ATTITUDE OF THE ARMENIAN PATRIARCHATE IN INSTANBUL TOWARDS THE ISSUE OF THE FORCIBLY ISLAMIZED ARMENIANS
Ruben Melkonyan
"Noravank" Foundation
09 March 2010
As a result of the historical developments in the 15th century the
Armenian Patriarchate in Istanbul was established, which, besides
spiritual and religious had also had secular and political functions
connected with the Armenians living in Turkey. Alongside with the
stance and the attitude of the Patriarchate to various issues of
Armenians living in the Ottoman Empire and then in the Republic of
Turkey it would be also interesting to consider the approaches and
the policy of Patriarchate as regarded to the issue of the Armenians
forcibly Islamized during the Armenian Genocide.
After the World War I the defeated Ottoman Empire faced the issue
of the Armenians who were retained and forcibly Islamized during the
Genocide put forward by the Entente. Particularly, they demanded to
return Armenian women and children captured by the Muslim families
to their families and if they had no families to the Armenian or
Christian organizations. In this mission a serious role was allotted
to the Armenian Patriarchate in Istanbul which turned into a leader
in the saving of the splinters of the Armeniancy. Particularly,
the commissions were created which studied and gathered information
about the location and status of the Armenians who were retained and
forcibly converted after what they started the activity directed to
the saving of those splinters, i.e. the process of reclaiming them
from Muslim families.
The works directed to the reclaiming of the Armenian orphans and
women activated in 1919, during the second enthronement of Patriarch
of Istanbul Zaven Ter-Eghiayan (1913-1916, 1918-1922). The Ottoman
government of that day, represented by the Ministry of Home Affairs,
on February 5, 1919 sent an order to the provinces which said: "To
pass the Armenian women and children who are in Muslim families to the
commission consisting of the Armenians"1. This decree which is kept
today in the Ottoman archive of the prime-minister of Turkey was not
a manifestation of a good will but a result of serious pressure and
constraint. It is remarkable that while speaking about this decree
many Turkish scholars criticize it and consider it an evidence of
the weakness of the Turkish government of that time.
Of course the process of saving the splinters of the Armeniancy
faced a number of obstacles, among which were, e.g. the fact that
many Armenian women had children from those who had retained them
and they were faced with a difficult choice either to leave their
children and to return to their roots or to stay in captivity and
suffer till the end of their lives. It should be mentioned that over
that period a number of Armenian women and particularly minor girls
preferred to stay with their abductors. On this ground some Turkish
sources state that those women had chose their men on their own
accord and the commission forcedly returned them to their Armenian
roots. The Turkish party has also put into circulation recently
the absurd idea that while reclaiming the Armenians retained by the
Muslims the Armenian Patriarchate had also gathered Muslim Turkish,
Kurdish children and presented them as Armenians in order to increase
the number of the Armenians2. Turkish scholars call this a process
of forced Christianization. Of course, it is not excluded that some
inaccuracies may be revealed but in the most of the cases children who
were presented as Turkish of Curd Muslims were Armenian children who
were torn from their roots and educated in the ardent Muslim spirit
and who had almost lost the memories and the consciousness of their
Armenian decent.
However, in the issue of the four-years activity (1919-1922) of the
commission thousands of Armenians were reclaimed from Muslim families
and returned to their roots and religion. Summing up their work at
the beginning of 1921 the Armenian Patriarchate in Istanbul prepared
the report which English version was sent to the US State Department.
According to that report in 1921 there were still 63000 Armenian
orphans in Muslim families which representation in the provinces was
as follows:
1. Ter-Zor district
a) Nearby Zibar, Egabar and Varaqora ashirets – 500
b) Nearby Zibur ashiret – 600
c) Nearby Semmar ashiret – 700
d) Nearby Aneza ashiret – 2000
2. Nearby Cecen ashirets of Resulain districts – 2000
3. Istanbul and its suburbs – 6000
4. Izmir, Bursa, Balikesir – 2000
5. Inebolu – 1500
6. Eskisehir and Konia – 3000
7. Kastamonu – 500
8. Trebizond – 2500
9. Sebastia – 3500
10. Kesaria – 3500
11. Erzurum – 3000
12. Diarbekir and Mardin – 25000
13. Kharberd – 3000
14. Bitlis and Van – 50003.
The League of Nations, by the decision of which the special
investigating board was created, also dealt with the issues of the
Armenian women and children Islamized during the Genocide. In the
final report various difficulties connected with the reclaiming of
the Armenian women and children from the Muslim families are brought
and explanations are given: "An entire people was an accomplice to
this crime". A report stating that 90.819 Armenian children and women
were reclaimed from Muslim homes while almost as many had still been
forcibly retained4. If we compare those facts we see that the number of
the Armenian orphans presented by the Armenian Patriarchate – 63000 –
at some extent complies with the data of the League of Nations and
becomes even more convincing.
And even later the issue of the Armenians who stayed in provinces and
were at the different levels of assimilation had been the centre of
the attention of the Armenian Patriarchate in Istanbul. Particularly,
the works directed to the study of the issue of the converted Armenians
and returning them to their roots were carried out by Patriarch Garegin
Khachaturian (1951-1990). Over that period Kurdish speaking Armenian
children were brought to Armenian educational institutions in Istanbul
from provinces. Patriarch Shnorhq Galstyan who accessed to the throne
in 1961 (1961-1990) not only actively dealt with the issue of the
assimilated Armenians but also carried out scientific study of the
matter and gave the group division of the Armenians living in Turkey
and that work helps those who deals with that theme even today. Thus,
in 1980 in Jerusalem while speaking about the Armenians living in
provinces in Turkey, the patriarch divided them into four groups:
"a. Armenians who adopted Islam of their free will, separated from
Armenians and live among the Turks. Their number is about one million.
b. Armenians who were Islamized three generations ago and live in the
way of Kurdish ashirets separately and do not mix. There are hundreds
of such families in the district of Khnus; they know that they are
Armenians; they deliberately marry with each other and cherish the
hope to return to the religion of their fathers.
c. Armenians who were Islamized of their own will or against their
will but who realized their being Armenian and who after settling in
Istanbul through the court change word "Islam" in their passports to
"Ermeni".
d. The Armenians from provinces who regardless of all the obvious
or non-obvious difficulties stayed Armenians and today most of the
Armeniancy in Istanbul consists of themÂ"5:
It is remarkable that during the enthronement of Shnorhq patriarch
and mostly due to his efforts the well-known Ermeni Varto ashiret
moved to Istanbul and began communicate with the Armenian community.
The present patriarch of Istanbul Mesrop Mutafian has also touched
upon the issue of the Islamized Armenians for many times and, for
example, on May 30, 2007 stated during the meeting: "One should not
also forget that during the deportation many Armenians, in order to
avoid it, converted to Islam. We also regard them as our people"6.
Recently the archbishop Aram Ateshyan, the representative of
the Patriarchate in Istanbul and one of the main candidates at
the election of the joint-ruler patriarch, has also turned to the
issue of the Islamized Armenians in Turkey. In his interview to
authoritative Turkish "Hyurriyet" newspaper archbishop Aram said
that there were cases of Islamization in the republican period too,
and his family, a part of which converted in Islam in 1950s and today
lives in Diyarbekir as Muslims, did not avoid it as well. Answering
the question of the correspondent about the attitude of Patriarchate
towards the ethnic Armenians who want to return to their Christianity
and their roots Atehsian said: "Any citizen of Turkey can turn to the
passport office and change his religion. But it does not mean that
the man who has adopted Christianity is perceived by us as an Armenian.
This asks time. There is a six-month course during which we look at
how loyal he is to his roots and if we see persistence in his desire
to return to his roots then the patriarchate gives an appropriate
document which he can take to the passport office and change his
religion converting to Christianity. Then that man is christened and
becomes a member of the Armenian Apostolic Church"7.
It is well known that soon the elections of the joint-ruler patriarch
of Istanbul will take place and we can say that all the candidates
(Bishop Sepuh Chuljian, Archbishop Garegin Bekchian, and Archbishop
Aram Ateshian) one way or another touched over the issues and problems
assimilated Armenians.
Thus we can see that the issue of the forcibly converted Armenians
has been in the spotlight of the Armenian Patriarchate in Istanbul and
since the beginning of the 20th century all the Armenian patriarchs,
willing or not, has been facing the problems of the converted
Armenians. Having no case to act in this direction amid the Turkish
realities, they, however, made definite steps. At the same time we hope
that their policy will not change and will become even more active.
1Atnur Ä°., Turkiye’de Ermeni Kadınları ve Cocukları Meselesi
(1915-1923), Ankara, 2005, s. 189.
2BaÅ~_yurt E., Ermeni Evlatlıklar, Ä°stanbul, 2006, s. 44-45.
3Ozdemir H., Cicek K., Turan O., Calık R., Halacoglu Y., Ermeniler.
Surgun ve Göc, Ankara, 2004, s. 120, 122-123.
4Õ~JÕ¡O~@Õ½
 5;¡Õ´ÕµÕ¡Õ ¶ Õ~M., Õ~DÕ"O~@Õ¦Õ¸&#x D5;µÕ¡Õ¶ Ô±., Ô±Õ¦Õ£Õ¥O~ @Õ"
Õ¬Õ"Õ£ Õ¡ÕµÕ" O~CÕ¡Õ½Õ¿Õ¡ ;Õ©Õ²Õ©Õ¥O ~@Õ¶ Õ¡ÕºÕ¡O~AÕ¸ ;O~BO~AÕ¸O~BÕ´
Õ¥&#x D5;¶ Õ~@Õ¡ÕµÕ¸O~A O~AÕ¥Õ²Õ¡Õ½ ;ÕºÕ¡Õ¶Õ¸O ~BÕ©ÕµÕ¡Õ¶ O~CÕ¡Õ½Õ¿Õ¨ ;,
p
5Â"Ô±Õ¬Õ&quo t;O~DÂ", Ô¹Õ¥Õ°O~@Õ¡ ;Õ¶, 18.12.1980, see the same
Ô½Õ¡Õ¶Õ&#x AC;Õ¡O~@Õ¥Õ¡Õ&# xB6; Ô¿., Õ~@Õ¡Õµ Õ¢Õ¶Õ¡Õ¯&# xD5;¹Õ¸O~BÕ©Õ¥& #xD5;¡Õ¶
Õ§Õ©&# xD5;¶Õ¸Õ¯O~@O…Õ&#x B6;Õ¡Õ¯Õ¡Õ¶ ; Õ¾Õ¥O~@Õ¡Õ¯ ;Õ¥O~@ÕºÕ¸O~BÕ& #xB4;Õ¶Õ¥O~@Õ¨
Ô ;¹Õ¸O~BO~@O~DÕ"Õ
 1;ÕµÕ" Õ~@Õ¡Õ¶O~@Õ¡&#x D5;ºÕ¥Õ¿Õ¸O~B&# xD5;©Õ"O~BÕ¶Õ¸O ~BÕ´
(1923-2005), Ô±Õ¶Õ©Õ"&# xD5;¬Õ"Õ¡Õ½, 2009, Õ§Õ" 27:
6Õ~MÕ¡Õ½Õ¸ O~BÕ¶Õ¥Õ¡Õ¶ ; Õ…., Ô"Õ~^Õ¶Õ¹Õ ¶
Õ§ Õ~DÕ¥Õ½O~@Õ¸&#x D5;º ÕºÕ¡Õ¿O~@Õ" ;Õ¡O~@O~DÕ"Õ¶
O~D&#x D5;¡Õ²Õ¡O~DÕ¡&# xD5;¯Õ¡Õ¶ ÕµÕ¡ÕµÕ¿&# xD5;¡O~@Õ¡O~@Õ¸O~BÕ& #xA9;Õ¥Õ¡Õ¶O~A
Õ ;¤O~@Õ¤Õ¡Õº
 5;¡Õ¿Õ³Õ¡Õ ¼Õ¨, Â"Ô±Õ¦Õ¤&# xD5;¡Õ¯Â", Ô²Õ¥ÕµO~@Õ¸ ;O~BÕ©,
08.06.2007, see the same Õ~NÕ¡O~@Õ¤Õ¡&#x D5;¶ÕµÕ¡Õ¶ Õ~M.,
Ô¿O~@Õ¸Õ¶ Õ¡O~CÕ¸Õ Õ°Õ¡Õ´Õ·&# xD5;¥Õ¶Õ¡Õ°
 5;¡ÕµÕ¥O~@Õ" Õ¢Õ¡O~@Õ¢Õ¡ ;Õ¼Õ¨,
Õ¢Õ¡ ;Õ¶Õ¡Õ°Õµ& #xD5;¸O~BÕ½Õ¸O~BÕ&#x A9;ÕµÕ¸O~BÕ¶Õ&# xA8; O~G Õ¥O~@Õ£Õ¡O~@Õ&# xBE;Õ¥Õ½Õ¿Õ
 8;,
ÔµO~@O~GÕ¡Õ¶, 2009, Õ§Õ" 32:
7Konuralp O., Turkiye Ermenilerinin Gizli KalmıÅ~_ Travması,
Hurriyet, 22.11.2009.
Other issues of author
ON THE TOPICAL ISSUES OF ARMENIAN COMMUNITY IN ISTANBUL [22.02.2010] ON
THE MANIFESTATION OF TURKISH STATE POLICY IN REGARD TO THE ARMENIANS
[30.11.2009] TURKISHIZING OF THE PLACE NAMES IN THE REPUBLICAN
TURKEY [29.10.2009] ON THE MANIFESTATION OF ARMENIAN DESCENT IN
TURKEY [27.04.2009] ON ARMENIAN ORIENTATION OF ERGENEKON [31.03.2009]
PROBLEM OF ETHNIC ORIGIN ON THE POLITICAL AGENDA IN TURKEY [05.03.2009]
ON MUTUAL PERCEPTION OF ARMENIANS IN TURKEY [09.02.2009]