Map Close  
Person info Close  
Information Close  
Source reference Close  
  Svenska
 
Index

Armenia

The Urartu Civilisation

Victory for Independence

Artashisian Dynasty on the Armenian Throne

Armenia caught between Rome and the Arsacids

The Acceptance of Christianity

Defending Christianity

Armenia Under the Bagratouni Dynasty

Cilicia - the New Armenia

Armenia Under Turanian Rule

The Renaissance or the Resurrection of Armenia

The Eastern Question

Russia in the Caucasus

The Armenian Question

Battle on Two Fronts

Tsarist Russia Against the Armenians

The Revolution of the Young Turks and the Armenian People on the Eve of World War I

The First World War

The Resurrection of Armenia

Armenia on the Road to Independence, 1918

- Armenia on the Road to Independence, 1918

Eastern Armenia

Western Armenia

"The Fateful Years" (1914-1917)

"Hopes and Emotions" (March-October, 1917)

The Bolshevik Revolution and Armenia

Transcaucasia Adrift (November, 1917

Dilemmas (March-April, 1918)

War and Independence (April-May, 1918)

The Republics of Georgia, Azerbaijan, and Armenia

The Suppliants (June-October, 1918)

In conclusion

Soviet Armenia

The Second Independent Republic of Armenia

Epilogue

Previous page Page 332 Next page Smaller font Larger font Print friednly version  
Recent historians of Ottoman movements emphasize that many sincere officials attempted to bring progressive change to the Empire and that all imperial decrees were not mere "paper reforms". This view undoubtedly has validity, but it is difficult to substantiate in the Armenian experience. European intervention unsustained by force added to the tragedy of the Armenians. Even before the proclamation of the reform act of October, 1895, massacres had begun in Trabizond. In the following months, the Armenian Plateau met with the same fate. 14 Abdul Hamid's actual response to European meddling was the extirpation of between one and two hundred thousand Armenians during 1895-1896. Thousands more suffered material ruin or fled abroad. 15 Once again, the nations of Europe, now involved in the struggle of for empire, turned away from the tragedy to which they had contributed. 16 Nor could the Armenians any longer find solace in Russia. Her new foreign minister, B. A. Lobanov-Rostovsky did not want another Bulgaria on the border of Transcaucasia. His solution was an "Armenia without Armenians". 17 Such views were naturally shared by Prince Golitsyn, the proponent of confiscating the properties of the Armenian Church.

The Armenians revolutionaries were not successful in their battle against Abdul Hamid as they were in their campaign against Golitsyn. In the decade following 1896, disillusion and disappointment were widespread among the populace. It was, however, too late to retreat. Attention was turned from evils of the system to the culpability of the Sultan. Dashnaktsoutiun, ascribing importance to the role of the individual in history, plotted to eliminate Abdul Hamid. 18 Kristapor Mikayelian, one of the party's founders, directed a group of conspirators to carry out the verdict in 1905. By a quirk of fate, the plans were foiled; Abdul Hamid lived, but Mikayelian died from the explosives intended for the Sultan. 19 Significantly, participants in the plot were of several nationalities, for by the turn of the century, Dashnaktsoutiun had accepted the tactic of collaboration with other groups struggling against the common oppressor.

The "Young Turks" and the Coup f 1908

Armenians were not alone in their opposition to the Sultan. In Geneva, Paris, and other émigré centres, the "Young Turks" formed societies, drafted programs for change, and envisaged a new, improved state structure for their homeland. Patriotic Turkish leaders like Ahmed Riza believed that only the institution of efficient, just government could save the Ottoman Empire from dissolution. 20 In 1902 the first congress of Ottoman liberals, attended by Turkish, Arab, Greek, Kurdish, Armenian, Albanian, Circassian, and Jewish representatives, convened in Paris. Though united in condemnation of Abdul Hamid, the congress split on the issue of inviting the European nations to intervene on behalf of the abused peoples of the Empire. 21 Riza denounced the Armenian-sponsored majority resolution calling for intervention and opposed any form of regional-national self-rule. In his view, "Autonomy is treason; it means separation." 22