465) An Armenophile Exposes 1890s Armenian Propaganda

These two pages from an article ("Turkey and Armenia," pp. 204-205) by Richard Davey in Fortnightly Review (Vol LVII New Series, Jan. to June 1895) were sent by reader M. Mersinoglu.

How refreshing that a Western author such as Richard Davey (who also wrote The Sultan and His Subjects, Vol. 1 in 1897, and what seems like later editions in 1907 and 2001), exhibiting a clear bias for the Armenians, could still somewhat overcome his prejudices in the interest for truth. He was not fooled by Armenian propaganda, which he termed "hysterical sensationalism." . . .

Every man of heart must admire, nay reverence, the nobility of the Armenian character, and its steadfast adherence to its old institutions and its ancient religion, through sorrows and trials which would have driven other peoples to despair, and applaud their pluck in keeping their wrongs before the public. But surely it is not for us to endorse falsehoods and exaggerations without taking the trouble to verify them. A few examples will serve my purpose better than a long dissertation. One of these associations established in London publishes a little newspaper yclepy [sic] The Anglo-Armenian Gazette. I cull a few gems from its columns to show the method with which these "patriots" work. In the February number for 1894 I find this: "Some thirty years ago an Armenian published a pamphlet to prove the descent of Queen Victorian from the ancient kings of Armenia. Since which time the Armenians have been wondering why her Majesty does not annex Armenia to her dominions." This would be merely silly if it were not extremely mischievous. There exists at the Sublime Porte a sort of official Romeike, presided over by an Armenian clerk, whose duty it is to cut out of the foreign newspapers everything he can find that is disagreeable to the Sultan. Those he translates into Turkish, and they are sent up every evening to Yildiz for His Majesty's perusal — en parenthèse, His Majesty must have had a good deal of unpleasant reading during the last few months! Now, when he reads such a paragraph as the above, and finds that it emanates from an association presided over by some of Her Majesty's Cabinet Ministers and Members of Parliament, he, whose mind is eastern and not western, puts his own construction upon it, and comes to the conclusion that it is an indirect but, nevertheless, semi-official suggestion as to the propriety of our annexing a part of his dominions. In another number I find the following questions asked: "Is it not a beautiful sight to see the Armenians of Constantinople going about the streets in rags and tatters rather than, by renouncing their ancient religion, accepting the golden epaulets and decorations of a Pasha?" This is an insinuation that no Armenian can accept office under the Turkish Government unless he turns Muhammedan. There happen to be, at the present moment, no less than eleven Armenian, four or five German, and three English Pashas, not one of whom has ever been requested to change his religion. As to the "rags and tatters," the Armenian population of Constantinople, which is exceedingly active and industrious, is very fairly well off — some few very rich. At least a quarter of the officials in the Government employ are Armenians, for the Turks cannot do without the assistance of their superior intelligence. Moreover, a good third of the commercial and banking interests of Turkey are in the hands of Armenians. On the other hand, undoubtedly the Anglo-Armenian and American-Armenian Associations — by flooding Turkey with revolutionary pamphlets, principally sent over the Persian frontier from Tabriz, where there is a headquarter of Armenian revolutionary propaganda, by notoriously exaggerating the proportions of the unfortunate events which take place in Armenia, and by creating secret societies whose avowed object is the overthrow of the Sultan — have made the very name of Armenia odious to him. Aided by busybodies and notoriety-hunters in England and America, they have greatly impeded the action of the ambassadors, and done more harm to the cause of their compatriots than they can ever undo. The truth must prevail, and the truth about Armenia is terrible enough, without the aid of hysterical sensationalism.


The "great Armenian horrors' boom"


If anyone wishes to form an idea of how Armenian atrocities are manufactured and exaggerated, let him read the Blue-books on "affairs at Aleppo," 1879. The London papers, inspired by the "patriots," announced, with a great flourish of trumpets, that 500 Armenians had been tortured and massacred in the neighbourhood of that city; and there was, so to speak, a great Armenian horrors' boom all over the western world and America too. Well, after all this sensationalism, the number of slain was eventually reduced by our own and the American consuls to eight.


1896 propaganda from an American book, about Sasoun.
Here's an account as to how many really died.

Within the past six weeks the London papers have been gloating over the "atrocities" committed upon Armenians at, and in, Sasoun. The number of the killed was at first 2,000, then 3,000, and finally, thanks to a telegram from Boston, from "one who had received a letter from Sasoun" — how the letter had time to reach America, and how it had been allowed to get out of Turkey, were details never explained! — it was declared that the "massacred Armenians exceeded 10,000." In all these despatches, and in the articles commenting upon them, Sasoun is almost invariably described as a "town" or "village." As a matter of fact Sasoun is neither the one nor the other, but a wild district in the Upper Valley of the Tchai-Batam, a branch of the Tigris, and separated from the basin of the Euphrates by high mountains. It is remoter from Erzeroum, but about equal distance from Diabekir, Mousch, and Bitlis. Nothing can be imagined more terrifically grand than the scenery of this desolate country. The gorges and ravines which cross it are as dreadfully gloomy as the one described by Shelley's Beatrice. A score of cataracts and waterfalls tumble headlong from the black precipices, and gathering together their waters rush desperately towards the Tigris and Euphrates, at the foot of the various dangerous defiles and passes.
Thoughts from Holdwater

How interesting, if the author's claim is correct, that an Armenian was given the job of translating foreign newspapers for the Sultan. (Since Armenians were comparatively well versed in languages, the claim can be believed. But if Sultan Abdul Hamid was so anti-Armenian, it's worth pondering why he would have trusted an Armenian.)

Note how the author was quick to "applaud (the Armenians') pluck in keeping their wrongs before the public." (Pluck!) If Davey admired the Armenians for their boo-hoo'ing talents in 1894, he might have had a heart attack if he knew how professionally the Armenians were still at the game, over a century later.

Interesting as well that the Blue-books from 1879 are challenged for truthfulness, well before the discredited volumes from the WWI years.

I don't know anything about the author, but get the feeling he must have been the typical, deeply-ingrained Christian of the times. His level head has discerned to a degree the foul propagandistic play at work, and yet he still goes on to write, "The truth must prevail, and the truth about Armenia is terrible enough..." How was he able to distinguish the truthful reports from the "mischief"? I guess when the information came from the missionaries, Richard Davey was quick to believe it.

I was curious as to see what excerpts of Davey's work the Armenian "genocide" sites have selected, for their own purposes. From his The Sultan and his Subjects book, we learn that he has given a thumb's up to the story about "every Armenian man, woman, and child" who were "put to the sword" by the Turks, during the "memorable siege of Erzerum (Karin), in 1627." He adds there were also "massacres ... on a great scale at Bitlis, Van and Aleppo."

Where did he get this information from?

In the article we're examining, Davey has written, much to his credit, "But surely it is not for us to endorse falsehoods and exaggerations without taking the trouble to verify them." So how did he go about verifying the 1627 claims? (The almost guaranteed answer: he didn't. He doesn't seem to have been playing by his own rules.)

Another Davey passage that is popular in some Armenian sites:

"I have before me, as I write, a report presented to the Sultan in 1876 by the Armenian Patriarch of Constantinople. It gives a long and concise list of the yearly massacres and vexations to which the Armenians in Taurus regions and in Asia Minor have been subjected during the years extending from 1860 to 1877."

This would be the same Armenian Patriarch who claimed a 3 million Ottoman-Armenian population during the 1878 Berlin Congress, which the Patriarch quickly revised to 1,780,000.

Assuming Davey did not go on to contradict the above passage in the same book, why is Davey accepting the word of the Patriarch at face value without "taking the trouble to verify" the Patriarch's claims? The Patriarchate was famous for its "falsehoods and exaggerations." Did Davey believe the Patriarch's word was gold because the Patriarch was a man of the book?

Finally, among those "Aryan" Armenians who enjoy criticizing Jews in Armenian forums:

The lower class jews, in several parts of the town, aided the turks in slaughtering their Christian neighbours; but their sole object was plunder.' (August 1896) From 'The Sultan and his Subjects' 1907 By Richard Davey. P 393.

This is the very first I'm hearing of Ottoman Jews being accused of participating in massacres; the Ottoman Jews were peaceful people rarely given to violence. I can't imagine how Richard Davey would have gone about verifying this claim. Perhaps his presumed strong Christian inclinations allowed him to believe the worst of the Jews.

Richard Davey is to be commended for going beyond the majority of his peers during the period, who were intoxicated by the "great Armenian horrors' boom." Yet even those who strove to be fair, and had at least some idea of how "mischievous" the Armenians were, couldn't let go of their ingrained, prejudiced beliefs. Even when Davey points fingers at the beloved Armenians, it's in terms of oh, those rascals!

***********************************************************
© Holdwater
http://www.tallarmeniantale.com/expose1894propag.htm

***********************************************************