THE ARMENIANS.
Their Origin--Early History--First Nation to Accept
Christianity--Dispersion Under Oppression--Change from
Agricultural to Commercial People--General Characteristics;
Loyalty to Nation and Religion--Industry--Morality--Intellectual
Ability--Shrewdness--Jealousy of One Another--Influence of Missions
and European Ideas--Growth of National Ambition--Armenians
in Russia--Autonomy--Armenians in Other Countries--Patriarch
Mattheos--Outlook for the Future.
The Armenians are generally supposed, from their language, to be of
Aryan origin, though having not a little in common with the Turanian,
or at least the non-Aryan races. In the Assyrian period, their country
was occupied by the Nairi and Urarda, both probably Turanian stock.
When the Aryan Armenian migration occurred is not known, but the
name first occurs, in the form of Armaniya, in a Persian cuneiform
inscription of Darius Hystaspis, 522-486 B. C.
According to Armenian tradition, the name is derived from a king,
Aram, under whose rule the nation achieved considerable power, though
subsequently overcome by the mythical Queen Semiramis of Assyria. They
do not, however, call themselves Armenians, but Haik, and their country
Haiasdan, after Haik, whom they consider the son of Togarmah, the son
of Gomer, the son of Japhet, the son of Noah. He, according to their
traditions, established the Armenian kingdom in the vicinity of Ararat,
to which country he had escaped from the tyranny of Belus, the king
of Assyria, at an uncertain date, perhaps 2000 B. C. From that time
on they were a more or less powerful people, sometimes achieving a
period of independence, but generally succumbing to the attacks of the
more powerful kingdoms that arose to the south and west. Any accurate
statement of those early years it is impossible to make. It appears
to be the fact that most of their kings, among them Tigranes, the
friend of Cyrus, the younger Chosroes of the family of the Arsacidae,
and Mithridates, were not of Armenian origin, but chieftains from
the neighboring races, Parthian or others, who by personal force of
character gained a supremacy, and established for the time being what
was called an Armenian kingdom.
On the defeat by the Persians of Chosroes, of the family of the
Arsacidae, his young son Durtad escaped and went to Rome. He
subsequently gained the assistance of Rome and was re-established upon
his throne. It was through his influence in the latter part of the
third century, that the Armenians as a nation accepted Christianity.
This was the signal for renewed attacks by Persia, and the kingdom met
with various fortunes, achieving a certain independence under the sway
of the family of the Pagratidae, who for two centuries maintained a
general authority in what was known as Armenia. In the middle of the
eleventh century the Byzantine Empire became master of the greater part
of the country, and in the fourteenth century the Ottomans commenced
the reign that has been carried on till the present day.
Armenian history states that, in the time of Christ, Abgar, of their
royal line, was king of Edessa or Urfa in Northern Mesopotamia. In
other histories he is spoken of as King of the Arabs, but the Armenians
claim him for themselves. The name is certainly Armenian. According to
the chief Armenian historian, this king listened to the preaching of
Thaddeus, one of the seventy disciples who were sent forth by Christ,
and was also healed by him of a severe disease. The result was that he
accepted the Christian faith, and was baptized with his whole family.
His successor, however, refused to follow in his steps, and persecuted
the people so, that this incipient growth of Christianity was almost
destroyed. In the time of Durtad (Tiridates), in the latter part of
the third century, under the influence of Gregory the Illuminator,
as he is called, there was a great revival of Christianity, and it
was accepted as the religion of the nation. From this great preacher
the Church receives the different names by which it is known, “the
Gregorian Church,” the “Loosavorchagan Church” (Loosavorich being the
Armenian for “Illuminator”). Under his influence the king was baptized
in 301 A. D., and although there was bitter opposition on the part
of some of the nobles, the nation as a whole followed him, and the
Armenians have the distinguished honor of being the first people to
make Christianity their national religion.
Situated far from Constantinople, it was natural that they should not
mingle intimately with the theological strifes of the early centuries.
They were generally represented at the Church councils, but by some
chance sent no delegate to the Fourth Council at Chalcedon in 451 A.D.
The condemnation at that council of Nestorianism and Eutychianism
was either misreported to them, or misunderstood by them, and at a
synod of their bishops it was repudiated, and they declared themselves
decidedly in favor of the Monophysite doctrine of the nature and person
of Christ. There thus arose constant strife between them and the Greek
Church, and more and more they were shut off by themselves, so that
their national life developed, not merely independently of that of the
surrounding churches, but to the exclusion of any external influences,
such as materially affect the growth of modern ecclesiastical
communities. They would not accept instruction at the hands of the
Western Church, had no means of education within themselves, and as a
natural result formalism took the place of spiritual life. This was
assisted by the constant strife for their existence as a nation, until
the Church, as a church, lost almost its entire hold upon the spiritual
life of the people.
The history of the Armenians for the five centuries intervening
between the conquest of their home by the Turks and their coming into
prominent notice before the Christian world in the early part of the
present century, is one of constant conflict between the disintegrating
influences of an oppressive government and the intense national
characteristics of the people. From the very beginning they felt the
terrible rule of the Moslems, and as far back as 1360 some refugees
came to Edward III. of England complaining that the Moslems were
trying to exterminate their people. A little was done for them. They
were allowed to live in England and to collect subscriptions for their
fellow-sufferers, but that was about all.
In a certain sense the result of the oppression was not altogether
injurious. Up to that time the Armenians had been strictly confined
within their borders. Whatever of tyranny had been exercised there had
served to repress their national life. Now commenced a dispersion,
with both good and evil results. They wandered westward over Asia
Minor; quite a number settled on the northern slopes of the Taurus and
established a kingdom with Sis as its capital. Cut off from their own
people, they secured a patriarch to themselves, and there seemed every
possibility of their forming a distinct nation. This, however, was
destined to fall under the rule of the Turks, and they were scarcely
distinct from their fellows in other parts of the empire. Others
wandered eastward and peopled the Caucasus, which was then Northern
Persia. Shah Abbas recognized their value as subjects, and early in the
seventeenth century transported a colony to the vicinity of Ispahan.
This emigration naturally carried out of their own country some of the
most aggressive elements, and as was not unnatural, those who remained
felt still more the pressure of the surrounding Moslem tribes, who
crowded into their villages. Thus little by little the ancestral plains
of Armenia became more and more Moslem.
Another influence operated quite forcibly. In a preceding chapter
reference has been made to the custom of villagers leaving their homes
for a shorter or longer term of life in the cities and larger towns.
This was especially characteristic of the Armenians. Constantinople,
Smyrna, Trebizond, Adana and all the western cities of the empire, as
well as many inland, depended entirely upon this form of emigration for
their artisans and the great mass of their day-laborers. While many
of these bachelors, as they were called, returned to their own homes,
a large number became permanent occupants of the cities, sometimes
bringing their families with them, sometimes making their own homes.
In this way there grew up a class distinct in many respects from the
original Armenian population, with different ambitions, differing
needs and widely different customs. The agricultural character of the
race began more and more to disappear and the people became known as
tradesmen. With the control of commerce came the control of money, and
these Armenian tradesmen were the bankers in the empire. They found
their way into the service of the government, made themselves essential
to the Sultans and governors, and amassed in many cases large fortunes.
We come thus to the situation about the time of the Treaty of Paris.
The Armenians, no longer a homogeneous people with a national territory
markedly and distinctively their own, were scattered to the number
of from three to four millions over the whole of the Turkish Empire,
the Caucasus and Northern Persia. They had the same marked racial
characteristics. Physically of good stature, strong features, manly
bearing; industrious and frugal; loyal to their religion and to their
nation; of marked ability, adapting themselves to any circumstances,
whether of climate, social or political life; very kindly, sympathetic,
affectionate; with an element of the jovial in their life; intensely
proud of their history and their faith; clannish almost to the last
degree, refusing such association with other races as might imply the
loss of their own; of exceptionally pure morals among the Eastern
races; intense lovers of home and family life, and hospitable in the
extreme; with acute minds and suave manners, they manifested many of
the essential elements of a strong nation.
There were, however, other features which must be noted. They were
grossly ignorant and for the most part densely superstitious, held in
absolute thrall by a Hierarchy bigoted and overbearing to the last
degree, and fully as ignorant as the people whom they misled. Their
constant strife with other races and their long history of subjugation
had developed a shrewdness of dealing which partook in marked degree of
the unscrupulous. They were ready to take advantage of anybody and of
anything to further their ends. Obsequious and servile in their bearing
towards superiors, they were looked upon by the Turk as a necessary
evil; a fruitful source of income in the shape of taxes, advantageous
for their general skill as artisans and as servants, but beneath
contempt for their trickery. Similarly they had the hatred of their
fellow-Christians of other churches.
There was, however, another characteristic that has been recognized by
their best men for years as operating more than almost anything else to
keep them in subjection and prevent their best development. With all
their intense nationality manifesting itself in their devotion to their
history and to their church, their absolute refusal to be swallowed up
in any other race or any other community, there is a lack of mutual
confidence, a jealousy of one another’s advance that has made it
impossible for them as a race to hold together in any onward movement.
This is undoubtedly due to intense individuality and also to the
pressure of despotism. They are not by any means lacking in personal
courage, as is witnessed by multitudes of instances. Individually
they will fight for their lives and their honor and especially for
their families. They will suffer martyrdom for their religion, as they
have suffered repeatedly during the centuries. They will sacrifice
personal interests for Christ’s sake, but when it comes to the waiving
of personal opinion, the entrusting of power and the rendering of
obedience to others, they have throughout their history failed entirely.
A most marked instance of this was seen in the city of Erzrum. A
wealthy Armenian from Russia, anxious for the education of his people,
established a set of schools of very high grade, and for a time
they were carried on most successfully. But before long there came
jealousies in the management of those schools; mutual suspicion of
personal interest on the part of the directors, and year by year what
might have been the central point of Armenian national life dwindled in
strength until it almost disappeared.
The result of these characteristics was manifest in the general
situation of the Armenians, and their relation to the other peoples of
the empire. They were in many respects the most useful, and in some
respects almost the best hated of all. Their shrewdness and ability
made them indispensable. Thus they were everywhere the tradesmen and
small bankers, but at the same time had very little interest in general
commerce. The business directory of Constantinople shows almost no
Armenian firms, even for local business, and very few Armenian houses
engaged in foreign trade. Then also, when Sultan Mahmud II. organized
the government on a semi-European plan, he drew very largely upon the
Armenians for his administration officials in the various departments,
finding their versatility, ability and adaptability of the greatest
value.
At this time they began to show the result of two very powerful
influences from the West--those of American missions, and of French
literature and social life. The influence of American missions among
the Armenians has been a great power. While the proportion of those
who have identified themselves with what is known as evangelical
Christianity, in distinction from the excessive formalism of the old
Church, which had largely lost its spiritual power, was not large, it
included many men of great influence, and the general effect upon the
nation in opening the eyes of the more intelligent to the possibilities
of the new century were very marked. Wherever an American missionary
went, there was a school, and not merely a school of his own, but a
school for each of the different communities. The priests of whatever
faith found that they could not afford to lose their hold upon the
children and young people, and thus were sown far and wide the seeds
of the intellectual life that was spreading so rapidly in Europe. The
general condition of the nation, so far as education was concerned,
was deplorable. Throughout the villages it was rare to find a man
who could read, and even in the towns and cities the proportion was
very, very small. Many of the priests even were unable to read the
Scriptures in the old language, which was to them practically dead.
The introduction of these schools changed this in a marked degree. The
natural intellectual activity of the race asserted itself, and over all
the empire there was manifest a new impulse. So far as that impulse was
due to the influence of the missionaries, it was in the line of good
morals and the best national development.
Side by side, however, with this came another. As intercourse with
Europe increased, adventurous young men spread throughout the schools
of Paris and Vienna. They brought back a craze for French literature,
not the best, but the worst. With this came a revolt against religion.
It became fashionable to be known as free thinkers, and free thinking
meant not liberty, but license of thought and of life. The immediate
effect was almost appalling. The nation which had hitherto been noted
for its strict morality, became widely immoral. Gambling was almost
universal among the young men in the cities, on the seaboard, and the
achievement of considerable wealth, while in the government service,
and the openings of trade, had the effect of weakening national life.
The pride of national life had not lost all its power, but the hold of
national principles was becoming weaker. The best men in the nation
looked on aghast, and longed for influences that should serve as
anchors to keep the people. Thus there grew up a sympathetic feeling
between the better class of Armenian ecclesiastics and the American
missionaries, whose influence was strongly conservative.
The reigns of Abdul Medjid and Abdul Aziz were times of great advance
for the whole Armenian people. Oppression still existed, and oppression
of the worst form, but they were becoming more and more able to meet
oppression. Not merely in the cities, but throughout the empire, and
even in the villages, there was manifest a development which had, as
has already been said, its tokens both of good and evil, the good,
in the main, being predominant. The advent of the present Sultan,
following as it did upon the revolution which showed how thoroughly
rotten the whole Turkish fabric was, and accompanied by the events
which resulted in the formation of the Bulgarian kingdom, seemed to
open a new era to the Armenians. The young men who had been under the
educating influences of the different schools and colleges of the
Americans, or of the universities of Europe, were assuming positions
of influence among their people. Furthermore, education in their own
schools had brought sharply before them their own former history,
and there was a great revival of interest in the early kings. The
plains and valleys and mountains of Armenia were covered with a halo,
which perhaps was not historically just, but which served at any
rate to rouse the highest enthusiasm among the people. The use of
their own language, which had drifted from the severe simplicity of
its original form into a sort of mongrel, under the influence of the
Turkish language and other surroundings, was coming back. Everywhere
throughout the nation there was manifest an increasing ambition to do
for themselves what the Bulgarians had done.
Accordingly, at the conference at Berlin, a prominent Armenian was
present, and he set forth in very vivid and glowing terms the situation
of his people. The political effect of this is reserved for another
chapter. We here simply desire to point out its effect upon the nation.
That was undoubtedly in the main advantageous. It brought to an even
higher pitch their desire for education; it bound them more closely
together; brought them under the influence, to a greater degree, of the
better class of leaders, and as a natural result the first ten years
of Abdul Hamid’s reign were coincident with an even greater advance
in the general condition of the nation than had been made during the
preceding twenty years. Parallel with this, however, there was another
development, the result of two influences: the free thought of central
Europe and the pressure brought to bear by their compatriots in the
Caucasus.
Here we should turn aside to refer to that section of the Armenian
nation under Russian rule. When Russia conquered the Caucasus, and
drove the Persians south of the Aras and Schamyl’s followers into
Turkey, she found that for the development of the new territory she
must depend chiefly upon the Armenians, who had already come in in
considerable numbers. Accordingly they were made welcome and for some
time a good degree of freedom was allowed them. Their national church
was not interfered with, and though their schools were under close
supervision, they were not prevented from developing to a considerable
degree their national life. At the same time they were practically
unrestricted in trade. The easy-going Georgians were no match for them,
and in Tiflis, Schemachi, Shusha, Baku, Erivan, Armenian influence
became very strong, so that it was not surprising that there arose a
dream of national independence. They probably did not expect to wrest
any portion of Russian territory from the hand of the Czar, but they
did apparently hope for a revival of ancient Armenia in that portion
under Turkish rule. So long however as their condition in Russia was
fairly comfortable they made little attempt in that direction. But
it became apparent to the Russian Government as the years went by
that there was danger lest they find difficulty in carrying out the
general policy of the empire, which was to weld its very heterogeneous
population into a solid mass. Accordingly a system of repression was
commenced. Everywhere the Armenians felt the severe iron hand that
drove the people on the Baltic to despair. Their schools were more and
more interfered with. Their monastery and its theological department
at Etchmiadzine were watched with the eye of a detective, and both
in the choice of the Catholicos (the Primate of the Armenian Church)
and in the conduct of his office, the authority of the Holy Synod was
exercised in no slight degree. Naturally the people became restive.
They had seen the success of the Pan-Slavist Committee in stirring up
the disturbances in the Balkan Peninsula, and they conceived the plan
of accomplishing the same thing for their compatriots in Turkey. The
fuller statement of this will come in a later chapter on the Rise of
the Armenian Question. Here we note simply that the general effect
upon the Armenian people was to create still more of dissatisfaction
with their situation under the Turkish rule and fill their minds with
visions of political independence.
Parallel with this was the other influence referred to, that of the
free thought of Central Europe. The young men who had been educated
in the schools of France and Germany had become acquainted with the
stories of the revolutions that marked the close of the eighteenth
and the early half of the nineteenth century. Lacking the substantial
basis of careful investigation, not even knowing, or at least not
recognizing, the true character of their own history, they sought to
enkindle a flame not so much of revolt against the Turkish Government
as of protest to Europe against that government’s oppression. Had it
not been for the irreligion, even atheism, that characterized their
movement, they might perhaps have had greater influence. In fact
they accomplished very little, for they immediately encountered the
general conservatism of the nation, which declined to commit itself
to the leadership of those who had thrown aside to such a degree
the restraints of the Church. This was assisted by the conviction,
or at least the fear, that these men were not so much interested in
the general welfare of the people as in procuring opportunities for
political advancement for themselves, and by the fact that for the most
part they were out of the country and not liable to suffer themselves
in case of trouble. The result was that there was no unity of action or
of sentiment. No one man or body of men were authorized to speak for
the nation. Individuals set forth their personal opinions, but there
was no telling to what extent they represented the people. Constant
intrigues weakened the power of the Patriarch at Constantinople, the
civil head of the nation, and affected the choice of the Catholicos,
at Etchmiadzine, its religious head. Furthermore, the very rigid
censorship of the press, the oppressive and absurd school laws, and
even the restrictions on travel, which made it no easy matter for an
Armenian to go from one section of the empire to another, all combined
to prevent any united action or even sentiment.
In general the condition of the rural districts had grown worse.
Kurds, Circassians and Lazes held the greater portion of the plains
of Eastern Turkey, having dispossessed the Armenians, without making
good their place so far as taxpaying was concerned. The result was that
when the collector came around, he found the revenue much diminished,
unless he could squeeze the same amount out of half the people. In the
mountains there was occasionally successful resistance to the raids of
freebooters, but that had grown more difficult since the organization
of the Hamidieh Kurdish cavalry. On the other hand, in the towns and
cities, the Armenians were advancing, at least in material prosperity.
Not merely the trade and banking but the real estate had come very
largely into their hands. They were on the whole wealthier and more
comfortable. With material prosperity, however, there had not come
proportionate intellectual and moral power, and the description given
above was increasingly true.
The bearing of all this upon the question of their autonomy and
independence as a nation is evident. That the Armenians have very many
of the qualities that make a successful nation no one will deny. Their
ability is undoubted. Their race tenacity evidenced in their loyalty to
their faith, even in its weaker form, and the hold that their language
has even upon those with whom it ceased to be vernacular, mark them as
a people of power. Their faculty of adaptation to new circumstances in
the use of any means that come to hand would ensure in marked degree
success in meeting new emergencies. The mutual jealousy and inordinate
self-seeking that have hitherto proved so serious a hindrance to their
general advancement might very likely be overcome were they compelled
by force of circumstances to waive personal feeling or see everything
collapse. Men who could fight together as did the Armenians of Zeitun
must have the best elements of patriotism. For the overcoming of
these obstacles, however, it is essential that there be the pressure
of outside circumstances. In the case of the Armenians that pressure
was absolutely lacking. They were very differently situated from the
Bulgarians, who were in the overwhelming majority in their own country,
which moreover is compact. The Armenians are scattered over the whole
Turkish Empire, and there are wide differences between those of
different sections. The mountaineers of Bitlis can neither understand
the language nor appreciate the ideas of the villager of Harput, much
less those of the merchant of Smyrna or Constantinople. The men of
Aintab and Adana, with their Turkish, can scarcely confer, still less
associate intimately, with those of Marsovan.
Thus the very cosmopolitan character of the nation, its versatility and
ability, all operate to prevent what the Armenian nationalists so much
desire, and these characteristics must be kept in mind if we would form
an approximately correct idea of the nation.
A word should be said about Armenians outside of their own country. As
a rule Armenians do not make a pleasant impression upon the people of
other countries. They are looked upon as tricky, scheming, unreliable.
Where they have formed colonies of some size, as in New England and
California, they are contrasted to their own great disadvantage with
the communities of Scandinavians, Germans, and others. Where they
appear as individuals in the cities, in trade or as artisans, they
suffer from similar comparisons. In all such cases, certain things
must be kept in mind. The colonies are almost entirely made up of
those who come from the poor sections of Asia Minor or Eastern Turkey,
and even then are deprived of the refining influences of home as they
have left their families in their own country. They are entirely
uneducated, accustomed to very different kind of living, have not the
language facility of those who have lived in Constantinople, and find
it extremely difficult to enter into the new life about them. Those who
gather in the cities are as a rule planning for a return to the East.
They purpose to remain here long enough to make some money, or secure
American citizenship, and then to go back to their homes. A few come
expecting to stay and become loyal American citizens. Such as a rule
find a cordial welcome and make a good impression. Two things must be
remembered: the Armenian is essentially Oriental in his character and
the true Oriental does not adapt himself easily or speedily to American
life; those who know the race most widely and most intimately esteem it
the most highly.
No better illustration can be given of the best development of the
Armenian character, that which gives hope of their ultimate success as
a nation, than the position taken by the present Armenian Patriarch
in Constantinople. Mattheos Ismirlian is described by an American
resident in Constantinople, as a man somewhat above medium height,
thin and of dark complexion, but with strong, resolute face, having
the large features characteristic of his race. He was born in 1845, in
Constantinople, and received the name Ismirlian (the man from Smyrna,
Ismir,) from the fact that his grandfather was originally a resident
of that city. He was educated in the Armenian schools, and at the
age of nineteen was made deacon of the Armenian Church in one of the
Bosporus villages. In 1869, he entered the celibate college and was
ordained as arch-priest. His ability and industry brought him to the
front, and he was elected successively secretary to the Patriarch,
member of the assembly of the community and a member of the synod. He
was noted as a preacher and teacher, simple, direct and intense in his
style, and achieved a high reputation throughout the nation. He was
also recognized on every hand as a man of unusual soundness of judgment
and purity of motive. Seven years later, when only thirty-one years of
age, he was ordained as bishop and was promoted rapidly. In 1886, he
was made leader or director of the parish of Egypt, where he instituted
numerous improvements, and his service was so efficient as to bring
for him decorations from King Menelek, of Abyssinia, and the Sultan,
but more than all, the devotion of his own people. After five years of
service he returned to Constantinople and soon after, when there became
necessary the election of a Catholicos, his name was prominent among
the candidates. He refused absolutely to make any effort to secure this
prize, coveted by every Armenian bishop, and yet his name ranked not
only among the first four in the assembly, but on the subsequent ballot
was one of the two sent to the Czar for selection. The choice fell upon
Khrimian, also well and most favorably known throughout the nation, but
it placed Ismirlian in the front rank for further honors.
In December of 1894, at the time when the affairs of the nation were
most critical, as will be understood from the chapter on the condition
in 1894, the one sentiment of all was in favor of him, but the question
arose whether the Sultan would favor his election. He was well known
as a man of great resoluteness and patriotism, and one who would never
yield an iota of what he felt it was right to demand. He was elected,
and contrary to expectation, that election was immediately confirmed by
the Sultan. From that time on the Patriarch has been “in a very real
sense the champion of his people, bearing their griefs and carrying
their sorrows as few have done, in an office that has been filled by
men of conspicuous consecration.” Every legal means in his power has
been used in behalf of his people, and threats of imprisonment or of
death have accomplished nothing. Soon after his installation he sent to
the Minister of Justice a letter asking power to appoint new bishops
in places where the bishops had been imprisoned for varying periods.
The reply came that the statements about those bishops were false, and
their withdrawal was demanded. The Patriarch answered, “The statements
are true, and the truth I cannot withhold.” From that time to this he
has been a thorn in the side of the Turkish Government; neither bribes,
flattery nor deception have availed. Loyal to the Sultan, his loyalty
refuses servility, as is instanced in his statement to the Sultan in
his first audience: “As far as my conscience permits me I will obey
you, but at the same time I must look to the welfare of my people.”
It is scarcely surprising that the Sultan in a rage sent him away and
omitted the customary decoration. A little later, realizing his power
with the people, the Sultan sent for him and offered him the highest
decorations that could be given to a civilian subject in the empire.
The reply came as follows:
“Your majesty, what have I to do with such things? I am a simple
priest. I live on bread and olives, as do my people. I have no place in
my house for such gorgeous things. I pray you, do not ask me to accept
them.”
Another illustration of his boldness and firmness is found in the
following statement, made to his people in the installation service:
“Before God and in presence of this meeting, I swear to remain faithful
to my government and my nation, and to watch over the just and explicit
fulfilment of this constitution (the constitution granted by Abdul
Aziz). My understanding of the word faithful is this: faithfulness
involves on the side of the government protection of life and property.
Without this, faithfulness on the side of the subject is hypocrisy.”
It was not only towards the government, however, that the Patriarch
had occasion to manifest his high courage. Recognizing very clearly
the absurdities of the revolutionist movement, he steadily refused to
give it any countenance whatever, and threats were numerous on the part
of the disappointed Huntchagists that he should be killed. He feared
this no more than the threats of the government, and has steadily
pursued his way, holding to what he felt to be right and best for his
nation. It is scarcely too much to say that such a man deserves the
same rank accorded to the great leaders of the world, and a nation that
can at such a crisis produce such a man and stand by him is a nation
that under proper training, and with favorable circumstances, may be
expected to develop a high national character.
The general situation of the Armenians at the present time is one
that calls for the sympathy of the entire Christian world. They have
lost a large proportion of their best men by massacre; throughout
the empire it has seemed to be the unwavering purpose of the Turkish
Government to cut down the very men who had most influence, and who
most used their influence in behalf of good citizenship and upright
life. The most conservative estimates, endorsed by the British
Ambassador at Constantinople, for the sections where there has been
careful investigation, give the number killed at 25,000, and admit that
the real number is far larger. For a nation numbering not more than
2,000,000 within the borders of the empire, to lose probably not less
than 40,000 or 50,000 of its best men is a terrible thing, and the loss
cannot but have a serious effect upon the future development. This,
however, is not all. Not merely have these lives been blotted out, but
property to an incalculable degree has been destroyed. The Armenian
nation is shorn of a large part of its strength; whether there is
enough left to give it vigor or power for the immediate future remains
to be seen. The outlook is by no means hopeful, and yet seldom in the
history of the world has the effort to blot out a race been successful.
Whatever be the political outcome, as set forth in other chapters of
this book, there can be but one hope for all those interested in the
Armenian people, and that is, that they may by this terrible experience
realize their weakness and unite their strength for a purer and truer
national life than they have had at any time, even than many of them
have dreamed of. This, however, will depend very largely upon the
support accorded to them by the Christian nations of the world. If
that support fails, then the responsibility rests, not alone upon the
Armenians, but to a great degree upon those nations.
[Illustration:
ARMENIAN WOMAN. A good illustration of the Armenian type. The
head-dress is that usually found in the Caucasus. The Armenian women,
as a rule, are fine looking, with intelligent faces and womanly
bearing. This is especially noticeable in the case of old women.
Among the oriental races, as a rule, the old women are not handsome,
but the reverse is true of the Armenian women.]
[Illustration:
AN EVANGELICAL ARMENIAN CHURCH IN CONSTANTINOPLE. For many years the
congregation occupied a building which became unsafe through age and
was taken down. Attempts were made for several years to secure a
permit for a new building, but all failed, and the people in a single
night put up this building for the purpose of having a place where
they could worship.]
[Illustration:
KURDISH MOUNTAIN VILLAGE. A typical scene in the mountains. There is
a group of houses mostly connected by passages half under ground.
The walls are of rough stone. The roof is formed, as seen, by rough
beams, over which branches are stretched and earth over them,
sometimes formed into a dome, in which there is a hole serving as
window and chimney.]
[Illustration:
A TURKISH VILLAGE SHEIKH, probably connected with some one of the
Dervish orders. Many of them are men of great intelligence and
considerable force of character, especially those who are the chiefs
of large communities.]