Simon Vratzian
BY SIMON VRATZIAN
From The Armenian Review
Volume 3, Number 3
Autumn, October, 1950
(asbarez.com) The Armenian Question and the Birth of the Revolution
After the loss of their independence in the latter part of the Fourteenth Century, for almost six centuries the Armenian people remained under the domination of the foreign ruler. Armenia had been overrun successively by the Seljuk, the Mongol, the Tartar, the Turk and the Persian, all of whom ravaged the country with fire and sword, until the Seventeenth Century when Armenia was partitioned between Persia and Turkey.
The countless wars of the centuries, the lootings and the oppression had brought Armenia and the Armenian people to brink of extreme misery. The one time flourishing economy and culture were ruined and the educational centers – the monasteries and the schools were .rendered desolate. Under the insufferable weight of exorbitant taxation the Armenian people were reduced to stark poverty. Life under the heel of the barbarians became unendurable in Armenia. As a result of these insufferable hardships and privations, large masses of Armenians took the road to foreign countries in search of security and a decent life. In the course of time populous and quite prosperous colonies were established in Poland, Crimea, India, Constantinople, as well as commercial and cultural centers in Venice, Genoa, Amsterdam, Moscow, St. Petersburg and elsewhere. In 1605 Shah Abbas of Persia transplanted large numbers of Armenians from the Ararat Plain into Persia with a view to revitalizing his capital. The newcomers founded the flourishing town of New Julfa in the immediate vicinity of Ispahan.
While an economically and culturally ruined Armenia continued to languish under the yoke of foreign oppressors, the colonies gradually prospered and in. the course of time became centers of national regeneration, always keeping a living tie with the fatherland. These colonies started and developed the art of Armenian printing: The first printed Armenian book saw the light 1512 in Venice. With the foundmg of the Mekhitarist Institution in 1701 in Venice, a great impetus was given to the cause of Armenian education. The first printed Armenian newspaper “Azdarar”-Messenger -saw the light •in 1784 in the City of Madras, India. It was also in these colonies that the first stirrings of Armenian emancipatory notions took form, such as the demand for Armenian independence on the principles of democracy.
These emancipatory notions agitated abroad naturally found an echo in Armenia where the sentiment for freedom was not completely extinguished. In a number of mountainous regions, such as Karabagh, Sassoun, Zeitun etc., the people lived a semi-independent existence. The hope of the fatherland’s independence was far from being dead among the Armenian nobility and clergy. Taking advantage of various occasions, there had even been •some attempts to restore the independence of Armenia. The Meliks of Karabagh, headed by David Beg, revolted against Persian domination, and Shah Tahmaz was obliged to recognize the independence of Karabagh from 1722 to 1730.
It was with the cooperation of these same Meliks that Catholicos Hagop of Julfa called an assembly in 1678 in Etchmiadzin where it was decided Ito .send a delegation to Europe, headed by the Catholicos, to solicit the intervention of the Pope and the powers in behalf of the Armenians. When the Delegation arrived in Constantinople the Catholicos died and the members returned to Armenia; but one of them, a young man by the name of Israel Ori, proceeded to Europe where he entered the service of Louis XIV. At first as a common soldier, and later as an officer, he fought in the Franco-English war, was taken prisoner by the English, and fina1ly obtaining his freedom, he settled in the Palatinate of Dusseldorf. In the course of time he won position and rank, became an intimate friend of Prince Johann Wilhelm of the Palatinate, and eventually persuaded him to champion the cause of Armenia’s emancipation.
Thereafter, supported by the Prince, and as the .representative of the Meliks of Karabagh, Israel Ori made appeals to the Papal Throne and Emperor Leopold, and equipped with their recommendations, he went to St. Petersburg in order to enlist the support of Peter the Great. Both Emperor Leopold and Peter the Great showed a keen interest in the Armenian cause; however, the times were quite unfavorable for any positive action. Peter the Great went so far as to organize an invasion against the Persians and reached as far as Derbend, but eventually he was forced to retreat. Israel Ori is quite a figure in Armenian history, both as a personality and as a political worker.
Russian expansion toward the south continued after the death of Peter the Great. During the reigns of Catherine the Great and Emperor Alexander I, Russia conquered northern Caucasus, penetrated the Caucasian mountains, and occupied the Khannates of eastern Transcaucasia. In 1801 Russia annexed Georgia, and later, in the reign of Nicholas I, a part of Armenia as far as the Arax River. By the Treaties of Turkmencha (1828) and Adrianople (1829) Armenia was partitioned between Russia and the Ottoman Empire. Later, in 1878, the regions of Kars and Ardahan also were annexed to Russia.
Thereafter, the life of the Armenians in Russia and Turkey took entirely different courses. Russian Armenia, which at the time of occupation was practically desolate, was swiftly populated, the country was rebuilt, the people prospered economically, and a beginning was made of a cultural revival. The middle of the Nineteenth Century is regarded as ~the period of Russian Armenian renaissance. Schools were founded in the villages and the towns. In Tiflis was founded the Nersessian College which played a prominent role in the regeneration of the Armenians. A similar school called the Lazarian Jemaran (College) was likewise founded in Moscow. In 1858, in Moscow was begun the publication of “Hiusisapayl,” a liberal monthly publication which established a new era for the Armenians. The same year•saw the publication of Khachatour Abovian’s famous book, “Verk Hayastani” – The Wounds of Armenia-which lent a terrific impetus to the national revival and was instrumental in educating generations in the spirit of patriotism.
By the 70’s the Armenians of Russia were already organized, having reached a distinct cultural stage with their .schools, press, literature, and national consciousness. They were engrossed not only with their own destiny, but with the condition of their kinship, en in Turkey as well. And when in 1877 the Russo-Turkish war broke out, the Armenians of Russia rose to a man in defense of the Turkish Armenian cause.
In contrast with this, the Armenians in Armenia proper and the remaining provinces continued to grope in ignorance and material poverty, abandoned to their fate. On the other hand there were administrative abuses, exorbitant and insufferable taxes, corruption of wanton officers, and the unbridled depredations of the Kurdish Ashirets -tribes. The absence of elementary law and judicial restraint, particularly 1n the case of the Armenian peasantry, had created a life which was a veritable hell. The situation was further aggravated by the fact that the Government, driven by political or other considerations, was populating the Armenian regions with Moslem immigrants from Caucasus and the Balkans. These newcomers •squatted on Armenian lands, and ~encouraged by the Government, kept oppressing the Armenians, who were forbidden to carry arms for their self-defense. The Patriarchate of Constantinople was powerless to defend the rights of the Armenians in the provinces; the countless protests to the Government fell on deaf ears. The Armenian peasant, ~either had to submit to this relentless oppression, or to leave the country. As a result, Armenia slowly was being depopulated of Armenians while their places were being taken by the Moslems.
The middle of the Nineteenth Century was the beginning of the •revival of Turkish Armenians, influenced chiefly by the French Revolution and the Treaty of Paris of 1856 which obliged the Sultan to introduce reforms in the country and to guarantee the safety of the Christian minorities. The Armenian youth of Constantinople who had been educated in French schools started a movement to overhaul the Patriarchate and the national bodies through the implementation of democratic principles. The result of this movement was the National Constitution of 1863, promulgated by the Sultan, which guaranteed national-religious-cultural autonomy within the compass of the Armenian Patriarchate. The Turkish Armenians stood now as a national, religious, and judicial community, with a representa~t1ve National Assembly and administrative bodies which had direct control over the religious, educational and civil life of the community. The National Constitution, for all practical purposes, remained, however, as a purely metropolitan institution, and it was a long time until its influence was extended to the provinces.
When in 1869 Khrimian was elected Patriarch of Turkish Armenians the plight of the Armenian peasantry in the provinces became the issue of the day. An Investigating Commission appointed at the behest of Khrirnian made a -study of the abuses which were being perpetrated on the Armenians. Countless specific charges, supported by the testimony of eye witnesses, included such abuses as: “manifest collusion and exorbitant ratings in the collection of the taxes,” “the denial of the right of the Christians to appear and testify in courts in their behalf,” “corruption, bribery, and graft among government officers, an genera oppress1ve practices, violations, terroristic acts and crimes of all sort.”
When the report was read in the National Assembly, the general picture was so in~ credibly awful that a shiver ran down the spines of the delegates. Patriarch Khrimian, on •his part, confirmed the veracity of the report, saying: “I have spent the greater part of my life with the poor people, and I submit to this Assembly that there is not the slightest exaggeration in the report. The Investigating Commission has been very conscient1ous in the collection of the most important facts.”
The report meticulously avoided any mention of politics, and restricted itself to a mere factual enumeration of the administrative abuses, calling on the “beneficent Government” for the exercise of the elementary rights of .safety of life and personal property. On April 11, 1872, the Patriarch submitted the report to the Sublime Porte. The Armenians fully believed that the Government would pay serious heed to the Patriarch’s appeal and would take practical steps to ameliorate the condition of the Armenian people in the provinces. Great was the disappointment when the Government reluctantly •received the report and did not take one step to remove the abuses.
Until then, and as late as 1878 when as ~ result of the Russo-Turk1sh war the Armenian Question once again came to the fore, the Armenians never entertained any thought of presenting any political demands. Within Turkey proper their aspirations were limited to simple safety of life and property, equality before -the law, and the fr.ee development of their national-cultural life. In some quarters the conviction even prevailed that the existence and the future of the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire were better safeguarded than under Russian domination. According to Patriarch Nerses Varjabedian, “The Turk killed the body, but the Russian killed the soul.” However, with their barbarous policy, the Turks repelled the Armenians and opened a rift between the Armenian and the Turk.
From this viewpoint, the Russo-Turkish war of 1877-78 had fatal consequences. In that war the Armenians unanimously supported the view of defending the fatherland. The Armenian Patriarchate assured the Government of Armenian loyalty, and with Pastoral letters instructed the Armenians to support the Government in the war effort to the limit. Armenian delegates of the Parliament delivered patriotic speeches. The same was true of the Armenian press. No other subject people could have manifested a greater degree of loyalty and patriotism to their government. And yet the Islam Turk was immovable in his fanaticism against the Christian Armenians. On December 6, 1876, the Mohammedan rabble of the City of Van, supported by the Turkish soldiers and gendarmerie, looted and burned the Armenian market place, burning down more than 1,500 Armenian shops and stores. In one 11fight the Armenians of the City were forced to sit on the ashes. The Government did nothing •to punish the criminal~ or to redress the Armenian losses.
While the war was being waged, at the very moment when the Armenians of Constantinople and the provinces were devoted to the defense of the country, the tribes of Sheik Jellaleddin, with the manifest connivance of the Turkish Government and army, were looting and ruining :the villages in the region of Van, the Armenians of Beyazit, Alashkert and other places were being massacred and looted by the Turkish soldiers, and the Armenian peasantry, under the dread of the massacre, were rushing to the Caucasus for safety. The news of these atrocities naturally disturbed the Constantinople Armenians who had expected a better treatment from the Sultan’s Government. Suspicion and disillusionment were beginning to take root in their hearts.
On the other hand, the victorious Russian armies were advancing with promises of freedom to the enslaved Christians of Turkey. The City of Karin-Erzeroum-which was considered the heart of Turkish Armenia was already occupied by Russian armies. Bulgaria had taken up arms for her independence. The Russian armies had occupied Adrianople and were knocking at the gates of Constantinople at San Stefano when the Sultan issued for peace.
Only then did the Armenians realize that there was no other way out for them except the inclusion of a provision for Armenian reforms in the forthcoming peace treaty. Upon the appeal of Patriarch Nerses Varjabedian, the Russian High Command inserted in the Treaty of San Stefano (March 3, 1878) a provision called Article 16 whereby the Sultan undertook to carry out certain 11eforms in the Armenian populated provinces of Anatolia before the withdrawal of the Russian armies from the 0ccupied regions.
The Treaty of San Stefano, however, remained a dead letter. Beaconsfield’s England, after signing the secret Treaty of Cyprus with Turkey by which she assumed the protectorate of that country, served Russia with an ultimatum demanding tile revision of the Treaty of San Stefano by the six .signatories of the Treaty of Paris. Powerless, Russia yielded, giving way to the Congress of Berlin which was presided over by Bismarck, the “honest broker.” The Armenians also sent a Delegation to the Congress of Berlin, headed by former Patriarch Muguerdich Archbishop Khrimian. The Delegation visited Rome, Vienna, Paris and London in an attempt to enlist the support of these governments in behalf of Armenian aspirations, and after completing its tour, it presented to the Congress of Berlin a summary of Armenian demands which had been endorsed by the National Assembly and the Patriarch of Constantinople.
The Armenian plan of reform’s called for the formation of an autonomous administrative unit, consisting of the provinces of Van and Erzeroum, the Armenian populated sections of the Province of Diarbekir (to the east of Kharpert), the Sanjak of Arkana, rthe northern part of the Sanjak of Sughert, add a part of the Province of Trebizond, including the port city of Rizzeh, under a General Governor to be appointed by the Sublime Porte and with the agreement of the powers. The Governor was to be assisted by a Council of the people’s representatives and an Executive Council, the first a legislative body, and the second, the executive. The autonomous region was to be organized on the democratic pattern, with national and religious equality for all the people. The plan clearly defined the respective jurisdictions of the Governor General and the Central Government.
The Anglo-Russian rivalry prevented, however, the consideration of the Armenian plan at the Congress, and even Article 16 of San Stefano, modest as it was, met with the violent opposition of Beaconsfield. English diplomacy was opposed to the presence of the Russians in Armenia until after the execution of the reforms. Finally, the San Stefano article was replaced by Article 61 of the Congress of Berlin (July 13, 1878). Article 61 provided:
“The Sublime Porte undertakes to carry out, without further delay, the improvements and reforms demanded by local requirements in the provinces inhabited by the Armenians, to guarantee their security against the Circaassians and Kurds. It will periodically make known the steps taken to this effect to the Powers, who will superintend their application.”
The Armenians naturally were not .satisfied with this result. The 61st article not only did not give autonomy, but the promised reforms were far from being reassuring. In the end, everything was left to the Sultan’s will under the platonic protectorate of the six powers, whereas the Sultan’s will was known to all. It was no wonder, therefore, that the Armenian Delegation returned home from Berlin wholly dissatisfied and embittered. In its protest letter to the delegations at the Congress the Armenian Delegation had said:
“The Armenian Delegation expresses its profound disappointment and regret that the Congress has rejected their legal and at once modest demands. We had thought that a people consisting of several millions, which to date has never been the tool of foreign policy, a people which, despite the fact that it has been subjected to greater persecution and oppressive treatment than the other Christian races in Turkey, has never been a cause of trouble to the Turkish Government, a people which although not a kinsmen or coreligionist with any nation but nevertheless is Christian as all other Christian peoples of Turkey, in this century of ours could have hoped to find the same protection which ‘has been accorded to others. We had hoped that such a nation which cherished no political ambitions could have been granted the right to live its own life on Armenian soil and to be governed by Armenian officers. The Arrmenians now realize that they have been betrayed, that their rights have not been recognized, because they have been peace-loving, and that they have gained nothing by preserving the centuries- old independence of their church and their national identity.
”The Armenian Delegation will return 10 the East, taking along this lesson. Notwithstanding it, the Delegation affirms that rthe Armenian people shall never .stop its protest until Europe gives satisfaction to its just demands.”-Berlin, July 13, 1878.
However, the Armenian disappointment was tempered with a certain degree of optimism. True, the Congress had denied the Armenians <the right to autonomy, still the reforms, if carried out, were a distinct gain. Most important of all, the 6lst article of the Berlin ‘treaty had raised the Armenian Question to the dignity of an interna1ional issue. On the other hand, the Congress of Berlin was a ringing lesson; “The Armenians were ignored because they a-re a peace-loving people. Henceforth, the Armenian people shall never •stop raising their voice until Europe has given satisfaction to their just demands.”
With this disposition Khrimian left for Constantinople where his return was being awaited with anxious impatience. After ‘submitting •his official report to the Patriarch and the National Assembly, Khrimian, who was an eloquent orator, delivered a sermon from the Cathedral of Pera on his mission to Europe which left an historic imprint on the political and •intellectual development of the Armenian people, and which was a direct call to revolution.
Khrimian related that when he entered the Congress of Berlin he saw in the hall an enormous cauldron filled with Harissa-a native thick porridge of ground wheat and meat. At the invitation of the President, each representative of the Balkan nations approached the cauldron holding in his hand an iron spoon and helped himself. When the turn came to the Armenian representative, having nothing but a paper spoon in his hand, he could not help himself .to the Harissa. The dignitary who was standing beside <the kettle, seeing the paper •spoon, asked him, ”Where is your iron spoon? We are serving Harissa here, but the man who has no iron spoon can have none. Get this well. If in the near future again Harissa should be served here, don’t forget your iron spoon if you don’t want to return. Empty handed.”
In conclusion, Khrimian admonished his listeners:
”Armenian people, you of course understand well what it means to be armed, what all arms can accomplish. Therefore, blessed people of Armenia, when you re1urn to your homes, take to your relatives and friends a gift of arms. Get hold of arms, and again arms. My people, above all things else, put your .trust in yourselves, •strengthen your intellect and your right arm. A man can be saved by his effort alone.”
Arms alone, however, were not enough to insure freedom and prosperity. Other factors were necessary. And Patriarch Nerses Varjabedian called the attention of the Armenian people to these very factors. On August 2, 1878, he gave an extensive report to the National Assembly on the Congress of Berlin, replying meanwhile to his critics. The Patriarch himself had been disappointed in the Congress, but he realized that “at no time, and by the hand of no one man could such a task be accomplished.” Time and persistent endeavor were indispensable requisites for success. Therefore, he exhorted, “let us prepare ourselves for the future. Firs1, we must not -stay here; we must go Ito Armenia. We must send to Armenia our patriotic men, our men of intelligence and talent, our educators and our church-loving men. We must send there our teachers and spirited youths. Let our artisans and merchants go to Armenia. Let our wanderers return to the homeland. There will no longer be any famine or massacre there, no longer any oppressions, no longer any violations against life, property and honor. We shall build highways, irrigation canals, and factories there. Let the capitalists hasten there, form their corporations, in order to •establish schools in all the villages and the towns, business firms, and factories for the workingmen. Let all Armenians unite from all parts of the world, from India, Turkey, England, Russia, Austria, and as far as Persia.”
Nor was it Khrimian and Varjabedian alone who were imbued with this spirit. All Armenians were engrossed with the same concern. They all agreed with Khrimian that the trip to the Congress of Berlin, from the viewpoint of the future, was not entirely useless. The Armenian Question had become an international issue. A new path had been opened before the Armenians. Khrimian and Varjabedian had shown the way along which they should travel for a brighter future. And that was the path which the Armenians espoused.
Presently, in Constantinople and other Armenian centers, one after another there came into existence cultural, educational and economic societies, all pledged to the founding of schools, libraries, and cultural and economic institutions in Armenia. The young people, as teachers, as agricultural experts, or as disseminators of new ideas, took the road to Armenia with the aim of educating and enlightening the people, and raising their intellectual and economic standards. University graduates went to the remotest backwoods villages of Armenia, shared the hardships and the privations of the peasants, and in many cases sacrificed their lives in their effort to serve the national cause. For the young people the 80’s were years of idealistic emotions and hopes. Like the butterfly which is attracted by the burning light, these youths rushed to the bosom of the suffering people in Armenia where they were burnt up in the ensuing fire.
The reforms promised by Article 61 of Berlin, however, yielded no positive results. The signatories of the Treaty, always mutual rivals, contented themselves with paper reminder •s and paper demands which produced an exactly opposite result. The Sultan became increasingly harsh in his treatment of the Armenians. His first step, after the conclusion of the Congress, was the organization of the famous Hamidieh Regiments, ostensibly for the defense of the Caucasian border, but in reality intended to further suppress and weaken the Armenians. This mob, clad in government uniform, armed by the government, and instigated by the same government, turned into a veritable scourge to the defenseless peasantry. They were of invaluable assistance to the Sultan in his policy of depopulating Armenia as the radical solution of the Armenian Question.
The next step was the implementation of rigorous measures against the intellectuals and the national institutions. A number of schools were closed outright and the teachers were either imprisoned or •sent into exile. Khrimian himself was exiled to Jerusalem. The Armenian benevolent and cultural institutions were dissolved. A strict censorship was instituted against the press and literature. The prerogatives of the Patriarchate and the National Assembly were abrogated, and eventually the National Constitution was suspended. The names “Armenia” and “Armenian” were prohibited in the press. Arrests, imprisonments, and executions became the order of the day, especially in the provinces. An infernal situation had been created for the Armenians. And yet, the best the signatories of the Treaty of Berlin would do was to present the Sultan with paper ultimatums couched in friendly terms.