The lost Muslims of Yerevan

Originally posted by bg_turk You can clearly see the instrumental role Armenians played in the Russian expansion into the region. It was a century marked by defeat after defeat for the Muslims forces. Hundreds of thousands of muslims were displaced and flocking towards the lands that were still under Muslim control. The distrust against the Armenians was rising.

     Armenians were subjected to Ottoman and Russian rule, and had to follow the orders of their respective empires regardless of what they really wanted to do. Plus, what you mentioned are just military campaigns, not an expulsion of Muslims from the Caucasus.

Originally posted by bg_turk Russians were nothing but expansionist agressors following their imperialist interests.

     Um, what do you call the Turkish and Persian states during this time? Ottomans, an empire, were not expansionist aggressors, but stateless Armenia was responsible for what happened to all the Muslims in the Caucasus, right? (not to mention on the OTHER SIDE of the Caucasus mtns).

In August the Persians, led by Prince Abbas Mirza, arrived at the plains of Yerevan in an attempt to force the Russians to end their siege, but were defeated in battle near the city of Astarah. Finally, on October 2, the garrison of Yerevan, consisting of 4,000 men and 50 canons, surrendered. Volunteer Armenian infantrymen and cavalrymen participated during the entire campaign and fought side by side with the Russian soldiers.

     The battle took place in Armenia, of course there are going to be a group of rebels who were ready to join anyone who would help them overthrow Persian occupation. I don't see how this, or any of the other instances you mentioned, constitutes as Armenian aggression. The fact that there are SOME Armenian volunteers for the Russian army just means Armenia is a country just like any other, with a small group of rebels who will join any invader to overthrow their current rulers.

     You're turning an economic issue into a religious and ethnic one. Many of the Armenians who wanted to overthrow Muslim rule were sick of paying excessive taxes for being non-Muslims in an Islamic empire. Under the Russians this ridiculous tax didn't exist. God knows how many financially poor Armenians became Muslims during this time because of this stupid "Islamic" law.

     Also, Armenians have been politically divided for millenia. For every Armenian who wanted to overthrow Muslim rule, there were many more Armenians who wanted to stay under their current rulers, since many Armenians in both Persian and Turkish empires were economically very successful for centuries. This doesn't mean there weren't any poor Armenians, but we don't know much about them, since many of them converted to Islam and disappeared from the Armenian community completely.

Edited by ArmenianSurvival

This is know secret, the Turkic rulers governed the area for over 1000 years and Armenians were a minority population in the provinces.

Yes more double standards and hypocrisy, if this had been done by the other side it would have been called genocide however, when its done by Armenia its a laughing matter and cause for celebration.

This is the prime reason I stopped being duped by the Armenian thesis, from a Non-Turk/Non-Armenian viewpoint it was clearly a war both side's suffered claiming a systematic genocide occured as response to war-time defeat is shamefull and ridiculous.

Hundreds of thousands of Brittish troops were killed by Turks fighting in WW1, just because we lost that particular part of the war it doesn't give me any right what-so-ever to then later claim that the only reason we lost is because the Turks miraculously comitted a genocide against us.

Nothing of the sort, face it, these Turks were very brave and died protecting their homelands ie they were on the defensive fighting against the Brittish, French, Russians 3 super powers and then the Greeks and Armenians, now to battle against all at the same time take's real courage and heroism so I'm sorry but these guys deserve respect for this.

Its like German's blaming us for defending Britain and fighting for our homeland in the war, are we meant to feel sorry for the Germans who decided Britain would be a nice extenstion of their land? PLEASE.........

So who ruled in the region for past 1000 years huh? or is this an Armenian version of history which we never got to hear

Its all it ever is "opinions" and their's so many and not many hardcore facts so................

About the main topic, where did all these people of Yerevan go? there seems to have been a very large population, will there be any move's towards a re-location to rebuild friendship and ties?

Survival,

Edited by bg_turk - 20-May-2006 at 19:36

Originally posted by bg_turk Survival, can you please provide a source for your map? and which year it is? boundaries which it shows on the Balkans are wrong - in 1915 I believe Western Thrace was Bulgarian, and there were a few Armenians in Dedeagac too whcih is not shown on the map (I know that from a BulgaroArmenian refugee who was deported in the population exchange between Greece and Bulgaria). Western Thrace was not Greek until after the end of WW1.

     I actually got the source from one of your posts (it was a map of the Treaty of Sevres). Here is the bibliography for the information on the site (it doesn't specify what that particular map is based on): http://www.imprescriptible.fr/bibliographie2.htm

Originally posted by bg_turk Also if you compare with your previous map which shows the distribution of the Armenians before the Azeri-Armenian war, you will see that areas in Georgia and Azerbaijan which are shown with  Armenian majority on this one are not shown as such on the previous one - notably the region to the North-West of Nagorno-Karabakh and the region around Akhaltska - unless Georgia and Azerbaijan also performed ethnic cleansing prior to the collapse of the Soviets I do not know how would you explain this discrepancy? Wouldn't you expect actually the areas populated by armenians after 1920 to increase, and not decrease as your maps show, since quite a few Armenians were expelled from the West and had to settle in territories under Russian control?

     The Ottoman army marched all the way to Baku. They killed Armenians in Baku and many parts of Azerbaijan, and eradicated the Armenian population of Nakhichevan (which is precisely why there are 0 Armenians remaining in Nakhichevan today, even though it was not part of the Ottoman Empire). The Ottoman army even penetrated Persia, killing the Armenians around Lake Urmia, and also Chaldean Christians.

     Also another thing that might be throwing you off is that the map doesn't show population density. The city of Yerevan, in the period that the map shows, was a town of tens of thousands (with an absolute Armenian majority). Under Soviet rule it became industrialized and it is now a city of over 1 million people (with an absolute Armenian majority...so it would look the same on the map when in actuality there was a huge change in population). Also if you look closely many Georgian urban centers have relative or absolute Armenian majorities. Many of them went to Yerevan after the first Armenian republic was established (1918), and after the Soviets took over, they moved Armenians from many parts of the USSR back to Armenia. So in a nutshell part of the Armenian population in Azerbaijan shown on this map were either killed or driven out by the Ottoman army, and the ones in Georgia were moved to Armenia by the Soviets after 1920.

Edited by ArmenianSurvival - 21-May-2006 at 00:56

Originally posted by ArmenianSurvival       The Ottoman army marched all the way to Baku.

" Armenians were never a majority in Northeastern Cilicia"

Even when there was an Armenian Kingdom in Cilicia?

" Let's just think about it before claiming this, who'd have the purpose to erase Assyrians, and more importantly, why?"

What was the purpose of killing Jews in Nazi Germany?

"Really? I thought the Ottoman army was halted at Yerevan?"

Nope, they went through Georgia, reached Baku. They also entered Karabakh and northern Iran. The army was headed by Enver Pasha (once again) and was called the Army of Islam.

Only one of the Ottoman regiments that headed straight for Yereven were halted...

Originally posted by bg_turk So Enver occupied Baku in 1918? This was just around the time when the Russian advance into Eastern Turkey had halted...

     In 1918 the Russian army was long gone, retreated all the way back into Russia in 1917 because of the Russian Revolution. Thats how Enver was able to march to Baku.

Originally posted by bg_turk ...and major cities such as Van, Erzurum, Erzinjan,Trabzon, Kars etc, were under Armenian control. It is really surprising that Enver was all the way to Baku at a time when half of Anatolia was under Armenian control.

     It is more surprising how half of Anatolia could be under Armenian control when in 1918 there were no Armenians there and the Russian army was nowhere in sight for a good year by then.

Originally posted by bg_turk What happened to Enver's units then? Did he try to advance on Armenian units from the East?

     He went to Central Asia and fought in wars there to get the central Asian Turkic republics their independence. He even died in a battle which took place in Central Asia.

Edited by ArmenianSurvival - 21-May-2006 at 18:48

Originally posted by bg_turk Please Survival stop denying that! Eastern Turkey was under Armenian control until the early months of 1918. The map below shows  how far the Russians had reached before they had haulted, when they left due to the Bolshevik Revolution. Armenians were in control of the territories for 2 whole years between 1916-1918. Armenian forced mounted a stiff defense of the territories but left alone they were defeated by Ottoman forces , and by March the Ottoman Army had captured Trebizond, Erzurum, Kars, Van and Batumi.

     It was under Russian control. There was no independent Armenia until the First Republic of Armenia was established in 1918 (territories of the Russian province of Erivan, created only due to the Russian retreat and a failed invasion of Yerevan by Enver's troops). While the Russians were there, there was no independent-anything. It was all part of the Russian Empire. It was only after the Russian army left in 1917 that a power vaccuum was created in the region, with the remaining Armenian deportees left in the middle, forced to take up whatever arms they could find, in order to hold off Ottoman troops whom they knew were out to "deport" them. The Ottomans used these acts of self-defense (as well as other instances) as propaganda to say "look, the Armenians are resisting our rule" (just like how the Nazis called the Warsaw ghetto uprisings "revolts"). The Armenians who held off the Ottomans near Yerevan in 1918 barely carried the day. It was only after this victory in 1918 that an independent Armenia was created out of the former Russian province of Erivan (which, as I said, Enver tried to take but failed).

Originally posted by bg_turk Enver reached Baku on September 1918, but he had never entered Yerevan because Armenian forces defeated him at Sarikamish.

     He sent a force to take Yerevan, but they were defeated (barely). Also, I have only heard the Young Turks say that the Armenians were to blame for their defeat at Sarikamish. They used this as justification to carry out their plans for deportation. In reality the Ottomans lost at Sarikamish because of the Russian army (which had Armenian units from Russian Armenia in it, but if we're using this logic, we might as well blame the Ukranians for the Ottoman defeat at Sarikamish). After the Russians left I don't think Enver feared the Armenians so much, especially when he attacked them everywhere else, and then went all the way to Central Asia to fight.

Edited by ArmenianSurvival - 21-May-2006 at 19:59