İlim ve Medeniyet
Yeni Nesil Sosyal Bilimler Platformu
This article briefly touches upon the life and writings of Prince Sabahaddin, a highly controversial figure. Prince Sabahaddin and his father, Mahmut Pasha, have recently become subjects of interest due to their depiction in a television series about Abdulhamid II. Mahmut Pasha, often portrayed in the series as collaborating with the British and pursuing self-interest, had a fascinating life story. Similarly, Prince Sabahaddin was a distinct personality. This short piece will briefly cover both figures.
It is understood that Prince Sabahaddin's lineage is originally Georgian. His grandfather, Koca Hüsrev Pasha, was instrumental in his rise, enabling him to reach a position where he could marry a Sultan's daughter. Mahmut Celaleddin Pasha was born in 1853, the result of his grandfather Halil Rıfat Pasha's marriage to İsmet Hanım. Marrying Seniha Sultan, daughter of Abdülmecid, in 1876 allowed Mahmut Pasha to rise rapidly within the establishment (Akyıldız, 1992, pp. 175-177). Several incidents are said to have strained his relationship with Abdülhamid, and his resulting animosity towards the Sultan would reportedly influence his future decisions (Akyıldız, 1992, pp. 175-177).
Mahmut Celaleddin Pasha began his service as a member of the Council of State (Şuray-ı Devlet) in 1876. After being granted the rank of vizier and pasha in 1877, he was appointed Minister of Justice (Adliye Nazırlığı) a year later. However, he was dismissed in August 1878 when Saffet Mehmet Esad Pasha, the Grand Vizier of the time, suggested he lacked the requisite experience due to his youth (Akyıldız, 1992, pp. 175-177). A subsequent event—his steward's involvement in an attempt to restore Murat V to the throne—further complicated his position. Although his innocence was later established, his resentment towards the Sultan persisted, and he repeatedly declined Abdülhamid's invitations to return to the palace (Akyıldız, 1992, pp. 175-177). Cenk Reyhan, who has studied Prince Sabahaddin, finds Mahmut Celaleddin Pasha's opposition to Abdülhamid particularly intriguing, especially given the son-in-law's strong opposition to his father-in-law from the dynasty (Reyhan, 2002, p. 146).
Mahmut Celaleddin Pasha's flight abroad is a significant event in the historical narrative. Before his departure, he was living a secluded life at home, speaking openly about the country's trajectory and the failures in administration and governance (Akyıldız, 1992, pp. 175-177). It is highly likely that Prince Sabahaddin was influenced by his father, was aware of the state's internal affairs, and his father's views shaped his own thinking.
In 1889, he fled to Paris through an arranged scheme. This incident caused a stir in both Europe and the Ottoman Empire. Although Abdülhamid tried to prevent it, he was unsuccessful. Aware of the potential danger, the Sultan put Celaleddin Pasha under close surveillance (Akyıldız, 1992, pp. 175-177). His actions in Europe, particularly giving anti-Sultan interviews to the press, were noteworthy. He later started his own newspaper to continue his opposition. The newspaper, Osmanlı, launched in 1900, began discussing highly sensitive issues. It notably declared that Abdülhamid had usurped the Caliphate, asserting that the true Caliph should be Mehmet Reşat Efendi. The attempt to strengthen this argument by obtaining a fatwa (religious edict) from a sheikh in the Marrakech region is particularly striking. This newspaper was subsequently distributed in the Ottoman Empire and Arab provinces (Akyıldız, 1992, pp. 175-177).
When discussing Prince Sabahaddin, we must mention the first Young Turk Congress in 1902. Although Mahmut Celaleddin Pasha was intended to lead the congress, Prince Sabahaddin took over due to his father's illness. Celaleddin Pasha passed away in 1903. Abdülhamid wanted to bring his body back for burial, but his sons refused until the declaration of the constitutional monarchy (Meşrutiyet). Following the 1908 declaration of Meşrutiyet, his remains were brought to Istanbul and interred in Eyüp Cemetery (Akyıldız, 1992, pp. 175-177).
Prince Sabahaddin, whose birth name was Mehmet Sabahaddin, was one of Mahmut Celaleddin Pasha's two children with Seniha Sultan; his brother was Ahmet Lütfullah. His father had three other children from a second marriage to İsmet Hanım (Akyıldız, 1992, pp. 175-177). While this is a chronological account, there is limited information about Sabahaddin's early life. We know he received a good education from private tutors in languages, literature, painting, piano, and science (Uçman, 2007, pp. 341-342).
He and his father likely chose to fight the regime from abroad due to the perceived threat of persecution or because they, along with other Young Turks, believed that power was too distant to reach within the country, leading them to France (Reyhan, 2002, p. 146). They fled to Europe in 1898, where they undertook the task of uniting the opposition against Abdülhamid. This was necessary due to internal factions among the dissidents, and they also sought solutions to the problems of minorities (Reyhan, 2002, pp. 146-148).
The congress, held between February 4 and 9 in 1902, adopted the following principles:
To encourage the appreciation of social works among the Turkish people to promote private initiative and ultimately adopt a path of "administrative decentralization" (adem-i merkeziyet).
To foster a "common ground for understanding" among the various ethnic groups constituting the Ottoman Empire.
To "protect the rights of the Ottomans" in more advanced countries and to "influence public opinion in favor of the Ottomans" in those nations.
To work for the "implementation of this program" by establishing societies and committees within the country and to "confront various forces" (Reyhan, 2002, pp. 146-148).
Key concepts here include private initiative (teşebbüs-i şahsi), decentralization (adem-i merkeziyet), improving the Ottoman image in Europe, and taking concrete steps through associations (Reyhan, 2002, pp. 146-148). However, disagreements among the opposition groups prevented the formation of a unified front. Consequently, Prince Sabahaddin pursued his own course, founding the Private Initiative and Decentralization Society (Teşebbüs-i Şahsi ve Adem-i Merkeziyet Cemiyeti). Its publication was the journal Terraki. Reyhan notes that this movement was misunderstood by the public but embraced by minorities, merchants, and young people. This suggests limited popular acceptance and influence on the movement's scope, which nonetheless strengthened the opposition to Abdülhamid (Reyhan, 2002, pp. 146-148).
Prince Sabahaddin's ideas and actions materialized in the establishment of the Liberal Union Party (Ahrar Fırkası) in 1908. The party had a short lifespan; its opposition to the Committee of Union and Progress (CUP/İTC) is cited as a factor in its demise (Reyhan, 2002, p. 149). Following the 31 March Incident, party members faced intense pressure, including arrests and executions, on the grounds of their alleged involvement (Reyhan, 2002, p. 149). Prince Sabahaddin returned to Turkey after the CUP leaders left the country following World War I. However, his stay was cut short when the Ottoman Dynasty was expelled in 1924 (Uçman, 2007, pp. 341-342). Prince Sabahaddin died in Switzerland in 1948 (Uçman, 2007, pp. 341-342).
Moving on to his compiled works, the volume, edited by Ahmet Zeki İzgöer, begins with Prince Sabahaddin's life. İzgöer compiled four of the Prince's key explanations (İzah):
Teşebbüs-i Şahsi ve Tevsi-i Mezuniyet Hakkında Bir İzah (A Note on Private Initiative and Extension of Authority), Istanbul 1323 (1907).
Teşebbüs-i Şahsi ve Adem-i Merkeziyet Hakkında İkinci Bir İzah (A Second Note on Private Initiative and Decentralization), Istanbul 1324 (1908).
İttihat ve Terakki’ye Açık Mektuplar, Mesleğimiz Hakkında Üçüncü ve Son Bir İzah (Open Letters to the Committee of Union and Progress, A Third and Final Note on Our Profession), Istanbul 1327 (1911).
Türkiye Nasıl Kurtarılabilir? (How Can Turkey Be Saved?) (İzgöer, 2006).
Before presenting the İzahs, İzgöer provides Prince Sabahaddin's thoughts on subjects such as "Education" and "Islam" (İzgöer, 2006).
In the first İzah, Prince Sabahaddin states that he is working towards three main goals. The first is the autocratic regime (istibdat). However, Sabahaddin argues that the autocracy stems not from a few people in the palace, but from the shortcomings in the education system, social life, and upbringing. The second goal is to promote unity between Muslims and Christians, discouraging all forms of autonomy or separatist politics. The final goal is to turn Western public opinion in favor of the Ottoman Empire (Sabahaddin, 1907).
This section also addresses and explains the concept of Decentralization (Adem-i Merkeziyet). Sabahaddin clarifies that he means administrative decentralization, not granting independence to groups like the Armenians. His aim is to increase the influence and effectiveness of local powers to expedite bureaucratic processes and overcome unnecessary obstacles in the Ottoman Empire. He cites the example of a governor struggling with excessive bureaucracy to build a simple road (Sabahaddin, 1907). He also argues that centralized decisions are often inappropriate because regions have different economies and needs; an official should assess local needs before acting (Sabahaddin, 1907).
Another key concept he discusses here is "Private Initiative" (Özel Teşebbüs). He begins his explanation by quoting the verse: “O you who believe! Take care of yourselves! And there is nothing for man except what he strives for.” (Sabahaddin, 1907).
Following the quote, he criticizes the education system, claiming it hinders private initiative, encourages students to rely on patronage, and promotes the goal of quick money and obtaining civil service positions. He notes the excessive number of civil servants in the country (Sabahaddin, 1907). Students seek civil service positions through patronage and need further patronage to advance, creating a cycle of dependency. He argues that the main purpose of education should be to enhance a student's abilities in terms of "body," "mind," and "morality," and criticizes the neglect of physical education (Sabahaddin, 1907). He strongly emphasizes practical education, contrasting the progress in natural sciences, which he attributes to observation and experimentation, with the theoretical bias of Turkish education (Sabahaddin, 1907).
He asserts that the government deliberately seeks to "stifle" personality within the education system, aiming to raise a "generation of dependents." For him, the most important concepts are private initiative and freedom (Sabahaddin, 1907).
In this section, Prince Sabahaddin responds to accusations leveled against him, particularly those from Hüseyin Cahit. Cahit had alleged ties between the Ahrar Party and the Greek Patriarchate and claimed that the idea of Decentralization would lead to islands like Mytilene and Chios falling back into Greek hands (Sabahaddin, 1908).
Prince Sabahaddin refutes these claims, stating he had no relationship with the Greeks, was not a member of the Ahrar Party, did not participate in parliamentary elections, and that Decentralization was merely the application of Article 108 of the Constitution (Sabahaddin, 1908). He discusses the personal hardships he endured, the sacrifices he made for his cause, and his sole desire for his country to reach the level of contemporary civilizations (Sabahaddin, 1908).
Here, he discusses his correspondence with the CUP, outlining his views and relations with the committee.
First Letter: He addresses the question: "Why did the attacks begin?" He analyzes the situation before and after the Meşrutiyet. He states that before the Meşrutiyet, all evil was attributed to autocracy, and the source of autocracy was believed to be Abdülhamid; thus, they thought his removal would solve everything (Sabahaddin, 1911). However, Prince Sabahaddin argues that after the Meşrutiyet, the situation did not improve, the evil persisted, and autocracy continued even after Abdülhamid's deposition. He attributes the nation's problems to the following factors:
In private life: Useless tradition, a system of livelihood that prevents the rise of personality through productive and legitimate work, and poor education that perpetuates this system from generation to generation.
In public life (government organization): Centralization, which reflects the laziness of private life into public life, does not conform to local needs, operates at high cost, and has turned Turkey into a land of misery (Sabahaddin, 1911).
He proposes the "Cure" as: getting rid of the centralism that is the source of all evil, prioritizing personal development, avoiding laziness, re-establishing lost Ottoman unity, and combining national sovereignty with administrative decentralization (Sabahaddin, 1911).
Prince Sabahaddin believes the unfairness directed at him stems from the fact that those who previously criticized Abdülhamid and then "applauded him" after the Meşrutiyet was declared, expected him to do the same. According to the Prince, he was targeted because he continued to oppose Abdülhamid, in line with his previously stated principles, even after the declaration of the Meşrutiyet (Sabahaddin, 1911).
Second Letter: Prince Sabahaddin responds to an article in Neyyir-i Hakikat newspaper. The paper accused him of providing financial assistance to soldiers and inciting them against the government/Meşrutiyet. It also accused him of establishing the Ahrar Party, which they claimed was a menace to the country (Sabahaddin, 1911).
Third, Fourth, and Fifth Letters: These letters address similar topics (Sabahaddin, 1911).
Sixth Letter: He discusses the "great discovery of Sociology," which divides nations into two classes: Communal (Kamucu) and Individual (Ferdi) Structures. Communal structures include Asia, Africa, South America, Turkey, and Russia. Their "points of support" are not themselves but the group they belong to, such as family, community, party, or government. In these societies, private initiative and personal enterprise are absent (Sabahaddin, 1911). The Individual Structure is the reverse.
Seventh Letter: He argues that Turkey must transition from the Communal to the Individual Structure. He draws attention to the poor state of agriculture and the peasantry, suggesting that the educated elite must guide the villagers (Sabahaddin, 1911). He is greatly impressed by a school in France and argues that Turkish youth should be sent abroad, not to become "enlightened consumers," but "enterprising producers" (Sabahaddin, 1911).
Eighth Letter: His comments about Abdülhamid are particularly notable:
"But just as Abdülhamid was not the real perpetrator of yesterday's evils, the heroes of liberty are not the real organizers of today's evils. The true source of evil is ourselves, and the fundamental center of our sin is our way of life" (Sabahaddin, 1911).
Towards the end of the letter, he reiterates that Abdülhamid was not the main problem, but rather the system of education and upbringing, and defends the solutions he previously cited (Sabahaddin, 1911).
Prince Sabahaddin's views here are not significantly different from those discussed above. He highlights the great importance of Science Sociale (Social Science), praising its accuracy and noting the lack of study in this field in Turkey. He observes that Turkish intellectuals are concerned about the country's salvation but cannot find the solution, which he believes lies in Science Sociale (Sabahaddin, n.d.). His most significant influence in this area is Edmond Demolins (Sabahaddin, n.d.).
According to him, Turkey can be saved by transitioning from the Communal Structure to the Individual Structure. He compares French and English schools: while English schools emphasize information and knowledge, the French are superior because, even with half the knowledge of the English, they receive a practical-oriented education and are thus always ahead (Sabahaddin, n.d.). Therefore, one of the key concepts Sabahaddin proposes for Turkey's salvation is education based on observation and experimentation (Sabahaddin, n.d.). In the Communal Structure, advancement is achieved through patronage, not merit or personal skills. This leads to problems like laziness and inability to self-develop. France is cited as an example of the opposite structure (Sabahaddin, n.d.).
Prince Sabahaddin lived during a turbulent period, a complex environment marked by the collapse of the Ottoman Empire and the rise of the Republic. The Ottoman Empire had been losing territory for years, with the Russians reaching Yeşilköy in the War of 1877–1878, the British occupying Cyprus, and revolts erupting in the Balkans. Intellectuals sought ideas to save the Empire, which was now a state targeted for partition by the "Great Powers". The available path was a delicate balance of power politics, and the price was steep. Prince Sabahaddin remains a controversial and questionable figure (Dur, 2023). The question remains whether there is a direct connection between his writings and his life experiences.
Dominant ideas of the era included Ottomanism (Osmanlıcılık), Turkism (Türkçülük), and Islamism (İslamcılık). However, all three were ultimately unsuccessful due to external pressure and influence, as the era was one of unavoidable imperial collapse and the construction of nation-states. Amidst this chaos, intellectuals sought various solutions, many looking to Europe. While not all saw Europe as the sole cure, it was clear that the future lay in becoming an industrial society rather than an agricultural one. "Modernization" was increasingly seen as a material undertaking. Continuous war, loss of territory, and the influx of refugees into Anatolia caused intellectual circles to experience crises and search for a way out.
Prince Sabahaddin proposed the Individual Structure, Decentralization (Adem-i Merkeziyet), and Private Initiative (Teşebbüs-i Şahsi) as the way forward. These concepts were derived from his observations in Europe and his interactions with scholars there. Aykut Kansu, however, argues that Prince Sabahaddin's views were inaccurate and his proposed solutions mere fantasies.
Prince Sabahaddin is known in Turkey as a pioneer of Liberalism, but Aykut Kansu argues the opposite in his article. Kansu asserts that Prince Sabahaddin embraced an ultra-conservative worldview and worked for its adoption in Turkey (Kansu, 2002, p. 161). According to Kansu, the goal of Demolins and Science Sociale was to revert to the feudal state of France before the French Revolution (Kansu, 2002, p. 161). They advocated for the feudal structure, rejecting concepts brought by the French Revolution—such as liberty, equality—and rejecting Liberalism (Kansu, 2002, pp. 161-162). Being conservatives, they supported the feudal order, the rule of nobles over peasants, and a system where local nobility held authority against the central government (Kansu, 2002, p. 162).
Kansu states:
"...Since Prince Sabahaddin did not think Turkey could establish a colonial empire in Africa and other continents like France, he envisioned this as internal colonization. He planned to educate young people from the wealthy Turkish class and send them to Anatolian peasants, whom he believed could not even farm properly on their own, as 'agricultural patrons.' This, according to Prince Sabahaddin, was the solution for Turkey's development: 'individual entrepreneurship' or 'teşebbüs-i şahsi'. As Demolins suggested, young people should be discouraged from civil service, given a special education—meaning, raised as individuals suited for the 'individualistic family' type—and unleashed upon Anatolia to become the masters of the peasants" (Kansu, 2002, p. 161).
Kansu further adds:
"...Starting with the example of France, the representatives of this ideology were fundamentally opposed to the new state model established after 1789. The French Revolution was denounced not only because it touched the privileges of the aristocracy, but also because it undermined the existing stability, the authority of the aristocracy among the people, and the respect for the upper class by prioritizing individual rights and freedoms. Especially the new parliament and its inseparable component, the model of representation—that is, liberal democracy—was seen by the ultra-conservatives as something too evil to be tolerated" (Kansu, 2002, pp. 161-162).
Because Kansu's perspective diverges from common understanding, his core arguments were directly quoted. Kansu concludes that Prince Sabahaddin's proposals were incorrect, and he opposes those who claim that Prince Sabahaddin's methodology constituted "the first real analysis of Turkey" and contributed to social sciences (Kansu, 2002, pp. 163-164).
This work has ultimately focused on Prince Sabahaddin's views. In addressing his İzahs, the biographical section relied on DİA entries, and Aykut Kansu's work was cited due to its original ideas.
Akyıldız, A. (1992). Mahmud Celaleddin Paşa. Diyanet İslam Ansiklopedisi, 2, 175-177.
Kansu, A. (2002). Prens Sabahaddin’in Düşünsel Kaynakları ve Aşırı-Muhafazakar Düşüncenin İthali. In Modern Türkiye’de Siyasi Düşünce. C.1. Tanzimat ve Meşrutiyetin Birikimi (pp. 154-164). İletişim Yayınları.
Reyhan, C. (2002). Prens Sabahaddin. In Modern Türkiye’de Siyasi Düşünce. C.1 Tanzimat ve Meşrutiyetin Birikimi (pp. 143-153). İletişim Yayınları.
Uçman, A. (2007). Prens Sabahaddin. Diyanet İslam Ansiklopedisi, 34, 341-342.
Akyıldız, A. (1992). Mahmud Celaleddin Pasha. In Diyanet Islamic Encyclopedia, 2, 175-177.
Kansu, A. (2002). Prince Sabahaddin’s Intellectual Sources and the Importation of Ultra-Conservative Thought. In Political Thought in Modern Turkey. Vol. 1. The Accumulation of Tanzimat and Meşrutiyet (pp. 154-164). İletişim Publications.
Reyhan, C. (2002). Prince Sabahaddin. In Political Thought in Modern Turkey. Vol. 1. The Accumulation of Tanzimat and Meşrutiyet (pp. 143-153). İletişim Publications.
Uçman, A. (2007). Prince Sabahaddin. In Diyanet Islamic Encyclopedia, 34, 341-342.
Tranlated by ia
Ozan Dur
Türkiye based middle east ve history researcher
Ozan Dur, İstanbul 29 Mayıs Üniversitesi Tarih Bölümü’nden mezun olup, İngilizce, Osmanlıca, Farsça, Arapça ve İbranice öğrenerek dil alanında uzmanlaştı. Humboldt Üniversitesi, İmam Humeyni Üniversit ...
Yorum Yaz