IX.

Some people, perhaps, will say that whether these stories of massacres be true or false, it is inopportune to defend the reputation of a nation with whom we are at war. If this argument were true, it would apply with equal force as a criticism of the officers and men who have written home from Gallipoli, giving spontaneously such wholehearted and generoustestimony to the bravery and chivalry of the Turks. Truth can never be inopportune so long as our conscience is clear, which it would not be if we allowed false stories to remain uncontradicted simply because the untrue assertions might be detrimental to an enemy. But at this advanced stage of the war such stories are scarcely likely to have any effect on the neutral nations, who are, indeed, more likely to be influenced in our favour if we show ourselves fair-minded and willing to investigate the truth. Their object is simply to bias public opinion in this country still further against an already misjudged and badly maligned enemy.

Some good-natured people have indeed gone so far as to say, that “the fact of the Armenians rising in rebellion and butchering the Moslems of Van and only waiting an opportunity to do so in other places, was no justification for the severity of the Turkish Government, or for the reprisals of the local Turks and the cruelties of the Kurds.” But even admitting, all exaggeration apart, the severity of the Turkish Government’s action in ordering the removal of the Armenian population and the methods adopted by local officials to stamp out disaffection, it must not be forgotten how critical the situation was for Turkey: that for her it was a matter of life and death. There is not the slightest doubt that, unless the incipient revolution had been immediately crushed and further danger removed, the Turkish army on the Caucasus would have been hopelessly cut off and the Moslem population exterminated at the hands of the revolutionaries. The British Government has never hesitated under much less critical conditions to suppress rebellion within its borders with an iron hand and by measures which, surveyed after the time of stress and danger was past, have appeared both harsh and cruel in the extreme.

It is possible that a certain number of innocent Armenians may have been killed by the mob who, infuriated and panic-stricken by the reports they had received of the butchery of their co-religionists at Van, and the slaughter of the soldiers at Zeitun, believed that should the Armenians get the upper hand they would suffer in the same manner; but for the fate of these poor victims, or for the excesses committed by the Kurds, it would hardly be just to hold either the Turkish Government or the local Turkish officials responsible. These had done everything possible to disarm the tribes so as to make them amenable to law and order, but despite their endeavours the Kurds were being continually armed by outside agencies. One of the principal causes of the Albanian revolution was the attempt to disarm the mountaineers, and after that experience it is greatly to the credit of the Turkish Government that they still persisted in trying to deprive the Kurds of their rifles.

We have no hesitation in repeating that these stories of wholesale massacre have been circulated with the distinct object of influencing, detrimentally to Turkey, the future policy of the British Government when the time of settlement shall arrive. No apology, therefore, is needed for honestly endeavouring to show how a nation with whom we were closely allied for many years and which possesses the same faith as millions of our fellow-subjects, has been condemned for perpetrating horrible excesses against humanity on “evidence” which, when not absolutely false, is grossly and shamefully exaggerated.

During the Boer war the most horrible charges were made on the Continent against the conduct of our troops. One picture, for example, in the then famous and widely circulated FrenchAssiette de Beurre, showed a number of British soldiers lining a trench and firing on the advancing Boers, who were unable to reply because a number of their own women-folk weretied to stakes along the front of the British trenches. By pictures such as these the fury of the European nations was roused against us, and there was hardly a single one we could call a friend. Turkey, however, stood true: thousands of her Moslem subjects volunteered to fight for us, and prayers were offered up in her mosques for the success of the British arms. And over a score of influential Moslems, headed by Obeid-Ullah Effendi, formerly Minister of Education for Syria and to-day a member of the Ottoman Legislative Assembly, attended at the British Embassy at Pera, and there openly made prayers for the success of the British Arms in South Africa.

The Turks are one of the few races who have always found themselves in full sympathy with the British character, and to whom we appeared neither “cold” nor “perfidious.” This is not surprising, because the characteristics of the two peoples are very similar, with the exception that the Turk is not a sportsman for the reason that he objects to taking life unnecessarily; which fact does not however prevent the British soldier from referring to him as a “good sport.”

Although the Turks may at times have expressed regret and disappointment at some action of the British Government, they always ended by saying: “ah, if only Beaconsfield or Palmerston were alive; they were men!” This liking is reciprocated by most Englishmen, and especially by those who have lived for any length of time in close contact and community with the Turks (such as the Whittalls, one of the great families of English merchants who have made Constantinople their home). On the occasion of King Edward’s telegram of congratulation to Sultan Abdul Hamid after the grant of the Turkish Constitution, Sir William Whittall wrote in theNear EastOctober 1908:

It is to be hoped that, as now practically the whole of Turkey is enthusiastic for England, we shall know how to meet the circumstancesand preserve their affection, for they are worth loving, and some future day their love for us will be an important factor in our history.

Unfortunately these high expectations remain unfulfilled.

British officers and soldiers fighting in Gallipoli have under strange conditions developed this sentimental liking for their opponents. The Rev. Dr. Ewing, a Scottish chaplain serving with the forces in Gallipoli, relates the appreciation shown by a captured Turkish officer when, being led behind our lines, he saw the care with which the clergyman had fenced round the little Moslem cemetery to protect “God’s acre” from destruction, and writes:—“Such little amenities may do something to soften the asperities of war, and make easier the resumption of friendly relations when the war is over.” “On the whole, however,” he adds, “I can hardly imagine a war waged with less animosity on both sides, than this between ourselves and the Turks.” If such are the impressions and experience gathered on the battlefield itself, it would behove us here at home in England to treat with the greatest circumspection, at least, the accusations against an honourable foe and—mindful of the many “God’s acres” that have been consecrated on the fire-swept slopes of Gallipoli by the blood of Christian and Moslem heroes alike—to be careful lest any wanton or unqualified word of ours make more difficult “the resumption of friendly relations when the war is over.”

FOOTNOTES[1]“Through Asiatic Turkey”.[2]“Three American missionaries called: they had been settled for several years in Anatolia, and had succeeded in making some converts amidst the Armenians, but they had not in any one instance induced a Mohammedan to change his faith. One of them observed that the Turks were by no means a cruel race.” (Col. F. Burnaby: “On Horseback through Asia Minor.”)[3]“Odysseus”: “Turkey in Europe.”[4]Extract from Sir Henry Layard’s (H.M. Ambassador at Constantinople) despatches.[5]I was told some ghastly details, but I doubt the veracity of them, as they were related to me by a town Armenian.[6]These would not be so called if committed by any other troops than those of the Turkish Army.[7]“Forty years in Constantinople.”[8]He has since increased this figure to 1,000,000.[9]TheTimes, in a leading article, adds the further information that “The Italian Consul, who reports this enormity, saw it done with his own eyes.”[10]“Everything had been carefully prepared in Asia and in the Press of Europe and America before the Armenian outbreak (1895-96) to boom a second Bulgaria.” (Sidney Whitman: “Turkish Memories.”)[11]On December 31st, 1913, the Special Correspondent ofThe Timesat Constantinople warned his readers that there was great danger of the introduction into Asia Minor of Macedonian methods with band-warfare and all its attendant horrors, and in February, 1914, the Press reported that a large quantity of contraband ammunition had been seized by the gendarmerie in the vilayet of Bitlis.

FOOTNOTES

[1]“Through Asiatic Turkey”.

[2]“Three American missionaries called: they had been settled for several years in Anatolia, and had succeeded in making some converts amidst the Armenians, but they had not in any one instance induced a Mohammedan to change his faith. One of them observed that the Turks were by no means a cruel race.” (Col. F. Burnaby: “On Horseback through Asia Minor.”)

[3]“Odysseus”: “Turkey in Europe.”

[4]Extract from Sir Henry Layard’s (H.M. Ambassador at Constantinople) despatches.

[5]I was told some ghastly details, but I doubt the veracity of them, as they were related to me by a town Armenian.

[6]These would not be so called if committed by any other troops than those of the Turkish Army.

[7]“Forty years in Constantinople.”

[8]He has since increased this figure to 1,000,000.

[9]TheTimes, in a leading article, adds the further information that “The Italian Consul, who reports this enormity, saw it done with his own eyes.”

[10]“Everything had been carefully prepared in Asia and in the Press of Europe and America before the Armenian outbreak (1895-96) to boom a second Bulgaria.” (Sidney Whitman: “Turkish Memories.”)

[11]On December 31st, 1913, the Special Correspondent ofThe Timesat Constantinople warned his readers that there was great danger of the introduction into Asia Minor of Macedonian methods with band-warfare and all its attendant horrors, and in February, 1914, the Press reported that a large quantity of contraband ammunition had been seized by the gendarmerie in the vilayet of Bitlis.

Back to Index Next