The stolen heritage

[khodja]

Gamavor,

 

My undergraduate years were spent at one of the top public universities in America, my masters at one of the top 40 in the US and Law School at one of the top 45. Do not attibute my thinking to these schools but to my experiences in life, many of which were with my fellow Armenians.

[khodja]

Ali,

 

I sincerely hope that our two peoples can resolve the rift that exists. The official histories of that era tout the Armenians who achieved high positions in Ottoman life but do not explain what happened to them or their progeny. It is as if the history of Ottoman Armenians suddenly became one of the past, not the present. All ties were severed. The survivors had to begin from scratch financially and emotioanlly.

[aurguplu]

khodja,

 

i share your hopes. as for the turkish official histories, just let me tell you that for most intelligent turks, "official history" means "lies". come on, we lived in a country where almost ten per cent of the whole population was armenian. our neighbours, our business partners, people in our government, our small-scale artisans, the people who built the dolmabahçe palace,

our doctors, grocers etc. many of them were armenian. do you think we don't ask the question of what happened to them all, or whether they were all insurgents?

 

the time will come. as i said many times before, to think of the genocide was a crime a decade ago. today you can conduct surveys in turkey where you ask people whether they think the genocide did take place, and eleven per cent are vocal enough to say "yes".

 

i!ll be damned if there will not be a formal recognition of the genocide by the end of this decade.

 

regards,

[aurguplu]

khodja,

1. about a decade ago, there was a genetic survey being conducted in the eastern black sea region, which could not be completed because word had leaked that the staunchly muslim and nationalist population of the region was genetically no different from the armenians. the people were fuming, they took it as an affront, and refused to cooperate further.

2. during the s-300 missile crisis with greece about two years ago. a village in the black sea region, a stronghold of the mhp (the grey wolves), protested the greeks and took the very nationalistic decision of "not speaking greek in public in the village anymore".

3. the founder of the mhp, the late a.t. (you know whom i mean) is frequently rumoured to have been of armenian origin and aware of the fact since his relatives spoke armenian.

4. ziya gökalp, the founder of turkish nationalism, is a kurd from lice, diyarbakır. he never entertained the latter lunacy that the kurds were an ancient turkish tribe.

5. the ethnicity of atatürk is a taboo subject in turkey, and speculation is rampant.

6. in almost every case where a dig takes place anywhere in turkey, and some old bones are unearthed, the subsequent dna analyses reveal that the local population is genetically related to the bones, unless they are known to have been recent (19th-20th centuries) immigrants from central asia or the balkans.

7. the population of anatolia when turks came in must have been around 12-15 million, whereas the incoming turks can not be proven to have numbered much bove three million (the nationalists have tried to swell the numbers, but available records do not support them).

8. a good number of the registers of the ottoman empire all the way from the fourteenth century, which have been prepared fo critical editions, can still not be published on account of the evidence of gradual or sudden mass conversions to islam in anatolia.

and, finally, turks are for the most part fully aware of the fact that they are far more similar to the neighbouring peoples than the central asians. all they have to do is look at the mirror.

regards,

[aurguplu]

a query

 

does the word "khakhonch" (written in turkish as hahonç, stress accent on first syllable, the h is the ch in scottish loch) mean anything in armenian, or does it ring any bells to an armenian?

 

regards,

[MJ]

Yes, Ali. It is an Armenian word. I am out the door in few minutes, and unfortunetely cannot check it
's meaning, though I know precisely what beach "animal" it describes.

I also would like to address some of the issues that you have raised on the Armenian downplaying of the Armenian uprising in Ottoman Turkey and the like, but unfortunately have to run now. Hopefully will do it next weekend.

[khodja]

Gamavor,

 

Didn't Armenians fight with the Russian and French forces? Did that not give the butcher Talaat an excuse? As for Kouyoumjian he wrote under the name of Michael Arlen and told his children nothing about their Armenian heritage. His son wrote a book explaining his personal journey to discover his roots. I read it in it's entirety.

 

Mustafa or Mehmet? Take your pick. You still can't take my being away from me. You are not the first and noe will you be the last Armenian to try. Being a Loosavorchagan or even a christian is not what makes one an Armenian.

[aurguplu]

gamavor,

i agree that the indo-european homeland problem is an unsolved one. the one theory that had gained widespread acceptance was that it was somewhere in southern russia. this theory had the great advantage of explaining the geographical distribution of the historically attested indo-european language subfamilies, and also the widely believed genetic relationship the ancestor of indo-european had to uralic (and perhaps altaic and paleosiberian languages). common sense dictates that a language family might be genetically related, or at least share common features with, its geographical neighbours. now caucasian, afroasiatic (formerly known as hamito-semitic), hurrian, urartian and sumerian and other language isolates from pre-indo-european anatolia and the middle east are worlds apart from indo european in terms of phonetics, basic vocabulary, morphology, and grammar in general (altogether language typology), whereas this is not the case with uralic and surprisingly with altaic and a good many of the paleosiberian languages. stanford linguist joseph geenberg and various russian scholars have argued rather convincingly on this.

i have recently read an online abstract outlining the theory that the homeland was eastern anatolia and the caucasus, there appears to be archaeological evidence in that direction, and it also explains some linguistic puzzles and borrowings in indo-european, but poses more problems than it solves.

all this aside, there is hardly anty evidence that the historically attested ancient indo-european peoples ever had a clue that they were related linguistically. only the greeks and romans perceived that their languages were related, and the romans explained this as them being descendants of some tribe which fought at troy. i was also informed orally that alexander the great had noticed that "there was something" between greek and sanskrit when he invaded india. other than that, the europeans only knew that their languages were more similar to one another than say, arabic, hebrew, hungarian or turkish until about the eighteenth century, when systematic work was carried out. there is no evidence whatsoever of a consciousness of a common indo-european past, and the indo-europeans gleefully slaughtered one another throughout history.

as for the turks, they do not base their right to belong here or anywhere not on linguistics or geographical origin, but on their sword. this is the only observable criterion that the people of the world actually have been using anywhere anytime. the russians belong to central asia no more than we belong to anatolia (and probably a good deal less in fact, since we are the biological and cultural descendants of the asian invaders and the local population, whereas they are for the most part just slavs misplaced) but they are there and will stay there unless and until someone has the power to throw them out, of which there is no sign today.

to compare the turkish invasion of anatolia to the european invasions of the americas, africa and australia is not simply ridiculous, but sound historical practice, which does produce unpalatable results for the europeans in question and forces them to kick the habit of harbouring a "holier than thou" attitude towards other conquering nations.

if europeans are expecting that turks and other conquering nations (the arabs, for instance) leave their conquered lands and get back to wherever they came from, they should set an example by sailing back to the old continent and leaving the americas and australia to the americans and the australians. they won't do that, will they?

he who has never sinned, let him cast the first stone.

[ThornyRose]

Ali, that reminds me, are you aware of Abdi İpekçi's daughter speaking up about her family? They were Sebutaycı, and they said that another prominent person who was in charge of foreign affairs at the time (either our minister, İsmail Cem, or Akarcalı was also one. My mother told me about this; I haven't watched the program myself.

[MJ]

OK, Ali. I am at my hotel and have a little time, and can get back to the promised subject. First about "khakhonch." Haven't had obviously a chance to look in the dictionary, but it is something close to a "shell." Not the shell itself, but I think the living organism inside. However, in practice people use it also in the sense of its hard surface.

I have also promised to address a couple of issues for quite some time. Will try as best as I can in the current conditions.

I haven't had a chance to check the date of the Letter of Nubar ***** vs. the date of the signing of the Severes Treaty. Obviously, Nubar ***** had to present a picture of viability of the proposed Armenian State and make a cased that Armenians "deserve" it and have earned" it by the standards of the time. And if he had to exaggerate a little bit for such purpose - he had to do so. But what I recall the letter saying was that thousands of Armenians had come from all over the world to fight against the Ottomans."" In my view it is just a rhetoric statement what he has said. The question is only how many thousands is "thousands" - two, three, ten or hundred? For example, if there was one Armenian form Iran, one from France, one from America, and five thousand from Caucasus and Eastern Anatolia, I think Nubar *****'s statement would have been quite accurate.

Let's also look at the real context of the issues from a wider perspective.

In our around 1890 at least two Armenian political parties had been established with the agenda of the liberation of Armenia. This fact on its own makes me only feel proud, and under no pretext I would like to "hide" it for the sake of the questionable political gains. The first one was the Hnchagian party, and then Tasnaks followed them. People at the foundations of these parties had been men who in my view should be put on the pedestal of the Armenian history, though I find many of the actions of their followers wouldn't or shouldn't be seen from that perspective. They, including Michael and Khristopor, established organizations with the purpose of National Liberation, which is the holiest of all holly aspirations in my view - even by the standards of the modern world, as documented by the various resolutions of the UN. I am not feeling a need to put myself in a defensive position and try to justify them claiming that they where frustrated by the refusal of the Sultans to implement the reforms that they had promised in the last 30 years or so. I don't need that they needed such justification - the country and the nation was enslaved for about 700 years, and they were trying to liberate it.

One may claim that they have been occasionally committing terrorist acts, and looking at it from the point of view of the morality and rationality of our days, one may claim that it was not morally and otherwise justified. But we have to see it in the context of the era they have lived in. The teroristic actions were a quite common mentality at the time throughout Europe and Russia. Besides, one has to look at it very carefully as to understand the chronology of the events as to figure out whether these where terrorist actions or reactions. The highest profile terrorist action of the time that I can recall without having the literature in my hands is the one committed against the Bank Ottoman.

However, the outcome of the straggle for Armenia’s independence by 1905 was total fiasco – the idea of independence was too elitist. The masses in rural/agrarian areas where too assimilated or bitten to the point as not to raise their heads from under the heavy yoke, the wealthy were not supportive of any perturbations which might’ve jeopardized their economic stability, and the talks of independence were just subjects of debates in the Armenian “political clubs” of Istanbul, consistently finding their way to the Armenian Satirical literature of the time. By 1905 the spirit of the liberation was out and the spirit of revolution was in. There was almost nothing left from Mikael or Kristapor (all the way to our days). In one word – it was a total fiasco.

It is also interesting to note that the ruling circles of the Ottoman Empire have indeed used this very skillfully. Armenians, to an extent, have raised their voice for liberation. I wish it had been serious or at least well executed. But they have tried to implement European models in the Ottoman Empire. As we have discussed earlier, the best thing that they could do for their own oppression was the terror. They have given much desired pretext to the Sultan to implement unprecedented horror. And interestingly enough, Armenians do a demonstration in Istanbul with slogans of independence, and enormous numbers of totally unaware Armenians get slaughtered in Adana. Obviously, the reaction of the revolutionaries was going to be more hate and more escalation (knowing our loud-mouth revolutionaries) – this is what the Sultan needed – more violence from Armenians easier for him to implement the massacres. The goal of this posting is not to analyze the Armenian revolutionaries, though I feel it needs to be done, finally. I think their responsibility in the Armenian massacres has to be exposed. But it requires systematic studies and I am not in the position of doing it.

As far as the period of the WW1 is concerned, of coarse WW1 has awakened the hopes for the liberation of Armenia, though to a very limited extend. It would be naïve to assume that the much oppressed minority would not find at least few thousand sons who would raise for the occasion. My problem is not that they have done it. To the contrary, I am ashamed that they have not done it properly. But, again, as I claimed above, the nation was too assimilated and too bitten up. Basically, even those who were the loud mouth revolutionaries of the time had pledged loyalty to the Empire. Sure there have been few thousand volunteers that have joined the Russian Army to fight against the Ottoman. No Armenian can deny it. To the contrary, these volunteers have become the heroes of the nation and part of its folklore. They are the ones who have inspired at least some pride to the nation in the future to come, so that not too look like an entire nation has been slaughtered without resistance. You also tell as that many Armenians have served as guides for the Russian Army due to their familiarity with the local terrain – quite possible. How many of them? From my perspective, if not to consider that they were most likely being fooled by the Russians with the promises of granting liberty to Armenians after the victory, the entire nation had to rise up. But this was not the perspective of the time. I would have much preferred, perhaps from the safe distance today, that the entire nation – women, children, the elderly had risen, joined with the allies and had given resistance to the Ottoman Army to the latest drop of their nation. And then, if they were slaughtered in the battle, I would’ve felt that they did their best, but they lost. There would’ve been no complain – it would’ve been a fair game. But unfortunately, this was not the reality. Armenian men, primarily, were summoned to the Ottoman Army, and had served faithfully until the point of being slaughtered first. The political parties had committed loyalty – it would have been even stupid not to commit it given that the men where in the Ottoman Army and they had no intention to rise against the Empire – I think there is no such evidence whatsoever.

In the past you have mentioned that Armenians dismiss any context for the commitment of the Genocide by the Ottomans. I have to tell you that you were wrong. Those of us who value things like liberty and sovereignty and statehood have always understood that this has been exactly the context for the Ottomans or the Ittehat to commit the Genocide, even though the reality of it has not existed. Many of us have even expressed this idea in different public forums. Only culturally Ottoman Turks like Khodja could think or claim that the Genocide has been committed because of the racial and religious motivations. Because the consciousness of liberty, independence, statehood, sovereignty doesn’t exist in their minds – something hereditary. Therefore, On behalf of those for whom the Armenian Sovereignty has been and remains of the utmost value, let me tell you that you were absolutely right in your assertion. Moreover, I think that the potential Armenian independence was the only compelling motivation of the Ottoman Turks to commit the Genocide. But the thing is the while we can understand such motivations of the oppressors, we don’t feel that it warrants Genocide of such scale, and moreover denying its commitment 85 years later, thus continuing the torture of the Genocide for the survivors and their generations as if inserting needles into the voodoo doll of the Armenian psyche. My understanding is that you were of the same opinion.

I just want to reiterate – there would be impossible to find a healthy Armenian who would not proudly accept that Armenians have rebelled in the Ottoman Empire. Only some of them would exaggerate it to feel more proud, others would totally deny it because they may make some “political calculations.” But the real issue is the scale of that rebellion, its geography, its implications for the Ottoman Turkey, and so on. Perhaps this is something more for the professionals.

One last comment of mine along these lines would be an assertion that Turkey didn’t have a rational use for the Eastern Anatolian provinces then, and it lacks such use even now. But I know that these things are not defined by “rationality.”

As far as the Armenian atrocities are concerned, I think this issue is also frequently misunderstood or misrepresented. Many of us do know that Armenians have committed some atrocities. Even the Armenian historical literature provides such evidence (not too detailed though). And it would be stupid or at least naïve from our sides to think that in the course of the events of the WW1 and the Genocide, no Armenians would’ve committed atrocities. We even know the names of some of the commanders that have led such atrocities. Our relative silence on this issue is not because of our non-recognition of these events. It is because of our understanding and the existing evidence that the Turkish side is taking these atrocities out of their context and scale, and trying to create a picture of quid-pro-quo. When the events of the region and era are properly recognized and properly interpreted, I can assure you that you would find many Armenians who would come forward clear and loudly and denounce those commanders and their subordinates. But for now, indeed we would not go after them, because first things first.

Sorry for this hectic material. I have had a long and tiresome trip, and it is getting late. Hopefully will be more systematic at my next chance to speak out.

[aurguplu]

thorny

abdi ipekçi was a selanikli (or sabetaycı , and ismail cem is his cousin. his full nam is ismail cem ipekçi. another member of that community was the late gülçin telci, author at hürriyet. i don't know about bülent akarcalı.

regards,

[raffiaharonian]

Khakhounch = snail

[ThornyRose]

Thanks for confirming - but why do these winks and smiles appear when we use the letter "ı" right before closing parentheses? I'll say infopop has a sense of humour of its own!

[khodja]

Martin,

 

I ask you, now that there is an independent Armenia after hundreds of years, with the exception of the 2 years of the first Armenian Republic of 1918-20, why are so many Armenians leaving the homeland and settling in the land of the former conquerer, the Russians. Armenians did very well financially under the Ottomans, especially after the Tanzimat Reforms. My family reached the pinnacle of economic and social spheres. If sovereignity is so important to Armenians, why are they leaving Armenia in droves? Could it be that there is something in the Armenian psyche which dos not allow for a successful sovereignity? Yes, although born Armenian, I have realized after years of study that I have more French, Hebrew and Assyrian heritage than Armenian. It was leaders of these backgrounds who led Armenia during it's most glorious periods, not those of Armenian heritage.

[khodja]

Ditto the smattering of Chinese genes from the Mamikonian family.

[MJ]

You will not get any serious reply from me so long as you are "khodja," and so long as you (disgustingly so) remain liability for the Armenian self-consciousness.

 

[ October 20, 2001: Message edited by: MJ ]

[khodja]

A candinal rule for the Armenians should be "First, know thyself."

[khodja]

Excuse me, "cardinal rule."

[MJ]

And what do you know about Armenia and Armenians? Things that you can see from the prism of your national traitor grandfather or his pony-tail grandson?

[khodja]

Martin,

 

You assume that my great-grandfather and grandfather were traitors. That was not the case. Traitors are not held in high esteem by their fellow countrymen/co-religionists. FYI, I have never worn my hair in a pony-tail.

[khodja]

Martin,

 

I have read volumes on Armenians, and not just that which is based on mythology. I have also visited numerous Armenian communities around the globe. For some strange reason I have become acquainted with numerous persons of partial Armenian heritage or concealed Armenian heritage long before their heritage was revealed to me. These persons were from all walks of life from salesclerks to famous celebrities. I repeat, for Armenians "first, know thyself."

[MJ]

Yeah. Keep comforting yourself.

[khodja]

The cart has been placed before the horse. The establishment of an Armenian Armenian Reconciliation Commission is critical.

[khodja]

Back to my original premise. Why do Armenians NOT do well when under the tutelage of other Armenians? If you answer that question you will solve Armenia's problems.

 

Personally, I regret that I reentered the Armenian community in my early 20's. As an odar at that young age I had accomplished more than the majority of my peers. The basic instincts of the Armenians are to tear down their own. No people who harbor these instincts will EVER find success as a national group.

[Harut]

because, Armenians did well under Russians too.(before Soviet Union)