male; teachers are not more than 25 years of age; and are sought by political and military leaders, scholars, literati, and state officials for marriage.306 The prolific writer, thinker and literary pioneer Şemseddin Sami’s work Kadınlar (Women) similarly pointed to women as natural caretakers and educators of children. The author mentioned that when a child is of school age, teaching him/her is easier and more effective if the teacher is female, the reason being that the child was under a mother’s care up until that time. He also added that Ottomans can follow the American example where most primary school educators are female. Şemseddin Sami personally supported the idea that women should be allowed to work outside the home as they are the other half of the human race, and they would be more successful than men in such professions as nursing, pharmacy and trading.307 Ahmet Mithat, and many other writers of the period, employed fiction to respond to, and draw a utopian vision of, Ottoman modernity, and to teach the public what cultural advancement would look like in practice. His fictional works -Esaret, Felatun Bey ile Rakım Efendi, Diplomalı Kız, and Çingene, present the reader with male figures who conscientiously educate girls under their guardianship, whether daughters, concubines or slaves. The author believed that educating women beyond literacy is crucial in improving their position in life; cultivated, wise women would make desirable wives, responsible mothers and housewives, as well as qualified teachers, surgeons, and authors. He addressed the constrictions of old customs

306 [Namık] Kemal, “Maarif,” İbret, no. 16 (22 Haziran 1288 [/1872]): 1-2.

307 Ş. Sami, Kadınlar (Istanbul: Mihran Matbaası, 1296 [/1878/79/80/81]), 21-46.

119

and beliefs, unfaithful husbands and emotional weakness as impediments to a woman’s achieving a better and happier life.308 While he fought ignorance in his writings, Ahmet Mithat usually idealized relatively dependent, submissive and modest female characters whose education and intellectual improvement benefit them but do not, and at times should not, release them from their gendered positions in or outside of marriage. He juxtaposes Mihriban Hanım and Canan in Felatun Bey ile Rakım Efendi where Mihriban is mocked as a woman who cannot embroider or knit, and is not interested in washing, ironing and cooking because she has servants to do it, like the Europeans do; Canan is praised as a talented and humble girl who is home schooled to better groom her to be a suitable and engaging future wife, who can play the piano and discuss intellectual topics, too. As life in the Empire was transforming in many respects, male reformers and progressive writers expressed a desire for cultured Muslim wives as intellectual companions and romantic partners, but also sought to reaffirm their own status in the family by reproducing the traditional attachments and hierarchical distinctions, between men and women, but in a new context.

Prevalent claims on the press about women’s capabilities, backed by frequent news items on foreign women entering professions, and women’s demands to attain knowledge evidenced from Islamic creed and history, were complicated by the issue of the employment of skills attained by urban Muslim women in Ottoman society, considering their strictly restricted public appearance and configured positioning against Western mores. Along this line, Fatma Aliye’s description of the European suffragettes in her 1895

308 See his works “Felsefe-i Zenan” (Women’s Philosophy, 1287), “Diplomalı Kız” (The Girl with a Diploma, 1307), Peder Olmak Sanatı (The Art of Being a Father, 1317).

120

essay “Let us take warning from the bluestockings!”309 as a model of learnedness, was followed by her disapproval of them for the acts they engaged in publicly as women. Indeed, women were often portrayed in late 19th- century Ottoman women’s periodicals as reading, writing and thinking in their home environment,310 or else doing house chores.311 The leading argument in late Ottoman literature about women was that the highest honor for them was building a marriage, raising good children, and running domestic matters, which was not far from the predominant European and American discourse of female upbringing. Their education was meant to lead women to behave in compliance with their responsibilities towards family and society, and to make the shared life easier; otherwise it would upset the societal balance. Education for women would result in superior domestic qualifications, as well as schoolteachers, midwives and factory workers for the nation and its economic liberation.

Emulation of the West and of European lifestyles was discredited in general in favor of preserving cultural identity and moral values; however, a further atmosphere of turmoil and extensive social disorder were projected by the writers when European lifestyles were believed to threaten the established norms of gender roles. Nurullah, the protagonist in Ahmet Mithat novel Jön Türk (Young Turk), which was published soon after the Young Turk revolution, confronts Ceylan, a smart, outgoing girl who was raised with a Western education and outlook:

309 Fatma Aliye, “Bas Bleu’lardan İbret Alalım,” Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete, no. 2 (15 Rebiyülevvel 1313 [/1895]): 2-3.

310 For instance, see Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete, no. 87 (7 Teşrinisani 1312 [/1896]): 4; no. 131 (25 Eylül 1313 [/1897]): 5. See Appendix A in this dissertation.

311 For instance, see Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete, no. 80 (19 Eylül 1312 [/1896]): 4; no. 81 (26 Eylül 1312 [/1896]): 4; no. 82 (3 Teşrinievvel 1312 [/1896]): 5.

121

A girl should know her femininity and a boy should know his manliness… Theory is different, practice is different. People read a variety of books… Difference and conflicts in people’s opinions are reflected in their books… But can we put these theories into practice?... A human being, even a girl, should learn many things. However, s/he should not deviate from behaving according to the requirements of his/her status. A girl should behave as a girl and a man as a man.312

Ceylan is influenced by “the cause of women’s liberty” through the trends and developments in Europe; she reads, thinks and discusses issues of gender, love and marriage with Nurullah, an intellectual man of a “traditional Muslim Turkish mindset.” Her wish to seduce and marry Nurullah against his will leads Ceylan to act immorally. She gets him to impregnate her, but he chooses instead to marry Ahdiye instead, a chaste and innocent lady, who had a more limited and conservative education without the infection of Western ideas, and is the role model for the author. In the novel, Ceylan sets herself on fire and dies tragically. At the beginning of the new constitutional period in the Empire that came with promises of freedom and justice for all and with changes in women’s social activities, Ahmet Mithat warned against personal liberties and that thoughts of equality for women could penetrate minds through reading and upbringing, and might challenge social norms.313 The road that is followed in educating women, and the scope and objectives of their education, were central issues in shaping the identity of the modern Ottoman Muslim woman. Ceylan’s uncontrolled, nonindigenous education confused her with the feminist thoughts that were not applicable in Ottoman society, created clashes within her, and led her astray, turning her into an “indecent, profane creature.” She was portrayed as a girl with some “masculine” qualities such as relaxed manners, an unrestricted mind and good

312 Ahmet Mithat, Jön Türk (Istanbul: Tercüman-ı Hakikat Matbaası, 1326), 27.

313 Hülya Argunşah, “Ahdiye İle Ceylan Arasında Bir Jön Türk: Ahmet Mithat Efendi’nin Feminizmi,” Turkish Studies 8, no. 9 (Summer 2013): 6.

122

handwriting. As one of the leading contributors to the Ottoman discussion of women and as an advocate of women’s rights, Ahmet Mithat propounds in this later work that, in order to be able to cultivate the new Ottoman woman who will maintain a balance between modernization and cultural values, the information that women are exposed to ought to be monitored. The ideal woman for marriage, as laid out in the book Jön Türk, reveals the dichotomy women were caught in: she “holds a moderate position between a civilized education and traditions,” and she is a person “who abandoned old beliefs but has not yet delved into new ideas.” She has “some” familiarity with music, and it was supposed, that learning “some” French would not be harmful so that she could properly accompany her husband.314

Public negotiators of a modern Ottoman identity cautiously approached women’s learning of music and French, which had arrived through new patterns in education. They were deemed as the qualities of a modern, refined Ottoman woman and often admired, too, but not without an uneasiness about their limits and proper uses. Another supporter of Ottoman women in the literary arena, Tahsin Nahid, wrote that some books coming from the West mislead women in the name of Francophilia; ladies who know foreign languages and casually read these foreign books get bored of their lives and lose their way.315 Women novelists such as Güzide Sabri, Fatma Aliye and Halide Edib, on the other hand, attempted to reconcile the two ends of this double bind in their idealization of Muslim female characters educated in Western culture, arts and languages, and, at the same, time tightly

314 Ahmet Mithat, Jön Türk, 74.

315 Tahsin Nahid, İctihad (July 4, 1913), quoted in Şefika Kurnaz, II. Meşrutiyet Döneminde Türk Kadını (Istanbul: M.E.B., 1996), 35.

123

bound to their Ottoman roots or Turkish nationalist ideals, as can be seen in the characters Kaya in Yeni Turan, Refika in Raik’in Annesi, Nedret in Nedret, Macide in Seviyye Talib, and Sabahat in Enîn. They are modern, cultured women who uphold morality and responsibilities, resist flashiness, frivolity and degeneration, contribute to their communities, make their presence felt in their relationships, have self-confidence, and, if they have a career, are hardworking, decent teachers, of possibly French or piano.

Wary of women becoming too free and too ambitious in their pursuit of modernity alafranga, popular journalists, readers, and state officials, believed women’s learning and education needed to be properly supervised with due consideration of the moral order and women’s envisioned roles in society. Ottoman male and female intellectuals in particular feared the influence of French novels on Ottoman women. The obvious popularity of the novel genre, and the powerful narratives they conveyed about romantic relationships, concerned writers about its potential effects on the female reader, and they warned both readers, and the parents of daughters, about them. As Carter Findley, a historian of Turkey argued, novels were neither merly entertainment nor were reflections of existing reality; the boy-meets-girl plot, despite the norms of gender segregation in society, implied transforming reality.316 Mehmed Celâl (Nuri) thought novels did no good except to disorient younger people and confuse them, and he recommended that everyone, especially women, remove them from their libraries and, instead, read more serious works.317 According to Tevfik Fikret, a significant figure in late Ottoman literary history, novels

316 Carter Vaughn Findley, Turkey, Islam, Nationalism, and Modernity (New Haven & London: Yale University Press, 2010), 185.

317 Mehmed Celâl, Roman Mütalaası (Dersaadet: Kasbar Matbaasi, 1312 [/1896-99]), 9-10. For more on the topic, see M. Fatih Andı, Roman ve Hayat (Istanbul: Kitabevi, 1999), 33-40.

124

guided women towards evil if they did not have a strong sense of morality and a reserved character.318 Reading foreign language novels provoked thoughts of suicide in young girls, claimed Ethem Nejat in the journal Türk Kadını (Turkish Woman).319 An articulate female contributor to the same journal, Nezihe Rikkat, shared her complaints that some foreign and Turkish novels had contemptable characters that girls wanted to emulate, but she blamed girls’ primitive education and inexperience in life, and suggested that such harmful works be identified by educators to help parents.320 Ahmet Mithat’s ideal female reader was educated and not easily seduced by novels and poetry, but found a balance in the enjoyment of romance works and others, as demonstrated in his Dürdane Hanım, Hayret and Müşâhedât. Fatma Aliye echoed similar sentiment in her works where she didn’t give credit to the genres women read, but, rather, to the more discerning woman who didn’t get carried away by a romantic story, as evidenced in Muhâdarât and Ûdî. “Novels were the same but the minds that processed them were different.”321

The quest for a balance between adoption of novelties and the preservation of old, established values by women became more evident when their public appearances leaned in a new direction at the turn of the century. The liberalized political agenda that followed the reinstallation of the Constitution and the Parliament in 1908 enhanced urban, upper

318 Tevfik Fikret, “Musahabe-i Edebiyye: Romanların Tesiri,” Servet-i Fünun, no. 476 (13 Nisan 1315 [/1899]): 115.

319 Ethem Nejat, “Hanımların Hatıra Defterleri,” Türk Kadını, no. 8 (29 Ağustos 1334 [/1918]): 115-17.

320 Nezihe Rikkat, “Musahabe: Aile Kitabhanesi,” Türk Kadını, no. 17 (30 Kanunisani 1335 [/1919]): 257-58.

321 “Romanlar hep birdi. Fakat okuyan kafalar başkaydı.” Fatma Aliye, Muhâdarât, ed. Fazıl Gökçek (Istanbul: Özgür Yayınları, 2012), 104.

125

and middle class Muslim women’s mobility in economic, literary, educational and social spheres, by providing them with the means to organize, and justification for it in public discourse. A number of women’s charitable associations and sororities, women’s periodicals, public schools, government positions, enterprise in private sectors,322 war relief efforts and female public speakers emerged at this time. Women of letters demanded that women’s civic activities be normalized and legitimized, especially in areas and positions that had not been open to them before, and public spaces such as steamboats, restaurants, streets, parks and trolleys be equally accessible for women and girls as much as they were for men.323 Employment opportunities, and the opening of professions to women, such as medicine and clerkships, were promoted and celebrated in the progressive print media. However, these were coupled with an emphasis on good moral standing, common good, or a justifiable need for women to be publicly present. When a group of Muslim women were hired by the Postal & Telegram Ministry at the Telephone Company in 1913 after an extended struggle in the women’s press, Aziz Haydar wrote about one worker doing her job “with full dignity.”324 Ahmet İhsan applauded it because, as he put

322 Private sectors such as tailoring, trade, baking and photography (1919). See Kadınlar Dünyası, no. 194/2 (8 Kanunisani 1921); Y. S. Karakışla, Osmanlı Hanımları ve Kadın Terzileri (1869-1923) (Istanbul: Akıl Fikir Yayınları, 2014); Kurnaz, II. Meşrutiyet Döneminde Türk Kadını. Urban Muslim women worked in general as educators and factory workers before 1908. In 1897, 121 out of 201 workers in a match factory were female. See Bernard Lewis, The Emergence of Modern Turkey (London: Oxford University Press, 1968), 469-75. In 1916-17, in Istanbul alone, there were 7185 female workers and civil cervants. See Tülin Sümer, “Türkiye’de İlk Defa Kurulan Kadınları Çalıştırma Derneği,” Belgelerle Türk Tarihi Dergisi 2, no. 10 (1968): 61.

323 See for instance Emine Semiye, “Muhterem Biraderimiz Cavit Beyefendi’ye,” Kadın, no. 9 (8 Kanunievvel 1324): 2-5; Fatma Aliye, “Terbiye-i İçtimaiye,” [except in] Mahâsin, no. 11 (Teşrinievvel 1325 [/1908]): 741.

324 Yavuz Selim Karakışla, “Dersaadet Telefon Şirket-i Osmaniyesi ve Osmanlı Kadın Telefon Memureleri,” Tarih ve Toplum 36, no. 212 (Aug. 2001): 29-37, no. 213 (Sept. 2001): 21-33; Aziz Haydar, “Kadınlığın Yeni Bir Hatvesi Daha,” Kadınlar Dünyası, no. 152 (19 Temmuz 1330 [/1914]): 4.

126

it, Muslim women would now be able to contribute to the wealth of their community too, just like girls and women in other communities, and is a great step for civilization.325 Again, women’s admittance to medical school was propagated by the need for female doctors to serve female patients, among other arguments, by indicating that some husbands selfishly did not want male doctors to see their wives, which costed women’s lives.326 Women’s public attire became a point of contention, too. Their stylish covering was disapproved of by both men and women for reasons of morality and preservation of customs, and reports of harrassment, by police officers and others, as well as stories of physical attacks on women’s veil, and humiliation, appeared in the press.327 This happened despite fashion having a larger focus in women’s magazines, that were owned and edited mostly by men throughout the late Ottoman era. According to Şukufe Nihal, a lifelong advocate of equal education for girls, an ideal schoolgirl “spread purity in the streets while they walked in all their simplicity, dignity, and solemnity,”328 namely, behaving honorably and wearing modest clothing. Concerns in this new era were reflected in contemporary literature about women earning livelihoods legitimately, honorably and chastely, and society’s scrutiny towards their clothing, behavior and intentions when they visited parks, theaters stores, schools, gatherings, and other activities, while still familiar, saw that the

325 Ahmet İhsan, “İstanbul Postası,” Servet-i Fünun 46, no. 1191 (20 Mart 1330 [/1914]): 486.

326 “Kadın-Tababet,” Kadınlar Dünyası, no. 134 (8 Mart 1330 [1914]): 2.

327 See Ayşegül Baykan and Belma Ötüş-Baskett, Nezihe Muhittin ve Türk Kadını (1931) (Istanbul: İletişim, 1999), 92-93; Halide Salih, “Kadınlar İçin,” Tanin, no. 103 (31 Teşrinievvel, 1324 [/1908]); “Şura-yı Ümmetten,” Kadın, no. 3 (27 Teşrinievvel 1324 [/1908]): 13–14.

328 Şukufe Nihal, “İctimaiyyat: Mekteblerde Kıyafet,” Türk Kadını, no. 7 (Aug. 15, 1918): 98-99.

127

conditions had changed. They were being negotiated among different discursive elements, in terms of their upholding an indigenous cultural identity.

Women’s public endeavors per se were not without controversy. Attempts were made to regulate women’s desire to acquire identities other than “wife,” “sister” and “daughter” and to pursue interests outside of the home to work, attain higher education, or entertainment outside. Indeed, intensified controversies between different schools of thought during the years of 1908-1919 about the correct proportions of Western, Islamic and national elements to be incorporated into the Turkish cultural and political transformation, initially reflected a common and renewed emphasis on the precedence of women’s domestic roles and educating them accordingly.329 The rise of the nuclear family as a central unit of modern society influenced the arguments of intellectuals, journalists and writers of various backgrounds. An early 20th- century Ottoman intellectual, Celâl Nuri, criticized the traditions that kept women from actually participating in society, pointing to the progress of women in the West as an example; yet, he added, Western education did not yield favorable results in Ottoman women, and that a national education system crafted according to the needs of Ottoman Muslim women had to be developed. He declared, “We do not really need political women or women with technical knowledge for the time being. We are primarily in need of mothers, wives, and tutoresses, to raise future generations. This is what it is all about.”330 He also expressed that fathers should participate in educating children in line with this objective. Halide Edib, on the other hand, in a 1909

329 See Zafer Toprak, “The Family, Feminism, and the State During the Young Turk Period, 1908-1918,” in Première Rencontre Internationale sur l'Empire Ottoman et la Turquie Moderne (Istanbul-Paris: Éditions ISIS, 1991), 441-52.

330 Celâl Nuri, Kadınlarımız, (Istanbul: [Matbaa-i İctihad], 1331 [/1912/3]), 119-20.

128

letter to the journal criticized the “feminine” outlook and content of women’s journals and added that women needed to learn as much as men did, and that their subjects shouldn’t be any different from men’s. Yet, she added that “this should not happen in a way that takes women from their actual duties, including cookin; and no matter how enlightened they are, this should be in an harmonious perfection with their female duties, sensibilities and roles as educators.”331 Besides the issues of domesticity and femininity with regards to the new Ottoman woman, her adaptation to Western modes was invoked as well in the context of her public activity, as in the case of Belkıs Şevket’s flight. A journalist, teacher and activist, she flew on a plane in the skies above Istanbul in 1913, becoming the first Muslim Turkish woman to do so, which aimed to draw attention to the Ottoman Association for the Defense of Women’s Rights (Osmanlı Müdafaa-i Hukuk-ı Nisvan Cemiyeti)’s campaign to purchase an airplane for the Ottoman army, an aspect of the new Ottoman woman’s civic involvement. Among various, mostly supportive reactions in the press, the jounal Tasvir-i Efkâr, which had apparently introduced a Western female pilot on its pages, called the act ifrat (an overdoing), and inappropriate for Ottoman women.332 The publication of the association, Kadınlar Dünyası, declared that Belkıs Şevket’s flight proved that Ottoman women were “interested in scientific developments,” they could “do everything that men could,”333 and that they could “compete with their Western counterparts.”334 So, the flight

331 Halide Salih, “Mehâsin’i Okuyan Kardeşlerime,”Mehâsin, no. 6 (Şubat 1324 [/1909]): 418-21.

332 Aziz Haydar, “Bunu mu Beklerdik?” and Naciye Feham, “Tasvir-i Efkar’a,” Kadınlar Dünyası, no. 120 (30 Teşrinisani, 1329 [1913]): 7, 8; Mükerrem Belkıs, “Teyeran Münasebetiyle İki Cereyan,” Kadınlar Dünyası, no. 119 (23 Teşrinisani, 1329 [/1913]): 4-5.

333 Mükerrem Belkıs, “Müsavat-ı Tamme,” (Full Equality) Kadınlar Dünyası, no. 118 (16 Teşrinisani 1329 [/1913]): 2-4.

129

was a remarkably symbolic achievement in itself, and was an argument in support of a dynamic Ottoman Muslim woman identity and pushed the boundaries of various identity configurations such as “Muslim,” “female,” “Eastern” and “modern”.

The Turkish nationalist discourse of the pre-Republican era came with its vision of a new Turkish womanhood as well, which carefully struck the balance between a dual identity, one in public and the other in private. When the multiethnic Ottoman Empire collapsed after WWI, the father of Turkish nationalism and the primary ideologue from the Young Turks’ Committee of Union and Progress (CUP), Ziya Gökalp, came into the spotlight for his views that cultural authenticity, that is based in ancient Turkic roots, should be the foundation of a new political existence. It regarded Islam as a constituent element, and credited Western civilization for its material aspects. Within this framework, there was “a politically active woman who participated in war, served on political committees, and were as courageous as men; she was a socially responsible woman who is concerned about both social welfare and housekeeping instead of leisure and luxury.”335 This view solicited cultured, patriotic and moralistic women proud of their Muslim Turkish identity, and were active and productive equally in both the domestic and public spheres, and served their communities. Halide Edib, a leading member of this intellectual formation in the late Ottoman Empire period, believed that Turkish women, except for hardworking village women, needed to abandon laziness, and that they could be successful in different areas of life concurrently, just like the exemplars of English and American women who

334 Belkıs Şevket, “Uçarken,” Kadınlar Dünyası, no. 120 (30 Teşrinisani 1329 [/1913]): 3-4. For an account and evaluation of the implications of Belkıs Şevket’s flight, see Serpil Atamaz, “The Sky is the Limit: Nationalism, Feminism, Modernity, and Turkish Historiography,” International Journal of Turkish Studies 20, no. 1-2 (2014): 85-101.

335 Ayşe Durakbaşa, “The Formation of Kemalist Female Identity: A Historical-Cultural Perspective” (master’s thesis, Boğaziçi University, 1987): 71-72.

130

operated efficaciously in professional and domestic spheres.336 She prescribed further deindividualization and popularization of ideals in which people demanded rights and services, including those pertaining to women, not for their own sake but for the well being of the country. Middle- and lower class Islamic women of Turkey in their modest public attire and morality, and their diligence, enthusiasm and devotion to the nation, symbolized the nation’s honor. They averred that traditional culture could be incorporated into these new conditions, rather than the small group of elitist, superficially Westernized women with limited interests in women’s conditions and common goals, and preoccupied with their individual comfort and their husbands and children.337 Writers of this period, such as Müfide Ferit, also emphasized cooperation and companionship between men and women towards achieving mutual ideals, on condition that women’s education was realized under equal and convenient circumstances.338 Hence, in the nationalist discourse, Ottoman Turkish women were projected to assume responsibility and to show sacrifice in the social arena next to their “natural” duties at home, similar to the many other countries undergoing nation formation. The move to support women in the public sphere, with an understanding about their primary obligations being home and family, evolved into one that considered women’s involvement in communal life equally indispensable for the nation, thereby attributing to them a double mission. There, the emphases on the ideas that the personal gain and motive may not legitimize their public presence, and domestic roles may not fall

336 Şefika Kurnaz, İkinci Meşrutiyet Döneminde Türk Kadını (Istanbul: M.E.B., 1996), 38.

337 Halide Salih, “Beşiği Sallayan El Dünyaya Hükmeder,” Tanin, no. 6 (24 Temmuz 1324 [/1908]): 2-3; Derya İner, “Halide Edib Adıvar's Role As a Social Reformer and Contributor to Public Debate on Constitutionalism, Status of Women, Educational Reform, Ottoman Minorities, and Nationalism During the Young Turk Era (1908-1918)” (PhD diss., University of Wisconsin-Madison, 2011); 86-87, 91-92.

338 Müfide Ferit, “Feminizm-1,” Türk Kadını, no. 20 (17 Nisan 1335 [/1919]), 307.

131

into a secondary position, reemerged more strongly, and drew the boundaries of Ottoman Turkish women’s new roles and identities in a way that preserved the (en)gendered hierarchies and scrutinized women’s self-regulating activity.

A journal article expressed the views of graduates from the İnas Darülfünun (Women’s University) on the topic as follows: “Our prospective association should... change women’s minds about a wrong idea, namely the delusion of favoring the ability to support oneself over building a family and the so-called ‘submitting to the authority of men’; and we should explain that building a family is as important for women as receiving an education and having the ability to sustain oneself.”339 Afife Kemal’s play, İrşâd-ı Şebâb (Guiding the Youth),340 written during this period, aimed to demonstrate how the ideas against building a family that were developed by educated women could harm the nation and why women needed to fulfill the divine role of motherhood. Different European women were held up as role models for the new Turkish woman in the relevant discourse. The famous educator Ethem Nejat spoke highly of German women’s housewifery and criticized the Ottoman women of the day that chose to imitate French women, and their perceived lack of responsibility for their households, and busied themselves with grooming and social activities. These are not like the ignorant and nagging ladies of yesterday, but the knowledge they possess is superficial. They are far from being housewives and are incapable of building a happy life with their children. Conversely, the new, patriotic generation would launch the true Turkish woman, and who would also be a “family

339 “Kadınlık Şuunu, İnas Darülfünunu Mezunelerinin Cemiyetleri,” Türk Kadını, no. 2 (6 Haziran 1334 [/1918]): 31.

340 Afife Kemal, İrşâd-ı Şebâb (Matbaa-i Âmire, 1334 [/1915/6/7/8]).

132

woman.”341 Gender-normative roles such as child-rearing, domestic labor, or participation in politics were never really made an issue of in public debate by female or male intellectuals in the Empire; moreover, men’s superior position in marriage and divorce was kept intact despite prolonged debates, and reforms in the Ottoman Law of Family Rights of 1917.342

Since the 1890s, Ottomans tried to create, promote, and enforce their visions of shifting Ottoman identities through the press, and bitter debates between various ideological positions dominated the second Constitutional period (1908-19). Women were both the objects and subjects of this debate. They were an important part of cultural politics during the period of transformation, in which the vision of the new and proper Ottoman woman, progressive, but indigenous, was commonly identified as the benchmark of Ottoman cultural integrity, from within the attempts at a conservative modernity. This vision was being negotiated in the literary arena directly and indirectly by diverse actors owning dissimilar viewpoints, including Ottoman Muslim women who took up the pen. Kandiyoti suggests that the position of women was so closely identified with Ottoman cultural integrity that it “continued to elicit reflexes which united men, sometimes across political persuasions, well into the Republican period.”343 Women as well, did not appear in a position of refusal with regard to such prevailing ideas about women’s modesty,

341 Ethem Nejat, “Evsiz Barksız Hanımlar,” Türk Kadını, no. 5 (18 Temmuz 1334 [/1918]): 69-71; “Evladsız Anneler,” Türk Kadını, no. 4 (4 Temmuz 1334 [1918]): 52-53. Female writer Şukufe Nihal criticized him for this view in the same journal. See, “Evli Barklı Hanımlar,” Türk Kadını, no. 6 (1 Ağustos 1334 [/1918]): 83-85.

342 See Judith E. Tucker, “Revisiting Reform: Women and the Ottoman Law of Family Rights, 1917,” The Arab Studies Journal 4, no. 2 (Fall 1996): 4-17.

343 Deniz Kandiyoti, “End of Empire: Islam, Nationalism and Women in Turkey,” in Women, Islam and the State, ed. Deniz Kandiyoti (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1991), 43.

133

femininity or adoption of Western ways. On the contrary, they seem to have resorted to these very ideas to provide justification for their new roles and appearances, with Islamic, nationalistic or feminist considerations as seen above.

On the other hand, as we will see in the following units, the traditional interpretations, manifestations and scope of such hegemonic assertions were being undermined or reworked by a range of claims, propositions and adjustments made by women, and by their diverse alliances and conflicts exhibited in discussions of relevant issues, such as public writing, public attire and nondomestic activity. Their collective contribution brought about an agency in the literary arena that counteracted the sponsored profiles of the new Ottoman woman as it related to its constructions. As connoted in the theory of negotiation,344 a process of contestatory responses to normative attitudes could result in compromises on the part of the dominant. Moreover, literary theorists’ characterizations of a double-voiced women’s literature,345 which reflects women’s distinctive culture, and creates an intellectual subcurrent, confirm that women’s writing, even that which appears subservient to the hegemonic discourse, is potentially disturbing to it, due to the subtext built into the body of the main discourse.

Ottoman women’s emergence into public writing and their involvement in the larger discussion of proper social change in the late 19th century not only created a critical

344 See Antonio Gramsci, Selections from the Prison Notebooks of Antonio Gramsci, ed. and trans. Quintin Hoare and Geoffrey N. Smith (New York: International Publishers, 1971).

345 See Mary Ellmann, Thinking About Women (New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1968); Sandra M. Gilbert and Susan Gubar, The Madwoman in the Attic: The Woman Writer and the Nineteenth-Century Literary Imagination (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1984); Elaine Showalter, A Literature of Their Own: British Women Novelists from Brontë to Lessing (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1977);“Feminist Criticism in the Wilderness,” Critical Inquiry 8, no. 2, Writing and Sexual Difference (Winter, 1981): 179-205.

134

agent that intervened in discourses, but it was how writing women ideologically positioned themselves in the literary arena, which disclosed an individual public identity for themselves. Each time they displayed diverse proximities to Islamic, national, cultural and modern ideas in the literary arena, the boundaries of the late Ottoman woman’s proper existence were revisited, and invariably blurred on how to be a modern, Muslim woman. They demonstrated more actual, explicit, multifaceted and dynamic female identities with individual and subjective contentions, when considering the aforementioned idealized and uniform urban Ottoman Muslim womanhood that was produced in the same venue. The study of the women of letters through their writings shows us the parameters and extent of their public self-presentations in the face of the social, historical, discursive background of the time, together with their negotiations and subjectivities.

5.2 To Write or Not to Be: Public Writing as an Act of Identity Negotiation

The educated, urban woman of the late Ottoman period employed and negotiated new avenues outside of the traditional domain to articulate her new existence, which included writing. The search for a new identity outside of the domestic sphere is manifested in the questioning of, and its relation to, the female characters in such works as Felsefe-i Zenân, Levâyih-i Hayât, Muhâdarât, whose ultimate purpose for their reading and studying, should not be solely for the man they would marry in the future, as they expressed it.346 Authorship seems to be an endeavor that constituted a way to expand the sphere that the new woman related to by corresponding with it. It reclaimed the sanctioned forms of

346 Fatma Aliye Hanım, Hayattan Sahneler (Levâyih-i Hayât), ed. Tülay Gençtürk Demircioğlu (Istanbul: Boğaziçi Üniversitesi Yayınevi, 2002), 90, 92.

135

their public engagement, rather than simply following the male-generated nationalist desire for them to be educated mothers and wives as well as good Muslims.

I will explore the experiences of Ottoman Muslim women of letters who assumed a privilege ordinarily reserved for men, writing in the public sphere, their motivations for taking part in it, and their survival strategies. Thereby, I aim to elicit how women’s public writing impinged upon the gendered perception of womanhood through its negotiation of women’s proper appearances and roles, and its accommodation of cultural and progressivist values. Ottoman literature, religious works and legal treaties depicted the ideal woman as a subject whose virtue resided in her silence and concealment. It was not deemed appropriate for women to publicly express their opinions, feelings or experiences (except in the field of Islamic sciences). Some Ottoman women had composed letters and poetry, or produced a diary or a collection of religious morality stories between the 15th and the mid-19th centuries, as cited before in the unit about their literary tradition, but these works were either private or circulated amongst a limited group of peers. Following the expansion of communication, educational institutions and communal ideologies and movements and the consequent development of the modern public sphere in the late Ottoman era, more women emerged into the literary forum with an unprecedented public voice. Their writing and publishing were justified in discourse as a sign of an enlightened and capable Ottoman woman, and symbolized national progress. However, as we will see below, the gendered perception of women’s public writing persisted throughout history in both familiar and changed forms.

One of the earliest examples of public writing by Ottoman women was divan (Ottoman court) poetry. The content of these poems and response to these women poets

136

and their works demonstrated the existence of a critical look towards women’s literary engagements. Their work was often subject to gender-based evaluations by their male counterparts and literary historiographers, not only in terms of content and quality but also by its mere presence.347 It is also possible to read in women's poetry an uneasiness, a protest regarding society's and their male counterparts' critical view of them and their work. Illustrating this are Şeref Hanım's verses asking God for protection from both her mistakes and against the lash of the poets.348 Havlioğlu suggests that tezkire writers created a specific discourse in which to talk about women poets, where they marginalized women poets based on their gender, and made room for their deficiencies, and speculation about their private lives.349 The persona, beauty and morality of the female poets, be it negative or positive, typically appeared in the tezkire critiques and overshadowed the work itself, and not like

347 One of the most well-known female poets Mihri Hatun (1460-1515) wrote a parallel poem (nazira) to the poet Necati Bey, which was a traditional practice to pay tribute to a poet and to display one's own mastery. According to numerous tezkires (biographical dictionary of poets), Necati Bey found this presumptuous, and called Mihri impertinent in his verses: “Ey benüm şi'rüme nazire diyen / Çıkma râh-ı edebten eyle hazer / Dime ki işte vezn ü hafiyede / Şi'rüm oldı Necatiye hem-ser”. See Metin Hakverdioğlu, “Mihri Hatun Divanı (İnceleme-Metin)” (master’s thesis, Ahmet Yesevi Kazak-Türk Üniversitesi, 1998), 13.

A nazira is “a poem written in emulation of another writer. The Nazira must be in the same meter and have the same rhyme; it should moreover be conceived in a similar spirit… The fascination of Nazira-writing lay in the endeavor to outdo one’s fellow-craftsman on his own chosen ground.” E. J. W. Gibb, A History of Ottoman Poetry, vol. 1 (London: Luzac & Co., 1900), 99.

348 “Beni hıfz eyle hatâdan yâ Rab/ Bir dem ayırma rızâdan ya Rab/ Gerçi bî-ma'nîdir amma sühânım/ Sakla ta'n-ı şu'arâdan yâ Rab” (Oh God, save me from mistakes… Protect me against the reprisals of poets). Also see Kastamonulu Feride Hanım's remonstrance to her mother: “Duhtrine böyle m'ider mâderi söyle bana/ Görmedim billâh cihânda böyle bir âzâr ana” (Is that how a mother treats her daughter/ Never ever seen a scolding like this, mother); and Mihri's confrontation: “Bir müennes yigdürür kim ehl ola/ Bin müzekkerden ki ol nâ-ehl ola” (An efficient woman is much better than/ A thousand inefficient men). See, Yasemin Ertek Markoç, “Klasik Türk Edebiyatında Kadın Şairlere Bir Bakış,” Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi 9, no. 2 (Oct. 2011): 223-35.

349 Didem Havlioğlu, “On the Margins and Between the Lines: Otttoman Women Poets from the Fifteenth to the Twentieth Centuries,” Turkish Historical Review, no. 1 (2010): 33-34. For instance, see the anecdotes on Feride Hanım and Trabzonlu Fitnat Hanım in İbnü'l-Emin Mahmud Kemal İnal, Son Asır Türk Şairleri (Kemâlü'ş-Şuarâ), vol. 1, ed. Müjgân Cunbur (Ankara: Atatürk Kültür Merkezi Yayınları, 1999), 623, 659.

137

the treatment of male poets.350 Although female poets are often praised for their capabilities in poetic expression, the underlying suggestion in tezkires and the general sense in the poet community seems to be that they wander into male territory and it is not expected, if not altogether inappropriate, for women to expect or gain public recognition that men of letters had. This understanding of women’s public writing proposed a gendered identity with configurations of privacy, modesty and limited capacity, and was also reinforced by the anxiety it created for male identity.

While talent, knowledge and creativity in women did not go without acknowledgement and support from patrons of poetry, women's mentors, literary critics, men of letters and others, these qualities brought about an uneasiness on the part of its receptors. Writerly manifestations in women essentially challenged not only the familiar borders of womanhood, but the convenient definitions of manhood as well. Such unease displayed itself in different cultural settings over the centuries in varying ways, and was not unique to the Ottoman Empire or to its Muslim subjects. Its most extreme forms were demonstrated as humiliation by ridicule and insult, and the depiction of women of letters as ugly, unfeminine, pedant, lewd, and prudish. The assault on the woman writer's biological and social identity pinpoints the overarching implications of her writing.351

350 Latifi's tezkire, for example, comments on the purity and virginity of the poets Zeynep Hatun (d. 1474) and Mihri Hatun. On one hand, Aşık's tezkire presents Mihri as a pious, virginal, beautiful and modest woman, and a coquette on the other. About the representations of female poets in tezkires see Walter Andrews and Mehmet Kalpaklı, The Age of Beloveds: Love and the Beloved in Early-Modern Ottoman and European Culture and Society (Durham: Duke University Press, 2005), 197-216.

351 The case with Madeleine de Scudery and Lady Mary Wroth, and Molière's plays Les Précieuses Ridicules and Les Femmes Savantes probably present the most infamous examples. Lord Denny, one of the contemporary critics of Lady Mary Wroth’s Urania (1651), the first work of romance by an Englishwoman during the Renaissance, being bothered by the content of the book, wrote the following critique about the author: “Hermaphrodite in show, in deed a monster/ As by thy works and words all men may conster/ Thy wrathful spite conceived an Idell book/ Brought forth a foole which like the damme doth look./ ... leave idle books alone/ For wise and worthyer women have written none.” See Josephine A. Roberts, “An Unpublished

138

In the 17th century, contemporaneous Ottoman women's engagement in love poetry, the most popular form of divan literature and of women's writing, was high, and in her cultural network, a similar confusion was generated as to the gendered identities. The woman poet, as a female, gave voice to the lover and effectuated a female self-presentation in her poetry, as opposed to the idealized feminine beloved in the poetic tradition. Thus, she took a masculine part and left the male poet in a quandary. Either becoming a poet was the same as abandoning the (supposedly) female virtues for a woman, or the presumed gender distinctions and categories no longer held.352 The story of “Tashih” written by Makbule Leman in 1895 aimed to convince men that they needed educated wives at home, which shows that the same anxiety persisted up until the late Ottoman era. The story critically demonstrates why some Ottoman men might have felt uncomfortable about having wives who could write, with the male character speaking humorously on the topic:

I don't want that sir, I don't. I can never concede that a woman who will become my partner in life can also do my job. Oh, dear! Even if I will sigh for a woman's face till doomsday, I still couldn't develop intimacy with such a woman. A woman using a writing kit, my pens and papers is to say that she needs to wear my coat and fez as well and I should dress as a lady... I have never been fond of a woman who resembles a man.353

An intelligent and talented female with a public personality disturbed the projected male identity and endangered the reach of its provisions, too. In fact, the atmosphere of censure towards women’s writing could be witnessed up until to the more contemporary periods,

Literary Quarrel Concerning the Suppression of Mary Wroth's “Urania” (1621),” Notes and Queries 22 (Dec. 1977): 533.

352 See Andrews and Kalpaklı, The Age of Beloveds, 198.

353 The original: “İstemem efendim, istemem. Hayatıma iştirâk edecek bir kadının mesleğime iştirâk etmesini hiç kaldıramam. Oh canım! Kıyâmete kadar kadın yüzüne hasret kalsam yine böylesiyle ünsiyyet edemem.Yazı takımı, kalemlerimi, kağıtlarımı kullanan kadına demek ki paltomu fesimi de giydirmeli de ben soyunup dökünüp hanım olmalı… Erkeğe benzeyen kadından hiç hoşlanmam!” See Makbule Leman, “Tashih,” in Ma'kes-i Hayal (Dersaadet: Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete Kütübhanesi, 1314 [/1897/8]): 31.

139

which came from a choice to withhold appreciation in order to deter women from their desire to prove their brainpower, as it is assumed that they typically and chiefly wrote with this motivation, Madame de Staël argued.354 Yusuf İzzeddin, the eldest son of the late Ottoman Sultan Abdulaziz, asserted that women’s highest virtues were chastity and delicateness and not intelligence, wisdom, or ingenuity, and that the latter qualities would not benefit but only harm women.355 The celebrated female troubadours (âşık) in Turkey today, such as Sarıcakız and Sinem Bacı, who compose and sing poems, playing saz (a stringed musical instrument), like their male peers, have expressed that their success and popularity have caused problems with their husbands and damaged their ties with other male bards.356 These examples attest to the fact that the survival of en/gendered identities continues to be critical for the preservation of certain privileges enjoyed by men in the elite/educated or popular circles.

Women, the usual occupiers of the private space, appeared in public discourse in the late Ottoman period, as soon as they took up the pen, and assumed roles next to men as producers of knowledge and opinion in areas that concern not only women but also the state and society in general. In cultures where there were stricter gender-based divisions between public and private, such as the case in early modern China, women of letters derived their strength from adhering to the inner sphere, which was associated with women.

354 Madame de Staël, Edebiyata Dair, trans. Safiye and Vehdi Hatay (Ankara: Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı Yayınları, 1989), 341.

355 The original: “Kadınlar için en büyük fazilet iffet ve ismettir. Bir kadın akıl ve zekasiyle, ilim ve marifetiyle metholunmaz... akıl ve zekasından, ilim ve marifetinden fayda yerine zarar gelir.” Quote from a letter from Yusuf İzzeddin to his third wife, Tazende Hanım, dated 1316 [/1898/9/1900/1]. Necmeddin Erim, “Yusuf İzzeddine Dair Yeni Vesikalar,” Tarih dünyası 1 (1950): 211-12.

356 Ayfer Yılmaz, “Geçmişten Günümüze Kadın Şairlerin Konumuna Genel Bir Bakış,” 21. Yüzyılda Eğitim ve Toplum 1, no. 2 (Aug. 2012): 60.

140

As women's culture did not meddle in, and their perspective did not enter, the mainstream, their writing faced less confrontation.357 However, when the delineation of the notions of public and private became more flexible, as it was in Europe in the same period, to write and be published meant to step out of the private sphere and enter into the public discourse; hence, it disturbed the usual occupiers of this realm. Using this analogy, it appears that learned and literary Ottoman women in the late 19th century had blurred the line between the public and the private more than ever, since they had increasingly moved out of the preceding literary manifestations in terms of its forms, themes, pursuits and settings, and adjusted themselves to the contemporary patterns of intellectual production in the public arena. Still, the professional training and recognition of female writers remained a challenge in terms of gendered hierarchies.

Recognition in the field of divan poetry traditionally required establishing a degree of reputation among other poets through participation and networking in social gatherings (meclis) and building professional relationships. Ottoman women of letters (such as the 15th- century poetess Mihri and the 19th- century writer Fatma Aliye) were known to work with male mentors, while observing certain rules such as a visual divider, bodily covering, or age difference with the mentor, but due to the segregation of sexes in society which gradually increased after the 16th century, women's participation in literary circles could not be an ordinary practice. The poet Nigar binti Osman (1862-1918) was able to organize Tuesday gatherings in her home in late Ottoman times,358 which was similar to the

357 Marie Florine Bruneau, “Learned and Literary Women in Late Imperial China and Early Modern Europe,” Late Imperial China 13, no.1 (June 1992): 162-63.

358 Nigar binti Osman's Tuesday gatherings are reported to be the first of this kind. The poet and composer Leyla Saz’s son, Yusuf Razi, related that at these gatherings, Nigar entertained women who would not mingle with gentlemen before 4:00 in the afternoon, and other mixed gatherings would happen after 4:00.

141

European salon model, where female and male literati, distinguished artists and politicians all mingled together. Later, İhsan Raif Hanım and her husband Şahabettin Süleyman also held meetings in their home once or twice a week, and prominent literati of the period like Ahmet Haşim, Yahya Kemal and Yakup Kadri were among the invitees. This reflected changing value judgements in Westernized high-class circles in Ottoman society at the time, but were highly exceptional in nature for the period preceding the Republic.359 Renowned Turkish literary figure Ahmet Hamdi Tanpınar’s (1901-1962) memoirs show that the same cultural codes that impeded literary women in their professional communications and training were transferred to the new century to a large extent. He related that he and his fellow college students would go to coffeehouses with their professor and the great poet Yahya Kemal when they did not have class, but their female friends were upset as they could not participate in these informal meetings.360 The 19th- century women of letters in the West operated in corresponding conditions; while male writers moved actively in public, were able to interact with each other at universities, coffeehouses and in other literary circles, women were largely isolated at home, barred from universities,361 and

See Taha Ay, “En Yaşlı Kadın Şairimiz Leyla Hanımefendi,” Yedigün [7 gün], no. 70 (July 11, 1934): 8. Nigar also wrote that she had always designated a separate room for her lady guests who chose to stay secluded. Abdülhak Şinasi indicates Nigar's Tuesday meetings started after the restoration of the Constitution in 1908 (See Abdülhak Şinasi [Hisar], “Ediplerimize Dair Hatıralar. Nigâr Hanım,” n.p., June 27, 1931 or Abdülhak Şinasi Hisar, “Geçmiş Zaman Edipleri: Nigar binti Osman II,” Türk Yurdu, no. 264 (Jan. 1957): 532.) but Nazan Bekiroğlu explains she encountered the Tuesday meetings (journée de réception) in Nigar's diary as early as 1889. See Nazan Bekiroğlu, Şair Nigar Hanım (Istanbul: İletişim, 1998), 177-78. It could be that the meetings before 1908 were taking place irregularly and were more informal.

359 In the early years of the Republic, women of letters such as Şukufe Nihal, Nezihe Muhiddin and Halide Nusret were known to have friendships with prominent men of letters, with whom they met for talks about literature.

360 Ahmet Hamdi Tanpınar, Yahya Kemal (Istanbul: Dergah Yayınları, 2011), 20.

361 The Ottoman Women's University was opened in 1914; after 1921, female and male students' classes were merged gradually, shortly before the birth of the Republic.

142

could not travel freely and had restricted friendships, Ellen Moers states.362 Yet, the actual difficulty for women of letters was rather the social indifference; and the hostility of the world. The women who were told, in Virginia Woolf's words: “Write if you choose, it makes no difference”363 could even be considered lucky at times.

As aforementioned, the peculiarities of the 19th- century Ottoman Empire allowed women to emerge as writers in the public realm towards the end of the century. Women's education was regarded by the intellectual and the bureaucratic elite as essential to social progress, and a necessity for the current day and age. Continuous attempts to modernize public and private education and to develop journalistic writing cleared room for urban Muslim women in the public sphere and contributed to their intellectual formation and literary existence. Women's writing was acknowledged insofar as it was regarded as a sign of progressive Ottoman womanhood. Yet, a large-scale push to educate women for the sake of the public good and the questioning in intellectual circles about traditional gender relations neither translated into a general acceptance and appreciation of learned and literary women nor relief for the 19th- century Ottoman women of letters from their anxieties and doubts experienced by their predecessors and contemporaries.

Although both men and women advocated change in the position of women in the modernizing Ottoman society, there was a fear of the impact of educating women in composition. Ottoman diplomat and scholar Halil Halid, who published his autobiography in 1903, mentions in one of his books that his mother was one of the most well-read women

362 Ellen Moers, Literary Women (New York: Oxford University Press, 1985), 43. The salons where men and women from different segments of society came together to converse about literary, social and political topics existed in Europe since the 16th century.

363 Virginia Woolf, A Room of One’s Own (New York: Harcourt, Brace and Co., 1929), 91.

143

in their town, and that others would come to hear her read sacred legends alound, but she was not allowed to learn how to write. Writing was believed to potentially lead women to commit indecent acts such as composing love letters to young men.364 The custom of segregation did not allow free communication between opposite sexes. Through writing, it was feared that women would have a form of contact with men, and this could endanger the moral standards of the established order. A 1912 publication titled “How to Marry Girls?”, a translation by Avanzade Mehmet Süleyman, a prolific writer of women- and family related issues, warned families to look for girls who wrote letters or notes and looked pale, as if in love, and advised them that, “if she writes letters, prevent her and explain ..that such habits are not good.”365 Another prominent figure Ahmet Rasim similarly relates in his memoirs of the Ottoman press that reading and writing abilities were undesirable and distrusted in a woman even among learned and literary men. He recalls an incident where a young poet was degraded for his unmannerly and unethical take on a poem of Nigar binti Osman’s who had, according to the author, “an established moral standing in public.”366 Again, the poet and composer Leyla Saz (b. 1850) tells about an “ignorant” woman she met in a neighborhood in the city of Kastamonu. While Leyla Saz was looking for the house of another poet friend, Ferîde Hanım, she stopped a woman for directions who referred to Ferîde Hanım reproachfully, saying that although “a daughter of the Bahar-zâde family,” she writes to earn her living; and that Feride writes “notes, letters and petitions,

364 Halil Halid, The Diary of A Turk (London: Adam and Charles Black, 1903), 19-20.

365 Kızları Nasıl Evlendirmeli?, trans. Avanzade Mehmet Süleyman (Dersaadet: Necm-i İstikbal Matbaası, 1330 [1911/5]): 4.

366 The original: “Ahlâkının yüceliği ve nezâhetli hali hepimizce bilinen” See Ahmet Rasim, “İstibdâd-ı Edebî'de Kadınlar,” Matbuât Hâtıralarından: Muharrir, Şair, Edib (1924), ed. Kazım Yetiş (Istanbul: Tercüman, 1980): 195-96, 193.

144

and her writing is in the hands of men working in the government.”367 Şukufe Nihal stated that she started writing stories when she was little but she hid them as though it were a shameful act, just as Güzide Sabri had done. In fact, when Güzide Sabri's religion tutor saw a piece of her writing, he got angry and told her that she should learn the basics of her religion before imitating poets.368 Likewise, the novelist Muazzez Tahsin wrote a lot when she was a schoolchild but hid her writing from everybody and eventually destroyed it, for she was terrified that somebody would see it.369 These stories suggest that the public’s negative perception of writing women that came from their family, peers and the rest of society persisted in the late Ottoman era and became more visible as more women wrote. Writing meant being in the public eye, and this could hurt the reputation of a woman, who was expected to be secluded and reserved, in different ways.

The new roles assigned to Ottoman women in the name of societal progress and the associated developments encouraged women's presence in the public sphere, while the practice and the discourse of this presence were conditioned by still relevant gender definitions and the absence of an established female tradition as such. This introduces, as exemplified below, the hesitations that a talented woman might feel concerning the presentation of her self as a rightful occupier of the public space with a traditionally male engagement.

367 The original: “Bahar-zâde Kızı” “şukkâ yazar, nâme yazar, arz-ı hâl yazar, yazısını hükumetde erkekler okur.” İnal, Son Asır Türk Şairleri, 623.

368 Güzide Sabri Aygün, “Hatıratımdan Birkaç Yaprak,” Gecenin Esrarı (Istanbul: İkbal Kütüphanesi: Hüseyin, 1934), 9-10.

369 Muazzez Tahsin Berkand, Kırılan Ümitler (Istanbul: İnkılap ve Aka Kitabevleri, 1970), 7-8.

145

Gilbert and Gubar assert that women attempting to take up the pen for the first time were often overwhelmed by feelings of self-doubt and inadequacy, and this is what women's upbringings was almost designed to induce.370 A politically and intellectually active figure of the late Ottoman era, Emine Semiye, used the pen name Emine Vahide for her first publication because, as she said, she did not think she was competent enough to join the ranks of the famous female literati but couldn't resist her passion for progress either.371 At 15, the prolific writer Muazzez Tahsin wrote a letter to a friend that, as a child, she used to tear her writing into pieces as if writing was a sin, but she did the same today for she doubted her competency this time. “I tell myself: You fool! Who are you to dare to write?... Why not, İsmet? You tell me... What do I lack?”372 Fatma Aliye, a powerful female voice in the predominantly male Turkish literary and intellectual establishment in Constantinople, recounted the first time she wrote something of her own to be published. It was the preface of a novel she translated from French, George Ohnet's Volonté (1888). She commented that: “If I had any hope for myself, it was just to be able to understand French well. I never imagined that anything I wrote in Turkish could be good enough.”373 Why would a woman like Fatma Aliye, who had all the necessary qualifications and the

370 Sandra M. Gilbert and Susan Gubar, The Madwoman in the Attic: The Woman Writer and the Nineteenth-Century Literary Imagination (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1984), 59-60.

371 The original: “Şöhretli edibelerimiz arasına katılmağa kendimde iktidar göremediğim ve halbuki arzu-yı terakkiperveraneme de galebe edemediğim için.” Emine Semiye- Binti Cevdet, “Binti Ahmed Remziye Hanımefendi hazretlerine cevap,” Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete, no. 75 (8 Ağustos 1312 [1896]): 4.

372 Berkand, Kırılan Ümitler, 7-8.

373 The original: “Kendimden bir ümidim varsa o da Fransızcayı iyi anlayabilmekten ibaretti. Yoksa Türkçe yazdığım şeylerin iyi olabilecekleri hatırımdan bile geçmiyordu.” See Ahmet Mithat Efendi, Fatma Aliye Hanım yahut Bir Muharrire-i Osmaniyenin Neşeti, ed. Müge Galin, trans. Lynda Goodsell Blake (Istanbul: İsis Yayıncılık, 1998), 71.

146

spirit, too, doubt that she could create anything good in her own language? Could this be a typical feeling for any writer to have? Fatma Aliye's education and literary training is a process that involved, besides her own effort, both facilitation and restriction in her intellectual surroundings at once. She had her own room, a study desk, a bookshelf and private tutors for various subjects, but it appears that she started studying French but later secretly read novels and translated works until she was permitted by her family to do so. Her cautious approach and the circumspect consent she received from her father and husband for furthering the scope of her literary pursuits, when evaluated together, give us a hint to her state of mind when she first successfully wrote down her ideas. She was disillusioned about her abilities and was rediscovering the limits of her proper engagements and appearances, implied by her female education and education in femininity. The household education of girls in upper-class families was considerably advanced; however, it was not intended to elicit or encourage such practical skills as writing and translating for general distribution, but rather, to bring up cultured and refined girls. Indeed, once her father Ahmet Cevdet Paşa, a renowned scholar and a traditionalist statesman, found out about his daughter's remarkable skills, he commented that Fatma Aliye's mind could work well beyond her limited training, saying, “provided that she were a boy, she would have to receive a more systematic education and she would become a genius,”374 echoing the creator of a female Shakespeare in A Room of One's Own. Her aptitude was sought in a boy yet she was a girl. Conscious about the prioritization of her gender in how her self was perceived in general, Fatma Aliye signed her first printed work, Meram (Volonté), as “A

374 The original: “Erkek olmalı imiş de muntazam tahsil görmeli imiş. Hakikaten bir dahiye-i uzmâ kesilir idi.” Ibid., 75.

147

Woman” (Bir Kadın) in 1890,375 hiding her name, though not her gender, as mentioned previously in the unit about the identification of writers. Besides, many Ottomans deemed the preoccupation with the nonindigenous genre of the novel menacing, particularly in women.

Fatma Aliye’s mere announcement of her female identity in her first appearance in literary circles left the reading public astonished. People thought this fine translation belonged to a man. After the author's identity was disclosed, they believed it was actually done by Fatma Aliye's brother, or that it was edited and corrected by her father or her favorite author, Ahmet Mithat. As a matter of fact, these persons disapproved or were unaware of her work. Likewise, the public was surprised and began to look for a man's name when it encountered work of other female writers in popular newspapers in the late 19th century. Some of these works were nontraditional in style and expression, which was a new inclination for even mainstream literary circles. Ahmet Rasim regretted that he had deemed Mihrünnisa Hanım’s poetry in Hazîne-i Evrak to be “too good to actually belong to a woman.”376 Makbule Leman's name was assumed to be one of the pseudonyms of Muallim Naci, the director of the newspaper Tercümân-ı Hakîkat where she published, because “people couldn't assign that power of expression to a woman.”377 Women were quick to disprove attributions of inadequacy and seemed confident in public through their

375 George Ohnet, Meram, trans. Bir Kadın (Istanbul: Kitabci Kasbar, 1307).

376 The original: “Bir kadının benim tahayyülümün üzerinde böyle bir neşide sahibesi olduğuna adeta inanmak istememiştim.” Ahmet Rasim, “İstibdâd-ı Edebî'de Kadınlar,” 192.

377 The original: “.. o kudret-i kalemiyeyi bir kadına veremediklerinden” Fatma Aliye, “Makbule Leman,” Tercüman-ı Hakikat Nüsha-i Fevkaladesi (June 19, 1897): 28-29, quoted in Firdevs Canbaz, “Fatma Aliye Hanım'ın Romanlarında Kadın Sorunu,” (master’s thesis, Bilkent University, 2005), 78.

148

work, but we do not have much evidence regarding their personal experiences with feelings of inadequacy, especially among those writing anonymously.

As one of the first female translators of the novel, which was a new genre for the Ottomans in any case, Fatma Aliye's initial self-concealment in her use of “A Woman” fulfilled another function besides provoking second thoughts about women's potential: protecting her public identity until she had seen the reactions. She wrote in the preface of her translation that the litterateurs had usually been sympathetic towards men who published their first work, so, in turn, she hoped they would not deny the same to women like herself newly appearing in literary circles either; they would excuse her mistakes and not let her down in her desire to encourage and set an example for the ladies on the same path.378 Her appeal revealed women's precarious position in the field. Lack of an established tradition in women’s public writing meant that the late 19th- century woman of letters had to confront precursors who were almost exclusively male, and therefore considerably different from herself.379 These precursors would try to corral her within designations of her person, as well as her potential, as confirmed by what her predecessors experienced. The mood can be felt in a recounting by Makbule Leman, one of the first women to publish in a general-appeal periodical in the early 1880s.380 Makbule Leman expressed that she had felt very lonely and weak when she had taken that first shy step into the world of publishing.381 After Fatma Aliye made her first appearance, Ahmet Mithat not

378 Bir Kadın, “Dibace,” in George Ohnet, Meram, 2-3.

379 Gilbert and Gubar, The Madwoman in the Attic, 48-49.

380 Abdülhak Mihrünnisa Hanım and “L... Hanım” [Leyla Hanım] also have such early publications in Hazine-i Evrak in 1881 (1297), and, we are aware of a poem by Maide Hanım (1830-1881) which was published in the Basiret newspaper imploring women to help the nation.

149

only encouraged her in his private letters to her, but also afterwards mediated her reception among the literati as her mentor. He commended and presented Fatma Aliye in the preface he wrote for her novel, Muhâdarât (Conversations/Stories, 1891/2), as the virtuous (iffetli) daughter of Ahmet Cevdet Paşa, a shy translator whose competence was above many men of letters.382 Ahmet Mithat desired to reconcile Fatma Aliye's gendered identity and literary presence in the public eye because the word “iffetli” implies the troubled social code on a woman's public visibility and emphasis on “competence” points to the ingrained considerations of a woman's capacity and place in literary practice. He appealed to intellectual circles to uphold the new Ottoman womanhood and to encourage aspiring women writers to that effect. Due to the critical reception and lack of appreciation for their intellectual assertiveness and creativity, the Ottoman women of letters who produced skillful writing, in many instances and for various reasons, went public pseudonymously, kept their work private or even destroyed the work.383 So, the encouragement and intellectual protection that late Ottoman women writers found early on in their careers, as in the case of Fatma Aliye, was of great importance for their emergence into the field. Even the later generations of resolute writers looked for encouragement from the established literary circles. Muazzez Tahsin Berkand expressed in a 1937 letter to Halide Edib: “You don't know how afraid I am. Even though I receive a lot of letters, as well as love and

381 In the original: “Ben bundan on iki, on üç sene mukaddem meydan-ı matbuatta ilk hatve-yi mütereddidânemi attığım zaman kendimi pek tenhalık içinde bulmuş ve kuvvetim kesilecek bir hâle dûçâr olmuştum.” See Makbule Leman, Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete, no. 1 (19 Ağustos 1311 [/1895]): 4. The mentioned publication is: “Hazan,” Müntehabat-ı Tercüman-ı Hakikat 1, no. 14-15 (1884/5?): 434-35.

382 Ahmet Mithat, “Kariîn-i Kirâma,” in Fatma Aliye, Muhâdarât (Kostantiniyye: Kitabcı Arakel, 1309 [/1891/2]): 9, 14.

383 For instance, it has been reported that Banu Cevheriye (1863/4-1914/6) burnt her collection of poems for reasons unknown. See Mehmet Aydın, Ne Yazıyor Bu Kadınlar: Osmanlıdan Günümüze Örnekleriyle Kadın Yazar ve Şairler (Kızılay/ Ankara: İlke Kitabevi Yayınları, 1995): 39.

150

attention from the readers of my novels, the fact remains that there is not a single man of letters who has written even a few words of encouragement or criticism, which so breaks my spirit.”384

Most of the women who wrote enjoyed a favorable intellectual and educational environment through their families and schools, where attainment of knowledge and creative arts were already deemed esteemed pursuits. Arife, Ayşe Sıdıka, Emine Semiye, Fatma Fahrünnisa, Hadice İffet, Abdülhak Mihrünnisa, Nigar binti Osman and Saniye Hanım were all daughters of educators and scholars, like Fatma Aliye. Some women received cooperation, assistance, and endorsement for their literary endeavors from their families before and/or after marriage, such as with Ulviye Mevlan, Halide Nusret and Makbule Leman, while other writers had to endure a harder path fraught with various obstacles. The prolific writer Halide Edib indicates that her English governess made her read English literature when she was a teenager, which, in turn, she says, sowed the seeds of her specialization in writing novels. She had also translated an American pedagogical book, The Mother at Home; or, The Principles of Maternal Duty into Turkish piecemeal as assignments during these lessons; later, Mâder was welcomed and published by her father in 1897 under Halide's name after considerable editing by Mahmud Esad Efendi.385

384 In the original: “Ne kadar korkuyorum bilmezsiniz. Romanlarımızı takip eden karilerden birçok, birçok mektuplar aldığım, onlardan çok sevgi ve alâka gördügüm halde, memlekette eli kalem tutan adamlardan bir tanesinin benim için iki teşvik veya tenkit sözü yazmamaları, benim cesaretimi öyle kırıyor ki…” See İnci Enginün, “İki Mektup (Muazzez Tahsin Berkand-Halide Edip),” Hisar 15, no. 135 (Mar. 1975): 27.

385 Halide Edip said the editing by Mahmud Esad Efendi of her translation changed the work’s language to old-style Turkish, prompting Halide Edip to feel the work was no longer her own. Her father had also sent it to be exhibited at Yildiz Palace; later, the Sultan granted Halide an imperial token, the Şefkat Nişanı (Tenderness Order). Halidé Edib, Memoirs of Halide Edib (New York and London: The Century Co., 1926), 180-81.

151

Some writers specifically mentioned their mothers in their accounts of their upbringing as the first person to stimulate them in a literary sense. Halide Nusret (b. 1901) relates that her mother would read literary works to her children, as well as prepare literary topics for discussion and lead the conversations; she was a natural teacher. She credits her mother with her love of reading and poetry, who also gave her a daybook in which to write in. She also owes, she said, a great deal to her Persian tutor, Molla Hıdır Efendi, for the composition assignments and encouragement that set her off on a path towards a career in writing.386 Her father was also keen on her education but didn't get to see her publish, as Halide Nusret's first public work was a prose poem that she wrote at fifteen commemorating the death of her father, “Ağlayan Kahkahalar” (Weeping Laughs).387 Her Turkish teacher, Pakize, encouraged this first publication. Şukufe Nihal showed her first writings to Hamdullah Suphi (b. 1885), the future minister of education in the last Ottoman parliament of 1920, when she was about thirteen years old; he advised her to not try carving out an artistic style but instead, to focus on conveying reality, using a “serious” language.388 Nigar binti Osman's literary identity as a poet and composer was prepared and nurtured by her family. Nigar and her mother, Emine Rif'ati Hanım, would read poetic verses and plays to each other for entertainment. Nigar’s literary attempts were encouraged particularly by

386 Zorlutuna, Bir Devrin Romanı (Istanbul: Timaş, 2009), 20-21, 75; Halide Nusret Zorlutuna, Yayla Türküsü (Istanbul: Çınaraltı Yayınları, 1943), 2; Nazan Aksoy, Kurgulanmış Benlikler: Otobiyografi, Kadın, Cumhuriyet (Istanbul: İletişim, 2009), 117. A prominent man of letters, Şevket Süreyya Aydemir, wrote in his memoirs that his mother, who could both read and write unlike his father, was his first teacher. (Şevket Süreyya Aydemir, Suyu Arayan Adam (Istanbul: Remzi Kitabevi, 1976), 23-24.

387 Nusret-ül Kazımî, “Ağlayan Kahkahalar,” Talebe Defteri, no. 36 (15 Mart 1333 [/1917]).

388 Hasene Ilgaz, “Hamdullah Suphi'den Şükufe Nihal'e Bir Mektup,” Kadın, no. 1057 (Oct. 1973): 4, quoted in Hülya Argunşah, Bir Cumhuriyet Kadını Şükufe Nihal (Istanbul: Timaş, 2011), 80. (H. Suphi's letter is dated 18 Kanunievvel 1325/ Dec. 31, 1909).

152

her father, Osman Paşa, who at times would personally deliver Nigar’s works to the offices of women's journals.389

The nonelite, urban women of letters who did not have private tutors, mentors or personal connections, found their encouragement, and their way to get published, through women's periodicals. These periodicals not only asked their readers to tell others to buy or read their publications, but they were also an accessible venue for aspiring writers because they encouraged reader contributions, and often published their work. Through illustrations and opinion pieces, these journals promoted the reading and writing women, and celebrated their works.390 Furthermore, the acknowledged presence and competence in women's public writing post-1890, which was a result of the increase and visibility of their work in periodicals and individual printings, also inspired and guided writers, which their predecessors had lacked. One early example was the wide reception of the first book of poetry in Turkish by a woman that displayed the conventions of modern literature, Nigar binti Osman's Efsûs (1887). The book inspired and heartened other Muslim women of the time to write, according to a reference in the poet's diary.391 Since the mind of the artist is particularly vulnerable to the opinion of others,392 women's journals on occasion took it upon themselves to defend female writers against attacks on their credibility. In one

389 Nazan Bekiroğlu, Şâir Nigâr Hanım, 31, 36.

390 For instance, see the caption of an illustration of a woman, sitting pensively at her desk, pen in hand, that reads: “I wonder what I shall write!” in Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete, no. 134 (2 Cemaziyelahir 1315 [/1897]): 1; or another one with a woman at her desk that reads: “… Imagine what beautiful work she must be creating!” in Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete, no. 87 (7 Teşrinisani 1312 [/1896]): 4. See Appendix A in this dissertation.

391 Bekiroğlu, 59-60.

392 Woolf, A Room of One’s Own, 98.

153

specific example, the Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete (Ladies’ Own Newspaper, 1895-1908) published an anonymous editorial that argued against a letter published in the mainstream journal İkdam that criticizing the writings of women would not do any good but would only spoil the enthusiasm of novice writers. Such harsh, exaggerated comments were not fair for even the most established writers, let alone women who have not yet reached the desired level of progress, it said. They were both ill-timed in terms of efforts to further both national progress and women's progress, and unjustified, too, as they obviously disregarded many acknowledged female writers in the field like Nigar, Hamiyet Zehra, Emine Vahide and so on.393

For some women who wanted to continue their intellectual development after marriage and/or to become professional writers and write regularly, the main issue proved to be uncooperative husbands, as was the case with prolific novelists Güzide Sabri and Fatma Aliye. Güzide Sabri (b. 1883/6), said in an interview that, while her husband was alive, she waited until he went to bed to take up her writing, as he disapproved of his wife’s public identifiability through her writing. Once he fell asleep, she would sit at her desk and work until morning. Yet, her father sat in on her lessons, read her writings every night and complimented her on them.394 Güzide Sabri achieved fame for her work, Ölmüş Bir Kadının Evrâk-ı Metrûkesi (The Deserted Papers of A Dead Woman), which was published in 1905. People were curious about the author, but not much was discovered about her, probably due to the reservations of her husband, as well as Güzide Sabri's reclusive way of

393 “Hanımlarımızın Yazdıklarını Şimdi mi İntikâd Etmeli?,” Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete, no. 34 (14 Kanunievvel 1311 [/1895]): 2-3.

394 See Hikmet Münir, “Değerli Bir Kadın Romancı: Güzide Sabri..,” Yedigün [7 gün], no. 271 (May 17, 1938): 7-8, 21; and Aygün, “Hatıratımdan Birkaç Yaprak,” 11.

154

life. After getting married, up unil 1887, when she obtained her husband’s consent for her literary pursuits, Fatma Aliye both secretly read novels and translated a French book (Les Sept Péchés Capitaux), without her husband’s knowledge. Şukufe Nihal (b. 1896) expressed that her greatest ambition in life was to live in an atmosphere of art, cultivate herself and be an artist but was married off too young,395 implying that her aspirations did not complement married life. She too had benefited from the intellectual atmosphere of being exposed to distinguished guests, scholarly discussions, and private tutors at home. Yet, it was feared that women's readerly (particularly novels) and writerly engagements would alienate them from their “actual roles” as wives and mothers, and render them disobedient.396 Thus, the aspiring female writers of the late 19th century benefited from the encouraging developments of Ottoman modernization that was taking place in the form of girls' schools’ schools, women's periodicals and the discourse of educated, informed Ottoman women, not to mention the support of people around them, including parents, teachers and mentors. However, they still had to work their way around various obstacles and inherited convictions to realize, and negotiate the borders of, this new intellectual existence, and convince the people around them to let them take their places in the publishing arena. In light of that, I believe that, with the gradual swelling of the numbers of women consumers of public texts, and their simultaneous assumption of writer roles in the late 19th century, we need to evaluate their shared motives, experiences and concerns

395 See the interview with the author in Neriman Malkoç Öztürkmen, Edibeler, Sefireler, Hanımefendiler: İlk Nesil Cumhuriyet Kadınlarıyla Söyleşiler (n.p.: 1999), 26.

396 Hülya Argunşah, “İlk Kadın Yazarlarda Toplumsal Kimliğin Yapılandırılması Sürecinde Babanın Keşfi,” in 21. Yüzyılın Eşiğinde Kadınlar: Değişim ve Güçlenme, Uluslararası Multidisipliner Kadın Kongresi, Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi, Oct. 13-16, 2009 [International Multidisciplinary Congress on Women], vol. 2, ed. Füsun Çoban Döşkaya (Izmir: 9 Eylül University, 2011).

155

that arose from a common position, vis-à-vis the family, state, society and their male counterparts.

Public work, be it as a writer, teacher, orator, philanthropist, association member, nurse, political lobbyer, entrepreneur or artist, was the mark of the new breed of urban, middle- and upper class Ottoman woman in the late 19th and early 20th century. It was a way to communicate their new selves through a newly opened venues. But what were the immediate motives for women to enter the field of public writing?

The first two issues of the first periodical to target women, the weekly Terakkî-i Muhadderât (Progress of Muslim Women, 1869), carried anonymous signatures which probably belonged to the editors. The journal aimed to educate the female public, but it did not directly encourage women to contribute their writing. But, beneath its logo, it declared that it welcomed information from its readers. Women were mainly identified as a segment of the general reading public, and were on the receiving end. Yet, readers continued to embrace the journal and by the third issue, Belkıs, Adile, Rabia and others, declared they would write to the journal to encourage other women to contribute, and to disseminate knowledge. Later, women like Ülker Hanım assumed a writer’s position in the journal through her letters.397 It seems that it was the idea of being a “guiding hand” for the public that drove the first women of letters to engage in public writing, as the writer was deemed in part a teacher, an authority, and a leader. The women's press was basically envisioned as a tool for enlightening women, but the participation of educated women in publishing, presented it also as a forum for women to discuss and share ideas, and thus attracted more women to write. The female owner of the journal Şükûfezar (Flower Garden, 1887), Arife,

397 Terakkî-i Muhadderât, no. 3-48 (1285-86 [/1869-70]).

156

who also contributed to it, said that, as writing women, they needed to collectively disprove the oft-repeated claim of female ineptitude, and declared, “We are a group of people mocked by men as being long-haired and short-minded. We will strive to prove the opposite.”398 Her argument was that writing denoted talent and intelligence, attributes traditionally assigned to men, and that not all women have internalized that misbelief, but they would also work to invalidate it.

Fatma Aliye stated in an early letter that it was her own hope that helped her surmount her insecurities to enter the world of writing, and allowed her to desire to attain the title of “woman of literature” as well.399 Her wish to become a literary persona was echoed in the narratives of subsequent women of letters. Şukufe Nihal said that when she was around nine or ten years old, she experimented with writing romantic stories; she had a desire to write more and “to live the life of an artist.” Her first publication in 1909, at the age of thirteen, was a letter essay bemoaning the lack of a girls' high school and men's indifference towards the issue in spite of its urgency.400 Four years later, she published her first poem.401 Halide Nusret expressed that throughout her life, she sought to become “a great author,” but couldn’t. Nevertheless, she says that at the very least, she produced writing for the good of the country and the nation.402 With the spread of the printing press

398 Arife, “Mukaddime,” Şükûfezar, no. 1 (1301 [/1883/86]): 6.

399 The original: “Ümid olmasa aczimle beraber âlem-i edebiyata girmeğe kalkışmaz ve ol şehrâhda ilerleyip bir edibe ünvânına kesb-i liyakat eylemek hevesinde dahi bulunmazdım.” See “Varaka-i Mahsûsa,” Tercümân-ı Hakikat, no. 3519 (1890): 5.

400 Şukufe Nihal, “İnas Mektepleri Hakkında,” İttihad (Ağustos 1325 [/1909]) and Mahâsin, no. 10 (Eylül 1325 [/1909]): 732-33.

401 “Hazan,” Resimli Kitap 9 (1329 [/1913/4]): 312-13. She was able to pursue her education and literary work actively only after her divorce, thus, she was not able to produce as much as she wished to in her teens.

157

and periodicals in the late Ottoman period, literary works became more visible and available to a broader audience, and even single poems and articles could be easily and readily published. Many letters written by women to Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete articulated a wish to write for the journal, and a wish for their essays, stories and novels be published in the journal,403 indicating a corresponding aspiration among the broadening community of learned Muslim women to step into a literary career and be part of the intellectual community. Ahmet Emin's review of the early 20th- century Ottoman press noted that every day, large numbers of unsolicited articles poured into newspaper offices every day from passionate readers who wished to see their work in print, and/or genuinely desired to further an idea; many of these letter writers were students, women, reformers of every kind and retired officials.404 Getting one's writing published not only implied public recognition as a person of letters, but it also meant a potential public and personal legacy would be established for the writer, as it did with earlier literati like the Ottoman poets. They had often openly expressed in their works that they intended to leave the world a name through their work; as exemplified in the verses of the 16th- century female poet Hubbî 'Aişe: “I labored so that I might be remembered / That people might gladden my soul with a prayer.”405

402 “Halide Nusret Zorlutuna İle Bir Konuşma,” Interviewer: Turgut Günay, Töre (Oct.-Nov. 1973), quoted in Zeki Gürel, Halide Nusret Zorlutuna: Hayatı ve Eserleri (Ankara: Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı, 1988), 65-66.

403 Tezer Taşkıran, Cumhuriyetin 50. Yılında Türk Kadın Hakları (Başbakanlık Kültür Müsteşarlığı: Cumhuriyetin 50. Yıldönümü Yayınları, 1973), 33.

404 Ahmet Emin, The Development of Modern Turkey as Measured by its Press (New York: Columbia University, 1914), 126.

405 Andrews and Kalpaklı, The Age of Beloveds, 212.

158

Some female writers depicted their initial orientation towards writing as an inner drive that was uncontrolled and seductive. Makbule Leman’s desire to step forward was because she was compelled, like how a master addresses a pupil: “Go!” She said, “I heard the call. Yes! It was justified. Eventually, I found a glorious, honorable community.”406 Güzide Sabri explained that her zeal to write had been an eternal addiction. When she was ten-years-old, she took pleasure from her loneliness and great stories came into her mind. The landscapes of their neighborhood provoked a state of melancholy within her; when she resorted to writing out of the need to express what she felt, she realized she found comfort.407 She was one of those literati whose writing was highly self-effusive and self-reflective. Similarly, for Muazzez Tahsin Berkand, it started as an irresistible desire when she was a child. Excited by the feeling, she produced many stories and a novel (1914) as a teenager but did not publish them at the time. She developed an ambition in those years to become a novelist and write only for her self, to survive her self,408 which led to a career as one of Turkey’s most prolific and popular novelists.

Averse to becoming public personalities, many apparently competent contributors, with only one or few published pieces in late Ottoman women's periodicals, seem to have employed writing for reaching a sympathetic community regarding issues they deemed to

406 The original: “Fakat bir hiss-i derûn, bir arzû-yı terakkî sanki bir üstadın şâkirdine hitabı gibi

âmirâne bir surette bana: - Git, Git!... diyordu. İcabet ettim. Oh isabet ettim. Git gide ne şanlı şerefli bir cemiyete vâsıl oldum.” Makbule Leman, Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete, no. 1 (19 Ağustos 1311 [/1897]): 4-5.

407 Aygün, “Hatıratımdan Birkaç Yaprak,” 9.

408 “Yalnız kendim için, kendimi yaşatmak için...” An excerpt from a letter the author wrote to a friend, İsmet, around the time she began writing her first novel Kırılan Ümitler (1914) at 15. The letter is included in the long-delayed publication of the novel in 1957, entitled “Bu Romanın Hikayesi.” To understand her early inclination to write, also see Enginün, “İki Mektup,” 27 and Enver Naci, “Türk Edebiyatında Kadın Romancılar: Muazzez Tahsin Berkand,” Yarım Ay, no. 130 (Apr. 1, 1941): 15.

159

be common, such as Refia Şükrân. She published only a few pieces in the journal Kadın (Woman), but submitted a relatively long critique addressing the conditions of girls' schools. In the piece, she complained that not even one line of writing appeared in the press about girls’ schools since the revolution in 1908, and, thanks to one recent article about the issue, she dared to also write about it. The schools, she emphasized, needed urgent improvement in terms of curriculum, funding and facilities. The revolutionary press surprisingly, and most sadly, kept quiet and ignored the problem, which compelled her to disregard her own incompetencies and take up the pen in the hope that it would provoke others with a true power of expression to treat the issue.409 In fact, Refia Şükrân had another article on the same topic published three issues before, written in a softer tone, that advocated that it was time for women writers to concentrate on publishing more on the other important matter of schooling because they had been consciously deprived of systematic primary and secondary schools and qualified female teachers during the previous highhanded rule [of Abdulhamid II]. It was anticipated that the problem about girls' schools would be taken more seriously and be given high priority in the postrevolutionary women’s press, and that 1908 would serve as much as a turning point for women's education, as it did for press freedom. In the meantime, as Frierson indicated, Sultan Abdulhamid II suffered the disreputable historiographical fate of the prerevolutionary ruler, though women as well as men learned some of their public savvy and confidence in the gazettes, schools and workplaces that were the products of Hamidian efforts of infrastructural modernization.410 The flourishing of the press, that followed the

409 Refia Şükrân, “Terakki İçin Nelere Muhtacız, Mektepler,” Kadın [Salonica], no. 22 (9 Mart 1325 [/1909]): 5-6.

160

restoration of the constitutional monarchy and the lifting of censorship in 1908, appears to have been another factor that inspired other Ottomans in their political, literary and other scholarly intentions in the publishing arena. Most notably, Halide Edib started publishing her work in the year 1908 within Tanin (Resonance), which had clear connections to the revolutionary Union and Progress (İttihat ve Terakkî) party.

Women of letters' signing their work with their own names411 was an indication that they sought an independent public identity through writing. By rendering the ability to produce skillful writing for an audience, and participating in the portrayal of various possible female existences in their works, Ottoman women were intervening in current as well as historic representations of women while carving out their own individual and collective public identities. Their contribution in the literary arena not only became a forceful element in the formation of knowledge and discourse on the femininity, modesty, public visibility, cultivation and competencies of the new Ottoman woman, but also expanded the definitions of such attributes, and of the writing itself as a gendered area of engagement.

410 Elizabeth Frierson, “Unimagined Communities: State, Press, and Gender in the Hamidian Era 1876-1909” (PhD diss., Princeton University, 1996), 29-30.

411 Traditionally, Ottoman women were identified socially in relation to a prominent male family member, namely, as someone's daughter, wife, mother or sister, and not singly referred to by their own names.

CHAPTER 6

WOMEN’S CHANGED PROXIMITIES TO

CONTEMPORARY IDEAS, IDENTITIES

AND PROJECTS

6.1 The Codes of Modesty

In this unit, I investigate late Ottoman women of letters’ involvement in the discourse on female modesty. I explore how their discussions of women’s outside attire and presence in public places reinterpreted the codes of modesty for urban, Muslim women who were caught between their loyalty to indigenous values and their aspirations to be liberated from social restrictions. Their diverse perspectives on relevant issues created a collective female agency that complicated the definitions of modesty for the idealized Ottoman woman, and worked against a settled, homogenized Ottoman discourse that definitively defined the modern Ottoman Muslim woman.

Islam enjoins both men and women to observe modesty in dress and demeanor, to limit attraction between the sexes and to protect privacy and reputation.412 Yet, the attitudes toward its observance and the motives for its enforcement changed throughout history according to regions, cultures and people’s statuses, deriving its inspiration from not only

412 For a discussion of modesty regulations in the Sunni tradition of Islam, see Eli Alshech, “Out of Sight and Therefore Out of Mind: Early Sunni Islamic Modesty Regulations and the Creation of Spheres of Privacy,” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 66, no. 4 (Oct. 2007): 267-90.

162

religious sources, and focusing largely on the modesty of women. Arguments over standards of modesty in women in Muslim societies revolved around veiling and seclusion, namely, women’s clothing choices, visibility and conduct in the public realm and commingling of sexes. Relevant official statements served as one mechanism that kept women from becoming overly involved in politics and from equal participation in social and economic realms of public life.413

In Ottoman society, women’s traditional status in family and society underwent changes with more public and professional roles being open to women and with the development of new ideological viewpoints in the last decades of the Empire, but emphasis in the public discourse on female modesty continued to align with the expectations of gendered behavior, and the desire to regulate female appearances was more assertive. Maintain sexual morality for the the good of society, as well as for the family’s reputation, took on new ground in the late 19th and early 20th century, demonstrating a shift from religious to national signification. Women-related issues formed a pocket of cultural resistance against Christendom in Muslim societies as it was women who were targeted by the alien designs; thus, women came to represent the strong repository of Muslim identity.414 Discourse on Ottoman women’s modesty played an important role in the constructions of a national womanhood that contested Western, non-Muslim morals and was directly tied to the efforts of cultural authenticity against foreign influence. This particular discourse served to obscure men’s need to be reassured about their control over

413 For instances, see Suad Joseph et al., “Modesty Discourses,” Encyclopedia of Women and Islamic Cultures: Family, Law and Politics (Leiden and Boston, Mass.: Brill, 2005): 494-507.

414 Deniz Kandiyoti, “End of Empire: Islam, Nationalism and Women in Turkey,” in Women, Islam and the State, ed. Deniz Kandiyoti (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1991), 7.

163

women while they were out in the sexually integrated public domain. In this regard, modesty regulations appeared to have created limitations for women. Nevertheless, they also provided a framework for the validation of Muslim women’s modern public presence and activity in religious and cultural terms.

The change in the late Ottoman Muslim women’s outside attire became one of the main discussions concerning modesty and Western economic and cultural domination in the late Ottoman period because of its everyday visibility and indications of foreign and allegedly non-Islamic adaptations. So, the issue was discussed in various ways, but I will focus here on the moral/religious aspect of the debate as it was treated in women’s writings. Ottoman women, Muslim and non-Muslim, formed an important consumer base for the European fashion market that came out of: increased international trade, encounters with foreign visitors, teachers and governesses, books and periodicals and advertising tools such as the popular press. Dress has traditionally been a marker of both social status and honor. Wearing the latest Western fashions and displaying a modern look had come to be identified with financial means, education and power at the turn of the century415 but it also seemed to conflict with the rules of Islamic modesty for women. Moreover, contemporary literature, critical of the emulation of European mores, portrayed it as a type of corrupt attitude among higher-class people.

European fashion first began to be adopted indoors and with accessories worn by upper class women. As an outside garment, towards the end of the 19th century, urban Muslim women gradually abandoned the ferace (overcoat) and yaşmak (headgear), while

415 Elizabeth B. Frierson, “Gender, Consumption and Patriotism: The Emergence of an Ottoman Public Sphere,” in Public Islam and the Common Good, ed. Armando Salvatore and Dale F. Eickelman (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2004), 110.

164

the çarşaf, a two-piece body cover, along with a veil for the face (peçe), were revived in a variety of fashionable styles. Yet, the color, fabric, adornments, and the tight-fittedness of the skirts of the çarşafs, and the sheer fabric of the peçe upended the Islamic norms of avoiding attraction and guarding the body in public by properly concealing it. According to Mustafa Âsım, who wrote a series of articles regarding female personal care, fashion trends and beauty/health products in the “Beauty, Dressing and Health” section in Hanım Kızlara Mahsus (Girls’ Own Newspaper), women who were overly dressed up when they went out, as if going to a ball, in çarşafs with short pelerines and transparent face veils, both violated religious norms of covering and ruined morality.416 He criticized women attending prayers and public activities during Ramadan nights in fashionable attire. With an eye to getting themselves out of the house, they used the excuse of going to pray and listen to sermons in the mosque, but what they actually did was attract attention in the mosque, and then, after saying their prayers too quickly, headed for the street, he argued. Thus, they committed sin rather than perform good deeds and infringed on the bounds of moral and religious principles.417 Menswear was modernized by the orders of the government at the beginning of the 19th century; a European-style outfits (trousers, setre and potin) were adopted by state officers, and city residents followed, and, in addition, mens’ headwear changed from the sarık to the fez. Yet, changes in women’s clothes were not welcomed by the Ottoman state as women’s public appearance symbolized traditional values and morals to be emblematically contained or renounced. The state issued decrees

416 In the original: Böyle baloya gidercesine süslenip de üzerlerine de ma‘hud kısa pelerinli çarşafları şeffaf peçeleri aldılar mı, artık ne dinen mesturiyyet kalıyor ve ne de ahlaken mahviyyet!” See Mustafa Âsım, “Çarşaflar ve Peçeler,” Hanım Kızlara Mahsus, no. 89-291 (30 Teşrinisani 1316 [/1900]): 3-4.

417 Mustafa Âsım, “Ramazan Piyasaları,” Hanım Kızlara Mahsus, no. 91-293 (14 Kanunievvel 1316 [/1900]): 2-3.

165

that warned women “in the çarşaf who wandered around immodestly dressed without considering the rules of Islamic covering.”418 After the constitutional revolution of 1908, the state authorities continued to publish warnings for women “who did not dress according to religious imperatives and national morals.”419

The prevailing concession of the time to embrace Western ways after adapting them to Ottoman culture, seemed to also be applicable to Western fashion in women’s periodicals. They published writings critical of transparent veils and tight çarşafs alongside advertisements for fashionable boutiques and items. In her article, “Discussion: From Where Does Fashion Originate?” Gülistan İsmet recommended that people be guided by moderation in following fashion; they should avoid extremes in their adoption or rejection of fashion and they ought to consider their own tastes and body features too.420 For Fatma Aliye, fashion was not necessarily something Muslim women should keep away from. The now traditional clothing items such as the yaşmak and the ferace were not known in earlier periods, and as long as it was compatible with the Islamic codes of covering the hair and body, so the shapes were not outlined, and as long as they were not extravagant, women could dress as they wanted, Turkish- or European-style.421 She expressed that she did not

418 See The Prime Ministrial Ottoman Archives (BOA), İ. ZB. (İrade Zabtiye) 2/15 (18 Ra. 1317 [/1899]).

419 BOA, DH. HMŞ (Dahiliye Nezareti Hukuk Müşavirliği) 17/33 (2 Ağustos 1326/ 1328 Ş. [/1910]); BOA, DH. MUİ (Dahiliye Nezareti Muhaberat-ı Umumiye İdaresi) 121/15 (2 Ağustos 1326/ 1328 Ş. [/1910]); Meral Altındal, “Şeyhülislam Abdurrahman Nesib Efendi’nin Tesettüre Dair Beyannamesi [18 Mart 1328 [/1912]],” Toplumsal Tarih 15, no. 87 (Mar. 2001): 24. For some of the statements from the Office of the Şeyhülislam, the highest religious office that were issued between 1912-19, see Kemal Yakut, “Tek Parti Döneminde Peçe ve Çarşaf,” Tarih ve Toplum, no. 231 (Apr. 2002): 24-25. Also see Appendix B in this dissertation.

420 Gülistan İsmet, “Musâhabe: Moda Nereden Çıkıyor?” Hanım Kızlara Mahsus, no. 88-290 (26 Teşrinisani 1316 [/1900]): 3.

166

believe Islamic covering to be the sole indication of modesty for women.422 In her interview with Fatih Kerimi, she also criticized Ottoman male intellectuals and statesmen, for refusing to acknowledge women’s religious rights and liberties regarding two issues, no matter how enlightened they were: covering and polygamy. Before this view of women was rehabilitated, women and men could not come together, as most men could not control themselves in women’s circles, she noted.423 Women of letters were active in shaping a hybrid modernity for Ottoman women, and their interpretation of the relationship between fashion and Islamic modesty seemed different. The proposed idea that a woman in a European-style outfit had loose morals presented complications for writers who wanted to make more room for personal choice and involved themselves in the evaluations of modesty in Islam that allowed for the variations in the attire of Muslim women.

The Young Turk Revolution of 1908 and its air of freedoms led to more variation in the clothing of urban Muslim women. The new çarşafs dominated the scene and the feraces almost disappeared. “In the first two years of the revolution, women could go to parks and theatres with their male relatives wearing çarşafs that were not far from civilized dress,” the author and activist Nezihe Muhiddin recounted in her book, Türk Kadını (Turkish Woman).424 Beyond the discontent about fashion addiction or violations of the

421 Mübeccel Kızıltan, Fatma Aliye Hanım: Yaşamı-Sanatı-Yapıtları ve Nisvan-ı İslam (1891) (Istanbul: Mutlu Yayıncılık, 1993), 95, 116; Şefika Kurnaz, II. Meşrutiyet Döneminde Türk Kadını (Istanbul: M.E.B., 1996), 38. The Ottoman state had issued regulations in the 18th- and early 19th century regarding ferace styles as well. See the original decrees in Pars Tuğlacı, Osmanlı Döneminde İstanbul Kadınları (Istanbul: Cem Yayınevi, 1984), 11-12, 19-21.

422 Fatma Aliye Hanım Evrakı, 11/3.

423 Fatih Kerimi, İstanbul Mektupları (Istanbul: Çağrı Yayınları, 2001), 264-65.

424 Ayşegül Baykan and Belma Ötüş-Baskett, Nezihe Muhittin ve Türk Kadını (1931) (Istanbul: İletişim, 1999), 92-93.

167

modest clothing code in some circles, the period after the revolution brought to light the concerns as to whether or not women’s Islamic covering could be preserved at all. Tight skirts and sheer face veils were used by women at their own risk, because, women that wore stylish çarşafs or opened face veils had been harassed by engraged members of the public,425 and even, giving into the pressure from conservative circles, by the Istanbul police, who ripped women’s skirts and pelerines with scissors for a temporary period of time.426 Previously in the 1890s, incidents had happened whereby some women wearing the traditional ferace and yaşmak were exposed to similar assaults and restrictions.427 Women’s covering, representing Islamic morality and regulating women’s gendered existences, stood for the conservation of national/religious values in the face of the Western influence experienced in all spheres of Ottoman Muslim life. In one of her published lectures in Kadın (Woman), a journal with close ties to the revolutionary organization CUP, Fehime Nüzhet reprimanded the women who bothered their husbands with such empty fears that Islamic covering would be abolished by the Young Turks as they brought liberties. She declared that it was the most valuable point of pride for women, that no conscientious Muslim woman would want their covering to be banned, and that even the most progressive woman knew that her çarşaf was not an obstacle to progress but that closed-mindedness was.428 Women’s periodicals protested the bigotry and verbal and

425 Ibid., 93-94; P.B., “Beyaz Konferans 8,” ed. Süleyman Bahri, Kadın-İstanbul, no. 8 (24 Mayıs 1328): 2-3.

426 Zafer Toprak, “Tesettürden Telebbüse ya da Çarşaf veya Elbise – ‘Milli Moda’ ve Çarşaf,” Tombak, no. 19 (Apr. 1998): 56. For an example, see Bernard Caporal, Kemalizmde ve Kemalizm Sonrasında Türk Kadını (1919-1970) (Ankara: Türkiye İş Bankası Kültür Yayınları, 1982), 147-48.

427 Fanny Davis, The Ottoman Lady: A Social History from 1718 to 1918 (New York: Greenwood, 1986), 198.

168

physical offenses that were directed at women over their appearances in the public arena.429 People went on to think that anyone who condemned verbal and physical attacks on women who wore short or long çarşafs or sheer or thick face veils as they run an errand tended to be labeled feminists.430 Writer Abdullatif Nevzat criticized the low morality of his fellow men, no matter what their social status, who behaved shamelessly towards women on the streets, and added that they needed the actual “covering.”431 Women of letters, with different ideological orientations and varying attachments to religious and national values, negotiated the codes of female modesty that were attributed to Islamic covering and to particular dress items, and the need for change and tolerance with respect to its manifestations.

In this period, some pro-Western writers brought forth suggestions that Islamic dress be abandoned as it posed an obstacle to societal progress by hindering women’s active participation in social, economic and educational spheres, and in their interactions with others, arguing that morality can be attained without Islamic covering.432 The view seemed to reflect the existing practices of modesty that segregated women by not only diminishing their visibility, but also in the acceptable levels of contact they could have with

428 [Muhterem Hanımefendiler,] Kadın, no. 17 (2 Şubat 1324 [/1909]): 11.

429 For instance, Halide Salih, “Kadınlar İçin,” Tanin no. 103 (31 Teşrinievvel 1324 [/1908]): 2; “Kadınlara Hürmet,” Tanin no. 50 (6 Eylül 1324 [/1908): 7; Ayşe İsmet, “Feryat,” Kadın, no. 20 (23 Şubat 1324 [/1908]): 10; “Şura-yı Ümmetten,” Kadın, no. 3 (27 Teşrinievvel 1324 [/1908]): 13–14; Nesrin Salih, “Türk Kızları,” Kadınlar Dünyası, no. 52 (25 Mayıs 1329 [/1913]): 2-3.

430 Ebuzziya, “Nisaiyyûn,” Mecmua-i Ebuzziya, no. 148 (13 Cemaziyelahir 1330 [/1912]): 226.

431 Abdullatif Nevzat, “İçtimaiyat, Evvela Erkeklerimizi Örtelim,” Sebilürreşad 10, no. 241 (11 Nisan 1329 [/1913]): 112-13.

432 For instance, Abdullah Cevdet, “Tesettür Meselesi,” Mehtab, no. 4 (1 Ağustos 1327 [/1911]): 29-31; Kılıçzade Hakkı, “Tamamen Hallolunmadıkça Bitmeyen Bir Mesele,” İçtihad, no. 92-3 (6 Şubat 1329 [/1914]): 2067-70; Selahaddin Asım, “Tesettür ve Mahiyeti,” İçtihad, no. 100 (3 Nisan 1330 [/1914]): 2255-58.

169

men they did not know, as exemplified in one case of a group of women’s efforts to collect donations to build a girls’ school. A regular contributor to the Kadın journal, a well-known educator and activist for the revolutionary regime, Zekiye, explained in one of her pieces that they could ask men for donations because, as Muslim women, their obligation to maintain a modest outlook (“mestûriyyetimiz”) prevented them from doing so. Therefore, they had to seek men’s cooperation.433 Yet, the idea of doing away with women’s coverings incited reactions from writers, male and female, who predominantly gathered around the journal Sırat-ı Müstakim, and its successor Sebilürreşad. They fiercely defended the Islamic principles of women’s covering which they associated with the nation’s morals and habits. Fatma Zehra described Muslim women’s covering as their “stronghold for modesty and virtue,” and those arguing against it were “adversaries of morality and honor.”434 Meliha Nigar435 and Fatma Aliye argued that the Muslim women of the past were proof that Islamic covering was not an impediment to women’s progress, and thus, Fatma Aliye advocated national progress without breaking away from its Islamic and Turkish identity.436 For Maide Rıza, Muslim women could very well keep covering, the most established form of propriety, while working towards attaining their rights, and men should not be occupied with women’s veils just as women did not comment on men’s attire.437 An

433 Zekiye, “Darülmuallimat’dan Nakiye Hanım’a,” Kadın, no. 21 (2 Mart 1325 [1909]): 5.

434 Fatma Zehra, “Muhterem Sebilürreşad ceride-i İslamiyesi hey’et-i tahririyesi erkan-ı kiramına,” Sebilürreşad 11, no. 278 (26 Kanunievvel 1329 [/1913]): 277-78.

435 Meliha Nigar, “Sebilürreşad ceride-i İslamiyesine,” Sebilürreşad 11, no. 279 (2 Kanunisani 1329 [/1913]): 291-92.

436 Fatma Aliye Hanım Evrakı, 9/1 and 9/3.

437 Maide Rıza, “Kılıçzade Hakkı Bey’e,” Rübab, no. 104 ( (13 Şubat 1329 [/1914]): 57-60, “Cemal Nadir Beyefendi’ye -Hüseyin Hüsnü Bey’in Makaleleri Münasebetiyle-,” Rübab, no. 106 (27 Şubat 1329 [/1914]): 83-87.

170

intellectual reflex to hold on to an indigenous communal identity defined in religio-cultural terms against the uneasiness of losses or ambiguities prevailed in the related writings of women of letters from religious and nationalist circles, and were accompanied by concerns about the preoccupation with trivia and fashion and the so-called moral degeneration associated with the growing influence of Western life-styles. But the concomitant calls for the reinterpretation of relevant cultural traditions, and convictions, coming from the same, or other, cliques conditioned the overall discourse produced by the women of letters. Women’s critiques of the practice of Ottoman Muslim women’s covering targeted its culturally enforced forms and implementations as well as its topicality, purporting a broader understanding of modesty for the contemporary Muslim woman.

Some such critiques came from the daughters of the Ottoman Muslim progressive elite, such as Zeyneb Hanım and Selma Ekrem, who had Western educations and had experienced living in Europe and the US, respectively. They began to address the issue of women’s covering in a more secular, personal or humanistic framework, in contrast to the religious/nationalistic standpoint mentioned above. They wrote from abroad about their frustrations over the cloistering of women behind lattices and curtains in upper-class households and the veiling of girls at young ages. Zeyneb commented that it is almost impossible for Turkish women to enjoy walking as a recreational activity and to view life “without a veil and with eyes that are free.” As she watched children in Europe playing and laughing, with their eyes full of joy, she thought of the children in her own country “who are already veiled at their age. Their childhood has passed before they knew it.”438 Selma

438 Zeyneb Hanoum, A Turkish Woman’s European Impressions, ed. Grace Ellison (Philadelphia, J.B. Lippincott Co.; London: Seeley, Service and Co. Ltd., 1913), 80.

171

Ekrem recounted her state of mind as a child putting on the çarşaf: “I felt my rising horror of [the] veils that covered faces and [the] long skirts that entangled legs. How could I run and play with the tight cords of this misery binding me from hand to foot? …I wanted to feel the wind and the air on my face for ever.”439 The çarşaf and the veil do not represent morality or virtue but confinement, traditions and the will of elders in the autobiographical narratives of both authors. According to the French naval officer and novelist Pierre Loti, who had been in contact with upper class Muslim women when he lived in Ottoman Turkey, Turkish women were granted freedom of thought and reading but moral and physical freedom were withheld from them.440 There was evidently a class component to this evaluation. Upper class women, except those with a relatively more liberal upbringing or those living outside of Ottoman Turkish centers, were usually subject to stricter regulations with respect to seclusion and privacy. Juxtaposing it with the quality education and high level of cultivation they had, the situation was confronted more radically by them, if not internalized conservatively.441 But as of the mid-1910s, the need to reform Muslim women’s street attire in order to reconcile it with the present-day needs of women as participants of the urban, public sphere was publicized widely in nationalist feminist literature, precipitating debates on whether or not the çarşaf and the face veil actually fell under the requirements of Islamic covering for women.

439 Selma Ekrem, Unveiled: The Autobiography of a Turkish Girl (New York: Ives Washburn: Vail-Ballou Press, 1930), 179-80.

440 “The Disenchanted,” Current Literature (1888-1912) XLII, no.1 (Jan. 1907): 109.

441 Roberta Micallef indicates that Zeyneb Hanım describes her unhappiness with her life with the disjuncture between the vision offered by her education in Western literature and her reality. See Roberta Micallef, “Identities in Motion- Reading Two Ottoman Travel Narratives as Life Writing,” Journal of Women's History 25, no. 2 (Summer 2013): 98.

172

Fatma Aliye pointed out to her female European guests in her book Nisvan-ı İslam (Muslim Women), written two decades earlier, that women’s faces were not ordained by Islam as a private part of the body to be covered in the presence of unrelated men, but that face veiling became a custom among the Ottomans.442 Throughout the book, she positioned herself as a member of Muslim Ottoman culture before the Western one, defending regulations in Islamic religion and giving explanations for various local codes of practice. Contemporary women seemed to have owned a comparable position vis-à-vis the West, based on more nationalist grounds and concerns in their discussions. The Kadınlar Dünyası (Women’s World) journal’s contributors indicated that understanding and practices of Muslim women’s concealment changed in the Islamic world according to time and the local customs.443 Agreeing on a form of dress for Ottoman women that did not violate Islamic guidelines, yet was suitable for work outside the home was declared the first objective for the Ottoman Association for the Defense of Women’s Rights (Osmanlı Müdafaa-i Hukuk-ı Nisvan Cemiyeti),444 Kadınlar Dünyası’s associated society. Many writings revolved around the idea that the use of the face veil was an outdated and restrictive practice in the contemporary era, and as Mükerrem Belkıs put it, it humiliated Muslim women, making them look like ogres.445 Aziz Haydar claimed it was unhealthy,

442 The original: “İslam kadınlarının saçları örtülü olunca yüz şeran namahrem değildir… Bu da bizde adet ve teamül olmuştur.” Mübeccel Kızıltan, Fatma Aliye Hanım, 95.

443 Pakize Sadri, “Anadolu İhtisasatı 2,” Kadınlar Dünyası, no. 66 (8 Haziran 1329 [/1913]), “Anadolu İhtisasatı 5,” no. 76 (18 Haziran 1329 [/1913]); Belkıs Şevket, “Tesettür ve peçe,” Kadınlar Dünyası, no. 72 (14 Haziran 1329 [/1913]): 4. 444 “Osmanlı Müdafa-i Hukuk-ı Nisvan Cemiyeti Programı,” Kadınlar Dünyası, no. 55-56 (28-29 Mayıs 1329 [/1913]).

445 Mükerrem Belkıs, “Kıyafet-i Hariciye-i Nisvan,” Kadınlar Dünyası, no. 70 (12 Haziran 1329 [/1913]): 1-2, “İzdivaç ve Usul-i İzdivaç 5,” Kadınlar Dünyası, no. 112 (5 Teşrinievvel 1329 [1913]): 4-5.

173

and nor was it Islamic or even ethical.446 Some women had already thrown back the face veil or discarded it altogether in the years following the 1908 revolution.447 Yet, scandalizing reports surfaced about women in public with their faces visible, such as the following, showed that use of the face veil was still common among women and an expected condition of female modesty, even if it did not secure it, as Ottoman intellectuals such as Ebuzziya argued.448 “Last night, two disgraceful women, dressed in Parisian fashion and without a face veil, entered the Tokatliyan Coffeehouse to collect charitable donations, which was outrageous. Their Islamic dignity…”449 In uncovering the face, they imitated the Europeans with suspect morals, abandoned the good fight for Muslim female integrity and called for the ruin of the nation.450 For the proponents of Islamic, nationalist or Westernist ideologies, the image of the Ottoman woman, as they configured it, was the national identity symbol against the foreign one. Women of letters based their arguments on this view as well to challenge the conviction that the face veil and the çarşaf was proper attire for the new Ottoman woman. In order to show that there existed a wide variety of clothing, Kadınlar Dünyası published photographs of the attire of Muslim women from

446 The original: “Şeriat-ı Muhammediyede peçe yoktur… Peçe ahlaki de değildir… Sıhhi de değildir.” Aziz Haydar, “Biraz Dedikodu,” Kadınlar Dünyası, no. 128 (25 Kanunisani 1329 [/1914]): 3.

447 Nicole Van Os, “Millî Kıyafet: Ottoman Muslim Women and the Nationality of Their Dress,” in Ottomans, vol. 4 of The Turks, eds. Hasan Celal Güzel, C. Cem Oğuz and Osman Karatay (Ankara: Yeni Türkiye Publications, 2002), 583.

448 Ebuzziya remarked: “Şeriat onu muhâfız-ı iffet add etmiyor, ..muhsanât-ı nisânın bir lâzıme-i setresiye olmak üzere ta‘yîn eyliyor.” Ebuzziya, “Tesettür Meselesi,” Mecmua-i Ebuzziya, no.112 (14 Ramazan 1329 [1911]): 1079.

449 Şefika Kurnaz, İkinci Meşrutiyet Döneminde Türk Kadını (Istanbul: M.E.B., 1996), 50.

450 Elisabeth B. Frierson, “Gender, Consumption and Patriotism: The Emergence of an Ottoman Public Sphere,” in Public Islam and the Common Good, ed. Armando Salvatore and Dale F. Eickelman (Leiden and Boston, Brill, 2004), 117-18.

174

different regions including Anatolia. Women of letters, poets and writers such as Fatma Aliye, Aziz Haydar, Nimet Cemil, Belkıs Şevket, Yaşar Nezihe, Müfide Ferit and Emine Semiye had their photos of them taken without a face veil published in journals and books as early as 1913,451 owning the new look and proposing its normalization as modest and progressive.

The talk of national fashion for the Ottoman women largely addressed the Muslim urban population of the Empire. Yet, some writings, like those of Emine Seher Ali, claimed there should be a more inclusive Ottomanist look, which accommodated non-Muslim inhabitants as well,452 though the historical shift towards an Ottoman identity that was Muslim and Turkish was already underway. Regarding Islamic dress, Emine Seher Ali commented that “the renegotiations of Muslim women’s outdoor garments, calling it unnecessary and bad, are futile attempts because we, as Muslim women, have a religion dictating it in the first place and it is mandatory to obey it. What’s more is that we wouldn’t be in this situation if we hadn’t drifted so far away from it.”453 Some groups attributed that the reason behind the defeats in the Balkan Wars (1912-13), where the Ottoman Empire lost territories with Muslim populations, was the violation of Islamic covering codes with the degenerate çarşaf styles of women. Similarly, others found the very practice of Islamic covering itself accountable for the existing downfall of the nation.454 Appropriate Islamic

451 For instance, see Fatma Aliye’s full-length portrait in Kadınlık, no. 10 (10 Mayıs 1330 [/1914]): 1; Emine Semiye’s portrait in Dersaadet, no. 1 (1336 [/1920]): 1. See Murat Uraz, Kadın Şair ve Muharrirlerimiz (Istanbul: Tefeyyüz, 1941), 8; and Appendix A in this dissertation.

452 Emine Seher Ali, “Artık İş Başına,” Kadınlar Dünyası, no. 21 (24 Nisan 1329 [/1913]): 1-2.

453 Emine Seher Ali, “Tesettür Meselesi,” Kadınlar Dünyası, no. 39 (12 Mayıs 1329 [/1913]): 1-2.

175

covering that reflected modesty was traditionally seen as a condition for the wellbeing of society in terms of its preservation of the moral order, which constituted the rationale for the implementation of dress codes. But in some contemporary convictions as mentioned above, its implications also extended to the spheres of the nation’s political and economic wellbeing, from within divergent appeals, such as national integrity because it upheld native customs and using local products, and national advancement because it eluded backward customs and wasteful spending.

Aziz Haydar’s calling the public attire of contemporary Muslim women awkward and unethical455 targeted not the so-called stylish and un-Islamic variations of the çarşaf, but, rather, it was the thick face veils and loose garments that did not honor the individual persona of the woman wearing it. Her declaration of her commitment to true Islam, as it was lived by the Prophet, alongside her arguments, placed her on secure ground to challenge the traditional displays of female modesty, as well as religiosity. During World War I, more women needed to be active outside the home to earn their livelihoods or to contribute to the national cause by working in medical and social care, and in arms production;456 as a result, simple and practical dress was favored by most, and the use of the face veil decreased. The role of Ottoman women in the public sphere grew after the Ottomans were defeated in WWI; as they organized and participated in resistance efforts against the Allied occupation of the country through numerous voluntary associations,

454 For a critical evaluation of this view, see the “Çarşaf Meselesi” article by İbnü’l Hakkı Mehmet Tahir, the owner of the Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete (Ladies’ Own Newspaper, 1895-1908): Sadık Albayrak, Meşrutiyet İstanbul’unda Kadın ve Sosyal Değişim (Istanbul: Yeditepe Yayınları, 2002), 532-35.

455 Aziz Haydar, “Biraz Dedikodu,” 3.

456 In 1916-17, in Istanbul alone, there were 7,185 female workers and civil cervants. Tülin Sümer, “Türkiye’de İlk Defa Kurulan Kadınları Çalıştırma Derneği,” Belgelerle Türk Tarihi Dergisi 2, no. 10 (1968): 61. Women worked in weapons manufacturing and as nurses during WWI.

176

underground activities and public protests, at which some were public orators.457 Arguing for the removal of the çarşaf and the adaptation of Turkish fashion as a requirement of the time, Zehra Hakkı declared in 1919 that:

Since it is the case that women are forced to assume positions in public life next to men, it means that their clothing, same as their thinking, has to modernize as well, like men’s clothing did. No one can tell women to preserve their old attire! ...Our men, when they changed to foreign dress from head to toe, did not worry about keeping the national specificities of the old dress alive in the new one. But we, Turkish women, must not follow in the same way. 458

A long overcoat complemented with a proper headscarf to cover the hair, was suggested by Zehra Hakkı for Ottoman Turkish women, which, according to her, better qualified as Islamic covering than the çarşaf did with regards to the representation of their national identity. The prominent intellectual Halide Edib, on the other hand, believed that the çarşaf was representative of Ottoman women and their integration into the National Struggle because the majority still wore it, and it denoted a shared nationalist/religious spirit.459 She had depicted her ideal female character in her 1912 politically charged novel Yeni Turan (The New Turan) without a çarşaf or face veil, but with a headscarf and overcoat.460 Conceding to its Islamic and national character, the author viewed women’s

457 Associations such as Müdafaa-i Hukuk Kadın Cemiyetleri (Women’s Associations for the Defense of Rights), Anadolu Kadınları Müdafaa-i Vatan Cemiyeti (Anatolian Women’s Society for National Defense), Türk Ocakları (Turkish Hearths) and Asri Kadınlar Cemiyeti (Modern Women’s Society). For women’s roles in the underground activities of resistance during the National Struggle, see Bilge Criss, İşgal Altında İstanbul (1918-1923) (Istanbul: İletişim, 1994), 178-82.

458 The original: “Ve madem ki kadınlar umumi hayatta erkeklerin yanında mevki almaya cebredilmişlerdir, o halde bunlar gibi onlar da, fikren olduğu gibi kıyafet cihetiyle de asrîleşmeye mecbur bulunuyorlar demektir. Binaenaleyh kadınlara “eski kıyafetinizi muhafaza edeceksiniz!..” denemez… Erkeklerimiz kavuklarından pabuçlarına kadar bütün giydiklerini ecnebilerinkilerle değiştirirlerken, aldıkları şeylere terk ettiklerinden bir şeyler katmak, yani eski telebbüsün millî hususiyetini yenilerde ifa etmek kaygısına düşmediler. Fakat biz Türk kadınları aynı yolu takip etmemeliyiz.” Zehra Hakkı, “Millî Moda,” İnci, no. 1 (Feb. 1, 1919): 4.

459 Ayşe Durakbaşa, “The Formation of Kemalist Female Identity: A Historical-Cultural Perspective” (master’s thesis, Boğaziçi University, 1987), 74.

177

attire as a symbol with more functional, political connotations. She defied the Republican government’s political push to have women unveil in their quest to create the new Turkish woman, and, her novels of the period emphasized the modesty and strong morality in their female characters.461 Women of letters, like Halide Nusret, who were concerned with the decline in moral values among the younger generation as displayed in their choice of “throwing away the çarşaf” and wearing makeup in public, pleaded for the preservation of religiosity and national traditions in women’s appearances in order to be able to resist cultural imperialism and social erosion.

Today, throwing away the çarşaf is like flying off an unending cliff with a blindfold. This is as clear to me as two times two equals four. Yes, modest covering can appear meaningless for a woman that has reached scientific and intellectual maturity. We admit that. Nevertheless, does not our deplorable -could be, bright and progressive! for some- moral condition of recent years proves that we have not yet attained this blissful maturity?462

Another well-known literary figure of the time, Şukufe Nihal, warned mothers about letting their girls attend schools dressed unmodestly and with painted faces. She described a girl she saw wearing a çarşaf pinned to the waist, so to expose the pink low-cut blouse she had on underneath.463 The writer advised schoolgirls to demonstrate restraint and maintain innocence in order to keep the respect of the public.

460 Halide, “Yeni Turan,” Senin [Tanin], no. 42 (25 Ağustos 1328 [/1912]): 2 - Tanin, no. 1468 (29 Eylül 1328 [/1912]): 2

461 Deniz Kandiyoti, “Women as Metaphor: The Turkish Novel from the Tanzimat to the Republic,” in Etat, ville et mouvements sociaux au Maghreb et au Moyen-Orient, Actes du colloque C.N.R.S.-E.S.R.C., Paris, 23-27 mai 1986, [The State, Urban Crisis, and Social Movements in the Middle-East and North Africa, Symposium Proceedings] ed. Kenneth Brown (Paris: Editions l’Harmattan, 1989), 149.

462 The original: “Bugün için çarşafları atmak, nihayeti olmayan bir uçuruma doğru gözü bağlı uçmaktır. Bunu iki kere iki dört eder kadar kat‘î biliyorum. Evet, ilmen, fikren tekmil etmiş bir kadınlık için tesettür manasız olabilir. Bunu itiraf edelim. Fakat bizim daha o mes‘ûd tekmile yaklaşamadığımızı son senelerdeki elim -belki de bazılarınca parlak ve müterakki!- vaziyyet-i ahlâkiyyemiz ispat etmiyor mu?” Halide Nusret, “Tesettür Mes’elesi,” Genç Kadın, no. 8 (10 Nisan 1335 [/1919]): 117.

178

Mahir-Metinsoy argued that “Feminist writers tried to defend women’s education unless it undermined social norms, values, and the always-important modesty of women. In this sense, it could be argued that the articles reproduced certain patriarchal ideas.”464 Although women writers adopted the discourse of female modesty, to be able make a stronger argument for women’s new public rights and roles, or, quite the reverse, for support of the conventional order because they feared decline in moral values, I first claim that women’s involvement in relevant public discussions changed its dynamics because it introduced an unprecedented agency in the discourse, which transformed its traditional hierarchies of power. Second, their attempts to subvert and redefine the codes of modesty contributed to the destabilization of the general discourse on how to be a modest Muslim woman in public.

Being a powerful tool for the display of identities, clothing became a central theme in late Ottoman public discourse about modernization due to its implications in civility as well as authenticity. Muslim women’s clothing was always deemed a more vulnerable area for change because of its inherent moral value. Before 1908, the general discussion on Ottoman women’s clothing largely focused on the question of how to deal with the arrival of Western fashion culturally, religiously and economically, and its effects on families and society, and it accordingly stressed women’s patriotic roles and religious allegiances. At the turn of the century, the topic began to be discussed in more nationalistic terms, with inquiries about the place of Ottoman Islamic dress code in the contemporary world, and its

463 Şukufe Nihal, “Mekteplerde Kıyafet: Validelere,” Türk Kadını, no. 7 (15 Ağustos 1334 [/1918): 99.

464 See Elif İkbal Mahir Metinsoy, “The Limits of Feminism in Muslim-Turkish Women Writers of the Armistice Period (1918-1923),” in A Social History of Late Ottoman Women: New Perspectives, eds. Duygu Köksal and Anastasia Falierou (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2013), 96.

179

role in the formation of a national identity that represented its indigenous qualities. The relevant debates elaborated on the issue of the display of modesty as a fundamental aspect of proper female appearances in the non-private, public sphere. Alev Çınar points out that “manipulating, shifting, or displacing the boundaries of the private on one’s body through clothing becomes an effective tool by which the established boundaries of the public are challenged and unsettled.”465 As women reinterpreted the boundaries between the private and the public, with or without the face veil, traditional versus new, attractive çarşafs, and simple or modernized public attire, they negotiated the temporal and spatial codes of modesty. That being said, resolving the issue of female modesty is about rehabilitating the public as well, as Fatma Aliye expressed.

From Fatma Fahrünnisa’s call for a national dress466 to Fatma Zerrin’s declaration that “We are reformists, our task is heavy, and our responsibility is big!”467 late Ottoman-era women of letters assumed roles in reshaping the identity of the urban, Muslim woman in a modernizing state, as well as in the reshaping of an identity that had significant implications on the configurations of a progressive yet indigenous Ottoman identity. Their involvement in the debates of Islamic covering by demonstrating varied proximities to indigenous and modern norms and values, such as religiosity, progress, nationalism and privacy, brought about multiple interpretations as to the meaning of female modesty. While some vehemently criticized any concession from traditional clothing, others despised it or

465 Alev Çınar, Modernity, Islam, and Secularism in Turkey: Bodies, Places and Time (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2005), 57-58.

466 Fatma Fahrünnisa, “Gönül İster ki…,” Millet, no. 9 (31 Temmuz 1325 [/1908]): 1-2.

467 The original: “Biz inkılapçıyız ve vazifemiz ağır, mesuliyetimiz büyüktür!” Fatma Zerrin, “Tizreftar, Fakat Mantıkla,” Kadınlar Dünyası, no. 92 (4 Temmuz 1329 [/1913]): 3.

180

regarded it as nonessential. Overall, however, it created a collective agency that impaired a consolidation of the general public discourse on the codes of modesty to go in a specified direction. On the other hand, it is my belief that the extensive literary input by late Ottoman women on this issue advised the efforts to moderate a new, modernized female dress for women in Republican-era Turkey by passing on its fundamentals and justifiable reach. Indeed, the new Turkish state maintained the emphasis on public morality and modesty in women’s dress while settling for a variety in its expressed forms.468

Besides her appearance, a woman’s behavior in public and her pursuits indicated her state of modesty as well. City streets, as nonprivate domains, were considered areas of depravity and impropriety; so, the propriety of a woman’s existence here was commonly characterized by serious, beneficial work, and maintaining restraint and decent when in recreational areas, stores, schools, gatherings, and in other public places. Kazım Nami, of the journal Türk Kadını, commented on the rights and responsibilities of women, and expressed that they shared men’s tasks and it was observed that in many of those tasks, they were even more involved than men. Their obligation in return was to guard their chastity (iffet) from being stained, because unlike men, women were deemed sacred and precious on society’s moral compass. It is true that women were as free as men, but neither women nor men had absolute freedom.469 As explained before in the discussion of the new Ottoman womanhood, women of letters who supported women’s general public presence

468 Sevgi Adak, “Women in the Post-Ottoman Public Sphere: Anti-Veiling Campaigns and the Gendered Reshaping of Urban Space in Early Republican Turkey,” in Women and the City, Women in the City: A Gendered Perspective on Ottoman Urban History, ed. Nazan Maksudyan (New York and Oxford: Berghahn, 2014), 40.

469 “Kadına verilen bu kıymet mukabilinde ondan aranan vazife iffetini lekeden korumaktır.” Kazım Nami, “Kadının haklarına, vazifelerine dair,” Türk Kadını, no. 2 (6 Haziran 1334 (1918]): 18-19.

181

and pursuits shared the pledge to maintain modesty in consideration of the new woman’s assuming jobs, pursuing entertainment or education, through their writing of nonfiction and fiction. For instance, Fatma Aliye declared that women should be able to work in factories within the confines of decency, and what should be considered immoral is idleness and gossip.470 Her heroine in Udî (1897/8), Bedia, exemplifies a moral character who works to earn an honorable living by giving music lessons; she is set against a foil character who dances and sings in men’s clubs. Again, Müfide Ferit advised Ottoman women to behave not in a spoiled manner, but to instead, be chaste and sincere with the men they work with out of respect for themselves.471 Karakaya-Stump interprets the particular espousal of a serious posture by the late Ottoman woman writer as “a pre-emptive act against anxieties instigated by the potential subversion of popular norms related to female modesty and the segregation of gender spaces through the increased visibility of women in the public sphere.”472

On the other hand, new forms of public spaces, such as theatres, presented another subject of debate over modesty among women of letters. A the theatrical play genre flourished in the post-revolution period, which was conducive to the air of liberty and the accompanying interest in writing and watching plays, Emine Semiye expressed that it was a necessity to create a women-only section in theatres so that they could also watch

470 Fatma Aliye, “Terbiye-i İçtimaiye,” [except in] Mahâsin, no. 11 (Eylül 1325 [/1908]): 740-41.

471 Müfide Ferit, “Musâhabe: Yeğenlerime Mektuplar,” Türk Kadını, no. 19 (20 Mart 1335 [1919]): 289-90.

472 Ayfer Karakaya-Stump, “Debating Progress in a 'Serious Newspaper for Muslim Women': The Periodical Kadın of the Post-revolutionary Salonica, 1908-1909,” British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies 30, no. 2 (Nov. 2003): 174.

182

historical and moral plays.473 Regarding an incident where a group of women were attacked in the city of Izmir because they were going to the theatre, Ayşe İsmet penned an article titled “Feryad” (“A Cry”), that expressed how ignorant and old-fashioned it was to think Muslim women would lose their religion and faith by going to the theatre. Quite the opposite, it would serve to adorn their morality and improve their thinking; besides, it was their legitimate right to watch a play.474 Habibe, an older woman, responded to Ayşe İsmet a few issues later in the same journal contesting her perspective. Habibe accused İsmet of trespassing on the issue of women’s legitimate rights, and argued that theatres actually did spread indecency and violated religious bonds. She went on to suggest that people seeking progress shouldn’t disclaim everything from the Hamidian era while imitating Europeans in their pursuit of amusement outside of the home in nonsegregated areas and in revealing clothes, but should preserve old, good habits and moral education.475 Women of letters’ employment of the modesty discourse appears to have complicated, in various contexts, the definitions and readings of modest conduct for the contemporary Ottoman women, who were assigned a joint mission of promoting progress while maintaining the customary values of a largely gendered nature.

6.2 The Peripheries of Femininity

Women’s expanded, unprecedented visibility in the public domain, was a result of the changes in their perceived societal status as contributing agents of national salvation

473 Emine Semiye, “Muhterem Biraderimiz Cavid Beyefendi’ye,” Kadın, no. 9 (8 Kanunievvel 1324 [/1908]): 4.

474 Ayşe İsmet, “Feryad,” Kadın, no. 20 (23 Şubat 1324 [/1908]): 10.

475 Müteveffa Hacı Mustafa Bey Halilesi Habibe, “Bir İki Söz,” Kadın, no. 24 (23 Mart 1325 [/1909]): 9–10.

183

and development, along with the modernizing reforms in education and the press, created an anxiety in the late Ottoman intellectual elite and state actors as they attempted to preserve the established codes of the gendered society. In order to cope, they contemplated the new female identity as a way to reproduce those attachments, which would, in the meantime, feature the indigenous and moral character of Ottoman modernization, putting at ease any concerns regarding national integrity. The modesty of women was readdressed in this context to supervise women’s engagements, appearances and demeanor in nonprivate areas so as to align their new visibility with native values that minded women’s privacy and traditional social hierarchies. Another aspect of this configuration which oversaw the manifestations of the new Ottoman female identity was the maintainance of the domestic sphere as women’s most genuine and important area of existence, insofar that public pursuits such as higher education, a literary career, earning money, activism or entertainment could be characterized as discordant with their femininity. In this section, I will explore the late Ottoman women of letters’ involvement in this discourse on domesticity, the conflicting views of individual writers on the pursuit of public endeavors, and the resulting collective agency in negotiating the borders of femininity.

Cenab Şehabettin,476 a literary authority of the late Ottoman Empire period, argued in his article, “Bir Mes’ele-i Hayatiyye” (A Critical Issue), that a woman’s throne should be the four walls of her home and the borders of her territory should not reach beyond its door. As long as she was in her territory, she would be the sun of community and its source of heat and light. He added that he disapproved of women engaging in sports or flying

476 Cenab Şehabettin (1870/1-1933/4) was a lecturer of language and literature at the university (Darülfünun), and was an important figure in The New Literature (Edebiyat-ı Cedide) school; he was also a medical doctor.

184

planes, and that he would not permit his daughter to learn math and physical sciences because, if women learned everything, it would make them even more ignorant.477 According to him, the women who, in the name of enlightenment, imitated European women by removing their face veils and declaring rivalry with men fell out of womanhood because motherhood was their real duty, which didn’t require extensive freedoms, literature or science. They don’t breastfeed their babies and leave the nurturing of their children to nannies. It was because motherhood involved many responsibilities, and if they fulfilled them personally, they wouldn’t even find time for reading, let alone champion women’s freedoms or enter writing contests.478 Those who gathered around the so-called idea of women’s progress were a bunch of clowns with masculine haircuts, outfits and manners.479 Another male author from the same period, Mehmed Nafiz, denigrated Ottoman women, saying the majority of them were ignorant, senseless, and caged in their homes.480 These comments reflected the dichotomy most urban women found themselves in concerning their attachments to, and their subsequent growing out of, traditional female roles. Indeed, the most successful women’s periodical of the prerevolutionary era, Hanımlara Mahsus

477 Enis Tahsin Til, “Cenap Şahabeddin, Büyük nesir üstadının hayatı ve kadınlık hakkındaki düşünceleri,” Akşam, 25 April 1950, 5.

478 Cenab Şehabeddin, “Bizde Nisâiyyun,” Evrak-ı Eyyam (Dersaadet: Kanaat Matbaası, 1331), 116-18.

479 See Derya İner, “Halide Edib Adıvar's Role As a Social Reformer and Contributor to Public Debate on Constitutionalism, Status of Women, Educational Reform, Ottoman Minorities, and Nationalism During the Young Turk Era (1908-1918)” (PhD diss., University of Wisconsin-Madison, 2011), 82; Halide Edib, “Cenab Şehabeddin Bey'e,” Tanin, no. 1344 (15 Mayıs 1328 [/1912]).

480 Mehmed Nafiz, “Haftalık Tenkidat-ı Edebiye: Seviyye Talib Hakkında,” Tanin, no. 740 (9 Eylül 1326 [/1910]), quoted in Rumelihisarı Muhaddarat-ı İslamiyesi tarafından: Atiyye, Faike et al., “On Milyon İslam Hemşirelerimize,” Yeni Gazete, no. 754 (16 Eylül 1326 [/1910]): 3. His humiliating words received a fierce reaction from Ottoman women, a number of whom jointly penned a letter to be published that refuted his claims and defended Ottoman womanhood. See the reference in this footnote.

185

Gazete (Ladies’ Own Newspaper), did not present a solid stance regarding women’s activities outside of the home, as demonstrated by the publication of occasional news and images regarding the achievements of women, mostly Western, in both various professions and their learning of the science and arts, while juxtaposed alongside eloquent images of female confinement and motherly, wifely roles, and essays that satirized Western-like behaviors.481

Women’s domestic roles and their significance for the future of the nation was a popular theme in the press of the time, and dominated the discussions on the new Ottoman womanhood for the public’s education of modern patriotism, as elaborated in the unit above. It was concertedly proposed by both women and men that the household and children were a woman’s, and her primary, responsibility. In the light of this identity configuration and gender role association reinforced within the nationalistic discourse, all of the other engagements women undertook seemed to potentially undermine their home-based, womanly identity. In an 1895 article that condemned Western women’s chasing after higher education or entertainment outside the home that deviated from their primary, domestic duties, Hamiyet Zehra noted that she witnessed some Ottoman women on the streets so frequently that she could only “pity this addiction of going out to see plays three or four times a week,”482 thus associating the behavior with the unwomanly and foreign lifestyle she criticized. The idea would be echoed in many other writings, such as Habibe’s.

481 Elizabeth B. Frierson, “Mirrors Out, Mirrors In: Domestication and Rejection of the Foreign in Late-Ottoman Women's Magazines (1875-1908),” in Women, Patronage, and Self-representation in Islamic Societies, ed. D. Fairchild Ruggles (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2000), 182, 186-88, 190-93.

482 Hamiyet Zehra, “Kadınlarda Vazife,” (The Duty of Women) Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete, no. 25 (13 Teşrinisani 1311 [1895]): 2-3.

186

The craving to enjoy the same entertainment introduced by European culture, such as watching plays, does not mean progress but decline for women; she noted this is because it sacrifices domestic duties and the ruining of high feminine virtues.483 This is apart from the morality issues related to the lack of restraint mentioned previously in this paper.

Though the naturalized division of labor between the genders continued to form the basic premise of social organization at the turn of the century, women increasingly began to be considered for public roles other than teaching, writing and working in factories, owing to the influence of sociopolitical conditions such as reforms, the constitutional revolution, and domestic wars that shook the community, as well as of the advance of the Turkish nationalist, feminist and Westernist ideologies that entertained affirmative viewpoints. Women, like Fatma Seniye, argued that they were still not ready to assume outside responsibilities in the way Western women did, who managed to live double lives as both housewives and professionals, and did not usually have maids, although it was admirable. It would be good enough if they properly fulfilled their commitments to their households.484 Yet, in the same revolutionary women’s periodical, Kadın (Woman), many like Zekiye advocated that a woman can rightfully manage her house and still find time to perform public services through philanthropic activity, and they could not be a party to the consideration of women as chickens sitting in their coops anymore.485 They rebuked the

483 The original: “Avrupa medeniyeti muktezâ-yı müzeyyanât-ı hâriciyeye inhimâk, nisvân için bir terakkî değil bir tedennidir… Tiyatroya gitmekle muhadderat-ı İslamiyye.. vazîfe-i beytiyyesini fedâ ederek fazîlet-i nısviyyesinin zıyâ‘ına sebebiyet vermiş olur.” Müteveffa Hacı Mustafa Bey Halilesi Habibe, “Bir İki Söz,” Kadın, no. 24 (23 Mart 1325 [/1909]): 9–10.

484 Fatma Seniye, “Musahabe-i Nisaiye: Neler Yapmalıyız?,” Kadın, no. 6 (17 Teşrinisani 1324): 4.

485 “Cemiyet-i Hayriye-i Nisvaniye ve Sergide Zekiye Hanımefendi’nin Nutku,” Kadın, no. 10 (15 Kanunievvel 1324 [/1908]): 14.

187

inactive and extravagant upper class woman who led a life isolated from the rest of the society. This new Muslim woman configuration had to avoid, on the other hand, extremism, signified by the Western women, who assumed roles and deeds outside of a woman’s milieu, and demanded expanded rights, and she still had to stay within the justified limits of her country’s common social good. The previously negative connotations about women’s public engagements in general and the associated indecency or irresponsibility were moderated to a certain extent by the new circumstances, provided that it was not for personal amusement and domestic duties were not neglected, but the controversy over women’s pursuing professions and higher education for personal fulfillment and the right to suffrage were not easy ones to be settled since they were indicative of not just women’s progress but a change in gender norms as well.

The discourse was prevalent about the need for, and the benefits of, letting women work. If women joined the workforce, their contribution would benefit the family and the national budget, and those without a husband or father would be able to support themselves and their children, and, female physicians were needed, too, as there were women who had reservations about getting medical care from a male doctor. Yet, the arguments did not help ease the concerns of some women writers about how the working woman would be affected in her relationship with her husband, what it meant for her femininity and whether or not it was actually an elevating position for her. Zühre asked how a woman could possibly keep up with her domestic responsibilities and care for her children if she made herself busy with practicing law or medicine. She disputed the idea that because women and men had the same innate capabilities - not proven anyway - that their social duties had to be the same as well, and argued that “Masculinized women should be undesirable as much as

188

feminized men are reprehensible.”486 Zeyneb Hanım, an upper class Ottoman woman who escaped to Europe from, what she called, the suffocating atmosphere of Hamidian rule, expressed thoughts in her letters to Grace Ellison that women would not be any happier in masculine spheres: “I wonder, when the Englishwomen have really won their vote and the right to exercise all the tiring professions of men, what they will have gained? Their faces will be a little sadder, a little more weary, and they will have become wholly disillusioned.”487

Advocates for women’s attaining professions and getting jobs claimed that, apart from all other benefits to the person and society, women’s economic activity would forcefully negotiate their given gendered position by challenging the norms that render women dependent on men and powerless vis-à-vis the masculine authority. Fatma Aliye’s essays and fiction encouraged women to stop being lethargic and seek to become directors, producers and educators or, if they could, open factories that would hire female workers, or to obtain their diplomas, so as to ensure that women would have the necessary autonomy to make decisions about their own lives, to refuse subjugation to unjust treatments, and beat the misery of discontentment.488 Her sister, Emine Semiye, referred to the privileges given to women in Islam that contemporary Ottoman Muslim women were deprived of. Women would be aware of this if they received a good education, after which, they would

486 The original: “Kadınlaşmış erkekler ne kadar menfûr ise erkekleşmiş kadınlar da o derece na-makbûl olmalıdır.” Zühre, “Kadın Bilgileri,” Mahâsin, no. 7 (Mart 1325 [/1909]): 469.

487 Zeyneb Hanoum, A Turkish Woman’s European Impressions, ed. Grace Ellison (Philadelphia, J.B. Lippincott Co.; London: Seeley, Service and Co. Ltd., 1913), 187.

488 For instance see Fatma Aliye, “Terbiye-i İçtimaiye,” [except in] Mahâsin, no. 11 (Eylül 1325 [/1908]): 738-42; “Nisvan-ı İslam,” İkdam, no. 5127 (20 Ağustos 1324 [/1908]): 1; Re’fet (Istanbul: 1314 [/1896/7/8/9]); Fatma Aliye Hanım Evrakı, 9/2 and 9/3.

189

earn their livelihoods in areas such as trading and the arts, and be able to resist the material and spiritual strikes men attempted to incur against women.489 Opposing the idea that a woman should not have to, or want to, enter public professions as it is anomalous with female disposition and gender roles, these women of letters defended the notion that acquiring jobs had the potential to undermine the established feminine position for good. A contributing approach to the question of women’s employment was presented by some other writers like Aziz Haydar, Ulviye Mevlan and Naciye in the feminist women’s journal Kadınlar Dünyası (Women’s World) as an alternative to these gender-based justifications, which adopted a human rights and civic rights perspective, and questioned the mobilization of the old, stable customs for contemporary needs:

Our good customs that are inherited from our fathers unfortunately are not solutions to our miseries today… But when you say women should work as merchants, officials, and artists, you are subjected to strong objections and protests! …how can Turkish women become officials and artists, when women should only be minding their femininity, they say!490

I, too, am a human. I, too have personal rights. I, too, am an active organ of this nation… I, too, am working; the law does not grant you any privileges, we are equal in everything. … Neither you suppress me, nor I will become an enemy to you. If we want to live like human beings, we must work together.491

489 Emine Semiye, “Yeni Nizam Darbeleri,” Yeni Gazete, no. 404 (26 Eylül 1325 [/1909], 2, quoted in Şahika Karaca, “Öncü Bir Kadın Yazar Emine Semiye’nin Kaleminden “İslamiyette Feminizm”,” Ç.Ü. Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi 21, no. 2 (2012), 273; Emine Semiye, “İslamiyette Feminizm,” [5 Mayıs 1326 (/1910)] in Halil Hamid, İslamiyette Feminizm yahut Alem-i Nisvanda Müsavat-ı Tamme (n.p.: Kiteun? Matbaası, n.d.), 3-8.

490 The original: “Bizim dededen kalma güzel kaidelerimiz maatteessüf bugünkü sefaletimize çaresaz olamıyor… Sonra kadınlar da çalışsın, tacir olsun, memur olsun, sanatkar olsun dediğiniz zaman şiddetli itirazlara protestolara maruz kalırsınız!.. Türk kadını nasıl memur, nasıl sanatkar olurmuş!.. Kadın yalnız kadınlığını bilmeli imiş..” Aziz Haydar, “Kadınların Sa‘ye İştirakı,” Kadınlar Dünyası, no. 147 (13 Haziran 1330 [/1914]): 4.

491 The original: “Ben de insanım, benim de hukuk-u şahsiyem var. Ben de bu milletin faal bir uzvuyum. Ben de çalışıyorum. Kanun sana fazla bir hak bahş etmiyor, her şeyde müsaviyiz.. Ne sen beni ez, ne ben sana düşman olayım. Eğer yaşamak, insan olmak istersek el ele verelim, çalışalım…” Aziz Haydar, “Kadınlığın Yeni Bir Hatvesi Daha,” Kadınlar Dünyası, no. 152 (19 Temmuz 1330 [/1914]): 4.

190

In the years to follow, a discussion began among the writers of Türk Kadını (Turkish Woman) in response to a Nezihe Rikkat essay entitled “Erkekleşme” (Becoming Manlike). The piece revealed some perceptions and evaluations with regard to contemporary urban, Muslim women and their becoming more engaged in the traditionally male public domain. The author of the essay caricatured such women as unfeminine and coarse, and expressed her displeasure with the change in gender roles. She later said that her employing of humor, not caught by many who read the essay, necessitated exaggeration, and she was not serious in either her language or attitude, but she made her point.492

You know the female wrestlers in the entertainment ads? …I feel like I am discovering a similar, strange transformation in the spirit of many of my friends. I consider women as fragile beings that are disposed to bashfulness. Now I am surprised when I encounter ladies fearlessly walking alone in empty streets at night and fighting with the police. I am taken aback by those jumping on the trolley as it passes by, holding demonstrations and looting shops. …I even know some women who have smacked officers, with war medals on their chests, who tagged along behind themselves. …All the flippant, spoiled girls in our neighborhood pursued positions in accounting and in clerkship before they have learned how to make an omelette, and they became clerks in banks and post offices and entered Darülfünun [university]. As a matter of fact, women battalions have been formed and we even have female corporals and sergeants appointed to positions. In short, women are present in all the professions, from clerkship to garbage collection. How many ladies can you find at home after nine in the morning? Some go to the store, some to the office. Don’t be fooled to think that those who lost their gender are only from the lower classes. Has our esteemed literary woman not travelled to Syria to start a system [of education] under the command of a known chief officer?[493] From time to time, when I see ladies from Darülmuallimat [Female Teachers’ Training School] walking in the streets, arm-in-arm and talking loudly about politics, I sense the coming of a remarkable revolution. I don’t know… [But] We were not used to such things. We grew up quite shy and restrained. We would not leave the side of our mothers, our homes. In our free time, we would dream about our future husbands and play our pianos, violins and ouds. That was our fun… It was true that women also needed to participate in public life. But shouldn’t it have happened without

492 Nezihe Rikkat, “Bir Fikir Etrafında: Darülfünun’dan Sabahat Hüsameddin ve Mutie Sabri Hanımefendilere,” Türk Kadını, no. 14 (12 Kanunievvel 1334 [/1918]: 221.

493 The author is referring to Halide Edib, who was called to Syria by Cemal Pasha in 1916 to oversee the reorganization of schools in Damascus and Beirut.

191

renouncing our superiority to men in naivety, bashfulness, refinement and politeness?494

One reaction to Nezihe Rikkat’s essay came from Mutia Sabri, a student at İnas Darülfünun (Women’s University), the school Nezihe Rikkat wrote about. Mutia Sabri responded to her in the next issue of the journal, saying that a teacher from Darülfünun was not a masculinized female wrestler but a civil servant, and a pure, refined professional woman. Becoming a civil servant did not mean losing femininity; cooking an omelette and taking a clerkship were unrelated matters. She argued that working women were trying to replace their lost husbands, fathers and brothers, and even if it wasn’t so, working next to men, they became partners with men in their struggle to earn a living and did not deserve to be reproached. The situation of the country required all individuals to put in their maximum effort, and for women, this had to be more than cooking or playing instruments. As for the women running after trolleys, they were surely moved by a time commitment, women countered some policemen because of their rude and illogical treatment, and women strolling in their devastated neighborhoods did not mean they were becoming manlike. One

494 The original: “Bazı varite kumpanyalarının ilanlarında kadın pehlivanlar vardır… Birçok refikalarımın maneviyatlarında bu garip istihaleyi keşf ediyor gibiyim. Ben kadınları hicâb ile me’lüf narin bir mahluk addederdim. Şimdi gece yarısında tek başına yangın yerlerinden bî-perva geçen, polis ile kavga eden hanımlara tesadüf ettikçe ta‘cib ediyorum. Yolda yürürken koşarak tramvaya atlayanlara, sokakta miting yapıp dükkânları yağma edenlere hayretle bakıyorum… Öylelerini tanıyorum ki, arkalarına takılan göğsü madalyalı harp zabıtlarını sokakta şamarlıyorlar… Mahallemizin hoppa, şımarık kızları omlet pişirmesini öğrenmeden hep birden gidip maliyeye kâtibe yazıldılar; bankalara, postahaneye memure oldular; Darülfünun’a girdiler. Son zamanlarda kadınlardan taburlar bile yapıldı; onbaşılar, çavuşlar bile nasb edildi. Hasılı, kâtibelikten çöplüğe kadar kadınların girmediği meslek kalmadı. Sabahleyin alafranga dokuz buçuktan sonra kaç hanımı evinde bulabilirsiniz? Kimi dükkanına, kimi kalemine gidiyor. Zannetmeyiniz ki cinsiyetini kaybeden yalnız âdî bir tabakadır. Muhterem edibemiz bile ma‘hûd bir paşa’nın kumandası altında Suriye’ye teşkilat yapmaya gitmemiş miydi? Ara sıra yolda kol kola, haykırışarak siyasiyatdan bahseden Darülmuallimâtlı hanımları görünce pek yakında müthiş bir inkılâbın hazırlanmakta olduğunu hissediyorum. Bilmem.. Biz böyle alışmamıştık. Pek mahcup, pek muhteriz büyüdük. Vâlidelerimizin dizlerinin dibinde evlerimizden ayrılmazdık. Boş vakitlerimizde zevcelerimizi tahayyül ederek piyanomuzu, kemanımızı, udumuzu çalardık. Bütün eğlencelerimiz bu kadardı… Kadın da cemiyet hayatına iştirâk etmeli idi. Fakat bu, erkeklere karşı safvetimizle, hicâbımızla, zarâfet ve nezaketimizle de haiz olduğumuz rüchanı terk etmeksizin olmalı değil miydi?” Nezihe Rikkat, “Musahabe: Erkekleşme,” Türk Kadını, no. 13 (28 Teşrinisani 1334 [1918]): 194-95.

192

had to have very shallow thinking to be convinced that in imitating some male behavior that women’s refined sensibilities, imprinted on them for centuries that were either natural or nurtured later on, would be wiped out.495

Nezihe Rikkat defended her views in a subsequent letter distinguishing those women who were under an obligation to be in public but had preserved their decency and morals, from others who participated in ugly scenes and protests or who did not refrain from drawing people’s attention by their loose, impudent manners. She stressed that she considered women’s employment as a hard struggle borne out of difficult circumstances, and was not a gained privilege nor a sign of civilization. People were deceived into thinking that not being busy with nondomestic work was a deprivation. The pride that ladies felt in being civil servants concerned the author, and, through her writing, she wanted to deter girls from such whims by writing. Because, as she believed, a woman’s only happiness was in being able to build a family, and that a woman would spend her time most productively when doing domestic work. Upon Mutia Sabri’s inquiry regarding her claim that women entered all professions, despite there being no female doctors, engineers, lawyers or diplomats, Nezihe Rikkat wrote sarcastically, “…I understand, the retired ambassadors will rock the cradles from now on.”496

Her claim that women’s new public roles and positions were violating the gendered borders so much that their feminine qualities, such as bashfulness, seclusion, modesty and domesticity, were being subjugated to masculine mannerisms, received more reactions

495 Mutia Sabri, “Nezihe Rikkat Hanımefendi’ye,” Türk Kadını, no. 14 (12 Kanunievvel 1334 [1918]): 214.

496 Nezihe Rikkat, “Bir Fikir Etrafında,” 219-21.

193

from Halide Nusret, Cevriye Cemil, Aliye Esad, Refika Zati and others; their published letters were both positive and negative. Claims of Mutia Sabri conveyed that seclusion and domesticity could not be relegated anymore as preferred feminine qualities, because contemporary women’s obligations to family and community had changed over the course of time, necessitating their public presence which was yet unaccustomed. For her, seeming violations of female bashfulness and women’s nonpeaceful conduct was far less critical than the injustices and violations of rights women encountered and which pushed them to react this way. She was also disturbed that female university students were presented as masculinized, low class people; she countered the view by emphasizing not their femininity or higher social status, but their professionalism and purity, which denoted the significance of women’s public pursuits and their decent standing, typical to the discourse of justification. Refika Zati, a woman who apparently had studied in a foreign school and visited European countries, joined the discussion in the pages of Genç Kadın (Young Women) in addressing Aliye Esad (who also challenged Nezihe Rikkat); she argued that women attending college were supposed to be the most refined and the most intellectual, but no one had heard of any contributions made by Darülfünun graduates to the country or to the nation. She added that Nezihe Rikkat was right in criticizing those ladies who had forgotten their domestic duties and rushed to enroll in university on a whim. The contributor declared that she was a patriot (vatancı), much more than Aliye Esad was a defender of women, and added that they needed to leave aside altogether such issues for the time being and cry for the homeland.497

497 Refika Zati, “Bir Feryad,” Genç Kadın, no. 7 (27 Mart 1335 [/1919]): 97-99.

194

The renewed emphasis in the public discourse on women’s duty to care for the home and children put those women who worked or studied outside at odds with their femininity and sense of responsibility. The nationalist attitude in general claimed for greater participation of women in public life, but laid out its conditions and scrutinized its forms and practices, making sure that borders of gender and culture, as well as values, were not trespassed upon. A male writer of the period, İbrahim Alaaddin, expressed the importance of educating women in a way that would allow them to be integrated into the public but without losing the purity of their femininity (cinsiyet safvetlerini), thereby avoiding the tendency to be manlike.498 Representations of a woman’s femininity between a busy domestic life and a highly defined and justified public life left little room for the negotiation of individual pursuits in the public arena, and further discredited the self-absorbed, extravagant life style of upper class women.

The discourse that advocated for women’s employment as a means of empowerment before the male authority or to expand their legal rights, was overshadowed by the nationalist discourse of post-WWI. Important writers of the late Ottoman and early Republican period, such as Halide Nusret and feminist political activist Nezihe Muhiddin, favored a division of responsibilities between the genders for the proper working of society, and warned against a prevailing neglect of domestic duties. Nezihe Muhiddin’s campaign for women’s equal access to education and jobs was offset by her support of a complementary division of labor for the common good. While she detested the old, haughty woman stuck in the house and busy with gossip, she was not sure about the new woman,

498 İbrahim Alaaddin, “Kız Çocukların Ruhiyatı 1,” Türk Kadını, no. 18 (20 Şubat 1335 [/1919]): 274-76.

195

either, dressed in men’s attire and competing with men in swimming or horseback riding.499 Despite the long-standing public propaganda demanding employment right for women, Halide Nusret declared that earning a livelihood was incompatible with the feminine nature, and thus was a man’s responsibility, to the fierce objections of her female friends. She underlined, however, that it was not superior to women’s home-based labor.500 In the meantime, she expressed her appreciation for women working honorable jobs in times of need and difficulty, and her annoyance with men who considered women as ornamental, like trinkets. She also related an encounter she had with a young male artist at a home gathering; with a wry expression, he spoke ill of working women.

When I asked him, “What should a woman without a man or financial means do in order to survive?”, he just scoffed… For the first time in my life, on that day, I wanted so badly for all the women in the world to work just like men, to form women’s governments, and to employ little men like this for jobs like sweeping and washing the dishes, fastening an ornamental apron onto them. Can you picture him?... Then it’s our turn to laugh together… because he is not worth our anger.501

Women working in jobs or performing public services in times of need could be justified, and was less unsettling for their femininity and domesticity than their seeking professional education or careers through university study. Higher education supposedly caused defeminization by ruining natural female constitutions such as affection and

499 Ayşegül Baykan, “Nezihe Muhittin’de Feminizmin Düşünsel Kökenleri,” Nezihe Muhittin ve Türk Kadını (1931) (Istanbul: İletişim, 1999), 33, 35.

500 The original: “Ne imiş de efendim, onlar erkeklerine minnettar olarak yaşayamazlarmış!... Aman ne çarpık düşünceler, yarabbi… tabiatın vazifeleri cinsin arasında taksim etmiş olduğuna inanır mısınız, inanmaz mısınız?” Halide Nusret, “Dedikodu: Kadınları Çalıştırma!,” Süs, no. 28 (22 Kanunievvel 1339 [/1923]): 3-4.

501 Ibid.

196

compassion or by making them concerned with matters of the mind.502 Zühre, in a lengthy article in 1908, stated that although there was no big difference between the two sexes by nature, she supposed that women had flimsier nerves and less liability. So whatever the feminists said, she considered those women freaks of nature, who were as knowledgeable as a member of an institution, or, as capable of analyzing and criticizing the philosophy of Darwin, whom she knew nothing about besides his name. “It is for sure that solving an equation or operating on a wound is quite inappropriate, and even shameful, for a woman.”503 In response to an article by İsmet Hakkı (İkdam, no. 5119), Keçecizade İkbal similarly commented on the pages of İkdam that women’s natural disposition was discordant to pursuing science, that the government opening higher education institutions for girls was a waste of time, and that Muslim women might not adhere to such a feminist agenda.504 The attitude that considered university education to be against female nature and purpose of existence asserted an alliance with the national identity vis-à-vis what is deemed feminist, and thus foreign. Alternatively, for İsmet Hakkı, girls’ education had to be as detailed as men’s because Muslim women might not be held back from pursuing science

502 For a series of articles on the topic, see Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete, “Kadınların Tahsili Hakkında Bir Mütalaa 1,” no. 20 (26 Teşrinievvel 1311 [1895]); “Kızların Tahsili Hakkında Bir Mütalaa,” nos. 21-24 (30 Teşrinievvel 1311- 9 Teşrinisani 1311 [1895]).

503 Zühre, “Kadın Bilgileri,” 469-70. I suspected in my research that Zühre could be a pseudonym for a male author, because of the author’s bold attitude in publishing highly conservative views on women’s nature and capabilities, in a women’s periodical of the postrevolutionary era, and the harsh and rude language used against women, which was not typical to the polemics among women of letters. Moreover, the author proudly declared her/his ignorance about Darwin, and in the other parts of this article, continued mocking women that were interested in astrology and so on. Female signatures began to be used more commonly in this period by men in revolutionary circles who wanted to promote their own visions of the new Ottoman woman, as discussed before in the sections on “identification” and “women’s press.” On the other hand, pseudonymous female pen names of male writers, if recurrent and exhibiting patterns like Zühre, are usually revealed to the contemporary literary circles in different ways or are disclosed later on by those who knew the author, and if not the tone and the wording, Zühre’s convictions are not unlikely to be found among women of letters as is shown in this section.

504 Keçecizade İkbal, “Biz de Adam Olacağız,” İkdam, no. 5126 (19 Ağustos 1324 [/1908]): 1.

197

which was a condition of progress. Antifeminism among Muslim women was doing much harm to them, she reasoned.505 On the same topic, several years later, the prolific contributor to the Kadınlar Dünyası journal, Mükerrem Belkıs, asserted that higher education was a human right, and that there was nothing unusual in demanding it but in not giving it.506

Exemplified cases of diversity among women’s voices explicitly negotiated, and attempted to represent within limits, the proper proximities to Islamic, cultural and modern ideas and identities for the new Ottoman Muslim woman. Girls’ education, and its forms and contents, was undoubtedly the most aggressively pursued topic among women of letters of the late Ottoman period, and it was a shared concern in the literary arena among the various ideological groups in relation to women’s roles and the progress of the nation. Yet, the higher educational aims of women were questioned, as it implied change in the gender roles that were crucial to the integrity of families and the workings of Ottoman society. It is because it had extended to the jobs and intellectualism that were identified to be a part of men’s domain, and not defined as a particular contribution to, or even within the limits of, women’s activities, such as managing happy families, educating and raising children or engaging in philanthropy, but was erosive to these roles and identities. Those who defended women’s higher education were left in a self-contradictory position with reference to their gendered identity and cultural authenticity. Thus, the relevant discussion aimed to reconsider these identities in the contemporary era within the context of a new

505 İsmet Hakkı, “Kadınlarımız ve Maarif,” Demet, no.2 (24 Eylül 1324 [/1908]): 24-27.

506 Mükerrem Belkıs, “İnkılap ve Terakki İçin,” Kadınlar Dünyası, no. 99 (12 Temmuz 1329 [/1913]): 1.

198

Ottoman womanhood. Exactly how Muslim, Ottoman, and female would a woman remain when she pushed the boundaries of her existence in the public sphere, which carried connotations of masculinization and foreign influence, and were destructive to Ottoman social and cultural integrity? Or, would she be able to present her self as the new face of progressive nation, between modernity and traditions?

Late Ottoman women of letters debated women’s involvement in another highly masculinized domain, the political sphere, though not as extensively as education and employment which were deemed more pressing than, or the preconditions of, political rights.507 Some women in the higher classes, such as Emine Semiye and Selma Rıza, had become actively involved in CUP (Committee of Union and Progress) activities but women could not participate in the electoral process. In the early periods of the revolution, writers like Salime Servet Seyfi advised women to give up on gatherings and rhetorical orations, to leave the important and mentally tiring political and internal affairs to the men and work for the organization of affairs inside their homes, of which they were the definite rulers.508 Müfide Ferit and many others argued that the time for women to demand suffrage had not yet come because even men were newly discovering how to rule a constitutional system.509 Arguments by female writers in favor of women’s full participation in public affairs management, which mostly took place in Kadınlar Dünyası, declared that most women were equally, if not more, capable, intelligent and productive than men who had political rights, and it was a matter of legal and social equality that would lead to national

507 “Kadın ve Hakk-ı İntihab,” Kadınlar Dünyası, no. 133 (1 Mart 1330 [/1914]): 2.

508 Salime Servet Seyfi, “Osmanlı Hanımlarına,” Ümmet, no. 3 (28 Mayıs 1326 [/1910]): 9-10. Also see Keçecizade İkbal, “Biz de Adam Olacağız,” 1.

509 Müfide Ferit, “Feminizm,” Türk Kadını, no. 21 (8 Mayıs 1335 [/1919]): 325.

199

development. Mükerrem Belkıs held the idea that because women and men were different in their thought patterns and feelings, they had to have a say in the government and men could not replace them.510 The issue was not intensely elaborated in the Ottoman media, but frequent press reports of the Western women’s struggle and their achievements kept the Ottoman public informed and also demonstrated the Ottoman women’s continued interest in women’s emancipation. On the other hand, some female writings revealed that many Ottoman women were quite far from sympathizing with the aggressive methods of their Western counterparts in their quest for political participation. In 1895, Fatma Aliye warned Ottoman women against gaining a bad reputation like the European “blue-stockings” who displayed continuous outrage and did not have ladylike behaviors in public, although they were exemplars of progress with their literacy and knowledge.511 The suffragettes that Zeyneb Hanım observed at a street meeting in London were courageous and cultured women, she noted, but they were being treated by the crowd as if they were not even ladies, which led the author to think that she would rather groan in bondage if the price for freedom was to be insulted this way by ruffians.

All the time they interrupted her, but she went bravely on, returning their rudeness with sarcasm. What an insult to womanhood it seemed to me, to have to bandy words with this vulgar mob. One man told her that “she was ugly.” Another asked “if she had done her washing.”…No physical pain could be more awful to me than not to be taken for a lady.512

510 Mükerrem Belkıs, “Müsavat-ı Tamme,” Kadınlar Dünyası, no. 118 (16 Teşrinisani 1329 [/1913]): 2-4.

511 Fatma Aliye, “Bas Bleu’lardan İbret Alalım,” Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete, no. 2 (15 Rebiyülevvel 1313 [/1895]): 2-3.

512 Zeyneb Hanoum, A Turkish Woman’s European Impressions, 190-91.

200

Women’s writings on political participation were limited, and they do not provide us with sufficient data to evaluate the ways in which it was perceived to empower or undermine women’s domestic roles and feminine identity. Nevertheless, the above examples from high-class Ottoman women present the notion that their identification as proper ladies in public was a strong enough matter of concern that they would distance themselves from activities that could cast them into the peripheries of their femininity in the eyes of people, even if it were for a worthy cause. Again, remembering that late Ottoman women of letters’ advocation for a greater public presence in which women could work, study, perform services and even entertain in the public sphere as decent, respectable ladies, it seems that for the majority of women, it was indeed an indispensable component of their proposed public identity.

What reinterpreted the roles of urban, Muslim women in a more inclusive way and assigned them new obligations and rights in society were the efforts of modernization aimed at national development. The grand gender narrative that conflated women with domesticity, and defined men as the main actors in the public realms of economic, political and cultural activities, was being destabilized with women’s new roles and endeavors in the urban sphere of the modernizing Empire. Recourse to the discourse of femininity and modesty attempted to keep women’s new presence in traditionally masculine domains under check and within proposed limits, with religious and national adherences that defined cultural integrity. It contemplated domestic engagement as definitive of a woman’s identity and concomitant to her natural disposition more than anything else, while their restrained and refined behavior characterized this gendered identity in the public sphere, which was contrasted to the boldness and assertiveness of the male identity. Women easily came into

201

conflict with their feminine qualities through their public pursuits in education, employment, entertainment and public services.

The demanding position of women as both subjects of modernity and preservers of domesticity brought to the fore ambivalent ways of seeing themselves. Women of letters deliberated about whether the new Ottoman woman could stay true to her womanliness, execute domestic chores and satisfy commitments to the family if she were to be involved in the male sphere of activity, as agents of change. For some, the new woman was an educated, but secluded, mother or daughter who took domestic work more seriously, and more professionally, than before, and preserved her feminine virtues of loving care and subtle guidance through her family responsibilities and engagement in solidarity activities. Yet for others, the home was not the only place where modernity was to be enacted; like men, the new woman was equally needed, capable and deserving to be in many areas and positions in the public sphere. Domestic roles and female qualities were not hurt, but in fact nurtured by it. They demanded to share the burdens as well as the enjoyments of social life alongside men, but this demand did not apply to the challenges and rewards of home life because of its renewed association with femininity. Moreover, women usually felt the need more to come to terms with their domesticity because they were familiar and subject to it, as Hilde Heynen acknowledges.513 On the other hand, it made sense for women, according to Irigaray, to adopt and appropriate the feminine role “to convert a form of subordination into an affirmation, and thus begin to thwart it … To play with mimesis is thus, for a woman, to try to locate the place of her exploitation by discourse, without

513 Hilde Heynen, “Modernity and Domesticity: Tensions and Contradictions,” in Negotiating Domesticity: Spatial Productions of Gender in Modern Architecture, eds. Hilde Heynen and Gülsüm Baydar (London and New York: Routledge, 2005), 24.

202

allowing herself to be simply reduced to it.”514 The late Ottoman women of letters’ adaptation of the discourse of femininity created an important site of collective agency in negotiating its forms and displays for the new Ottoman woman. Their literary output on women’s roles and rights in society offered divergent readings of femininity in the discursive public sphere with maternalist, libertarian, progressivist and nationalist points of view. It not only helped undermine any hegemonic representations of femininity, but the writers’ changing proximities to the ideological projections of modernity, Islam and nationalism, and their related cultural and gendered components, also continuously unsettled the attempts to configure an idealized Ottoman Muslim woman that they themselves participated in, and were subject to.

514 Luce Irigaray, This Sex Which Is Not One (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1985), 76.

CHAPTER 7

CONCLUSION: WRITING HER SELF

This dissertation offers a study of the constructions of female gender identity at the intersection of modernity and national culture within the late 19th- and early 20th- century Ottoman urban context. It investigates Muslim women of letters’ role in this construction, and focuses on the ways they molded, in the discursive public sphere, the projects that affected their own images, presences and receptions.

Both the Western influence and the nationalist movements of progress sought to shape gender ideals and presented Ottoman women as potent members and bastions of society. The proposition of a new female public identity, with women actively partaking in work life, education, teaching, social/political activism, and engagement in reading and writing, carried with it a potential crisis in gender identification and roles, and agitated the established social order and the hierarchies of power. The resulting attempts at configurations of the new woman with sustained attachments to feminine qualities, whether they were the new workers, educators, activists or high-class intellectuals of the Empire, offered a dynamic process of negotiation between the new social arrangement brought about by modernity and the problematic issue of maintaining cultural integrity. The public discourse on the new Ottoman woman predominantly asserted that the exercise of new rights and roles was subject to, and would be justified by, maintaining womanly duties and

204

upholding modesty in public endeavors. This composition not only proclaimed the indigenous character of Ottoman/Turkish modernity through the presentation of women as the guardians of native values against the invasion of Western mores, but also oversaw the change in the boundaries of men and women’s gendered identities. The women of letters were a group of agents who could influence the formation of this public discourse, by employing their newly attained skills in languages and literacy, and taking part in the newest channel of communication, the public press.

The origins of Ottoman discourse on the new woman in the public press goes back to the late 1860s. This particular discourse, which propounded the strengthening of women’s domestic skills and feminine virtues by way of education, and the loosening of traditional customs of seclusion for healthy marriages, encountered a new representation of the new woman when the urban, literate women joined public writing around the same time. Ottoman women’s writing on its own had always negotiated the traditional codes of female modesty and feminine identity, because it publically exposed a woman’s name and “private” personality, and relegated her to a sphere of “manly” endeavors. The writing woman’s presence in the modern, literary sphere reasserted writing as a legitimate area of activity for, and a manifestation of, the progressive Ottoman woman, and thus affected the relevant discourse at its point of origination. Writing for the modern press differed from women’s previous literary practice; they mostly wrote poetry for a particular literary community. Late Ottoman women with any degree of literacy and with any topics on their minds, could publish in a shared venue that would quickly reach a wide, unassociated public.

205

A critical look at women’s writings for discussions of Islamic covering, working in public offices, seeking higher education, attending theaters, reading novels and so on, displayed their divergent positions on the definitions and demonstrations of modesty and femininity, and the appropriation of these notions. What prompted my research project was essentially the twin desire to illuminate the intellectual diversity among the late Ottoman women of letters, and to contest the exclusion and assimilation of select sources in literature, which resulted in the misrepresentation of writing women and their experiences. Late Ottoman women’s history is often portrayed as a struggle for emancipation from traditional attachments. Labeling women’s adoption of Western forms of dress, entertainment or education, or their emergence into the public domain, as progress by itself is problematic, as both Islamic covering and morality, and female domesticity were reinterpreted as forms of modernity within the nationalist discourse, by both men and women. What was prioritized in this research project was women’s negotiations in what constituted modest and feminine behavior for those Muslim women who had committed themselves to both national/cultural survival and improving women’s lives, and, as such, the newly identified role of women carried vital implications for both discourses. Their relevant writings, which revealed their changing interpretations of progress, with varying alliances to Islam, nationalism and modernity, brought about contestations, more often than not, over a range of activities and practices explored above, as to whether these were appropriate for the idealized Ottoman woman. Their intellectual output demonstrated their varied efforts not only to partake in the represetations of urban, Muslim Ottoman women, but also to carve out their own individual public identities, to counterbalance their objectified positioning. Specifically, it was my intent to more clearly present these women

206

of letters as a diverse group of individuals, and accordingly, to help disclose their collective agency in unsettling the boundaries of “the new Ottoman woman,” both in discourse and in practice.

The women of letters, who largely viewed modesty as an integral element of the new Ottoman Muslim woman’s identity, complicated its definitions when they pointed to Ottoman females’ Islamic covering, which was a major issue in the period. Their discussion of modest attire, which involved religious, nationalistic, humanistic and cultural values, bore arguments that drastically opposed each other. Depending on their ideological formation, personal conditions, or the source of motive or provocation in a specific case, the writers displayed different degrees of alliances and conflicts with these values in their arguments, be it explicitly or implicitly. They never seemed to directly attack any established values, but fiercely challenged particular positions and perceptions, asserting other priorities, while reconciling or questioning their authenticity or suitability for the contemporary age. This framework allowed for both the traditional çarşaf (a two-piece, loose garment) and the face veil (peçe), and the more contemporary forms of dress, to be considered modest and moral by different female actors, and to be defended, despised, or dismissed for their irrelevancy, at the same time.

Conditioned also by the discourse of femininity, late Ottoman Muslim women put forward their subjective selves in their writings in the issues of domesticity and public pursuits as well; their collective agency worked to enable individual women to survive and thrive as diverse members of the modernizing Muslim community. Paying due regard in their discourse to the importance of family and to the association of domestic duties with the female gender, women negotiated the representations of femininity outside the

207

domestic sphere. It is interesting to note that those holding contradictory positions about women participating in public life, and its implications for their gendered identity, had similarly employed elements of Islamic tradition as part of their discourse, or had resorted to national ideals. In the late Ottoman Empire, as in other Muslim societies that underwent Westernization or nationalist projects of modernity, the appeal to Islamic or nationalist arguments during the debates of change, was generally meant to position the demands for progress into a more legitimate context, and/or to distinguish the local culture from the modernized, foreign element. In either case, they represented a familiar foothold against cultural contamination during a process of critical transformations. Appropriation of these elements by different women manifested a whole range of conflicting opinions and positions, which attested their connection with other motives such as state policies, personal freedoms, equal rights, ideological predispositions or preservation of privileges. Was an ideal Ottoman woman someone who worked to earn her living, raced after trolleys, studied advanced science, participated in political matters and went to the theatre? Or, was she someone who protected her own reserved and refined character, raised her children to the best of her ability, and found education and employment in accordance with her feminine disposition? The juxtapositions left the Muslim urban woman writer in a stalemate in her alliances to both progress and traditions, while the reconciliation of these identities in the constructions of the new Ottoman woman in contemporary discourse often created dualities and ambiguities with regard to her individual positions. The women of letters’ divergent visions on contemporary feminine identity ranged from advocating traditional roles to full participation in public life; their varying positions did not serve to stabilize, but rather further unsettled, the definitions of their gendered identity.

208

Collectively, these subjective approaches, along with the writers’s accompanying public self-representations, formed a collective agency in the literary arena that challenged the hegemony of a particular vision of “the new woman.”

My concentration on the elements of modesty and femininity does not deny the other identifications that attempted to define the idealized Ottoman woman in discourse, such as Islamist, Ottomanist, Unionist, feminist or Turkist. But I believe these are the most binding, widespread and persistent attributes that affected the urban Muslim women’s presence and their activities that spanned different ideologies, social classes, ethnicities, professions, and regions. The fact that all of these women were conditioned by their gender (which continued to prescribe the domestic sphere as their primary realm of existence), by their morality as the basis of their public standing, and by the modernist reforms that significantly reinterpreted female roles, better position the evaluation of the new woman’s identity for research into the scope of women’s agency during periods of historical transformations, such as this one. My objective was to collectively study women writers with discordant standpoints with gender dynamics in mind, and to provide insights that will better our understanding of women’s positions vis-à-vis the configurations of Ottoman identity and its political and cultural survival. Additionally, I endeavored to present a more informed and inclusive framework regarding their participation in the formation and deformation of this identity to encourage more women’s studies in the history of this period via the social and ideological transformations that took place.

Considering the literacy rates in the late Ottoman period (less than 10%), the group in question in this study was a relatively small one, and reflected, in general, middle- to upper- class values. Yet, as the collocutors of discourse directed at women who were both

209

urban and Muslim, they had a critical position as a relevant party in the discussion in the literary field that was also a public one. Discourses structure reality, and reinforce, or subvert, hierarchies of power. Their contributions could have shifted the discourse in a particular direction, indicating a recognition and embracing by the subject. However, my research shows that women did not explicitly run counter to, but negotiated, the basic elements of this discourse, that is to say, modesty and femininity, in their displayed forms, and did so in the same way they approached the dominant ideologies that nourished them: Islamic, the modern, the national and the cultural. Such input was far from lending itself to a particular image of the ideal Ottoman woman that the majority could encourage and propound. Even if their individual input relayed a certain vision, their efforts, when considered collectively, dissolved any attempts towards this end. Thus, I concur that the Ottoman intellectual heritage did not manage to pass down to the Republic a particular model for Muslim Turkish female identity which had already been widely accepted. It nevertheless perpetuated a nationalistic individual connected to values that were Islamic, modern and cultural, as well as aware of her gendered positions. Kandiyoti argued that in communities where women were the bearers of corporate identities, they could not emerge as full citizens.515 Female identity, with its references to social order and indications of national advancement, continues to have a representative value in different cultures today. History locates the patterns of continuity and change in human activity of the past and interprets their meaning to us today. In this connection, it is hoped that this study will contribute to efforts to distinguish and assess the policies, movements and strategies that

515 Deniz Kandiyoti, “Identity and Its Discontents: Women and the Nation,” Millennium 20, no. 3 (Mar. 1991): 441.

210

seek to shape female identity, and illuminate the collective attitudes that work to thwart them from within.

On the other hand, the present research does not claim to be comprehensive, neither in its coverage of all the actors, factors and venues that were involved in building an ideal Ottoman Muslim woman and unsettling it, nor in its analysis of the scope and the outcome of these endeavors. Its focus on the women of letters of the late Ottoman period was to highlight their collective agency in the literary arena, and its effect on the discourse. There are many discoveries in this area of scholarship that remain isolated and await attempts at collective treatment. I hope this study will encourage further critical studies of their writings as well as spur more investigation into other dimensions and effects of their group existence, such as interactions with the male counterpart, the foreigner and the female readership.

APPENDIX A

FIGURES

Figure 1. Aziz Haydar Hanımefendi. Kadınlar Dünyası, no. 139 (18 Nisan 1330

[/May 1, 1914]).

212

Figure 2. Fatma Aliye Hanımefendi. Kadınlık, no. 10 (10 Mayıs 1330 [/May 23,

1914]): 1

213

Figure 3. Belkıs Şevket Hanımefendi. Kadınlar Dünyası, no. 100-18 (16 Teşrinisani

1329 [/Nov. 29, 1913]): 1.

214

Figure 4. Yaşar Nezihe. T. Z., ed. Nevsal-i Milli (Dersaadet: Asar-ı Müfide

Kitabhanesi, 1330 [/1914]), 217.

215

Figure 5. Prominent author Halide Edib, in the center. Mary Mills Patrick, A

Bosphorus Adventure: Istanbul (Constantinople Woman’s College) 1871-1924

(Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1934), n.p. [244-45].

216

Figure 6. Müfide Ferit Hanımefendi. Süs, no. 3 (30 Haziran 1339 [/June 30, 1923]): 1.

217

Figure 7. A woman at her study desk. Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete, no. 87 (7

Teşrinisani 1312 [/Nov. 19, 1896]): 4.

218

Figure 8. Woman reading newspaper at home. Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete, no.

131 (25 Eylül 1313 [/Oct. 7, 1897]): 5.

219

Figure 9. Thinking what to write. Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete, no. 134 (2

Cemaziyelahir 1315 [/Oct. 29, 1897]): 1.

APPENDIX B

SELECTED ARCHIVAL DOCUMENTS

Document 1. A state decree warning women about violations of the modest attire.

The Prime Ministrial Ottoman Archives (BOA), İ. ZB. (İrade Zabtiye) 2/15 (18 Ra.

1317 [/1899]).

221

Document 2. An official letter by the Ottoman Ministry of Internal Affairs

concerning the dress code for women. Prime Ministrial Ottoman Archive

(BOA), DH. MUİ (Dahiliye Nezareti Muhaberat-ı Umumiye İdaresi) 121/15

(2 Ağustos 1326/1328 Ş. [/Aug. 15, 1910]).

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Archives

The National Library in Ankara (Ankara Milli Kütüphane)

Atatürk University Library Seyfettin Özege Rare Book Collection (Atatürk Üniversitesi Kütüphanesi Seyfettin Özege Nadir Eserler Dermesi)

The Prime Ministerial Ottoman Archives (BOA) (Başbakanlık Osmanlı Arşivleri)

The Beyazıt State Library Hakkı Tarık Us Collection (Beyazıt Devlet Kütüphanesi Hakkı Tarık Us Koleksiyonu)

Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality Atatürk Library (İstanbul Büyükşehir Belediyesi Atatürk Kitaplığı)

The Women’s Library and Research Center Foundation (Kadın Eserleri Kütüphanesi ve Bilgi Merkezi Vakfı)

Archives of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey (TBMM Arşivi)

Primary Sources

Newspapers and Journals with Women’s Writings

Demet, issues 1, 2, 5, 6, 7.

Genç Kadın, issues 7, 8.

Hanım Kızlara Mahsus, issues 88-290.

Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete, issues 1, 2, 25, 34, 35, 69, 72, 75, 80, 81, 82, 87, 91, 109,

131, 134.

İkdam, issues 5126, 5127.

İnci, issue 1.

223

İnsaniyet, issue 2.

İttihad, Ağustos 1325.

Kadın, issues 3, 6, 9, 10, 17, 20, 21, 22, 24, 29, 52.

Kadın-İstanbul, issue 8.

Kadınlar Dünyası, issues 21, 33, 39, 55, 56, 62, 66, 70, 72, 76, 92, 99, 112, 118, 119,

120, 128, 133, 134, 147, 152.

Mahasin, issues 6, 7, 8, 10, 11.

Millet, issue 9.

Sebilürreşad, volume 11, issue 279.

Süs, issue 28.

Şükûfezar, issue 1.

Terakki, issues 83, 85, 104.

Terakkî-i Muhadderât, issues 3, 5, 11.

Türk Kadını, issues 2, 6, 7, 11, 13, 14, 17, 19, 20, 21.

Rübab, issues 104, 106.

Talebe Defteri, issue 36.

Tanin, issues 6, 56, 103, 1344.

Tercüman-ı Hakikat, issues 8, 3519.

Ümmet, issue 3.

Yeni Gazete, issue 754.

Other Primary Source Works by Women

Afife Kemal. İrşâd-ı Şebâb. Matbaa-i Âmire, 1334 [/1915/6/7/8]).

Aygün, Güzide Sabri. “Hatıratımdan Birkaç Yaprak.” In Gecenin Esrarı, 5-17.

Istanbul: İkbal Kütüphanesi: Hüseyin, 1934.

224

Başar, Şukufe Nihal. Yalnız Dönüyorum. Istanbul: Kenan Basımevi, 1938.

Baykan, Ayşegül, and Belma Ötüş-Baskett. Nezihe Muhittin ve Türk Kadını (1931).

Istanbul: İletişim, 1999.

Berkand, Muazzez Tahsin. “Bu Romanın Hikayesi.” In Kırılan Ümitler, 5-8. Istanbul:

İnkılap ve Aka Kitabevleri, 1970.

Fatma Aliye. Muhâdarât. Edited by Fazıl Gökçek. Istanbul: Özgür Yayınları, 2012.

__________. Re’fet. Istanbul: 1314 [/1896/7/8/9].

Fatma Aliye Hanım. Hayattan Sahneler (Levâyih-i Hayât). Edited by Tülay Gençtürk

Demircioğlu. Istanbul: Boğaziçi Üniversitesi Yayınevi, 2002.

Halide. “Yeni Turan.” Senin, no. 42 - Tanin, no. 1468 (25 Ağustos 1328 [/1912] - 29

Eylül 1328 [/1912]): 2.

Halidé Edib. Memoirs of Halide Edib. New York and London: The Century Co., 1926.

Kızıltan, Mübeccel. Fatma Aliye Hanım: Yaşamı-Sanatı-Yapıtları ve Nisvan-ı İslam

(1891). Istanbul: Mutlu Yayıncılık, 1993.

Makbule Leman. Ma'kes-i Hayal. Dersaadet: Hanımlara Mahsus Gazete Kütübhanesi,

1314 [/1897/8]).

Ohnet, George. Meram. Translated by Bir Kadın. Istanbul: Kitabci Kasbar, 1307.

Selma Ekrem. Unveiled: The Autobiography of a Turkish Girl. New York: Ives

Washburn: Vail-Ballou Press, 1930.

Zeyneb Hanoum. A Turkish Woman’s European Impressions. Edited by Grace Ellison.

Philadelphia, J.B. Lippincott Co.; London: Seeley, Service and Co. Ltd., 1913.

Zorlutuna, Halide Nusret. Bir Devrin Romanı. Istanbul: Timaş, 2009.

__________. Yayla Türküsü. Istanbul: Çınaraltı Yayınları, 1943.

Unpublished Archival Documents

Atatürk Library. Fatma Aliye Hanım Evrakı, 9/1, 9/2, 9/3, 11/3.

BOA İ. ZB. (İrade Zabtiye) 2/15 (18 Ra. 1317 [/1899]).

BOA DH. HMŞ (Dahiliye Nezareti Hukuk Müşavirliği) 17/33 (2 Ağustos 1326/ 1328 Ş. [/1910]).

225

BOA DH. MUİ (Dahiliye Nezareti Muhaberat-ı Umumiye İdaresi) 121/15 (2 Ağustos 1326/ 1328 Ş. [/1910]).

Books, Manuscripts, Edited Volumes, Yearbooks, Pamphlets, Letters and Articles

Abdullah Cevdet. “Tesettür Meselesi.” Mehtab, no. 4 (1 Ağustos 1327 [/1911]): 29-31.

Abdullatif Nevzat. “İçtimaiyat, Evvela Erkeklerimizi Örtelim.” Sebilürreşad 10, no.

241 (11 Nisan 1329 [/1913]): 112-13.

Ahmet İhsan. “İstanbul Postası.” Servet-i Fünun 46, no. 1191 (20 Mart 1330 [/1914]):

486.

Ahmet Mithat. Jön Türk. Istanbul: Tercüman-ı Hakikat Matbaası, 1326.

__________. “Kariîn-i Kirâma.” Introduction to Muhâdarât, by Fatma Aliye, 3-15.

Kostantiniyye: Kitabcı Arakel, 1309 [/1891/2].

Ahmet Mithat Efendi. Fatma Aliye Hanım yahut Bir Muharrire-i Osmaniyenin Neşeti.

Edited by Müge Galin. Translated by Lynda Goodsell Blake. Istanbul: İsis Yayıncılık, 1998.

Avanzade Mehmed Süleyman, ed. Nevsal-i Nisvân. Dersaadet [Istanbul]: Hanımlara

Mahsus Gazete Kütübhanesi, 1315/1897.

Celâl Nuri. Kadınlarımız. Istanbul: [Matbaa-i İctihad], 1331 [/1912/3].

Cenab Şehabeddin. “Bizde Nisâiyyun.” In Evrak-ı Eyyam, 113-18. Dersaadet: Kanaat

Matbaası, 1331.

Düstur (1. tertip). Vol. 2. 1289 [/1872/3/4].

Ebuzziya. Mecmua-i Ebuzziya. no. 112 (14 Ramazan 1329 [/1911]) and no. 148 (13

Cemaziyelahir 1330 [/1912]).

Ethem Nejat. “Evsiz Barksız Hanımlar.” Türk Kadını, no. 5 (18 Temmuz 1334 [/1918]):

69-71.

__________. “Hanımların Hatıra Defterleri.” Türk Kadını, no. 8 (29 Ağustos 1334

[/1918]): 115-17.

Halil Hamid. İslamiyette Feminizm yahut Alem-i Nisvanda Müsavat-ı Tamme. n.p.:

Kiteun? Matbaası, n.d.

İbrahim Alaaddin. “Kız Çocukların Ruhiyatı 1.” Türk Kadını, no. 18 (20 Şubat 1335

[/1919]): 274-76.

226

İnceoğlu, F. Samime, and Zeynep Süslü Berktaş, eds. Fazıl ve Feylesof Kızım Fatma Aliye'ye Mektuplar. Istanbul: Klasik, 2011.

İstanbul Kız Muallim Mektebi 1933-Dariilmuallimat 1870. Istanbul: İstanbul Kız

Muallim Mektebi Yayını, 1933.

[Namık] Kemal. “Maarif.” İbret, no. 16 (22 Haziran 1288 [/1872]): 1-2.

Kılıçzade Hakkı. “Tamamen Hallolunmadıkça Bitmeyen Bir Mesele.” İçtihad, no. 92-

3 (6 Şubat 1329 [/1914]): 2067-70.

Mahmud Cevad bin eş-Şeyh Nafi. Maarif-i Umumiye Nezareti Tarihçe-i Teşkilât ve

İcraatı. Istanbul: Matbaa-i Amire, 1338 [/1922].

Mehmed Celâl. Roman Mütalaası. Dersaadet: Kasbar Matbaası, 1312 [/1896-99].

Milli Nevsal. Istanbul: Kanaat Matbaası ve Kitabhanesi, 1922.

Mustafa Âsım. “Çarşaflar ve Peçeler.” Hanım Kızlara Mahsus, no. 89-291 (30

Teşrinisani 1316 [/1900]): 3-4.

[Namık Kemal]. “Terbiye-i nisvan hakkında bir layihadır.” Tasvir-i Efkâr, no. 457 (4

Şevval 1283 [/1867]): [1-2].

Sadi. “Takdir, teşekkür.” Mütalaa, no. 33 (11 Mart 1312 [1313] [/1897]): 1.

Salnâme-i Devlet-i Âliyye-i Osmâniye (Dersaadet: Selanik Matbaası, 1327).

Selahaddin Asım. “Tesettür ve Mahiyeti.” İçtihad, no. 100 (3 Nisan 1330 [/1914]):

2255-58.

Ş. Sami. Kadınlar. Istanbul: Mihran Matbaası, 1296 [/1878/79/80/81].

T. Z., ed. Nevsal-i Milli. Dersaadet: Asar-ı Müfide Kitabhanesi, 1330 [/1914].

Tevfik Fikret. “Musahabe-i Edebiyye: Romanların Tesiri.” Servet-i Fünun, no. 476 (13

Nisan 1315 [/1899]: 115-18.

“The Disenchanted.” Current Literature (1888-1912) XLII, no.1 (Jan. 1907): 109.

Secondary Sources

Catalogues

Duman, Hasan. Union Catalogue of the Periodicals in Arabic Script in the Libraries of

227

Istanbul (İstanbul Kütüphanelerindeki Arap Harfli Süreli Yayınlar Toplu

Kataloğu 1828-1928). Istanbul: Research Center for Islamic History, Art and

Culture, 1986.

Özege, M. Seyfettin. Eski Harflerle Basılmış Türkçe Eserler Kataloğu 3 (L – P).

Istanbul: Fatih Yayınevi, 1975.

Unpublished Theses and Dissertations

Akşit, Elif Ekin. “Girls’ Education and the Paradoxes of Modernity and Nationalism in

the Late Ottoman Empire and the Early Turkish Republic.” PhD diss.,

Binghamton University, 2004.

Barzilai-Lumbroso, Ruth. “Turkish Men, Ottoman Women: Popular Turkish Historians

and the Writing of Ottoman Women’s History.” Ph.D. diss., University of

California, 2007.

Bodur, Marella. “Modernity, Social Movements and Democracy: Feminist Movements

in Post-1980 Turkey.” PhD diss., Carleton University, 2005.

Canbaz, Firdevs. “Fatma Aliye Hanım'ın Romanlarında Kadın Sorunu.” Master’s

thesis, Bilkent University, 2005.

Durakbaşa, Ayşe. “The Formation of Kemalist Female Identity: A Historical-Cultural

Perspective.” Master’s thesis, Boğaziçi University, 1987.

Ergün, Mustafa. “II. Meşrutiyet Devrinde Eğitim Hareketleri (1908-1914).” PhD diss.,

Ankara University, 1978.

Frierson, Elizabeth. “Unimagined Communities: State, Press, and Gender in the

Hamidian Era 1876-1909.” PhD diss., Princeton University, 1996.

Hakverdioğlu, Metin. “Mihri Hatun Divanı (İnceleme-Metin).” Master’s thesis, Ahmet

Yesevi Kazak-Türk Üniversitesi, 1998.

İner, Derya. “Halide Edib Adıvar's Role As a Social Reformer and Contributor to Public

Debate on Constitutionalism, Status of Women, Educational Reform, Ottoman

Minorities, and Nationalism During the Young Turk Era (1908-1918).” PhD diss., University of Wisconsin-Madison, 2011.

Keskin, Tülay. “Feminist /Nationalist Discourse in the First Year of the Ottoman

Revolutionary Press (1908-1909): Readings from the Magazines of Demet,

Mehasin and Kadın (Salonica).” Master's thesis, Bilkent University, 2003.

Yıldız, Hülya. “Literature as Public Sphere: Gender and Sexuality in Ottoman Novels

and Journals.” PhD diss., The University of Texas at Austin, 2008.

228

Articles, Books, Book Chapters, Published Conference Preceedings, Encyclopedias

Adak, Hülya. “Suffragettes of the Empire, Daughters of the Republic: Women

Auto/biographers Narrate National History (1918-1935).” New Perspectives on

Turkey, no. 36 (2007): 27-51.

Adak, Sevgi. “Women in the Post-Ottoman Public Sphere: Anti-Veiling Campaigns

and the Gendered Reshaping of Urban Space in Early Republican Turkey.” In

Women and the City, Women in the City: A Gendered Perspective on Ottoman

Urban History, edited by Nazan Maksudyan, 36-70. New York and Oxford: Berghahn, 2014.

Ahmet Emin. The Development of Modern Turkey as Measured by Its Press. New

York: Columbia University, 1914.

Ahmet Rasim. “İstibdâd-ı Edebî'de Kadınlar.” In Matbuât Hâtıralarından: Muharrir,

Şair, Edib (1924), edited by Kazım Yetiş, 191-97. Istanbul: Tercüman, 1980.

Aksoy, Nazan. Kurgulanmış Benlikler: Otobiyografi, Kadın, Cumhuriyet. Istanbul:

İletişim, 2009.

Akşit, Elif Ekin. “Harem Education and Heterotopic Imagination.” Gender and

Education 23, no. 3 (May 2011): 299-311.

Aktaş, Cihan. Tanzimat’tan 12 Mart’a Kılık-Kıyafet ve İktidar. Istanbul: Kapı, 2006.

Aktaş, Çiğdem. “Toplumsal Açıdan Erenlerin Ser Çeşmesi: Hacı Bektaş Veli.” Gazi Üniversitesi Türk Kültürü ve Hacı Bektaş Veli Araştırma Dergisi, no. 14 (2000): 199-231.

Akyılmaz, S. Gül. “Osmanlı Miras Hukukunda Kadının Statüsü (The Position of

Women in Ottoman Inheritance Law).” Gazi Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi 11, no. 1-2 (2007): 471-502.

Akyüz, Kenan. Batı Tesirinde Türk Şiiri Antolojisi. Istanbul: İnkılap, 1985.

Akyüz, Yahya. “Osmanlı'da “Kadın Öğretmenli Ev Sıbyan Mektepleri” (Amerikan ve

Fransız Eğitim Tarihinden Benzer Örnekler).” Ankara Üniversitesi Osmanlı Tarihi Araştırma ve Uygulama Merkezi Dergisi, no. 15 (2004): 1-12.

__________. “Öğretmenlik Mesleği ve Osmanlı'da Kadın Öğretmen Yetiştirilmesi.”

Tarih ve Toplum 33, no. 195 (Mar. 2000): 31-43.

__________. Türk Eğitim Tarihi. Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri

Fakültesi, 1982.

229

Albayrak, Sadık. Meşrutiyet İstanbul’unda Kadın ve Sosyal Değişim. Istanbul: Yeditepe Yayınları, 2002.

Alkan, Mehmet. Ö. “Osmanlı İmparatorluğu'nda Eğitim ve Eğitim İstatistikleri, 1839-

1924.” In Osmanlı Devletinde Bilgi ve İstatistik, edited by Halil İnalcık and Şevket Pamuk, 125-45. Ankara: T.C. Başbakanlık Devlet İstatistik Enstitüsü, 2000.

Alshech, Eli. “Out of Sight and Therefore Out of Mind: Early Sunni Islamic Modesty

Regulations and the Creation of Spheres of Privacy.” Journal of Near Eastern

Studies 66, no. 4 (Oct. 2007): 267-90.

Altındal, Meral. “Şeyhülislam Abdurrahman Nesib Efendi’nin Tesettüre Dair Beyannamesi [18 Mart 1328 [/1912]].” Toplumsal Tarih 15, no. 87 (Mar. 2001):

24.

Andı, M. Fatih. Roman ve Hayat. Istanbul: Kitabevi, 1999.

Andrews, Walter, and Mehmet Kalpaklı. The Age of Beloveds: Love and the Beloved

in Early-Modern Ottoman and European Culture and Society. Durham: Duke University Press, 2005.

Argunşah, Hülya. “Ahdiye İle Ceylan Arasında Bir Jön Türk: Ahmet Mithat Efendi’nin

Feminizmi.” Turkish Studies 8, no. 9 (Summer 2013): 1-16.

__________. Bir Cumhuriyet Kadını Şükufe Nihal. Istanbul: Timaş, 2011.

__________. “İlk Kadın Yazarlarda Toplumsal Kimliğin Yapılandırılması Sürecinde

Babanın Keşfi.” In 21. Yüzyılın Eşiğinde Kadınlar: Değişim ve Güçlenme,

Uluslararası Multidisipliner Kadın Kongresi, Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi, 13-16 Oct. 2009 [International Multidisciplinary Congress on Women]. Vol. 2. Edited by Füsun Çoban Döşkaya, 389-402. Izmir: 9 Eylül University, 2011.

Atamaz, Serpil. “The Sky is the Limit: Nationalism, Feminism, Modernity, and Turkish

Historiography.” International Journal of Turkish Studies 20, no. 1-2 (2014): 85-

101.

Ay, Taha. “En Yaşlı Kadın Şairimiz Leyla Hanımefendi.” Yedigün [7 gün], no. 70 (July

11, 1934): 7-8.

Aydemir, Şevket Süreyya. Suyu Arayan Adam. Istanbul: Remzi Kitabevi, 1976.

Aydın, Mehmet. Ne Yazıyor Bu Kadınlar: Osmanlıdan Günümüze Örnekleriyle Kadın Yazar ve Şairler. Kızılay/ Ankara: İlke Kitabevi Yayınları, 1995.

Beauvoir, Simone de. The Second Sex. Translated by Borde and Malovany-Chevallier. Random House: Alfred A. Knopf, 2009.

230

__________. Şair Nigar Hanım. Istanbul: İletişim, 1998.

Berkes, Niyazi. The Development of Secularism in Turkey. Montreal: McGill University Press, 1964.

Berktay, Fatmagül. “Doğu ile Batı’nın Birleştiği Yer: Kadın İmgesinin Kurgulanışı.”

In Modern Türkiye’de Siyasi Düşünce, vol. III: Modernleşme ve Batıcılık, 275-85.

Istanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 2002.

__________. “Kendine Ait Bir Tarih.” (A History of Her Own) Tarih ve Toplum, no.

183 (Mar. 1999): 47-54.

__________. “Osmanlı’dan Cumhuriyet’e Feminizm.” In Modern Türkiye’de Siyasi

Düşünce, vol. I: Cumhuriyet’e Devreden Düşünce Mirası: Tanzimat ve Meşrutiyet’in Birikimi, 348-61. Istanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 2001.

Bruneau, Marie Florine. “Learned and Literary Women in Late Imperial China and

Early Modern Europe.” Late Imperial China 13, no.1 (June 1992): 156-72.

Butler, Judith. “Conclusion: From Parody to Politics.” In Gender Trouble: Feminism

and the Subversion of Identity, 142-49. New York and London: Routledge, 1990.

Carr, Helen. “A History of Women's Wrtiting.” In A History of Feminist Literary

Criticism, edited by Gill Plain and Susan Sellers, 120-37. Cambridge, UK; New York: Cambridge University Press, 2007.

Coşkun, Betül. “Kadınların İtiraf Vasıtası Olarak Mektup Hikayeler -Tanzimat'tan

Cumhuriyet'e-.” A. Ü. Türkiyat Araştırmaları Enstitüsü Dergisi [TAED], no. 50 (2013): 119-36.

Criss, Bilge. İşgal Altında İstanbul (1918-1923). Istanbul: İletişim, 1994.

Cunbur, Müjgan. Osmanlı Dönemi Türk Kadın Şairleri. Ankara: Türk Kadınları Kültür

Derneği Genel Merkezi Yayını, 2011.

Çetin, Nurullah. “Tahsin Nahit ve Şiiri.” A. Ü. Dil ve Tarih-Coğrafya Fakültesi Dergisi

36, no. 1-2 (1993): 23-33.

Çınar, Alev. Modernity, Islam, and Secularism in Turkey: Bodies, Places and Time.

Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2005.

Davis, Fanny. The Ottoman Lady: A Social History From 1718 to 1918. New York:

Greenwood, 1986.

Delikgöz, Ömer, and Nazmi Ziya Şehit. “Impact of Women Letters to the

231

Modernization and Individualization Process of Ottoman Women.” In Women’s Memory: The Problem of Sources, edited by Birsen Talay Keşoğlu and D. Fatma Türe, 68-80. Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2011.

Dikici, Recep. “Osmanlı Âlim ve Ediplerinin Kadınlar Hakkındaki Eski Harfli Eserleri

Üzerine Bir Bibliyografya Denemesi.” Selçuk Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, no. 33 (2015): 217-30.

Durakbaşa, Ayşe. Halide Edip: Türk Modernleşmesi ve feminizm. Istanbul: İletişim,

2000.

Ellmann, Mary. Thinking About Women. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1968.

Enginün, İnci. “İki Mektup (Muazzez Tahsin Berkand-Halide Edip).” Hisar 15, no. 135

(Mar. 1975): 27-28.

Enloe, Cynthia. Bananas, Beaches & Bases: Making Feminist Sense of International

Politics. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1990.

Enver Naci. “Türk Edebiyatında Kadın Romancılar: Muazzez Tahsin Berkand.” Yarım

Ay, no. 130 (Apr. 1, 1941): 15, 19.

Ergin, Osman. İstanbul mektepleri ve ilim, terbiye, ve sanʾat müesseseleri dolayısiyle

Türkiye Maarif Tarihi (History of Turkish Education). Vol. 1-2. Istanbul: Eser Neşriyat ve Dağıtımı, 1977.

Ergun, Sadeddin Nüzhet. Aka Gündüz: Hayatı ve Eserleri. Istanbul: Cumhuriyet

Kitaphanesi, 1937.

Erim, Necmeddin. “Yusuf İzzeddine Dair Yeni Vesikalar.” Tarih dünyası 1 (1950):

211-13.

Ertek Markoç, Yasemin. “Klasik Türk Edebiyatında Kadın Şairlere Bir Bakış.” Sosyal

Bilimler Dergisi 9, no. 2 (Oct. 2011): 223-35.

Falierou, Anastasia. “Enlightened Mothers and Scientific Housewives: Discussing

Women’s Social Roles in Eurydice (Evridiki) (1870-1873).” In A Social History of Late Ottoman Women: New Perspectives, edited by Duygu Köksal and Anastasia Falierou, 201-24. Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2013.

Fatih Kerimi. İstanbul Mektupları. Istanbul: Çağrı Yayınları, 2001.

Fesch, Paul. Constantinople aux derniers jours d'Abdul-Hamid. Paris: Marcel Rivière,

1907.

Findley, Carter Vaughn. “Fatma Aliye: First Ottoman Novelist, Pioneer Feminist.” In

232

Collection Turcica: Histoire économique et sociale de l'Empire ottoman et de

la Turquie (1326-1960), Actes du sixième congrès international tenu à Aix-en-Provence du ler au 4 juillet 1992, edited by Daniel Panzac, 783-94. Paris: Peeters, 1995.

__________. Turkey, Islam, Nationalism, and Modernity. New Haven & London: Yale

University Press, 2010.

Fortna, Benjamin C. Learning to Read in the Late Ottoman Empire and the Early

Turkish Republic. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011.

Frierson, Elizabeth B. “Gender, Consumption and Patriotism: The Emergence of an

Ottoman Public Sphere.” In Public Islam and the Common Good, edited by Armando Salvatore and Dale F. Eickelman, 99-125. Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2004.

__________. “Mirrors Out, Mirrors In: Domestication and Rejection of the Foreign in

Late-Ottoman Women's Magazines (1875-1908).” In Women, Patronage, and Self-representation in Islamic Societies, edited by D. Fairchild Ruggles, 177-204. Albany: State University of New York Press, 2000.

Gibb, E. J. W. A History of Ottoman Poetry. Vol. 1. London: Luzac & Co., 1900.

Gilbert, Sandra M., and Susan Gubar. The Madwoman in the Attic: The Woman Writer

and the Nineteenth-Century Literary Imagination. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1984.

Göçek, Fatma Müge. “Ethnic Segmentation, Western Education, and Political

Outcomes: Nineteenth-Century Ottoman Society.” Poetics Today 14, no. 3 (Autumn, 1993): 507-38.

__________. “Shifting the Boundaries of Literacy: Introduction of Western-Style

Education to the Ottoman Empire.” In Literacy: Interdisciplinary Conversations, edited by Deborah Keller-Cohen, 267-88. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press, 1994.

Gramsci, Antonio. Selections from the Prison Notebooks of Antonio Gramsci. Edited

and Translated by Quintin Hoare and Geoffrey N. Smith. New York: International Publishers, 1971.

Gürbilek, Nurdan. “Erkek Yazar, Kadın Okur.” In Kadınlar Dile Düşünce: Edebiyat ve

Toplumsal Cinsiyet, edited by Sibel Irzık and Jale Parla, 275-305. Istanbul: İletişim, 2004.

Gürel, Zeki. Halide Nusret Zorlutuna: Hayatı ve Eserleri. Ankara: Kültür ve Turizm

Bakanlığı, 1988.

Halil Halid. The Diary of A Turk. London: Adam and Charles Black, 1903.

233

Hanioğlu, M. Şükrü. A Brief History of the Late Ottoman Empire. Princeton: Princeton

University Press, 2008.

Havlioğlu, Didem. “On the Margins and Between the Lines: Otttoman Women Poets from

the Fifteenth to the Twentieth Centuries.” Turkish Historical Review, no. 1 (2010):

25-54.

Heynen, Hilde. “Modernity and Domesticity: Tensions and Contradictions.” In

Negotiating Domesticity: Spatial Productions of Gender in Modern Architecture, edited by Hilde Heynen and Gülsüm Baydar, 1-29. London; New York: Routledge, 2005.

Hikmet Münir. “Değerli Bir Kadın Romancı: Güzide Sabri...” Yedigün [7 gün], no. 271

(May 17, 1938): 7-8, 21.

[Hisar], Abdülhak Şinasi. “Ediplerimize Dair Hatıralar. Nigâr Hanım.” N.p., 27 June

1931.

Hisar, Abdülhak Şinasi. “Geçmiş Zaman Edipleri: Nigar binti Osman II.” Türk Yurdu,

no. 264 (Jan. 1957): 530-34.

Irigarary, Luce. This Sex Which Is Not One. Translated by Catherine Porter. New York:

Cornell University Press, 1985.

İbrahim, Bahadır. Alevi ve Sünni Tekkelerinde Kadın Dervişler. Istanbul: Su, 2005.

İnal, İbnü'l-Emin Mahmud Kemal. Son Asır Türk Şairleri (Kemâlü'ş-Şuarâ). Vol. 1,

edited by Müjgân Cunbur. Ankara: Atatürk Kültür Merkezi Yayınları, 1999.

İnalcık, Halil. “Learning, the Medrese, and the Ulema.” In The Ottoman Empire: The

Classical Age 1300–1600, 165-72. New York: Praeger, 1973.

__________. “Popular Culture and The Tarikats- Mystic Orders.” In Religion and

Culture in the Ottoman Empire. Vol. 4 of The Ottoman Empire: The Classical Age 1300-1600, 186-202. New York: Praeger Publishers, 1973.

Joseph, Suad, et al. Encyclopedia of Women and Islamic Cultures: Family, Law and

Politics. Leiden and Boston, Mass.: Brill, 2005.

Kristeva, Julia. “Oscillation between Power and Denial,” in New French Feminisms: An Anthology, edited by Elaine Marks and Isabelle de Courtivron, 165-67. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 1980.

Kandiyoti, Deniz. “End of Empire: Islam, Nationalism and Women in Turkey.” In

Women, Islam and the State, edited by Deniz Kandiyoti, 22-47. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1991.

234

__________. “Identity and Its Discontents: Women and the Nation.” Millennium 20,

no. 3 (Mar. 1991): 429-43.

__________. “Women as Metaphor: The Turkish Novel from the Tanzimat to the

Republic.” In Etat, ville et mouvements sociaux au Maghreb et au Moyen-Orient, Actes du colloque C.N.R.S.-E.S.R.C., Paris, 23-27 mai 1986, [The State, Urban Crisis, and Social Movements in the Middle-East and North Africa, Symposium Proceedings], edited by Kenneth Brown, 140-52. Paris: Editions l’Harmattan, 1989.

Karaca, Şahika. “Öncü Bir Kadın Yazar Emine Semiye’nin Kaleminden “İslamiyette

Feminizm”.” Ç.Ü. Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi 21, no. 2 (2012): 269-80.

Karakaya-Stump, Ayfer. “Debating Progress in a 'Serious Newspaper for Muslim

Women': The Periodical Kadın of the Post-revolutionary Salonica, 1908-1909.” British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies 30, no. 2 (Nov. 2003): 155-81.

Karaosmanoğlu, Yakup Kadri. Gençlik ve Edebiyat Hatıraları. Ankara: Bilgi Yayınevi,

1969.

Karpat, Kemal. “Reinterpreting Ottoman History: A Note on the Condition of

Education in 1874.” International Journal of Turkish Studies 2, no. 2 (Winter 1981-82): 93-100.

__________. “The Transformation of the Ottoman State, 1789-1908.” International

Journal of Middle East Studies 3, no. 3 (July 1972): 243-81.

Kasaba, Reşat. “Kemalist Certainties and Modern Ambiguities.” In Rethinking

Modernity and National Identity in Turkey, edited by Sibel Bozdoğan and Reşat

Kasaba, 15-36. Seattle and London: University of Washington Press, 1997.

Kaymaz, Kadriye. Gölgedeki Kalem Emine Semiye. Istanbul: Küre Yayınları, 2009.

Keçeci Kurt, Songül. Yabancı Okullara Karşı Osmanlı Refleksi: Özel İslam Mektepleri.

Istanbul: Yitik Hazine Yayınları, 2013.

Kılıç, Fatma. “Maskeli Erkekler; Gölgelenen Kaynaklar; II. Meşrutiyet Dönemi Kadın Dergilerinde Jön Türkler'in Ağzından Feminist Söylevler.” In Kadın Belleğini Oluşturmada Kaynak Sorunu, Kadın Eserleri Kütüphanesi ve Bilgi Merkezi Vakfı 20. Yıl Sempozyumu, 17-19 Nisan 2009, Kadir Has Üniversitesi, 433-51. Istanbul: Kadın Eserleri Kütüphanesi ve Bilgi Merkezi Vakfı: T. C. Kadir Has Üniversitesi, 2009.

Kızları Nasıl Evlendirmeli?. Translated by Avanzade Mehmet Süleyman. Dersaadet:

Necm-i İstikbal Matbaası, 1330 [1911/5].

Kristeva, Julia. “Women's Time.” Translated by Alice Jardine and Harry Blake, Signs

235

7, no: 1 (Autumn, 1981): 13-35.

Kurnaz, Şefika. II Meşrutiyet Döneminde Türk Kadını. Istanbul: MEB, 1996.

__________. Osmanlı Kadın Hareketinde Bir Öncü Emine Semiye: Hayatı, Eserleri,

Fikirleri. Istanbul: Timaş, 2008.

Kurtoğlu, Ayşenur. “Osmanlı Kadınlarının Gazeteleri ile İlk Tanışıklıkları.” İslamiyat

3, no. 2 (Apr.-June 2000): 87-96.

Lerner, Gerda. The Majority Finds Its Past: Placing Women in History. Chapel Hill:

UNC Press, 2005.

Lewis, Bernard. The Emergence of Modern Turkey. London: Oxford University Press,

1968.

Mahir Metinsoy, Elif İkbal. “The Limits of Feminism in Muslim-Turkish Women

Writers of the Armistice Period (1918-1923).” In A Social History of Late Ottoman Women: New Perspectives, edited by Duygu Köksal and Anastasia Falierou, 85-108. Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2013.

McCarthy, Justin. The Ottoman Turks: An Introductory History to 1923. London; New

York: Longman, 1997.

Meyers Spacks, Patricia. The Female Imagination. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1975.

Micallef, Roberta. “Identities in Motion- Reading Two Ottoman Travel Narratives as

Life Writing.” Journal of Women's History 25, no. 2 (Summer 2013): 85-110.

Micklewright, Nancy. “Public and Private for Ottoman Women of the Nineteenth

Century.” In Women, Patronage, and Self-Representation in Islamic Societies,

edited by D. Fairchild Ruggles, 155-76. Albany: State University of New York Press, 2000.

Moers, Ellen. Literary Women. New York: Oxford University Press, 1985.

Moi, Toril. “’I am Not a Woman Writer’: About Women, Literature and Feminist

Theory Today.” Feminist Theory 9, no. 3 (Dec. 2008): 259-71.

Os, Nicole A.N.M. Van. “Ottoman Women's Organizations: Sources of the Past, Sources

for Future.” Islam and Christian-Muslim Relations 11, no. 3 (2000): 369-83.

__________. “Millî Kıyafet: Ottoman Muslim Women and the Nationality of Their

Dress.” In Ottomans. Vol. 4 of The Turks, edited by Hasan Celal Güzel, C. Cem Oğuz and Osman Karatay, 580-92. Ankara: Yeni Türkiye Publications, 2002.

236

Öztürk, Cemil. Atatürk Devri Öğretmen Yetiştirme Politikası. Ankara: Türk Tarih

Kurumu Basımevi, 1996.

Öztürkmen, Neriman Malkoç. Edibeler, Sefireler, Hanımefendiler: İlk Nesil

Cumhuriyet Kadınlarıyla Söyleşiler. N.p.: 1999.

Patrick, Mary Mills. A Bosphorus Adventure: Istanbul (Constantinople Woman’s

College) 1871-1924. Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1934.

__________. Under Five Sultans. New York and London: The Century Co., 1929.

__________. “Women in Turkey.” Forum (1886-1930) 37, no. 1 (July 1905): 115-

27.

Pehlivan, Gürol, Bülent Bayram and Mehmed Veysi Dörtbudak. Osmanlı Taşrasında

Kadın, Şair, Mevlevi Olmak: Tevhide Hanım ve Divanı. Manisa: Manisa Belediyesi Kültür Yayınları, 2006.

Picktall, Marmaduke. With the Turk in Wartime. London, Toronto: J. Dent, 1914.

Pierce, Leslie P. The Imperial Harem: Women and Sovereignty in the Ottoman Empire.

New York, Oxford University Press, 1993.

Quataert, Donald. “Overview of the Nineteenth Century.” In An Economic and Social

History of the Ottoman Empire. 1300-1914, edited by Halil İnalcık and Donald Quataert, 761-76. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1994.

Rosaldo, Michelle Zimbalist. “Women, Culture, and Society: A Theoretical Overview.”

In Woman, Culture & Society, edited by Michelle Zimbalist Rosaldo and Louise Lamphere, 17-42. Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1974.

Ruşen Eşref. Diyorlar Ki…. Edited by Şemsettin Kutlu. Istanbul: M.E.B. Kültür

Yayınları, 1972.

Schick, İrvin Cemil. “Print Capitalism and Women's Sexual Agency.” Comparative

Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East 31, no. 1 (2011): 196-216.

Scott, Joan. “Women’s History.” In New Perspectives on History Writing, edited by

Peter Burke, 42-66. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1991.

Scott, Joan W. “Gender: A Useful Category of Historical Analysis.” The American

Historical Review 91, no. 5 (Dec. 1986): 1053-75.

Selim Nüzhet. Türk Gazeteciliği. Istanbul: Devlet Maatbası, 1931.

Sertel, Yıldız. Annem: Sabiha Sertel Kimdi ve Neler Yazdı. Istanbul: Yapı Kredi

237

Yayınları, 1993.

Shaw, Stanford J., and Ezel Kural Shaw. Reform, Revolution and Empire: The Rise of

Modern Turkey 1808-1975. Vol. 2 of History of the Ottoman Empire and Modern Turkey. Cambridge; London; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1977.

Showalter, Elaine. A Literature of Their Own: British Women Novelists from Brontë to Lessing. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1977.

__________. “Feminism and Literature.” In An Introduction to Post-Colonial Theory,

edited by Peter Childs, 179-202. London; New York: Prentica Hall, 1997.

__________. “Feminist Criticism in the Wilderness.” Critical Inquiry 8, no. 2, Writing

and Sexual Difference (Winter, 1981): 179-205.

Silay, Kemal. “Singing His Words: Ottoman Women Poets and the Power of

Patriarchy.” In Women in the Ottoman Empire: Middle Eastern Women in the Early Modern Era, edited by Madeline C. Zilfi, 197-213. Leiden: Brill, 1997.

Somel, Selçuk Akşin. Gayrimuslim Okulları Nasıl Azınlık Okullarına Dönüştü.

Istanbul: Tarih Vakfı, 2013.

__________. “Sources on the Education of Ottoman Women in the Prime Ministerial

Ottoman Archive for the Period of Reforms in the Nineteenth and Early Twentieth Centuries.” In Beyond the Exotic: Women’s Histories in Islamic Societies, edited by Amira El-Azhary Sonbol, 295-306. Syracuse, N.Y.: Syracuse University Press, 2005.

Staël, Madame de. Edebiyata Dair. Translated by Safiye and Vehdi Hatay. Ankara:

Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı Yayınları, 1989.

Sümer, Tülin. “Türkiye’de İlk Defa Kurulan Kadınları Çalıştırma Derneği.” Belgelerle

Türk Tarihi Dergisi 2, no. 10 (1968): 59-63.

Şanal, Mustafa. “Osmanlı İmparatorluğu'nda Kız Öğretmen Okulunun

(Darülmuallimat) Kuruluşu, Okutulan Dersler ve Kapatılışı (1870-1924).” Ankara Üniversitesi Osmanlı Tarihi Araştırma ve Uygulama Merkezi Dergisi, no. 26 (Fall 2009): 221-44.

“Talk About Books.” The Chautauquan; A Weekly Newsmagazine (1880-1914) 72, no.

5 (Oct. 4, 1913): 106.

Tan, M. Turhan. “Unutulurak Ölen Bir Edib.” Cumhuriyet, July 13, 1936.

Tanpınar, Ahmet Hamdi. Yahya Kemal. Istanbul: Dergah Yayınları, 2011.

238

Taşkıran, Tezer. Cumhuriyetin 50. Yılında Türk Kadın Hakları. Başbakanlık Kültür

Müsteşarlığı: Cumhuriyetin 50. Yıldönümü Yayınları, 1973.

Tekcan, Rana. “Sessiz Sedasız Yaşayanlar: Biyografide Kadın.” In Kadınlar Dile

Düşünce: Edebiyat ve Toplumsal Cinsiyet, edited by Sibel Irzık and Jale Parla,

145-56. Istanbul: İletişim, 2004.

Til, Enis Tahsin. “Cenap Şahabeddin, Büyük nesir üstadının hayatı ve kadınlık

hakkındaki düşünceleri.” Akşam, 25 April 1950.

Toprak, Zafer. “Fikir Dergiciliğinin Yüz Yılı.” In Türkiye’de Dergiler Ansiklopediler

(1849-1984), 13-54. Istanbul: Gelişim Yayınları, 1984.

__________. “Tesettürden Telebbüse ya da Çarşaf veya Elbise – ‘Milli Moda’ ve

Çarşaf.” Tombak, no. 19 (Apr. 1998): 52-63.

__________. “The Family, Feminism, and the State During the Young Turk Period,

1908-1918.” In Première Rencontre Internationale sur l'Empire Ottoman et la Turquie Moderne, 441-52. Istanbul-Paris: Éditions ISIS, 1991.

Topuz, Hıfzı. II. Mahmut'tan Holdinglere Türk Basın Tarihi. Istanbul: Remzi Kitapevi,

2003.

Toska, Zehra et al. İstanbul Kütüphanelerindeki Eski Harfli Türkçe Kadın Dergileri

Bibliyografyası (1869-1927). Istanbul: Metis, 1993.

Tucker, Judith E. “Revisiting Reform: Women and the Ottoman Law of Family Rights,

1917.” The Arab Studies Journal 4, no. 2 (Fall 1996): 4-17.

Tuğlacı, Pars. Osmanlı Döneminde İstanbul Kadınları. Istanbul: Cem Yayınevi, 1984.

Ulusoy, Çağatay. Haremden Mektuplar I. Istanbul: Vakit Matbaası, 1956.

Uraz, Murat. Kadın Şair ve Muharrirlerimiz. Istanbul: Tefeyyüz Kitabevi, 1940.

Uysal, Sermet Sami. Eşlerine Göre Ediplerimiz. Istanbul: Timaş, 2010.

Woolf, Virginia. A Room of One’s Own. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Co., 1929.

Yakut, Kemal. “Tek Parti Döneminde Peçe ve Çarşaf.” Tarih ve Toplum, no. 231 (Apr.

2002): 23-32.

Yalçın Bilim, Cahit. Tanzimat devrinde Türk eğitiminde çağdaşlaşma (1839–1876).

Eskişehir: Anadolu Üniversitesi Yayınları, 1984.

Yenisey, Fazıl. Bektaşi Kadın Şairlerimiz. İzmir: Pazar Neşriyat Yurdu, 1946.

239

Yılmaz, Ayfer. “Geçmişten Günümüze Kadın Şairlerin Konumuna Genel Bir Bakış.”

21. Yüzyılda Eğitim ve Toplum 1, no. 2 (Aug. 2012): 6-63.

Zürcher, Erik J. Turkey: A Modern History. London: Tauris, 2007.