1 of 7
DAILY NEWSPAPER REPORTING OF THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE:
COULD THEY ALL BE WRONG?
Armenian News Network / Groong
April 23, 2008
By Katia M. Peltekian
In a world where there were no radios, televisions or the internet,
the only source of information for events occurring around the world
was the newspaper. At the time, the news did not travel fast, but it
did eventually reach the four corners of the world.
Throughout the world, papers filled their pages with news from the
Ottoman Empire. Towards the end of the 19th century, when European
countries as well as the United States were on friendly terms with
Turkey, thousands of reports about the on-going massacres and
mistreatment of the Armenians were printed on the pages of such well-
known newspapers in the English language as The Times (of London),
The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Los Angeles Times, The
Toronto Star, The Montreal Gazette, etc. These newspapers included
reports by correspondents, travelers, and consuls or ambassadors of
different countries based in the different regions of the Ottoman
Empire. But the more detailed reports came from the missionaries who
witnessed the plight of the Armenians and tried to help the orphans
and the survivors as best they could.
It is to be noted that the Western press covered the Hamidian
massacres much more extensively than the massacres of World War One
period since many of the western countries broke diplomatic relations
with Turkey when the Great War broke out. Not only diplomats left the
Empire but for safety reasons their citizens left also. On the other
hand, as a neutral country, the USA kept its ambassador, consuls and
missionaries in Turkey for the first three years of the War. As the
number and frequency of the reports in the British press dropped, for
example, those in the American press were on the rise until America
joined the War on the side of the Allies in April 1917.
THE SOURCES
A careful examination of various newspapers in the English language
will show that the sources for information originated from what could
be labeled as the best kind of evidence: eyewitnesses as well as
victims themselves. Most of the news originated from the war zone and
its vicinity where refugees were welcomed; the reports included the
eyewitness accounts of missionaries, consuls, survivors and refugees.
Other sources emerged from world capitals such as London, Paris,
Berlin, Washington and, more importantly, from Constantinople where
correspondents and diplomatic missions of neutral or allied countries
resided.
Thus most of the information about the ongoing massacres in the
different regions of the Ottoman Empire came from diplomatic
missions, religious missions, physicians, teachers and travelers.
These sources were often referred to as sources of `unquestioned
veracity, integrity and authority'; in many instances, the reports
came from an eyewitness whose `reliability cannot be questioned', or
from `well-known Americans who are cognizant of the actual situation
in Turkey' who `produce absolutely trustworthy evidence and
authenticated data.'
The United States maintained a neutral position during the first
three years of the Great War. It had an ambassador residing in
Constantinople, and consuls and vice-consuls well-spread around the
Ottoman Empire. In addition, the American missionaries were placed
throughout the area where they could observe events or record
eyewitness testimonies directly from survivors and victims. Since the
missionaries were in daily contact with the people, they were able to
provide credible testimony on the treatment of the Armenians during
the deportations and about the mass murders.
The British and the Commonwealth countries, on the other hand,
depended on the British ex-residents of Turkey who left their homes
as the war broke out. Also correspondents traveling with the Russian
army on the Caucasus front reported the scenes of atrocities as the
Russians liberated the Armenian cities of Erzurum, Bitlis and Trebizond.
In many instances the British, Canadian and the American newspapers
relied also on reports written by the foreign press or were released
by foreign missionaries and diplomats. For example, the Italian
consul of Trebizond Signor Giacomo Gorrini stated in a special cable
dispatch to a Canadian newspaper in August 1915 the following:
The decree, which was published on June 24, ordered the massacre of
Armenians, and forms the blackest page in Ottoman history ... The
result of the proclamation was carnage on a big and bloody scale ... I
saw thousands of innocent women and children placed on boats which
were capsized in the Black Sea. Thousands of young Armenian women
were forcibly converted to Mohammedism ... I shall never forget the
scenes of horror I witnessed from June 21 to July 23, when I left.'
Another source of information came from the Germans themselves,
Turkey's allies during the Great War. In October 1915, The Los
Angeles Times published a translated version of what a German
official had declared in German newspapers:
If Turkey considers necessary that the Armenian uprising and other
intrigues be suppressed with all means ... that does not constitute
massacres nor atrocities, but simply a measure of a justified and
necessary character ... `
Occasionally, there also appeared the Turkish `version' of the events
that occurred in the Eastern provinces of the Ottoman Empire, denying
all the reports that diplomats and missionaries wrote. However, there
was a Turkish statesman who denounced the atrocities committed by the
Turkish authorities. According to a statement Cherif Pasha sent to
The New York Times in October 1915
... the Young Turks, or the Committee of Union and Progress, ... for
years plotted the extermination of the Armenian people.
The answer of the Turkish Consul General in New York Djelal Bey to
the same newspaper came as such:
... There may have been cases where inoffensive people shared the
fate of the offender ... Unfortunately, in times of war, such
discrimination is utterly impossible... However much to be deplored may
be these harrowing events in the last analysis, we can but say that
the Armenians have only themselves to blame.
In 1916, The Times of London (Great Britain) printed an interview
with Talaat Bey, the Turkish Minister of Interior. The source was a
newspaper from Germany - an ally of Turkey. Talaat was quoted
confessing the following:
The removal of the Armenians from the eastern Vilayets of Turkey
became in consequence a military, national and historical necessity ...
The removal of the western group to Deyr-Zor was unfortunately
entrusted to an incapable official and serious `excesses' followed ...
We have been blamed for not making a distinction between the innocent
and the guilty. It was impossible; the innocent of today might become
the guilty of tomorrow.
THE WORD `GENOCIDE'
The word Genocide was not coined until the 1940s; however, other
terms and phrases were used to describe the way the Armenians were
treated in Ottoman Turkey not only by the Turkish and Kurdish
population but by the Turkish authorities also.
Some of these terms in the American and British press correspond
partly or wholly to the definition of Genocide: `organized and
systematic massacre,' `a systematic authorized and desperate effort
on the part of the rulers of Turkey to wipe out the Armenians,' and
`a war of extermination on Armenians,' `annihilation of the whole
people,' or `the gradual destruction of the Armenians.'
Although successive Turkish governments have denied that the Ottoman
government had any intention to wipe out the Armenians, the reports
coming out of Turkey confirmed that the `police massacre Armenians on
orders of authorities,' that the Armenians were `exiled under
conditions that mean slow extermination,' that the Armenians were
`being exterminated as a result of an absolutely premeditated policy
elaborately pursued by the gang now in control of Turkey,' or that
`the massacres are the result of a deliberate plan of the Turkish
Government to get rid of the Armenian question.'
Many similar descriptions do in fact confirm that the Turkish
authorities planned and executed the extermination of the Armenian
population.
PERIOD BEFORE THE GREAT WAR
One reason Turkey and Turkish historians now give for the wholesale
massacre of Armenians is that there was a war and just as Turks were
killed, so were the Armenians. Of course, they also claim that many
Armenians were punished because they were traitors and joined the
Russian army fighting against Turkey. However, there is no
explanation for the massacres that occurred prior to the Great War.
During the Sultan Hamid era, hundreds of thousands of Armenians were
killed in cold blood in such cities as Zeitoun, Sassoun, Ourfa,
Erzurum and Van in the 1890s.
At the time, the newspapers of the western world, which were on good
terms with Turkey, printed thousands of reports describing the
deplorable situation of the Armenians under Turkish rule. A small
sampling of the headlines from the 19th century papers outlines the
condition of the Armenians under Turkish rule:
. Fresh Turkish Outrages: 700 Christians reported to have been
massacred at Erzeroum. (The New York Times - Sept. 27, 1876)
. The Erzeroum Massacre: Armenians slaughtered and the British
Consulate stoned. (The New York Times - July 26, 1890)
. Dungeons for Christians: Nearly 2,000 Armenians immured in Turkish
prisons. (The Washington Post - April 10, 1893)
. The Armenians: Innocent Christians executed by the Ottoman
Authorities. (The Los Angeles Times - Aug. 4, 1893)
. Armenians murdered in Turkey: Hundreds of bodies thrown into the
harbor of Constantinople. (Chicago Daily Tribune - Oct. 20, 1893)
. Massacre of Armenians: Horrible tales of butchery perpetrated by
Turks - Thousands were killed. (The Halifax Herald - Nov. 20, 1894)
. Massacre of the Armenians: Turkish troops made a solitude and called
it peace in Sassoun. (The New York Times - Nov 27, 1894)
. Disturbed Armenia: Massacres Confirmed. (The Times - Dec. 4, 1894)
He Tells of the Sacking of Hadjin: Another story of the Armenian
massacre from an eye-witness. (Chicago Daily Tribune - Dec. 8, 1894)
. Horrible Massacres: Treacherous Turkish troops murder 360 Armenians
of all ages and both sexes. (The Halifax Herald - Feb 28, 1895)
. Eight Thousand Butchered: The horrors of the Armenian massacres only
just beginning to be realized by the World. (The New York Times -
March 25, 1895)
. Turkish Atrocities: Pitiful stories of pillage, burning, torture and
murder. (The Halifax Herald - June 13, 1895)
. The Trebizond Massacre. (The Sunday Times - Oct. 27, 1895)
. The Massacres in Erzurum. (The Times - Nov. 16, 1895)
. Plunder and Outrage: Armenian villages for a distance of 200 miles
are looted and burned and their inhabitants killed or put to flight.
(The Los Angeles Times - Jan. 1, 1896)
. 100,000 Massacred in Armenia and 250,000 Christians rendered
homeless. (The Halifax Herald - Jan. 3, 1896)
. Two Thousand Dead: The awful sweep of the ravenous Turk. (The Los
Angeles Times - Feb. 12, 1896)
. At Mercy of the Turks: Graphic picture of the suffering of the
Armenians - Massacres the result of definite plan devised by the
. Sultan and his advisers to annihilate the `Hated Christians' (Chicago
Daily Tribune - Feb. 22, 1896)
. Armenians Killed at Oorfa: 8,000 victims said to have been murdered.
(The New York Times - May 19, 1896)
. The Armenian Outrages: How the Christians were murdered by the cruel
Turks - Stories of horror which are unequaled - Mothers killed in the
presence of their husbands and children. (The New York Times - June
1, 1896)
. Fresh Disturbances in Van: Renewal of the Armenian massacres - 400
people killed. (The Washington Post - June 25, 1896)
. Deportation of the Armenians - (The New York Times - Sept. 7, 1896)
. Armenians Slain by the Hundreds: British Ambassador Currie makes a
protest. (The Halifax Herald - March 27, 1897)
. The Tokat Massacre. (The Times - May 6, 1897)
Wholesale Massacre: Secret Extermination. (The Halifax Herald - July
13, 1897).
And the massacres did not stop there. At different intervals of time,
massacres of the Armenian population also took place during the first
years of the 20th century.
The following selective excerpts from different newspapers illustrate
the situation of the Armenians between 1900 and 1914. The Armenians
were exposed to not only massacres but also dislocation. They were
disarmed, dispersed, pillaged, outraged and murdered in cold blood
during peaceful times. The worst was in 1909 when the Turks and Kurds
descended on the Armenians of the Vilayet of Adana and wiped out an
estimated number of 30,000 in the towns and villages of the district.
At the time, there was no Great War. The Armenians were not simply
casualties of war. Their extermination was a premeditated plan set by
the Turkish authorities.
Chicago Daily Tribune - Oct. 21, 1900.
According to a dispatch to a French newspaper, `frightful massacres
of Armenians have just occurred in the district of Diarbekir.' The
report asserts that for five days, the Turkish population of the city
killed and outraged the Armenians as the Turkish troops watched. In
addition, eight villages were entirely destroyed and burned and the
residents were left homeless.
.....
DAILY NEWSPAPER REPORTING OF THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE:
COULD THEY ALL BE WRONG?
Armenian News Network / Groong
April 23, 2008
By Katia M. Peltekian
In a world where there were no radios, televisions or the internet,
the only source of information for events occurring around the world
was the newspaper. At the time, the news did not travel fast, but it
did eventually reach the four corners of the world.
Throughout the world, papers filled their pages with news from the
Ottoman Empire. Towards the end of the 19th century, when European
countries as well as the United States were on friendly terms with
Turkey, thousands of reports about the on-going massacres and
mistreatment of the Armenians were printed on the pages of such well-
known newspapers in the English language as The Times (of London),
The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Los Angeles Times, The
Toronto Star, The Montreal Gazette, etc. These newspapers included
reports by correspondents, travelers, and consuls or ambassadors of
different countries based in the different regions of the Ottoman
Empire. But the more detailed reports came from the missionaries who
witnessed the plight of the Armenians and tried to help the orphans
and the survivors as best they could.
It is to be noted that the Western press covered the Hamidian
massacres much more extensively than the massacres of World War One
period since many of the western countries broke diplomatic relations
with Turkey when the Great War broke out. Not only diplomats left the
Empire but for safety reasons their citizens left also. On the other
hand, as a neutral country, the USA kept its ambassador, consuls and
missionaries in Turkey for the first three years of the War. As the
number and frequency of the reports in the British press dropped, for
example, those in the American press were on the rise until America
joined the War on the side of the Allies in April 1917.
THE SOURCES
A careful examination of various newspapers in the English language
will show that the sources for information originated from what could
be labeled as the best kind of evidence: eyewitnesses as well as
victims themselves. Most of the news originated from the war zone and
its vicinity where refugees were welcomed; the reports included the
eyewitness accounts of missionaries, consuls, survivors and refugees.
Other sources emerged from world capitals such as London, Paris,
Berlin, Washington and, more importantly, from Constantinople where
correspondents and diplomatic missions of neutral or allied countries
resided.
Thus most of the information about the ongoing massacres in the
different regions of the Ottoman Empire came from diplomatic
missions, religious missions, physicians, teachers and travelers.
These sources were often referred to as sources of `unquestioned
veracity, integrity and authority'; in many instances, the reports
came from an eyewitness whose `reliability cannot be questioned', or
from `well-known Americans who are cognizant of the actual situation
in Turkey' who `produce absolutely trustworthy evidence and
authenticated data.'
The United States maintained a neutral position during the first
three years of the Great War. It had an ambassador residing in
Constantinople, and consuls and vice-consuls well-spread around the
Ottoman Empire. In addition, the American missionaries were placed
throughout the area where they could observe events or record
eyewitness testimonies directly from survivors and victims. Since the
missionaries were in daily contact with the people, they were able to
provide credible testimony on the treatment of the Armenians during
the deportations and about the mass murders.
The British and the Commonwealth countries, on the other hand,
depended on the British ex-residents of Turkey who left their homes
as the war broke out. Also correspondents traveling with the Russian
army on the Caucasus front reported the scenes of atrocities as the
Russians liberated the Armenian cities of Erzurum, Bitlis and Trebizond.
In many instances the British, Canadian and the American newspapers
relied also on reports written by the foreign press or were released
by foreign missionaries and diplomats. For example, the Italian
consul of Trebizond Signor Giacomo Gorrini stated in a special cable
dispatch to a Canadian newspaper in August 1915 the following:
The decree, which was published on June 24, ordered the massacre of
Armenians, and forms the blackest page in Ottoman history ... The
result of the proclamation was carnage on a big and bloody scale ... I
saw thousands of innocent women and children placed on boats which
were capsized in the Black Sea. Thousands of young Armenian women
were forcibly converted to Mohammedism ... I shall never forget the
scenes of horror I witnessed from June 21 to July 23, when I left.'
Another source of information came from the Germans themselves,
Turkey's allies during the Great War. In October 1915, The Los
Angeles Times published a translated version of what a German
official had declared in German newspapers:
If Turkey considers necessary that the Armenian uprising and other
intrigues be suppressed with all means ... that does not constitute
massacres nor atrocities, but simply a measure of a justified and
necessary character ... `
Occasionally, there also appeared the Turkish `version' of the events
that occurred in the Eastern provinces of the Ottoman Empire, denying
all the reports that diplomats and missionaries wrote. However, there
was a Turkish statesman who denounced the atrocities committed by the
Turkish authorities. According to a statement Cherif Pasha sent to
The New York Times in October 1915
... the Young Turks, or the Committee of Union and Progress, ... for
years plotted the extermination of the Armenian people.
The answer of the Turkish Consul General in New York Djelal Bey to
the same newspaper came as such:
... There may have been cases where inoffensive people shared the
fate of the offender ... Unfortunately, in times of war, such
discrimination is utterly impossible... However much to be deplored may
be these harrowing events in the last analysis, we can but say that
the Armenians have only themselves to blame.
In 1916, The Times of London (Great Britain) printed an interview
with Talaat Bey, the Turkish Minister of Interior. The source was a
newspaper from Germany - an ally of Turkey. Talaat was quoted
confessing the following:
The removal of the Armenians from the eastern Vilayets of Turkey
became in consequence a military, national and historical necessity ...
The removal of the western group to Deyr-Zor was unfortunately
entrusted to an incapable official and serious `excesses' followed ...
We have been blamed for not making a distinction between the innocent
and the guilty. It was impossible; the innocent of today might become
the guilty of tomorrow.
THE WORD `GENOCIDE'
The word Genocide was not coined until the 1940s; however, other
terms and phrases were used to describe the way the Armenians were
treated in Ottoman Turkey not only by the Turkish and Kurdish
population but by the Turkish authorities also.
Some of these terms in the American and British press correspond
partly or wholly to the definition of Genocide: `organized and
systematic massacre,' `a systematic authorized and desperate effort
on the part of the rulers of Turkey to wipe out the Armenians,' and
`a war of extermination on Armenians,' `annihilation of the whole
people,' or `the gradual destruction of the Armenians.'
Although successive Turkish governments have denied that the Ottoman
government had any intention to wipe out the Armenians, the reports
coming out of Turkey confirmed that the `police massacre Armenians on
orders of authorities,' that the Armenians were `exiled under
conditions that mean slow extermination,' that the Armenians were
`being exterminated as a result of an absolutely premeditated policy
elaborately pursued by the gang now in control of Turkey,' or that
`the massacres are the result of a deliberate plan of the Turkish
Government to get rid of the Armenian question.'
Many similar descriptions do in fact confirm that the Turkish
authorities planned and executed the extermination of the Armenian
population.
PERIOD BEFORE THE GREAT WAR
One reason Turkey and Turkish historians now give for the wholesale
massacre of Armenians is that there was a war and just as Turks were
killed, so were the Armenians. Of course, they also claim that many
Armenians were punished because they were traitors and joined the
Russian army fighting against Turkey. However, there is no
explanation for the massacres that occurred prior to the Great War.
During the Sultan Hamid era, hundreds of thousands of Armenians were
killed in cold blood in such cities as Zeitoun, Sassoun, Ourfa,
Erzurum and Van in the 1890s.
At the time, the newspapers of the western world, which were on good
terms with Turkey, printed thousands of reports describing the
deplorable situation of the Armenians under Turkish rule. A small
sampling of the headlines from the 19th century papers outlines the
condition of the Armenians under Turkish rule:
. Fresh Turkish Outrages: 700 Christians reported to have been
massacred at Erzeroum. (The New York Times - Sept. 27, 1876)
. The Erzeroum Massacre: Armenians slaughtered and the British
Consulate stoned. (The New York Times - July 26, 1890)
. Dungeons for Christians: Nearly 2,000 Armenians immured in Turkish
prisons. (The Washington Post - April 10, 1893)
. The Armenians: Innocent Christians executed by the Ottoman
Authorities. (The Los Angeles Times - Aug. 4, 1893)
. Armenians murdered in Turkey: Hundreds of bodies thrown into the
harbor of Constantinople. (Chicago Daily Tribune - Oct. 20, 1893)
. Massacre of Armenians: Horrible tales of butchery perpetrated by
Turks - Thousands were killed. (The Halifax Herald - Nov. 20, 1894)
. Massacre of the Armenians: Turkish troops made a solitude and called
it peace in Sassoun. (The New York Times - Nov 27, 1894)
. Disturbed Armenia: Massacres Confirmed. (The Times - Dec. 4, 1894)
He Tells of the Sacking of Hadjin: Another story of the Armenian
massacre from an eye-witness. (Chicago Daily Tribune - Dec. 8, 1894)
. Horrible Massacres: Treacherous Turkish troops murder 360 Armenians
of all ages and both sexes. (The Halifax Herald - Feb 28, 1895)
. Eight Thousand Butchered: The horrors of the Armenian massacres only
just beginning to be realized by the World. (The New York Times -
March 25, 1895)
. Turkish Atrocities: Pitiful stories of pillage, burning, torture and
murder. (The Halifax Herald - June 13, 1895)
. The Trebizond Massacre. (The Sunday Times - Oct. 27, 1895)
. The Massacres in Erzurum. (The Times - Nov. 16, 1895)
. Plunder and Outrage: Armenian villages for a distance of 200 miles
are looted and burned and their inhabitants killed or put to flight.
(The Los Angeles Times - Jan. 1, 1896)
. 100,000 Massacred in Armenia and 250,000 Christians rendered
homeless. (The Halifax Herald - Jan. 3, 1896)
. Two Thousand Dead: The awful sweep of the ravenous Turk. (The Los
Angeles Times - Feb. 12, 1896)
. At Mercy of the Turks: Graphic picture of the suffering of the
Armenians - Massacres the result of definite plan devised by the
. Sultan and his advisers to annihilate the `Hated Christians' (Chicago
Daily Tribune - Feb. 22, 1896)
. Armenians Killed at Oorfa: 8,000 victims said to have been murdered.
(The New York Times - May 19, 1896)
. The Armenian Outrages: How the Christians were murdered by the cruel
Turks - Stories of horror which are unequaled - Mothers killed in the
presence of their husbands and children. (The New York Times - June
1, 1896)
. Fresh Disturbances in Van: Renewal of the Armenian massacres - 400
people killed. (The Washington Post - June 25, 1896)
. Deportation of the Armenians - (The New York Times - Sept. 7, 1896)
. Armenians Slain by the Hundreds: British Ambassador Currie makes a
protest. (The Halifax Herald - March 27, 1897)
. The Tokat Massacre. (The Times - May 6, 1897)
Wholesale Massacre: Secret Extermination. (The Halifax Herald - July
13, 1897).
And the massacres did not stop there. At different intervals of time,
massacres of the Armenian population also took place during the first
years of the 20th century.
The following selective excerpts from different newspapers illustrate
the situation of the Armenians between 1900 and 1914. The Armenians
were exposed to not only massacres but also dislocation. They were
disarmed, dispersed, pillaged, outraged and murdered in cold blood
during peaceful times. The worst was in 1909 when the Turks and Kurds
descended on the Armenians of the Vilayet of Adana and wiped out an
estimated number of 30,000 in the towns and villages of the district.
At the time, there was no Great War. The Armenians were not simply
casualties of war. Their extermination was a premeditated plan set by
the Turkish authorities.
Chicago Daily Tribune - Oct. 21, 1900.
According to a dispatch to a French newspaper, `frightful massacres
of Armenians have just occurred in the district of Diarbekir.' The
report asserts that for five days, the Turkish population of the city
killed and outraged the Armenians as the Turkish troops watched. In
addition, eight villages were entirely destroyed and burned and the
residents were left homeless.
.....
Comment