At the end of XIX - beginning of XX centuries. the national liberation struggle of the non-Turkish peoples of the Ottoman Empire intensified, striving to secede from Turkey and lay the foundation for the creation of independent national states. This movement was the result of rapid social and national development, which could not be stopped by any force. Armenian population Ottoman Empire
It is for this reason that the Young Turks adopted the concept of Ottomanism at the end of the 19th century. Yu.A. Petrosyan writes: "When active propaganda activities of the "Unity and Progress" society began in the 90s of the 19th century, Panosmanism, as an ideological concept, took the leading place in it. In essence, it became the basis of the program of the Young Turks in the national question." Petrosyan Yu A. To the study of the ideology of the Young Turk movement. Turkological collection. - M., 1966. P.67. They declared the Ottoman Empire a common homeland for the Muslim and non-Muslim peoples living on its territory. The Young Turk ideologists sought, with the help of the Ottoman doctrine, to ensure that these peoples abandoned the national liberation struggle and the desire to create independent nation-states, united with the Turks in the struggle for the creation of a constitutional monarchy Ibid. P.78.. The concept of Ottomanism was intended to preserve the integrity of the Ottoman Empire, and ultimately ensure the assimilation of all the peoples of the multinational Ottoman Empire. The Young Turks claimed that they were striving to achieve, through the regime of a constitutional monarchy, "the equality of all compatriots - Turks, Kurds, Bulgarians, Arabs and Armenians", stated that the Ottoman Empire was "the property of all Ottomans - subjects of the Sultan. Petrosyan Yu A. To the study of the ideology of the Young Turks movements, Türkological Collection, Moscow, 1966, p. the special position and role of the Turks in historical development and the current position of the Ottoman Empire Ibid. P.143..
Subsequently convinced that Ottomanism was unable to prevent the national liberation struggle of the peoples of the Ottoman Empire and subject them to assimilation, the Young Turks began to implement a policy of genocide, which, in their opinion, should undoubtedly ensure the integrity of the Ottoman Empire.
The genocide implies a coordinated action plan aimed at destroying the foundations of the existence of national groups in order to eradicate them Sahakyan R.G. The Armenian Genocide in the assessment of the advanced public. - "Bulletin of social sciences" AN Arm. SSR, - Yerevan, No. 4, 1965. S.43. people's lives. But this concept also corresponds to the term "ethnocide", which in modern political science literature is often included in the concept of "genocide", although these are not identical concepts. Indzhikyan O.G. Social psychology of genocide. - Yerevan, Hayastan, 1990. P.57. The concept of genocide includes the violation of the rights of the people as a certain set of people and is a crime against humanity, since such destruction violates the hereditary gene pool, reproductive ability, intelligence, spirituality of the representatives of the human race.
A.R. Anklaev considers genocide as a certain regulation of the ethno-political conflict "based on the strategy of elimination and/or politicization of ethnic differences." Aklaev A.R. Ethnopolitical conflictology. Analysis and management. - M., 2005. P.58.
Mass extermination of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire and Kemalist Turkey at the turn of the 19th-20th centuries. is the first genocide in world history. This is the largest and longest-running crime of genocide. The time of the Armenian Genocide is divided into two main periods: 1876 - 1914. and 1915 - 1923. Barsegov Y. The Armenian Genocide is a crime against humanity (on the legitimacy of the term and legal qualification). - Yerevan: Hayastan, 1990. P. 122. At the initial stage, an attempt was made to partially destroy the Armenian ethnic group in the Ottoman Empire in order to prevent the intensification of the Armenian national liberation struggle and exclude the Armenian issue from the agenda of international diplomacy. This would have prevented the intervention of the great powers in the internal affairs of the Ottoman state in order to carry out reforms under international control aimed at ensuring the security of the Armenian population. Armenian question. Encyclopedia. /Under. Ed. Khudaverdiana K.S. - 1991. P. 167.
The political conditions and reasons for the beginning of the Armenian pogroms in Ottoman Turkey were associated, first of all, with the systemic nationwide crisis, the failure of the reform era of the "Tanzimat", the emergence of bourgeois relations, the awakening of the national liberation struggle of the subservient non-Turkish peoples of the empire and with the corresponding geopolitics of the great powers. There. P.168.
The comprehensive crisis of the Ottoman Empire led to dependence on Western and Zionist capital. Ottoman society in the second half of the 19th century. needed unifying ideas, a new model of socio-economic development. In the economic sphere, there were certain disproportions associated with the emergence of bourgeois relations and the concentration of national capital in the hands of the non-titular nations of the empire: 45% of the production capital was in the hands of the Greeks, 25% - of the Armenians and only 13% - of the Turks, while in trade the Armenians controlled from 60 to 80% of the capital. Mandelstam A.N. Young Turkish state. Historical and political essay. - M., 1975. P. 174.
The economic and cultural development of the Armenians allowed them to have a clear system of national political organization (the "Hunchak", "Armenakan" and ARF "Dashnaktsutyun" parties); the political program for the liberation of Western Armenia with the support and in alliance with Russia, France and England; self-sufficient national intelligentsia and political elite, formed in opposition to the reactionary policy of the Ottomans; support from Russia. The desire of the Armenians of Western Armenia to liberate themselves from Turkish enslavement was complemented by a positive example of the fate of compatriots from Eastern Armenia, which is part of the Russian Empire.
In turn, the military-political elite of the Ottoman Empire turned out to be inadequate to the political and economic tasks that society faced, unable to ensure the evolutionary process of the development of the state and overcoming the crisis. This led the Turks to roll back to the Middle Ages and make simplified decisions, which, in turn, turned into a destructive policy towards the subject non-Turkish peoples, that is, to the destruction of the Armenians and other peoples of the empire. There. S. 178.
Since 1878 Turkey crossed out the word "Armenia" from the official geography and proceeded to the mass extermination of Armenians using the ethno-religious factor. The regular "Khamidiye" cavalry detachments, created in 1891, were actively used in punitive expeditions against the Armenians and for the formation of a military barrier on the Turkish-Russian border Kirakosyan D.S. Young Turks in the face of history. - Yerevan, 1986. P.28..
In the mid 90s. 19th century the Armenian population of the Ottoman Empire was subjected to deadly blows from the Turkish authorities.
According to A. Dzhivelegov's definition, "... Sultan Hamid decided to exterminate his Armenian subjects, and the powers timidly protested against Hamid's games." "From 1892 to 1912, the Armenian population of Greater Armenia decreased by 612,000 people" Jivelegov A. The future of Turkish Armenia. - M., 1911. S. 10 .. Turkish statesman Ismail Kemal wrote in his memoirs that in the eyes of Abdul-Hamid, the Armenians became dangerous due to the active intervention of Europe, in particular, England A.V. Armenian question. - St. Petersburg: Pushkin's speed printing, 1906. S.182 .. Armenians scattered throughout the empire, he wrote, freely used Turkish, communicated with their Muslim neighbors and, according to the Sultan, were the only people who could spread destructive ideas. The Sultan did not like the evolution of Christians, in particular Armenians, who opened European-type schools, conducted successful trade and "became an influential active force in a Muslim state." He was hostile to the Armenians, who successfully developed trade with Europe Mandelstam A.N. Young Turkish state. Historical and political essay. - M., 1975. S. 68 ..
Describing the situation of the Armenians, back in October 1890, a correspondent of one of the Parisian newspapers reported that "the beaten Christians begged for help, and their voice found a sympathetic response in Russia", that "Turkish Armenia turned into a vast slaughterhouse, from where the people flee in horror to Persia and Transcaucasia". Marunov Yu.V. Policy of the Young Turks on the national question (1908-1912). - M., 1961. P. 172.
Upon acquaintance with foreign documents, as well as materials of the Turkish press of 1890-1893. It is striking that the official Turkish circles at first refrained from attributing more or less serious political intentions to the Armenians Marunov Yu.V. Policy of the Young Turks on the national question (1908-1912). - M., 1961. S.128 .. But soon the situation changed dramatically. After the events in Lesser Armenia, when the details of the beatings of Armenians became public, even the pronunciation of the words "gnchak", "freedom", "revolution" could be regarded as a crime. Now "the sultan was firmly intent on slaughtering the Armenians", nullifying their "active role in the economic life of the country" and directed "all his energy to preparing the foundations of this terrible future," Arp wrote. Arpiaryan Kirakosyan J.S. Young Turks in the face of history. - Yerevan, 1986. P. 123 ..
In 1893, the Turkish authorities launched a stormy activity to arrest Hnchak propagandists. The arrested were gathered in Ankara. Young wrestlers from Marzvan, Yozgat, Siverek, Kayseri were brought here. At the trial, the Armenians sharply criticized the existing order in the country, the system of government, opposed harassment and injustice. The court sentenced 17 people to death by hanging, but the Sultan "generously" brought their number to five (the sentence was carried out on July 10, 1893) Ibid. P.136..
The Soviet orientalist G. Bondarevsky writes that as a result of the policy of settling Muslim immigrants on Armenian lands in the eastern provinces in Sasun in 1894, a peasant uprising broke out, which served as a convenient pretext for Abdul Hamid II and his ministers to crack down on them. He notes that "Turkish pashas received an order personally from the Sultan to drown the uprising in blood" Bondarevsky G.L. The Baghdad Road and the Penetration of German Imperialism in the Middle East (1888-1903). - Tashkent, 1955. S. 59. Regarding these events of the 90s. in the "History of Diplomacy" it is said: "Sultan Hamid organized a massacre of the Armenian population in a number of places in Asia Minor, and then in the very capital of his empire" History of diplomacy. T. II. - M., 1963. P.333. - three days officially informed both the High Port and the embassies of the six powers. History of diplomacy. T. II. - M., 1963. S.337.
The wild beatings of Armenians in 1895 began on September 30th. On October 3, massacres of the Armenian population took place in Ak. Hissar, October 8 - in Trabzon (where a special military unit was sent from Istanbul), October 27 - in Bitlis, October 30 - in Erzurum, November 1-5 - in Arabkir, November 1 - in Diyarbakir, November 4-9 - in Malatya, November 10 - in Harput, November 2 - in Sivas, November 5 - in Amasya, November 18 - in Marash, November 30 - in Kayseri, etc. The second beating in Urfa (December 28-29, 1895) was the most terrible .), when the Turkish executioners locked 3 thousand people in the church and burned them there. P.339..
For many months, in the expanses from the Sea of Marmara to the border with Iran, Christianity was destroyed city after city. According to J. Bryce, "many villages were set on fire, churches were turned into mosques, women were raped, boys and girls were taken out and sold into slavery" Barsegov Y. The Armenian Genocide is a crime against humanity (on the legality of the term and legal qualification). - Yerevan: Hayastan, 1990. P. 162. He sums up what he said with the following words: "Abdul-Hamid sowed death with one wave of his hand" History of diplomacy. T. II. - M., 1963. S.338 ..
And here is what A. Vitlin says about the massacre organized by Abdul-Hamid in Istanbul: “He went so far as to decide what weapons should be used. He did not like small arms. with lead heads, and for three days in a row from the port settlement where the market was located, the noise of the machines on which the locksmiths worked, fulfilling his order was heard. For three days in a row the noise from the blows of batons did not subside until dead silence descended on the Armenian streets. History of diplomacy. T. II. - M., 1963. S.339.
In 1894-1896. as a result of pogroms and massacres in Asia Minor (in Sasun, Zeytun, Urfa, Van, etc.), about 350 thousand Armenians were destroyed, hundreds of thousands were forced to flee and leave their historical homeland. Rotstein F.A. International relations at the end of the XIX century. - M. - L., 1960. S. 172.
Pointing to the fact of pre-arranged massacres and the vile role of the Turkish rulers in this matter, the German General von der Goltz in 1897 wrote in the newspaper Militar Voshenblat: “The massacres of Armenians in Asia Minor and Constantinople are not the result of Turkish fanaticism, but a conceived political conspiracy, so that these victims must be blamed on a few people, not the people "Ibid. P.174..
During the years of pogroms, part of the Western Armenians took up arms and organized self-defense; in some places this resistance was successful. Worthy of special mention is the defense of the Armenian population of Zeytun. In the autumn of 1895, the Sultan's troops made a campaign against Zeytun. Fierce battles took place, the Turkish troops suffered heavy losses, but could not break the resistance of the highlanders Gemanyan E. The Armenian liberation movement in the 19th century. - M., 1915. P.96.. The news of the heroic resistance of the Zeytuns spread in many countries. For diplomatic reasons, representatives of the great powers intervened. Negotiations began between the Sultan's government and the Zeytuns, the parties made mutual concessions. According to the agreement, Turkish troops were withdrawn from Zeytun. Ibid. S. 172..
In 1896, the Armenians of the city of Van also organized armed self-defense. They fought heroically against the Turkish rioters, but were defeated.
During the massacre of the 1890s, representatives of various strata of the Armenian society repeatedly turned to the great powers, asking for their intercession and help. These appeals, however, had no effect; no state has taken effective steps to prevent or stop the massacre. On the contrary, some of these states pursued a patronizing policy towards the Sultan's government Darbinyan A. Since the time of the Armenian liberation movement. - Paris, 1947. P.79.. The massacre of Armenians aroused indignation among the progressive world community in many countries. Rallies and demonstrations of protest took place, Abdul Hamid was called a "pogromist", "bloody". Prominent writers, publicists and political figures acted as defenders of Western Armenians and accusers of the Sultan. However, public opinion was unable to stop the atrocities of the Sultan's government.
With the emergence of the ideological-political and organizational movement of Pan-Turkism and the advent in 1908. to the power of the government of the Young Turks, a new process of liquidation of the Armenian people within Turkey begins Rotshtein F.A. International relations at the end of the XIX century. - M. - L., 1960. S. 172 ..
Another wave of extermination of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire, undertaken in 1909. in Adana (as a result of which 30 thousand people were killed), became a harbinger of the new pan-Turkist policy of the Young Turk government. Zakharyan K. The Genesis of the Catastrophe: The Formation of the Armenian Question in the 10th and 10th Centuries. - Yerevan: NTV Publishing House, 2006 - 140s. Having exterminated 30 thousand Armenians in Adana, the Young Turks actually followed the path of Abdul-Hamid. In the same year, the Greeks, Chaldeans, and Assyrians were massacred. A year later, in 1910, - Albanians, then - Macedonians, Bulgarians, Arabs and others. These events led to the fact that "Armenians stopped believing in the Young Turks" Grigoryan M. Genocide: memory and responsibility: // Voice of Armenia. - 1998. - 22 October. P.17.. The English author Benson called the massacre in Adana "experimental", a trial in the policy of the Young Turks Grigoryan M. Genocide: memory and responsibility: // Voice of Armenia. - 1998. - 22 October. P.17. .
The collapse of the Young Turks, the fall of the Ottoman Empire, it seemed, provided the Western Armenians with the opportunity to take a breath, stand on their own feet to become masters of their homeland. However, the wave of the Kemalist movement that arose in Turkey was directed not only against the imperialist powers, but also against the legitimate interests of the Armenian people. As far as the struggle of the Turkish people for their independence was fair, so was the struggle carried out in 1920-1923. nationalist Turkey's policy of depriving the ancestral land of the natives of Western Armenia - the tormented, scattered Armenian population around the world.
The successful offensive of Russian and Anglo-French troops in 1914-1915. brought closer the liberation of Western Armenia and Cilicia, which, in turn, contributed to the intensification of the policy of Genocide against the Armenian people of the Ottoman Empire Harutyunyan A.A. World War I and Armenian refugees (1914-1917). - Yerevan, 1989. P.145. Having received the refusal of the Armenian political organizations from joint participation in the war against Russia and the Entente bloc as a whole, the government of the Young Turks in 1915-1918. carried out the total and widespread extermination and deportation of more than 1.5 million Armenians Zakharyan K. Genesis of the catastrophe: The formation of the Armenian question in the 10th century. - Yerevan: NTV Publishing House, 2006 - 140p..
From May-June 1915, the mass deportation and massacre of the Armenians of Western Armenia began. The ongoing deportation of the Armenian population in fact pursued the goal of its destruction. US Ambassador to Turkey Morgenthau noted "the true purpose of the deportation was destruction and robbery, this is indeed a new method of massacre" Zakharyan K. Genesis of the catastrophe: The formation of the Armenian question in the 19th century - Yerevan: NTV Publishing House, 2006. P.46 .. G. Montgomery, in an article devoted to the causes of the Armenian massacres in 1915, emphasizes that "the plan of the crime was developed and decreed by the central committee of Ittihad" Hakobyan Seyran Yurievich. Ethno-Political and International Legal Consequences of the Armenian Genocide in Turkey: dis. ... cand. polit. Sciences: 23.00.02..
The Armenians who left their places of permanent residence were reduced to caravans, which were sent to the interior of the country, Mesopotamia and Syria, where special camps were created for the deported Nersisyan M.G., Sahakyan R.G. Armenian Genocide in the Ottoman Empire. - Yerevan, 1966. P.164. Armenians were exterminated both in their places of residence and along the route of caravans. As a result, only a part of the deported Armenians reached their destinations. But those who reached the deserts of Mesopotamia were also in danger: there are cases when the Armenians were taken out of the camps and cut out in the desert.
The actions of the Turkish rioters were distinguished by cruelty. This was demanded by the leaders of the Young Turks. So the Minister of Internal Affairs Talaat demanded that the Armenians cease to exist, not to pay attention to age, gender, or remorse. Eyewitnesses of the events, Armenians who survived the horror of deportation and genocide, left numerous descriptions of the incredible suffering that befell the Armenians.
In October 1916, the newspaper "Caucasian Word" published a report about the massacre of Armenians in the village of Baskan: "We saw how the unfortunate people were first torn off everything of value, then stripped and killed ....." Avakyan A. Genocide of 1915: Mechanisms for making and executing decisions. - Yerevan: Gitutsyun, 1999. P.72.
As a result of the Armenian genocide carried out by the Young Turks in 1915-1916, 1.5 million Armenians died and 600,000 became refugees. Ibid. P.85..
The leaders of the Young Turks did not hide their satisfaction with their successful atrocity: already in August 1915, the Minister of Internal Affairs Talaat cynically stated that "the actions against the Armenians are basically completed and the Armenian question practically does not exist" Vinogradov K.B. World politics of the 60-80s. 19th century Events and people. - L., 1991. P. 165 ..
The relative ease with which the pogromists managed to carry out the Armenian genocide is partly due to the unpreparedness of the Armenian population, as well as the Armenian political parties, for the impending annihilation. A certain role was played by the fact that in some Armenian societies there was an idea that disobedience to the Young Turks would lead to even greater victims. However, in some areas, the Armenian population offered significant resistance to the Turkish vandals. The Armenians of Van, having successfully resorted to self-defense, repelled the attacks of the enemy, held the city in their hands until the arrival of the Russian troops.
October Revolution of 1917 allowed the Turks to prevent the liberation of Western Armenia and Armenian Cilicia, as well as the revival of independent Armenia under the protectorate of the United States Sarkisyan E.K. The policy of the Ottoman government in Western Armenia in the last quarter of the 19th and early 20th centuries. - Yerevan, 1972. P.168.. The Turks were able to annex the Transcaucasus twice in 1918 and 1920, as well as carry out the Armenian Genocide in Eastern (Russian) Armenia.
During the aggression against Armenia in 1918, the Turks, having occupied Karaklis, massacred the Armenian population, killing several thousand people there. P.99.. It was a direct continuation of the Armenian genocide of 1915-1916. In September 1918, Turkish troops occupied Baku and, together with Azerbaijani nationalists, massacred the Armenian population there. P.101..
As a result of a new wave of Genocide, the Armenian population of the Kars region, Nakhichevan, Nagorno-Karabakh, Baku, Akhalkalaki, Akhaltsikhe, Alexandropol were destroyed. Nersisyan M.G., Sahakyan R.G. Armenian Genocide in the Ottoman Empire. - Yerevan, 1966. P. 143.
During the Turkish-Armenian war of 1920, the Turks managed to capture Alexandropol. Continuing the policy of their predecessors - the Young Turks, the Kemalists also tried to organize genocide in Eastern Armenia, where, in addition to local residents, there were refugees from Western Armenia. In Alexandropol and the villages of the district, the Turkish invaders massacred the peaceful Armenian population. One report described the state of affairs in the Alexandropol district: "All the villages are robbed, there is no shelter, no grain, no clothes ... .. the streets are overflowing with corpses. All this is complemented by cold, hunger" History of the Armenian people. T. 6. - Yerevan, 1981. P. 172. Tens of thousands of Armenians became victims of the atrocities of the Turkish occupiers.
In 1918-1920, the city of Shushi, the center of Karabakh, became the scene of pogroms and massacres of the Armenian population. In September 1918, Turkish troops moved to Shushi, devastating the Armenian villages and destroying the population along the way.
On September 25, 1918, Turkish troops occupied the city, but after the end of the World War they were forced to leave it. In December 1918, the British entered Shushi. Soon Musavatist Khosrov-bek Sultanov was appointed governor-general of Karabakh. With the help of Turkish military instructors, he formed detachments that were stationed in the Armenian part of Shusha. The forces of the rioters were constantly replenished, there were many Turkish officers in the city. In June 1919, the first pogroms of the Armenians of Shusha took place; on the night of June 5, at least 500 Armenians were killed in the city and its environs. On March 22, 1920, Turkish bands perpetrated a terrible pogrom of the Armenian population of Shushi, killing over 30 thousand people and setting fire to a part of the city where Armenians lived. The Armenian Question. Encyclopedia. /Under. Ed. Khudaverdiana K.S. - 1991. P. 269 ..
The last episode of the Armenian tragedy was the massacre of Armenians in the Western part of Turkey during the Greco-Turkish war in 1919-1922. In August-September 1921, Turkish troops achieved a turning point in the course of hostilities and launched a general offensive against the Greek troops. On September 9, the Turks broke into Izmir and massacred the Greek and Armenian population. The Turks sank the ships that were in the ports of Izmir, on which were Armenian refugees, mostly women, old people and children. Ibid. P.269..
As a result of the Moscow and Kars treaties of 1921, the Turks managed to divide spheres of influence with Bolshevik Russia in the Caucasus and Asia Minor, annex the territory of Kars, Ardagan, Artvin, Surmalinsky district with Greater and Lesser Ararat, and also seize the territories of Nakhichevan, Nagorny from Armenia. Karabakh and Javakhk. The last acts of the Armenian Genocide were committed by the Kemalists in Istanbul, Izmir and Cilicia History of diplomacy. T. II, - M., 1963. S. 272 ..
The policy of persecution and extermination of the surviving remnants of Western Armenians continued in 1921 and 1922. throughout Turkey. The nationalists completely adopted the methods of the Young Turks. Many dark sides domestic policy nationalists are still poorly covered in the Soviet Turkological literature. For a long time, the practice prevailed, according to which historians tried to avoid the facts of hostile actions of the Kemalists against national minorities. In particular, the fact of the arson of the city of Izmir and the extermination of its Greek and Armenian population is still passed over in silence.
In total from 1919 to 1923. 400 thousand Armenians were destroyed. Rostovsky S.N., Reisner I.M., Kara-Murza G.S., Rubtsov B.K. New history of colonial and dependent countries. Volume 1 - M. Politizdat, 1960. P.124.
Thus, the policy of genocide of the Ottoman Empire against the Armenian population was committed with the political goal of eliminating the Armenian ethnic wedge, which was an obstacle to the implementation of Turkey's aggressive pan-Turkic interests in creating the Great Turan empire. The Armenian Genocide was also aimed at preventing Russia from entering Asia Minor and preventing the liberation of Western Armenia from the Turkish yoke, as well as minimizing or eliminating the decisive role of the Armenian factor in the South Caucasus.
VLADIMIR GRIGORYANTS
Armenian Church of 1903 in Krasnovodsk (Turkmenbashi)
Some ethnic groups of Transcaspia and Central Asia in the late XIX - early XX centuries. the works of G.B. Nikolskaya and A.M. Matveev, but the information about the Armenians found here is random (1). Even in such a fundamental work as "The Peoples of Central Asia and Kazakhstan", information about the Armenian settlers of the Transcaspian region is limited only to an indication that since the beginning of the 80s. 19th century in the Trans-Caspian region, cities with new Russian and Armenian populations appear (2).
The basis for writing this article was the materials of the tsarist administration, published in the "Overviews of the Transcaspian region" for 1882-1911, the population census data of 1897, as well as some information extracted from the fund of the office of the head of the Transcaspian region of the Central State Archive of the Turkmen SSR and a number of other sources.
The penetration of Armenians from Transcaucasia into the Transcaspian took place in line with the development of Russian-Turkmen relations. Since the beginning of the 19th century individual representatives from Armenians, mainly military and trading estates, who had significant experience in communicating with the countries of the East, in particular with Iran, and who spoke oriental languages, were attracted by the tsarist administration as merchants and translators to participate in expeditions aimed at strengthening relations between Russia and the Turkmen tribes living on the coast of the Caspian Sea (3).
Merchants-fish merchants from Astrakhan Armenians also took an active part in the development of Russian-Turkmen relations, who, according to the Russian traveler and naturalist G.S. conducted a rather lively barter trade with the Mangishlak Turkmens. After the creation of the Russian sea station on the island of Ashur-Ada (1842) and the Novo-Petrovsky fortress on Mangishlak (1846), Astrakhan merchants-fish merchants from Armenians and Russians set up trading posts here, buying fishery products from the Turkmens (4). By the beginning of the 80s. Astrakhan fishermen from Armenians had already firmly established themselves in Fort Alexandrovsky (the Novo-Petrovsky fortification on Mangishlak was later renamed Fort Alexandrovsky). The vast majority of them had families, their own houses, kept shops with various petty and manufactured goods (5). It should be noted that the Armenian merchant population living on the southeastern coast of the Caspian Sea was noted back in the 70s. 17th century sent as a consul to Iran by M. Skibinevsky (6). As for the merchant class of Armenians living in Iran, it appeared in Iran relatively long ago (7).
In 1869, the foundation of the city of Krasnovodoka was laid by the landing of Caucasian troops on the eastern shore of the Caspian Sea. From that time on, the systematic advance of the Russian troops deep into the territory of Transcaspia began. In the process of advancing, Russian troops needed constant supply vehicles, food and fodder. A very significant role in supplying the Russian army was played by Armenian merchants. As can be seen from the book of N. I. Grodekov, Armenian merchants-contractors of Russian citizenship Gukasov, Ter-Oganov, Khublarov and others were food and fodder suppliers for the Russian army (8).
The Russian army advancing into the Transcaspian was accompanied by a mass of small merchants (9). Kuropatkin (later the head of the Transcaspian region), a direct participant in the conquest of Turkmenistan, wrote: “Armenians really came to the Transcaspian region simultaneously with the troops that occupied the region, serving as scribblers with units of the troops, as well as small merchants” (10). Moreover, the supply of the Russian army was carried out by Armenian merchants not only from the western coast of the Caspian Sea, the Armenian merchants also bought fodder and food in Iran and delivered it to the fortified points of Transcaspia, where the Russian troops were located. So, in 1881, a resident of Shusha, Avel Manukov, appealed to the chief of staff of the troops of the Transcaspian region with a complaint that he, who was buying up barley in the Kochan district from Persian subjects, and who wanted to deliver the bought barley to the fortification of Askhabad, was detained in the Persian village Hovvaz. The certificate issued to Manukov by the headquarters of the troops of the Transcaspian region noted that “... there are no obstacles to his trip to Persian possessions to buy grain fodder and other food items, and therefore the regional headquarters asks the Persian border commanders to repair Manukov free and unhindered passage there and back" (11).
Armenian merchants sometimes delivered very important information for the Russian army from Iran. So, in 1881, the merchant Pavel Abelov, arriving from Mashhad to the fortification of Askhabad, reported to the head of the department of the Akhal-Teke district about the mood of the population of the city of Merv and how the Turkmens of Merv relate to the prospect of joining Merv to Russia (according to the Mervs who arrived in Mashhad) (12).
Merchants conducting trade operations between Iran and the Transcaspian very often had to deal with the hostile attitude of the Persian population of the border regions. The head of the department of the Akhal-Teke district reported to the head of the Transcaspian region that "... our merchants, Persians and Armenians, have to travel in whole groups and always armed ..." (13).
With the occupation of the territory of Turkmenistan by Russian troops, a stream of settlers rushed to the Transcaspian from the western coast of the Caspian Sea. A significant part of the resettlement flow was made up of Armenian merchants, artisans, artisans, workers and peasants from the Erivan, Elisavetpol and Baku provinces. The bulk of the Armenian settlers came from the territory of Azerbaijan.
In the economy of Azerbaijan in the second half of the XIX century. the Armenian commercial and industrial bourgeoisie occupied a fairly prominent place. A significant part of the capital was concentrated in the hands of the Armenian bourgeoisie in the oil and fish industries, flour-grinding, rice-cleaning, silk-winding, distillery, wine-making and tobacco industries (14). However, mainly small merchants from Armenians moved to the Transcaspian region, hoping to use the lack of competition for enrichment.
The agrarian reform of 1870 in Armenia and Azerbaijan further worsened the already difficult situation of the peasantry. Otkhodnichestvo is especially intensified in lean years (1883-1893). In search of work, the largest number of otkhodniks settled in Baku, but some of them also left for the Trans-Caspian Territory (15).
Many artisans and handicraftsmen from Armenians also moved to the Trans-Caspian region, who were ruined due to the rapid development of industrial production. A well-known incentive for their resettlement was also the absence of any developed industry in Transcaspia. The reasons that prompted the resettlement of artisans and workers were the extremely difficult situation of the working class of Azerbaijan and the great demand for labor in the Transcaspian region, associated with the construction of the railway and the formation of cities.
The policy of inciting ethnic hatred carried out in Transcaucasia by tsarism together with the bourgeoisie professing nationalism, in particular the policy of playing off Armenians and Muslims, was certainly another reason for the resettlement of the Armenian population in the Transcaspian region.
Moving to the Trans-Caspian region, the Armenians (as well as the newcomers in general) usually settled in the places of fortifications of the Russian troops, where urban settlements soon arose.
By 1883, Armenians made up a very significant part of the urban settlements of the region. In Krasnovodsk, Armenians made up 25.5% of the city's population, in Kizil-Arvat - 26.3%, in Askhabad - 41.7%, in Merv - 18.3% (16).
It should be noted that in the first years after the annexation of Turkmenistan to Russia, the population of the urban settlements of the region grew mainly from Persians, immigrants from Iran, Armenians and Russians, the number of population of other alien nationalities was insignificant. So, in Krasnovodsk in 1883, 184 Persians, 89 Armenians and 40 Russians were noted with a total population of 349 people. 300 Russians, 250 Persians and 200 Armenians lived in Kizil-Arvat, with a total population of the city of 760 people. In Askhabad, with a total population of 1558 people, there were 800 Persians, 650 Armenians and 20 Russians, and in Merv (in 1884), with a total population of 458 people, 160 Jews, 91 Russians, 86 Armenians and 46 Persians and Transcaucasian Tatars were noted (Azerbaijanis). Approximately the same was the ratio of the Armenian, Russian and Persian population in the period 1882-1890. in general by counties and on the scale of the entire region (17).
The rapid growth of the Armenian population in this period is explained by the fact that the penetration of Armenians into the region was mostly voluntary, Armenian merchants, artisans, workers and peasants rushed to the region, hoping to find more suitable job and improve your living conditions. The Armenian migrants relatively easily endured the conditions of the hot climate of Turkmenistan, in addition, a significant part of the migrants had a good command of oriental languages, in particular Azerbaijani, which to a certain extent facilitated contacts with the local Turkmen population of the Transcaspian region. Knowing the local language, the Armenians also settled in smaller urban settlements in the region. According to the data for 1883-1884, the number of Armenians in such relatively small urban settlements as Chikishlyar, Kazanjik, Bami, Serakhs exceeded the population of any other newcomer nationality (18).
By 1885, the number of Armenians living in Krasnovodsk had grown to 322, but by 1890 it had fallen back to 89. Approximately also changed during this period the population of the city of Krasnovodsk as a whole. From 339 in 1883 it grew to 1263 in 1886 but then dropped to 384 by 1690(19). This was caused, apparently, by the further migration of the alien population to the newly formed urban settlements of the region, primarily to Askhabad, Kizil-Arvat, and also to Merv, the alien population of which grew especially sharply in 1886-1887.
The Armenian population of Kizil-Arvat increased by 1890 to 480 people and accounted for 25% of the total population. By this time, 680 Russians, 460 Persians, 270 Transcaucasian Tatars and 25 Jews also lived in Kizil-Arvat. In Askhabad, the number of the Armenian population increased with the completion of the Trans-Caspian railway to Askhabad in 1885. So, if in 1885 there were 916 Armenians here, then already in 1886 the number of Armenians increased to 2190 people. Subsequently, the number of the Armenian population of Askhabad decreases. By 1890, 1,500 Armenians were noted in Askhabad, which accounted for 17.6% of the city's population. The largest number was the number of Persians - 3200 people, Transcaucasian Tatars, there were 183 people, Russians - 1250 people (20). In Merv, within two years (1884-1886), the number of Armenians increased sharply from 84 to 3182 people. However, by 1890 the number of Armenians in Merv was reduced to 490 people (21). By 1890, a completely insignificant number of Armenians was noted in the Tejen district. Of the smaller urban settlements in the region, the relatively high number of the Armenian population in the period 1883-1890. marked by a source in Chikishlyar, Uzun-Ada, Kaakhk and Serakhs (22).
On the whole, during the noted period, the Armenian population of Transcaspia increased from 1,583 people to 3,437 people, i.e., more than doubled, while the newcomer population of the region increased from 4,000 people to 16,002 people, i.e., more than four times. Accordingly, the share of the Armenian population in the total number of newcomers decreased from 36.6% in 1883 to 21.5% in 1889. The largest number of the Armenian population in the region - 5500 on average - was noted by the source in 1886-1887. (23).
A sharp increase in the number of Armenians in the region in 1886-1887. (as well as the alien population as a whole) is apparently explained by bringing the Transcaspian railway to Askhabad, and then to Merv. On the contrary, the subsequent decrease in the number of the Armenian population (and the newcomer) is explained by the fact that the stay in the region in the period 1882-1890. for a significant part of the settlers was still temporary. So, when in 1883 the Armenians asked the head of the Trans-Caspian region to allow them the right to choose a foreman, they were denied on the grounds that their stay in the region was temporary. “... In Askhabad,” the head of the Akhal-Teke district reported to the head of the region, “there is not a single merchant who would settle here for permanent residence ...” (24). The data on the ratio of the number of male and female population can also serve as confirmation of the temporary nature of the stay in the region of immigrants in the first decade after the accession of Turkmenistan to Russia.
So, in Askhabad in 1884, out of 268 Armenians, there were men - 261 and women - only 7 (25). Apparently, many of the Armenians who came to the region in order to earn money or for trading purposes, however, were not sure how successful the resettlement would be, and left their families in the Transcaucasus. The first wave of settlers to Transcaspia met certain difficulties here, connected with the change of residence, and soon some part of the Armenians returned to Transcaucasia.
Between 1890 and 1895 the number of Armenians in the region has changed insignificantly. By 1892, it is reduced to 2871 people. Fleeing from the cholera epidemic that hit the region, some of the Armenians left the Transcaspian region, but by 1893 the number of Armenians in the region was over 3,500 people (26).
In subsequent years, the growth of the Armenian population in the region continues. In 1897, 4256 Armenians already lived in the Transcaspian region. Of these, 3975 people lived in cities and 261 in the territory of counties outside the cities (27). In 1900, 3,399 Armenians lived in Askhabad, 835 in Krasnovodsk, 678 in Kizil-Arvat, and 549 in Merv, which respectively accounted for 14.4%, 12.0%, 18.9% and 10.7% of the population specified cities. The total number of Armenians living in the region was 6136 people, which accounted for 12.4% of the total newcomer population of the region (28).
By the end of the XIX century. the ratio of the number of male and female population among the Armenians living in the region changes somewhat. According to the 1897 census, there were 3,100 men and 1,156 women of Armenian nationality in the region. Of these, there were 478 unmarried girls, 1894 unmarried men, 547 married women, 1150 married men, 128 widows, 51 widowers, 2 divorced women, no divorced men (29). As can be seen from the given data, the number of men, exceeding the number of women of Armenian nationality in the region, consisted primarily of unmarried men and, apparently, not yet firmly settled in the region, then of married men, but who left their families behind. outside of the Caspian. At the same time, the ratio of the male and female population, which has changed in comparison with 1883, indicates that a significant part of the Armenian settlers have already settled down to live in the Transcaspian region.
The justification of the Armenian population in Transcaspia soon aroused the anxiety of the tsarist administration. The head of the Transcaspian region, Kuropatkin, wrote in 1892 to the head of the main headquarters of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, Obruchev, that “... The Transcaspian region turned out to be largely an Armenian corner in 10 years, both in terms of the number of the Armenian population, and the main thing and in terms of the role that this population occupied in the region, seizing trade, crafts, contracts ... ". “Even now,” he continued further, “Armenians in the Trans-Caspian region constitute friendly close-knit communities in the main points, in Askhabad, in Merv, in Kizil-Arvat. These societies draw all their spiritual and political hopes from the Caucasus” (30).
In 1894, in response to an inquiry from the military ministry on the issue of Turkish Armenians who had fled to the Transcaspian region, the head of the Transcaspian region, categorically opposing the settlement of Armenian immigrants from Turkey, expressed the opinion of the extreme undesirability rapid increase the number of the Armenian population from Transcaspia. He considered the correct solution of the issue to be the resettlement of Armenian immigrants to Turkey. “... It seems most desirable,” the head of the region wrote, “that this industrious agricultural population should live within Turkey, on our border with Asiatic Turkey” (31).
Despite this, the number of the Armenian population in Transcaspia continues to increase in the first years of the 20th century. In 1902, 7,658 Armenians already lived in the region, which accounted for 12.6% of the total newcomer population in the Transcaspian region (32). In 1903, the number of Armenians in the region increased even more and reached 8414 people (33). According to the information of the tsarist administration, a significant increase in the newcomer population in 1902-1903. was a consequence of unemployment in the eastern Caucasus, in particular in Baku, and famine in Khorasan (34). The number of Armenians living in large cities of the region has grown. In 1902, there were 4690 Armenians in Askhabad, 922 in Krasnovodsk, 782 in Kizil-Arvat and 642 in Merv, which accounted for 22.0%, 13.4%, 22.8% and 10.0% of the population, respectively. specified cities (35).
The increase in the number of the Armenian population in the region is accompanied by a steady decline in the share of the Armenian population in the total number of newcomers. This is due to the extremely high population growth of Russian and Persian nationalities. So, for 1902, the number of Russians in the region was determined at 31,425 people, and the number of Persians - at 12,717 people, which respectively amounted to 51.9% and 21.0% of the total newcomer population of the region (36).
By 1905-1906. the number of Armenians living in the region is reduced to 6,500 on average. The reasons for such a sharp decrease in the number of the Armenian population are still not clear enough. The tsarist authorities, trying to weaken the revolutionary movement, sought to kindle ethnic hatred among the population of Transcaspia, and it is possible that part of the Armenians left the Transcaspian region due to the aggravation of the national question. Thus, according to the report of the Askhabad newspaper, in April 1905 in Askhabad a police officer was brought to justice for pitting Muslims and Armenians (37). In July 1905, a special “Committee for the Appeasement” of the Armenian and Muslim population was created in Askhabad (38), and in Krasnovodsk in November of the same year, the “city police”, the administrative committee of which included representatives of the Muslim, Armenian and Russian population (39 ).
In subsequent years, the growth of the Armenian population of the Transcaspian region again occurs. By the beginning of the second decade of the XX century. the number of Armenians living in the region exceeded 11,000 people and amounted to 9.9% of the newcomer population of the region and 2.4% of the total population, including the indigenous Turkmen population (40). At the same time, 6667 Armenians lived in Askhabad, 682 - in Krasnovodsk, 2140 - in Merv (41).
By 1911, the ratio of the number of men and women of the Armenian population of the region had leveled off to a comparative degree. Thus, out of 11,479 Armenians, 6,450 men and 5,029 women were noted by a source, in particular, in Askhabad, 3,596 men accounted for 3,071 women, in Krasnovodsk, 410 men - 272 women, in Merv, 1,285 men - 885 women (42).
So changed, in comparison with the initial settlement of Armenians in the region, the ratio of men and women of the Armenian population clearly shows that at the beginning of the 20th century. Armenians - immigrants from Transcaucasia have already settled quite firmly in the Transcaspian region for permanent residence.
Those are in in general terms picture of resettlement and growth dynamics of the Armenian population in the Transcaspian region in the late 19th-early 20th centuries.
__________________________________
1. G. B. Niholskaya, On the issue of the Uighurs in the Transcaspian region (“Proceedings of the Tashkent state university", new. ser., issue. 223, historical sciences, book. 48, Tashkent, 1964); A. M. Matveev, From the history of immigrants from Iran in Central Asia in the second half of the 19th and early 20th centuries. (Sat. "Iran", 1973); his own. Materials on the history of the Iranian Enjumen in Ashgabat (1907-1911) ("Proceedings of SAGU", new
-ser., Historical sciences, book. Yu. Tashkent, 1936); G. B. Nikolskaya, A. M. Matveev, From the history of Asian and European immigrants in Central Asia at the beginning of the 20th century.
(“Proceedings of the Tashkent State University”, issue 425, Historical Sciences,
book. 4, Tashkent, 1972).
2. “Peoples of Central Asia and Kazakhstan. Ethnographic essays, vol. 2. M., 1963, p. 8.
3. X. Agaev. Relations between the Caspian Turkmens and Russia in the 19th century,
Ashkhabad, 1965. pp. 32, 35, 48-50. 74-75; "History of the Turkmen SSR", vol. I, Ashgabat, 1955, p. 517.
4. X. Agaev. decree. cit., pp. 12. 16.
5. Central State Archive of the Turkmen Soviet Socialist
Republic (hereinafter - TsGA TSSR), f. I-1, op. 1, d. 186, ll. 4-9.
6. N. G. Kukanova, Coverage of Russian-Iranian Economic Relations of the End
XVIII-early XIX centuries. in little-known archival documents (collection "Iran", M., 1973, p. 186).
7. Zakary Kaiakertsi, Chronicle, M., 1969, pp. 47-48 (see also editorial note on p. 283); "History of the countries of Foreign Asia in the Middle Ages", M., 1970, p. 582; I. G. Kukanova, decree. cit., p. 186.
8. N. I. Grodekov, War in Turkmenistan in 1880-1381, vol. IV, St. Petersburg, 1884, ch. IV, p. 220. 238-241, ch. VIII, pp. 195-296.
9. A. I. Maslov, Conquest of Akhal-Tepe, St. Petersburg, 1887, p. 167.
10. TsGA TSSR, f. 1-1-1, op. 2, d. 2718, l. twenty.
11. Ibid., 38, ll. 13-13 about.
12. Ibid., 66, ll. 33-33 rev.
13. Ibid., l. 34 vol.
14. History of Azerbaijan, vol. 2, Baku, 1960, pp. 254-258.
15. Ibid., pp. 260-262.
1b. "Overview of the Transcaspian region for 1882-1890", Askhabad, 1897, tables 12, 13, 14 (Data for Merv for 1884). Here and below, the calculations are based on
statements about the number of newcomers to the region, placed in the "Reviews of the Transcaspian region" for different years.
17. Ibid.
18. Ibid.
19. Ibid., pl. 12.
20. Ibid., pl. 13.
21. Ibid., pl. fourteen.
22. Ibid., pl. 12, 13, 14.
23. Ibid.
24. TsGA TSSR, f. I-1, op. 2, d. 580, l. 3.
25. "Overview of the Transcaspian region for 1882-1890", tab. 13.
26. "Review of the Transcaspian region for 1890-18915", Askhabad, 1897, pp. 29, 31.
27. "The first general census of the population of the Russian Empire in 1897", vol. 82,
Transcaspian region, St. Petersburg, 1901. pp. 58-60.
28. "Review of the Transcaspian region for 1900", Askhabad, 1902, pp. 12-13.
29. "The first general census of the population of the Russian Empire", pp. 90-91.
30. TsGA TSSR, f. I-1, op. 2, file 2718, ll. 20v., 22.
31. Ibid., d. 8773, ll. 1-3.
32. "Review of the Transcaspian region for 1902", Askhabad, 1903, pp. 10, 11.
33. "Review of the Transcaspian region for 1903". Askhabad, 1904, p. 11.
34. Ibid., p. 156.
35. "Review of the Transcaspian region for 1902", pp. 10, 11.
36. Ibid.
37. "Ashkhabad", 13. IV. 1905, p. 2.
38. Ibid., 12. VII. 1905, p. 1.
39. Ibid., 9.XI. 1905. pp. 2-3.
40. "Review of the Transcaspian region for 1911", Askhabad, 1915, pp. 64, 70.
41. Ibid., Appendix No. I.
42. Ibid.
|
Ethno-confessional composition of the population of the Yerevan province in 1865 (p. 113)
Changes in the ethnic composition of the population of eastern Armenia in the 1830-1850s (p. 115)
Distribution of the ethnic composition and population of Eastern Armenia by sex according to the 1897 census (p. 136)
Ethnic composition and population of the Yerevan province by sex at the beginning of 1914 (p. 151)
The natural movement of the population in four counties of the Yerevan province for 1908-1914. (page 154)
Dynamics of the ethnic composition of the population of Eastern Armenia in 1873-1914 (page 155)
The natural movement of the population of Eastern Armenia in 1891-1914. (page 159)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The study is devoted to the study of ethno-demographic processes on the territory of Eastern Armenia in three historical sections: before joining the Russian Empire - at the turn of the 18th and 19th centuries; in the first half of the 19th century: - with the disclosure of the features of resettlement processes, ethnic composition and population dynamics; in the second half of the 19th - early 20th centuries. - against the background of administrative-territorial transformations and the specifics of socio-economic development, the change in the ethnic composition and population density, the direction of the main migration flows in the territory of Eastern Armenia are characterized.
The book was first introduced into scientific circulation and analyzed significant factual material of interest to ethnographers, historians, demographers, geographers and a wide range of readers.
INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER I. Eastern Armenia at the turn of the 18th-19th centuries
§ 1. Historical, cultural and ethno-ecological characteristics of the region
§ 2. Ethnic situation in the region at the end of the 18th - beginning of the 19th centuries.
CHAPTER II. Dynamics of the ethnic composition of the population of Eastern Armenia in the first half of the 19th century
§ 1. Stages of accession of Eastern Armenia to Russia and features of resettlement processes
§ 2. The population of Eastern Armenia in the middle of the XIX century. and the process of stabilizing the ethnic composition
CHAPTER III. Ethno-demographic characteristics of the population of Eastern Armenia in the second half of the 19th - early 20th centuries.
§ 1. Shifts in the ethnic composition and distribution of the population of the region in the second half of the 19th century.
§ 2. The ethnic composition of the population of Eastern Armenia at the beginning of the 20th century. and features of ethno-demographic processes
CONCLUSION
SUMMARY (in Armenian)
SUMMARY (on English language)
LIST OF SOURCES AND LITERATURE
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
APPENDIX(Cards)
I. Eastern Armenia on the eve of joining Russia (at the turn of the 18th-19th centuries)
II. Armenian Region in 1828 - 1840
III. Ethnic Composition of the Population of Eastern Armenia (30s of the 19th century)
IV. Ethnic composition of the population of Eastern Armenia (mid-19th century)
V. Population density of Eastern Armenia (1870s)
VI. Administrative-territorial division of Eastern Armenia (late XIX - early XX century)
VII. The main historical and ethnographic regions of Eastern Armenia (late XIX - early XX century)
VIII. Ethnic composition of the population of the Yerevan province (according to the data of 1886)
IX Ethnic composition of the population of Eastern Armenia (according to the 1897 census)
X. Population density of Eastern Armenia (according to the 1897 census)
XI. Ethnic composition of the population of Eastern Armenia (according to 1914 data)
XII. The main migration flows of the Armenian population in the XIX century.
XIII. Population density of Eastern Armenia (according to 1914 data)
1. Economic and socio-political life of Eastern Armenia
In the XX century. Armenia entered as before divided into two parts: the Eastern, which was part of the Russian Empire, and the Western, languishing under the yoke of Sultan's Turkey. This determined the features of the socio-economic and socio-political life of the two parts of the Armenian people: progressive processes took place in Eastern Armenia, inextricably linked with the general development of Russia; the life of Western Armenians, which took place under the conditions of the most cruel regime of Turkish despotism, became even more difficult, full of tragic events.
At the end of the 19th century, Russia entered the era of imperialism. The intensive development of industry embraced not only the central, but also the outlying regions of the empire, including the Transcaucasus. Large industrial centers such as Baku, Tiflis, Kutaisi, Batumi arose here, the urban population increased, and the size of the working class increased. The rise of industrial production was also characteristic of Armenia.
The leading branch of industry in Eastern Armenia was copper smelting, based on the local raw materials, the copper mines of Alaverdi and Zangezur. From the end of the 19th century, copper smelting in Armenia began to increase sharply, which was stimulated, on the one hand, by Russia's increased demand for copper, and, on the other hand, by the penetration of foreign, in particular French, capital into the copper ore industry of Armenia. Mercilessly exploiting the local labor force, improving production technology, foreign industrialists have achieved an increase in copper smelting. If in 1900 copper smelting at Alaverdi plants did not exceed 20 thousand poods, then already in 1901 59.7 thousand poods were produced, and in 1904 - 116 thousand poods. In Zangezur in 1900, 50 thousand poods of copper were smelted, in 1904 - 68.4, and in 1907 - 94 thousand poods of copper.
Copper production continued to increase in subsequent years, until the outbreak of the First World War. So, in 1910, 278.2 thousand were produced in Armenia, in
1913 - 343 thousand pounds. On the eve of the First World War, Armenia accounted for 17 percent of all produced in tsarist Russia copper.
Wine and cognac production also received significant development. Large enterprises in this industry were the Yerevan factories of Shustov and Saradzhev. In the Erivan province, the cost of alcohol-cognac production in 1901 was 90 thousand, and in 1908 - 595 thousand rubles. In 1913, 188,000 decaliters of wine and 48,000 decaliters of cognac were produced in Armenia. About 80 percent of cognac, spirits and wines produced in Armenia were exported to Russia and also entered the international market.
The enterprises of copper ore and wine-cognac production essentially determined the industrial image of Armenia, since, in addition to them, there were only a few food industry enterprises, as well as a large number of various handicraft workshops. According to official data, in 1912 there were 2,307 manufacturing enterprises, which employed 8254 people. Thus, on average, each enterprise had no more than 3-4 workers. Basically, these were primitive productions for the primary processing of agricultural raw materials, mechanical workshops, etc.
The development of industry was accompanied by an increase in the number of workers in Armenia. (The unfolding railway construction also contributed to this. In 1895, the construction of the Tiflis-Kare railway line began; the first trains along this road went in 1899. The construction of the Alexandropol-Yerevan railway (ended in 1902) and Yerevan-Julfa ( ended in 1906. In addition to the road builders, the ranks of the proletariat of Armenia were replenished by railway workers who serviced these roads. Work collectives were formed at the railway stations and in the depot of Alexandropol, Sanahin, Kars, Yerevan, Julfa. At the beginning of the 20th century, the number of workers in Armenia reached about 10 thousand people.
The proletariat of Transcaucasia from the very beginning of its formation was international in composition. The main detachments of the working class were concentrated in the oil fields and industrial enterprises of Baku, in the factories and factories of Tiflis, Batumi, Kutaisi and other cities of Transcaucasia. Georgians, Russians, Armenians, Azerbaijanis, Ukrainians, Greeks and workers of other nationalities worked together in these industrial centers. A large number of landless and poor peasants from Armenia went to work in these cities, often settled here and turned into proletarians.
Especially many Armenians worked at the enterprises of Baku, the largest industrial center of Transcaucasia. There were also many Armenian workers at the enterprises of Tiflis, Batumi, Kutaisi. At the beginning of the century, about one third of the workers employed at the enterprises of Batumi were Armenians, including refugees from Western Armenia who moved here after the massacre of the Armenian population in Turkey in 1894-1896. In turn, a significant number of workers - Russians, Azerbaijanis, Greeks, Persians - worked at the industrial enterprises of Armenia. In the first decade of the 20th century, the total number of Armenian workers in Transcaucasia reached 35-40 thousand people.
The Armenian commercial and industrial bourgeoisie was also scattered throughout Transcaucasia. The big industrialists Mantashev, Ter-Gukasov, Aramyants and others invested their capital in the oil industry of Baku, received huge profits, and advanced to the forefront of the Russian industrial bourgeoisie. Armenian capitalists owned quite a few light and food industries in Tiflis. In Armenia itself, copper mines and various industrial enterprises were owned by the capitalists Melik-Azarian, Melik-Karagezov and others.
The position of the workers was difficult. They were subjected to brutal exploitation by entrepreneurs who only sought to obtain maximum profit. The work of the workers of copper mines and copper smelters of Alaverdi and Zangezur was especially exhausting. The working day here lasted 12-14 hours, or even more; wage was low; safety equipment at mines and enterprises was virtually absent; occupational diseases were widespread among workers - a consequence of harmful working conditions. The workers had no trade unions of their own and did not take any part in public life. Their families lived in unbearably difficult conditions. Gradually, the discontent of the workers grew, whose protest against unbridled exploitation took on ever more persistent and organized forms.
More disastrous was the position of the peasantry. At the beginning of the 20th century, the process of disintegration of patriarchal relations and the growth of commercial agriculture continued in the countryside. The stratification of the peasantry deepened, the impoverishment of its majority. The best lands passed into the hands of the landlords and kulaks. Landlessness became a terrible scourge for the working peasants, who were forced to leave the village in search of work and go to the cities, to a foreign land. Otkhodnichestvo has become a common feature of rural life. Heavy
taxes, forced labor, complete lack of rights, the dominance of merchants and usurers made the life of a peasant worker hopeless. Describing the situation in the Armenian village, a correspondent of one of the newspapers of that time wrote: "Sorrow, pain, tears, sweat, need, poverty, oppression, ruin, deprivation - such is the village."
Despite the general backwardness of Armenia's agriculture, since the end of the 19th century, cotton crops have expanded, which was due to the needs of the textile industry in Russia, and the area of vineyards has increased, providing raw materials for the wine and cognac industry of Armenia.
The beginning of the 20th century was marked by major events in the socio-political life of Transcaucasia: the rise of the workers' revolutionary movement, stormy speeches
broad masses against tsarism, the emergence of social democratic organizations. The revolutionary uprisings of the workers that began in Transcaucasia were part of the general revolutionary movement that engulfed Russia and took place under the influence of Marxist ideas.
It is known that since the beginning of the 20th century Russia has become the center of the world revolutionary movement. The revolutionary struggle of the Russian working class, supported by the peasant masses, had an enormous impact on the world historical process. The Russian proletariat became the leading force in the liberation, revolutionary movement. The peculiarity of the new stage of the labor movement in Russia was its combination with Marxist theory. This is one of the greatest historical merits of Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, the great revolutionary, brilliant scientist and theorist, founder of a new type of Marxist party, the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.
Having embarked on the path of revolutionary struggle as early as his student years, V. I. Lenin, from the very first steps of his activity, closely linked the propaganda of Marxist ideas with the political and economic struggle of workers in enterprises. Through the efforts of V. I. Lenin and his comrades-in-arms, in the fall of 1895, the St. Petersburg workers' circles were united into the "Union of Struggle for the Emancipation of the Working Class." This organization, together with similar unions and groups soon created in Moscow, Kyiv, Ivanovo-Voznesensk and other cities of the country, marked the beginning of the union of Marxism with the labor movement. In the ranks of the St. Petersburg "Union" many revolutionaries were hardened, including those from the Transcaucasus.
The ideas of Marxism began to penetrate into the Armenian reality from the 80s of the XIX century. From the first information in the Armenian democratic press about K. Marx, his teachings,. International Association of Workers-Internationale before translations into Armenian of Marxist literature and its illegal distribution, from the activities of the first Marxist-Armenian participants in the all-Russian revolutionary movement to the emergence of local social democratic organizations that were part of the Russian social society created by V. I. Lenin -Democratic Party - this is the way of penetration of Marxism into the Armenian reality.
The first attempts to translate Marxist literature into Armenian were made by Armenian students studying in Europe in the late 80s and early 90s of the 19th century. The first work they turned to for translation was the programmatic document of Marxism, the Manifesto of the Communist Party. At the end of the 19th century, “Wage Labor and Capital”-K. Marx, "Scientific Socialism" by F. Engels, a number of works by prominent Western European Marxists of that time P. Lafargue, F. Lassalle, W. Liebknecht and others, as well as popular revolutionary literature. This literature was delivered to Transcaucasia in various ways, distributed among the workers and students.
The spread of Marxist ideas in the Transcaucasus, the first steps of the revolutionary movement of the proletariat of the region, were largely facilitated by the Russians exiled to the Caucasus and working here, the revolutionaries-V. G. Kurnatovsky, G. Ya. Franceschi, I. I. Luzin, M. I. Kalinin, S. Ya-Alliluev and others.
The Armenian Marxist revolutionaries, together with the revolutionary leaders of other peoples of Russia, took an active part in the revolutionary struggle of the Russian proletariat, in the creation of a new type of Marxist party. Isaac Lalayants (1870-1933), an ally of V. I. Lenin in the Samara period of the leader’s activity, who then took an active part in the publication of the Iskra newspaper, became major revolutionary figures on a national scale. Bogdan Knunyants (1878-1911) is a prominent revolutionary who went through a revolutionary school in the St. Petersburg Union of Struggle for the Emancipation of the Working Class, headed by V. I. Lenin, who then actively fought for the Leninist principles of building a proletarian party at the II Congress of the RSDLP Stepan Shaumyan (1878-1918)
An outstanding revolutionary, a major theoretician of Marxism, a glorious leader of the heroic Baku Commune; Suren Spandaryan (1882-1916) - a professional revolutionary, an ardent propagandist of Marxism, a member of the leading core of the RSDLP.
Under the influence of the Russian revolutionary movement in Transcaucasia, primarily in its industrial centers, Marxist groups and circles began to emerge, united under the banner of social democracy. In 1898, the first Marxist group of Armenian workers was created in Tiflis, which included Melik Melikyan (Grandfather), Asatur Kakhoyan and others. The group carried out propaganda work among the workers, maintained ties with the Georgian and Russian Social Democrats in Tiflis, published the handwritten newspaper Banvor (Worker). In 1901, the group was crushed by the tsarist authorities. In the summer of 1899, the first Marxist circle in Armenia appeared in Jalalogly (now Stepanavan), headed by Stepan Shaumyan.
The circle included local revolutionary youth who studied Marxism and spread revolutionary ideas among the working people.
The creation of a Marxist workers' party in Russia stimulated the emergence of social democratic organizations in Transcaucasia, which were built on the principles of internationalism and were local organizations of the RSDLP. Most of them actively supported V. I. Lenin and the Iskra newspaper edited by him in the struggle against all kinds of opportunists who tried to prevent the creation in Russia of a truly Marxist revolutionary party.
In 1901, the Tiflis, Baku, Batumi committees of the RSDLP were formed, which had their own underground printing houses. At the end of 1902, the first social democratic cell was created in Yerevan, which included workers from the railway and Shustov's factory. Following this, social democratic circles were organized in Alexandropol - in the city and the garrison, in Karey, Alaverdi, in a number of villages of Lori.
In the summer of 1902 in Tiflis, on the initiative of S. G. Shaumyan, B. M. Knunyants and A. Zurabyan, the "Union of Armenian Social Democrats" was created. This organization worked under the leadership of the Tiflis Committee of the RSDLP, and then became part of it. "Union" founded the first illegal Marxist newspaper in Armenian - "Proletariat". AT
In October 1902, the first issue of this newspaper was published, in which the manifesto of the "Union of Armenian Social Democrats" was placed. Having familiarized himself with the Russian translation of this document, V. I. Lenin responded to it with a special article “On the Manifesto of the Union of Armenian Social Democrats”, which was published in 1903 in Iskra. V. I. Lenin highly appreciated the activities of the Union and the manifesto he published. On all the fundamental questions of revolutionary theory and practice, the Union of Armenian Social Democrats stood on the positions of Lenin's Iskra. The Union defended the Leninist organizational principles of building the party, promoted the ideas of proletarian internationalism, and actively fought against opportunist trends in Russian social democracy. The "Union of Armenian Social Democrats" and its organ-newspaper "Proletariat" played a big role in spreading the Marxist ideology in the Armenian reality and in the revolutionary education of the Armenian working people.
The interests of leading the labor movement in Transcaucasia, the strengthening of the activities of the Social Democratic organizations of the region required the organizational unification of disparate Social Democratic groups and organizations and the creation of a single regional leading center. This task was carried out by the first congress of Caucasian organizations
RSDLP, which took place illegally in March 1903 in Tiflis. The congress decided to form the Caucasian Union of the RSDLP and proclaimed it an integral part of the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party. The congress elected the governing body of the Caucasian Union - the Caucasian Union Committee of the RSDLP. At different times, it included prominent revolutionary figures of Transcaucasia - B. Knunyants, A. Tsulukidze S. Shaumyan, A. Dzhaparidze, M. Tskhakaya, F. Makharadze and others. The creation of the Caucasian Union of the RSDLP was an important step in rallying the revolutionary forces of the region on the eve of the first Russian revolution.
The revolutionary movement of workers that unfolded in Russia at the beginning of the 20th century soon spread to the Transcaucasus. On May 1, 1901, a powerful demonstration of working people took place in Tiflis, led by the Tiflis Social Democratic Organization. The May Day demonstration in Tiflis served as the signal for deployment; revolutionary movement throughout the region. The Iskra newspaper noted that "from this day on, an open revolutionary movement begins in the Caucasus."
The revolutionary movement of the workers of the Caucasus developed in close connection with the all-Russian worker-peasant movement; revolutionary movement. It is known that in the years preceding the first Russian revolution, yakal revolutionary; struggle in Russia steadily intensified. A wave of workers' protests, imbued with the spirit of political consciousness, swept across the country. The universal was especially powerful; strike in southern Russia that began in 1903. In contrast to the strikes of the previous period, the Social Democratic organizations connected with Iskra played an active role in this strike. The combination of economic and political demands, the participation in the movement along with the Russian workers of the Ukrainian and Transcaucasian proletariat made this movement especially dangerous for tsarism. In Transcaucasia, strikes took place at the enterprises of Baku, Tiflis, Batumi, Alexandropol, and Alaverdi. The general strike of the workers of the Baku oil fields and enterprises in July 1903 was especially stubborn. In Armenia, the workers of the Alaverdi copper mines were at the forefront of the strike movement. Local social-democratic organizations sought to direct the workers' movement into the mainstream of organized political struggle.
Under the influence of the revolutionary movement of the workers, on the eve of the first Russian revolution, the peasant movement revived. At the end of 1903, there was an uprising of the peasants of the village of Haghpat in the Lori district. The landlord of this village was distinguished by his cruelty, merciless exploitation of the peasants. He owned the best arable land and pastures. Driven to extreme poverty, the indignant peasants refused to rent land, and arbitrarily seized those plots of land that they had cultivated before. The landowner went to court, which, of course, protected his interests. In November, police and guards were sent to Haghpat to enforce the court's decision and take away the land, livestock and property from the peasants. Haghpatians resisted the authorities; there was a clash between the peasants and the police, during which five peasants were killed. The angry peasants revolted and drove the guards out of the village. The authorities sent troops and police to Haghpat. The uprising was crushed, and its participants were massacred. About 200 peasants were arrested and put on trial, the village was subjected to a brutal execution.
A major event in the socio-political life of Armenia at the beginning of the 20th century was the powerful uprising of the Armenian masses against the reactionary national policy of the tsarist autocracy. Since the end of the 19th century, the tsarist government and its local bodies in Transcaucasia began to implement a number of measures aimed, in particular, against the national rights of the Armenian population of the region. Armenian schools were closed, the activities of charitable and publishing societies were limited, and strict censorship of the periodical press was established. Especially zealous in carrying out these repressions was the governor of the Caucasus, Prince Golitsyn, a zealous conductor of the great-power policy of tsarism in the region subject to him.
On June 12, 1903, the tsarist government adopted a law on (confiscation of lands and profitable property of the Armenian church and transferring them to the jurisdiction of the relevant ministries of Russia. This law not only undermined the economic foundations of the Armenian church, but at the same time was directed against the people, its political rights, national identity and culture, against the Armenian school, since it was at the expense of the church that the majority of Armenian schools in Transcaucasia were maintained.
cultural and educational institutions was supposed to facilitate the implementation of the colonial policy of tsarism. This is exactly how the law of June 12, 1903 was perceived by broad sections of the Armenian people. The royal law caused general indignation among the Armenian population of Transcaucasia. When the government and its local bodies tried to start implementing the law, the masses of the Armenian population everywhere rose up to fight against the tsarist autocracy.
In July-September 1903, in many cities of Transcaucasia - Alexandropol, Karey, Yerevan, Echmiadzin, Tbilisi, Elizavetpol (Kirovabad), Shusha, Baku, Karan Lisa (Kiro-Vakan), Batum, Igdir, Jalal-Ogly and others - took place crowded rallies and demonstrations, the participants of which demanded the abolition of the tsarist law and urged not to obey the authorities. In many places, the protests of the Armenian workers turned into clashes with the police and the Cossacks. Bloody events took place in Alexandropol, Elizavetpol, Tiflis. Troops were put into action in Yelizavetpol, the authorities severely cracked down on the participants in anti-tsarist protests: there were victims among the Armenian population, hundreds of people were arrested. In Tiflis, the authorities were forced to introduce martial law.
The uprising of the working people against the tsarist autocracy acquired the character of a nationwide movement. All sections of the Armenian people took part in the struggle - workers, peasants, artisans, intellectuals, clergy. Political parties were also actively involved in the struggle, each of which, of course, pursued its own goals, sought to direct this movement along its own path. The Dashnak Party, which previously denied the need for a political struggle of the Caucasian Armenians, now, in the face of the unfolding events, was forced to declare that along with the “national issue of Turkish Armenians”, it also recognizes the existence of the “question of Russian Armenians”. The Dashnaks sought to use the national liberation movement of the people for their own political purposes, to isolate the struggle of the Armenian working people from the general revolutionary movement of the peoples of Russia and direct it into a narrow national channel.
The Hnchak party after the Armenian pogroms in Turkey in 1894-1896 experienced a serious crisis due to the disappointment of a significant part of the working people in the politics of the Hunchakisg Party. Many members of this party left it gladly and joined the RSDLP. During the struggle of the Armenian working people that unfolded after the adoption of the law of June 12, 1903, the Hunchak party resorted to terror tactics, which, of course, could not lead to positive results, but only distracted the masses from the organized struggle against the autocracy. In October 1903, Hunchakist terrorists made an unsuccessful attempt on the life of the governor of the Caucasus, Golitsyn, who was only slightly wounded.
With regard to the anti-tsarist movement of the Armenian people, the social democratic organizations took a different position. Exposing the true essence of the colonial policy of tsarism, they supported the Armenian people and called on them to unite with the Russians and other peoples of Russia in their common struggle against the tsarist autocracy. The Bolshevik committees issued numerous leaflets and appeals in which, responding to the events of the day, they called on the working people to rally under the banner of the proletariat. The central organ of the RSDLP, the Iskra newspaper, noted with satisfaction that the Social Democrats of the Caucasus "quite correctly assessed the political significance of the tsar's campaign against Armenian church property and showed by their example how the Social Democracy in general should treat all such phenomena."
The social-democratic organizations of Transcaucasia urged the peoples of the region to support the just struggle of the Armenian workers. This was all the more important because the tsarist authorities sought to cause inter-ethnic strife in Transcaucasia and thereby prevent a further strengthening of the revolutionary movement. However, the Georgian, Azerbaijani and Russian workers of the industrial centers of the region united with the Armenian working people and thwarted the cunning plans of the autocracy. At the same time, social-democratic organizations opposed the attempts of the Dashnaks to divert the Armenian workers from the class struggle, rebuffed their nationalist preaching, and condemned the tactics of individual terror. After the failed assassination attempt on Golitsyn, the Caucasian Union Committee of the RSDLP issued a leaflet "The Beast is Wounded", which, in particular, stated that the Golitsyns would disappear only with the overthrow of the autocracy.
The tsarist government, however, having broken the resistance of the people with the help of armed force, began to implement the law of June 12, 1903. By the end of this year, the confiscation of the property and lands of the Armenian church was basically completed.
But the struggle continued. Armenian peasants refused to cultivate the lands seized by the tsarist authorities, did not rent trade, handicraft and other enterprises. The unrest of the people increased. The first Russian revolution that began in Russia forced tsarism to retreat. On August 1, 1905, the Tsar repealed the law of June 12, 1903; property of the Armenian Church, as well as those received from him during 1903-1905. income were returned.
The events of 1903 showed the Armenian working people that their liberation could be achieved only in the common struggle of all the working people of Russia against the tsarist autocracy. At the same time, these events played a big role in the revolutionization of the working people. That is why S. G. Shaumyan noted that "1903 was a turning point in the history of the Caucasian Armenians."
§ 1. Development of capitalist relations
At the end of the 19th and at the beginning of the 20th century, capitalist relations began to develop in both Western and Eastern Armenia. In the backward Ottoman Empire, capitalist relations developed very slowly. England, France and Germany artificially preserved the integrity of the crumbling empire and turned it into their semi-colony.
The most active role in the development of the economy of the Ottoman Empire was played by the Greek, Jewish and Armenian population. In Constantinople, Izmir, Erzurum and other large cities, Armenian industrialists founded enterprises for the production of flour, oil, wine, vodka, and textiles. In the cities of Western Armenia and Cilicia - Van, Kharberd, Marash, Edesia, Aintape, Bitlis and others, small enterprises were founded to process local raw materials - silk, cotton, leather and tobacco. Small metal-working factories were opened in the regions for the production of agricultural implements. Modern technology and equipment for these enterprises were ordered by Armenian industrialists from the USA and European countries. Well-known entrepreneurs were the Kyurkchyan brothers, Grigor Ipekchyan, the Barikyan brothers and others. These enterprises gave work to the local Armenian population. During the anti-Armenian pogroms inspired by the Ottoman government, these enterprises were often destroyed and looted. The owners had to, giving bribes to Turkish officials, again with difficulty to restore production.
AT agriculture the development of capitalist relations led to a further stratification of the peasantry. The impoverished peasants turned into hired day laborers or joined the ranks of the emerging working class. Many peasants moved to the cities in search of work. The availability of cheap labor contributed to the further development of production. By the end of the 19th century, the Armenian urban population of the Ottoman Empire increased dramatically due to the decrease in the peasant population in Western Armenia. More than 100,000 Armenians moved to the cities in search of work. Many traveled to European countries, to Russia and even to the USA to escape the constant oppression of the Ottoman authorities and in search of a prosperous life.
In less backward Russia, under the auspices of the state, capitalism developed more rapidly. The reform of 1861, which abolished the serfdom of the peasantry, was applied in Transcaucasia and Armenia only from 1870. In 1867-1874. administrative reform was carried out. The territory of Transcaucasia was divided into 5 provinces: Yerevan, Tiflis, Kutaisi, Elizavetopol, Baku. Yerevan province was divided into 7 districts. Attached in 1878, the Kars region was divided into 4 districts. On the empty lands of the newly annexed territories, the authorities began to settle Russian settlers. In this way, the tsarist government tried to change the demographic picture, weaken the Armenian liberation movement and secure the region for Russia.
The reform of 1861 and subsequent reforms created certain conditions for the development of capitalist relations in Russia. In Transcaucasia, the development of capitalist relations was facilitated by the presence of minerals and rich oil fields in Baku.
At the end of the 19th century, capitalist relations in Russia began to develop rapidly. Russia began construction of the strategically important railway line Tiflis-Kars for the rapid deployment of troops in the event of a war with Turkey. In 1899, the construction was completed and the railway communication Tiflis - Alexandropol - Kars was opened, in 1901 Alexandropol - Yerevan, and in 1908. Yerevan - Nakhichevan - Julfa.
The road contributed to the intensification of the exploitation of copper mines in Alaverdi and Kapan. They were given in concession to French entrepreneurs. There has been a significant increase in the urban population in Eastern Armenia. The construction of railways also contributed to the further development of capitalism in the Transcaucasus. There were no large industrial enterprises in Eastern Armenia, and Armenian entrepreneurs mainly concentrated their activities in Baku and Tiflis. Prominent entrepreneurs were Mantashev, Aramyants, Lianozov, the Ghukasyan brothers, Mirzoyan, Dolukhunyan and others. They invested their capital in the oil industry in Baku. All of them were also major patrons of Armenian culture and were engaged in charity work.
In agriculture, the cultivation of new industrial crops began - cotton, silkworm, tobacco. The arable land was reduced, and instead the area of land devoted to horticulture, melon growing, and viticulture was expanding. To serve the needs of the local market, small enterprises for the manufacture of leather and vegetable oil, for the processing of cotton, silk. The extraction of copper at the mines of Alaverdi and Kapan, salt - at the salt mines of Kokhpa and Nakhichevan expanded. Impoverished and land-poor peasants moved to Tiflis and Baku in search of work, replenishing the ranks of the emerging proletariat.
In 1887, the production of Armenian cognac was founded in Yerevan. The first brandy factory in Yerevan was opened by the Armenian industrialist Tairov. Other industrialists also acted in cognac production. The cognac brand "Ararat" of the winemaker P. Musinyants, produced at the N. Shustov factory, achieved the greatest fame, which was awarded diplomas of international exhibitions and exported to Russia and Europe.
§ 2. The Ottoman Empire at the end of the 19th century. Anti-Armenian policy of Abdul-Hamid II
At the end of the 19th century, the once strongest Ottoman Empire experienced economic and political decline. It actually turned into a semi-colony of European powers, which artificially preserved its integrity in their own interests. As a result of the Russian-Turkish war of 1877-1878. The "Armenian question" has become a matter of international politics. The European powers began to use it to put pressure on Turkey.
The Sultan's government tightened the national and economic oppression of the Armenian population. in some cities there were clashes between the Armenian population and the police, there were casualties. In the summer of 1890, in the Gum Gapu region of Constantinople, on the initiative of the Gnachakian party, a demonstration was organized demanding that the perpetrators of the murders be held accountable and that the reforms of the Armenian population be implemented in accordance with the 61st paragraph of the Berlin Treaty. The demonstrators marched to the Sultan's palace to present a petition to the government. The police shot the demonstration, the instigators were arrested.
Having lost faith in the reality of hopes for resolving the Armenian issue through diplomacy, a tendency has emerged in the Armenian society to achieve a solution to the issue by revolutionary political methods. In 1894, the Armenian population in the mountainous region of Sasun rebelled against the sultan's oppression. The rebels were led by members of the "Hnchakyan" party Murat, Gevork Chaush, Hrayr and others. The irregular Turkish units, and later the regular sultan's troops, were defeated by the rebels. But soon the superior forces of the Turkish troops surrounded and took Sasun. More than 7 thousand Armenians were killed. Those leaders who survived were condemned and exiled.
But the Ottoman government failed to break the Sasunians. Many participants in the uprising continued to fight in small Haiduk detachments.
The rebels hoped by their actions to draw the attention of the great powers to the solution of the Armenian issue. However, the European powers were content only with the fact that they created a commission of inquiry, and the following year presented the Sultan's government with a reform program to improve the situation of the Armenian population, demanding that those responsible for the mass extermination of the Armenian population be punished and reforms be carried out.
The Sultan promised to carry out this so-called May 1895 reform program, but in reality no reforms were carried out.
Convinced that the government was not going to carry out reforms, the Hnchakyan party organized a crowded demonstration in September 1895 in the capital. Foreign diplomats were informed in advance that the peaceful demonstration was aimed at drawing the attention of the powers to the "Armenian Question". The demonstrators marched to the seat of government in Bab Ali to launch a petition. The demonstration was dispersed by the police. With the connivance of the government, pogroms took place in Constantinople, about 2 thousand Armenians were killed. The Sultan was forced to approve the May Reform Program, but even more intensified the oppression of the Armenians.
On the initiative of the "Hnchakyan" party in October 1895, an uprising of Armenians in Zeytun took place against national discrimination and oppression. Nazareth Chaush was elected leader of the uprising. The Zeytuns arrested officials of the local administration and captured the barracks of Turkish soldiers, capturing 700 people. The government sent an army of 30,000 to put down the uprising. Six thousand Zeytuns who took up arms defended themselves for about 4 months. The enemy lost about 20 thousand soldiers, more than half of Zeytuns fell in battles. With the mediation of the powers, the rebels and the government compromised. The Ottoman government granted amnesty to the leaders of the uprising.
In order to resolve the "Armenian Question" and suppress the liberation aspirations of the Armenian people, the government of Abdul-Hamid II began to periodically carry out pogroms against Armenians. At the end of 1895 mass pogroms took place in Erzurum, Trabizon, Bitlis, Sebastia, Edessa and other cities. Almost 300 thousand Armenians were destroyed. A significant number of the Armenian population was forced to leave the country. Many Armenians were forced to accept Islam.
Armenian political parties, fearing new pogroms, began to prepare the Armenian population for self-defense. When in 1896 the government tried to repeat the Armenian pogroms, in some places it already met with organized resistance from the Armenian population. An example of heroic self-defense was shown by the inhabitants of Van, Malatia, Edessa and other cities.
§ 3. Armenian liberation movement at the beginning of the 20th century
In 1901, a group of haiduks led by Andranik, wishing to draw the attention of the European powers to the disenfranchised position of the Armenian population in the Ottoman Empire, fortified themselves in the Arakelots monastery.
Andranik's group consisted of 37 people and two dozen peasants who joined them. From November 3 to November 27, haiduks fought off attacks by superior forces of the regular Turkish army. At the talks, haiduks demanded the release of political prisoners, the disarming of the bandit Kurdish detachments, and the return of the villages seized from them to the Armenian peasants. When the ammunition was already running out, the haiduks broke through the encirclement at night and went into the mountains. They proved that the Armenian people continue to fight for their freedom.
In 1904, the heroic self-defense of Sasun took place. In order to finally break the resistance of the Sasunians, the Sultan's government concentrated significant forces for the complete capture of the region. On April 1, 1904, the 10,000 regular army and the 5,000 irregular "Hamidiye" detachments launched an attack on Sasun. They were opposed by 200 haiduks and a thousand local peasants, defending the 12,000 Armenian population.
Having learned in advance about the plans of the Ottoman government to capture Sasun, the parties "Dashnaktsutyun" and "Hnchakyan" sent armed detachments of volunteers to help the population, melted weapons into the region. Haiduk detachments of Andranik, Murad, Arakel, Gevork Chaush and others gathered their forces to Sasun. The Military Council led the self-defense, and the famous haiduk Andranik was elected military leader.
Despite the heroic resistance of the Sasunians, regular troops and Kurdish detachments captured Sasun and brutally massacred the population.
§ 4. The policy of tsarist Russia in the Armenian question at the beginning of the 20th century
The tsarist government feared that the liberation movement in Western Armenia might also rouse the population of Eastern Armenia to the liberation struggle. It interfered in every possible way with the activities of national political parties, persecuted the leaders of the liberation movement, and banned the activities of the Haiduk detachments on its territory.
With the intensification of revolutionary sentiment in the Russian Empire, the tsarist government intensified the policy of national oppression and persecution in order to distract the masses from the revolutionary struggle. The government was convinced that the liberation struggle was directed by the Armenian Church. In 1903, by order of the governor of the Caucasus, G. Golitsin, all the property of the Armenian Apostolic Church was requisitioned and Armenian schools were closed.
Catholicos of All Armenians Mkrtich Khrimyan condemned the anti-Armenian policy of tsarism. The Armenian political parties "Dashnaktsutyun" and "Hnchakyan", as well as the Russian Social Democrats, joined the struggle against tsarism. Rallies and demonstrations of the Armenian population took place in Elizavetopol, Baku and Tiflis, Etchmiadzin, Alexandropol, Shushi and Yerevan, there were clashes with the police, there were killed and wounded. In some villages, the peasants offered armed resistance to the police and the Cossacks.
The persecution of public figures and advanced intelligentsia began, many ended up in prison or in exile. Despite all the efforts of the tsarist government, a revolutionary situation was growing in the country.
In January 1905, the first bourgeois-democratic revolution began in Russia. In Transcaucasia, as well as throughout the country, strikes began. In the summer of 1905, strikes took place in Kars, Alexandropol, Alaverdi and other cities of Eastern Armenia. The tsarist government, worried about the beginning of the revolution, and having also met with a unified rebuff from the Armenian society, on August 1, 1905, canceled its previous decision and returned the requisitioned property to the Armenian Church.
The new governor of the Caucasus, I. Vorontsov-Dashkov, began to pursue a more flexible policy in the conditions of the outbreak of the revolution. In order to distract the peoples from the revolutionary struggle, tsarism began to kindle ethnic hatred. Azerbaijani-Armenian clashes on ethnic grounds took place in Baku, Elizavetopol, Shushi, Nakhichevan and Yerevan.
During 1906-1907. the revolution went into decline. On July 3, 1907, the Second State Duma was dispersed and the unlimited power of the tsar was restored. The revolution is over.
A period of reaction began in Russia. Prime Minister P. Stolypin led the reactionary policy. At the same time, Stolypin tried to carry out reforms in the country for the further development of capitalism. This was the aim of his agrarian reform.
After the suppression of the revolution, tsarism began the persecution of national political parties. Using internal squabbles in the party, the government accused the Dashnaktsutyun party of anti-government and anti-Russian activities. There were mass arrests of members of the Dashnaktsutyun party, and a noisy trial began.
In January 1912 in St. Petersburg, the Judicial Chamber of the Senate began hearings on the Dashnaktsutyun case. Charges were brought against 159 persons. However, contrary to expectations, the sentence was very lenient. About 100 people were acquitted, the rest received relatively light and short sentences.
This lenient sentence was due to several factors. By that time, a new revolutionary upsurge had begun in Russia, P. Stolypin was killed. International relations escalated, preparations were underway for a war with Germany and its ally Turkey. Under these conditions, the tsarist government considered it good not to exacerbate national persecution, to weaken the national oppression of the Armenians in order to use them in the impending war against Turkey.
§ 5. Young Turk coup
In 1908, after a coup d'état, the Young Turks came to power. The peoples of the Ottoman Empire supported the Young Turks in the hope of establishing democratic rule in the country.
The fall of the bloody regime of Sultan Abdul-Hamid II was welcomed by all the peoples of the Ottoman Empire. Hopes were pinned on the Young Turk government that it would abolish the legal inequality of Christians and grant democratic freedoms to the peoples of the empire. However, the government of the Young Turks led a policy of assimilation of other peoples. Pan-Turkism and Pan-Islamism became the official policy. Encountering resistance to their plans, the Young Turk government began to act by violent means.
In Cilicia in April-May 1909, by order of the government, the Armenian population was massacred and plundered. In some cities and villages, the Armenian population was saved thanks to heroic self-defense. In general, more than 30 thousand of the Armenian population were killed.
In 1912, a triumvirate of leaders of the Young Turks came to power in Turkey, which concentrated all power in its hands. All state issues in the Ottoman Empire are now decided by Taleat - Minister of Foreign Affairs, Enver - Minister of War and Jemal - Minister of Internal Affairs.
§ 6. The Armenian question in 1912-1914 and great powers. Russia's position
In 1911, the Turkish-Italian war took place, as a result of which Turkey lost significant territories. In 1912-1913. The First and Second Balkan Wars took place. The Balkan peoples, having joined forces, defeated the sworn enemy and liberated their national territories, once captured by the Turks.
Crowds of Turkish refugees from the lost territories of the European part poured into the Asian regions of Turkey. The government of the Young Turks began to populate the depopulated Armenian villages and city blocks with Muslim immigrants from the European regions of the empire.
After the Balkan wars, the "Armenian question" was again included in the agenda of international diplomacy. Catholicos of All Armenians Gevorg V authorized the well-known Armenian philanthropist and public figure Poghos-Nubar Pasha to negotiate with the governments of the powers to resolve the “Armenian issue”. In addition, the Catholicos, through the Viceroy of the Caucasus, asked the tsar to implement the decisions of the Berlin Congress.
In 1913, the great powers came to an agreement and demanded that the Young Turk government carry out reforms in Western Armenia. Russia was entrusted with the mission of overseeing the implementation of the reforms.
On January 26, 1914, a Russian-Turkish agreement was signed to carry out reforms in Western Armenia.
According to the Russian-Turkish agreement, two territorial-administrative units were to be formed from the regions inhabited by Armenians, headed by European governors. Discrimination on national and religious grounds was to be abolished, equality of all citizens was introduced. All nationalities were to have equal representation in administrative bodies, the police, and the courts. By the summer of 1914 European governors had already been appointed. But they did not even have time to start their duties. Taking advantage of the outbreak of the First World War, the Young Turk government refused to implement the planned reforms.
A.E. Khachikyan.
History of Armenia. Brief essay. Edit Print, Yerevan - 2009
