Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-11T01:54:14.779Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Archaeological Ethnography of the Battle of Aslıhanlar (29–30 August 1922): A Case Study of Public Archaeology, Visual Storytelling, and Interactive Map Design

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Can Aksoy  and
Ziyacan Bayar
Can Aksoy*
Affiliation:
Institute of Archaeology, University College London Qatar, Qatar
Ziyacan Bayar*
Affiliation:
Faculty of Fine Arts, Dokuz Eylül University, Turkey
*
[email: ziyacanbayar@gmail.com]
[email: ziyacanbayar@gmail.com]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Our article seeks to determine the functions of visual communication design through the lens of modern conflict and public archaeologies. The Battle of Aslıhanlar, which took place in the triangle of the villages of Çal Köy, Allıören, and Yüğlük in Kütahya from 29 to 30 August 1922, was the focus of our experimentation. Our archaeological survey project was carried out in 2013; interviews with local people, a review of the literature available and our observations of local myths and traditions that emerged after the war constitute the basis of our article. We categorized these sources for the project design in order to form a storytelling narrative, so that the viewer could participate in the process of conflict as well as the ongoing research. We foresaw three major challenges while categorizing this complex dataset: equivalence of visual language; variable outputs of the multi-dimensional research methods; and interactivity for creating a live social platform. We responded to these challenges by developing a graphic design concept and an interactive map of the data. Our design surrounds the viewer with a historical timeline, which includes all of our research findings in one interactive interface.

Notre article tente d'établir quels sont les rôles que la communication visuelle remplit, à travers l'étude d'un conflit moderne et des approches de l'archéologie publique. Le sujet de notre enquête est la bataille d'Aslıhanlar qui se disputa du 29 au 30 août 1922 dans le triangle formé par les villages de Çal Köy, Allıören et Yüğlük dans la province de Kütahya. Un relevé de terrain effectué en 2013, des entrevues avec la population indigène, un examen de la littérature à notre disposition et nos observations sur les mythes et traditions locales qui ont vu le jour après la guerre constituent les éléments sur lesquels nous avons basé notre étude. Nous avons classé ces sources dans la phase d'élaboration de notre projet, le but étant de composer un récit qui permette à un participant de prendre part au déroulement des évènements du conflit et à la recherche en cours. Nous avons anticipé trois enjeux majeurs liés à la classification d'un ensemble complexe de données : équivalence du langage visuel, résultats variables suivant les méthodes de recherche multidimensionnelle employées, et interactivité dans la création d'un réseau social en direct. Nous avons répondu à ces défis par le développement d'un concept infographique et par la création d'une carte interactive. Notre projet d'infographie comprend une frise chronologique contenant tous les résultats de notre étude en une seule interface interactive. Translation by Madeleine Hummler

Unser Artikel versucht, die Rolle der visuellen Kommunikation aus der Sicht einer neuzeitlichen Auseinandersetzung und der Öffentlichkeitsarchäologie zu bestimmen. Die Schlacht von Aslıhanlar, die am 29. und 30. August 1922 in einem von den Dörfern von Çal Köy, Allıören und Yüğlük gebildeten Dreieck in der Provinz Kütahya stattfand, steht im Mittelpunkt unseres Experimentversuches. Eine Geländeaufnahme in 2013, Befragungen der ansässigen Gemeinschaften, eine Bewertung der Literatur und unsere Beobachtungen der einheimischen Mythen und Traditionen, die nach dem Krieg entstanden, bilden die Grundlage unserer Untersuchung. Wir haben diese Quellen in der Entwicklungsphase des Projektes in Kategorien eingestuft, sodass eine erzählerische Geschichte, die den Beschauer an dem laufenden Forschungsprozess beteiligt entsteht. Wir hatten drei größere Herausforderungen bei der Kategorisierung dieser komplexen Datenmenge vorgesehen: die Gleichwertigkeit der visuellen Sprache, die unterschiedliche Wiedergabe mehrdimensionalen Forschungsmethoden und die Gestaltung einer interaktiven sozialen Plattform. Wir haben es versucht, diese Probleme mit einem grafischen Konzeptentwurf und einer interaktiven Karte zu lösen. Unser Design umfasst eine historische Zeitlinie, die alle Ergebnisse unserer Untersuchung in einer interaktiven Schnittstelle einschließt. Translation by Madeleine Hummler

Keywords

Battle of DumlupınarTurkish War of IndependenceGreco-Turkish Warvisual storytellinggraphic designBataille de Dumlupınarguerre d'indépendance turqueguerre gréco-turquenarration visuelleinfographieSchlacht von Dumlupınartürkischer Unabhängigkeitskrieggriechisch-türkischer Kriegvisuelle Erzählunggrafische Darstellung
Type
Articles
Information
European Journal of Archaeology , Volume 19 , Issue 1 , 2016 , pp. 68 - 94
Copyright
Copyright © 2015 the European Association of Archaeologists 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aksoy, C. 2014. The Battle of Aslıhanlar Battlefield Research Project: A Case Study of the Turkish War of Independence. Unpublished Survey Report written for the Turkish Ministry of Culture.Google Scholar
Alaeddinoğlu, S., Aliağaoğlu, A. 2007. Savaş Alanı Turizmine Tipik Bir Örnek: Büyük Taarruz ve Başkomutan Tarihi Milli Parkı. Anatolia: Turizm Araştırmaları Dergisi, 18–2: 215–25.Google Scholar
Aldıkaçtı, O. 1985. Kurtuluş Savaşı ve Ulusal Egemenlik Kavramı:TBMM'nin 65. Kuruluş Yıldönümü Sempozyumu. Ankara: TBMM Basımevi.Google Scholar
Altay, F. 2008. 10 Yıllık Savaş ve Sonrası. İstanbul: Eylem Yayınları.Google Scholar
Artuç, I. 1986. Başkomutan Meydan Muharabesi: Büyük Taaruz. Istanbul: Kastas.Google Scholar
Atak, B. 2010. Küçük Gezgin Zafertepeçalköyde. Kütahya: Zafertepe Çalköy Belediyesi.Google Scholar
Atatürk, M.K. 1980. Nutuk. Ankara: Kültür Bakanlığı Yayınları.Google Scholar
Aydoğan, E. 2005. Oltu Şura Hükümeti'nin Ermeni Mücadelesi: Yasin Haşimoğlu'nun Hatıraları. Istanbul: Salkım Söğüt Yayınları.Google Scholar
Bayındır-Goularas, G. 2012. 1923 Türk-Yunan Nüfus Mübadelesi Ve Günümüzde Mübadil Kimlik ve Kültürlerinin Yaşatılması. Alternatif Politika, 4 (2): 129–46.Google Scholar
Belen, F. 1999. Büyük Türk Zaferi (Afyon'dan İzmir'e Kadar). İstanbul: Yeni Gün Haber Ajansı Basın ve Yayıncılık A.Ş.Google Scholar
Berber, E. 2009. Yunan İşgali: Geldikleri Gibi Gidemediler. NTV Tarih, 4: 28–36.Google Scholar
Bölükbaşı, D. 2004. Turkey and Greece: The Aegean Disputes. London: Cavendish Publishing.Google Scholar
Çalışlar, I. 2009. Gün Gün, Saat Saat İstiklâl Harbi'nde Batı Cephesi: Org. İzzetin Çalışlar'ın Anılarıyla. Ankara: Türkiye İş Bankası Kültür Yayınları.Google Scholar
CFA Archaeology Ltd. 2014. Graphic Design and Interpretation. [online] [accessed 2 August 2014]. Available at: <http://www.cfa-archaeology.co.uk/services/graphics-design-illustration/graphic-design-interpretation>..>Google Scholar
Demircioğlu, A. 2007. Milli Mücadele'de Mustafa Kemal Paşa ve Büyük Millet Meclisi Hükümeleri'nin Barışçı Politikası ve Istikbal Gazetesi (1919–1933). A. Ü. Türkiyat Araştırmaları Enstitüsü Dergisi, 33: 278–86.Google Scholar
Design n.d. User Interface Design Guidelines. [online] Interactondesign [accessed 13 July 2014]. Available at: https://www.interactiondesign.org/members/imagelibrary/zoom.html?g=L21lbWJlcnMvaW1hZ2VsaWJyYXJ5L2ltYWdlcy9JcGhvbmVJY29ucy5qcGc.Google Scholar
E.L.I.A., The Hellenic Literary and Historical Archive 2006. Greek Literary and Historical Archives. [online] [accessed 2 April 2014]. Available at: <http://eliaserver.elia.org.gr/elia/site/content.php?sel=13>..>Google Scholar
Emanuel, B. 2008. Rhetoric in Graphic Design. Dessau: Grafische Werkstatt Hochschule Anhalt Dessau.Google Scholar
Erdem, N. 2010. Yunan Tarihçiliğinin Gözüyle Anadolu Harekatı (1919–1923). Istanbul: Derlem Yayınları.Google Scholar
GDFB, Graphic Design Festival Breda 2012. Theme/Visual Storytelling [online] Graphic Design Festival, 23 April 2012 [accessed 23 July 2014]. Available at: <http://www.graphicdesignfestival.nl/en/news/gdfb2012-theme-visual-storytelling/>..>Google Scholar
Genelkurmay Başkanlığı 1997. Büyük Taarruz Harp Tarihi Broşürü. Ankara: ATASE Yayınları.Google Scholar
Gonatas, S. 1958. Apomnimonevmata 1897–1957. Athens.Google Scholar
González-Ruibal, A. 2012. From the Battlefield to the Labour Camp: Archaeology of Civil War and Dictatorship in Spain. Antiquity, 86: 456–73.Google Scholar
Haciantoniyu, K. 1994. Mikra Asia — O Apeleftherotikos Agonas 1919–1922. Athens: Ekdosis Pelasgos.Google Scholar
Hamilakis, Y., Anagnostopoulos, A. 2009. What is Archaeological Ethnography?. Public Archaeology, 8 (2–3): 65–86.Google Scholar
Hamilakis, Y., Theou, E. 2013. Enacted Multi-Temporality the Archaeological Site as a Shared, Performative Space. In: González-Ruibal, A., ed. Reclaiming Archaeology: Beyond the Tropes of Modernity. London: Routledge, pp. 181–94.Google Scholar
Hofmann, T., Brjornlund, M., Meichanestidis, V. 2012. The Genocide of the Ottoman Greeks: Studies on the State-Sponsored Campaign of Extermination of the Christians of Asia Minor (1912–1922) and Its Aftermath: History, Law, Memory. Athens: Aristide D. Caratzas, pp. 1–300.Google Scholar
Jensen, P.K. 1979. The Greco-Turkish War 1920–1922. Middle East Studies, 10: 553–65.Google Scholar
Jowett, G.S., O'Donnell, V. 2006. Propaganda and Persuasion. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Kanellopoulos, K.D. 1936. Küçük Asya Mağlubiyeti-Ağustos 1922–c. II. Atina: Anesti Oralli.Google Scholar
Kapsis, Y. 1989. Hamenes Patrides. Athens: Ekdosis Livani.Google Scholar
Koliopoulos, J.S., Veremis, T.M. 2010. Modern Greece: A History since 1821. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Koundoura, M. 2007. The Greek Idea. London: Tauris Academic Studies.Google Scholar
Kurtuluş 1994. Directed by Z. Öztan. [online] [accessed 22 January 2011]. Available at: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nNRtw-KEHnY&feature=channel_video_title>..>Google Scholar
Mango, A. 2002. Atatürk: The Biography of the Founder of Modern Turkey. New York: Overlook.Google Scholar
Marulyalı, Y., Aksüt, L. 2007. Umo Mimarlık. [online] 25 January 2007 [accessed 22 January 2011]. Available at: <http://www.mimdap.org/w/?p=616>..>Google Scholar
Mason, D. 2002. Reading Greece. The Hudson Review, 55 (3): 4–32.Google Scholar
Matbuat ve İstihbarat Müdüriyet-i Umumiyesi 1922. Anadolu'da Yunan Zulüm ve Vahşeti. Ankara: Matbuat ve İstihbarat Matbaası, pp. 1–100.Google Scholar
Matomena Homata. 2008. Directed by K. Koutsomitis [online] [accessed 22 January 2011]. Available at: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OyC4fcnEihE>..>Google Scholar
Milas, H. 2010. Kimin Yaktığı Çok mu Önemli? Azınlıkça [online] Vol. 57 [accessed 8 September 2014]. Available at: <http://www.azinlikca.net/yazarlar/herkul-millas/kimin-yaktigi-cok-mu-onemli-herkul-millas.html>..>Google Scholar
Niş, K. 1968. Türk İstiklal Harbi, Batı Cephesi: Büyük Taarruz (1–31 Ağustos 1922) C 2, Ks. 6, 2. Kitap. Ankara: Genelkurmay Başkanlığı Harb Tarihi Dairesi Resmi Yayınları Seri No. 1.Google Scholar
OpenStreetMap. n.d. About. [online] [accessed 10 July 2014]. Available at: <http://www.openstreetmap.org/about>..>Google Scholar
Özakman, T. 2013. Şu Çılgın Türkler. Ankara: Bilgi Yayın Evi.Google Scholar
Özpunar, H. 2012. Anılar ve Fotoğraflarla İşgal Günlerinde Afyonkarahisar. Afyonkarahisar: Lider Ajans Matbaacılık.Google Scholar
Özpunar, H. 2013. Büyük Zaferin 91. Yıldönümün'de Dumlupınar ve Afyonkarahisar. Taşpınar, 10: 62–64.Google Scholar
Özpunar, H. 2014. Bir Zamalar Afyonkarahisar. Ankara: Salmat Basım Yayım Ambalaj.Google Scholar
Pannafino, J. 2012. Interdisciplinary Interaction Design. Pennsylvania: Assiduous Publishing.Google Scholar
Sağlam, S. 2012. Son şahitlerin dilinden Kurtuluş Savaşı. [online] Zaman [accessed 2 April 2014]. Available at: <http://www.zaman.com.tr/gundem_son-sahitlerin-dilinden-kurtulus-savasi_2008396.html>..>Google Scholar
Saunders, N.J. 2001. Matter and Memory in the Landscapes of Conflict: The Western Front 1914–1999. In: Bender, B. and Winer, M., eds. Contested Landscapes: Movement, Exile and Place. Oxford: Berg, pp. 37–53.Google Scholar
Schofield, J. 2005. Combat Archaeology: Material, Culture and Modern Conflict. London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
Smith, M.L. 1999. Ionian Vision: Greece in Asia Minor, 1919–1922. Michigan: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Stratigos, K. 1999. I Ellada Sti Mikra Asia, 5i Ekdosi. Athens: Ekdosis Ap. A. Harisis.Google Scholar
Triantalilfillidis, H. 1984. I Mikrasiatiki Ekstratia Ke To Imerologion Enos Oplitu, Vol. 2. Athens: Ekdosis Dodoni.Google Scholar
Trikupis, N. 1967. General Trikupis'in Hatıraları. Istanbul: Kitapçılık Ticaret Limited Şirketi Yayınları.Google Scholar
Tufte, E.R. 2001. The Visual Display of Quantitative Information, Vol. 2. Connecticut: Graphic Press.Google Scholar
Twemlow, A. 2008. What is Graphic Design For? trans. Özgen, D. İstanbul: Yem Yayıncılık.Google Scholar
Wildbur, P., Burke, M. 1998. Information Graphics: Innovative Solutions in Contemporary Design. London: Thames & Hudson.Google Scholar
Zafertepe Çalköy Belediyesi. 2010. Zafer Tepe Savaş Alanı Kavram Projesi Başlatıldı [online] 30 December 2010 [accessed 22 January 2011]. Available at: <http://zafertepe.bel.tr/haberdetay.asp?ID=42>..>Google Scholar