the great war and the tragedy of anatolia

117 Pages·2014·5.73 MB·English

THE GREAT WAR AND THE TRAGEDY
OF ANATOLIA
ATATURK SUPREME COUNCIL FOR CULTURE, LANGUAGE AND HISTORY
PUBLICATIONS OF TURKISH HISTORICAL SOCIETY
Serial XVI - No. 88
THE GREAT WAR
AND
THE TRAGEDY OF ANATOLIA
(TURKS AND ARMENIANS IN THE
MAELSTROM OF MAJOR POWERS)
SALAHi SONYEL
TURKISH HISTORICAL SOCIETY PRINTING HOUSE - ANKARA
2000
CONTENTS
Sonyel, Salahi Abbreviations.......................................................................................................................VII
The great war and the tragedy of Anatolia (Turks and Note on the Turkish Alphabet and Names..................................................................VIII
Armenians in the maelstrom of major powers) / Salahi Son­
Preface....................................................................................................................................IX
yel.- Ankara: Turkish Historical Society, 2000.
Introduction.............................................................................................................................1
x, 221s.; 24cm.~( Atattirk Supreme Council for Culture,
Language and History Publications of Turkish Historical
Chapter 1 - Genesis of the 'Eastern Question'................................................................14
Society; Serial VII - No. 189)
Turco- Russian war of 1877-78......................................................................... 14
Bibliyografya ve indeks var. The Congress of Berlin.......................................................................................17
ISBN 975 - 16 - 1227 - 6
Gunboat diplomacy............................................................................................ 19
Genesis and development of Armenian militant organizations..................20
1. Ermeni meselesi _ Ttirkiye. I. E.a. II. Dizi.
956.101543 Towards civil war in Anatolia..........................................................................23
Chapter 2 - The Young Turk Revolution and its Aftermath.....................................33
Young Turks and Armenians...........................................................................33
Armenian intrigues and clandestine imports of arms................................35
A new Armenian agitation.............................................................................38
Election of a new Armenian Patriarch...........................................................40
The first general election under the new regime.....................................44
Chapter 3 - The Counter-Revolution.............................................................................48
The events of 13 April 1909 (31 Mart Vak'asi)..........................................48
The Adana incidents.......................................................................................52
Who was responsible for the Adana incidents?.........................................01
The Commission of Inquiry into the Adana incidents............................65
ISBN 975-16-1227-6
Chapter 4 - Towards Catastrophe...................................................................................72
Raportor: Prof. Dr. ilber ORTAYLI The Balkan wars..............................................................................................72
A new reform scheme.....................................................................................74
Armenian revolutionary organizations in action again............................76
Kurdish incidents............................................................................................78
Partition of the Ottoman Empire.................................................................80
The Ottoman Empire joins the Central Powers.........................................81
Chapter 5 - The Tragedy of Anatolia................................................................................92
The Ottoman Empire enters the war...........................................................92
Armenian activities............................................................................................95
'Armenians, die small allies of the Great Powers fighting Turkey'........98
Armenian atrocities........................................................................................100
ABBREVIATIONS
British Armenophils and 'autonomous Armenia'....................................107
Armenian atrocities and rebellions continue...........................................108
In this book the following abbreviations have been used:
Revolt in Van...................................................................................................109
AP Accounts and Papers (British Parliamentary Papers)
Relocation of the Armenians........................................................................112
ATBD Askeri Tarili Belgeleri Dergisi
The aftermath of the relocations................................................................122
ATASE Genelkurmay, Askeri Tarili ve Stratejik Etiid Baskanligi Ar
Armenian incidents continue......................................................................127
BA Ba§bakanlik Arsivi
Further Ottoman justification for the relocations...................................131
BTTD Belgelerle Turk Tarilii Dergisi
The Musa Dag episode..................................................................................133
Cab. British Cabinet Papers
Chapter 6 - War-time Disinformation...........................................................................137 Cmd. British Command Papers
Turco- Armenian incidents and Entente propaganda............................137 CO British Colonial Office
The Blue Book................................................................................................143 Conf. Confidential
Ambassador Morgendiau's story..................................................................149 CUP Committee of Union and Progress
Dr. Johannes Lepsius.....................................................................................154 DDF Documents Diplomatique Frangaise
Chapter 7 - The Last Stages of the War.........................................................................157 Desp. despatch (dispatch)
Collapse of die Tsarist regime......................................................................157 DGP Die Grosse Pol id к
Armeno-Muslim conflict................................................................................164 Doc. Document
DOOA Documents on Ottoman Armenians
Chapter 8 - The Defeat of the Ottoman Empire.........................................................170
Ed. Editor (edition)
Armistice of Mudros......................................................................................170
Fn. Foot-note (note)
Armenian claims and disinformation.........................................................171
FO British Foreign Office (Political Files, 371)
Hitler and the Ai menians.............................................................................178
HMG Her (His) Majesty's Government
Cooperation between the Ai menians and the Nazis............................. 182
HMS Her (His) Majesty's Ship
Conclusion..........................................................................................................................184
Karal Оятяпh Tarihi
Sources ..............................................................................................................................191
Karal 1 The Armenian Question
Index .............................................................................................................................209
Lang The Armenians, a people in exile
Lang 1 Armenia, cradle of ci\ilisation
Lewis, B. Istanbul and the civilisation of the Ottoman Empire
Lewis 1, B. Emergence of Modern Turkey
McCarthy Death and exile
McCarthy 1 Armenian terrorism
Memo. Memorandum
No. : Number
M.P. : Member of Parliament
N.d. : No date
Sonyel 1 : Ottoman Armenians
PREFACE
Sonyel 2 : Armenian terrorism
Sonyel 3 : Minorities and the destruction of the Ottoman Empire
It is becoming more evident from primary documents preserved in the various
TiTE : Turk Inkilap (Devrim)Tarihi Enstitiisti
European, American and Ottoman archives, now made available to researchers
Varandian : History of the Armenian Revolutionary Movemant and the public, that long before the outbreak of the First World War the major
Vol. : Volume Powers, such as Russia, Britain, France, Germany and others, were vying with one
another in order to gain ascendance and influence in the Near and Middle East.
N.B. The surnames used in the notes stand for their respective publications as The main contry which in both the economic and military sense, became their
listed in the sources. Crown copyright recordst in the Public Records Office appear arena of conflict, before, during and after the war, was the Ottoman Empire.
by permission of the Controller of H.M. Stationery Office.
The ambitions of these Powers were directed towards infiltration into that
empire in order to exploit its vast and practically untouched resources, and to in­
corporate it into their orbit of economic and other influence. One of the main re­
Note on the Turkish Alphabet and Names sources that made this venture attractive to them was oil. They were so keen to pos­
sess this rare liquid mineral that they were perfectly willing to indulge in acute
Throughout this volume modern Turkish orthography has been used in
competition, even to the extent of armed conflict, in order to possess the vast oil
transcribing Turkish names and place-names except when quoting from non-
resources of the Middle East. In fact, one of the chief causes of the First World War
Turkish sources; for example, Istanbul and not Constantinople, Ankara and not
was this internecine economic competition among such Powers.1
Angora, Kayseri and not Caesarea, and so on.
It was mainly for economic reasons that the major expansionist Powers, from
The pronunciation of the following Turkish letters used in this book should
be noted: the early part of the nineteenth century onwards, began to send to the Ottoman
territories travellers, missionaries, and various other agents, in the guise of diplo­
с - j as in jam
mats, and through them to map the areas of strategic and economic importance,
g - ch as in chart
and to establish relations with Ottoman Christian and Muslim communities which
g - g with an upturned comma as in agha (aga) they could exploit and use in their designs. It did not take them long to discover
l - i without the dot as in sadik (faithful)
o - French eu as in deux or seul, or German o as in offnen
§ - sh as in shall 1 It is interesting to note here that in August 1918 British Foreign Secretary Arthur James Balfour
drew the attention of the Imperial War Cabinet to the 'incredible prospects for Iraqi oil development.
ii - French u as in lumiere, or german u as in sclnitzen. Thereupon Prime Minister David Lloyd George declared, 'I am in favour of going up as far as Mosul
before the war is over'. (Minutes, War Cabinet 457, Imperial War Cabinet, 30, 13.8.1918 in Cab. 23/43).
Mosul (Musul) was part of the Ottoman Empire, and on the conclusion of the Armistice of Mudros on
30 October 1918, ending the war between the Entente Powers and that empire, it was being defended
by the Ottoman Vlth Army commanded by General Ali ihsan (Sabis). The Brtish force under General
Sir William Marshall seized Mosul three days after the signature of the armistice, thus putting the
finishing tourh on Britain’s apparent mastery of the Middle East'. William Stivers: Supremacy and oil-
Iraq, Turkey and the Anglo-American world order, 1918-1930, Ithaca, 1982, pp. 24-2:>; see also Sir
Arnold T. Wilson: Mesopotamia, 1917-1920: a clash of loyalties, London, 1931, pp. 10-11; Britton C.
Busch: Britain, India and the Arabs, 1914-1921, University of California Press, 1971, pp. 152, 200 and
273; FO 371, files 3411 and 3413; Cmd. 1061. part 5: Li\re Rouge Turc, nos. 4-8, pp. 9-15; Arnold J.
Toynbee and K.P. Kirkwood: Turkey, London, 1926, pp. 274 ff.; Harry N. Howard: Pardtion of Turkey,
New York, I960, p. 210; Ali ihsan (Sabis) Pa§a: Harp hauralanm (my war memoirs), Ankara, 1951.
and to establish reladons with Ottoman Christian and Muslim communities which
they could exploit and use in their designs. It did not take them long to discover
that they could easily influence and use some, if not all, of the leaders of the
Greek, Armenian, Assyrian and Kurdish communities.
They employed various methods in bringing these communities under their INTRODUCTION
influence: religious antagonisms, economic boons, the protege system of affording
protection to them,2 human rights issues, and finally promises of autonomy, even The Turks1 began their influx into Anatolia (Asia Minor) after having
of independence. Most of those promises were false, as these Powers were not so overwhelmingly defeated the military forces of the Byzantine Empire at the battle
much interested in the Ottoman communities as in the lands and territories which
of Malazgirt (Manzikert) in 1071 CE2 and laid the foundations of the Ottoman
they occupied. Nevertheless, some of the leaders of these communities were
Empire,3 which, in its heyday, stretched over three continents - Asia, Africa and
deceived by such promises, and consciously or not, allowed themselves to be
Europe. The conquests of the Turks brought under their sway many non-Muslim
manipulated by these Powers in their quest to dismember the Ottoman Empire.
peoples, including Christians, Jews and others.
This ultimately led to the tragedy of Anatolia. This book attempts to trace the main
events that contributed to that tragedy, which brought catastrophe to all the The Ottoman Empire was organized on Islamic principles which allowed
peoples of Anatolia, mainly to the Turks, other Muslims, and Christians, including 'People of the Book' or 'of the Scripture', (Ahl el-Kitab), such as Christians and
the Armenians. Jews, to retain their own religion and become subjects of the Muslim rider,
provided that they agreed to certain conditions. According to Muslim law and
Dr. Salahi Sonyel practice the relationship between the Muslim state and the non-Muslim
(Visiting Professor, communities, to which it extended its tolerance and protection, was conceived as
Near East University, regulated by a pact called dimma; those benefiting from it were known as 'People
Northern Cyprus) of the Pact’ (Ahl al-dimma), or more briefly dimmi (zimmi). By the terms of his
contract with the dimmi, the Muslim ruler guaranted their lives, liberties and
properties, and allowed them to practise their religion. The dimmi, in return,
undertook to pay the special poll tax (cizye), and the land tax (haraf), and agreed
to certain restrictions that placed them legally at a lower status to that of their
Muslim fellow subjects.1 Thus the dimmi were allowed the toleration of the Islamic
state, subject to certain conditions, and enjoyed a considerable measure of
1 For various suggestions about the definition of the term 'Turk', and about the origin of the
Turks, see Eliot Grinnell Mears (ed.): Modern Turkey, New York, 1924, p. 2; Lord Kinross: The
Ottoman centuries-the rise and fall of the Turkish Empire, London, 1977, p. 15; Bernard Lewis:
Istanbul and the civilization of the Ottoman Empire, University of Oklahoma Press, 1963, pp. 10-11;
Bernard Lewis: Emergence of Modern Turkey, London, 1961, p. 6; Geoffrey Lewis: Turkey, London,
1955, p. 217; Stanford J. Shaw and Ezel Rural: History of the Ottoman Empire and Modern Turkey, 2
vols., vol. 1, Cambridge, 1977, pp. 1-2.
2 C.E. stands for Common Era.
' For the genesis and early development of the Ottoman Empire, including the Sel<;uk and
Mongol periods, see H.A.R. Gibb and Harold Bowen: Islamic society and the West, vol. 1, London,
1956, part 1, pp. 21-22; Kinross, p. 78; B. Lewis, p. 12; Shaw and Rural, vol. 1, pp. 2 ff.
2 For the protege system, see S.R. Sonyel: 'The protege system in the Ottoman Empire', Journal of 1 A.S. Tritton: The Caliphs and their non-Muslim subjects, Oxford, 1930, pp. 5-17; Gibb and
Islamic Studies, vol. 2, no. 1, January 1991, pp. 56-66. Bowen, 1, part 2, pp. 207-208.
communal autonomy, whereas polytheists and idolaters were not entitled to such Dakin.10 The traditional Islamic society was egalitarian. It never develepod
toleration.5 anything like the caste system of Hindu society to the east of it, or the aristocratic
privileges of Christian societies to the west.11 The Turks adopted a conciliatory
The policy of the Sultans towards each community was determined by the
policy towards the Christians from the beginning. The Balkan peasants soon began
circumstances in which it had come under their control. Once determined, these
to appreciate that conquest by the Muslims meant, for them, liberation from
policies were rarely modified for the sake of uniformity. The Ottoman government
Christian feudal Powers whose many exactions and abuses had worsened their
usually dealt with the dimmi of all denominations as members of a community
situation, whereas Ottomanization conferred upon them many benefits, such as
(millet), not as individuals. The status of the individual dimmi derived exclusively
law and order.12
from his membership of a millet (community or nation).1’ The internal
organization of the dimmi was determined by their own religious laws. According Like any other state, the Ottoman Empire strove to establish relations with
the the tradidonal view, millets were religious corporations with written, elaborate, other states. In February 1536 the empire signed an agreement with France, which
charters. In fact, they were practically autonomous bodies in all that concerned permitted the French to trade throughout the Ottoman Empire. By this agreement
religion, culture, economic and social life. Each millet was presided over by its the Ottoman government recognized the jurisdiction of French consular courts
highest ecclesiastical dignitary (Patriarch or Chief Rabbi), known also as the Millet within the empire, with an obligadon to carry out consular judgments, if necessary,
Ba$i (Head of the Community), who was elected by the community, and held by force. The Ottomans granted complete religious liberty to the French in their
office at he discretion of the Ottoman government. He was responsible to the empire, and gave them the right to keep guard over the Holy Places, which
government for the administration of the millet for which he acted as the amounted to a French protectorate over all the Catholics in the Levant.
recognized intermediary. His authority, besides his religious functions, included
This ominous treaty marked the beginning of the Capitulations, a system of
the control of schools, and even the administration of certain branches of civil
privileges granted to foreign Powers. It allowed the exchange of permanent envoys
law. He enforced discipline on his flock with the support of the government. These
between the Ottoman Empire and France; it enabled the latter to become, and for
special functions assigned to the ecclesiastical leaders gave the millets, as
a long time to remain, the predominant foreign influence at the Bab-i Ali
institutions, a religious character.7 Despite this communal separation all social
(Sublime Porte);13 and to act as the official protector of all the Europeans
classes, institutions and communides were linked together to form the Ottoman
established in the Ottoman Empire until the enactment of the Capitulations with
society through the auspices of the Sultan, the keystone of the system, to whom all
England in 1583." In granting to a foreign Power what came to be extra-territorial
subjects owed allegiance.8
and supra-state, or supra-national, privileges within the frontiers of the empire, a
As Ottoman power spread into the Balkans, some of the Orthodox Christians precedent was established, fraught with problems and dangers, that would bedevil
adopted Islam; joined the Muslims, and played a leading role among the gaziz the Ottoman Empire for centuries, and would ultimately contribute to its
(early Turkish warriors)'. However, there was no general Islamization of Christians downfall.15
- least of all by compulsion - within Ottoman territories, as confirmed by Douglas
Benjamin Braude and Bernard Lewis (eds.): Christians and Jews in the Ottoman Empire-the Douglas Dakin: The unification of Greece. 1770-1923, London, 1972, p. 6; Barbara and Charles
functioning of a plural society, vol. l-the central lands, New York, 1982, pp. 4-5. Jelavich: The Balkans, New York, 1965, pp. 27-28.
*’ Gibb and Bowen, I, part 2, pp. 207-212. 11 B. Lewis, p. 52; cf. William Miller: The Ottoman Empire and its successors, 1801-1927, 4 vols.,
7 For further information oil the millet system, see Gibb and Bowen, I, part 2, pp. 207-261; London, 1966, p. 21, who claims unfairly that the Muslims regarded the Christians as an 'inferior caste'.
Tritton, pp. 5-12; Paul Wittek: The rise of the Ottoman Empire, London, 1938, pp. 28 ff.; Sir Harry 12 Kinros, p. 42.
Luke: The making of Modern Turkey, London, 1936, chapter iv. 1:1 ВяЬ-i A/i referred to the Ottoman government, as later, Quai d'Oisay referred to the French
s For a different version of the millet system, see Braude and Lewis I, pp. 13 and 74; Benjamin government, and Whitehall to the British government.
Braude: 'Foundation myths of the Millet system' in Braude and Lewis I, pp. 141 ff; see also Kemal 11 FO 371/3410/132748: Memorandum by S. Ferrier, entitled 'French religious protection in
Karpat: Millets and nationality: the roots of the incongruity of nation and state in the post-Ottoman Turkey', dated 30 July 1918; see also G. P. du Ransas: Le regime des Capitulations dans VEmpire
era', in Braude and Lewis, I, pp. 141 ff. Ottoman, U-p. 90.
Kinross, p. 26; see also George Arnakis: 'Gregory Palamas among the Turks and documents of 15 For a review of the different Capitulations granted to various Powers, giving them rights of
his captivity as historical sources', Speculum 26 (1951), pp. 104-118; see also Kimt: ’Transformation of protection over Ottomn subjects, see FO 371/3410/132748; see also FO 78/50: Arbuthnot to Fox,
Zimmi into Askeri' in Braude and Lewis, I, p. 57. 5.5.1806 and 6.6.1806, and FO 195/294, 493 and 597; FO 524/8.
It is generally believed that the reign of Sultan Suleyman the Magnificent as the 'tebaa-i sadika-i §ahane' (loyal subjects of the Sultan), or 'millet-i sadika'
(1520-1566) marked the zenith of the Ottoman Empire. Thereafter elements of (loyal community).110 However, during the poriod of Otoman decline, some of
weakness crept in, and began the slow and steady decline that ensued, particularly their leaders began to intrigue with the major expansionist Powers, mainly with
after the accession of Suleyman's son, Selim II (1566-1574). There were many Russia.
causes for that decline, military, economic, political and social.111 The Ottomans Tsar Peter 'the Great' (1689-1725) used them in his grandiose schemes to
were at war with European adversaries for over forty years in the sixteenth century, invade the Caucasus the overwhelming majority of whose people was Muslim. The
between their second siege of Vienna (1685) and the Treaty ofjassy (1792). They Armenians, whose dependence on Russia, and expectations of help from it, had
fought with Austria, Russia, Venice, and others. As a result of these wars they not begun to grow through the first incursions of Russia into the Caucasus, organized a
only lost vast territories, but also, by the Treaty of Kiigiik Kaynarca (21 July 1774)17 military force to assist Peter. The Tsar, however, made lavish promises to them
which he did not keep.21 Under Catherine II (1762-1796), her supreme
they were compelled to concede to the Russians the right to intervene legally on
commander Prince Potemkin dreamt of an Armenian kingdom under Russian
behalf of the Sultan's Christian subjects in a manner that opened the way to
control,22 but ultimately he, too, let them down.
increased European influence in Ottoman internal affairs.
Despite their disheartening experiences, Armenian secular and religious
It is during this period of decline that some of the leaders of the Armenians in
leaders supported Russia in its invasion of the Muslim Khanates in the Caucasus
the Ottoman Empire began to have closer relatons, and to intrigue, with Western
and in the overthrow of their Muslim rulers. At the same time, some of the
Powers. Following the conquest of Constantinople (29 May 1453), which was
Armenians acted as spies for the Russians against their Muslim rulers, the
renamed Istanbul, Ottoman Sultan Mehmet II (1451-1481) decided to organize
Persians.2^ When the city of Derbend was under siege by the Russians in 1796, its
the Armenian millet, as he had already organized the Orthodox Christians, and
Armenian residents sent to the invaders information on the town’s water supply,
issued a firman in 1461, appointing Hovakim (Ovakim), the Armenian bishop of
enabling the Russians to defeat the Khan.21 An Armenian Archbishop, Argutinskii-
Bursa, to be Patriarch of all the Armenians within the Ottoman Empire. Turco-
Dolgorukov, proclaimed publicly in the 1790s his hope and belief that the Russians
Armenian relations18 were founded on mutual trust, respect and sympathy, which
would 'free the Armenians from Muslim rule'.25
were to last for centuries. Mehmet, one of whose official palace physicians was an
Armenian named Amirtovlat, saved 70,000 Armenians from the Crimea, where There are other examples of Armenian ecclesiastical support for the Russians
they had been exiled by the Byzantines, and settled them on the coasts of the Sea in the early 1800s. Both the Armenians and the Georgians, especially those who
of Marmara near Istanbul.1'1 He placed them under his protection; recognized had relatives in Persia (Iran), or did business there, continued to be valuable
their religion, rights and liberdes, and converted them into a most trustworthy and sources of information for the Russian officials, which had some effect on Russia’s
loyal element in the Ottoman state; so much so that, in time, they became known political and tactical decisions. After the death of Argutinskii-Dolgorukov, the
aspirant to his post, Daniel, who was backed by Russia as a candidate to die throne
of Catholicos of the Armenian Church, provided the Russians with information.
111 See Hammer-Purgstall, J. de: Gescliichte des Osmanischen Reiches, 10 vols., Pest, 1827-35; vol. Tsar Alexander I (1801-1825) specifically sought out Catholicos Daniel's advice,
II, pp. 354 ff.; N. Jorga: Gescliichte des Osmanischen Reiches, 5 vols., Gotha, 1908-13 vol. Ill, pp. 137 ff.;
and in 1808, he rewarded Daniel with the Order of St. Anne, first class, for his
Shaw and Rural, 1, pp. 175-8; Gibb and Bowen, I, part 2, pp. 232 ff; G.F. Abbott: Under the Turks in
espionage sendees to the Russians. Over the next few years, as Russia fought to
Constantinople-a record of Sir John Finch’s Embassy, 1674-1681, London, 1920, p. 12; see also Roger
Owen: The Middle East in the world economy, 1800-1914, London, 1981; Charles Issawi: The extend its frontier to die Kur and the Aras, Ai menians continued to send messages
economic liistoiy of the Middle East, 1800-1914, Chicago, 1961, pp. 3-13.
1' For the Treaty of Kiiciik Kaynarca (Koudjouk Kainarja) see AP 34, LXXII, 1854 (2199).
18 For the earliest contact and relations between the Turks and the Aimenians, see S.R. Sonyel:
The Ottoman Aimeiiians-victims of Great Power diplomacy, London, 1987, and other publications 2,1 Sonyel 1, p. 43.
listed in the bibliography. 21 Muriel Ann Atkin: The Khanates of the eastern Caucasus and the origins of the first Riisso-
I;l Vartan Artinian: The Armenian constitutional system in the Ottoman Empire, 1839-1863, Iranian war, P H.D. dissertation, Yale University, 1978, p. 7.
P.H.D. dissertation, Brandeis University, 1970, p. 21; see also Harry J. Sarkiss: ’The Armenian 22 See also M.S. Anderson: The Eastern Question, London, 1978.
renaissance, 1500-1863', Journal of Modern Histoiy, Chicago University, December 1937, and his The 2:< Atkin, pp. 25-27.
legal status of the Ai menians and Greeks under the Ottoman Turks, 1150-1566, Master's dissertation, 21 Ibid., p. 139.
University of Illinois, 1931. 2-' Ibid., p. 144.
to Russian officials encouraging them to occupy Muslim-ruled Khanates and save Empire.32 In such wars the pattern was always the same: Russian invasion of Muslim
the Armenians from 'Muslim oppression'.21’ territory, Armenians siding with the invader, huge Muslim mortality and
migration, and de facto population exchanges of Muslims and Armenians. That is
In many ways, the enmity which developed between the Armenians and the
how an Armenian majority was established what today is the Republic of Armenia,
Muslims had, at its root, Russian expansion into the Caucasus. After the conquest
a majority created by the Russians. Erivan was, until 1827, a Persian province with a
of Muslim territories by the Russians, the Armenians were encouraged to move
Muslim (primarily Turkish) majority. The destruction, or forced migration, of the
into Russian-held territory. For example, after the Russian occupation of Georgia,
Muslim population enabled the Russians to repopulate the region with Ai menians
Tsar Paul I (1796-1801) lured the Armenians there in 1800 by offering the
from the Persian and Ottoman Empires.33
Armenian leaders attractive terms to settle in 'Russian territory'.27 Armenians also
migrated to the Khanate of Karabag (Karabagh) after its occupation by the
During the Ottoman-Russian war of 1828 many Gregorian Armenians in the
Russians.28
eastern provinces of the Ottoman Empire helped the Russian commander
The earliest Armenian aspirations for autonomy, or independence, were Paskievich to capture Erzurum, which was restored to the Ottoman Empire by the
inspired by the ideas of the French Revolution (1789) ,21’ particularly by the Greek Treaty of Edirne (Adrianople) of 14 September 182931. Some of the Ottoman
rebellion (1821). The success of the Greeks in establishing their own state Armenians showed their loyalty to the Russian cause by acting as spies for the
stimulated the Armenians' national sentiments and taught them the lesson that, Russians, and reporting on Ottoman troop movements. When the Russian army
for a minority to realise its ambition for independence, the intervention of foreign left Anatolia, thousands of Ai menians followed them.35
Powers was indispensable30. Yet, in Anatolia the Armenians did not have the
Earlier, the Russian occupation of the northern provinces of Persia had
advantages which the Greeks and other Balkan peoples had. They were scattered
throughout the country; nowhere did they constitute a majority of the population; brought, within its frontiers, the monastery of Etchmiadzin, in the Khanate of
they were divided into hostile sects (Gregorian, Catholic and Protestant); they were Erivan, the seat of the primate of all the Ai menians, the Catholicos. Russian
disorganized; they lacked administrative capacity; and worst of all, they allowed diplomacy succeeded in reviving the dwindling authority of the Catholicos, who
themselves to be manipulated by the major Powers, particularly by Tsarist Russia, had been eclipsed by the Armenian Patriarch of Istanbul. Thenceforth, these
who vied with one another to despoil the Ottoman Empire. These Powers primates became the loyal and subservient agents of the Tsars. Nicholas I (1825-
considered the Armenians merely as pawns in their designs for self­ 1855), however, who coined the phrase 'Sick Man of Europe' to describe the
aggrandisement. But the Armenian militants were determined to get their own Ottoman Empire,31’ repeatedly asserted his status as supreme protector of the
way, at whatever cost.31 Therefore, they tried to capitalize on any crisis which the
Christians within the Ottoman Empire.37 Under his rule, Armenian hopes for
Ottoman Empire faced in the nineteenth century.
national emancipation were doomed to failure. The Russian authorities ruled the
The long struggle between Muslims and Armenians began in earnest during
the Russo-Persian and Russo-Ottaman wars of 1827-29, when the Armenians felt
that their opportunity had arrived. In these wars the Armenian subjects of the
Persian and Ottoman Empires, as well as the Armenians living in the Russian 32 Pasdermadjiau, H.: Histoire de TAimenie depuis les origines jusqui' an Traite <le Lausanne,
Paris, 1971. pp. 307 and 309.
Empire, fought on the side of the Russians against Persia and the Ottoman
33 Justin McCarthy: Death and exile-the ethnic cleansing of Ottoman Muslims, 1821-1922.
Princeton, New Jersey, 1995; see also Mehmcl Saray: The Turkomans in the age ofiinpcrialism-a study
of the Turkic people and their incorporation into the Russian Empire, Ankara. 1989; S.R. Sonyel: ' I he
211 Ibid., fn 6, pp. 49-50. Muslims of the former Soviet Union in the context of recent developments', Islamica, vol. 2. no. 3,
27 Ibid., pp. 173-75. Summer 1996, pp. 46-56.
28 Ibid., pp. 11-12, fn. 254. 31 AP 34, 1854,1.XXII, 2199; FO 371/3658/75852: Memorandum by Lewis Heck, April 1919; Shaw
2'' See also Bernard Lewis: 'The impact of the French Revolution on Turkey', Journal of World and Kurat, II, p. 31; Lord James Biyce: Transcaucasia and Ararat, London, 1896, p. 335; David Marshall
History, I, 1953-54. Lang: The Armenians, a people in exile, London, 1981, p. 3.
30 Churches Committee on Migrant Workers in Europe: Christian minorities in Turkey, Brussels, 3:1 McCarthy, p. 28.
September 1979, p. 7. 311 Leland James Gordon: American relations with Turkey, 1830-1930, Philadelphia, 1932, p. 3.
31 S. R. Sonyel: Armenian terrorism-а menace to the international community, London, 1987, pp. 37 David Marshall Lang ancJ Christopher Walker: The ,Aimenians, Minority Rights Group publica­
5-6. tion, Report no. 32, London, 1978, p. 10; Lang, pp. 1, 3 and 147.
INTRODUCTION 9
Erivan province, where 80 per cent of the population was Muslim before 1828,38
the Armenian programme of reforms.1:1 Yet many Armenians persisted in their
like any other colonial territory in their domain. In fact, the majority of the loyalty to Russia, and their Catholicos at Etchmiadzin did not hesitate to use his
population in Transcaucasia, including the Erivan province, was Muslim and anti- influence, even on the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire, in favour of the
Russian; but Russia, with the help of Armenians, suppressed ruthlessly the Muslims' Russians.11
periodic revolts.3'
Nevertheless in the first part of the nineteenth century Turco-Armenian
The Crimean War (1853-6), in which the Ottoman Empire sided with the West relations were relatively harmonious, and the Armenian Patriarch of Istanbul had
against Russia, gave another opportunity to the latter state to incite the minorities
some influence in government circles. The period following the Ottoman-Russian
in that Empire to rebellion, ostensibly posing as their spokesman, but actually
war of 1828 had ushered in a reform movement in the Ottoman Empire, known as
trying to weaken and dismember the Ottoman Empire. During this war some of
the Tanzimat (Regulation or Organization), which was inagurated by an edict
the Armenians in the eastern provinces of the Empire actively supported Russia
under the title of Giilhane Hatt-i §erifi (Noble Edict of the Rose Chamber), of 3
and spied on its behalf, despite the fact that in June 1853 the Sultan had sent a
November 1839.lr’ This edict was confirmed and reinforced by the Islahat Hatt-i
firman to Patriarch Hagop, confirming the ancient ecclesiastical and admistrative
Hiimayimu or Islahat Fennam (Imperial Edict of Reforms), of 18 February 1856.
privileges of the Armenian community.10 In March 1854 a number of Armenian
Both edicts aimed at expanding the reforms, which had already begun in the
agents were arrested in Kars.11 Nevertheless the majority of the Ottoman
military sphere, to other fields as well, and to secure equality and guarantees of
Armenians remained loyal to the Ottoman government, but the Russians
maintained relations with a number of them, and lost no opportunity in agitating life, liberty and estate to the Christian population of die Ottoman Empire.
among the Armenian militants.12
As a result of this reform movement the Armenian millet was given a
Armenian writer E. Aknouni claims that his coreligionists were dec eived by the constitution that was sanctioned by the Sultan on 17 March 1863. It was 'a
Isar, who had promised that the 'Armenian provinces' of the Ottoman Empire-i.e. remarkable document, institutionalizing a high degree of autonomy', according to
the eastern provinces where the overwhelming majority of the population was Benjamin Braude and Bernard Lewis.17 It ianugurated a 'golden age' (or the
Muslim-would be constituted into a separate kingdom under Russian protection. Armenian millet, some of whose militant leaders began to abuse their new
The Armenians had waited in vain for the fulfilment of that promise. When the privileges and strove for the establishment of an imperium in impcvio. I he
Isars needed volunteers, they showered the Armenians with compliments; but
Russians, who were not happy with the reforms, as they believed these would
when the time for action came, they closed their eyes and ears to Armenian
demands. I’he disillusionment of Catholicos Nerses Asdarakes, who had helped
the Russians with his Armenian volunteers against the Persians, is well known, f or
his oyalty he received from Tsar Nicholas 1 only a letter of thanks. The Russian
l'1 Edgar Granville: Caihk Rusva'mil Iiiikivc'Hcki ovunlaii (the conspiracies ol Isarist Russia in
government did not hesitate to use violence to save itself from the 'impertinent
Turkey), translated into Turkish by Orhan Ariman, Ankara, 1907, pp. 23-4; sec- also Ismet
demands' of this elderly cleric. When Nerses suddenly died in 1857, it was widely Parmakstzoglu: Eimeni kouiiteleriniit ihtilal hareketleri ve besledikleri eniellei (the rcvolutиinaiv
believed that the Russian government had him poisoned in order to Inn v with him activities of Armenian committees and (heir aspirations), Ankara, 1981, pp. 10-11.
*1 S.R. Sonvel: A/umnnes a nr/ the destruction of the Ottoman /'.trl/>iVe, Ankara, 1993, p. 201.
|Г| FO 78/300, part 1: Ponsonbv to Palmerston, 5.11.1839, enclosing the English translation ot the
edict; see also Diisfur (Laws), vol. 1, p. 8; Al> 24, 1850, LXI, 2334. part XVII, Eastern Papers; Tamiimu I.
Justin McCarthy: Armenian terrorism: liislory as poison and anlitloie,' I tn< 'iiialii >nal terrorism p. 50; Frank S. Hailey: Rritish policy nnrl the Turkish reform movement, Cambridge, Massachusetts,
and the <h Uf> connection, symposium. University of Ankara, 17-18 April HIM, p. 91.
1942. pp. 277-9 and 287-81; S.R, Sonyel: 'Tanzimat and its effec ts on the non-Muslim subjects of the
11 In II/ Kazernzadeli: The struggle for Transcaucasia, Oxford, 1951, p. 7, Ottoman Kmpire1, International Symposium on the 150th anniversaty oi 1 an/ini.it, Ankata, 1991, pp.
BA (Ba§bakanlik Ar^ivi-Prime Minislry's Archives), Yildiz Ksas F.vraki (Yildiz c'oc umetils),
353-388.
dot....... no. 553/1, < lass 18, internal no. /.93, Cat ion 33-Oflic e of the Sultan's Chief Clerk to Ih For the reform movement in the Ottoman Kmpire dining this period, see Bailey, pp. 2:>-38;
Patriarch Hagop, 7.0.18.53.
Wilbuiy W. White: The process ol change in the Ottoman Empire, Chic ago, 1937; I lenry Fltslia Alle n:
11 1 () НЪ/410: Brant to Redelitie, 20.3.185-1; see also Djemal Pasha: Mennn ics о/ a / inkisli
The Turkish transformation, Chicago, 1935; II.VV.V. Temperley: 'Reform movement in the Itukish
statesman, I'Jl.l-IWiy, New \ork, 1922, p. 24:>, who states that a tew Aimenian it'brls had given
Empire and Republic during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries', Chinese Social and 1’olitual
assistance lo the Russians'; see also McCarthy, p. 28.
Science Review, January, 1937, pp. 449-400.
L’ Djemal Pasha, p. 215.
17 Braude and Lewish, I, p. 23; see also Atamian. pp. 90-91.