Upon the Armenians' 50th Anniversary Commemoration in 1965, an Armenian-American lady named Etmekjian wrote to Toynbee (the contents of her March 1, 1966 letter are unknown, as is her follow-up) and the two letters Toynbee wrote in response revealed the historian made no reference to genocide.... although it appeared likely that was the kind of admission the woman was striving for. The second letter ends with the sentiment human beings should admit to wrongdoing, but "nationalism is a hindrance to this, unfortunately." The meat of the first  , dated March 16:

"It is true that the British Government's motive in asking Lord Bryce to compile the blue book was propaganda. But Lord Bryce's motive in undertaking it, and mine in working on it for him, was to make the truth known, and the evidence was good; the witnesses were all American missionaries with no political axe to grind. So the Blue Book, together with Lepsius's book, does give a true account.

In 1915 the Russians were invading North-eastern Turkey, and it was reasonable for the Turkish Government to fear that the Armenian minority there might be a 'fifth column'. So it would have been legitimate to deport them, as the U.S. Government deported the Japanese-Americans from the Pacific coast in World War II. But the deportations of the Armenians in 1915 were used — by the Turkish Government, not by the people —
 as an opportunity for treating the deportees in ways that were so inhuman that they were bound to cause wholesale mortality, as they did."

If I may take a moment to analyze, it looks like in this period of his life Toynbee is attempting to legitimize the 1915 events in accordance to his propagandistic views. (Although, of course, he is sincere in his beliefs. But why is he so convinced?) In his first paragraph, he admits the purpose of the Blue Book was "propaganda." While Toynbee probably tried to be as accurate as he could (instead of just blindly making things up), if one’s purpose is to distort truth, how could he feel the Blue Book was legitimate?

Particularly if he admits, "the witnesses were all American missionaries with no political axe to grind." Quite the contrary, the prayers of the missionaries directly instructed these religious fanatics to make the Turk as inhuman as possible, breaking the commandment, THOU SHALT NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS AGAINST THY NEIGHBOR; it was their "Godly duty" to vilify the Turks. And far from having no political axe to grind (has Toynbee lost all sense of reality, here?), the relief organizations became the most successful charitable drive in American history, raising an amount the equivalent of one billion dollars today, according to Peter Balakian’s "Burning Tigris" book. (Although I’ve come across another Balakian source where the poet claimed $2.5 billion. Ahh, Armenians and their propensity for numbers.) The most effective way to separate teary-eyed Christian sympathizers from their money was to claim poor, innocent Christians were being monstrously mistreated by heathen infidels.

The fact that Toynbee gives credence to mad-dog religious fanatic Vicar Lepsius’ work illustrates how Toynbee’s deep commitment to his Christian faith has colored his views. We’ll be coming to that.

Here is one indication of Toynbee's Devotion to Faith:

In "10 Questions for God," #6: Will the world end? (bigquestions.com/six/page1.htm), Toynbee provides among six symptoms of a dying society (from his "Study of History"):

(1) sexual 'freedom' wrecks families (kids lack care & relationship education);
(2) people believe the world is ruled by chance, so nothing they do matters;
(3) religion is watered down;
(4) technical skill outpaces moral and spiritual growth;
(5) real creativity is replaced with ‘moral abandon,’ lack of self-control.

The sixth and only "non-religious/spiritual" reason given regarded war becoming an obsession.

FROM TOYNBEE'S BIOGRAPHER:

"The British use the Ottoman Armenians against the Polish Jews in the propaganda war. In the war, Russia massacres the Polish Jews.

And Germany makes efforts to take the Jewish lobby in the USA to its side with the publications about this massacre.

In such a circumstance, Britain charges the Ottoman Empire, who is the ally of Germany, of conducting a similar massacre, with the aim of disrupting the German propaganda. Britain wants to prevent the Jewish lobby in the USA from sympathizing with Germany by propagating the unfounded rhetoric stating that similar incidents do happen in the Ottoman lands as well.

The reason of publication of the 'Blue Book' is to make propaganda against Germany.

Finally in 1917 the USA involves in the war, siding with the Allied States. Namely, Toynbee does win the propaganda war!"

William H. McNeill, "Arnold Toynbee - A Life" (1989 ). McNeill was professor of history emeritus at the University of Chicago, where he taught for 40 years. He further characterizes the Blue Book as "a disinformation book favoring the Allied states and aiming at shaping the public opinion, which does not go beyond the obsessive task of humiliating the Turks."

 

Arnold Toynbee, caricatured, his later years

I haven't read Experiences, a 1969 book by Toynbee, but Dadrian's Zoryan Institute points out Toynbee has gone back to his Blue Book roots, using words as "largely successful attempt to exterminate" to describe the Ottoman Turks' actions. Prof. Hikmet Özdemir tells us Dadrian claims to have written to Toynbee, and Toynbee apparently flat out spoke in genocidal terms that no doubt made the Armenian prosecutor giddy with delight. The Turkish professor is maintaining a professional level of respect toward Dadrian, but anyone who knows Dadrian is aware his word can be taken as far as can be thrown, when regarding this genocide obsession. Ozdemir wonders why Dadrian hasn't made this letter public. It's a good question; the Toynbee letter would have provided good ammunition for Dadrian's cause. (Not that it's entirely necessary, because other damning Toynbee statements have been rounded up... in Toynbee's penultimate work, "Acquaintances," as well. Still, every little bit of dirt helps, for the Dadrians of the world.) Perhaps, like Aram Andonian (of Talat Pasha telegrams fame), Dadrian might have "lost" the original.

Prof. Hikmet Özdemir reveals some interesting facts about Toynbee during his "pro-Turk" period. After his first 1912 visit, where he seems to have hated the land, his eyes kept opening during visits in 1921, 1923, 1929, 1948 1962, and finally 1968.

In 1948, his "pal," Turkish leader Ismet Inonu, ordered Toynbee's "Study of History." In a letter dated Nov. 23, 1948 to son Omer, Inonu wrote that he had met with Toynbee, and described the historian as too much of a Christian and somewhat of a religious fanatic. (The Turkish words: "Fazla Hristiyan" and "dinci.") Another friend, "liberal" writer Ahmet Emin Yalman, independently corroborated this Toynbee characteristic in 1952.

Prof. Özdemir informs us that in August 1914 some of Britain's luminaries and historians gathered and declared the first thing they needed to do in order to win the war at hand was to get the USA to join. They planned on opening a propaganda division with this goal in mind. The historians were told their duties would consist of writing books, preparing brochures, lobbying newspapers like "The New York Times," and all the news articles, photographs and the works would henceforth be prepared. This movement would grow to be known as "Wellington House."

Interestingly, a number of the documents in the British Archives are forbidden. Some are deemed never to be opened, while others are time-stamped: to be opened in 2015, 2020 and so forth.

 The Turkish professor also tells us after the USA hooked up in the First World War, they learned soon after that they were taken for a ride by British propaganda. With Britain in the role of The Boy Who Cried Wolf, the Americans took their time before coming to the rescue in W.W.II.

Toynbee featured in the cover of the Sept. 1958 issue of Wisdom (Vol. 3, No.27), in apainting by Yousuf Karsh

In June 15, 1916, Toynbee wrote Boston's Dr. Barton a letter , saying the missionary Rockwell turned down Toynbee's request for names connected with "Mrs. Christie's journal of events at Tarsus," as the information belonged to Barton. Toynbee asks Barton of the same, and additionally requests the missionary to "fill in confidentially any further gaps in my collection."

"It, of course, weakens very much my position in editing these documents if I cannot say in the preface that I am personally in possession of the names of the people and places concerned."

Toynbee badgers Boston's Dr. Rockwell with another letter on June 20th, pretty much saying the same. He adds, "If I have to admit in a certain number of cases that the names are actually unknown to me, this will have a very weakening effect on the body of the evidence."

Boghos Nubar

Toynbee also hobnobs with Boghos Nubar in a June 20 letter (along with Switzerland's Leopold Favre in a separate letter dated June 20), asking the Armenian leader for any "suggestions or corrections." Yes, it's sources like Nubar that helped make Toynbee's work "the official and most comprehensive British documentation," as the Zoryan Institute still tries to sell us. Toynbee lets Nubar know documents will be sent, "the authorship of which is still unknown to me."

"Of course, I would keep any further names you revealed to me as confidential."

Is this the kind of source Ara Sarafian possibly researched in an attempt to validate the Blue Book? Are we supposed to accept the word of Boghos Nubar, or for that matter, Turk-vilifying missionaries? Even if Sarafian pinned down some of these names... and how he could have done so is another matter, since even the principals from the period were having trouble making I.D.s of all the hearsay... what difference does it make? These conflicted sources could have made up any phony name, like "Emile Hilderbrand."

Toynbee was persistent, but for all his efforts to pin down the names, Dr. Barton had already written the young propagandist-historian on May 1, 1916 :

"I very much regret that we are unable to fill in the blanks in the documents that our Committee published in galley form for the press under date of October 14 1915. Most of these documents are not now here; in fact, many of them are not now accessible to us. I doubt if the names of the places would be especially significant."

"In Mrs. Christie's notes, the names have not been furnished to us."

Excerpts from Prof. Özdemir's Toynbee Speech