Hamidian massacres

The Hamidian massacres, also referred to as the Armenian Massacres of 1894–1896, refers to the massacring of Armenians by the Ottoman Empire, with estimates of the dead ranging from 80,000 to 300,000^[1], and at least 50,000 orphans as a result.^[2] The massacres are named for Abdul Hamid II, whose efforts to reinforce the territorial integrity of the embattled Ottoman Empire reasserted Pan-Islamism as a state ideology.^[3]

Abdul Hamid believed that the woes of the Ottoman Empire stemmed from "the endless persecutions and hostilities of the Christian world."^[4] He perceived the Ottoman Armenians to be an extension of foreign hostility, a means by which Europe could "get at our most vital places and tear out our very guts."^[5]

One of the most serious incidents occurred in Armenian-populated parts of Anatolia. Although the Ottomans had prevented other revolts in the past, the harshest measures were directed against the Armenian community. They observed no distinction between the nationalist dissidents and the Armenian population at large, and massacred them with brutal force.^[6] However, this occurred in the 1890s, at a time when the telegraph could spread news around the world and when the European powers were vastly more powerful than the weakening Ottoman state.

[edit] Background

Armenian Genocide Background: Armenians in the Ottoman Empire · Armenian Question · Hamidian Massacres · Zeitun Resistance (1895) · 1896 Ottoman Bank Takeover · Yıldız Attempt · Adana Massacre · Young Turk Revolution The Genocide Congress at Erzurum · Red Sunday · Tehcir Law · Labour battalion Deportation: Centers: All the settlements at Western Armenia Camps:Deir ez-Zor · Foreign aid and relief:ACRNE · NARC Resistance: Zeitun · Van · Musa Dagh · Urfa · Shabin-Karahisar Responsible parties: Young Turks: Committee of Union and Progress (Talat · Enver · Djemal · Behaeddin Shakir) · Teskilati Mahsusa · (Reşit Bey · Cevdet Bey · Topal Osman) Kurdish Irregulars Trials: Courts-Martial  · Malta Tribunals  · Soghomon Tehlirian Armenian Population Population · Casualties See Also Armenian militia · Operation Nemesis · Recognition · Denial · Timeline  v • d • e

In the period of 1894-96, when the Ottoman Empire was ruled by Sultan Abdul Hamid II, tens of thousands of Armenians were massacred.^[7] Some accounts suggest that the dead numbered as high as 300,000.

The origins of hostility towards Armenians lies in their status as a wealthy religious minority, in the days of the waning power of the Ottoman Empire. The Ottoman loss of dominion over various Christian regions was ushered in by an era of European nationalism, and the insistence of self-determination for many territories that had long been held under Ottoman authority. When this sense of nationalism seemed to be spreading into Anatolia proper, awakening a sense of Armenian political identity that was increasingly bent on equal rights and even autonomy, the Ottoman leadership perceived the threat as a threat to the Islamic character of the Empire, and even to the very existence of the Empire.

The success of Imperial Russia in the Russo-Turkish War, 1877-78, and the ensuing Treaty of San Stefano forced the Ottoman government to give away a large part of their territory (including the cities of Kars and Batumi) to the Russians. The Russian government claimed they were the supporters of the beleaguered Christian communities within the Ottoman Empire and it was now clear that the Russians could beat the Ottomans. The Treaty of Berlin—which reduced the magnitude of Russia's gains on the other side of the Black Sea—stated that the Ottoman government had to give legal protection to the Christian Armenians, but in the real world, the treaty's protections were not implemented.

The combination of Russian military success, clear weakening of Ottoman power, and hope that one day all of the Armenian territory might be ruled by Russia led to a new restiveness on the part of the Armenians still living inside the Ottoman Empire. Added to this was the fact that the Ottomans never applied justice evenly in disputes between Christians and Muslims (see Dhimmi).

Starting around 1890 the Armenians began clamoring to obtain the protections promised them at Berlin. Unrest occurred in 1892 at Marsovan and in 1893 at Tokat. Armenians wanted reforms in the Ottoman Empire and an end to the discrimination imposed upon them, with demands for the right to vote and the establishment of a constitutional government.^[8]

Contemporary political cartoon portraying Hamid as a butcher of the Armenians

Another reason for the massacres were the channeling of Kurdish bandits upon Armenians instead of just anybody in the area. Historically Eastern parts of the Ottoman Empire was the most insecure place, where especially the Kurdish rebels ransacked neighbouring towns and villages. When the Empire was too weak and disorganized to halt them, Sultan Abdulhamid (ironically who himself was a half Armenian because of his mother) gave a semi-official status to the Kurdish bandits which is known as Hamidiye Alaylari ({Abdul}Hamids's Regiments) and ignored the massacres as long as they were not directed towards the muslim population. The Armenians being the most populous and richest Christians in the area, faced great losses.

[edit] Sasun Resistance

In 1894, Sultan Abdul Hamid II began to target the Armenian people in a precursor of the Hamidian massacres. This persecution strengthened nationalistic sentiment among Armenians. The first notable battle in the Armenian resistance movement took place in Sassoun, where resistance against double taxation and Ottoman persecution was encouraged by Hunchak activists, such as Mihran Damadian, Hampartsoum Boyadjian, and Hrayr. The Armenian Revolutionary Federation also played a significant role in arming the people of the region. The Armenians of Sassoun confronted the Ottoman army and Kurdish irregulars at Sassoun, resisting bravely at first but then succumbing to superior numbers and Turkish assurances of amnesty (which was never granted).^[10]

In response to the resistance in Sasun Resistance (1894), the governor of Muş responded by inciting the local Muslims against the Armenians.^[11] The historian Lord Kinross claims that this was often achieved by gathering Muslims in a local mosque and claiming that the Armenians had the aim of "striking at Islam."^[12] The Sultan, Abdul Hamid II, sent the Ottoman army into the area and also armed groups of Kurdish insurrectionists. The violence spread and affected most of the Armenian towns in the Ottoman empire. The worst atrocity occurred when the cathedral of Urfa, in which three thousand Armenians had taken refuge, was burned.^[13] As Turkish historian Osman Nuri observed, "The mere mention of the word 'reform' irritated him [Abdul Hamit], inciting his criminal instincts.^[14]

[edit] Massacres

Haji Agha, a kindly Muslim neighbor, reportedly stood guard at an Aintab hospital, to protect it from an anti-Armenian pogrom in 1895.

In response, tens of thousands of Armenians were massacred, both in Istanbul and elsewhere in the Ottoman Empire. Abdul Hamid's Private First Secretary wrote in his memoirs about Abdul Hamid that he 'decided to pursue a policy of severity and terror against the Armenians, and in order to succeed in this respect he elected the method of dealing them an economic blow... he ordered they absolutely avoid negotiating or discussing anything with the Armenians and to inflict upon them a decisive strike to settle scores.' The French ambassador described Turkey as "literally in flames," with "massacres everywhere" and all Christians being murdered "without distinction."^[15][16] A French vice-consul declared that the Ottoman Empire was "gradually annihilating the Christian element" by "giving the Kurdish chieftains carte blanche to do whatever they please, to enrich themselves at the Christians' expense and to satisfy their men’s whims."^[17] The French diplomatic correspondence shows that the Hamidiye conducted massacres not only of Armenians but also of Assyrians.^[18][19]

The killings occurred from 1895 until 1897. In that last year, Sultan Hamid declared that the Armenian question was closed. All the Armenian revolutionaries had either been killed, or had escaped to Russia. The Ottoman government closed Armenian societies and restricted Armenian political movements.

The formation of Armenian revolutionary groups began roughly around the end of the Russo-Turkish War of 1878 and intensified with the first introduction of Article 166 of the Ottoman Penal code 166, and the raid of Erzerum Cathedral. Article 166 was meant to control the possession of arms, but it was used to target Armenians by restricting them to possess arms. Local Kurdish tribes were armed to attack the defenseless Armenian population. Some diplomats believed that the aim of these groups was to commit massacres so as to incite counter-measures, and to invite "foreign powers to intervene," as Istanbul's British Ambassador Sir Philip Currie observed in March 1894.

These mass killings are considered by some scholars, such as Yehuda Bauer, to have been an actual phase of the Armenian Genocide, which most scholars place strictly in the years 1915-1917.

[edit] Inaccurate reportage by the Ottoman government

After George Hepworth, a preeminent journalist of the late 19th century, traveled through Ottoman Armenia in 1897, he wrote Through Armenia on Horseback, which discusses the causes and effects of the recent massacres. In one chapter Hepworth describes the disparity between the reality of the Massacre in Bitlis and the official reports that were sent to the Porte. After retelling the Turkish version of events, which places the blame solely on the Armenians of Bitlis, Hepworth writes:

"....That is the account of the affair which was sent to Yildiz, and that story contains all that the Sultan has any means of knowing about it. It is a most remarkable story, and the discrepancies are as thick as leaves in Valambrosa. On the face of it, it cannot be true, and before a jury it would hardly have any weight as evidence. It is extremely important, however, because it is probably a fair representation of the occurrences of the last few years. That it is a misrepresentation, so much so that it can fairly be called fabrication, becomes clear when you look at it a second time... and yet it is from an official document which the future historian will read when he wishes to compile the facts concerning those massacres."^[20]

[edit] See also

• Yıldız Attempt
• Adana massacre
• Armenian Genocide
• Anti-Armenianism

[edit] References