Determining the property ownership on cadastral works in Turkey.
Abstract The transformation process from state to civil ownership in Turkey was started at the end of the Ottoman Empire and continued until after the formation of Turkish Republic. In this process, in accordance with the Civil Code legislation, most land users who had been using state lands were regarded as owners of those lands. These parcels of real estate were used in various ways and it became necessary to register these properties by using a process called ‘written cadastre’. The initial process was slowed down during World War II but an intensive cadastral program was begun after the war in both urban and rural areas, particularly in 1950s. The cadastre work had two components called technical and legal. The definition of land ownership is the legal foundation of the cadastre. If properties have their titles, land ownership can be defined based on the title; otherwise the ownership can be defined according to statements by experts chosen from local people. However, without title or written evidence, determining the land ownership is more problematic. In this context, this study explains how the ownership of properties, with or without a title, is determined in cadastral work in Turkey.
Turkish cadastral system
Abstract In Turkey, cadastral works were started after the foundation of the Republic of Turkey. These studies were carried out in such manner that ownership of the land was given to the people who were using it. Firstly, in 1924, the process was started in urban areas where one fourth of the total population of the country lived. Because of various problems including economic difficulties, technical deficiencies, personal insufficiencies, these cadastral works were only carried out in cities within the first 25 years from 1925 to 1950. Then the cadastral works were speeded up and most were carried out between 1950 and 1990. In this period, the work was achieved utilizing the available technology at that time in rural and urban areas. Today, 97% of the urban cadastral areas and 67% of the rural cadastral areas have been completed in Turkey. Generally, graphic, photogrammetric, orthogonal, and tachometric measurement methods have been used in this work. While 45% of the Turkish cadastral maps have been produced using graphic method which does not have a coordinate system, the other maps have been produced using the different measurement methods. These are also in different coordinate systems and scales. Only 7% of the whole cadastral maps are in digital format. On the other hand, because of the factors mentioned above, Turkish cadastral bases do not contain sufficient information to be converted to digital system in accordance with field. Since 1990, different methods have been used to digitize these non-digital cadastral maps. However, these attempts have failed. The main goals of this study are identifying historical background of cadastre and existing situation of it in Turkey.
The Austro-Prussian War: Austria's War with Prussia and Italy in 1866 . By Geoffrey Wawro. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1966. Pp. 313. $59.95. ISBN 0-521-56059-4.
This expanded and reworked Yale dissertation ventures into a topic done spellbindingly two decades ago by one of the grand masters of German military affairs, Gordon Craig, whose Battle of Koeniggraetz (Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott, 1964), was published in a series commissioned by Hanson W. Baldwin. NewYork Times military affairs editor. Wawro does not approach the literary brilliance of Craig, but his work goes beyond it in several important respects. First, although Craig dealt with a good deal of the preliminary background and also the aftermath, his book focused squarely on the major battle which decided the war, whereas the book at hand deals with the entire war, which included several other battles, notably Langensalza, between Prussia and the Hanoverians in north-central Germany and Custoza between Austria and Italy in northern Italy. Secondly, whereas Craig knew the German sources as well as anyone, Wawro here uses not only German, but Austrian, French, British, and Italian ones. Of the last two, the former are important for the diplomatic background, the latter for the southern campaign area as well as for the problematic PrussianItalian relations. Thirdly,Wawro has dug deeper than Craig into primary source archives. Especially for the central emphasis of the book, the Austrians and Italians, he has mined the archives in Vienna, Rome, Naples, Milan, and Venice. For example, he uses a number of war diaries which officers from captain to field marshal kept and later deposited in military archives. Interestingly, both authors use Hans Delbriick andTheodor Fontane. Delbriick wrote half a dozen essays on the war and after his death in 1929 two of his colleagues published a fifth volume of his classic Art of War in the Framework of Political History which dealt substantially with 1866, partly on the basis of Delbriick's Berlin University lecture notes. Fontane covered the war as a newspaper correspondent and published more than a thousand pages from his eyewitness experiences, Der deutsche Krieg von 1866, 2 vols, (Berlin, 1871-72).