PREVIOUS ACTS OF THE TURKISH TRAGEDY.
In this chapter[34] I shall take no account of events that have taken
place in legitimate warfare, where the slain were foreign enemies or
rebellious subjects of the Sultan, resisting with arms in their hands
after being ordered to submit. The “insurgents”—as the Porte has called
them—in all these cases have consisted of men, women, children, and
infants, and in each case, by a curious coincidence, have been
non-Mohammedan.
In all of these massacres, Turkish military or civil officers presided
and directed the bloody work, as will be seen by reference to the
authorities mentioned. There have been many other massacres of less than
ten thousand during the intervals, which, to use the language of Beder
Khan in Mosul (see Layard’s _Nineveh_), have confirmed the whole Turkish
principle, that “the Armenians were becoming too numerous, and needed
diminishing.”
This item of Turkey’s account, for the past seventy-five years only,
stands about as follows:
DEFENSELESS CHRISTIAN SUBJECTS MASSACRED IN TURKEY 1820 TO 1894.
1822. Greeks, especially in Scio (Chios) 50,000 [35]
1850. Nestorians and Armenians, Kurdistan 10,000 [36]
1860. Maronites and Syrians, Lebanon and Damascus 11,000 [37]
1876. Bulgarians, Bulgaria 10,000 [38]
1894. Armenians, Armenia, Sassoun 12,000 [39]
——————
Total 93,000
The above figures indicate the extent of the massacres mentioned. The
following extracts reveal the occasion and manner in which they were
carried out.
The first extract is in regard to the Greeks, and is a translation, by
Mr. Robert Stein, from the French:
“The blow had been long premeditated. Sultan Mahmoud was in the habit of
replying to every success of the Greek insurgents by ordering massacres,
violations, and enslavement in regions without defense, where there were
none but women, children, and inoffensive merchants. After the first
exploit of Kanaris, the quiet commercial town of Cydonia had promptly
been burnt. The Turkish admiral was beaten at Samos; for that reason
thirty days were spent in Cyprus in cutting off heads. The town of
Tripolitza, in the Morea, having been taken by the Palikares, the
inhabitants of Cassandra, in Thrace, were given up to bands of Arnauts.
The Sultan wished to take new reprisals to terrify the _rayas_
[Christian subjects], and to cause the nations of Europe to reflect. He
took care not to fix his choice on Crete, where his _nizams_ would have
been received with gunshots. Chios was an easy prey, and suspected
nothing, having always lived on good terms with the Porte, and having
even refused to take part in the insurrection of Hellas and the islands.
The Chiotes had always been the gentlest, the most docile, the most
timid of all the _rayas_. The secret societies which endeavored to rouse
the Greek people had not even deigned to initiate these islanders in
their projects of national resurrection. On the 8th of May, 1821, the
intrepid Tombasis, with fifteen brigs from Hydra and ten schooners from
Psara, had appeared before the island, and his patriotic advances having
been ill received, he had retired. The inhabitants of Chios, in order to
give new guaranties of submission, had sent to the Turks large amounts
of money, numerous hostages, and all their arms; even the little knives
with which they cut their bread had been taken from them.
“At this moment, on Easter Day, 1822, the Capitan-Pasha anchored in the
harbor, with seven ships and eight frigates. Inasmuch as many of the
people, frightened by the sight of this fleet, had fled to the
mountains, they were made to come down by promises of safety, and by
sending to them some consuls, who were simple enough to lend themselves
in good faith to this ignoble fraud. The Turkish admiral brought his
executioners with him; _bashi-bazouks_ from Roumelia, Zeibeks and Yuruks
from Asia Minor, the most ferocious and cowardly to be found in the
empire. The adventurers had come in great numbers, eager for their prey,
attracted by this country, so rich in harvests, in gold coins, and in
women. On the day fixed for this surprise all this rabble was crowded
into boats, with pistols and knives, and the carnage began. Whole
regiments courageously besieged villages containing three hundred souls.
For many of them, this slaughter was a great joke, a gigantic
_bakshish_. They slashed and burned all day; in the evening they
reckoned up the price of the slaves, the sheep, the goats, all huddled
together pell-mell in the profaned churches. The children and the women
escaped death; their youth and beauty saved them from the massacre, to
deliver them over at once to outrageous assaults or to reserve them for
the shameful fate of the harem. They were led off in long troops; they
were put on the market and sold in the bazaars of Smyrna,
Constantinople, and Brussa. Whatever resisted was killed without mercy.
At Mesta, a young girl cried and struggled against an Arnaut; the madman
seized her loosened hair, turned back the collar, and with a cut of his
sabre severed the pretty head. The person who described this scene to me
saw it with his own eyes.”[40]
In regard to the massacre of Nestorians in 1850, Layard states that
after 9000 had been massacred, “1000 men, women, and children concealed
themselves in a mountain fastness. Beder Khan Beg, an officer of rank in
the employment of the Sultan, unable to get at them, surrounded the
place, and waited until they should be compelled to yield by thirst and
hunger. Then he offered to spare their lives on the surrender of their
arms and property, terms ratified by an oath on the Koran. The Kurds
were then admitted to the platform. After they had disarmed their
prisoners they commenced an indiscriminate slaughter, until, weary of
using their weapons, they hurled the few survivors from the rocks into
the river Zab below. Out of nearly 1000 only one escaped.”[41]
In regard to the massacre of Maronites and Syrians in 1860, the
anonymous authority in _The Independent_ goes on to say:
“After the massacre of June and July, 1860, in Lebanon and Damascus,
under the direction of Tahir Pasha in Deir el Komr, Osman Beg in
Hasbeiya, Kurshid Pasha in Lebanon, and Ahmed Pasha in Damascus, a
conference was held in Paris, August 3d, by the representatives of Great
Britain, Austria, France, Prussia, Russia, and Turkey. As 11,000
Christians had been massacred, the European representatives called the
attention of the Sultan to his promise in the Treaty of Paris, March 30,
1856, ‘that serious administrative measures should be taken to
ameliorate the condition of the Christian population of every sect in
the Ottoman Empire....’ And then, in the presence and with the consent
of the five aforesaid Christian representatives, assembled together for
the express purpose of taking measures to stop the effusion of Christian
blood in Syria, caused by the wicked and wilful collusion of the
Sultan’s authorities, the following insult to the common sense, the
feelings, and judgment of Christian Europe was deliberately penned: ‘The
Plenipotentiary of the Sublime Porte takes note of this declaration of
the representatives of the high contracting Powers, and undertakes to
transmit it to his court, pointing out _that the Sublime Porte has
employed, and continues to employ, her efforts in the sense of the wish
expressed above_!’” (Churchill, pp. 220, 221.)
Colonel Churchill further says (p. 222):
“Nejib Pasha, who was installed Governor of the Pashalick of Damascus on
the restoration of Syria to the Sultan in 1840, declared to a
confidential agent of the British Consul in that city, not knowing,
however, the character of the person he was addressing, ‘the Turkish
Government can only maintain its supremacy in Syria by cutting down the
Christian sects.’ What Nejib Pasha enounced as a theory, Kurshid Pasha,
after an interval of twenty years, succeeded in carrying into practice.”
The writer in _The Independent_ adds:
“Thus we have Nejib Pasha in 1840, Beder Khan in 1850, Kurshid Pasha in
1860, Chefket Pasha in 1876, and Zekki Pasha in 1894, concurring in this
noble and philanthropic scheme for relieving the Turkish Empire of its
surplus Christian population!”
The following facts relate to the terrible atrocities perpetrated in
Bulgaria by Turkish _bashi-bazouks_ in the spring of 1876. I quote
verbatim from the preliminary report[42] of the Hon. Eugene Schuyler,
American Consul-General, to the Hon. Horace Maynard, the American
Minister, at Constantinople:
“PHILIPPOPOLIS, August 10, 1876.
“SIR:—In reference to the atrocities and massacres committed by the
Turks in Bulgaria, I have the honor to inform you that I have visited
the towns of Adrianople, Philippopolis, and Tatar-Bazardjik, and
villages in the surrounding districts. From what I have personally seen,
and from the inquiries I have made, and the information I have received,
I have ascertained the following facts:...
“The insurgent villages made little or no resistance. In many instances
they surrendered their arms upon the first demand. Nearly all the
villages which were attacked by the _bashi-bazouks_ were burned and
pillaged, as were also all those which had been abandoned by the
terrified inhabitants. The inhabitants of some villages were massacred
after exhibitions of the most ferocious cruelty, and the violation not
only of women and girls, but even of persons of the other sex. These
crimes were committed by the regular troops as well as by the
_bashi-bazouks_ [irregulars]. The number of villages which were burned
in whole or in part in the districts of Philippopolis, Roptchus, and
Tatar-Bazardjik is at least sixty-five.
“Particular attention was given by the troops to the churches and
schools, which in some cases were destroyed with petroleum and
gunpowder.
“It is difficult to estimate the number of Bulgarians who were killed
during the few days that the disturbances lasted; but I am inclined to
put 15,000 as the lowest for the districts I have named.... This village
surrendered, without firing a shot, after a promise of safety, to the
_bashi-bazouks_, under command of Ahmed Aga, a chief of the rural
police. Despite his promise, the arms once surrendered, Ahmed Aga
ordered the destruction of the village and the indiscriminate slaughter
of the inhabitants, about a hundred young girls being reserved to
satisfy the lust of the conqueror before they too should be killed. Not
a house is now standing in this lovely valley. Of the 8000 inhabitants
not 2000 are known to survive.
“Ahmed Aga, who commanded the massacre, has since been decorated and
promoted to the rank of _yuz bashi_ [centurian].
“These atrocities were clearly unnecessary for the suppression of the
insurrection, for it was an insignificant rebellion at the best, and the
villagers generally surrendered at the first summons.
“I am, sir, yours very truly,
“EUGENE SCHUYLER.
“The Hon. HORACE MAYNARD, etc.”
“The British Government had glossed over and tried to cover up these
horrible transactions, Premier Disraeli turning them off with a sneer.
The facts, as unearthed by Consul Schuyler, shook the British nation
like an earthquake, and came near unseating the Ministry....
“A similar investigation was made in the same district by Mr. J. A.
MacGahan, the brilliant correspondent of the London _Daily News_, who
confirms all that Mr. Schuyler discovered, in a special dispatch to the
_Daily News_, dated Philippopolis, July 28, 1876.”
The circumstances and character of the Armenian massacre of 1894 are
found in the first chapter of the present volume. In regard to this
event the writer in _The Independent_ of January 17th above quoted asks:
“Will history repeat itself in 1895? Will the remaining Armenians of
Sassoun be so terrorized as to refuse to testify before a Commission?
Undoubtedly.
“If the facts already known do not force Europe to place Eastern Asia
Minor under a Christian Viceroy there is little hope that any new facts
will influence them. The dead tell no tales. The living fear to speak,
lest they fall victims to the humane theories of Beder Khan and Nejib
Pasha.
“Will England now insist upon the protection of the Christian? She is
morally bound to. Four times has she saved the Ottoman Empire from
destruction, and the civilized world looks to her for a fulfilment of
her high mission in the East.
“May British public opinion compel British public men to action!”
To make this chapter a little more complete for reference, I add a
passing allusion to three other outrages not included in the above list,
which takes account of no massacres of less than ten thousand victims at
once.
OUTRAGES IN CRETE IN 1866–7.
On July 21, 1867, the British, Russian, French, and Italian Consuls at
Canea, Crete, sent the following identical telegram to their several
governments: “Massacres of women and children have broken out in the
interior of the island. The authorities can neither put down the
insurrection nor stay the course of these atrocities. Humanity would
imperatively demand the immediate suspension of hostilities, or the
transportation to Greece of the women and children.”
The number of relieving ships sent to Crete in obedience to this accord
was four French, three Russian, two Italian, three Austrian, and one
Prussian.[43]
OUTRAGES IN ARMENIA IN 1877.
The writer is C. B. Norman, special correspondent of _The London Times_,
who says in his preface:
“In my correspondence to the _Times_ I made it a rule to report nothing
but what came under my own personal observation, or facts confirmed by
European evidence.
[Illustration:
A HIGHWAY IN ARMENIA.
]
“A complete list it is impossible for me to obtain, but from all
sides—from Turk and Armenian alike—I hear piteous tales of the
desolation that reigns throughout Kurdistan—villages deserted, towns
abandoned, trade at a standstill, harvest ready for the sickle, but none
to gather it in, husbands mourning their dishonored wives, parents their
murdered children; and this is not the work of a power whose policy of
selfish aggression no man can defend, but the ghastly acts of Turkey’s
irregular soldiery on Turkey’s most peaceable inhabitants,—acts the
perpetrators of which are well known, and yet are allowed to go
unpunished....
“A bare recital of the horrors committed by these demons is sufficient
to call for their condign punishment. The subject is too painful to need
any coloring, were my feeble pen enabled to give it.”
A few, out of many cases reported by Mr. Norman are given:
“This gang also attacked the village of Kordjotz, violating the women,
and sending off all the virgins to their hills; entering the church they
burned the Bible and sacred pictures; placing the communion-cup on the
altar, they in turn defiled it, and divided the church plate amongst
themselves....
“Sheik Obaidulah’s men rivalled their comrades under the flag of
Jelaludeen; these latter operated between Van and Faik Pasha’s camp.
They attacked and robbed the villages of Shakbabgi and Adnagantz,
carrying off all boys and virgins. At Kushartz they did the same, and
killing 500 sheep, left them to rot in the streets, and then fired the
place. Khosp, Jarashin, and Asdvadsadsan, Boghatz, and Aregh suffered in
like manner; the churches were despoiled and desecrated, graves dug up,
young of both sexes carried off, what grain they could not transport was
destroyed, and the inhabitants driven naked into the fields, to gaze
with horror on their burning homesteads.”[44]
THE MASSACRE OF THE YEZIDIS NEAR MOSUL, 1892.
“The Yezidis are a remnant of a heathen sect, who have never been
converted to the Moslem faith.
“Their holy place is not far from the city of Mosul, one day’s journey,
and their principal villages are also close by. In the summer of 1892
the Sultan sent a special officer, called Ferik Pasha, to Mosul to
correct certain abuses in the government, to collect all back taxes, and
to convert the Yezidis. His authority was absolute, the Vali Pasha of
the city being subject to his orders.
“In reference to his work among the Yezidis, he, it was generally
reported, was to get a certain sum per capita for every convert made.
“He first sent priests among them to convert them to the “true faith.”
They not succeeding, he very soon gave them the old alternative of the
Koran or the sword. Still not submitting, he sent his soldiers, under
command of his son, who put to the sword all who, not able to escape,
refused to accept Mohammed. Their villages were burned, many were killed
in cold blood, some were tortured, women and young girls were outraged
or carried off to harems, and other atrocities, too horrible to relate,
were perpetrated.
“Those who escaped made their way to the mountains of Sinjar, where,
together with their brethren of the mountains, they intrenched
themselves and successfully defended themselves until the spring of 1893
against the government troops which had been sent against them.
“This massacre was reported to the French Government by M. Siouffi,
Consul at that time in Mosul, and to the English Government by Mr.
Parry, who was in that region under the instructions of the Archbishop
of Canterbury.
“The Yezidis who remained in their villages on the plain had Moslem
priests set over them to instruct them in the Moslem faith. They were
compelled to attend prayers and nominally become Mohammedans; but in
secret they practised their own rites and declared that they were still
Yezidis.”[45]
After the massacre of the Yezidi peasants in 1892 an English lady of
rank, visiting Mosul, was refused permission by the Pasha to travel
through the Yezidi district, lest she witness the dreadful results of
the massacre.[46]
The writer in _The Independent_ of January 31st, gives this explanation:
“The _reason_ of the recurrence of massacres in Turkey is the fanatical
intolerance of the Moslem populace and their hatred to Christianity,
unrestrained and often fomented by Turkish officials.
“Lord Stratford de Redcliffe, the ablest and best friend Turkey ever
had, who believed that ‘England should befriend Turkey in order to
reform her,’ says:[47]
“‘Turkey is weak, fanatical, and misgoverned. The Eastern question is a
fact, a reality of indefinite duration. Like a volcano it has intervals
of rest; but its outbreaks are frequent, their occasions uncertain, and
their effects destructive’ (p. 6).
“‘Did not the massacres in Syria in 1860 come upon us by surprise?...
Have we any substantial security against the recurrence of similar
horrors, of a similar necessity, and of a similar hazard?’ (p. 79).
“‘The position of the Ottoman Empire is one of natural determination
toward a state of exhaustive weakness’ (p. 97).
“‘Ill fares the country where neither strong hand nor willing heart is
to be found’ (p. 104).
“A joint Commission is now _en route_ to investigate the Sassoun
massacres. Will any good come from it? Doubtful. Lord Stratford says (p.
117):
“‘We know not how soon or where the kites may be again collected by a
massacre or insurrection.... Such occasional meetings [of Commissions]
have their portion of inconvenience and risk. Their failure is
discreditable; the effect of their success, at best, transient and
partial. The _evils_ they are meant to correct are themselves the
offspring of one pervading evil, the source of which is in
Constantinople.’”