The Armenians

Kitap İngilizce Tarih×

Künye:

Yazarlar:

C.F. DIXON-JOHNSON

Ekle

Emeği Geçenler:

Ekle

Yayın Yılı:

1916

Yayın Yeri:

Northgate, Blackburn

Yayıncı:

GEO TOULMIN & SONS, LTD.

Cilt:

Basım Kaydı:

Sayfa Sayısı:

ISBN:

İçerik Dosyası:

Web adresi:

http://louisville.edu/a-s/history/turks/Dixon-Johnson.pdf

Operatör:

Oğuz Kağan Bayrakdar

Güncelleyen:

Ramazan Acun

Özet:

The following pages were first read as a paper before the “Société d’Etudes Ethnographiques.”
They have since been amplified and are now being published at the request of a number of friends, who
believe that the public should have an opportunity of judging whether or not “the Armenian Question” has
another side than that which has been recently so assiduously promulgated throughout the Western World.
Though the championship of Greek, Bulgarian and other similar “Christian, civilized methods of
fighting,” as contrasted with “Moslem atrocities” in the Balkans and Asia Minor, has been so strenuously
undertaken by Lord Bryce and others, the more recent developments in the Near East may perhaps already
have opened the eyes of a great many thinking people to the realization that, in sacrificing the traditional
friendship of the Turk to all this more or less sectarian clamor, British diplomacy has really done nothing
better than to exchange the solid and advantageous reality for a most elusive and unreliable, if not
positively dangerous, set of shadows.
It seems illogical that the same party which recalled the officials (and among them our present
War Minister) appointed by Lord Beaconsfield to assist the Turkish Government in reforming their
administration and collecting the revenue in Asia Minor, and which on the advent of the Young Turks
refused to lend British Administrators to whom ample and plenary powers were assured, should now, in its
eagerness to vilify the Turk, lose sight of their own mistakes which have led in the main to the conditions of
which it complains, and should so utterly condemn its own former policy. Whatever hardships the
Armenians may within recent years have suffered, the responsibility for them must surely to a great extent
rest with the well-meaning idealists who, instead of trying to improve existing conditions, inspired their
helpless dupes with impracticable aspirations which were bound to lead to disaster.
The writer desires to thank those authors and travelers whose works he has so freely quoted, and
upon whose information he has relied for the historical and geographical notes, as well as Professor Henry
Leon, Mr. Robert Fraser, and other friends, who have afforded him their most valuable assistance.
The reasons for dealing with the subject at this particular juncture are given in the text and will,
he hopes, prove satisfactory to the reader.

The following pages were first read as a paper before the “Société d’Etudes Ethnographiques.” 
They have since been amplified and are now being published at the request of a number of friends, who 
believe that the public should have an opportunity of judging whether or not “the Armenian Question” has 
another side than that which has been recently so assiduously promulgated throughout the Western World. 
 Though the championship of Greek, Bulgarian and other similar “Christian, civilized methods of 
fighting,” as contrasted with “Moslem atrocities” in the Balkans and Asia Minor, has been so strenuously 
undertaken by Lord Bryce and others, the more recent developments in the Near East may perhaps already 
have opened the eyes of a great many thinking people to the realization that, in sacrificing the traditional 
friendship of the Turk to all this more or less sectarian clamor, British diplomacy has really done nothing 
better than to exchange the solid and advantageous reality for a most elusive and unreliable, if not 
positively dangerous, set of shadows. 
 It seems illogical that the same party which recalled the officials (and among them our present 
War Minister) appointed by Lord Beaconsfield to assist the Turkish Government in reforming their 
administration and collecting the revenue in Asia Minor, and which on the advent of the Young Turks 
refused to lend British Administrators to whom ample and plenary powers were assured, should now, in its 
eagerness to vilify the Turk, lose sight of their own mistakes which have led in the main to the conditions of 
which it complains, and should so utterly condemn its own former policy. Whatever hardships the 
Armenians may within recent years have suffered, the responsibility for them must surely to a great extent 
rest with the well-meaning idealists who, instead of trying to improve existing conditions, inspired their 
helpless dupes with impracticable aspirations which were bound to lead to disaster. 
 The writer desires to thank those authors and travelers whose works he has so freely quoted, and 
upon whose information he has relied for the historical and geographical notes, as well as Professor Henry 
Leon, Mr. Robert Fraser, and other friends, who have afforded him their most valuable assistance. 
 The reasons for dealing with the subject at this particular juncture are given in the text and will, 
he hopes, prove satisfactory to the reader.