The history of the mankind is often called to be the history of separate personalities, who shape the course of events in the whole world by their actions and words. Thus, the role of a personality in the history has always been stressed by scholars who claim that these are people that make history but not vice versa. The history of Turkey is not an exception, and the life and main ideas by Ahmet Agaoglu have played a central role in the formation of the new Turkey after the Ottoman Empire had been destroyed and the Turkish Republic established. The book Between Two Empires: Ahmet Agaoglu and the New Turkey is a brilliant source of information on Ahmet Agaoglu’s life and main political, social ideas. Although having its strong and weak points, this book is an example of a well-documented and argumentative source.
So, it is necessary to see the background of this book. First of all, Between Two Empires: Ahmet Agaoglu and the New Turkey is one of the first attempts in the Middle East studies to present a detailed and argumentative account of the life of a prominent political and social statesman. Aside from other points, the main idea of the book is the highlighting of the Turkish identity and its major principles. Historical background is also rather significant in the book as far as the author manages to put the life and work of Ahmet Agaoglu in the context of the two Russian (1905 and 1917) and one Turkish Revolution (1908), World War I, and a number of other events that determined the development of the mankind for the next century.
Therefore, the bulk of the data that Shissler (2003) operates with are either purely historical or deeply philosophical, depending on the matter of study in a certain chapter. The former are present because the book under analysis, aside from being a detailed biographical account of Ahmet Agaoglu’s life and work, is a historical work dealing with such controversial events in the history of humanity as the Russian revolutions, World Wars, etc. Therefore, Shissler (2003) describes those events through the prism of Ahmet Agaoglu’s personality:
He was involved directly or indirectly in three revolutions (1905 in Russia, 1908 in the Ottoman Empire, 1917 in Russia), a world war, and a war of resistance to the foreign occupation (the Turkish War of Independence). (Shissler, 2003, p. 1)
Based on these data, it is evident that Ahmet Agaoglu was a multicultural person being fluent in five Asian and European languages and considering himself to be a citizen of Turkey, France, Russia, Azerbaijan, and Persia. In Turkey, Azerbaijan, and Russia his work was especially prominent as Ahmet Agaoglu is considered to be the father of the Turkish independence philosophy, the very father of the Azerbaijan sovereignty, and one of the most notable persons in the Russian Muslim movement of the late 19th – early 20th century:
His life embodies the struggles of the late nineteenth-century Ottoman and Transcaucasian Muslim intellectual to somehow resolve the tension between the need for self-strengthening and the need to maintain an intact and authentic identity.” (Shissler, 2003, p. 2)
From this, the main ideas of the book can be traced as well. First of all, the concept of an intellectual choosing his way in life is central to this book. This intellectual views the traditional structure of the Imperial state he lives in as the limits to his cognitive and social activities and rebels against them. Accordingly, the idea of the elimination of the Ottoman Empire was crucial to this intellectual: “The Ottoman Empire, an unnatural (or outmoded) multi-ethnic construction, was in its death throes at the close of the nineteenth century, and from its ruins, the Turkish nation would emerge, triumphant…” (Shissler, 2003, p. 20) From this, the concept of identity is also derived from the intellectual consideration of Ahmet Agaoglu.
First of all, the identity pluralism is observed in the ideas by Ahmet Agaoglu as presented in the book. For example, at one of the stages of his career, namely the period of study in Paris, Ahmet Agaoglu defines himself as “a Persian writing about his native culture” (Shissler, 2003, p. 82), but the later paper and speeches of his manifest the shift of his consciousness towards the support of Russian Muslims and Turks in their struggle for the rights within the Russian Empire. Finally, the Turk identity is demonstrated by Ahmet Agaoglu during his life and work in revolutionary Turkey. So, it is evident that a talented personality is always in the search of an identity to best reflect his or her principles in their development. In any case, Ahmet Agaoglu contributed greatly to the political and social development of Turkish identity, the Russian Muslim movement, and the development of other countries.
Needless to say, the book under consideration has its positive and negative sides, i. e. its strengths and weaknesses. Among the strong points of Between Two Empires: Ahmet Agaoglu and the New Turkey the following ones can be listed. First of all, the comprehensive character of the data presentation adds to the book’s credibility. In other words, the focus of the author is not on a single idea but the wide variety of concepts, including history, personal and social philosophy, and identity, makes the book readable and involving for a larger number of readers. For example, those dealing with the history of modern Turkey, Russia, Azerbaijan, etc. will find this book extremely helpful and informative, as Ahmet Agaoglu played a prominent role in the development of all those countries, and the author of this book manages to cover all his activities in these countries.
Moreover, Between Two Empires: Ahmet Agaoglu and the New Turkey
represents a much wider scope of events including not only the personal ideas by Agaoglu but also the political occurrences in Turkey and other countries. For example, the readers can learn how the Revolution in Turkey was prepared and carried out, who the main figures thereof were, and how their deeds were motivated. The readers can also observe an analysis of Ataturk’s policies aimed at, first, strengthening the Republic, and, second, centralizing his role in it. The problematic state of the Muslim communities in the Russian Empire during the last years of its existence is also considered by Shissler (2003) in the context of the Communist revolutions and the overall world history.
However, weaknesses can also be observed in the book under analysis. First of all, the ambiguity and the many-sidedness of the interpretation of various concepts can be mentioned in this respect. For example, identity as a concept and as a specific feature of Ahmet Agaoglu is rather controversially reflected by Shissler (2003) in her book. The reason for this might be the lack of critical analysis and the focus on the description of events without inquiring into their nature. As a result, instead of making a specific conclusion, Shissler (2003) leaves a question after the consideration of the concept of identity in her book: “The questions remained: was he a Rus muscleman, a Shi’i, a Tatar, a Turk, a Persian, a Cedidist, a bey, a socialist revolutionary, or perhaps the Tsar’s loyal Muslim subject?” (Shissler, 2003, p. 63). This ambiguity leaves the readers with a feeling of unfinished idea transforming the book from a scholarly work into a philosophical paper.
Moreover, the consideration of the Russian setting in the early 20th century is rather incomplete and controversial. Speaking about the issues that Russian Muslims faced in that time, Shissler (2003) uses modeled expressions like “blind memorization” or “poor educational level”, but fails to consider the situation from the modern point of view analyzing the political and social situation (Shissler, 2003, p. 108). Thus, the book contains certain ambiguities but the overall picture it makes is rather positive and strong, which makes this book a reliable and valuable source of data.
Accordingly, the book Between Two Empires: Ahmet Agaoglu and the New Turkey by Shissler (2003) can be beneficially used for the study of various subjects including history, public policies study, social sciences, literature, civil rights, and many others. Being the source of the comprehensive overview of the political and social development of the world in the late 19th – early 20th century, the book by Shissler (2003) allows its readers to be well informed about the principles according to which the policies of various countries developed, and about the role the ideas by people like Ahmet Agaoglu played in them. Even the weak points of the book, like the lack of critical analysis, can be beneficially used in the study as an opportunity for students to develop their ideas on controversial points.
Drawing from this, the book under analysis can be assessed rather well, meaning that the data presented by Shissler (2003) are rather credible, precise, and based on the specific historic documents and Ahmet Agaoglu correspondence. This book is strongly recommended to those who are simply interested in Turkish or international history, as well as to those studying the establishment of the Turkish Republic in the context of the ideas by Ahmet Agaoglu.
To conclude, it is necessary to state that the role of a personality in the history of Turkey, as well as any other country, is rather substantial. The life and main ideas by Ahmet Agaoglu have played a central role in the formation of the new Turkey after the Ottoman Empire had been destroyed and the Turkish Republic established. The book Between Two Empires: Ahmet Agaoglu and the New Turkey is a brilliant source of information on Ahmet Agaoglu’s life and main political, social, etc. ideas. Having certain weak points, which are discussed above in the respective paragraphs, this book is rather valuable for the study of Turkish history and the role of the ideas by Ahmet Agaoglu in it.