An interesting question raised by the foregoing study is the extent to which pre-Kemalist Turkey offered a status quo. Did the Ottoman dynasty and its associated bureaucracy seek to maintain a stasis throughout its domains and to resist the inroads of change from without? If so, there is then the contrast, following the suggestions made by Deutsch, with the Kemalist revolution where an avid quest for innovation became the keynote. It is of course true that one tends to be so impressed by the social revolution engineered by Kemal Atatiirk, one of the most dramatic figures of modern political history, that the antecedents of the radical changes in Turkey following World War I are all but forgotten. Clearly, if Atatiirk was successful in changing the face of Turkey, it was on the basis of what had gone before.