Two war years in Constantinople — Inside the Classic

The Author's Position and Purpose

Stuermer's preface and declaration establish his unusual stance: a German publicly criticizing his own government and its ally. He claims to act on conscience, having avoided contact with anyone in Switzerland until his manuscript was sent to press. The excerpts show he was a former correspondent, not a diplomat or soldier, and his observations are explicitly labeled as sketches of ethics and politics. The catalog subject broadly covers the war in Turkey, but Stuermer's focus is on internal dynamics—German arrogance, Turkish nationalism, and the failure of cooperation. He describes pan-German expansionists celebrating Turkish alliance, only to be countered by decrees forcing German signs to be replaced by Turkish. This tension, not combat, dominates the text.

Language as a Battleground

A recurring detail is the struggle over language. Stuermer reports that Talaat's decree required all German notices to disappear, and later Greek signs were also removed. Turkish became mandatory for bookkeeping in banks and newspapers, threatening German employees who faced learning Turkish or losing their jobs. Stuermer calls this a 'sword of Damocles' over German businesses. He notes that the 'Osmanic Lloyd' and the 'German Bank' would have to keep Turkish books for a European clientele. These specific examples ground the narrative in administrative reality, showing how nationalist policies directly affected daily operations. The catalog subject does not capture this granular conflict over language and commerce.

German Optimism vs. Turkish Realities

Stuermer contrasts German optimism—belief in a final Turkish victory—with the Young Turks' systematic Turkification. He mentions German officials 'foisted on the Turkish Government' and professors who had to wear the fez and learn Turkish, yet still provoked anti-German comment. The excerpts suggest that by summer 1916, even blind optimists began to see that Germany would have no place in a victorious Turkey. Stuermer's tone is critical of both sides: German overconfidence and Turkish nationalism. The catalog subject implies a military history, but the text is a political commentary on alliance friction, with no battle scenes or strategic analysis in the provided excerpts.

Readers should approach Two War Years in Constantinople as a polemical memoir rather than a comprehensive history. Stuermer's evidence is anecdotal and shaped by his personal mission to expose German and Turkish failings. The excerpts offer a vivid, if partial, picture of wartime bureaucracy and cultural conflict. For a fuller understanding, consider how his position as a German critic may color his portrayal of Turkish policies and German responses.

Reading that correspondent's quiet anguish over language decrees in old Constantinople, I thought of something else sitting on my shelf. It’s the Historical records of the Buffs, East Kent Regiment (3rd Foot) — A Reader’s Guide, and how those soldiers’ names felt like a similar kind of witness. Both left me with a strange, heavy tenderness for people caught in other people's politics.