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.

In all of these massacres, Turkish military or civil officers presided and directed the bloody work, as will be seen by reference to the authorities mentioned. There have been many other massacres of less than ten thousand during the intervals, which, to use the language of Beder Khan in Mosul (see Layard’s _Nineveh_), have confirmed the whole Turkish principle, that “the Armenians were becoming too numerous, and needed diminishing.”

This item of Turkey’s account, for the past seventy-five years only, stands about as follows:

DEFENSELESS CHRISTIAN SUBJECTS MASSACRED IN TURKEY 1820 TO 1894.

1822. Greeks, especially in Scio (Chios) 50,000 [35] 1850. Nestorians and Armenians, Kurdistan 10,000 [36] 1860. Maronites and Syrians, Lebanon and Damascus 11,000 [37] 1876. Bulgarians, Bulgaria 10,000 [38] 1894. Armenians, Armenia, Sassoun 12,000 [39] —————— Total 93,000

The above figures indicate the extent of the massacres mentioned. The following extracts reveal the occasion and manner in which they were carried out.

The first extract is in regard to the Greeks, and is a translation, by Mr. Robert Stein, from the French:

“The blow had been long premeditated. Sultan Mahmoud was in the habit of replying to every success of the Greek insurgents by ordering massacres, violations, and enslavement in regions without defense, where there were none but women, children, and inoffensive merchants. After the first exploit of Kanaris, the quiet commercial town of Cydonia had promptly been burnt. The Turkish admiral was beaten at Samos; for that reason thirty days were spent in Cyprus in cutting off heads. The town of Tripolitza, in the Morea, having been taken by the Palikares, the inhabitants of Cassandra, in Thrace, were given up to bands of Arnauts. The Sultan wished to take new reprisals to terrify the _rayas_ [Christian subjects], and to cause the nations of Europe to reflect. He took care not to fix his choice on Crete, where his _nizams_ would have been received with gunshots. Chios was an easy prey, and suspected nothing, having always lived on good terms with the Porte, and having even refused to take part in the insurrection of Hellas and the islands. The Chiotes had always been the gentlest, the most docile, the most timid of all the _rayas_. The secret societies which endeavored to rouse the Greek people had not even deigned to initiate these islanders in their projects of national resurrection. On the 8th of May, 1821, the intrepid Tombasis, with fifteen brigs from Hydra and ten schooners from Psara, had appeared before the island, and his patriotic advances having been ill received, he had retired. The inhabitants of Chios, in order to give new guaranties of submission, had sent to the Turks large amounts of money, numerous hostages, and all their arms; even the little knives with which they cut their bread had been taken from them.

“At this moment, on Easter Day, 1822, the Capitan-Pasha anchored in the harbor, with seven ships and eight frigates. Inasmuch as many of the people, frightened by the sight of this fleet, had fled to the mountains, they were made to come down by promises of safety, and by sending to them some consuls, who were simple enough to lend themselves in good faith to this ignoble fraud. The Turkish admiral brought his executioners with him; _bashi-bazouks_ from Roumelia, Zeibeks and Yuruks from Asia Minor, the most ferocious and cowardly to be found in the empire. The adventurers had come in great numbers, eager for their prey, attracted by this country, so rich in harvests, in gold coins, and in women. On the day fixed for this surprise all this rabble was crowded into boats, with pistols and knives, and the carnage began. Whole regiments courageously besieged villages containing three hundred souls. For many of them, this slaughter was a great joke, a gigantic _bakshish_. They slashed and burned all day; in the evening they reckoned up the price of the slaves, the sheep, the goats, all huddled together pell-mell in the profaned churches. The children and the women escaped death; their youth and beauty saved them from the massacre, to deliver them over at once to outrageous assaults or to reserve them for the shameful fate of the harem. They were led off in long troops; they were put on the market and sold in the bazaars of Smyrna, Constantinople, and Brussa. Whatever resisted was killed without mercy. At Mesta, a young girl cried and struggled against an Arnaut; the madman seized her loosened hair, turned back the collar, and with a cut of his sabre severed the pretty head. The person who described this scene to me saw it with his own eyes.”[40]

In regard to the massacre of Nestorians in 1850, Layard states that after 9000 had been massacred, “1000 men, women, and children concealed themselves in a mountain fastness. Beder Khan Beg, an officer of rank in the employment of the Sultan, unable to get at them, surrounded the place, and waited until they should be compelled to yield by thirst and hunger. Then he offered to spare their lives on the surrender of their arms and property, terms ratified by an oath on the Koran. The Kurds were then admitted to the platform. After they had disarmed their prisoners they commenced an indiscriminate slaughter, until, weary of using their weapons, they hurled the few survivors from the rocks into the river Zab below. Out of nearly 1000 only one escaped.”[41]

In regard to the massacre of Maronites and Syrians in 1860, the anonymous authority in _The Independent_ goes on to say:

“After the massacre of June and July, 1860, in Lebanon and Damascus, under the direction of Tahir Pasha in Deir el Komr, Osman Beg in Hasbeiya, Kurshid Pasha in Lebanon, and Ahmed Pasha in Damascus, a conference was held in Paris, August 3d, by the representatives of Great Britain, Austria, France, Prussia, Russia, and Turkey. As 11,000 Christians had been massacred, the European representatives called the attention of the Sultan to his promise in the Treaty of Paris, March 30, 1856, ‘that serious administrative measures should be taken to ameliorate the condition of the Christian population of every sect in the Ottoman Empire....’ And then, in the presence and with the consent of the five aforesaid Christian representatives, assembled together for the express purpose of taking measures to stop the effusion of Christian blood in Syria, caused by the wicked and wilful collusion of the Sultan’s authorities, the following insult to the common sense, the feelings, and judgment of Christian Europe was deliberately penned: ‘The Plenipotentiary of the Sublime Porte takes note of this declaration of the representatives of the high contracting Powers, and undertakes to transmit it to his court, pointing out _that the Sublime Porte has employed, and continues to employ, her efforts in the sense of the wish expressed above_!’” (Churchill, pp. 220, 221.)

Colonel Churchill further says (p. 222):

“Nejib Pasha, who was installed Governor of the Pashalick of Damascus on the restoration of Syria to the Sultan in 1840, declared to a confidential agent of the British Consul in that city, not knowing, however, the character of the person he was addressing, ‘the Turkish Government can only maintain its supremacy in Syria by cutting down the Christian sects.’ What Nejib Pasha enounced as a theory, Kurshid Pasha, after an interval of twenty years, succeeded in carrying into practice.”

The writer in _The Independent_ adds:

“Thus we have Nejib Pasha in 1840, Beder Khan in 1850, Kurshid Pasha in 1860, Chefket Pasha in 1876, and Zekki Pasha in 1894, concurring in this noble and philanthropic scheme for relieving the Turkish Empire of its surplus Christian population!”

The following facts relate to the terrible atrocities perpetrated in Bulgaria by Turkish _bashi-bazouks_ in the spring of 1876. I quote verbatim from the preliminary report[42] of the Hon. Eugene Schuyler, American Consul-General, to the Hon. Horace Maynard, the American Minister, at Constantinople:

“PHILIPPOPOLIS, August 10, 1876.

“SIR:—In reference to the atrocities and massacres committed by the Turks in Bulgaria, I have the honor to inform you that I have visited the towns of Adrianople, Philippopolis, and Tatar-Bazardjik, and villages in the surrounding districts. From what I have personally seen, and from the inquiries I have made, and the information I have received, I have ascertained the following facts:...

“The insurgent villages made little or no resistance. In many instances they surrendered their arms upon the first demand. Nearly all the villages which were attacked by the _bashi-bazouks_ were burned and pillaged, as were also all those which had been abandoned by the terrified inhabitants. The inhabitants of some villages were massacred after exhibitions of the most ferocious cruelty, and the violation not only of women and girls, but even of persons of the other sex. These crimes were committed by the regular troops as well as by the _bashi-bazouks_ [irregulars]. The number of villages which were burned in whole or in part in the districts of Philippopolis, Roptchus, and Tatar-Bazardjik is at least sixty-five.

“Particular attention was given by the troops to the churches and schools, which in some cases were destroyed with petroleum and gunpowder.

“It is difficult to estimate the number of Bulgarians who were killed during the few days that the disturbances lasted; but I am inclined to put 15,000 as the lowest for the districts I have named.... This village surrendered, without firing a shot, after a promise of safety, to the _bashi-bazouks_, under command of Ahmed Aga, a chief of the rural police. Despite his promise, the arms once surrendered, Ahmed Aga ordered the destruction of the village and the indiscriminate slaughter of the inhabitants, about a hundred young girls being reserved to satisfy the lust of the conqueror before they too should be killed. Not a house is now standing in this lovely valley. Of the 8000 inhabitants not 2000 are known to survive.

“Ahmed Aga, who commanded the massacre, has since been decorated and promoted to the rank of _yuz bashi_ [centurian].

“These atrocities were clearly unnecessary for the suppression of the insurrection, for it was an insignificant rebellion at the best, and the villagers generally surrendered at the first summons.

“I am, sir, yours very truly, “EUGENE SCHUYLER.

“The Hon. HORACE MAYNARD, etc.”

“The British Government had glossed over and tried to cover up these horrible transactions, Premier Disraeli turning them off with a sneer. The facts, as unearthed by Consul Schuyler, shook the British nation like an earthquake, and came near unseating the Ministry....

“A similar investigation was made in the same district by Mr. J. A. MacGahan, the brilliant correspondent of the London _Daily News_, who confirms all that Mr. Schuyler discovered, in a special dispatch to the _Daily News_, dated Philippopolis, July 28, 1876.”

The circumstances and character of the Armenian massacre of 1894 are found in the first chapter of the present volume. In regard to this event the writer in _The Independent_ of January 17th above quoted asks:

“Will history repeat itself in 1895? Will the remaining Armenians of Sassoun be so terrorized as to refuse to testify before a Commission? Undoubtedly.

“If the facts already known do not force Europe to place Eastern Asia Minor under a Christian Viceroy there is little hope that any new facts will influence them. The dead tell no tales. The living fear to speak, lest they fall victims to the humane theories of Beder Khan and Nejib Pasha.

“Will England now insist upon the protection of the Christian? She is morally bound to. Four times has she saved the Ottoman Empire from destruction, and the civilized world looks to her for a fulfilment of her high mission in the East.

“May British public opinion compel British public men to action!”

To make this chapter a little more complete for reference, I add a passing allusion to three other outrages not included in the above list, which takes account of no massacres of less than ten thousand victims at once.

OUTRAGES IN CRETE IN 1866–7.

On July 21, 1867, the British, Russian, French, and Italian Consuls at Canea, Crete, sent the following identical telegram to their several governments: “Massacres of women and children have broken out in the interior of the island. The authorities can neither put down the insurrection nor stay the course of these atrocities. Humanity would imperatively demand the immediate suspension of hostilities, or the transportation to Greece of the women and children.”

The number of relieving ships sent to Crete in obedience to this accord was four French, three Russian, two Italian, three Austrian, and one Prussian.[43]

OUTRAGES IN ARMENIA IN 1877.

The writer is C. B. Norman, special correspondent of _The London Times_, who says in his preface:

“In my correspondence to the _Times_ I made it a rule to report nothing but what came under my own personal observation, or facts confirmed by European evidence.

“A complete list it is impossible for me to obtain, but from all sides—from Turk and Armenian alike—I hear piteous tales of the desolation that reigns throughout Kurdistan—villages deserted, towns abandoned, trade at a standstill, harvest ready for the sickle, but none to gather it in, husbands mourning their dishonored wives, parents their murdered children; and this is not the work of a power whose policy of selfish aggression no man can defend, but the ghastly acts of Turkey’s irregular soldiery on Turkey’s most peaceable inhabitants,—acts the perpetrators of which are well known, and yet are allowed to go unpunished....

“A bare recital of the horrors committed by these demons is sufficient to call for their condign punishment. The subject is too painful to need any coloring, were my feeble pen enabled to give it.”

A few, out of many cases reported by Mr. Norman are given:

“This gang also attacked the village of Kordjotz, violating the women, and sending off all the virgins to their hills; entering the church they burned the Bible and sacred pictures; placing the communion-cup on the altar, they in turn defiled it, and divided the church plate amongst themselves....

“Sheik Obaidulah’s men rivalled their comrades under the flag of Jelaludeen; these latter operated between Van and Faik Pasha’s camp. They attacked and robbed the villages of Shakbabgi and Adnagantz, carrying off all boys and virgins. At Kushartz they did the same, and killing 500 sheep, left them to rot in the streets, and then fired the place. Khosp, Jarashin, and Asdvadsadsan, Boghatz, and Aregh suffered in like manner; the churches were despoiled and desecrated, graves dug up, young of both sexes carried off, what grain they could not transport was destroyed, and the inhabitants driven naked into the fields, to gaze with horror on their burning homesteads.”[44]

THE MASSACRE OF THE YEZIDIS NEAR MOSUL, 1892.

“The Yezidis are a remnant of a heathen sect, who have never been converted to the Moslem faith.

“Their holy place is not far from the city of Mosul, one day’s journey, and their principal villages are also close by. In the summer of 1892 the Sultan sent a special officer, called Ferik Pasha, to Mosul to correct certain abuses in the government, to collect all back taxes, and to convert the Yezidis. His authority was absolute, the Vali Pasha of the city being subject to his orders.

“In reference to his work among the Yezidis, he, it was generally reported, was to get a certain sum per capita for every convert made.

“He first sent priests among them to convert them to the “true faith.” They not succeeding, he very soon gave them the old alternative of the Koran or the sword. Still not submitting, he sent his soldiers, under command of his son, who put to the sword all who, not able to escape, refused to accept Mohammed. Their villages were burned, many were killed in cold blood, some were tortured, women and young girls were outraged or carried off to harems, and other atrocities, too horrible to relate, were perpetrated.

“Those who escaped made their way to the mountains of Sinjar, where, together with their brethren of the mountains, they intrenched themselves and successfully defended themselves until the spring of 1893 against the government troops which had been sent against them.

“This massacre was reported to the French Government by M. Siouffi, Consul at that time in Mosul, and to the English Government by Mr. Parry, who was in that region under the instructions of the Archbishop of Canterbury.

“The Yezidis who remained in their villages on the plain had Moslem priests set over them to instruct them in the Moslem faith. They were compelled to attend prayers and nominally become Mohammedans; but in secret they practised their own rites and declared that they were still Yezidis.”[45]

After the massacre of the Yezidi peasants in 1892 an English lady of rank, visiting Mosul, was refused permission by the Pasha to travel through the Yezidi district, lest she witness the dreadful results of the massacre.[46]

The writer in _The Independent_ of January 31st, gives this explanation:

“The _reason_ of the recurrence of massacres in Turkey is the fanatical intolerance of the Moslem populace and their hatred to Christianity, unrestrained and often fomented by Turkish officials.

“Lord Stratford de Redcliffe, the ablest and best friend Turkey ever had, who believed that ‘England should befriend Turkey in order to reform her,’ says:[47]

“‘Turkey is weak, fanatical, and misgoverned. The Eastern question is a fact, a reality of indefinite duration. Like a volcano it has intervals of rest; but its outbreaks are frequent, their occasions uncertain, and their effects destructive’ (p. 6).

“‘Did not the massacres in Syria in 1860 come upon us by surprise?... Have we any substantial security against the recurrence of similar horrors, of a similar necessity, and of a similar hazard?’ (p. 79).

“‘The position of the Ottoman Empire is one of natural determination toward a state of exhaustive weakness’ (p. 97).

“‘Ill fares the country where neither strong hand nor willing heart is to be found’ (p. 104).

“A joint Commission is now _en route_ to investigate the Sassoun massacres. Will any good come from it? Doubtful. Lord Stratford says (p. 117):

“‘We know not how soon or where the kites may be again collected by a massacre or insurrection.... Such occasional meetings [of Commissions] have their portion of inconvenience and risk. Their failure is discreditable; the effect of their success, at best, transient and partial. The _evils_ they are meant to correct are themselves the offspring of one pervading evil, the source of which is in Constantinople.’”