Published on MİT’s official website under the “Special Collection” section, the document is dated 23 September 1929, placing it just six years after the establishment of the Republic of Türkiye in 1923. 

The disclosure is framed not as a reinterpretation, but as a primary archival release, positioning the intelligence service as both custodian and narrator of institutional memory.

The document was prepared by the National Security Service Directorate and circulated to the Chief of the General Staff, the Ministry of Interior, and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, indicating its classification level and bureaucratic reach. 

The text explicitly references “confirmed and verified intelligence” obtained from Cairo’s Masonic circles, reflecting the intelligence-gathering methods of the period. 

According to the report, Lawrence operated under multiple disguises and aliases, including “Sheikh Abdullah” and “Yakos Iskinazi,” moving across Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Jerusalem, and Sudan within a span of months in 1929.  

The report states that Lawrence arrived in Egypt approximately two months before the writing of the document, later traveling through Syria and Iraq, and making an unexpected appearance in Jerusalem in August 1929. 

At the time of writing, he was assessed to be in Khartoum, Sudan. 

One passage notes that Lawrence alternated between the attire of a Muslim cleric and that of an American Jewish rabbi, approaching Muslim and Jewish communities separately and delivering what the document describes as “poisonous suggestions” intended to inflame tensions. 

Beyond individual movements, the intelligence assessment embeds Lawrence’s activities within broader imperial dynamics. 

The document links British intelligence operations to debates within the British Parliament and policy considerations regarding Egyptian independence. 

It asserts that unrest in Palestine and Sudan was viewed as a means to demonstrate that Egypt was “not yet worthy” of independence, thereby weakening the political position of the MacDonald cabinet. 

Sudan is described as the most suitable operational environment for cultivating unrest due to its administrative structure and its permanent linkage to Egypt.

The text further claims that Sudan served as a staging ground for training agents and conducting negative propaganda, with the ultimate aim of destabilization.