{"id":159,"date":"2008-03-03T10:50:03","date_gmt":"2008-03-03T10:50:03","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"2013-11-26T20:19:26","modified_gmt":"2013-11-26T20:19:26","slug":"sport-in-turkey-the-post-islamic-republican-period","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/article\/sport-in-turkey-the-post-islamic-republican-period\/","title":{"rendered":"Sport in Turkey: the Post-Islamic Republican Period"},"content":{"rendered":"
Submitted by: Ergun Yurdadon, Ph.D.<\/div>\n

A Brief Evaluation of Development of Turkish Sport from 1839 to 1923<\/h2>\n

Although the modern Turkish Republic was officially established in 1923,
\nthe liberalization, secularization and the democratization process of
\nthe Republic was initiated in 1839. All of these three phases occurred
\nin conjunction with the Tanzimat reforms, which granted partial constitutional
\nrights to the Turkish people.<\/p>\n

After the Tanzimat, the Turkish people reorganized their lives and established
\norganizations on voluntary and constitutional principles. The formation
\nof such organizations also provided leadership for sports activities within
\nthe country. Eventually, the sport movement gained momentum. According
\nto Fisek, “Despite the discouragement of government, the popularity
\nand enthusiasm for sports were manifested” (p. 270). However, Turkish
\nsport had not yet set national objectives nor defined goals.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Prior to the Republican Period, between the 1650’s and the 1920’s, the
\nOttoman Empire was constantly at war with one or more of her enemies,
\nweakening the economic and political strength of the nation. During this
\nperiod of crisis, it was only natural that the issue of sport escaped
\nthe attention of officials. Nevertheless, it was also “…handed
\nover to the protection of a few rich individuals called Agas, and of sport
\nTekkes (an ancient form of sport clubs) which provided shelter and management
\nfor sport” (Fisek, 251). According to Fisek, “The largest of
\nall tekkes was in Istanbul and sheltered approximately 300 athletes, mostly
\nwrestlers” (p. 257). In some instances, services for the sports were
\nalso provided by the Sultan’s Palace.<\/p>\n

In the history of Turkish sport this period is remembered as the “Period
\nof Protectionism” (Fisek, 250). Furthermore, under the protectionist
\nsystem, entire services enhanced the athletic performance of Turkish athletes,
\nyet no effort was advanced for the development of the institution of sport
\nper se. According to Hicyilmaz, “…there was not any attempt or
\nany suitable approach to the problems connected with the issues of sport”
\n(P. 55).<\/p>\n

Specific issues regarding sport in Turkiye gained some attention only
\naround the beginning of the twentieth century when some European-educated
\nTurkish sportsmen returned with a Western view of sports. With the help
\nand the experience of these sportsmen “…the system of sport began
\nto organize and a few national objectives” were stated (Atabeyoglu,
\n11).<\/p>\n

Around the turn of the century, the Ottoman Empire had been suffering
\nfrom severe economic and political conditions and was on the verge of
\ncollapse. Finally, soon after WWI, the Empire was invaded and occupied
\nby the Allied nations of Europe. During this period of invasion, several
\n“Anglo-Saxon” sports entered into Turkiye.<\/p>\n

According to Fisek, “In the cities of Izmir and Istanbul, by using
\ntheir diplomatic immunity<\/span><\/strong>, the staff of Embassies of England
\nand France were organizing athletic competitions: cricket, rugby, hockey
\nand soccer” (p. 249). Ertug reported that, “In 1913, in Istanbul,
\nthe staff of the British Embassy organized a soccer tournament for the
\nhonor of the British commander General Harrington” (p. 8). Moreover,
\naccording to Hicyilmaz, “…by using their diplomatic privileges,
\nthe British merchants and the staff of the British Embassy not only organized
\nsports competitions but also formed several sports clubs and societies”
\n(p. 29). It is very important to point out that prior to this period the
\noccurrence of such events would have been immediately banned by the government.
\nHowever, due to prevailing conditions of the occupation, the Ottoman government
\nwas forced to remove the restrictions that blocked the formation of athletic
\nclubs or associations in the country. According to Howard, “Under
\nthe terms of the Istanbul treaty, during the invasion, the Allied nations
\nwere taking no orders from the Ottoman government” (pp. 136-137).
\nTaking advantage of the Ottoman government’s vulnerability, a significant
\nnumber of athletic clubs were formed, especially by the British. We cannot
\ninterpret England’s initiative as a favor to the Turks, however, England
\nwas not ever concerned with the physical health of the Turkish youth.
\nRather, it was a very common British policy that had been used successfully,
\nin India and in some African nations, to develop sports facilities in
\norder to restrict nationalism and curb political activity. In fact, in
\nthe early years of the occupation, the British established two soccer
\nclubs., “The Strugglers” and the “The Progress.” Although
\nthere is no clear evidence, the meanings of the names of the clubs exactly
\ncoincided with the political conditions of both England, which was “progressive,”
\nand the Ottoman Empire, which was “struggling” at the time.
\nAccording to Fisek, “The purpose of the formation and the orchestration
\nof sport clubs in Turkiye by England were entirely imperialistic”
\n(p. 268).<\/p>\n

It is relevant to stress how external factors influenced the internal
\ncreativity in every area of life in the country. In this regard, the condition
\nand the subsequent development of sport was not different-from, and were
\nheavily influenced by, the existing cultural systems in Western Europe
\nand America. For instance, programs in physical education were modeled
\nafter the calisthenics of Germany and the Scandinavian countries and resembled
\nthe sports and games from England and America. The military and civil
\ncolleges also promoted other gymnastics programs. The first sport clubs
\nand societies to be organized in Turkiye, however, were those overseen
\nby the British in soccer and rugby.<\/p>\n

British influence on Turkish sport was noticeable, specifically in soccer.
\nAccording to Ertug, “The first soccer and rugby club (Moda Futbol
\nve Ragby Kulubu) was formed in Moda, Istanbul in 1896′ (p. 6). Although
\nthe British introduced the majority of modern sports such as soccer, rugby,
\nand hockey, the Americans introduced the game of basketball. During the
\noccupation “…several nationalist groups were seeking an American
\nMandate to protect the country from an English occupation” (Hicyilmaz,
\n9). According to Fisek, “In 1919, with the financial and technical
\nassistance of the American government via the Chester Project in Istanbul,
\na branch of the YMCA was opened and basketball was introduced to the Turkish
\nyouth” (p. 249).<\/p>\n

In the 1890’s Turks were not permitted to participate in modern sport
\nevents against the newly formed British sports clubs, yet some Turks hoped
\nto have their own sport clubs and club memberships. At the turn of the
\ncentury, the Turks’ persistence paid off and they organized their own
\nathletic clubs. The first clubs to be organized were “The Black Stockings
\nin 1899, Besiktas in 1903, Galatasaray in 1905 and Fenerbahce in 1907”
\n(Fisek 256). Despite the fact that the sports clubs were formed back to
\nback, however, their actual organized athletics were not begun until after
\nthe declaration of the second Mesrutiyet (adoption of constitution) in
\n1908, which granted more personal freedoms to citizens.<\/p>\n

For a while, however, participation in sport activities evolved rather
\nslowly because, “Most of the societies and clubs were initially concerned
\nwith merely the game of soccer. Sports such as athletics or track and
\nfield, wrestling and basketball, that attracted more attention from the
\npublic, were added only later” (Haluk San, 12).<\/p>\n

In the first quarter of the twentieth century, participation in sport
\nactivities increased overwhelmingly, “…and at one point there were
\nso many sports clubs that for the first time the Turkish sport felt the
\nneed for federation” (Aksin, 316). From 1903 to 1914 patterned along
\nthe British style, a few soccer leagues such as Istanbul Futbol Birligi
\n(IFB) and Istanbul Futbol-Kulupleri Ligi (IFKL) were organized. Under
\nthe British authority and with the participation of such clubs as the
\nModa, Union Club, Elips and the Imogene Club, the IFB was formed in 1903.<\/p>\n

After a series of problems the IFB dissolved in 1910 however; but In
\nthe same year by adding a couple of Turkish clubs the former members
\nof the IFB reformed the IFB and established the IFKL which was dissolved
\nin 1914 (Fisek 284).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The objectives of the IFB and the IFKL were: scheduling and officiating
\nthe league games according to the British system.<\/p>\n

Since 1839, after the declaration of Tanzimat, strong nationalistic sentiments
\nwere evoked, and Turks aspired toward increased participation in political,
\ncultural and educational fields. Unfortunately, such developments, including
\nparticipation in sports, were frequently discouraged and suppressed by
\nthe Ottoman Sultans. During the reign of A. Hamit II (1876-1906) “…most
\nof the cultural and intellectual organizations were shut down” (Eliot,
\n124). According to San, Unsi and Var, “The Black Stockings club was
\nclosed because the club organized a soccer tournament which gathered an
\nunexpected number of spectators” (p. 67).<\/p>\n

Despite the fact that the Sultan A. Hamit II was determined to dismantle
\nthe functions of most of the social, cultural and intellectual societies
\nor clubs, “There were a few privileged athletic clubs that functioned
\nregularly and freely with the help of their members who were either high-ranked
\nmilitary generals or rich friends of the Sultan” (San, et. all, 30).
\nThe Besiktas Gymnastic Club (Besiktas Jimnastik Kulubu) was one of these
\nprivileged clubs that was formed by the special decree of the Sultan in
\n1903.<\/p>\n

The Turkish sport system was never completely able to free itself from
\nthe outmoded, pan-Islamic political views of the Ottoman Sultans. It is
\nimportant to remember that during the pre-Republican period, most people
\nwere barred from joining sport clubs or any other type of social and intellectual
\norganizations. Fortunately, with the support of the nationalistic movements,
\nand by the turn of the twentieth century, the sport movement gradually
\ngained momentum and became the main source of recreation and pastime for
\nthe Turkish youth. The enthusiasm for sports was especially manifested
\nby outdoor events such as soccer, grease-wrestling and running, and by
\nindoor calisthenics. According to Apak, “Whereas the game of soccer
\nwas practiced during the weekends, running and wrestling competitions
\nwere conducted at public gatherings and at festivals” (p. 352).<\/p>\n

Such recreationally innocent gatherings actually played a decisive role
\nin the rise and development of Turkish nationalism in the 1910’s. Initially,
\nsport crowds gathered solely for the sporting event, but such gatherings
\nsoon became a symbolic protest against the Sultanate. Sporting events
\ncontributed to the politization of many people, and eventually the sporting
\nevents served as a political arena.<\/p>\n

The Connection of Sports with Physical Education<\/h2>\n

Turkiye’s sporting and physical education heritage owes a great deal
\nto the reformists of Tanzimat who “…adopted and applied the general
\nprinciples of the French revolution in Turkiye” (Fisek, 262). Modern
\nsports were completely unknown in Turkiye prior to 1860, but by 1863 school
\ngymnastics were an esteemed component of urban high school student life.
\nIn almost all of these educational institutions, the “French system
\nof physical education and sport was practiced and instructed” (Okan,6).
\nAccording to Fisek, “The first recorded reference to a person teaching
\ntrack and field was a French gymnastics teacher, Curel, at Istanbul’s
\nMekteb-i Sultani High School in 1870” (p. 262).<\/p>\n

The birth of nationally oriented school sports was a natural result of
\nthe introduction of western physical educational systems in Turkiye. In
\naddition, Turkiye’s first taste of contemporary sports was made possible
\nby the practice of French calisthenics on school campuses. According to
\nSomali, “The first high school to practice calisthenics was Istanbul’s
\nKuleli Idadisi in 1863” (p. 10). At that time, the French gymnastics
\nprogram was a combination of “fencing, free-style or floor gymnastics
\nand shot put (Okan, 6). According to San, “By 1869 there were several
\nschools interested in physical education programs in their curriculum”
\n(p. 12). Those schools were “Kuleli Idadisi, Mekteb-i Sultani or
\nGalatasaray Lisesi, Mektebi Bahriye and Mektebi Harbiye’ (San, 12), the
\nlast two of which were military academies.<\/p>\n

The physical education classes were not designed to enhance or improve
\nthe physical well-being of students. Rather the PE classes were designed
\nwith such difficult program figures that allowed only the students who
\nhad skills to perform. Therefore) most of the students were discouraged
\nand did not participate In physical education classes any more (P. 263).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Around the turn of the twentieth century, physical education was not
\ndesigned to teach the basic fundamentals of physical and mental health.
\nEven though sports in Turkish schools were electives, the more prestigious
\nschools gained much status by offering them, since sports instruction
\nwas not available elsewhere, and its “Western” nature was fashionable,
\ngenerating new excitement among the students. It is not surprising that,
\nfrom the beginning, the formation and development of modern sports clubs
\nwere initiated on the high school campuses.<\/p>\n

Concurrently, there was a growth of in-service teaching in physical education
\nand coaching from Europe. “Sports and gymnastics became expensive
\nyet popular” (Okan, 10). Athletic clubs and associations sprung up
\nall over campuses with a subsequent increase in journalistic coverage
\nof sports, fired by readers interest at a time when sports events made
\neven headlines news. Fisek indicates that, “For over forty years
\nfrom 1860 to 1903 the development of Turkish sport was affected negatively
\nby various economic and political conditions” (p. 262). Despite the
\nfact that most of the modern sports in Turkiye are over a century-old,
\nvery few of them fully developed and reached the level of their European
\ncounterparts, nor were the standards of physical education for students
\nsatisfactory. Basically an elitist system, it remained geared for the
\nphysically gifted.<\/p>\n

Development of Sport in Turkiye since 1923<\/h2>\n

After the war of independence in 1923, through the restoration of full
\nnational and political independence and under the leadership of Ataturk,
\nthe founder of the Republic of Turkiye, the Turks eagerly decided to liberate
\nthemselves from any form of out-moded, pan-Islamic Ottomanist concepts.
\nAtaturk introduced several reforms ranging from education to religion.
\nThe fundamental aim of these reforms was to break the centuries-old traditions,
\nto modernize and to elevate Turkiye to the level of Western nations. Ataturk’s
\nliberal and far-reaching reforms also created expanding opportunities
\nfor the young and mostly European-educated sportsmen to revolutionize
\nand revive Turkish sport.<\/p>\n

After 1923, opportunities for sports participation were broadened through
\nleadership provided by the formation of numerous non-government sponsored
\nsports clubs and associations such as the TICI, (the United Sport Clubs
\nAssociation), making possible mass participation. According to Caglar,
\n“There was a gradual increase in the numbers of people involved in
\nvarious sports clubs and organizations on both the competitive and the
\nrecreational level” (p. 3).<\/p>\n

Prior to the Republican period, there were no stated national objectives
\nfor Turkish sport. Most of the organized sports activities, even if not
\nforbidden, were realistically out of the common citizen’s reach. In this
\nrespect, the status quo of Turkish sport greatly differed from sport as
\nit was overtly focused in the industrialized world. During the Ottoman
\nEmpire, sport was basically a form of amusement for the Sultan’s palace.
\nHowever, with the establishment of the new, democratic and politically
\nmore stable Republic of Turkiye, a new organizational framework for sport
\nwas formulated. With its theoretical premises geared toward mass participation,
\nthe envisioned programs promised renewed popular interest and vitality.
\nThis situation, along with the prospects of a revolutionary and improved
\nway of life, prompted a number of sportsmen to emphasize now aspects of
\nsport.<\/p>\n

Modern Turkiye’s sporting legacy owes a great deal to those European
\neducated sportsmen: Selim Sirri Tarcan, Ali Sami Yen, Burhanettin Felek,
\nNasuhi Baydar and Yusuf Ziya Onis who are considered the “…pioneers
\nof modern Turkish sport” (Sumer, 26). With their help, “Sport
\nand physical activity has undergone continuous expansion throughout this
\nhalf of the century’ (San, et al, 69-70). The establishment of numerous
\nathletic clubs, the formation of sport leagues such as ‘Cuma Ligi’, and
\nthe development of voluntary sport associations like the United Sports
\nClubs Association were all efforts of these far-sighted men.<\/p>\n

A number of trends were occurring simultaneously in Turkish sport during
\nthe early years of the Republic. On one hand, while most of the major,
\nmodern sports were spreading throughout the nation, major national sports
\nfederations were continuously expanding the number and the type of sporting
\nevents held, including long range goals for energizing efforts and further
\nplans. There was also a growing awareness of the political importance
\nof sport so that sport started to be used to foster national pride.<\/p>\n

On the other hand, and, “…due to the lack of sufficient finances,
\nthere was great difficulty in improving the existing conditions of sport”
\n(Fisek, 310). Moreover, and perhaps most importantly of all, the traditional,
\nindigenous Turkish sports such as Cirit, Grease-Wrestling, Archery and
\nother activities were declining and becoming part of “history.’ These
\ntraditional Turkish sports declined for several reasons; cirit, for example,
\nwere expensive to maintain. But a more significant fact was that they
\nwere seen as old-fashioned and not progressive, partly due to specific
\nBritish propaganda that presented Western sports to the younger Turks.<\/p>\n

As the modern Turkish Republic was developing rapidly, the traditional
\nlife styles of the Turkish people were also changing. According to Ceki,
\n“Many young people were<\/p>\n

looking around for things to do and to replace traditional ways of living”
\n(p. 9). It was during this transition that modern sports received the
\nmost ardent attention.<\/p>\n

The young generations spent their free time playing various ball games
\nsuch as basketball; volleyball and soccer, and running or doing calisthenics.
\nThe noblemen and the townspeople had other sporting activities such
\nas chess; backgammon, and various card games (Lewis, 89).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The “Halk Evleri” (folk or public houses) were formed and financed
\nby the government in order to fulfill the great hunger for sports and
\nto gratify the general public’s desire for intramural sports.<\/p>\n

Development of Institutional Sport (1922-1992)<\/h2>\n

The organizational and administrative development of Turkish sport in
\nthe Republican period can be divided into four periods.<\/p>\n

I- Turkiye Idman Cemiyetleri Ittifak 1922-1936
\nII-Turk Spor Kurumu 1936-1936
\nIII-Beden Terbiyesi Genel Mudurlugu 1938-1992
\nIV-Genclik ve Spor Bakanligi 1969-1992<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

I- (Turkiye Idman Cemiyetleri Ittifaki)<\/h2>\n

After the war of independence a national central organization of sport,
\nthe TICI (Turkiye Idman Cemiyetleri Ittifaki) was formed in 1922 in order
\nto improve the chaotic, unsatisfactory state of Turkish sport and the
\npoor performance of Turkish athletes. By the joint efforts of “Selim
\nSirri Tarcan, Ali Sami Yen, Burhanettin Felek and Yusuf Ziya Onis, the
\nmajor figures of Turkish sport movement, the first congress of TICI took
\nplace” (Fisek, 255 and Sumer, 25). The TICI was the very first independently
\norganized, volunteer, multi-sports association, which represented Turkish
\nsport both nationally and internationally. The basic principles of TICI
\nwere adopted from the Swiss sport model, the “Reglements Sportifs
\nde l’Union Suisse’ (Sumer, 30). The purposes of TICI were:<\/p>\n

to direct, coordinate and advance the activities of all sport organizations;
\nto represent Turkish sport In international events; to Identify and
\nstabilize the principles of amateur and professional sport; to organize
\nsport competitions on a national scale; to canalize the free time of
\nyouth for sport and to discover the new athletes, coaches and officials;
\nto Identify and direct the qualifications for the Olympic Games in accordance
\nwith the National Olympic Committee; to establish and register the national
\nsport federations to the International sport federations, to make sport
\npublications (Fisek, 354-365).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

For sixteen years, the Turkish sport movement was directed and controlled
\nby this truly democratic sport institution. Because of its populist status,
\nthe TICI was able to develop and grow at a very fast pace. Sport clubs,
\nfederations and societies were assembled within the various individual
\nnational sport federations that became forming members of TICI Individual
\nsport federations assembled under TICI. Examples are:<\/p>\n

    \n
  • Track & Field Federation 1922<\/li>\n
  • Soccer Federation 1922<\/li>\n
  • Bicycle Federation 1923<\/li>\n
  • Fencing Federation 1923<\/li>\n
  • Weight Lifting Federation 1923<\/li>\n
  • Swimming & Water Sports Federation 1924<\/li>\n
  • Skiing & Winter Sports Federation 1924<\/li>\n
  • Horse Riding and Trap & Shooting Federation 1926<\/li>\n
  • Basketball Federation 1934<\/li>\n
  • Volleyball Federation 1934<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

    Prior to the TICI, no sport organization was completely independent
    \nand almost all of them had some political or religious linkage. With the
    \ndevelopment of TICI, the issue of sport was temporarily freed from the
    \ntouch of politics and religion. In TIOX every form of ethnic and religious
    \ndiscrimination, divisive politics and religious activities were strictly
    \nprohibited. TICI became the sole representative and defender of Turkish
    \nsport at every level of athletics. TICI was also “…an official
    \noffice for the National Olympic Committee [NOCI” (Ertug, 68). Fisek
    \nreported that, “When Selim Sirri Tarcan officially established the
    \nNOC in 1924, he was also an executive member of the TICI’ (pp. 361-362).
    \nIn fact, “In the 1924 Paris Olympic Games, the national teams were
    \nfinanced and represented by TICI” (San, 6).<\/p>\n

    The 1930’s were a period of reforms, opportunities, freedom, and national
    \ndevelopment. During this renaissance it was possible to introduce innovations,
    \nnow ideas and various experiments. On the other hand, it was also a period
    \nof economic difficulties left over from the Great Depression. This situation
    \nnegatively affected the financial status of TICI.<\/p>\n

    During the mid-1930’s, there was a general scarcity of financial support
    \nfor TICI. Due to this lack of finances, there was great difficulty in
    \nimproving the existing conditions of Turkish sport. In 1936, in a congressional
    \nmeeting of TICI, the members and the administrative leaders of the association
    \nvoted that “The total movement of sport and physical culture should
    \nbe government supported, and made a state program” (Fisek, 266-269).
    \nIt followed that, “…the Turkish government was pushed to involve
    \n(itself) in the issues of Turkish sport more actively” (Hicyilmaz,
    \n22).<\/p>\n

    The aim of this decision was to prepare for life both the athletes in
    \nclubs and the students in classrooms. Clearly this could not have been
    \naccomplished without the permanent financial support of the government.
    \nDuring those years of financial concerns, the TICI was also suffering
    \npolitically and there were several disputes among the members of the TICI
    \nthat practically forced the organization to seek government support. “In
    \n1936 at its eighth and final congress, the TICI first changed its name
    \nand status and then dissolved itself forever” (Sumer, 28). With this
    \ndecision, the semi-government controlled organ of sport, known as Department
    \nof Sport (Turk Spor Kurumu [TSK] was officially established in 1936.<\/p>\n

    2- (Turk Spor Kurumu) 1936-1938)<\/h2>\n

    Due to the general economic situation, during the era of TICI, the efforts
    \nto improve the overall status of sport and the general fitness of the
    \npopulation in Turkiye met with limited success because of the lack of
    \nsufficient resources, such as inadequate sport and recreational facilities
    \nand expertise. Hence, in addition to the lack of resources, “The
    \nmain objectives of TICI’s member clubs were beyond the development of
    \nmass athletics” (Fisek, 374).<\/p>\n

    Apak reports that, “‘The sport authorities of ‘TICI were making
    \na visible effort to maintain a certain balance between competitive sports
    \nand mass participation” (p. 229). However, the former was frequently
    \nsacrificed for the latter. Pressure to obtain and improve the success
    \nlevel of Turkish sport in international arenas, especially in soccer where
    \nthe national team suffered heavy defeats, was one of the key factors in
    \nplacing the competitive sports ahead of mass sports. In the 1930’s, this
    \nsituation surfaced as a riveting concern for proponents of the nation’s
    \nonly political party of Republican Populist Party (RPP). A close relationship
    \nwas temporarily established between sport and party leaders. According
    \nto Fisek, “The politicians promised to rescue Turkish sport from
    \nits present conditions, by offering the invaluable goods and services
    \nof RPP’ (p. 373).<\/p>\n

    Such promises created a working relationship between sport leaders and
    \nthe leaders of the RPP. Eventually, in order to alleviate the existing
    \nconditions of sport, in 1936 in the eighth and last general congress of
    \nTICI, the delegates voted convincingly and overwhelmingly, to abolish
    \nitself and to establish the TSK [Turk Spor Kurumu (National Sport Association)].
    \nIn this transaction, a system parallel to the Soviet organization of sport
    \nwas created. The TSK was registered under the jurisdiction and the office
    \nof the General Secretary of the (RPP). Sumer writes that, “With the
    \nestablishment of TSK the Turkish government began to directly and officially
    \ninvolve itself in the matters of Turkish sport” (p. 29).<\/p>\n

    The TSK was presented as a hope and as a long awaited cure for the ills
    \nof Turkish sport. According to Fisek, “It was this hope and the assurances
    \nfrom the media and sport analysts that made the TICI close its doors and
    \nhand over the association and sports to the control of the government
    \n(p. 376).<\/p>\n

    This was the beginning of an autocratic, centrally administrated, government
    \ncontrolled sport management period in Turkish sport. There were living
    \nexamples of this model in Stalin’s Soviet Union and in Hitler’s Germany,
    \nboth of which were working successfully. In fact, “The government
    \nhired a German sport planner and organizer to help Turkish sport develop”
    \n(Fisek, 377). For a time, this arrangement appeared to be successful.
    \nFor instance, the TSK was able to use and benefit from the various resources
    \nof RPP such as the youth clubs, camps, folk houses, dormitories, hostels,
    \netc.<\/p>\n

    However, soon it was understood that the TSK was very far from being
    \na cure for Turkish sport. In fact, with the TSK, Turkish sport lost its
    \nmost important heritage, its legacy from the TICI as an independent, democratic
    \nvolunteer sport organization whose officers, unlike the TSK, “…were
    \nnot appointed by a higher authority but were elected’ (Sumer, 29). The
    \nTSK could not guard the independent democratic sporting heritage of TICI,
    \nand the further development of modern competitive sport program in Turkiye
    \nwas unsuccessfully cultivated.<\/p>\n

    Despite the slow progress under TICI, there had been indications of
    \ngrowing interest among the Turkish leaders concerning the possible significance
    \nof physical activities and sport within the context of national development.
    \nYet during the TSK, this essential concern was vanquished by political
    \nambitions of the TSK leaders. With power politics of key interest, sport
    \nand physical education were regarded as highly valuable tools for underlining
    \nboth national health and national defense programs. Despite the fact that
    \nthese uses of sport were praiseworthy, and possibly because of politization,
    \nTurkish sports stagnated. According to Sumer, “The battle for leadership
    \nwas the most important factor that paralyzed the functioning capacity
    \nof the system of sport in the nation” (p. 33). Therefore, the period
    \nof TSK “…was no more than a period of transition of sport from
    \nan independent volunteer system to a completely controlled and centralized
    \nsystem of sport administration” (Fisek, 373). The primary goal of
    \nTSK was: “To enhance the mental and the physical health of the citizens
    \nthrough organizing and developing sports and physical activities in revolutionary
    \nand nationalistic directions” (Records of BTGM, p. 657).<\/p>\n

    3-(Beden Terbiyesi Genel Mudurlugu 1938-1992)<\/h2>\n

    The attempts of TSK to centralize sport were unsuccessful. In 1938 a
    \nspecial law (3530) the “Beden Terbiyesi Kanunu,” was established
    \nin order to “…assist and promote culture and national development
    \nin Turkiye by creating a militant youth with a nationalistic spirit to
    \ndefend Turkiye’s national sovereignty” (Fisek, 367-386). With this
    \nlaw, the centralization of Turkish sport was accomplished.<\/p>\n

    Sport and physical education were considered by the government as capable
    \nof supporting the political struggle through disciplined training of the
    \nmasses. They were further regarded as vehicles through which national
    \nunity and national integration and national defense might be strengthened.
    \nIt was this idea that led to the establishment of the The National General
    \nDirectorate of Sport (Beden Terbiyesi Genel Mudurlugu) (BTGM) in 1936.
    \nThe directorate subsidized the hiring of coaches, the formation of sport
    \nfederations, the building and equipping of sport facilities, and the opening
    \nof regional administration offices in the major cities. Fostering the
    \ndevelopment of sport in general the BTGM has both major and minor departments
    \nfor all areas of athletic endeavor, as well as departments which “…plan,
    \nconduct and supervise the training of specialists in the building of sport
    \nfacilities, international sport relations, sport politics, budgeting,
    \nSport Lottery’ (TBMM Zabit Ceridesi, in Fisek, pp 2-3).<\/p>\n

    The BTGM was originally signed under the authority of the Prime Ministry
    \nbut, as the governments were changed, the responsibilities and the official
    \nadministrative location of the BTGM were changed and registered under
    \nthe authority of various sport ministries. For instance, in 1969, when
    \nthe Ministry of Youth and Sport was established, the BTGM was automatically
    \nlocated under this ministry:<\/p>\n

    When sport became an Issue of education, the BTGM was located under
    \nthe authority of Ministry of Education. When It became an issue of youth
    \nthen the BTGM was located under the administration of Ministry of Youth
    \nand Sport, and when sport became a national issue then the office of
    \nthe BTGM was registered under the authority of the Prime Ministry (Fisek,
    \n418).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

    BTGM was under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Education, Youth and
    \nSport.<\/p>\n

    The BTGM was responsible for the development of sport in Turkiye and
    \n“…worked in close co-operation with the various sport federations
    \nand practically supervised their work” (Beden Terbiyesi Kanunu, madde
    \n14, in Fisek, 367).<\/p>\n

    Since 1936 the Turkish system of sport has been a highly centralized
    \nand controlled bureaucracy that is administrated by the supervision and
    \nguidance of BTGM which currently uses the title or the name Genclik Spor
    \nGenel Mudurlugu (GSGM) or the Directorate of Youth and Sport. The objectives
    \nof the GSGM are:<\/p>\n

    to develop a bodily and mentally fit, united) revolutionist, nationalist
    \nyouth; to fertilize and spread out the sport and physical education
    \nnation- wide; to free the citizens of Turkiye from habits of drinking
    \nalcohol, smoking, and gambling; to develop strong and able-bodied citizens
    \nand national soldiers for the national defense; to open new horizons
    \nfor the national youth, to organize, administer and prepare sport competitions
    \nand represent the Turkish sport Internationally; to create opportunities
    \nfor both amateur and professional athletes to go abroad and compete
    \nand represent the Turkish Republic In International arenas (Fisek, 386).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

    The underlying, nationalistic principles of sport policy of GSGM have
    \nbeen centered in the principle of a sound mind in a sound body (“Saglam
    \nKafa Saglam Vucutta Olur”), a slogan adopted by Ataturk. A holistic
    \nphysical, mental and social development of the individual is emphasized
    \nto prepare people for personal well-being and for potential defense of
    \nthe nation. The strengthening of the masses is considered to be of central
    \nimportance for the regime. From its inception, the most important concern
    \nof the GSGM has been to use sport for the demonstration of national pride.
    \nThe achievements of Turkish athletes in international competitions have
    \nprovided an impetus for the rise of Turkish sport and to bring international
    \nrecognition to the nation.<\/p>\n

    4-(Genclik Spor Bakanlinligi)<\/h2>\n

    The Ministry of Youth and Sport (Genclik ve Spor Bakanligi) was established
    \nin 1969, during the government of the late Prime Minister Suleyman Demirel,
    \nin order to bring the state and Turkish sport closer together and to give
    \nthe governing body of sport more political authority. The GSB was an attempt
    \nto reshape Turkish sport and reemphasize its role in national development
    \nby fostering and equipping children and youth organizations, by contributing
    \nboth to physical fitness and sport-for-all programs and by contributing
    \nto competitive sports. The duties of GSB were to “…direct sport
    \nin the country, to work out a legislative policy, put sport programs into
    \neffect, and to coordinate the practical and theoretical connections or
    \nworks of federations and different physical cultural organizations”
    \n(Fisek 413).<\/p>\n

    However, several critics reported that the objectives of GSB were part
    \nof the objectives and the duties of several other ministries such as the
    \nministry of education, ministry of health and social services, ministry
    \nof labor, ministry of village affairs, ministry of tourism and the ministry
    \nof culture. But there was little co-operation among these various ministries
    \nfor sharing authority and responsibility. Although the GSB was granted
    \nofficial responsibility, this ministry gained very little respect governmental
    \nrole in sport.<\/p>\n

    For instance, starting in 1963 Turkiye entered into the period of a five-year
    \ndevelopment plan. According to Sumer, “In the first five-year development
    \nplan (1963-1968) the topic of sport was not taken up” (p.106). In
    \nthe second five-year plan, sport was mentioned in but a single line, the
    \n“Sport-for-all program should be encouraged” (Sumer, 106-107).<\/p>\n

    Moreover, during the GSB no effort was generated to close the gap between
    \nthe opportunities for city and rural youth in sport. Contrary to the objectives
    \nand the expectations of both GSGM and GSB, sport and physical education
    \nhad been considered to be of little value in national and economic development.
    \nConsequently, the expectations and the objectives of both the GSB and
    \nthe GSGM have not been accomplished.<\/p>\n

    As a final forfeiture, the dissolution of the GSB cost Turkish sport
    \na drastic budget reduction from the government. Turkish sport was left
    \nwith a low priority and sought “…technical assistance and aid from
    \nthe private sectors.” Another blow, along with the dissolution of
    \nGSB, was the loss of the country’s best sport science and education institutions
    \nsuch as the sport academies.<\/p>\n

    REFERENCES<\/strong><\/p>\n

      \n
    1. Adedeji, A. J. “Social and Cultural Conflict in Sport and Games
      \nin Developing Countries,” International Review of Sport Sociology<\/span>.
      \n14, 1, pp. 81-88, 1979.<\/li>\n
    2. Adivar, Halide Edip. Turkey Faces West: A Turkish View of Recent
      \nChanges and Their Origin<\/span>. New Haven, Yale University Press, 1930.<\/li>\n
    3. Aksin, Sina. Istanbul Hukumetleri ve Milli Mucadele<\/span>. Cem Yayinevi,
      \nIstanbul, 1976.<\/li>\n
    4. And, Metin. Culture, Performance and Communication in Turkiye<\/span>.
      \nPerformance in Culture, #4, Institute for the Study of Languages and
      \nCultures of Asia and Africa, 1987.<\/li>\n
    5. Andrews, John C. “Problems of Physical Education in the Third-World.”
      \nFIEP Bulletin<\/span>, Vol. 52. No. l, p.7, 1982.<\/li>\n
    6. Andrews, John C. “Physical Education, Sport and Recreation in
      \nDeveloping Countries.” FIEP Bulletin<\/span>. Vol. 55, No. 1, pp.
      \n5-15, 1985.<\/li>\n
    7. Apak, Rahmi “Turk Sporunun Yeni Hukumleri.” Ulku<\/span>
      \nNo. 11166, Agustos, pp. 229-348, 1936.<\/li>\n
    8. Armstrong, C. Harold. Gray Wolf, Mustafa Kemal: An Intimate Study
      \nof a Dictator.<\/span> 14th edition, London, 1947.<\/li>\n
    9. Ayda, Alide. “‘Turk’ Kelimesinin Mensei Hakkinda Bir Nazariye.”
      \nBelleten<\/span>, Sayi, 40, pp. 239-247, 1982.<\/li>\n
    10. Baker, B. Granville. The Passing of the Turkish Empire in Europe.<\/span>
      \nSeeley Service and Corporation Limited, London, 1913.<\/li>\n
    11. Baker, James. Turkey<\/span>. Henry Holt and Company, New York, 1877.<\/li>\n
    12. Berkes, Niyazi. The Development of Secularism in Turkey<\/span>. McGill
      \nUniversity Press, Montreal, 1964.<\/li>\n
    13. Blaug, Mark. North South: A Programme for Survival<\/span>. Pan, London
      \nand Sidney, 1970.<\/li>\n
    14. Blocking, John. Games and Sport in Pre-Colonial African Societies.<\/span>
      \nIn Baker, J. William and Mangan, A.J (Eds.), Sport in Africa pp. 3-23.
      \nAfricana Publishing Company, New York, New York, 1987.<\/li>\n
    15. Caglar, B. Kemal. “Sekizinci Spor Kongresi.” Acik Soz<\/span>,
      \n26 Nisan, pp. 3-7, 1936.<\/li>\n
    16. Cahen, Claude. Pre-Ottoman Turkey<\/span>: 1071-1330. Taplinger Publishing
      \nCompany, Incorporated, New York, 1968.<\/li>\n
    17. Calhoun, Donald B. Sport Culture and Personality<\/span>. Human Kinetics,
      \nCampaign, Illinois. pp. 157-161, 1986.<\/li>\n
    18. Ceki, Gultekin. “Devlet Butunlugu ve Spor Yonetimi Uzerine.”
      \nBayrak<\/span>, Cilt 23, No. 746, Mart, 1976.<\/li>\n
    19. Celebi, Evliya. Evliya Celebi Seyahatnamesi<\/span>. Ucdal Nesriyat,
      \nAnkara, 1987.<\/li>\n
    20. Cheska, Alyce. Revival, Survival and Revisal: Ethnic Identity Through
      \nTraditional Games<\/span>. Human Kinetics Publishers, Champaign, IL, 1987.<\/li>\n
    21. Coghlan, F. John. “Sport-for-all in Developing Countries.”
      \nFIEP Bulletin<\/span>, Vol. 55, No. 1, pp. 27-31, 1985.<\/li>\n
    22. Cumhuriyet,<\/span> Subat, 28. p. 13, 1992.<\/li>\n
    23. Cumhuriyet,<\/span> Nisan, 27. p. 16, 1992.<\/li>\n
    24. Davison, H. Roderic. Reform in the Ottoman Empire 1856-1876<\/span>.
      \nGordion Press, New York, 1973.<\/li>\n
    25. DeTott, Baron. Memories of Baron De Tott<\/span>. G. G. and Robinson,
      \nLondon, 1785. 1.<\/li>\n
    26. Dubberke, Harold. Critical Remarks Regarding Sports aid for Developina
      \nCountries<\/span>.<\/li>\n
    27. Jordanhill Collage of Education. London, 1966.<\/li>\n
    28. Eichberg, Henning. “<\/span>Force Againist Force: Configurations
      \nof Martial Art in Europe and in Indonesian Cultures.” Interternational
      \nReview of Sport, Sociology.<\/span>“18: 2., pp.33-66, 1963.<\/li>\n
    29. Eichberg, Henning. “Olympic Sport-Neocolonization and Alternatives.”
      \nInternational Review of Sociology of Sport<\/span>. 19:2., pp. 96-105,
      \n1964.<\/li>\n
    30. Eliot, Charles. Turkey in Europe. London, 1662. Encyclopedia Americana<\/span>.
      \nVol.26, 1968.<\/li>\n
    31. Ertug, Ali Riza. “Turkiye Futbol Tarihi<\/span>.” BTGM Ankara
      \nBolge Mudurluqu ‘Yayini, Ankara, 1973.<\/li>\n
    32. Eton, Williams. A Survey of the Turkish Empire<\/span>. Luke Hansard,
      \nGreat Turnstile, Lincoln’s-Inn Field, London, 1801.<\/li>\n
    33. Ferriman, Z. Duckett. Turkey and the Turks<\/span>. Mills and Boon,
      \nLimited, London, 1911.<\/li>\n
    34. Fisek, Kurthan. Devlet Politikasi ve Toplumsal Yapiyla Iliskileri
      \nAcisindan<\/span>;<\/li>\n
    35. Spor Yonetimi-Dunyada ve Turkiyede<\/span>.’Siyasal Bilgiler Facultesi,
      \nAnkara, Turkiye, 1963.<\/li>\n
    36. Freeman, M. William. Physical Education in a Changing Society<\/span>.
      \nHoughtan Mifflin Company, Boston, London, 1977.<\/li>\n
    37. Fu, Frank H. “A Comparison of Athletes from Different Regions
      \nof China.”<\/li>\n
    38. Journal of Comparative Physical Education and Sport.<\/span> 9 (2):
      \npp.17-16, 1987.<\/li>\n
    39. Funakoshi, Gichin. Karete-Do My Way of Life<\/span>. Kodansha International,
      \nTokyo and New ‘York, 1990.<\/li>\n
    40. Galbraith, John K. The Nature of Mass Poverty<\/span>. Penguin, Harmondsworth,
      \n1979.<\/li>\n
    41. Garnett, M. J. Lucy. Turkish Life in Town and Country<\/span>. William
      \nClowes and Sons, Limited, London and Beccles, 1951.<\/li>\n
    42. Geyikdagi, M. Yazar. Political Parties in Turkey: The Role of Islam.<\/span>
      \nPreager Publishers, New York, 1964.<\/li>\n
    43. Gokalp, Ziya. Turk Medeniyeti Tarihi: Islamiyetten Evvel Turk Medeniyeti,
      \nIslamiyetten Evvel <\/span>Turk Dini<\/span>. Turk Kultur Yayini, Beyazit,
      \nIstanbul, Turkiye, 1974.<\/li>\n
    44. Grimm, J. William. “The Third World.” America<\/span>. May
      \n5, Vol. 162, No. 17, pp. 449-451, 1990.<\/li>\n
    45. Gurun, Kamuran. Turkler ve Turk Devletleri<\/span>. Karacan Yayinlari,
      \nBirinci Cilt, 1981.<\/li>\n
    46. Harrison, Paul. The Third-World Tomorrow<\/span>. Penguin, Harmondsworth,
      \n1960.<\/li>\n
    47. Heinemann, Klaus. “Sport and Sociology of Body.” International
      \nReview of Sport Sociology<\/span>. 14, 1, pp. 41-53, 1979.<\/li>\n
    48. Heinila, Kalevi. “Sport and International Understanding a Contradiction
      \nin Terms.” Sociology of Sport Journal<\/span>. 2, pp. 240-246, 1985.<\/li>\n
    49. Hicyilmaz, Ergun. Turk Spor Tarihi<\/span>. Demet Ofset, Istanbul,
      \n1984.<\/li>\n
    50. Hietanen, Aki. “Towards a New International Sport Order.”
      \nCurrent Research on Peace and Violance<\/span>. Vol. 5, No.4, pp. 159-175,
      \n1982.<\/li>\n
    51. Hoberman, John M. “Sport and Social Change: The Transformation
      \nof Maoist Sport.” Sociology of Sport Journal<\/span>. 4 (2): pp.
      \n156-170, 1988.<\/li>\n
    52. Howard, Harry N. The Partition of Turkey: A Diplomatic History<\/span>;
      \n1913-1923. Howard Fertig Inc. The University of Oklahoma Press. NY,
      \n1966.<\/li>\n
    53. Huddleston, John. The Search for a Just Society.<\/span> George Ronald,
      \nPublisher, Oxford, 1989.<\/li>\n
    54. Huizinga, John. (1944) Homo Ludens<\/span>, published in German, in
      \nSwiss F.C. Hull trans., London, Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1949.<\/li>\n
    55. Hubbart, G.E. The Day of the Crescent: Glimpses of Old Turkey<\/span>
      \nUniversity Press, Cambridge, 1820.<\/li>\n
    56. Inalcik, Halil. The Ottoman Empire: The Classical Age 1300-1600<\/span>.
      \nEbenezer Baylis and Son Limited. Worchoster and London, 1973.<\/li>\n
    57. Kafesoglu, Ibrahim. Tarihte Turk Adi #. 2<\/span>. Arastirma Enstitusu,
      \nAnkara, 1966.<\/li>\n
    58. Keyder, Caglar. The Political Economy of Turkish Democracy: Turkey
      \nin Transition. <\/span>Editor’s Irvin C. Schick and Ertugrul Ahmet Tonak.
      \nOxford University Press, NY. Oxford, 1987.<\/li>\n
    59. Kibsy, Russ. ‘Sport-for-All and the working population.” FIEP
      \nBulletin<\/span>. Vol. 51, No.3, pp. 27-31, 1986.<\/li>\n
    60. Kiyokowa, Masaji. “The International Olympic Committee and International
      \nCo-operation.” FIEP Bulletin<\/span>. Vol. 52, No.3\/4, pp. 17-21,
      \n1982.<\/li>\n
    61. Krotee, March L. ‘The Rise and Demise of Sport: A Reflection of Uruguayan
      \nSociety.” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social
      \nSciences<\/span>. 445: pp. 141-154, 1979.<\/li>\n
    62. Landes, David. “Rich Country Poor Country, How Do Nations Develop?”
      \nCurrent<\/span>. March, 11-16, 1990.<\/li>\n
    63. Lengyel, Emil. Turkey<\/span>. Random House, H. Wolff. Inc., Now York,
      \n1941.<\/li>\n
    64. Lewis, Gooffery. Modern Turkey<\/span>. Praeger Publishers, Inc., New
      \nYork, 1974.<\/li>\n
    65. Lewis, Raphasla. Everyday Life in Ottoman Turkey<\/span>. Batsford
      \nLimited. London, 1971.<\/li>\n
    66. Lister, R.P. Turkey Observed. Eyre and Spottiswoode Publishers Ltd.
      \nLondon, 1967.<\/li>\n
    67. Mardin Sherif. Din ve Ideoloji<\/span>. Ankara Universitesi Siyasal
      \nBilgiler Fakultesi Yayinlari. No. 275. Sevinc Matbaasi, Ankara, Turkiye,
      \n1969.<\/li>\n
    68. Mathys, A.Micheal. \u201cThe Next Generation: Who Invented The Third
      \nWorld ?\u201d National Review<\/span>, September 3., p.1087, 1982.<\/li>\n
    69. McHenry, E. Dean. “The Use of Sport in Policy Implementation:
      \nThe Case of Tanzania.” The Journal of Modern African Studies<\/span>.
      \n18 (2): pp. 237-256 1980.<\/li>\n
    70. McIntyre, Thomas Duano.”Sport in German Democratic Republic and
      \nthe People’s Republic of China: A Socio-political Analysis.\u201d Journal
      \nof Physical Education, Recreation and Dance<\/span>, 56 (1): pp. 108-111,
      \n1985.<\/li>\n
    71. Menzies, Sutherland. Turkey Old and New<\/span>. Vol. 1, W.H.Allen
      \nand Corporation, London, 1882.<\/li>\n
    72. Menzies, Sutherland. Turkey Old and New<\/span>. Vol. 2, W.H.Allon
      \nand Corporation, London, 1882.<\/li>\n
    73. Monroe, W.S. Turkey and the Turks<\/span>. Colonial Press. Boston,
      \n1907.<\/li>\n
    74. Newman, Barnard. Turkey and the Turks<\/span>. Herbert Jenkins Ltd.,
      \nLondon, 1968.<\/li>\n
    75. New Columbia Encyclopedia.<\/span> (4976).<\/li>\n
    76. Nalle, Wilfreid. “Turkistan Tarihinin Yaziminda Karsilasilan
      \nSorunlar.” Belleten<\/span>, Cilt, 4411 Sayi, 184. pp. 347-369,
      \n1982.<\/li>\n
    77. Ojeme, E. 0. “Problems in the Development of Sport in Nigerian
      \nUniversities.”<\/li>\n
    78. International Rowiev for the Sociology of Sport<\/span>, 20 (3): pp.
      \n189-202, 1985.<\/li>\n
    79. Okan Kenan. Turk Spor Tarihi<\/span>. MOM yayini Ankara, Turkiye. pp.
      \n132-156, 1989.<\/li>\n
    80. Orga, Irfan. Portait of a Turkish Family<\/span>. The Macmillan Company,
      \nNow York, 1950.<\/li>\n
    81. Pallis, Alexander. In the Days of the Janissaries<\/span>. Hutchinson
      \nand Corporation. Publishers Ltd., Now York, 1951.<\/li>\n
    82. Porter, James. Turkey its History and Progress<\/span>. Hurts and Blackett,
      \nPublishers. London, 1854.<\/li>\n
    83. Reid, John. Turkey and the Turks<\/span>. Robert Tyas Publishing Inc.,
      \nLondon, 1840.<\/li>\n
    84. Reinhart, Robert. Turkey a Country Study<\/span>. Federal Research
      \nDivision, Library of Congress. USA, 1986.<\/li>\n
    85. Rice, Emmett A. A Brief History of Physical Education<\/span>. 3rd
      \nEdition, London, 1962.<\/li>\n
    86. Riiskjer, Soren. “Alterations in the Sport Involvement.”
      \nScandinavian Journal of Sport Science<\/span>. 8(3): pp. 117-122, 1966.<\/li>\n
    87. Robinson, D. Richard. ‘The first Turkish Republic<\/span>. Harvard
      \nUniversity Press, Cambridge, Massachussetts, 1963.<\/li>\n
    88. Ross, Saul. “Canadian Research Into Physical Education and Sport
      \nDevelopment Assistance; A Pledging Enterprise.” Canadian Journal
      \nof Development Studies<\/span>. Vol. 7, No.1 pp. 95-103, 1986.<\/li>\n
    89. San, Haluk., Unsi, Tevfik., and Var, Samim. Futbol Ansiklopedisi<\/span>,
      \nTicaret Postasi Matbaasi, Istanbul, 1963<\/li>\n
    90. Seppaenon, A. Paavo. Sport Achievement and Type of Culture. Proceeding
      \nof the First <\/span>International Seminar on the History of Physical
      \nEducation and Sport<\/span>. Wignate Institute for Physical Education. Nethanya,
      \nIsrael. April, 9,11, 1968.<\/li>\n
    91. Seton, Lloyd. Ancient Turkey<\/span>. Stevenson Publishers. London,
      \n1989.<\/li>\n
    92. Shaw, Stanford. History of the Ottoman Empire and Turkey.<\/span> Cambridge
      \nUniversity Press. London, NY, 1976.<\/li>\n
    93. Shaw, Stanford. History of the Ottoman Empire and Modern Turkey<\/span>.
      \nCambridge University Press, Cambridge, London, 1977.<\/li>\n
    94. Sirman, Nukhet and Finkel,Andrew. Turkish State, Turkish Society<\/span>.
      \nBilling and Sons Ltd. Worcester, England, 1990.<\/li>\n
    95. Snyder, E. Eldon, and Spritzer, Elmer. ‘Social Aspect of Sport<\/span>.
      \nPrentice-Hall Incorporation, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1978.<\/li>\n
    96. Somali, Vala. Besiktas Tarihi<\/span>, Istanbul, 1978.<\/li>\n
    97. Soundrs, E. John. “Sport and Physical Education in the UNESCO
      \nRegion of Asia and Pacific.” FIEP Bulletin<\/span>. Vol.55, No.1,
      \npp. 17-26, 1985.<\/li>\n
    98. Speakman-Yerta, A. Moureen. “Cross-Cultural Comparisons of Physical
      \nEducation Purposes.” Journal of Teaching in Physical Education<\/span>,
      \n6, pp. 252-268, 1987.<\/li>\n
    99. Stoddart, Brian. “Sport in the Social Construct of the Lesser
      \nDeveloped World: A Contemporary.” Sociology of Sport Journal..<\/span>
      \n6, pp.125-135, 1989.<\/li>\n
    100. Sumer, Riza. Sporda Democrasi: Belgeler\/Yorumlar<\/span>. 2. Baski,
      \nSafak Matbaasi, Ankara, 1969.<\/li>\n
    101. Tachau, Frank. Turkey, the Politics of Authority, Democracy, and
      \nDevelopment<\/span>. New York, 1984.<\/li>\n
    102. Turkey a Country Study<\/span>: Federal Research Division. Library
      \nof Congress, 1988.<\/li>\n
    103. Vasquez, Felix Moya. “Solutions for Physical Education in Developing
      \nCountries: The Cuban Experience. FIEP Bulletin<\/span>. Vol. 54, No.
      \n2, pp.19-27, 1984.<\/li>\n
    104. Vucinich, S. Wayne. The Ottoman Empire Legacy<\/span>. Shoe String
      \nPress Incorporated, Connecticut, 1910.<\/li>\n
    105. Wagner, A. Eric. “Sport in Asia and Africa: Americanization or
      \nMundialization ?” Sociology of Sport Journal<\/span>. 7, pp. 399-402,
      \n1990.<\/li>\n
    106. Ward, Barbara. Turkey.<\/span> Oxford University Press, London, Great
      \nBritain, 1942.<\/li>\n
    107. Williams, F. Jesse. “The Physical as Experience.” Journal
      \nof Higher Education<\/span>. Vol.22, No.9, pp. 463-69. 603-604, 1939.<\/li>\n
    108. Zachariah, Mathew. “Can the Rich and Poor Nations Co-operate
      \nto Internationalize the Curriculum?” Compare<\/span>, Vol.9, No.
      \n1, pp. 65-69, 1979.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
      Submitted by: Ergun Yurdadon, Ph.D.<\/div>\n

      A Brief Evaluation of Development of Turkish Sport from 1839 to 1923
      \n <\/h2>\n

      Although the modern Turkish Republic was officially established in 1923,
      \n the liberalization, secularization and the democratization process of
      \n the Republic was initiated in 1839. All of these three phases occurred
      \n in conjunction with the Tanzimat reforms, which granted partial constitutional
      \n rights to the Turkish people. <\/p>\n

      After the Tanzimat, the Turkish people reorganized their lives and established
      \n organizations on voluntary and constitutional principles. The formation
      \n of such organizations also provided leadership for sports activities within
      \n the country. Eventually, the sport movement gained momentum. According
      \n to Fisek, "Despite the discouragement of government, the popularity
      \n and enthusiasm for sports were manifested" (p. 270). However, Turkish
      \n sport had not yet set national objectives nor defined goals. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_is_tweetstorm":false,"jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_options":[]},"categories":[290,291],"tags":[59,27,60,8],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p4btio-2z","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":153,"url":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/article\/sport-in-turkey-in-the-pre-islamic-period\/","url_meta":{"origin":159,"position":0},"title":"Sport in Turkey in the Pre-Islamic Period","date":"February 22, 2008","format":false,"excerpt":"Submitted by: Ergun Yurdadon, Ph.D., Chair of Recreation Management, USSA This is an historical, descriptive analysis of sport in Turkiye from the earliest available records to the present day. In order to present a complete picture, the development of sport in Turkiye was divided into three periods: the pre-Islamic, Islamic\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Sports History"","img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":168,"url":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/article\/the-usage-of-the-sports-image-in-advertising-sector-in-selected-turkish-television-channels\/","url_meta":{"origin":159,"position":1},"title":"The Usage of the Sports Image in Advertising Sector in Selected Turkish Television Channels","date":"March 9, 2004","format":false,"excerpt":"Submitted by: Hakan Sunay, PhD. & Velittin Balci, PhD. ABSTRACT This research was made to assess the relationship between advertisements on marketing sports products on Turkish television channels and sports images on the basis of products, and to get information on the tendencies of onlookers of sports products through strengthening\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Contemporary Sports Issues"","img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2004\/03\/Graphic1.png?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":5951,"url":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/article\/prosocial-and-antisocial-behaviors-in-sport-the-roles-of-personality-traits-and-moral-identity\/","url_meta":{"origin":159,"position":2},"title":"Prosocial and Antisocial Behaviors in Sport: The Roles of Personality Traits and Moral Identity","date":"August 21, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Authors: Mevl\u00fct YILDIZ (1), Ender \u015eENEL (1), \u0130brahim YILDIRAN (2) (1) Mugla Sitki Kocman University, Faculty of Sports Sciences, Turkey. (3) Gazi University, Faculty of Sport Sciences, Turkey. Corresponding Author: Ender SENEL Mugla Sitki Kocman University, Faculty of Sports Sciences Kotekli\/Mugla, 48000 endersenel@gmail.com 00902522111951 (1) Dr. Ender SENEL is a\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Commentary"","img":{"alt_text":"Table 4","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/Table-4-3.png?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":195,"url":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/article\/colors-and-cultural-interactions-in-the-turkish-sport-clubs\/","url_meta":{"origin":159,"position":3},"title":"Colors and Cultural Interactions in the Turkish Sport Clubs","date":"March 6, 2005","format":false,"excerpt":"Submitted by: Okkes A. Gencay & Suat Karakucuk Abstract The purpose of this study was to determine the colors and color combinations used by the professional soccer clubs and to evaluate the proportion of the cultural interaction between the people and colors in Turkey. The study was carried out on\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Contemporary Sports Issues"","img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":7065,"url":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/article\/relative-age-effect-enhanced-physical-fitness-reference-standards-for-turkish-youths-who-live-in-istanbul\/","url_meta":{"origin":159,"position":4},"title":"Relative age effect-enhanced physical fitness reference standards for Turkish youths who live in Istanbul","date":"May 29, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Authors:\u00a0Nuri Topsakal Corresponding Author:Nuri Topsakal, PhDDuzce University Faculty of Sport Sciences,Department of Coaching Education, Istanbul, TurkeyMailing address: Duzce Universitesi Spor Bilimleri Fak\u00fcltesi Konuralp Yerle\u015fkesi\u00a0Merkez\/D\u00dcZCE81620Telephone: +90 544 308 25 03Fax: + 90 (380) 542 1365Email: topsakal.nuri@gmail.com Nuri Topsakal is an assistant professor for the University of D\u00fczce Faculty of Sport Science.\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Research"","img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":1538,"url":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/article\/determining-team-identification-service-quality-perceptions-and-sport-consumption-intentions-of-professional-soccer-spectators-an-investigation-of-gender-differences\/","url_meta":{"origin":159,"position":5},"title":"Determining team identification, service quality perceptions, and sport consumption intentions of professional soccer spectators: An investigation of gender differences","date":"February 3, 2014","format":false,"excerpt":"Submitted by Ali Aycan, Olcay Kiremitci, Erdin\u00e7 Demiray, R. Timu\u00e7in Gen\u00e7er ABSTRACT The purpose of this study has been to determine the relationships among gender, team identification, service quality perceptions and sport consumption intentions of professional soccer team spectators. 694 soccer spectators (female = 180, male = 514) participated in\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Contemporary Sports Issues"","img":{"alt_text":"table-1","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/02\/table-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/159"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=159"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/159\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1132,"href":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/159\/revisions\/1132"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=159"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=159"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=159"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}