The Armenian Crisis in Turkey: The Massacre of 1894, Its Antecedents and Significance, With a Consideration of Some of the Factors Which Enter Into the Solution of This Phase of the Eastern QuestionGreene, Frederick Davis
History
The Armenian Crisis in Turkey: The Massacre of 1894, Its Antecedents and Significance, With a Consideration of Some of the Factors Which Enter Into the Solution of This Phase of the Eastern Question
Greene, Frederick Davis
Armenian massacres, 1894-1896; Armenian question
“The Sultan evidently believes that he is equally independent of both
these governments, and decides all questions, great and small, for
himself. In form he does so, but no man can act independently of all his
sources of information, and of the personal influence of his
_entourage_. Under the present system he makes himself responsible for
every blunder and every iniquity committed in the Empire, but he has
disgraced three distinguished Grand Viziers for telling him so, and
seems to have no idea of the causes of the intense dissatisfaction with
his government which prevails among his Mohammedan subjects. The Turks,
as well as the Christians, also condemn the laws restricting personal
freedom, which have increased in severity every year. In many ways these
laws are more galling to the Turks than the Christians....
“There is another evil connected with this system which may lead to
serious difficulties with foreign Powers. All foreign relations are
supposed to be managed through the Minister of Foreign Affairs or the
Grand Vizier, but these officials have no power and but little
influence. They can promise nothing and do nothing. But in all delicate
diplomatic questions it is essential to treat with responsible agents,
and to discuss them with such agents in a way in which it is impossible
to treat with the Sovereign himself. The present system has been a
serious injury to Turkey. It has roused the hostility of all the
Embassies and led them to feel and report to their governments, that
there is no use in trying to do anything to save this Empire; that it is
hopelessly corrupt, and the sooner it comes to an end the better for the
world. There is no longer any concerted action of Europe at
Constantinople for the improvement of the condition of the people....
“If Sultan Abd-ul-Hamid would come out of his palace, restore to the
Porte its full responsibility, disband its secret police, trust his
Mohammedan subjects, and do simple justice to the Christians, his life
would be far more secure than it is to-day, with all precautions; his
people and all the world would recognize the great and noble qualities
which they now ignore, and welcome him as the wisest and best of all the
Sultans....
“The sad pity of it is that he will never do it. It is too late. The
influence of the Palace favorites is too strong. He will appear in
history not as the Sultan who saved the Empire, but as the one who might
have saved it and did not.”
CHAPTER VII.
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.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account