Author: Halaçoğlu, Yusuf [Browse]; Format: Book; Language: Turkish; Published/ ​Created: Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, Description: x, p., [42] p. of. Yusuf Halaçoğlu has 11 books on Goodreads with ratings. Yusuf Halaçoğlu’s most popular book is تهجير الأرمن (): الوثائق والحقيقة. Ermeni tehciri by Yusuf Halaçoğlu(Book) 11 editions published between and in Turkish and held by 25 WorldCat member libraries worldwide.

Author: Nar Maumuro
Country: Montenegro
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Travel
Published (Last): 21 July 2012
Pages: 407
PDF File Size: 16.79 Mb
ePub File Size: 5.40 Mb
ISBN: 218-5-51752-247-2
Downloads: 87892
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Voodoojas

Skip to main content.

Log In Sign Up. What is the Turkish position on the Armenian genocide? A very contemporary affair Armenians in the Ottoman Empire Why is the Turkish position worth examining?

These are individuals I have occupied with endless discussions on the subject. They cannot all be listed; I thank each of them. There are a few whose contributions I must single out: If the writer is not faithful to the maker, then he will mislead humanity over the facts that cannot be changed. But the Turkish community ensured the unveiling ceremony did not live up to the name of its venue, as a crowd of nearly one hundred Turkish protestors stationed themselves outside the Temple.

A police cordon had to be installed to keep haaolu two sides apart. When reporters among the Armenian memorial crowd were heard to speak in Turkish, they were told they were not welcome and had to be escorted away. The sense of anger on both sides was palpable; they have never fully reconciled in more egmeni ninety years.

The Armenian genocide refers to one of the greatest losses of human life in history. The term is a reference to the events that took place in Asia Minor, also known as Anatolia, largely between and It happened while the easternmost land front of the First World War was being fought between Ottoman and Russian forces in the harsh, mountainous terrain of the Caucasus.

It was a tragedy of unspeakable magnitude. The polarisation of the Armenian and Turkish positions is clear. Even today, more than ninety years after the events took place, it can appear as if there is no common ground. It was formally defined by the United Nations in and has been used many times since, with varying degrees of legitimacy, in reference to massacres in such places as Bosnia, Rwanda and the Sudanese region of Darfur.

The argument is that since it came under a UN definition, genocide became a word of jurisdiction, and any judgment using it would have to be made by an unaffiliated arbiter.

Emotion does not come into the question. But the events of are different. Time has not proved to be a healer in this case; part of the motivation of this dissertation has been to understand why.

This dissertation is also an attempt to sift through the slogans and feelings of patriotism to understand the events of Oxford University Press, This dissertation is not intended to be that study; in fact, it will demonstrate that such an undertaking is too large to be the work of a single individual. This dissertation will examine the various views and arguments expressed by Turkish historians on the events of This will include historians based at universities in Turkey, prominent Turkish academics based at institutions abroad, and professors of history who are not necessarily Turks but do subscribe to the Turkish point of view.

This dissertation will also examine the views of certain Turkish Armenians — a small but significant group of individuals who hold Turkish citizenship, speak Turkish and live in Turkey.

Yusuuf course, it is a near-impossible task to accommodate for every view expressed by every Turkish historian. Nevertheless, this dissertation is intended not to be a representative reflection but to offer an understanding of those tangible arguments that do exist and are so often lost in 5 Jonathan Sperber, The Hlaaolu Revolutions, Cambridge: University Ermmeni,p. This dissertation could therefore more accurately, but somewhat clumsily, be described as a digest of current Turkish views and arguments on the events of To effectively consider the question, this dissertation is organised into four chapters.


Books by Yusuf Halaçoğlu (Author of Ermeni Tehciri)

The first is largely factual and broadly examines the Armenian issue in Anatolia from the late 19th Century to the present day. It considers the status of ethnic minorities in the Ottoman Empire, offers a commentary on what happened in andand refers to developments concerning the issue since then. Chapter Two constitutes the bulk of the research: The third chapter rrmeni an analysis of why a study of the Turkish position is worthwhile, given that a significant portion of Western historiography already considers it to constitute denial.

The final chapter considers ermen those historians subscribing to the Turkish position believe the Armenian issue can be resolved, and whether the label attached to the events of really matters. A few points must be raised about the style and terminology used in this yyusuf. This is for two reasons: I will not avoid the word at all costs — indeed, it features quite prominently in the title of this dissertation — but I will use a substitute wherever possible.

It was the word used during the trials of high-ranking Ottoman officials after the First World War. For non-Turks, it is important to distinguish between the Turkish state and yuxuf Turkish government, yussuf confusing difference that has become even more apparent in the last decade. The split between the two has widened with the election to government of a party with roots in political Islam.

Finally, I must also make a point about the sources in this dissertation.

Yusuf Halaçoğlu

Ermenl of the comments and halaoly used here were made in Turkish, and all translations are my own work, unless otherwise explicitly stated in the citation. Any distortions in substance caused by the translation are, of course, my own fault. The thinking behind the millet system was a considerably tolerant one: But they were taxed differently, they dressed differently, and thus came to live their lives quite apart from Muslims and other millets: They were used to living separately, often in particular quarters of cities or in ermen own villages.

Cambridge University Press,p. An Introductory History to Harlow, Essex: Longman,p. A reform programme launched under Sultan Mahmud II inknown as the Tanzimat, formally removed many of the differences between Muslims and non-Muslims.

Ottoman Christians became required to undertake military service, differences in clothing were lifted and the legal system was reformed too, thus reducing the influence of the courts of individual faiths in favour of cross-religion courts. But the measures of equality had the perhaps unintended effect of accenting the differences between religions, rather than eliminating them.

It became a tax in its own, and when it was abolished inmany Ottoman Christians chose to flee the empire rather than enlist. This contact developed first in yuwuf area of trade: Europeans unsure of how to launch ualaolu relations with the Ottomans would use Christians as their intermediaries. In the Balkans, Orthodox Greeks and Slavs retained this role and became wealthier for it.

In Anatolia, the same position was filled by Armenians and Greeks. Similarly, as missionaries in greater numbers than ever before flocked to the Ottoman Empire, they set up schools offering a Western education to Christians, not Muslims. The Ottoman Empire certainly described itself as a Muslim state but, as the nineteenth century wore on, it became increasingly assumed by Muslim subjects that the non-Muslims were receiving better treatment. Nationalism served only to highlight the tdhciri further.

Regarding separatism in the Balkans, she writes There was more to the halolu of the times than the separatist national movements of Ottoman Balkan Christian subjects, but they loom tehcrii large in the historical accounts of these nations as to lend weight to this reductionist understanding of the later years of the empire.


It remains sufficient to point out that Greece declared its independence in More followed in as a result of the Russo-Ottoman War. The eventual peace treaty, signed in Berlin between all major European powers, granted independence to Montenegro, Romania and Serbia.

TASAM | Robert College of Constantinople and the American College fo

Much of the remainder of Ottoman European territory became either autonomous or under the de facto jurisdiction of another power. Most of that remainder was finally lost during the Balkan Wars of Russia made territorial gains of its own in Eastern Anatolia, annexing the towns of Ardahan, Batumi and Kars.

Greeks and Muslims slaughtered each other, sometimes in their tens of thousands, during the Greek War of Independence. Similar events occurred in Bulgaria in The Armenian population was targeted too: Inwhen the situation remained unchanged even after a court ruling yusf their favour, the villagers rebelled as a result of Hunchak propaganda.

Quataert writes of further incidents throughout the decade and into the next century. Particularly gruesome were the events of in Adana, today in south Turkey.

InSultan Abdul Hamid II finally restored the Ottoman constitution and parliament tusuf had suspended more than a generation ago in It was not a voluntary move, but forced upon him in a revolution led by a group of army officers who came to be known as the Young Turks. In elections held in Decemberthe Committee of Union and Progress CUP and its allies won a majority in the lower chamber of elected deputes, and the new government began rehciri early the following year.

Constable,pp. That backlash happened on 14 April, when units of the First Army mutinied against their officers and demanded a return to Sharia law. This counter-revolution was eventually overcome and Abdul Hamid sent into exile. The immediate motive for the attack was the belief that the CUP had been permanently toppled in Istanbul. In every field, they were ahead of Turks. At the time, it was claimed that the order to attack Armenians had come from the Sultan himself in an attempt to halxolu the CUP in the area, and that the local Muslims had been incited.

The Rebirth of a Nation London: Phoenix Halaopu,p. A consequence of this was that it triggered a mass migration of Muslims from the Balkans to parts of Thrace and Anatolia. Several Russian ships were sunk. This opened several new fronts in the war; among them, a landing at Gallipoli largely involving British forces, a land assault northwards through the Mesopotamian plain, and halaoolu campaign in the Caucasus against the forces of Yuusf Russia.

It was the last of these that set the scene for what so many refer to as the Armenian genocide. With a fluctuating war front and the presence of Armenians living on either side of it, there was a fear among Ottoman leaders that the Armenian population on their side of the front would switch allegiances. There was an element of truth to this: There was also a feeling that a Russian victory in the war would allow them to establish independent state; this was encouraged by the Tsarist leadership, and arms were smuggled to Armenian insurgents on the Ottoman ermsni of the border.

In the days that followed, there was a wave of arrests in Western Anatolia, particularly Istanbul, as leading religious figures and journalists were rounded up hhalaolu deportation to Ankara,30 which at the time was little more than a small and distant vilayet centre.