The Thirty-Year Genocide

Home > Other > The Thirty-Year Genocide > Page 15
The Thirty-Year Genocide Page 15

by Benny Morris


  the party that, in 1908, would topple Abdülhamid’s rule. Among them were

  “some four of the worst characters in the place.” Hallward said they regarded

  the situation as “revolutionary” and had sought to provoke disorder in order

  to topple the sultan.272

  The French ambassador reported that the 400 Armenian families still living

  in the Diyarbekir area after the massacres were in dire need, but the authori-

  ties were withholding aid. The local priest had refused to sign a tele gram to

  the sultan blaming the Armenians for inciting the vio lence they had suffered.

  Until he did so, the government wouldn’t help.273

  Antep (Aintab)

  In the fall of 1895, Antep, in Aleppo vilayet, was experiencing a by- now-

  familiar tension between Armenians struggling under Turkish oppression,

  and Turkish authorities perceiving in that strug gle only insurrectionary ac-

  tivity. On October 9, under authority of Constantinople, officials there ar-

  rested “the Protestant Pastor and a College professor” considered “guilty of

  sedition and the organ ization of [revolutionary] socie ties.”274 Barnham, the

  British consul in Aleppo, complained of revolutionaries stirring up “younger

  The Massacres of 1894–1896

  Armenians.” Led by a Hunchak called Aghasse, they were, Barnham thought,

  trying to provoke Turkish “retaliation.”275 But he offered no concrete illus-

  tration, and missionaries in Antep interpreted the situation differently. They

  felt, quite to the contrary, that local Christians had behaved with the “greatest

  forbearance” in the face of the “grossest and most wanton insult, abuse and

  vio lence” from their Muslim neighbors.276 Barnham saw it himself. Shortly

  after the October 9 arrests, he watched troops pass through the town “fol-

  lowed by crowds of Mussulman women weeping and cursing the infidels.”277

  Fear gripped local Christians, who worried that the fate of Trabzon and

  Sason would soon befall them. They shut themselves in their homes. Unable

  to work out of doors and shop in town, “thousands are without food,” a mis-

  sionary reported. “Over 1,000 men” had fled to “mosques and khans and

  houses of power ful Moslems” where they obtained shelter but lived as virtual

  prisoners.278

  Americus Fuller, a missionary and president of the town’s Central Turkey

  College, believed—or hoped— that Antep would escape the suffering en-

  dured by Armenians elsewhere. Circumstances in the town were diff er ent: the

  Christians were “exceptionally intelligent and influential” and “the leading

  Moslems . . . able men” who “have shown themselves to a degree tolerant of

  and even friendly to Christians.” Furthermore, “the Governor has seemed dis-

  posed beyond most Turkish officials to re spect the rights of Christians,” the

  town had a relatively large contingent of foreigners “sure to be witnesses of

  any vio lence done to Christians,” and the missionary hospital and college

  had generated “good will” among “all classes.” Moreover, the town’s Chris-

  tians had “given very little countenance to the ultra- revolutionists.”279 Still, there was no mistaking the repeated threats of anti- Christian vio lence, and the

  local government largely disarmed Christians while arming Muslims, alleg-

  edly to put down a pos si ble Armenian uprising.280

  The vio lence caught up with Antep on November 16, when the mission-

  aries, at breakfast, heard “a great noise of shouting and firing of guns . . . telling us that the work of blood and plunder had begun.” Crowds ran to and fro,

  and the roofs were covered with “excited men, women and children.” Mis-

  sionary physician Fred Douglas Shepard rode his horse through the town and

  heard, “most terrible of all, the shrill, exultant lu- lu-lu of Kurdish and Turkish women cheering on their men to the attack.” Fuller too remarked on the “loud

  Abdülhamid

  II

  shrill Zullghat . . . raised by Turkish women crowded on their roofs and

  cheering on their men to attack.” He likened the sound to that “of our northern

  loons, prolonged and sharpened.” Shepard and Fuller saw Armenians as-

  saulted and their homes looted. Armenians, “ women . . . often foremost,”

  defended their homes from the rooftops with “stones and firearms.”281

  Some mobs were beaten back, but where Armenian houses were isolated,

  the rioters broke through, plundering and torching. In certain areas, the “up-

  roar went on till near midnight.” Hamidiyes took part in the massacre, while

  other troops protected the missionary schools and hospital from the mob but

  made no attempt to stop the vio lence. Indeed, they took part in the looting.

  Missionaries watched villa gers leave the city loaded down with stolen goods.282

  Weeks later army deserters were seen in the streets of Aleppo selling their

  loot.283 A Franciscan priest who witnessed the massacre later told Barnham

  that “butchers and tanners . . . armed with clubs and cleavers” were promi-

  nent among the killers. They screamed “Allahu Akbar” as they broke down

  doors “with pickaxes and levers or scaled the walls with ladders” and then

  cut down the Armenians they encountered. “When mid- day came they knelt

  down and said their prayers, and then jumped up and resumed the dreadful

  work. . . . Whenever they were unable to break down the doors they fired the

  houses with petroleum.”284

  The plunder and massacre continued the next day, after Turkish villa gers

  entered the town, brushing past a cordon of soldiers. Kurds, “waving a green

  flag and beating tomtoms,” tried to join the villa gers but were blocked by the

  mufti and soldiers “ because it was feared that they would plunder Moslems

  as well as Christians.”285 This time the Christians were prepared and re-

  pulsed their assailants. “At one point on the line of defense were a few Muslim

  houses and we were delighted to learn that the men heartily and bravely

  joined in the defense with their neighbors,” Fuller recorded. But “the gal-

  lantry of this act was somewhat marred . . . by the demand which they made

  the next day for a large sum of money for this ser vice.” The men received

  “about five dollars apiece for this neighborly help.”286 Some Muslims “be-

  haved with great humanity” and protected Armenians.287 Even so, “not less

  than 400” Armenians were killed, according to Shepard.288 Fuller reported

  that Muslim casualties amounted to no more than twenty- five killed or seri-

  ously wounded.289

  The Massacres of 1894–1896

  Following the massacre, Antep’s prisons were crammed with Armenians.290

  In January 1896 some 750 were still “shut up in the Armenian church,” and

  all Armenian shops remained closed.291 Four thousand people depended on

  charity “for daily bread.”292 Barnham suggested that the continuing, wholesale

  arrest of wealthy Armenians was in large mea sure designed to enable expro-

  priation.293 The arrests may also have been used to press for conversion. As

  Antep’s leading Muslim notables, including the new kaymakam, told the Ar-

  menians after the massacres, there was now “no hope of their living in secu-

  rity unless they will become
Mohammedans.”294 By March, it was reported

  that at nearby Cibin all but one of the 500 or so Christians were forced to pro-

  fess Islam. The exception was a “lady over 110 years of age” who told her

  tormentors, “I am too old to change my faith. I know no one but Christ.” Many

  converts were robbed.295 Christian graveyards were desecrated, the bones

  carried off and scattered, and Christian- owned trees were destroyed.296

  No Antep Muslims were punished, and the authorities systematically por-

  trayed the Christians “as the aggressors.”297 In June 1896 Lutfi Pasha, the

  newly appointed commander of the reserve troops at Aleppo, tried to restore

  Christian property and bring the plunderers to justice. But his efforts came to

  naught after arrests of robbers led to a mass demonstration of Muslims in

  Antep. The detainees were soon released. Some threw stolen property into

  the street or burned it to protest Lutfi Pasha’s offenses against impunity.298

  In the aftermath, Fuller was sure that the local government was “wholly in

  sympathy with the rioters.” Indeed, there could “be no doubt that it has incited

  and directed nearly all the disturbances.”299 A few weeks after the killings, an

  American missionary described a firman ordering the massacre. Alterna-

  tively, he suggested that there had been “a wink from Constantinople.” More

  concretely, “the Mufti and Cadi [kadi, religious judge], together, issued a

  Fetva [or fatwa] the eve ning before the massacre to the effect that the lives

  and property of the Christians were lawful prey.”300 Barnham was later told

  that “a number of persons from Constantinople dressed as dervishes” had ar-

  rived shortly before the massacre and “ were received with extraordinary

  honor” by the authorities, who then spent hours closeted with them.301 Even

  if it could not be proven that orders had come from on high, at the very least,

  the arrival in town of crowds of villa gers at the start of the massacre suggested that the disturbances “had been planned beforehand.”302

  Abdülhamid

  II

  Additional Massacres

  There were hundreds, perhaps thousands, more attacks on Armenian com-

  munities during 1895–1896. More, certainly, than we are able to discuss in

  detail. What follow are brief summaries of some incidents about which docu-

  mentation is available.

  In the town of Tokat, in central Anatolia, a pogrom broke out on March 19,

  1895, triggered by a brawl in the marketplace. Between five and ten Arme-

  nians were killed, and about a hundred were wounded.303

  Merzifon was the site of a massacre on November 14, 1895. Around noon,

  a rumor spread that Armenians had attacked a mosque. Villa gers swarmed into

  the city, and the mob descended on the market, goaded by cries from the min-

  arets. The troops, according to all accounts, did not participate in the mas-

  sacre but were “tardy” in protecting Armenians. An estimated 150 died.304

  Gurun, in Sivas vilayet, was bathed in blood in November 1895. Replaying

  a standard pattern, the Armenians there were duped into defenselessness by

  official lies. The Armenians handed over their guns to the vali in exchange

  for a promise of state protection. When the mob attacked, its members had

  no trou ble breaking into homes, where reports indicate that they killed the

  men “and outraged the young women and girls; they cut open mothers with

  child, and tossed little children from knife to knife.” Then they torched the

  houses, burning to death anyone hiding inside.305 Estimates of the death toll

  range from 400 to as many as 2,000.306 The French ambassador sent home

  word that “more than a thousand bodies lay on the ground for ten days.”307

  The massacre in Kayseri began on November 30. A rumor spread that “the

  Christians are killing the Mussulmans,” provoking vio lence. Rioters rushed

  the markets and broke into houses.308 Women were murdered in a public

  bath and men in a local factory. “ There is ample evidence,” wrote a Western

  correspondent and witness, “that the Government deliberately gave per-

  mission for plunder and murder to continue for four hours. Soldiers said

  so plainly.”309 The number of dead was estimated at 500.310

  On January 1, 1896, the Christian quarter of Birecik, in Aleppo vilayet, was

  attacked by local Muslims, apparently with some soldiers participating and

  others observing from the sidelines. According to Fitzmaurice, who investigated

  these assaults as well, Birecik’s Armenians were “poor and hard- working”

  The Massacres of 1894–1896

  and had little “connection with po liti cal agitation” save “one or two so- called seditious documents” that had been “found among them.” The mob invaded

  Armenian homes and demanded “money, trinkets and other valuables on

  the promise of sparing their lives.” After valuables were handed over, many

  adult males were killed “with ruthless savagery” and the houses and churches

  pillaged. Armenian girls were taken “and much dispute and quarrelling oc-

  curred in dividing them among the captors.” The authorities subsequently

  restored almost all to their families.311

  Altogether, about 150 Armenians were murdered, and one Muslim was

  wounded “in a brawl over the plunder.”312 The dead were thrown into the

  Euphrates. Armenians attempted to secure their lives by converting to Islam,

  but even some converts were killed. About 1,600 Gregorian, Protestant, and

  Catholic Armenians turned Muslim; the Gregorian church was converted into

  a mosque; and some converts were circumcised. All “now wear turbans and

  are apparently most zealous in their attendance at the mosque,” Fitzmaurice

  reported.313

  But, under Western pressure, the sultan in effect refused to recognize the

  Birecik mass conversion. For months the local authorities, Western diplomats,

  and the Sublime Porte waged a strug gle over the converts’ souls. “My task has

  been a melancholy one,” Fitzmaurice wrote, “for the fanatical outburst, which

  had at first some po liti cal colouring, gradually . . . degenerated here into a fierce crusade against Chris tian ity. It was conducted with . . . thoroughness

  [and was] carefully planned.”314

  Urban pogroms, some substantial, occurred throughout the period of Oc-

  tober 1895– June 1896. On October 8, 31 Armenians were killed in Akhisar,

  Izmit sanjak, and 55–60 went missing.315 “Nearly 800” were killed in Bitlis

  on October 25–26.316 Gümüşhane, in Trabzon vilayet, lost between ten and

  thirty Armenians to vio lence on October 25.317 Bayburt, Erzurum vilayet, was

  the site of 650–900 killings on October 26 or 27.318 Erzincan (Erzingan) and

  Erzurum, both in Erzurum vilayet, witnessed mass killings: 200 or more dead

  on October 21 and 350 on October 30–31, respectively.319 Eight hundred

  were killed in Severek, Diyarbekir vilayet, on November 2.320 Estimates of the

  number killed in Arabkir, Harput vilayet, on November 1–5 range from

  1,171321 to 2,800.322 The Armenians of Malatya, Harput vilayet, suffered mas-

  sacres on November 4–7; between 1,580 and 3,000 were killed.323 In the

  Abdülhamid

  II

  Harput town of Adıyaman, 410 were killed
between November 7–9.324

  Sivas vilayet saw several massacres. On November 12, 1,200–1,500 were killed

  in the town of Sivas.325 On November 15, forty were killed in Amasya;326

  on November 26 or 28, perhaps 300 in Zile (Zela);327 and on June 20, 1896,

  400–500 in Niksar.328

  Armenian Rebellion?

  As the killing unfolded, Constantinople repeatedly offered the same justifica-

  tion: Armenians were not the victims of massacre, because they were engaged

  in a rebellion that the state had a right and duty to suppress. Yet at only two

  sites, Zeytun (Süleymanlı) and Van, did Armenians even arguably rebel. In-

  deed, it might be more accurate to say that Armenians in these locations did

  not rebel but only attempted to preempt massacres they sensed were coming.

  Zeytun

  The Armenians of Zeytun took up arms around October 20, 1895, in response

  to the news of massacres elsewhere. During the following weeks, the Zeytunlis

  killed dozens of Turkish prisoners and burnt a handful of Muslim villages

  before being overwhelmed by Turkish troops.329

  Built on a remote mountainside, Zeytun had a population of 8,000–9,000,

  overwhelmingly Armenians, plus 400 troops garrisoned in a fort overlooking

  the town. For centuries the residents had managed to preserve a mea sure of

  autonomy.330 Zeytunlis were known as a hardy people and, in the parlance of

  colonial times, backward. In 1881 a British diplomat wrote, “I find them to

  be a semi- barbarous and depraved community, little better than savages . . .

  ignorant, self- opinionated and conceited.”331 Barnham was more generous;

  yes, they were “poor”, because “ignorant and lazy,” but they also were “brave

  and in de pen dent.”332

  Turkish ill- treatment primed the Zeytunlis for action. In 1894 a newly ap-

  pointed kaymakam seized the possessions of local Armenians— whom he

  dubbed “dogs”—in lieu of unpaid taxes. A handful of Hunchak agents arrived

  from outside and exploited the discontent. According to Barnham, the rebel

  leader here, too, was Aghasse, “who won over the villa gers by pres ents of

  The Massacres of 1894–1896

  money, and by telling them fairy tales about the En glish. They were made to

  believe that the movement had the support of the British Government, which

 

‹ Prev