Tall Armenian Tale


The Other Side of the Falsified Genocide


  Armenian Patriarchs  
First Page


Major Players
Links & Misc.



Mahmut Ozan
Edward Tashji
Sam Weems

Studying what they preached unfortunately takes a long time. You must read much truly disgusting literature. What they wrote was not what one would expect of clergymen. Yet one reason they were so successful is exactly that people expected that clergymen would not lie.

Prof. Justin McCarthy, 2001 Presentation

Prof. McCarthy stated the above as regards to the missionaries, who frequently forgot the basic commandment THOU SHALT NOT SPREAD FALSE WITNESS AGAINST THY NEIGHBOR; the Protestant and some Catholic missionaries felt it was their godly duty to vilify the Turks. However, the above statement applies no less to many of the Armenian Patriarchs.

Many Armenian Patriarchs chose the road of the end justifying the means. If that meant professing loyalty to the nation which allowed their people to prosper for so many centuries, only to go behind the Sultan's back to spread deceitful propaganda, many of the latter-day patriarchs did not hesitate. Much of the massacre stories originated from these religious men, often taken at face value... because clergymen were not expected to lie.

One example that pops into my head is Arnold Toynbee's professing, in his 1916 Wellington House report of "The Treatment of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire," that the Patriarch's 2.1 million figure of pre-war Armenians would be more reliable than the Ottoman census of 1.1 million. Other than the fact that Toynbee missed the more recent census proclaiming 1.3 million, and besides another fact that Toynbee himself had estimated less than one million the previous year (before he became a propagandist), probably Toynbee had no way of knowing the way the deceitful patriarchs counted heads was including up to sixty Armenians per household.

Karekin II

Karekin II

   Then there is a current patriarch, His Holiness Karekin II, Supreme Patriarch and Catholicos of All Armenians, who conducted a ceremony in May 29, 2000, making the cowardly mass murderer Dro out to be a saint. How "Christian" is that?

I wonder if an Armenian Patriarch has ever condemned one of their many Armenian "heroes" for the crime of ruthlessly murdering defenseless innocents en masse, not to mention the ASALA and other terrorists who operated in more recent years.

On this page, we'll look at the shenanigans of these deceptive and deceitful Armenian priests who supported Armenian death squads, beginning in the mid-1800s.

Let us begin with what's directly below, a nicely researched article shedding light on patriarchal history that I discovered in a newsgroup; the source/author was not credited. (A clue is provided in "Footnote 63" that the author of "A Mob of Trine" might be Kamuran Gurun, of "The Armenian File" fame. A confirmation would be appreciated.)


A Mob of Trine:
Migirditch Khrimian, Nerses Varjabedian, and Matheos Izmirlian


-The champion of the opinion for the foundation within the Ottoman Empire of an autonomous Armenia is the Patriarch Migirditch Khrimian (1869-1873). Born in Van in the year 1820, Migirditch Khrimian became Vartabed (30) to Akdamar Church when he was 34 of age and thus became a Church member. In the printing house he caused to be established at Varak Monastery of Van in the year 1858, he started to publish the "Eagle of Van", which aimed at Armenian autonomy, and at the St. Garabed Monastery of Mus, the "Eagle of Mud" newspapers. Khrimian, who drew attention with sermons he made, was elected Armenian Patriarch of Istanbul in the year 1869(31). Its election to the position of patriarch would enable Armenian national interests to attain peaks.

Patriarch Khrimian

     -On his coming to office , the Patriarch Khrimian directed efforts to two basic issues:

-a. to re-examine the Armenian Nation Regulation and to bring thereon amendments to comply with desires and requirements expressed by the provinces,

-b. to ensure that the government are turned on to Armenia (32).
-In an address made at the Armenian National Assembly, Khrimian had said: " I am a representative of the Armenia who has suffered. I am fully aware how my predecessors addressed the government in search of a remedy. But, I will use a much more efficient , a much more painful way to interfere. (33)

-The bankers , brokers, money-changers and civil servants who disliked the policy of drawing the Armenians into adventure pursued by Khrimian and considered their future linked to the existence of Turkey, had taken side against himself. At the end, Khrimian, who failed to attain the goal he had pursued as patriarch, submitted his resignation in August, 1873.

-It became quickly noticed that the Patriarch Nerses Varjabedian (1874-1884) whom replaced Khrimian would pursue his tracks. In the year First Constitution was proclaimed. The Patriarch Nerses Varjabedian submitted a report to the Istanbul Conference (12 December 1876-20 January 1877), which was convened in Istanbul to bring a solution to Bulgarian question, depicting so-called acts of coercion to which the Armenian subjects of the Ottoman Empire were submitted, which report was entirely prepared by the former patriarch. However, nothing emerged from the report as the agenda of the conference dealt with other matters(34).

-The submission of reports of complaint and of petitions started at the times when Khrimian was patriarch would take a much more terrible shape after coming to the agenda of the Christians of Rumeli. When reports of oppression and of complaints submitted to the Sublime Porte (Babiali) and to European government are examined, it is easily seen that the most of the incidents which such reports depict are nothing but local police events. While, the Partiarchate, on the one hand, was making heard even the most ordinary events to the government, on the other, with quite lot of exaggeration provided reports to the representatives of the European governments in a bid to show them as if these were political events of utmost significance.

-Two ways appeared to be existing for the Armenians before the war of Ottoman-Russian of 18771878 was waged:

-a. to remain loyal to Ottoman Government and to Turks,

-b. to give course to actions by keeping track of activities pursued by other Christian communities present in the Empire and to await opportunities for the European governments intervention.

-The war, which the Tsarist Russia started against the Ottomans in the Balkans and Caucasia against the Ottomans with the object of framing the Pan-Slavist movement in the Balkans on 24 April 1877 unfolded promptly ended up with the coming close to San Stefano (Yesilkoy) of the Tsarist armies(35).

-When, in the First Constitutional Assembly, the official bulletin as regards Russia waging war against the country was being announced on 25 April 1877, a wave of tremendous emotion emerged and in an address made, Marion Effendi, the Armenian deputy of Halep (Aleppo) was quoted as saying " I declare in connection with our being both Armenian and Christian that we do not need the protection which Russia suggests. We can in no way accept the patronage which Russia puts before us and we do not need such a hand.

-We have never parted company with our Muslim friends nor will we do.

 If tiny Armenia was truly the first Christian state on earth why in the world doesn't your state owned church teach love and forgiveness? Even in Christ's time there was the separation of church and state. Armenia must separate its church and state if the true message of Christ is to be taught there. This is why your church has engaged in terrorism from the mid-1800s up to and including this very day. The Armenian Church is nothing more than a front and an extension of your state run terror machine.

Christian Scholar Samuel Weems, in a 2002 reply to hate mail

 -The Patriarch Nerses, in turn in a correspondence dated 13 April 1878 forwarded to the Foreign Secretary of Great Britain, Lord Salisbury, was giving utterance to the following : "It is no more possible for the Armenians to live together with the Turks. Only a Christian administration is able to secure equality, justice and freedom of conscience. Muslim administration should be replaced by a Christian one. Armenia (Eastern Anatolia) and Cilicia(37) are among places where it entails setting up Christian administrations ...The Armenians of Turkey, thus want this. That is to say, in the Armenia of Turkey they desire having a Christian administration in trust as the case is in Lebanon.”(38)

Nerses Varjabedyan

Nerses Varjabedyan

-The Patriarch Nerses making a visit to the Ambassador of Great Britain in Istanbul on 17 March 1878 was reported as saying "...a year before, we had no complaint to raise against the Ottoman Administration; but, now the victory by the Russians caused change in the situation. We claim having an autonomous Armenia in the Eastern Anatolia. If you feel unable to give us a hand, to go what through this we will address Russia." On the Ambassador asking what he meant by Armenia, the reply was quoted as "Van, Sivas, Diyarbakir and Cilicia."

As the Ambassador replied "but in none of such places you have the majority" the Patriarch said: "we do know this; but now Russia gained area in the East; the balance of power between Russia and Ottoman Empire changed. We have to consider our future.”(39)

-However, in the early days of the war, the same Patriarch Nerses had made it public that his person is an Ottoman patriot loyal to Ottoman Sultan (40). As the war approached its close, The Armenian Assembly meeting under the presidency of Varjabedian resolved to make an address to Russian Tsar. In a memorandum forwarded to the latter (41) they claimed that the areas in the Eastern Anatolia down to Firat (Euphrates) river should not be returned to the Turks, that these be annexed to Russia and if otherwise, the alike privileges to be conceded to Bulgaria and to Bulgarian nation (community) be also yielded to the Armenian nation, that in case a need arises to evacuate the areas occupied, a guarantee in kind should be sought and that the Russian occupation be continued till reformation is put into operation and completed.

-The Ottoman-Russian war of 1877-1878 terminated with the entering into effect of the armistice on 31 January 1878 at Edirne initiated on demand of peace b) Ottoman following the capitulation of Plevne and the opening of the way to Istanbul to Russian forces(42). The conditions for peace were negotiated at San Stefano (Yesilköy). On initiation of the armistice negotiations at Edirne, the Patriarch Nerses Varjabedian detailed the archbishop of Edirne, Kevork Vartabed Ruschuklian and Stephan Aslanian Pasha and Hovannes Nurian Effendi, members of
the Turkish delegation, to see to the Armenian interests(43). The former Ambassador o: Russia to Istanbul, Ignatiev, who was member of the Russian delegation announced the Armenian delegation that the privileges to be yielded to the Bulgarian would not be conceded to themselves, but they had to brace themselves for the day on which the autonomy would be ceded to them(44). In spite of all bids made, the Armenian delegation could obtain nothing of avail from Edirne Armistice talks.

-At the end, in the course of peace negotiations which continued at San Stefano (Yesilkoy), the Patriarch Nerses Varjabedian and some notables of the Armenian community came in person to have a talk with the Grand Duke Nicholas, the brother of the Tsar and succeeded to have a clause entered into the treaty in connection with the Armenians.

-The expression "Armenia" mentioned in the article XVIth of the San Stefano Treaty entered by and between the Ottoman Empire and the Russia on 3 March 1878, which contained extremely harsh conditions against the former, had caused the Ottoman Empire to acquiesce to the existence of such a country. However, the subject treaty would not be put into effect. Because, Russia had affected the international balance present in the Middle East and this had caused the Great Britain to express dislike as this latter pursued a policy of protecting the integrity of the Ottoman Empire.

-On becoming aware of the news that the Treaty of San Stefano will be subjected to modifications, the Patriarch Varjabedian moved and initiated activities with the governments invited to convene in Berlin. In line with this object, the archbishop of Besiktas, Khoren Nar Bey, went to Russia (St. Petersburg) and was received by the Tsar Alexander II. Khoren Nar Bey requested from the Tsar that the patronage the Russians provided to the Armenians be continued, that the defense of their causes be taken on at Berlin Congress. Another delegation under the presidency of the former Patriarch Khrimian had started a series of visits to European capitals (Rome, Vienna, Paris, London) to win the politicians of these countries to their sides in defense of the Armenian Cause (Hal Tahd). The delegation was fitted out with a project consisting of seven articles prepared to make specific the Armenian claims and to pave the way for the founding of an Armenia in Turkey(45).

-On the other hand, the Patriarch Nerses Varjabedian, in a correspondence (46) forwarded to Karekin Papazian, the Head of the Armenian Committee in Manchester, mentioned that their goal was to attain material and spiritual welfare through expressing gratitude towards Russia and expecting hope from the Great Britain. The Patriarch in the meantime had again visited the Ambassador of the Great Britain, Mr. Layard, to express the view that their parties had prepared a project for submission to the assembly, that it would be appreciated if the Great Britain backed the same(47).

-Moreover, the Patriarch Nerses, had forwarded statistics drawn up by clergymen attaining large figures, deliberately tempered with, as regards the Armenians living in the Ottoman Empire, to Great Powers.

-At the end, the sham question was accepted as the article 61 of the Berlin Treaty signed on 13 July 1878, without being much modified the Article 16th of the San Stefano Treaty. In this way, the "Armenian Question" was being identified as a a problem of reformation to be carried through under the supervision of the Great Powers in the Ottoman Empire. The Article 61th did not provide the Armenians with independence or autonomy alike Lebanon, brought them nothing but a promise to bring reformation. The Armenians were not delighted with the emergence of such a situation. Therefore, after a few while, they would make bids to initiate riots and to shed blood under the guidance of their Church and would demand Russia and Europe to interfere with.

-In a pamphlet issued in the year 1879 by Nuriaz Cheraz who had acted as translator-clerk in the delegation of the former Patriarch Khrimian to Berlin Congress, the author laid emphasis upon having no grounds for the Armenians to fall in distress with the results obtained and addressed the same as follows(48): "The Berlin Congress enabled us to lay the foundations of the national building which we plan to erect in years ahead.. Europe gave into our hands arms; we have to use such arms before the same becomes rusty... we have through the Berlin Congress come by a gold mine; it falls upon us to run such a mine and to dig gold out." As would be appreciated, the pamphlet suggested the Armenians to have recourse to armed action, that they had behind themselves European states to back them.
-The Patriarch Nerses Varjabedian nourished the belief that the question could only be solved through revolution and rioting and had set up a commission hidden under the title of "Reformation Commission" operating at the patriarchate for the achievement of it. A circular sent to the bishoprics in the midst of the year 1879 by the above-cited commission was openly inviting the Armenians to take arms. The subject circular was asking the Armenian clergymen in the provinces to abide by the following(49)

-1. In order to keep alive the question of Armenia, the Armenians of Gregorian, Protestant, Catholic sects and of other sects should be kept as an unified whole on this issue,

-2. The opinions of the children taking instruction at schools should be infused with the Armenian question. At villages having neither school nor means to hire instructors, the priests should teach the boys and the girls at least how to sign their names. They should further teach the illiterate elders at towns and villages how to write down. At least, these should be able to set their hands. Because, on days ahead, this would be necessary,

-3. Armenian Synods at the provincial centres and their spokespersons should frequently meet with the foreign consulates. The grievances suffered by the Armenians should openly be made known to consulates and with consular staff, a close relation should be established,

-4. Europe shall see to the rights of all Armenians and shall back them. All civilized governments of Europe are ready to do so. To hear grievances suffered by the Christian Armenians and to bring solution to them is required in compliance with the provisions of the article 61 of the Berlin Congress. Nothing sooner than the present moment, we have to make our best to prove the consulates how the Armenian people are skillful, honest and eager to absorb knowledge, to make the same agree with how much desire we feel for reformation and security,

-5. Notwithstanding where we are and what we do, the European travellers with whom we run across should be greeted with cheerful face, the Armenians hospitality should be displayed. The old Armenian stories should be told to them for they become a backer of the Armenian Cause (Hai Tahd),

 -6. Such matters should be made known to synods, priests and Church communities and efforts to insinuate the same should be made,

-7. The Ottoman Empire would not be in a position to hinder sincere relations which you would establish with the European travellers. If oppression and torture is inflicted owing to such relations, the local government authorities and the consulate the nearest to sites should be made familiar with the situation, and all happenings with all details required should be written to the Patriarchate.

Matheos Izmirlian

Matheos Izmirlian

-In the meantime, the primate Matheos Izmirlian, who was the acting Patriarch in Istanbul, was not dallying away and battered the bishoprics with correspondences. If these latter are carefully investigated, it exhibits itself that the Patriarchate was openly in betrayal, that the conduct it had chosen for itself to pursue was subversive, conducive to bringing intervention by foreign powers and contingent on seeking autonomy at the end(50).

-The province of Sivas was one of the Six Provinces (Alti Vilayet=Vilayat-i Sitte) on which the Armenians were laying claim. In other words, these were lands located West of Armenia which was planned to set up. Therefore, in terms of the allegations by the Armenians made. It was of a distinct significance. The coded correspondences pertinent to the years 1881 and 1882 which conveyed to the Home Office activities against the government conducted by the Patriarchate, forwarded by the governor of Sivas, Hakki Pasha, were drawing attention to the following matters(51)

-1. The Patriarchate had started to forward circulars to bishoprics indicating that preparations for initiating a revolt and inciting uprisings were under way,

-2. The Patriarchate had dismissed some bishops and priests in their right minds, whom had grasped the fact that revolts and uprisings would bring no outlet to Armenians, that interests of the Armenian community would be much harmed by, whom had rejected abiding by the instructions issued by the Patriarchate (which had some of these priests killed) and had nominated in their steads younger, much more aggressive ones,

-3. The Patriarchate, with circulars sent underhanded, had attempted taking population censuses, which was a commission to be performed by government authorities, with a view to indicating to European Powers that their parties held majority in the Six Provinces,

-4. The Patriarchate had collected duties from the Armenians under various names (under the colour such as aid to the Armenians who suffered from dearth, reimbursement of the debts payable for the Holy Jerusalem) and initiated large scale campaigns in Europe through press media in favor of the Armenians and against the Turks. As a consequence of such campaign, even the most ordinary events of murder were being displayed in the press as the killing in mass of the Armenians. Reports of murders published by the press had most of the times
no connection whatsoever with the Armenian Question. In brief, the events were being turned upside down to continue a campaign which was contingent on calumniation, slander and fabrication,

-5. The Patriarchate had on hand hundred of thousands liras (gold) amassed under the colour of "aid" from the Armenians. With a portion of the monies thus collected, the armed mobs acting in collaboration with the local volunteers initiated acts of terrorism after their being introduced to the country from the Russian borders into the Eastern Anatolia,

-6. The priests, in the course of the last three to four years had washed brains of the entire Armenian communities to go down to little children taking instruction at schools and thus had uprooted respect and obedience against instructions issued by the governmental authorities,

-7. The Patriarchate, further to its acting as leader in the establishment of the committees, had made huge sums allocated to such committees. There is benefit in mentioning that these committees were under order and sway of the Patriarchate.
-Following the death of Nerses Varjabedian in the year 1884, as Patriarch in his stead, was nominated the bishop of Erzurum Harouthioun Vehabedian (18851888) in the year 1885. This latter did not approve policy pursued by Migirditch Khrimian and Nerses Varjabedian and was convinced that awaiting any hope for help from Europe for the improvement of the Armenians situation in Turkey was of no avail. In the meantime, the former Patriarch Khrimian and his followers continued their programmes of defeatism. On the other hand, the Armenian bishops in accordance with instructions provided to themselves were active in the provinces of the Eastern Anatolia and were not shrinking from doing whatsoever is necessary to ascertain European powers' intervention. The Patriarch Harouthioun Vehabedian was familiar with preparations made underhand both at overseas and in provinces. In the meanwhile, the Patriarchate of Armenian Church in Jerusalem, with the decease of the Patriarch Yesayi Karabedian (1864-1885), had become vacant. By taking advantage of the vacancy and acting with the hunch of grievances and difficulties to arise in years ahead, the Patriarch decided to quit the Patriarchate of Istanbul to become the Patriarch of Jerusalem. At long last, with the ratification reluctantly conceded by the Sublime Porte, he was nominated Patriarch of Jerusalem(52).

Admit or deny that it was a high priest of the Armenian Church who first made-up and told the great lie that the Ottomans were massacring Armenians in Anatolia. Proof of this fact, which is in my book, is that your high priest concocted and started telling this tall tale 3 days after the Ottoman government announced it was removing disloyal Armenians who were helping the invading Russians. Your Armenian forefathers pretended to be loyal Ottoman friends and neighbors by day but in truth were disloyal cowardly traitors by night. I notice that you Armenians never once admit that you were helping the Russians in your greedy, get something for nothing, land grab attempt and this is why the Ottomans threw your forefathers out of the country.

Your high priest started telling his made up tall tale almost a full six weeks before a single Armenian behind the Ottoman army packed a bag to leave. Clearly there could not have been a massacre as your state owned church claims. I have the documented proof of this fact from the archives in Moscow, London, Paris, and Washington, D. C. What do you say about that?

Samuel Weems, in a 2002 reply to hate mail

 In the course of office term of Harouthioun Vehabedian, which was three years, the Armenian riot committees expanded their structures and opened branch-offices in Europe and America. Therefore, the Armenian nationalism, in other words, the revolutionary movement aspiring autonomy was changing hands from the Church to Armenian Revolutionary Parties. The first Armenian political party "Armenagan" with a certain efficacy, organized in line with the identical ones in Europe, having its own publishing organ, was set up at Van in the year
1885(53). The Armenians founded their first Marxist party in Geneva in the year 1887. These later in the year 1890 will became "Hunchak Revolutionary Party"(54).

In place of Harouthioun Vehabedian was nominated Khoren Ashikian (1888-1894), the Chief Priest of Izmit Monastery, known as an impartial priest. In the course of his office term, events of ordinary extent to occur in provinces were being exaggerated by the bishops and were reflected onto European scene as "Turkish oppression and torture" always with the claim that Europe should interfere in. On the other hand, with to object of bringing together the Armenians which had become dispersed as a result of coercive means used by the Tsar in Russia to remove radicalism, an Armenian Revolutionary Federation (Dashnak) was set up at Tiflis in the year 189055. Now on, the riots had become entirely consecutive, any coincidence being beyond question. At the date of 28 June 1890, a bloody riot occurred at Erzurum. This was followed by demonstrations at Kumkapi on 15 July 1890, and riots at Merzifon, Kayseri and Yozgat. With the conviction that he did not act as required, the committeemen arranged a criminal attempt against the Patriarch Khoren Ashikian, in which he was simply wounded. Following the event, he asked demission(56)

To replace Khoren Ashikian, the former Armenian Patriarch of Egypt, Matheos Izmirlian (1894-1896) was elected as Armenian Patriarch of Istanbul. With the election to the post of Patriarch of lzmirlian, the Hunchaks were delighted. The new Patriarch provided employment to committeemen and detailed them for services. He was not contending himself with spreading only his views on revolution and rioting, further to these, criticized with hard words all actions taken by the government and was sending reports both to British Embassy and to newspapers in London(57).

The insurrections carried out for the sake of Armenian autonomy in the course of Matheos izmirlian's office term spread with a speed almost in all provinces(58). These insurrections were suppressed within a short time through the tact displayed by the Sultan Abdulhamid II. The Armenians frustrated with emptiness of hopes inspired by the British policy had grown weary of Matheos Izmirlian. Moreover, the Armenian notables, who were in disagreement with the irreconcilable manner taken by himself since the day of his election and the upper level civil servants in the service of the Sublime Porte were suggesting him to resign. Philip Currie, the British Ambassador with drew his support from him. Even, the Senate member, the Armenian, Abraham Kara Kehya Pasha, had told him he would no longer be of service towards his community and he would do good if he did not continue sitting in his office. All of these negative happenings caused Matheos Izmirlian to demission(59). Following submission of his demission, he went to Jerusalem in September of the year 1896(60). He would only be able to return to Istanbul following promulgation of the Second Constitution to become the Patriarch elect for the second time (1908-1909)(61).

Artin Dadyan Pasha

Artin Dadyan Pasha

Following resignation of the Patriarch Matheos lzmirlian, the Bishop of Bursa, Mgr. Bartolomeos was nominated as acting patriarch. The Sublime Porte provisionally detailed a Mixed Council to be formed of clergymen and of eight secular members to replace civilian and religious synods existing at the times of office held by the former Patriarch, lzmirlian(62). A few times later, there occurred in Istanbul the Ottoman Bank raid (63) plotted by the Dashnak Party in Istanbul on 26 August 1896. The Mixed Council meeting under the presidency of Artin Dadian Pasha, in the meanwhile, elected as the Armenian Patriarch of Istanbul, Malachia Ormanian (1896-1908).

Malachia Ormanian

Malachia Ormanian

  -On the occasion of the 25th anniversary of the access to the throne of the Abdulhamid II, the Patriarch Ormanian ran a thanks giving ceremonies at Kumkapi Church and prayed God for the good of the Sultan after an address he made to make explicit grounds for the Armenians to remain faithful to Ottoman Empire (64). The Ottoman Government, in turn, attempted to inspire more trust for itself and to gain afresh the loyalty displayed by the Armenians. By the proclamation of an amnesty by the Sultan, all Armenians exiled or confined were set free.

-In the same period, the Armenian religious people continued their ruinous activities. Frustration and hopelessness experienced would push the Armenians into new ventures and the same would follow the tracks of the new illusions. As a matter of fact, the bishop of Cilicia region, Paul Terzian, would initiate activities for the founding of a sham Armenian state, comprising the areas of Maras and Adana provinces, called the Lesser Armenia. With an underhanded correspondence dated July 6, 1898 written to Foreign Minister of France, he, after raising complaints against the Ottoman Government, was offering setting up of a lesser Armenian state under the auspices to be provided by France (65). However, such an offer was brought to the knowledge of Abdulhamid II, and was definitively rejected.

Kevork V

     -In the year 1899, delegations elected from the various parts of the country, under the spokesperson of Minas Cheraz, applied to the Peace Conference held in the Hague and submitted a memorandum so that autonomy is conceded to Armenia (66).
-The Armenian committees directed by the Patriarchate, in a congress held in Paris in the year 1905, had resolved to establish an Armenian state in Cilicia (Adana, Maras and their environments)(67). Actually, this resolution was again nothing but the alliance of the cross. and the sword.

The article did not cover the war time Patriarch, at least not this version I came across; that would be Kevork V (1911-1930). The Armenian religious leader Hrant Vartabed wrote that "'The establishment of protestant communities in Ottoman territory and their protection by England and the United States shows that they did not shrink from exploiting even the most sacred feelings of the West, religious feelings, in seeking civilization", going on to state that the Catholicos of Echmiadzin Kevork V was a tool of Czarist Russia and that he betrayed the Armenians of Anatolia.

ADDENDUM and CORRECTION: The learning curve never ends. The wartime patriarch was not Kevork V. The Catholicos of Echmiadzin is a different religious entity. This represented the head of the Armenian Church, first established in 301 A.D., later to move around beginning in 485, and then to return to Echmiadzin in 1441.

The Armenian Patriarchate, the head of the Armenian millet within the Ottoman Empire, represented the other branch of Armenian religious (and in the Ottoman Empire, certain non-religious) leadership.

Patriarch Zaven

Zaven on cover of memoirs

The wartime patriarch was "Zaven," originally named Mikayel Ter-Yeghiayan before being ordained as a celibate priest by Ormanian in 1895. Zaven became patriarch in 1913, deemed untrustworthy by the Ottomans and sent away to Baghdad in 1916, returned to Istanbul in 1918, left before Ataturk took over, and finally settled in Baghdad (in 1927, for good), until his death in 1947. A book containing his words is entitled "My Patriarchal Memoirs."

ZAVEN ADDENDUM, 9-2006: “One day Tehlirian was summoned by Patriarch Zaven. Zaven was exiled in 1915 and the Armenian Church suffered greatly as a result of Mugerditchian’s betrayal. The Patriarch received and blessed Tehlirian and stated that Mugerditchian was three times worse than a traitor and he officially condoned Tehlirian’s act.” (Edward Alexander; "A Crime of Vengeance —  An Armenian Struggle for Justice," 1991, p.  45. Alexander was a U.S. Foreign Service Officer of Armenian descent.) Mugerditchian was accused of providing a list of Armenian ringleaders to Talat Pasha; if he did so, he was concerned about the Armenian rebellion rocking his nation during dangerous wartime, and was anything but a traitor. Zaven, by blessing a murderer, was a traitor to his religion.



(30) The clerical grades in the Armenian Church are as follows: Catholicos, Patriarch, Yepiscopos ( bishop ) , Vartabed, priest.
(31) Esat Uras, ibid, p. 417; Louise Nalbandian, ibid, p. 53; Kamuran Gürün, ibid, pp. 62,74-75.
(32) What is meant by the expression Armenia in here, is the Eastern Anatolia. However. the scientific environments agree on the Armenia being not an ethnical expression but rather a geographical one. To the geographical name "Armenia". Which stands for uplands/mountainous lands, mention would no more be made following the XIIIth century and the region (the Eastern Anatolia) until the second half of the XIXth century would be named as "Turcoman Country". For a much itemized information. See H. Kenial Tfrkozf, Türkmen ülkesi (Dogu
Anadolu) Adi ve Emperyalizmin Etkileri, Ankara 1985, p. 1-12; Kamuran Gürün, ibid, pp. 1-9: Mehlika Aktok Kasgarli, the above mentioned article, p. 329: Tuncer Baykara, Anadolu'nun Tarihi Cografyasina Giris, Anadolu'-nun Idari Taksimati, 1, Ankara 1988, pp. 2425.
(33) Mikael Varandian, Origins of the Armenian Movement, Vol. 11, Géneve 1913, p. 49, mentioned by Esat Uras, ibid, p. 413.
(34) Esat Uras, ibid, p. 417; Salahi Ramsdan Sonyel, The Ottoman Armenians, p. 41--
(35) Falur H. Armaoglu, qualified the Ottoman-Russian war of 1877-1878 as the work of the Balkan Slaves, whom Bismarck called "burglars of sheep", acting under the impetus of PanSlavism. See Siyasi Tarih Dersleri (1789-1919), Ankara 1961, p. 368.
(36) Enver Ziya Karal, Osmanli Tarihi, Vol. VIII, p. 235-236.--
(37) Cilicia is the region which is situated amid Taurus mountains, Amanus mountains and the Mediterranean Sea. In administrative sense, Cilicia is the name given to Adana province in the Ottoman Empire. The boundaries of Cilicia have time by time been subjected to change.--
(38) F.O. 424/70, Nu.134/1, mentioned by Bilal N. Simsir, British Documents on Ottoman Armenians (1856-1880), Vol. 1, Ankara 1982, p. 173, document No. 69.--
(39) Kamuran Gürün, ibid, p. 99.--
(40) The statement by Nerses Varjabedian made to express loyalty to Ottoman Sultan had caused him to be named as traitor of the Armenians, as the case was the same for Patriarch Hovagim. See Arev. 30.5.1985, p. 3. --
(41) Esat Uras, ibid, p. 439; Kâmuran Gürün, ibid, p. 97.--
(42) Nihat Erim, Devletlerarasi Hukuk ve Siyasi Tarih Metinleri Osmanli Imparatorlugu Andlasmalari, Vol. 1, Ankara 1953, pp 381-385.
(43) Esat Uras, ibid, pp. 451-457. --
(44) Esat Uras, ibid, p. 452.--
(45) For the whole text of the project. see Esat Uras, ibid, pp. 459485: Enver Ziya Karal, ibid, Vol. V111, p. 132: L'Angleterre et les Armeniens (1839-1904), pp. 19-22.--
(46) For the text of the letter, see Esat Uras, ibid, pp. 485-486.
(47) Kamuran Giirun, ibid, p. 104.
(48) Turkey Nu. 4 (1880), Nu. 118/1, mentioned by Bilal N. Simsir, ibid, pp. 602-606, document Nu. 309.--
(49) Mehmed Hocaoglu, Tarihte Ermeni Mezâlimi ve Ermeniler, Istanbul 1976, pp. 181-182.--
(50)As regards content of the correspondence, see Aspirations et Agissement Revolutionnaires des Comites Armeniens..., pp. 308-310.--
(51) Mehmed Hocaoglu, ibid, pp. 182-185.
(52) Aspirations et Agissement Revolutionnaires des Comites Armeniens..., p.13; L'Angleterre et les Armeniens (1839-1904), pp. 28-29; Esat Uras, ibid, p. 514.
(53) Louise Nalbandian, ibid. p. 90.--
(54) Louise Nalbandian, ibid, pp. 104. 117.
(55) Louise Nalbandian. ibid, p. 151.
(56) Esat Uras, ibid. p. 724-725.
Antragsteller regards the letter of threat sent by Hunchak Committee to Horen Ashikian_ see Aspirations et Agissements Revolutionnaires des Comittes Armeniens..., pp. 310-311.--
(57) Hüseyin Nazim Pasa. Ermeni Olaylari Tarihi, I. Ankara 1994, p. 66.--
(58) For a chronological listing of the uprisings, see Kamuran Gürün, ibid, pp. 139-159.--
(59) L'Angleterre et les Armeniens (1839-1904), p. 40.
(60) Esat Uras, ibid, p. 774; Salahi Ramsdan Sonyel, The Ottoman Armenians, p. 209.--
(61) Esat Uras, ibid, p. 883: Salalii Ramsdan Sonyel, ibid. p. 281.
62) L'Angleterre et les Armeniens (1839-1904), p. 41.--
(63) Concerning how the event did run, see Kamuran Gürün, A Mob of Trine: Migirditch Khrimian, Nerses Varjabedian, and Matheos Izmirlian

Patriarchal Population Hocus Pocus

Let's get an idea of how these patriarchs determined their statistics for the Armenian numbers.

A letter written by Patriarch Nerses, on 24 June 1880, to
the British Ambassador:

"...The previous censuses of the population have been done on the basis of number of houses; this method is absolutely erroneous, as the number of inhabitants of every household are by no means identical, and depend on whether the houses are occupied by Christians or Muslims. According to Muslim tradition, different families can't live in the same house; in Armenia custom, however, children and brothers after, as well as before their marriage, continue to live together. As a result, while one must count at most 3 to 8 inhabitants in a Muslim house, we can count 12 to 60 in Armenian house..."




(And there's another lie, with the above;  the described situation is totally  the reverse, in Turkish tradition; sons would continue
to live in the same house with their parents, after they
became married.)

So that's why the Patriarch's figures are always so ballooned up!

By the way, here's how the Patriarch finished his letter: "I realize how much your Excellency is already inclined in favour of the Armenian cause, which is the one of humanity and justice." (Wink-wink!)

(However, Lieutenant-Colonel C. W. Wilson, in a memorandum prepared for the Ambassador, didn't fall for the Patriarch's phony facts. He wrote: "The letter of the Armenian Patriarch shows a great lack of knowledge concerning the local realities of the population of the province of Sivas and the Christian population."

Let's see how the Patriarch's figures compare with the range of "neutral" sources (Cuinet=C, Lloyd=L, Lynch=LY)





Erzurum     215,177 121,935 134,967   (C) 106,768 (LY)
Van, Bitlis     348,500 140,854 168,938   (C) 164,620   (L)
Diyarbekir      88,800    86,202 101,579   (C)   90,034   (L)
Elaziz    158,000   84,422   93,000  (LY)   69,718   (C)
Sivas      243,515 131,361 170,433   (C) 170,433   (C)
Total 1,053,992 564,774  668,917 601,573

(K. Gurun, "The Armenian File," pg. 95)

  Now we can see who is more "reliable": the Ottomans, or the Armenian Patriarch.

     Why are the highest figures provided by no one but the Patriarch?

The obvious answer: truth was not the Patriarch's most pressing concern.

The Armenian population of eastern Anatolia,
"make-up" by the Armenian Patriarchate :

(a *) b c d e f
 (1880)  (1880) (1881) (1882) (1912)
Erzurum  215,177 111,000 128,478  280,000 215,000
Van  184,000 133,859 400,000 185,000
Bitlis 164,508 252, ** 130,460  250,000 180,000
Diyarbekir 88,000 150,000 105,000
Elaziz 155,000 107,059 270,000 168,000
Sivas 199,245 243,515 280,000 165,000

* In 1878, the combined population of Erzurum + Van+ Bitlis was 1,150,000

** 252,500 = Van+Bitlis


a:   to Berlin Congress
b:   to Sir Charles Dilke
c:   Patriarch's list
d:   Patriarch's list
e,f: Marcel Leart (Krikor Zohrap)

"It is apparent that there is no possibility of taking these lists seriously," wrote Kamuran Gurun in "The Armenian File." Who could argue?

Gurun also tells us the following, shedding further light on the Patriarchs' dishonesty:

"The fact that the Patriarchate did not repeat the 3,000,000 figure it gave to the Berlin Congress, but reduced it to 1,780,000, is significant. It is understood that the Patriarch spoke without reflection, thinking that autonomy was going to be obtained anyway, but that he did not repeat this figure, and even gave a figure under 2,000,000, when he saw that autonomy was not going to materialize, and he thought of the subject of taxes. Nevertheless, we shall see below that the figures given by the Patriarch for the six provinces too are quite exaggerated. It is also useful to remember that the Patriarch, who said he was basing his figures on the records of the Patriarchate, never revealed these records. Moreover, it is obvious that Catholic and Protestant Armenians would not be included in the Patriarchate records.

The Patriarchate figures being what they are, we can leave aside the Armenian sources who follow the Patriarchate, and Walker, who is obviously the standard-bearer of the Armenians. Besides, the figures given by Vahan Vardapet, member of the Patriarchate, clearly contradict them."

The figure for the Armenian population in Turkey, according to Vahan Vardapet was1,263,000. (According to the Djeridei Sharkieh, an Armenian newspaper published in Istanbul, dated 3/15 December 1886.)


There are many online sources of Gurun's indispensible work, which I have barely referred to in the preparation of the TAT site... I can see that was a mistake. The Links page features an HTML version or two.


Holdwater adds another example of Patriarchal population puff: It is well known the Patriarch's pre-war Armenian population figure was 2.1 million, contradicted by some Armenian historians from the period, such as Kevork Aslan, who had the number at 1.8 million. Yet German missionary Johannes Lepsius stated (as an "under oath" defense witness in the 1921 Tehlirian trial) that the number he obtained from the Patriarchate was 1,850,000. In other words (assuming known-liar Lepsius did not "exaggerate" this figure himself; Aslan probably got his number from the Patriarchate, as well), the Patriarch — just as in the Berlin Congress, when the Patriarch from that period shifted the figure over a million in a blink of an eye — shifted the pre-war figure by 250,000, just like that! Abracadabra!

"In advancing these figures, the Armenians might be charged with

Prof. Richard Hovannisian, basically admitting the Patriarchs were liars, in "Armenia on the road to independence", 1967, p. 37


At a meeting last autumn of the Armenian Assemble Nationale, M. Sdepan Papazian, the reputed author of the statistical Tables presented to the Berlin Conference, made a violent attack on the Patriarch for having communicated statistical Tables to the Embassies without having previously consulted the National Assembly, in consequence of which the enormous divergence between the Berlin and the more recent Patriarchal figures had attracted attention, and called forth remarks tending to show the untrustworthiness of both sets of figures. The Berlin compilation, by a glaringly unfair manipulation of official figures, tried to prove that, according to the said figures, the Armenian population of Erzerum and Van (including Bitlis and Hekkari) amounted to 1,150,000 souls. I have subsequently shown that, in all probability, the real number does not exceed 450,000: while the Patriarchal figures supplied to the Embassy in 1880 gave 373,500 Armenians, plus 85,000 Nestorians.

British Major Trotter, in a memorandum to his Ambassador on February 15, 1882, basically saying the Patriarch was a liar.








"West" Accounts


Armenian Views
Geno. Scholars


Turks in Movies
Turks in TV


This Site