THE ARMENIANS IN HISTORY AND THE
ARMENIAN QUESTION
by ESAT URAS
Anatolia is undoubtedly one of the most important regions of the world from the point of view of the role it has played in social and cultural history. From the very earliest times it had been the cradle of civilization, and many states and civilizations under many different names have been . .
established here. The soil of Anatolia, which has produced so many great men and conquerors, has attracted every nation of the world. The Armenians, who form the subject of this book, have laid claim as an indigenous people and on historical, political and cultural grounds, to a large part of Anatolia, and have attempted to prove that the region they call Armenia has belonged to them from ancient times, that on this soil they established independent Armenian kingdoms and that the whole remained under their sway for hundreds of years. This has given rise to a very serious problem in the history of Anatolia.
Before going on to discuss the contents of this book I should like to stress that the region defined as Armenia and which the Armenians constantly claim to be their own, has been the scene of greatwars and migrations and lies on the path taken by great conquerors arriving from the south and the east, with a local population which has continually varied its allegiance in accordance with the strength of the invaders. Armenia cannot be regarded as anything more than a simple geographical entity having no definite political frontiers, and it is quite impossible that an organized and continuous Armenian state, recognized by other nations,with definite boundaries and with a specific national outlook, could ever have existed in that part of Anatolia.
This book, entitled Armenians in History and the Armenian Question is divided into five parts.
Part I
contains a discussion of the information provided by Armenian writers on the Armenian geographical situation, history, language, literature and mythology, the place of the Armenian church in the history of Christianity, its relations with the Catholic and the Orthodox churches, and the population of Armenia.
Part II
treats relations with the state that remained under Armenian domination from the Middle Ages to the present day. There is also a discussion of the reform question and the various changes it underwent. There follows an examination of the state of affairs both before and after the Congress of Berlin, with reference to political views and correspondence in official sources.
Part III
deals with the active stage in Armenian politics, with the beginning of actual revolt and the setting up of revolutionary groups. The work of these revolutionary groups is examined together with their political programmes.
Part IV
deals with the period from the. Proclamation of the Constitution in 1908 to the end of the First World War. Part V deals with the Armenian question during the Armistice and Republican peiods, the Treaty of Lausanne and subsequent events.
All these various sections contain a comparative examination of Armenian activities in Iran, Russia and Turkey.
The views expressed in this book regarding the "Armenians" should not be taken as referring to those Armenians who, as honourable, hard-working citizens of the Ottoman Empire and the Turkish Republic, have lived for hundreds of years on good terms with the Turks. These are people of great nobility of character, who link their own future with that of the Turks and who have performed remarkable service to the country in the field of science, art and scholarship.
The "Armenians" who are the subject of this book are those have worked for their own independence to the detriment of the country as a whole, who have endeavoured to involve foreigners in our domestic politics, and who have created what is now known as the "Armenian Question".
These comprise people who have dragged the Armenian people from catastrophe to catastrophe, writers and poets who have stirred up the people by means of poems, novels and fictitious epics, and Catholicoi, Patriarchs and priests who have taken unduc advantage of their authority over their congregations. I feel it is my duty as a citizen of this country to make my attitude on this point quite explicit.
In preparing this book I have relied mainly on Armenian sources. Prime importance has been given to information given by the Armenian writers, and these I have examined and translated. I have French, and I have translated from these the relevant political views. I I have endeavoured to remain absolutely impartial as regards political and historical topics, and I have taken great care to present an accurate copy of all documents and leave the readers of this work to draw their own conclusions.
I have presented all the works mentioned in the bibliography
I contained in my own private library and comprising a number of works in the Armenian language and script as well as a number of books on the subject in various foreign languages to the Libary of the E Grand Turkish National Assembly. These can be examined by any who are interested in the subject.
Esat URAS
Ankara, April 10, 1953
English translation of the revised and expanded second edition
DOCUMENTARY PUBLICATIONS, 1988
_____________
