Jump to content

Talk:Armenian genocide

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Page semi-protected
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Infobox text in “Armenians in the Ottoman Empire” incorrect

There is a miscount in the Infobox to the right of the “Armenians in the Ottoman Empire” subtitle. Another of the editors’ absurdities. Listed are five vilayets but then the text says that they represented “the six most heavily Armenian-populated Ottoman vilayets”. Sivas, the sixth one, is missing, dearest editors. And one falsification of an RS text in ref. 4. Nowhere on p. 279 does Kévorkian (The Armenian Genocide: A Complete History) say that these vilayets were “the six most heavily Armenian-populated Ottoman vilayets”. This is what the author says on p. 279, ad verbum: “According to the figures presented in the previous chapter, of the 2,925 towns and villages of the empire in which Armenians lived, no fewer than 2,084 were located on the Armenian high plateau, properly speaking – that is, in the vilayets of Erzerum, Van, Bitlis, Mamuret ul-Aziz, and Dyarbekir.” By the way, did I mention that Kévorkian uses “the Armenian high plateau” and not “Anatolia” in this particular clause? Cheers73.173.64.115 (talk) 18:32, 21 July 2024 (UTC)Davidian[reply]

Good points. The caption now includes Sivas, and the text more closely matches Kevorkian's village-based analysis. There is still a problem, since Kevorkian doesn't use the "Six Villayets" concept explicitly on the page cited. Also, if we want to introduce the "Six Villayets", just doing so in this caption is odd. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 15:57, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you.73.173.64.115 (talk) 16:58, 23 July 2024 (UTC)Davidian[reply]
During the Congress of Berlin in 1878, these vilayets were referred to as Six Armenian Vilayets, not Six Vilayets.73.173.64.115 (talk) 18:16, 23 July 2024 (UTC)Davidian[reply]
Yes, but the cluster is given so many names by the sources, and I'd prefer to use the title of the linked article. You might want to propose a move of the linked article if you think that "Six Armenian Vilayets" would be a better title. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 19:47, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Six Armenian Vilayets (or, more precisely, "the provinces inhabited by the Armenians") was the name originally figuring in the official documents of the 1878 Congress of Berlin. Turks, of course, labored to drop anything "Armenian" in their "best" traditions, and I'm sorry to say, the title of the linked article, Six Vilayets, follows this Turkish preference. Whereas one would think the title must have followed the original name version and not the Turkish distortion.73.173.64.115 (talk) 15:47, 24 July 2024 (UTC)Davidian[reply]
First of all, as we and you can clearly see, he is an Armenian, and probably a nationalist one. So we can understand why he used Armenian Highlands(or plateu) instead of Anatolia.
Vilayet-i Sitte(Six provinces) were the Vilayets that Armenians had intense percentage in the whole vilayet. They were not majority but they were like %20-35. asperagasmanchini (talk) 18:40, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

“CUP regrouped as Turkish nationalists” is hypocrisy, the Turkish nationalists literally fought against the CUP…

Yeah, someone care to explain? Youprayteas talk/contribs 08:31, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What you wrote is not really true and the sources that say so are decades out of date. This was Zürcher's big contribution and now most historians changed their view (t · c) buidhe 10:27, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Istanbul Government is the CUP… which was allied to the Entente… which was fighting Turkish nationalists… Youprayteas talk/contribs 19:09, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You've got it backwards. The CUP as an organization didn't outlast World War I, but most of the leading figures in the Turkish Nationalist movement were ex-CUP. If you doubt me, there are literally three sources cited in the article, I would recommend checking them out. (t · c) buidhe 20:01, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
first of all, Union and Progress Party leaders left the country because of execution risk(Malta Exiles). The opposition group, Freedom and Accord Party captured the goverment and allied with Sultan.
Later, Mustafa Kemal Pasha, Refet Pasha, Kazim Pasha, Nurettin Pasha(Sakalli), Mustafa Ismet(Inonu) etc. were all quitted from CUP. asperagasmanchini (talk) 18:36, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note to self: new sources

  • Akçam, Taner (2023). "The Armenian Genocide: An Overview". The Cambridge World History of Genocide: Volume 3: Genocide in the Contemporary Era, 1914–2020. Cambridge University Press. pp. 67–92. ISBN 978-1-108-76711-8.
  • Akçam, Taner (2024). "Top-Down and Local Violence in the Late Ottoman Empire: The Role of Security Concerns and a Century of "Accumulated Experience"". Journal of Genocide Research. 26 (2): 121–141. doi:10.1080/14623528.2022.2127488.

End date of 1917 instead of 1923

I strongly oppose the change of the date to 1917 as opposed to 1923. Genocide was not only committed by the CUP/Ottoman Empire, but also by TNC and Ataturk. The genocide continued in systematic massacres of Armenian (many of who returned from deportations), but also in economic and cultural erasure. The article discusses how the Genocide ‘ended 2000 years of Armenian residence to the region.’ If that is the case, you simply have to expand the date to 1923, because TNC/ Ataturk’s policy were the final nail in the coffin. From systematic massacres, such as the aftermath of the Battle of Maras; to seizure of most Armenian property, and the systematic destruction of Armenian heritage (Ani being one of several examples); it’s hard to justify their exclusion. Would like to hear the moderators argument, of keeping those events-which truly did end Armenian presence in the region-from inclusion in the genocide. Thank you. Nlblough (talk) 07:39, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As it's possible to make the case either way, this is why I support removing the infobox. However, most sources end it at 1916, 1917, or 1918 so I don't support changing it. (t · c) buidhe 14:45, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A more nuanced version of the infobox, but less helpful to our readers, would go something like follows:
Location
Ottoman Empire (but also parts of Iran and arguably the Republic of Turkey)
Date
1915–1917 (some sources start at 1914 or earlier, and you can see 1916, 1918, 1923 or the present as end dates)
Target
Ottoman Armenians (but some would bundle in Assyrians and perhaps Greeks)
Attack type
Genocide, death march, Islamization
Deaths
600,000–1.5 million
Perpetrators
Committee of Union and Progress (but also random ottoman Muslims, Kurdish tribes, ottoman bureaucracy etc.) (t · c) buidhe 14:59, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I dont think so. Armenian state was the aggressor in Eastern Anatolia and responsible for many deaths just before Kazim Karabekir's troops' defences. During Turkish war of Independence the troops and irregulars fought. If we should extend it to 1923 then we should open a "Turkish genocide" page for the same years too. asperagasmanchini (talk) 18:31, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable sources

Taner Akçam isnt an objective source. He is anti-Turk and funding by EU. I'd suggest another sources, it can be from USA genocide researches. asperagasmanchini (talk) 18:33, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I fail to see how he isn't "objective". He has a track record of writing books published by university presses, was a history professor at the University of Michigan, and currently a scholar at Clark University. He is certainly a reliable source on the matter. I can't find any info on him being funded by the EU. Could you provide a source for that claim? — 🌙Eclipse (she/they/all neos • talk • edits) 12:23, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kurdish involvement & other collaborators

I see that the Kurdish involvement is completely missed out except for the Hamidiye cavalry in Hamidian massacres. It is a well known fact that during the genocide, some Kurdish tribes collaborated with the Ottoman authorities in the persecution of Armenians. Kurdish tribal leaders were motivated by promises of land and wealth. Even in some regions like Tur Abdin, Kurdish and Arab tribes jointly executed massacres against Armenians and Assyrians. There are some solid witnesses like Ernest Yarrow, where he states: "the Turks and Kurds have declared a holy war on the Armenians and have vowed to exterminate them." Or publications such as New York Times acknowledging it (pictured).

I would like to create a sub-section about the collaborators of this disgrace. Please do give your input on this. Regards. KarsVegas36 (talk) 16:56, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted these edits as I consider them poorly sourced and overly pro-Ataturk. The article currently doesn't mention him, because he was not particularly important to the genocide, however, for a better source consider Zürcher, Erik Jan (2011). "Renewal and Silence: Postwar Unionist and Kemalist Rhetoric on the Armenian Genocide". In Suny, Ronald Grigor; Göçek, Fatma Müge; Naimark, Norman M. (eds.). A Question of Genocide: Armenians and Turks at the End of the Ottoman Empire. Oxford University Press. pp. 306–316 [312]. ISBN 978-0-19-979276-4. where Ataturk is quoted as saying,

Whatever has befallen the non-Muslim elements living in our country, is the result of the policies of separatism they pursued in a savage manner, when they allowed themselves to be made tools of foreign intrigues and abused their privileges. There are probably many reasons and excuses for the undesired events that have taken place in Turkey. And I want definitely to say that these events are on a level far removed from the many forms of oppression which are committed in the states of Europe without any excuse.

We don't use primary sources like newspapers, rather secondary scholarship that places information in context. It's already mentioned in multiple places in the article, but I'm wary of exaggerating the "Kurdish" role as it is used to deny the genocide and shift blame from the main perpetrators. (t · c) buidhe 19:47, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I made these edits because the mainstream understanding includes Atatürk as a participant or supporter in the genocide, whereas he was clearly against it, with proven actions and statements. If you have a problem with the references given, I can seek for some better sources. His quote on this matter is actually very famous, even got itself a book title - A Shameful Act. Or appointing Armenians to key positions is basically common knowledge.
About the collab, I understand the point and worry about steering the direction to denial. Denying it would also mean denying my own heritage for me so we can walk on ice without any problems here. For that, we could just narrow it down into a small paragraph rather than a sub-section. There are many 'credible' references which could be easily accessed. One of them goes;
Armenian civilians in eastern Anatolia were rounded up, men and older boys were often killed in situ, and the rest were deported to concentration camps in the Syrian desert, suffering massacres and abuses en route at the hands of Ottoman gendarmes, irregular fighters and local Kurds, Turks and Circassians. In the desert they were joined by Armenians deported from Cilicia and western Anatolia and held in horrific conditions, and in 1916 many of the survivors were massacred. - ‘We did commit these crimes’: Post-Ottoman solidarities, contested places and Kurdish apology for the Armenian Genocide - Memory Studies 2021, Vol. 14(3) 634–649, Huw Halstead - University of St Andrews, UK
KarsVegas36 (talk) 20:17, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
the mainstream understanding includes Atatürk as a participant or supporter in the genocide, whereas he was clearly against it please familiarize yourself with our policies such as wp:Npov and WP:NOR. Wikipedia presents "the mainstream understanding" even if you believe it's wrong. If you have a problem with that you're on the wrong website.
I think the article already references the involvement of some Kurds. Direct quotes from the current version of the article include, "many women and children were kidnapped by local Kurds", "Armenian homes, businesses, and land were preferentially allocated to Muslims from outside the empire, nomads, and the estimated 800,000 (largely Kurdish) Ottoman subjects displaced because of the war with Russia.", "the killings... also involved local militias, bandits, gendarmes, or Kurdish tribes depending on the area", "Nomadic Kurds committed many atrocities during the genocide, but settled Kurds only rarely did so", "Armenian women captured during the journey ended up in Turkish or Kurdish households"
I oppose a separate section because the Kurdish actors were only able to commit the crimes that they did because of the enabling structure created by the CUP, and there's little evidence that the behavior of Kurdish muslims, for example, was better or worse than other muslims such as bedouins. (t · c) buidhe 20:35, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Armenian_genocide&oldid=1287072449"