Its me again needing help with another Suvla place name.

Can anyone help locate Mentestepe please? From the context it should be somewhere in the vicinity of Kavak Tepe and Tekke Tepe. Tempting to see it as a mis-transliteration of Mestan Tepe, but I don't think so.

Also date. In a posting on another forum a colleague has translated a memoir from a Turkish officer dated 21 August, 1331. Is it safe to calculate only the year to get the equivalent on the Gregorian calendar (i.e. 1915), or does the date of 21 August need calculating as well?

Many thanks for any help and guidance.

John

John

Two possibilities for you are i) Mesellegrek Tepe to the north of Kavak Tepe, and ii) Merkez Tepe (German Officer's Ridge) but that is Anzac rather than Suvla.

Yout suspicion about Mestan Tepe (Chocolate Hill) is at least part of Suvla.

Garth

Thanks Garth. You are right. On re-reading the text it makes entire sense to regard it as Mestan Tepe.

I am still stuck on the query regarding dates, though.

John

http://www.infoplease.com/spot/gregorian1.html

This might help.

Garth

John

The year 1331 seems to translate to roughly 1913.

Sue

1331 is 1912/13

1330 Dec.22, 1911
1331 Dec.11, 1912
1332 Nov.30, 1913

regards, Krithia

Many thanks for the help with the dates. However there is still a bit of a conundrum because the context makes it obvious that the equivalent year in the Gregorian calendar should be 1915, not in the spread 1911 - 1913. I wonder if the error arose in transliterating from Arabic script?

As regards Mentes Tepe, there is such a place in the Suvla sector. Just for the record, one of the maps in Canakkale Savasi, Siperin Ardi Vatan shows it as being just north of Yusufcuk Tepe (Hill 70) and a colleague on another forum informs me they are about 650 - 700 metres apart.

John

John,

re the two year difference mentioned above
the following is from 'Notes on the Turkish Army with a short vocabulary...1915' [N & M reprint with the Royal Armouries] see page 27 'Distance and Time'
quote: "On the 25th February, 1906, began the year 1324 of the Hegira, but the official or financial year is now reckoned two years earlier, consequently the Turkish year, 1331, corresponds to our 1915, although the actual year of the Hegira is 1333." (my emphasis)

regards
Michael

Nice work Michael - that now all makes perfect sense. Very many thanks for tying up another loose end.

John

Have a look at : germen officers trench

an interesting remark by Kannengieser also on the TIME.

eric

John

In relation to dating, one of the most useful sites I have found is the

Gregorian - Hijra - Rumi Converter

Bear in mind the Ottomans did not use Hijra but to confuse everyone, possibly including themselves, they used Rumi. So the three date converter is essential.

NB: Rumi = Roman

Cheers

Bill

Bill,

I think that the writers of the 'Notes on the Turkish Army...etc...' were trying to keep it simple for the chaps in the field, but you are correct and there are some details missing

Andrew Mango's biography of 'Ataturk' is most helpful; see pages 25/6
"For administrative purposes, a solar calendar was introduced in 1839. Known as Rumi (Roman), this also dated back to AD 622, but the day and the month were the same as in the (Christian) Julian calendar. The Rumi year started on 1 March, which corresponded to 13 March in the (international) Gregorian calendar in the nineteenth century, and to 14 March in the twentieth century. In 1917, thirteen days were added to the Rumi calendar. Thereafter the day and the month, but not the year, corresponded to the Gregorian calendar."

also see page 437 which brings us further up to date (sorry but can't resist a good pun)
"The avalanche of secularizing laws went on. ... ... ... On 26 Decmber 1925, the assembly adopted the international Christian era, and the twenty-four hour clock. This replaced the Muslim solar calendar, which had been used for administrative purposes, and the system of numbering hours from sunset, which regulated the times of the five canonical daily prayers. Thus, 1 January 1342, (Muslim solar Gregorian, corresponding to 19 December 1341, Muslim solar Julian, or 16 Jumada II, 1344, in the religious Muslim lunar calendar) became 1 January 1926. ... ... ...The Young Turks had changed the administrative calendar from Julian to Gregorian, but they did not dare date the year from Christ's birth, instead of the date of Muhammed's flight from Mecca to Medina. Mustafa Kemal had no such scruples"

I think that you can see why the backroom boys (in Cairo?) wanted to try and keep it simple

With best regards
Michael

Michael and Bill

Very many thanks for the additional detail. The memoir referred to in post #1 above has an entry dated 21 August, 1331. There is little doubt on my mind that the events described are those that took place on 21 August, 1915 (2nd Anafartalar). I am not certain about the original date of publication - I only have the date of a reprint. Can I safely assume from para 2 of Michael's post #12 above that 21 August, 1331 = 21 August, 1915?

John

John,

This is a difficult one
You have a reprint of an original of an uncertain date of publication (to use your own words)
Since the copy which you have uses the name 'August' for the month - instead of the then current Turkish word 'Agystos'
Then it is understandable to assume that 'a converstion of the calendar dates' has already been made by either the original writer or the editor of the reprint. But, if you can, then go back and check as far down the line as you are able.
Sorry, but that's the best I can offer at the present

with best regards
Michael