Armenian Books

This booklet contains an introduction which explains who Eznik (or Yeznik) was, and the context of his work. It was written in the mid-5th century. The Armenians had been converted to Christianity in the previous generation, but the Persian emperor was now attempting to convert them by force to a version of state Zoroastrianism, known as Zurvanism. Eznik wrote as part of the ideological counter, in four books. The first dealt with the nature of God, followed by books refuting Zurvanism, Greek paganism, and finally and most interestingly, the second century Marcionite heresy.

Thomas Samuelian has retold the work in order to make it accessible to those encountering it for the first time. This makes it less useful than the straight translation published since of the single manuscript, but much easier to read! Indeed Dr Samuelian's version makes it clear that Eznik is addressing concerns of interest today, and is not merely of antiquarian interest.

The text is lively, clear, and intended to bring Eznik to a new audience. This it does.

This is quite an interesting mystery. While not on par with the classics, it's a great thrilling read. Great Summer Beach Book!

You might think some people predicted the present-day campaign of denial 85 years ago. In any case, James Barton, head of the American missionary outfit, got all his missionaries who were in Turkey during the Armenian massacres and deportations to file signed and sworn statements. The statements are valuable, because they come from parts of Turkey where there were few other foreign eye-witnesses. One of the statements was book-length, and that was published seperately as "Days of Tragedy in Armenia," by Henry Riggs.

Some of the statements were boring to me, because I didn't recognize the place names. But the book is like a collection of short stories, so I just skipped to the next author. It might make a neat classroom project to have each student read one of the 21 reports and make a presentation, marking up a map. Just a thought....

So how did it go? In the years before and during the Armenian genocide, what was the policy of the US government towards Turkey (nee. the Ottoman Empire) and the Armenians? Payaslian dug up musty records, mostly in the US it seems, to furnish a recollection.

We see that the American policy towards the Ottomans was driven by a pragmatic realism. The Ottomans were the dominant power in that region and the Armenians were only one of a bunch of minorities chafing under the imperial yoke. Much of the book centres on the years of World War 1. The setbacks inflicted on the Ottomans led to the breakup of their empire and the rise of republican Turkey under Ataturk and the so-called Young Turks. The latter displayed their own version of pragmatism, by acceding to the reality of the Balkans and Syria being taken from Turkey.

This was contrasted by their reaction to the Armenian Question. The book goes into detail about the systematic massacres conducted against the Armenians. Accompanied by Wilson not doing much about it, apart from a few feeble pro forma protests. Wilson and his administration were clearly preoccupied with issues in western and central Europe. Leaving little to spare in attention for the Armenians.

I just finished "Unsilencing the Past" and I have to say the book was both interesting and a quick read. The book delivered insight and never before released information regarding the secretive dialogue held between Armenians and Turks during 2001-2004, otherwise known as the Turkish Armenian Reconciliation Commission (TARC). Author David Phillips was the moderator of the Commission.

The book explains how TARC was created and the difficult task of bringing Armenians and Turks together. Armenians have been skeptical of dealing with Turks since the Genocide of 1915-1923, when 1.5 million Armenians were murdered during the end of the Ottoman Empire. There was a systematical attempt by the Ottoman Turkish government to wipe out the Armenian race. Armenians faced deportation, expropriation, abduction, torture, massacre, and starvation in what was the first Genocide of the 20th century. As Phillips explains, "Rafael Lempkin, an author of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, described genocide as `what happened to the Armenians.' " According to Phillips, "Turks refuse to acknowledge the Genocide because acknowledgement contradicts their noble self-image. It is humiliating to be judged in the court of international public opinion for events that occurred before the Republic of Turkey was even born." Turkey has no diplomatic relations with Armenia and has imposed a blockade on their western neighbor.

Many in the Armenian Diaspora criticized TARC as an attempt to derail Genocide legislative progress. In October 2000, the House International Relations Committee overwhelmingly passed the Armenian Genocide resolution. After receiving pressure from Turkey, President Clinton phoned House Speaker Dennis Hastert to table the bill, citing national security concerns. TARC, the Armenian Diaspora argued, was created in 2001 to hinder legislative progress in the U.S. Congress and world bodies.

Turkish Commissioner Ozdem Sanberk proved the Armenian Diaspora correct by explaining, "The basic goal of our commission is to impede the initiatives put forth in the U.S. Congress and parliaments of Western countries on the genocide issue, which aim to weaken Turkey."

One of the memorable exchanges Phillips documents was when Turkish Commissioner Gunduz Aktan told Armenian Commissioner and former Foreign Minister Alex Arzoumanian, "Do you know how we feel when you try to embarrass us by introducing resolutions in parliaments around the world? Our feelings are hurt." "Your feelings are hurt. How do you think we feel?" responded Arzoumanian. "We were the ones who were genocided." This is the same Aktan whose comments before the House International Relations Committee were so menacing that Congressman Chris Smith (R-NJ) publicly criticized him for making "threats" against the United States and Congress.

Phillips concludes that TARC was a success, but I disagree. TARC failed because Turkey did not recognize the Armenian Genocide; TARC folded in 2004 with no palpable results. TARC asked the International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ) to conduct a study on the Armenian Genocide and their report concluded that Genocide took place. The ICTJ adds its name to a list that includes the Republics of Greece, France, Argentina, Canada, Italy, Switzerland, Uruguay, Lebanon, and Russia, along with the Vatican, European Parliament, and Council of Europe, as properly commemorating the Armenian Genocide. Moreover, hundreds of city councils, states, governors, mayors, community leaders, world bodies, and academics have recognized the Armenian Genocide. The evidence is clear. Ninety years after the fact, I hope Turkey understands that true reconciliation can only take place when Turkey comes to grip with its history and justice is seen for the 1.5 million victims.

I may be biased since the title character is my grandfather's sister but I found the story fascinating, well-written and thoroughly researched. It answered some questions about the stories handed down through the generations.

Peter-Arnold Mumm,Universitaet Muenchen, in the Journal of the Society for Armenian Studies 9, 1999:169 says "The edition is carefully carried out and instructively designed."

As mentioned in a phrase in the book, "being a Malatiasti was a very special thing". The term defines the group of Armenians immigrating from a city located in east Anatolia, called as Malatya (in Turkish today). Between 1895 and 1915, many conflicts had been arosen between the Turks and the Armenians of the Ottoman Empire, resulting in deportation of the Armenians and many deaths from both sides. We the Turks call these events simply as "deportation". But on the contrary, the Armenian side names these happenings as "Genocide", as in this book. The book is written by an Armenian who had born as the first generation of immigrants coming from that Anatolian city, and located in Cleveland, Ohio forming a new settlement in a small town called Newburgh, soon renamed as "Little Malatia". The book tells the stories of five boys born in '26, and their families and relatives lived in that region. The memories of the daily life of these people of Anatolian origin are recalled, their struggle for surviving in a strange new land, becoming loyal Americans, witnessing the crises and wars, indeed establishing a new life in America. While living on the other side of the world after about ninety years, they neither forgot the customs and traditions of this small city of Malatya in the old country, nor abandoned some characteristics and traits. These were having a lust for life, a great sense of humor, powerful social relationships, and having a great passion for devotion, loyalty and trust for family and friends, which are also valid today generally for the Turks living and originating from the city of Malatya.
I bought this book because it must have told about some general values which are shared between different ethnic types of people living and originating from Malatya. The writer, though never seen the old country, had begun to perceive some customs and values, a certain way of life once he had witnessed from his family and relatives. While reading the book I smelt nearly the same odor within their houses coming from the same meals that I once tasted in the house of my grandparents in Malatya, during my childhood. Some names of the meals, musical instruments, etc were almost the same. I am a Turk born in Malatya in 1964, and afterwards grown up and lived in another city located in the western side of Turkey, called Izmir. Like the other Malatians living in the other big cities of Turkey, we are also proud of originating from this rich city, which has a different milieu for establishing strong traditions and common values, carried by the cheerful and creative natives of the city. The city had raised two Turkish presidents and countless ministers, very influential politicians, artists, writers, businessmen, sciencemen, rectors of the important universities, and many successful people, which resulted in giving a different nickname for the city, "famous Malatya" speaken in Turkey nowadays. Maybe the secret comes from the old mosaistic structure of Anatolia, absorbing and using different cultures throughout the history.
Although the value of the efforts of the Armenian community opposing onto the Turks is exaggerated in the book in my opinion (this is an harmful way of thinking to all sides and proven to have no benefit to anyone), thanks to calling to mind again our shared values, strong customs of Anatolia, and this spiritual city.

Taner Akcam offers a valid and lucid perspective as well as a historically accurate explanation regarding the circumstances surrounding the Ottoman Empire's systematic massacre and elimination of the Armenians. His book is a true testimonial of Turkish crimes against humanity. This book clearly defines the complicity of the (Ottoman) Turkish state. The author evaluates and explains how during the war, 1915 thru 1921, the Turks methodically, planned and executed this genocide - and that their malicious actions were not just random happenstance resulting from said war. The act of genocide is distinguished from "normal" warfare in Mr. Akcam's book, leading the reader and the world to ponder if and when there will be retribution and justice for the Armenians...

This obviously is a political book on a controversial past event. Since I know little on this subject so I bought this book to learn more on this subject but unfortunately it means that I cannot assess the facts of the book properly.

The argument of the writer is that a dangerous shift took place in the Ottoman Empire and its policy changed to a Turkish nationalism. To these Turkish nationalist the existence of the Armenians in Turkish areas was a threat to this state so from about 1915 to the early 1920's they created a planned genocide of the Armenians.

After reading the book which I found tedious in parts, I am not convinced that he has proved his argument that a genocide took place.

Genocide surprisingly is a difficult case to prove. Partly because fortunately we have few examples as they are not that common. However also because the evidence is suppressed and denied for example during WW2, the Nazi destroyed the evidence while they did it and after almost all senior Nazis denied knowledge or responsibility for it.

What the book does show is that last scale deportations of the Armenians took place and that these did result in large-scale crimes against them which include robbery, kidnapping and a million murders. Having said this, I am not so sure it matters whether a genocide took place, clearly many people were murdered because they were Armenians.

After 1920s when they should have some justice, it was denied. It is a shame that so few people that did these robbery, kidnapping and murders were punished.

The Turkish responsibility is a question everyone wants to ask on the fate of Armenians in World War One.

Taner Akcam definitely wondered but concluded since many Armenians died, then there must have been some plan to exterminate them based on the opinions of some Westerners who were trying to force the United States into World War One by distributing stories (grossly exaggerated) of atrocities of Germans, Austro-Hungarians, and the Ottoman Empire, since they were the Central Powers.

However, many US and German consuls who were able to stay in the Ottoman Empire to witness the relocation of Armenians reported to their ambassadors that the Ottoman authorities tried to help many of the Armenians but that there was such a food shortage, that even the Turkish soldiers went to war hungry. Sanitary conditions in Eastern Turkey were terrible, and the Ottoman Empire was bankrupt. The Ottoman Empire had a war on all 3 fronts. Taner Akcam, by ignoring these makes conclusions on 1915 based on the opinions of some anti-Turkish reporters and diplomats.

Considering, Taner Akcam did indeed escape from a Turkish prison, regardless of why he was imprisoned, it shows he truly has a strong grudge against the Turkish government. By writing books about the sensitive genocide debate, he tries to pollute opinions to support the thesis that there was an Armenian Genocide, even though so many Turks were killed before the relocations of Armenians and after the rebellions by Armenians for the purpose of creating a Free Armenia.

One of the many achievements of Taner Akcam's excellent, provoking and unsentimental 'A Shameful Act: The Armenian Genocide and the question of Turkish Responsibility' is in shifting a generally acknowledged human disgrace from the particular to the whole.

This impeccably researched and written historical tragedy, is specifically aimed at the people of Turkey to consider the suffering inflicted in their name on minorities, especially the Armenians,living within the borders of the Ottoman Empire prior to, during and immediately following the First World War.

But equally, he is alert to the self-interest and lack of responsibility shown by the major Western powers, all sheltering uneasily together under the umbrella of an evolving World War that inevitably occurred. This included Russia in a state of revolution itself.

As Akcam unerringly concludes, the Great Powers used the terms human rights and democracy to "legitimize the most obvious colonial moves" towards Ottoman territory and the Turkish people began to view these notions as "Western hypocrisy."

Following the international failure post-war and subsequently to bring perpetrators of the Armenian genocide to justice, Akcam suggests mankind may not yet be able "to draw a clear line of division between humanitarian goals, on the one hand, and a state's economic and political interests, on the other."

In this situation, which would seem to apply to the great majority of major and minor players of our globe's so-called United Nations, how can we (as Akcam says) "come to a consensus about ethical norms."

As long as man and womankind harbour and prefer for whatever reason to express actively or passively negative qualities like self-interest,greed, pride and dominance, violence and war and "crimes against humanity" will continue.

Nevertheless,it is a book such as this, so ably scribed and argued, that offers new hope and, perhaps ultimately, relief from our darkest propensities.

'A Shameful Act' written by Taner Akcam is a very well written book about the events leading up to the genocide of the Armenians and afterwards when the first world war ended. Topics from the book include what led to the decision for genocide and why the postwar trials failed. When reading this book you will find a walk-through guide regarding this history written from a neutral point of view which leads me to highly recommend this book.

It is amazing that Armenians can rewrite history based on forged documents and lies. Armenians were some of the richest Ottoman citizens that held high positions in the government. They believed the lies of colonial European powers, such as Russia, Britain, France, with the promise of an independent state, and attacked the Ottoman Army from the rear. Armed with the weapons given to them by the Allies, they massacered hundreds of thousands of unarmed innocent Turkish civilians. While the Turkish men were at war fighting at many theathers of war, the Armenian men stayed home, because they were exempt from military service. "They raped any Turkish women they found. They extracted the babies from expecting Turkish mothers with their bayonets. They stuffed the innocent Turkish elderly men, women, and children,into their mosques and burnt them alive. Even Russian generals at the scene, who witnessed these heinous acts, called them the most barbarous race they had ever seen". The Ottoman government re-located them out of the war zone, in self defence. Any other country would have punished them much more severely for these treasonous and barberous acts. Calling this relocation a genocide is disingenous, at the very least. The rewiver is saddened by loss of life suffered by the Armenians during the re-location process. Most of the deaths were caused by attacking Kurdish and Circussian bandits for revenge and booty. The number of Armenian deaths have been greatly exaggerated. The Ottoman Government was unable to protect them any better, because the country was in turmoil, at the time, due to the great war.

The author Vahakn Dadrian (who is clearly biased because he is an Armenian nationalist and receives grants from the Armenian government) has used the forgeries called the Aram Andonian (an Armenian's forgeries) documents. These forgeries were used throughout the book to prove a thesis that the Ottoman Turks who allowed religious freedoms and minority rights to the Armenians were somehow evil masterminds comparable to the Nazis--this is absurd. His work is not scholarly; it is filled with propaganda, deceit, unverifiable information, and references to KNOWN forgeries. Anyone who buys the book is wasting their money and time by a grumpy nationalist.

I found it very baised toward to his own background nation. he implements that Armenians are Crafty and peace loving people. He never mentions in 1840 city of Maras, Ottoman military outpost, 400 Officer and solders taken prisoners by 5000 armenian mob and their ears and noses cut off and tortured to deadth (Before 1878-1894-1896-and so on.) City of Van murderings before July 10 1915- And after Russion armies invation of Eastern provinces. Never mensions killing their own patriach in Istanbul , cause he did not agree with dashnac organization. Could be a very good book if he was objective. Unfortunatly failed.

This study took an interesting approach, despite its title it has little about the actual implementation and excecution of the Armenian genocide instead covering topics such as: the Abdul Hamit Massacres, the Adana massacres, the bank Ottoman raid, Islam's bent for domination which implies inferiority for non-muslims dhimmis such as Armenians, German complicity, the failure of European humanitarian intervention due to their vested and colonial interests, the Young Turks, how the precarious situation of Armenians constantly massacred and vulnerable with little weaponry or outside diplomatic assistance made them contrary to Balkan Christians take the route of asking for reforms and protection within the Ottoman Empire instead of seeking their independence as they were in an existential crisis where they decided upon the failed project of seeking protection from a Turkish system that thrived on repression and oppression, the Kemalist invasion of Russian Armenia, a comparison of the Holocaust and the Armenian genocide, the Turkish post-war tribunals that failed to punish the key players of the Armenian genocide(but these trials did provide proof of the intent to destroy the Armenians), the role of impunity during and after the genocide and earlier massacres in the failure to punish muslims for their crimes and how the implacable Kemalists along with European vested interests made sure there was little in the way of punishment, among other topics. Chapter 14 entitled: "The Implementation of the Genocide" only spans from page 219-235 in the edition I read(second revised edition 1997). Such an approach to this study makes ensures that it is well covered why the Armenian genocide occurred, which is more important than drudging page after page about the actual genocide and its implementation, which would have gotten tedious as this book is over 400 pages.

The scholarship of Dadrian shines throughout the work, he cites countless works in Turkish, Armenian, German, French and English and the work is very well referenced with a plethora of footnotes. This man has been studying the Armenian genocide for decades and it shows, I doubt much is written in the languages he can read about the subject that he has not already read, and most of it seems cited in this work. How Turkish historians and other historians can deny the Armenian genocide shows to anyone who has read this work their complete lack of honor and decency, to comment on history with no other desire than to extricate Turkish society and state from their mis-actions. Dadrian uses Austrian and German diplomatic archives at a time when they were Ottoman Turkey's wartime allies, he references the memoirs of architects and implementators of the genocide where they incriminate themselves, he cites the Turkish trials after the war to punish the Young Turks published in the official Turkish government gazette at the time(Takvimi Vekayi), Ataturk's speeches, eyewitnesses, Allied diplomatic archives, Turkish historians such as Refik and Akcam, and Turkish sociologist Ismail Besikci, who attest to the reality of the Armenian genocide. With such evidence how can one deny the Armenian genocide, and claim to be honest or better yet, a member of humanity?

I had heard a lot about this book and I just finished reading it, I am quite familiar with the subject matter but in my oppinion this is the best. I think this book is a great contribution to the historical understanding of the Armenian Genocide and of Genocide in general. It's an extremely well researched book. The authors wide reading in the relevant sources in Turkish, Armenian, German, French and English, has no parrallel. I highly reccommend this book to anyone interested in this subject.