We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
The chapter begins with an explanation of the main arguments and sources that are used throughout the book. It introduces theories of ethnic bargaining and security dilemma and presents why these theories are employed in the research. In addition to the theoretical approach, the introductory section presents twenty-two Armenian and Ottoman Turkish dailies that are used as primary sources in the research. It demonstrates how and why the news items, reports, editorials, and political discussions in the dailies provide deep insights into the socio-political developments of the period and call for a comprehensive analysis. The chapter ends with a brief historical interlude section to give readers information about political and social developments in the Ottoman Empire before the Armistice years.
The Armistice of Mudros, signed on 30 October 1918, was perceived as an end to a never-ending nightmare by the Ottoman Armenians. The first chapter focuses on the political efforts of the Ottoman Armenian community leadership in a post-war atmosphere following the Armistice of Mudros. Benefiting from a comprehensive analysis of news items, editorials, and reports published in the Armenian and Ottoman Turkish papers, the chapter reflects the peculiarities of the Armenian political position during the first two years of the Armistice period. This chapter provides an analysis of the pro-independence approach of the Ottoman Armenians.
The emergence of the Turkish National movement in 1919 marked the opening of a new chapter in modern Turkish history. Numerous academic studies have analysed the rise of the Turkish National Movement, yet the reactions of the Armenian community have remained an understudied topic. This chapter examines how the Ottoman Armenians perceived the Turkish National Movement in Anatolia by utilising primary sources, including Armenian and Ottoman Turkish papers of the period. In doing so, this chapter provides new insight into the Ottoman Armenian community during the years in which the Turkish National Movement arose and aims to explain the political position of the Ottoman Armenians from 1919 to 1920, thus filling a gap in the recent historiography. This chapter clarifies the features of the political position of the Ottoman Armenians before the French, Greek, and Armenian defeats by the Nationalist forces.
The third chapter elaborates on the continuous support of the Ottoman Armenians for the establishment of a United Armenian state. The chapter analyses the meaning of the Turkish-Armenian War in the Caucasus and the French occupation in Cilicia and the aid campaign of the Ottoman Armenians in support of the Armenian military in the Caucasus and the French occupational forces in Cilicia. In doing so, this chapter demonstrate the pro-Entente and pro-Armenian independence political position of the Ottoman Armenians. The chapter further elaborates on the main argument of the book that before the defeat of Armenian forces in the Caucasus and the French forces in Cilicia, the majority of the Ottoman Armenian community demonstrated a pro-Entente approach and supported the establishment of an independent Armenian state.
The fourth chapter explores the transformation of the Armenian political position from a pro-Allied point of view to a pro-Turkish one. Especially from 1918 to 1922, the Armenian community in the Ottoman Empire supported the Allied Powers, hoping that an independent Armenian state would be established in eastern provinces. This common idea was shared by the Armenian political parties and was reflected as a common goal in the Armenian papers that were affiliated with various political organisations. Nevertheless, with the Nationalist victories on the battlefields, the Armenian community in Anatolia and particularly in Istanbul started to adapt themselves to the newly established Nationalist rule which excluded non-Muslim minorities. This significant turning point in the Armenian public sphere demonstrates the developing reflections of the Armenian community during the Republican years. This chapter clarifies how the Ottoman Armenians started to support the Nationalist movement after seeing that they had no alternatives following the defeat of Greek and French forces as well as the Armenian government in the Caucasus. The chapter further provides documentation from the primary sources to support the main argument of the book.
The concluding chapter summarizes the study and main arguments that the book demonstrates. Most importantly, this chapter puts the Armenian experience into a broader context of the dissolution of empires and the fate of minority groups. The reactions of Ottoman Armenians when the empire was transforming to a nation-state were similar to the political activities of other ethnic groups in Europe. Moreover, the chapter shows the importance of studying the history of minorities to critically approachstate-endorsed historical writing. It highlights how the book moves beyond the traditional state-endorsed and dominant monolithic approach that still exists in Ottoman Turkish historiography.