“Demographic processes and population of Eastern Armenia c. National policy of the Ottoman Empire towards the Armenian population at the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th centuries. Shnirelman’s opinion on the problem of resettlement of Armenians in the official propaganda of Azerbaijan

The center of historical Armenian statehood. It was there that the capitals of Greater Armenia were located, and in the Middle Ages also of Bagratid Armenia - Yervandashat, Armavir, Artashat, Vagharshapat (also a spiritual center), Dvin and Ani. All these cities were key areas for the development of ancient Armenian culture.

Shah Abbas I the Great, who deported Transcaucasian Armenians to Persia in 1603

The final blow to the Armenian presence in Eastern Armenia was dealt by the massive resettlement of residents deep into Persia, organized by the Persian Shah Abbas I, in 1603, the so-called. "Great Surgun" During this resettlement, in particular, the largest Armenian city of Jugha (now Julfa, near Nakhichevan), which was the world center of silk trade, was destroyed; its residents founded the Armenian suburb of Isfahan - “New Jugha”.

According to census data from the first half of the 19th century, about a third of the population of the entire territory of the entire Karabakh were Armenians, and about two-thirds were Azerbaijanis. George Burnoutian points out that the censuses show that the Armenian population was mainly concentrated in 8 of the 21 mahals (districts) of Karabakh, of which 5 constitute the modern territory of Nagorno-Karabakh, and 3 are included in the modern territory of Zangezur. Thus, 35 percent of the population of Karabakh (Armenians) lived on 38 percent of the land (in Nagorno-Karabakh), constituting an absolute majority (about 90%) on it. According to Ph.D. Anatoly Yamskov, one should take into account the fact that population censuses were conducted in the winter, when the nomadic Azerbaijani population was in the plains, and in the summer months they climbed to high-mountain pastures, changing the demographic situation in the mountainous regions. However, Yamskov notes that the point of view on the rights of nomadic peoples to be considered a full-fledged population of the nomadic territory they seasonally use is currently not shared by the majority of authors, both from post-Soviet countries and from “far abroad” countries, including both pro-Armenian and pro-Azerbaijani works; Moreover, in the Russian Transcaucasus of the 19th century, this territory could only be the property of the settled population.

Patronage of Armenians by Russian monarchs

The importance of the resettlement of Armenians in Transcaucasia was noted in his decrees by Peter I, who laid the foundation for this process. Even in his decree to the Senate, issued on March 2, 1711:

Peter the Great ordered to provide his patronage to the Persian Armenians and provide them with all possible benefits in order to attract them to Russia.

Another decree of Peter I, dated January 28, 1717, became the basis for the imperial leadership to resettle Armenians from the Ottoman Empire to the Russian borders. In the decree...

in the name of the rich and respected Smyrna merchant Peter Abro, the way to Russia was opened for Armenians living in Turkey.

The resettlement of Armenians within Russia also began under Peter I.

Many thousands of Armenians, in the days of Peter the Great, left Persia, Poland, Turkey and moved to Russia, contributing to its enrichment by trade, industry and agriculture.

From letters and instructions of Peter I in 1724:

Try in every possible way to call the Armenians and other Christians, if any, to Gilan and Mazandaran and revive the infidels in a very quiet way, so that they do not find out how much it is possible to reduce, namely the Turkish law.

Relocations of Armenians in the 19th century

Relocation of Armenians to Transcaucasia after the Turkmanchay Peace

Ambassador of the Russian Empire to the court of the Persian Shah A. Griboedov, who actively promoted the resettlement of Persian Armenians. He pointed out in his notes the “fundamental dissatisfaction of the local population” with the forms in which the Russian administration carried out this resettlement."

The fifteenth article of the Turkmanchay Peace Treaty allowed for a year the Armenians - subjects of Persia to move to the territory north of the Araks River, which, according to the treaties of 1813 (Gulistan Peace Treaty) and 1828 (Turkmanchay Peace Treaty) became the new Russian-Persian border. This article marked the beginning of the immigration of Armenians to Transcaucasia. The article read:

Moreover, those officials and residents will be given a one-year period, counting from this date, to freely move with their families from the Persian regions to the Russian ones, for the export and sale of movable property, without any obstacles from the government and local authorities and without exposing those being sold or property and things exported by these persons are subject to any duty or tax.

The Armenian population had high hopes for the possibility of resettlement, which is why the resettlement was voluntary and occurred very quickly. Glinka in his “Description of the resettlement of the Adderbidzhan Armenians within Russia” wrote:

The Armenians, inspired by the call of Colonel Lazarev, flew on the wings of zeal and love to the Russian regiments and provided the most important services... Many of the Armenians... extended fraternal embraces to the Russian soldiers, informed them of every movement of the enemy, served as their guides and acted on the battlefield.

L. E. Lazarev was entrusted with leading the organization of this resettlement. This was a difficult matter, since the Persian government, realizing how much it was losing with the departure of thousands of settlers, secretly prohibited the purchase of real estate from those resettled. Persian officials and trustees of the English East India Company intimidated them in every possible way. The Muslims showered the Christian settlers with curses and threw stones. Lazarev compiled lists of immigrants and supplied the poorest with money. Realizing that despite the one-year period, after the departure of the Russian troops everything would become much more complicated, Lazarev hurried and in three and a half months more than eight thousand families (about forty thousand people) crossed the Araks. On July 26, 1828, in a letter from Karl Nesselrod, then vice-chancellor and manager of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Griboedov noted:

These were Armenian families of Armenians from Tabriz, Maraga, the khanates of Salmas, Khoy, and Urmia. Most of the settlers settled in the territories of the Erivan, Karabakh and Nakhichevan khanates.

In a report to the commander-in-chief of the Russian army in the Caucasus, Count Paskevich, Griboyedov sharply criticized, in his opinion, the incompetence of the authorities who directly carried out the resettlement and the resulting chaos:

Your Excellency would like to find out more reliably through me about the methods that were adopted for the resettlement of Armenians from Aderbeijan, and about their current installation in our regions. L<азарев>considered himself the main instigator of this emigration, which, as you know, he explained quite publicly, but unfoundedly, because the Armenians had no idea about him, being solely driven by their trust in Russia and the desire to be under its laws. The treaty gave them every right to do this (...) Polk. L<азарев>thought only about composing proclamations, rather inappropriate, by the way, about the formation of a regular Armenian militia, even considering including in the circle of his plans (...) Karabakh itself and other regions that have their own authorities and where special power from those established long ago could not be allowed. (...) when placing them in our new places, everything was done senselessly, carelessly and unforgivably. The Armenians are mostly settled on the lands of Muslim landowners. In the summer this could still be done. The owners, Muslims, were mostly nomads and had few occasions to communicate with strangers of other faiths. No timber has been harvested and no other places have been allocated for the permanent settlement of the settlers. All this was missed in due time. It’s too late to correct the mistake this year. The settlers themselves are in cramped conditions and are crowding the Muslims, who are all grumbling and thoroughly. V. s. it is known that in general all the local residents should be considered migrants, for they were all evicted by the sardar in wartime and are in the poorest conditions. (...) Turning again to the settlers, I find that they are much more useful than our Georgian Armenians, generally traders who do not bring any benefit to the treasury; and those who crossed over from Persia were mostly artisans and cultivators.

At the same time, Griboevov, however, admitted that when distributing cash benefits to settlers, although there is a disorder (the poor do not get it, the rich are given too much), there is no conscious abuse.

According to Griboyedov, the massive resettlement of Armenians to Nakhichevan led to discontent among the local Muslim population of the region, which found itself in a difficult situation. Griboyedov noted in a report to Count Paskevich that this discontent could lead to the flight of Muslims to Persia, which the Russian administration considered undesirable for itself and which it prevented by forcibly returning the fugitives:

In the Nakhichevan region I found even more disorder and oppression from the resettlement of Armenians than in Erivan. Your Excellency knows how poor the former inhabitants are and how poor this province is. Here the Armenians, the newcomers, are better off than in any other place where I met them; but fermentation and displeasure in the minds of the Tatars reaches the highest degree. ... It can very easily happen that they abandon their farm and property in despair, and then in vain we will attribute this to Persian inspirations, as recently happened with the flight of the Sadaraks.

To mitigate the situation, Griboyedov recommended that Paskevich give instructions to resettle about 500 Armenian families further to Daralagez. On September 7, 1828, the “Note on the establishment of the Russian Transcaucasian Company”, prepared by Griboedov together with P. D. Zaveleisky, was published in Tiflis, aimed at transforming the region. It said, in particular:

The undersigned consider it their duty to touch upon the condition of the Armenians who again crossed into Russian borders because of the Araks. This numerous emigration, although prompted by the words of the Turkmenchay Treaty, could not have been foreseen when it was signed. A coincidence of circumstances, in relation to that subject, such as: the prolonged occupation of the Khoi province by our troops, etc., contributed a lot to this. It was fulfilled in the first four months after the pacification; nothing was or could be prepared for their reception. For this, cash benefits are not enough; their own ignorance of the region, which is new to them, can be disastrous for them; the change in air from sultry to harsh, in the elevated zone of our regions and vice versa, all these difficulties may still last.

According to the estimated data of Russian researchers of the 18th century, the approximate number of Armenian immigrants from Persia exceeded 100 thousand people. According to some estimates, the number of displaced people exceeded 60 thousand people. According to G. Chopin, commented on in 1841 by academicians Brosset and Keppen:

For some time after the conclusion of the Turkmanchay Treaty (February 10, 1828), according to which the Armenian region was annexed to Russia, most of the mahals of the Erivan and Nakhichevan provinces remained for more than a year without inhabitants, who during the war took refuge in neighboring Turkish pashaliks and in the inaccessible mountains of the Armenian region . In 1828, when the Armenians living in Azerbaijan received permission to move to our borders, their frequent parties began to cross the Araks and occupied all the empty villages that they encountered on the march - in this way they settled and took possession of houses, lands, gardens, mills indigenous people who began to gradually return only from 1829. But having found their homes in the hands of other owners, they, through requests and various persuasion, persuaded the Armenians to allow them to occupy small areas of the most unprofitable lands of their villages and build houses for themselves. Others retired to the mountains, and built completely new villages in the upper and middle zones.

The organizer of the resettlement of Armenians, Lazarev, wrote in a report upon completion of his actions

Instead of the deserts that now cover the fields of ancient great Armenia, rich villages will arise, and perhaps even cities, inhabited by industrial and hardworking residents

Penney's Encyclopedia Britannica, published in 1838, also noted that “the small population of Karabakh can be explained by the frequent wars that long ravaged the province, as well as the emigration of many Muslim families to Persia after its annexation to Russia, although after the conclusion of the Turkmanchay Peace, the Russian government encouraged many Armenians to emigration from Persia to Karabakh." According to Yamsky, in the mid- and late 19th century, immigrants from Turkey and Persia settled primarily in the territories of Eastern Armenia and Northern Azerbaijan, which partially included Nagorno-Karabakh.

Relocation of Armenians after the Treaty of Adrianople

John Baddeley described that Paskevich’s army, when returning from Turkey to Transcaucasia, was accompanied by about 90 thousand Armenian migrants. Among the Armenian settlers from the Ottoman Empire there were many peasants who mostly settled in Nagorno-Karabakh. The Armenian population of Karabakh in 1836 was 19,000 people. The resettlement had a great impact on changing the national composition of the city of Erivan. By 1828, there were approximately 87 thousand Muslims and 20 thousand Armenians in the Khanate of Yerevan (mostly coinciding with the modern territory of Armenia). By 1831, according to statistics from the imperial administration, the number of Armenians reached 65 thousand, and the number of Muslims decreased to 50 thousand. The city of Erivan still had a Muslim majority. Of the 11,400 inhabitants, more than 7,000 were Muslims and less than 4,000 were Armenians. . In the territories of the former Nakhichevan Khanate, after the migrations, there were about 17 thousand Azerbaijanis, and 10.7 thousand Armenian migrants. Over 2 thousand Armenians were resettled in the Ordubad district alone. During the period 1828-1830. The immigration of Armenians in the territories of Erivan and partly Elizavetpol provinces exceeded 140 thousand people. In 1831, Armenians and Greeks from Eastern Anatolia also settled in Tsalka. Almost the entire Georgian population was resettled to the central regions of Georgia. In a work detailing the information available at that time about the history and culture of the Armenians - “Review of Armenia. In geographical, historical and literary respects” by A. Khudabashev, published in 1859 in St. Petersburg, the following is said about the resettlement of Armenians in Transcaucasia in the 1828-1830s:

The number of inhabitants of these areas, from 1828 to 1830, increased with new settlers. Paskevich withdrew 90 thousand Armenians from Erzurum, Kars, Bayazed and Toprak-Kale at this time; from the Persian cities of Khoy, Salmas, Urmia, Tabriz and Maku up to 40 thousand. Colonel Lazarev was elected as a mediator in the resettlement of these Armenians.

According to Khudabashev, in 1859 the Armenian population in Transcaucasia (in the Armenian region, Georgia and Shirvan) amounted to 500 thousand people. Other Russian historians are contemporaries of the resettlement of the 1828-1830s. V. Potto and S. Glinka also confirm these figures in their works devoted to the resettlement of Armenians from Persia and Turkey to Transcaucasia. According to Encyclopedia Britannica, Russia's wars against Iran and Turkey in the 18th and 19th centuries led to large immigration of Armenians to the Transcaucasian provinces of Russia and Russia itself. Armenians settled in Yerevan, Tbilisi, Karabakh, Shemakha, Astrakhan and Bessarabia.

By 1832, the Armenian population of the Erivan province, which previously constituted no more than 20% of the total population, reached 50%. According to a contemporary of the events, the German traveler Baron Haxtausen, at the end of the Russian-Persian and Russian-Turkish wars of the early 19th century, more than 110 thousand Armenians from Persia and the Ottoman Empire moved to Transcaucasia. Also, according to him, from one third to half of the 300 thousand population of the Armenian region are immigrants from Persia and Turkey.

The Russian-Turkish War of 1877-1878 and the resettlement of Armenians in Transcaucasia

The ethnic composition of the region also underwent great changes in the second half of the 19th century. As a result of the Russian-Turkish War of 1877-1878, the Russian Empire defeated Ottoman Turkey and captured part of southern Georgia, which later made up the Batumi region. In two years - 1890-1891, more than 31 thousand Muslims were evicted from the region, whose places were taken by Armenian and partly Georgian settlers from the eastern regions of the Ottoman Empire. The resettlement of Armenians from these areas to the Batumi region continued until the beginning of the 20th century. In 1894-1895, a large number of Armenians settled on the Black Sea coast of Georgia - all the way to Sukhumi. Thanks to the resettlement after the Russian-Turkish War, Armenians began to form a dominant majority in the Erivan province, but in the city of Erivan itself they constituted a minority until the beginning of the 20th century. As Ronald Grigor Suny notes, the most important result of the Russian conquest of Transcaucasia and subsequent migration processes was the creation of a compact Armenian majority in a small part of their historical homeland

Relocations of Armenians in the 20th century

The Armenian genocide and its role in the resettlement of Armenians in Transcaucasia

Armenian refugee family

The resettlement of Armenians to Transcaucasia reached its apogee during the First World War. Armenians, subjects of the Ottoman Empire who entered World War I as allies of the Russian Empire, were subjected to genocide in the Ottoman Empire. Subsequently, they were forced to leave Turkish territories along with the retreating Russian troops. During the Russian retreat from Van in 1915 alone, more than 200 thousand Armenians from eastern Anatolia moved to the Erivan province. Most of the 800 thousand Armenians who emigrated from Turkey in 1915-1916 also settled in Transcaucasia. These processes continued on the lands of the Erivan and Elizavetpol provinces already as part of the independent Republic of Armenia, in the context of the fierce struggle of the Armenians against enemy invasions from all sides and the fight against the Musavatists (Azerbaijani nationalists), and took place in parallel with the eviction, and often the expulsion of the local Azerbaijani and Kurdish population Paganuzzi notes that “by personal order of the Sovereign Emperor Nicholas II, Russian troops took a number of measures to save the Armenians, as a result of which, out of the 1.651 thousand souls of the Armenian population of Turkey, 375 thousand were saved, that is, 23%, which in itself is an extremely impressive figure.” . .

Armenian refugees. Rice. A. Petrova

After the Russian retreat, the Armenian nationalist party Dashnaktsutyun took power in the areas populated by Armenians. In the context of an acute conflict between Armenians and Muslims, everything was decided by the force of arms and each side tried to resolve territorial issues at the expense of the others. On numerous Turkish fronts in Transcaucasia, the force was on the side of the Azerbaijanis, and accordingly the Armenians were the victims. On the Armenian side, the Dashnaks expelled the majority of the Muslim population in the territories that came under their rule, and in its place, Armenian refugees were settled in the Novobayazet and Sharur-Daralagez districts of the Erivan province. The Dashnaks claimed to include the entire Erivan province into Armenia, including Nakhichevan and Sharuro-Darlagyaz, Kars, part of the Tiflis province, and part of the Elizavetpol province (Nagorno-Karabakh). In turn, the Musavatists agreed to recognize only the former Erivan district for the Armenians, laying claim to Karabakh, Zangezur, Sharuro-Darlagyaz, Nakhichevan and Kars. . The Dashnaks also hoped for the return (with the help of the League of Nations) of the entire territory of Turkish Armenia. Commenting on the territorial claims of the Dashnaks, their political opponent, the Bolshevik Anastas Mikoyan, subsequently described them as “a grand plan for the expansion of Armenia.”

Stalin's territorial claims to Turkey and the resettlement of foreign Armenians to the Armenian SSR

Shnirelman's opinion on the problem of resettlement of Armenians in the official propaganda of Azerbaijan

Noting that “few of the Armenian authors dare to dispute the very fact of large migrations of Armenians from Iran and the Ottoman Empire to the territory of Eastern Armenia as a result of the Russian-Turkish and Russian-Iranian wars of 1826-1829,” and that “the Armenian researchers themselves agree , that at the beginning of the 19th century. Armenians made up barely 20% of the population of the Ervan Khanate, and only after 1828-1832. they outnumbered the Muslims (Aslanyan et al., 1966. P. 87; Parsamyan, 1972. P. 49-52, 66; Bournoutian, 1996. P. 77-79)”, Shnirelman believes that the problem of resettlement of Armenians in Transcaucasia occupies one of the key places in modern anti-Armenian propaganda in Azerbaijan, which claims that in this way the Russian authorities tried to create a Christian outpost against Muslims.

see also

Notes

1. http://www.iatp.am/economics/migr/gr-e5.htm
2. Ismail-zade, Delyara Ibrahim-kyzy. Population of cities in the Transcaucasian region in the 19th - first half of the 20th centuries. M., “Science”, 1991, p. 74
3. The Armenians: past and present in the making of national identity, Caucasus world, CAUCASUS WORLD. PEOPLES OF THE CAUCASUS. Peoples of the Caucasus Series. Edmund Herzig, Marina Kurkchiyan. Routledge, 2005. ISBN 0700706399, 9780700706396. Total pages: 255. Page 119. Link: http://books.google.com/books?id=Sypt9wkqYqAC&pg=PA119&dq=stalin+kars+repatriation+of+armenians&as_brr=3&ei=JRaESrukFIvyyATj2O3ZDQ&hl=ru#v=onepage&q=&f=false

   After his unanimous election Gevork VI sent a letter to Stalin supporting the repatriation of diaspora Armenians and the return of Armenian lands in Turkey. But the advent of the Cold War and Turkeys integration into the Inked Slates-led Western alliance made any border change impossible.

4. On the religious frontier: Tsarist Russia and Islam in the Caucasus. Firouzeh Mostashari. I.B.Tauris, 2006. ISBN1850437718, 9781850437710. Total pages: 203. Pp. 36. Link:
5. New imperial history of the post-Soviet space. Ilya Gerasimov. New Imperial History, 2004. ISBN 5852470244, 9785852470249. Total pages: 656. Pages: 308. Link:
6. On the problems of Nagorno-Karabakh and around it. Professor Rachinsky M., Page: 2. Link:
7. The newly independent states of Eurasia: handbook of former Soviet republics. Sandra L. Batalden. Greenwood Publishing Group, 1997. ISBN 0897749405, 9780897749404. Total pages: 233. Pages: 98. Link:
8. The problem of Nagorno-Karabagh: Geography versus Demography in Colonialism and Decolonization. Tadeuzs Swietochowski. Page 143-145. Central Asia: its strategic importance and future prospects. Hafeez Malik. Palgrave Macmillan, 1996. ISBN 0312164521, 9780312164522. Total pages: 337. Link:
9. Russian Azerbaijan, 1905-1920: The Shaping of a National Identity in a Muslim Community. Tadeusz Swietochowski. Cambridge University Press, 2004. ISBN 0521522455, 9780521522458. Total pages: 272. Pages: 7. Link:
10. - Britannica Online Encyclopedia. Armenia. The people.
11. The ghost of freedom: a history of the Caucasus. Charles King. Oxford University Press US, 2008. ISBN 0195177754, 9780195177756. Total pages: 291. Page 159. Link: http://books.google.com/books?id=3I5KtTraWG0C&pg=PA159&dq#v=onepage&q=&f=false
12. Conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh, Abkhazia and South Ossetia: a legal appraisal. Tim Potier. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2001. ISBN 9041114777, 9789041114778. Total pages: 314. Page 2. Link:
13. The forsaken people: case studies of the internally displaced. Roberta Cohen, Francis Mading Deng. Brookings Institution Press, 1998. ISBN 0815715137, 9780815715139. Total pages: 512. Pp. 256. Link:
14. Shnirelman V. A. Memory wars: myths, identity and politics in Transcaucasia. - M.: ICC "Akademkniga", 2003. - 592 p. Page: 58-59
15. New imperial history of the post-Soviet space. Library of the magazine "Ab Imperio". Ilya Gerasimov. New Imperial History, 2004. ISBN 5852470244, 9785852470249. Total pages: 656. Page 308. Link: ,
16. George Bournoutian, “The Ethnic Composition of and Socio-Economic Condition of Eastern Armenia in the First Half of the Nineteenth Century,” in Transcaucasian Nationalism and Social Change by Ronald Sooni (Ann Arbor, 1983).
17. The Azerbaijani Turks: power and identity under Russian rule. Audrey L. Altstadt. Hoover Press, 1992. ISBN 0817991824, 9780817991821. Total pages: 331. Pages 100, 28. Link:
18. The national composition is as follows: Armenians - 3145 thousand people (97.89% of the population), Yezidi Kurds - 40 thousand (1.26%), Russians - 14 thousand (0.45%), Assyrians - 3 thousand. (0.1%), Ukrainians - 1.3 thousand (0.04%), Muslim Kurds - 1.2 thousand (0.04%), Greeks - 1 thousand (0.03%). Jews, due to their extreme small numbers, do not appear in official data.
19. Abbas-Kuli-aga Bakikhanov. Gulistan-i Iram: " Shah Ismail (Safevi) resettled the Bayat tribe from Iraq partly to Erivan, and partly to Derbend and Shabran in order to strengthen the local rulers»
20. History of the East. In 6 vols. T. 2. East in the Middle Ages. M., “Oriental Literature”, 2002. ISBN 5-02-017711-3: “ In the descriptions of contemporaries, the Seljuk invasion appears as a disaster for the countries of Transcaucasia. The Seljuks quickly established themselves in the southern Armenian lands, from where the Armenian population was forced to emigrate to Byzantium. This is how the Armenian Kingdom of Cilicia arose, which existed until the end of the 14th century. In the Armenian Highlands, a centuries-long process of pushing aside the Armenian and Kurdish population by the Turkic newcomers began. The same thing happened within Transcaucasia.»
21. « Mainly schismatic Armenians live in this province... This Armenia stretches in length from Sebast [Sivas] to the Orogan [Mugan] plain, and in width from the Barkar mountains to Tauris [Tabriz]..."//After Marco Polo. Travels of Western strangers to the countries of the three Indies. M. Science. 1968
22. Rodionova E. M. Armenian-Iranian relations during the reign of Shah Abbas I The author is a teacher at the St. Petersburg Institute of Jewish Studies
23. Arakel Davrizhetsi. Book of stories
24. World History, M., 1958 vol. IV, p. 563
25. George A. Bournoutian. . Volume 9 of the Journal of the Society for Armenian Studies (1996, 1997): " An uncited Russian survey of 1832 and my article are used as the main sources for this statement. The survey lists the Armenian population of the whole of Karabakh at 34.8 percent (slightly over one-third) and that of the Azeris at 64.8 percent. This time Altstadt confuses the reader by identifying the whole of Karabakh with Mountainous Karabakh. The Armenian population of Karabakh (as will be demonstrated below) was concentrated in 8 out of the 21 districts or mahals of Karabakh. These 8 districts are located in Mountainous Karabakh and present-day Zangezur (then part of Karabakh). Thus 34.8 percent of the population of Karabakh populated 38 percent of the land. In other words, the Armenians, according to the survey cited by Altstadt, formed 91.58 percent of the population of Mountainous Karabakh.»
26. Anatoly Yamskov. Traditional land use of the nomads of historical Karabakh and the modern Armenian-Azerbaijani ethno-territorial conflict: “ Secondly, this is the problem of recognizing the rights of the nomadic pastoralist (as well as any other non-sedentary) population to the lands they seasonally use and to transfer these land rights to their descendants. Here only the last decades of the 20th century. were marked by significant and positive changes for the nomads, whereas previously such rights to the land of the nomadic pastoral population were practically not recognized by European states... So, it is precisely the questions of the political history of the territory and the ethnic history of the population permanently residing in this territory that are usually used as arguments proving the rights of each of parties to the lands of Nagorno-Karabakh. This approach prevails not only in Soviet and post-Soviet scientific research and journalism, but also in the works of scientists from “far abroad” with very different political orientations - see, for example, works that are quite neutral (Heradstveit, 1993, p. 22; Hunter , 1994, pp. 97,104-105; Loken, 1995, p. 10), clearly pro-Armenian (Chorbajian, Donabedian, Mutafian, 1994, pp. 6, 11) and almost equally openly pro-Azerbaijani (Altstadt, 1992, pp. 7-8 , 195-196).»
27. A. Khudabashev. Review of Armenia. In geographical, historical and literary terms. St. Petersburg, 1859. pp.: 395-396
28. Letters and instructions from Emperor Peter the Great to General Matyushkin, 1716-1725.
29. The Armenian People From Ancient to Modern Times, Volume II, By Richard G. Hovannisian
30. A Historical Atlas of Azerbaijan. Sherri Lieberman. The Rosen Publishing Group, 2004. ISBN 0823944972, 9780823944972. Pages: 64, page 41. Link:
31. Armenian deception: historical information, Tofik Kocharli, Eldar, 2004, Total pages: 102. Pp. 8-10. Link:
32. Eastern Armenia in Russian historiography of the 19th century. Mikhail Azatovich Muradyan. Hayastan, 1990. Total pages: 170. pp. 62-63.
33. Glinka S.N. Description of the resettlement of the Armenians of Adderbidzhan to Russia, with a brief preliminary summary of the historical times of Armenia. M., 1831, p. 38.
34. Mikhailova O. I. L. E. Lazarev, an acquaintance of Griboyedov // A. S. Griboyedov: Materials for the biography: Collection of scientific works. tr. - L.: Science. Leningr. department, 1989. - P. 159
35. FEB. Letter from A. S. Griboyedov to K. V. Nesselrod. - 1963
36. S. Glinka. “Description of the resettlement of the Aderbizhan Armenians within Russia”, Moscow, 1831, page 92
37. Griboedov A.S. Note on the resettlement of Armenians from Persia to our regions. // Griboyedov A. S. Complete works: [In 3 volumes]. - Pg.: Ed. Class of fine literature Academician. Sciences, 1911-1917. - T. 3. - 1917. - P. 267-270
38. The Russian conquest of the Caucasus. John Frederick Baddeley. 1907
39. Griboyedov A.S. Letter to Paskevich I.F., Count, October 1, 1828 // Griboyedov A.S. Works. - M.: Artist. lit., 1988. - pp. 611-614.
40. Griboedov A. S. Note on the establishment of the Russian Transcaucasian Company // Griboedov A. S. Works / Prepared by. text, preface and comment. V. Orlova. - M.; L.: Goslitizdat, 1959. - pp. 471-477.
41. Review of the history of the Armenian people from the beginning of their existence to the revival of the Armenian region in the Russian Empire,
42. On the religious frontier: Tsarist Russia and Islam in the Caucasus. Firouzeh Mostashari. I.B.Tauris, 2006. ISBN1850437718, 9781850437710. Total pages: 203. Pp. 41. Link: http://books.google.com/books?id=RBNDaEFGJrsC&pg=PA161&dq=shavrov+armenians&lr=&ei=P6yCStvTHInOzQSZh93OCg&hl=ru#v=onepage&q=1828&f=false
43. Journal “Questions of History” - Historical roots of the Russian orientation of the Armenian people and the progressive significance of the annexation of eastern Armenia to Russia. G. A. Galoyan. Corresponding Member of the Academy of Sciences of the Armenian SSR G. A. Galoyan. Page 10-11. 1978. No. 10
44. The state and the subaltern: modernization, society and the state in Turkey and Iran. Author - Touraj Atabaki. I.B.Tauris, 2007. ISBN 184511339X, 9781845113391. Total pages: 256. Page 34. Link:
45. Awarding the awards established by P. N. Demidov, Analysis of G. Chopin’s work “Statistical Description of the Armenian Region”, Author: Academicians Brosset and Keppen., 1841, p. 195 - Link:
46. George A. Bournoutian. The Politics of Demography: Misuse of Sources on the Armenian Population of Mountainous Karabakh. Volume 9 of the Journal of the Society for Armenian Studies (1996, 1997): " The only work which deals primarily with the Armenian immigration from Persian Azerbaijan to Russia is by Sergei Glinka.(11) He does not supply any numbers, but makes it clear that the majority of the Armenians were headed towards the newly-established Armenian Province, created from the Khanates of Erevan and Nakhichevan. An archival document, however, does shine some light on the issue. The document states that only 279 Armenian families decided to immigrate to Karabakh, and that they settled in Kapan and Meghri on the banks of the Arax (in the southernmost part of Zangezur bordering Iran).(12)
47. George A. Bournoutian. The Politics of Demography: Misuse of Sources on the Armenian Population of Mountainous Karabakh. Volume 9 of the Journal of the Society for Armenian Studies (1996, 1997): " All documents relating to the Armenian immigration make it clear that Russia, for political, military, and economic reasons, strongly encouraged the Armenians to settle in the newly-established Armenian province, especially the region of Erevan, which between 1795 and 1827 had lost some 20,000 Armenians who had immigrated to Georgia.»
48. Razmik Panossian. The Armenians: from kings and priests to merchants and commissars. Columbia University Press, 2006. ISBN 0231139268. Pp. 121-122. " The treaty of Turkmanchai stipulated mass population transfers: Armenians were to move to the Russian held domains, and Muslims were to leave them. Consequently, after 1828, 30,000 people from various parts of (northern) Iran crossed the Arax river into now Russian Armenia (a "homecoming" of sorts, 225 years after Shah Abbas" forced migration of Armenians in the opposite direction). Similarly, after the 1828-9 Russo-Turkish war and the treaty of Adrianople, thousands of Armenians moved to Russia from the Ottoman empire. Whereas before 1828 there were 87,000 Muslims and 20,000 Armenians in the Yerevan khanate/province, after the mass migrations Armenians constituted the majority population: 65,000, as opposed to 50,000 Muslims.».
49. E. Veidenbaum. Essay on the ethnography of the Caucasus region // Guide to the Caucasus. - Tiflis: Printing house of the Office of the Chief Civil Officer in the Caucasus, 1888. - P. 64-129.
50. Glinka S.N. Description of the resettlement of Armenians. P. 132
51. This limited population may be described to the frequent wars which have long desolated the province, and to the emigration to Persia of many Mohammedan families since its subjection to Russia, although many Armenians were induced by the Russian government, after the peace of Toorkmanchay, to emigrate from Persia to Karabagh.

Politsturm
2017-Mar-Sun

Late 19th century, was marked by the development of capitalist relations, especially after the peasant reform of 1870, Eastern Armenia was finally included in the common market of the Russian Empire. As a result, trade revived significantly, capitalization of subsistence farming increased, and bank capital began to penetrate into the village.

Economic ties between Eastern Armenia and other Russian regions received a new impetus for development thanks to the accelerated construction of roads. Suffice it to remember that in the 60-70s of the 19th century the Tiflis-Yerevan and Alexandropol-Goris roads were reconstructed and built. At the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries, the Tiflis–Yerevan–Julfa and Baku–Tiflis–Batumi railways were built in Transcaucasia.

It so happened that the activities of Armenian capital took place mainly outside the territory of Eastern Armenia. Armenians preferred to invest money in the largest trade and economic centers of Transcaucasia - Tiflis, Baku and Batumi, as well as the cities of the North Caucasus. According to statistics, at the end of the 19th century, more than half of the enterprises and banks of Tiflis belonged to Armenian capital, whose share in the total turnover was as much as 73%. Armenian capital also dominated the oil industry of Baku. In 1879, the Mirzoyan and Others Society owned 155 of Baku’s 295 oil wells. Patrons of Armenian origin founded printing houses, schools, hospitals and charitable societies throughout the Russian Empire. The Yerevan cognac factories of Shustov and Sarajev have increased production volumes every year since the beginning of the twentieth century. About 80% of cognac, spirits and wines produced in Armenia were sold in Russia.

Starting the story about the twentieth century, we note that Armenia entered it divided into two parts. Progressive processes took place in Eastern Armenia, directly related to the general development of the Russian Empire, of which it was a part. Western Armenia languished under the cruel regime of Turkish despotism. However, the most terrible act of the Turks, the Armenian Genocide, was yet to happen.

In 1914, the First World War began. On October 16 (29), Turkey entered the war on the side of the German-Austrian bloc. The Young Turks saw in this war a way to implement the idea of ​​pan-Turkism - the unification of all Turkic-speaking peoples into a single state under the leadership of Turkey. According to their plans, the “future great Turkish state” was to include the entire Caucasus, Crimea, Bashkiria, Tataria and Central Asia. It is clear that this program was openly anti-Russian and anti-Christian in general. The Young Turks considered Russia the main enemy in the path of their fantastic plans.

As a result of the campaign of Russian troops on the Caucasian front, Türkiye actually lost Western Armenia. Regions of Central Anatolia were under threat of capture. Armenian volunteer detachments fought as part of the Russian army. Their number reached 10 thousand people. The Armenians were inspired by the idea of ​​the quick liberation of Western Armenia, whose population could be saved from extermination. In total, not counting volunteers, about 250 thousand Armenians served in the Russian army. But in 1916, the tsarist government disbanded these units, as it did not have confidence in the national military units due to the revolutionary movement, which was growing every day.

At the beginning of the First World War, traditional Armenian parties such as the Armenian Revolutionary Federation Dashnaktsutyun and the Hunchak Party linked the solution to the Armenian Question (the liberation of the lands of Western Armenia) with Russia, England and France. Their party press organs constantly issued calls to support Russia and its allies. However, these hopes were empty. None of the great powers of that time was interested in independence or even autonomy for Western Armenia. The leadership of Turkey, on the contrary, called on the Armenians to create volunteer units that were supposed to fight against Russia. In 1916, the Armenian territories liberated by the Russian army were declared a temporary General Government, the management of which passed to the command of the Caucasian Army. It should be noted that at that time, the Armenian Bolsheviks, led by Stepan Shaumyan, who was sometimes called the “Caucasian Lenin,” did not believe that the Armenian question could be resolved based on the results of this war and tried in every possible way to turn it into a civil, revolutionary, directed war. against royal leadership.

In 1915, a terrible tragedy occurred. The Young Turk government organized the massacre of Armenians on an unprecedented scale and with truly unheard-of cruelty. It should be noted that, ironically, the Dashnaks, in the first time after the appearance of the Young Turks on the political arena of Turkey, flirted with them, considering them a progressive force with which they could negotiate. The extermination of the Armenian population occurred not only in Western Armenia, but throughout the entire Ottoman Empire. By carrying out the Armenian genocide, the Young Turks planned to put an end to the Armenian question forever. The detailed history of the course of the genocide is known, and does not fall into the list of tasks of this article. However, we believe it is important to dwell on the following questions.

Firstly, you need to understand that the Kaiser's Germany, being an ally of Turkey, patronized the Turkish government. Germany wanted to completely conquer the entire Middle East, while the liberation struggle of Western Armenians hindered these plans. In addition, German imperialism hoped, through the deportation of Western Armenians, to obtain free labor for the construction of the Berlin-Baghdad railway. The German leadership incited the Young Turks to carry out the forcible eviction of Western Armenians. There is evidence that German officers who were in Turkey themselves participated in organizing the massacre and deportation.

The Entente countries, which verbally declared the Armenians as their allies, also did not take any practical steps against the actions of the Young Turks. On May 24, 1915, they published a duty statement in which they accused the Young Turks of massacring Armenians. It is noteworthy that the United States did not make a single statement at all. On the contrary, the US State Department, contrary to all the facts reaching it, tried to create the impression that reports of the mass extermination of Armenians were exaggerated.

In 1919, Admiral Mark Bristol was appointed US High Commissioner to Turkey, who was against American aid to the Armenians. He advocated increasing American economic influence in Turkey, in order to achieve which, he was ready to sacrifice national minorities, including Armenians, who were perceived by him as a factor threatening the stability of Turkey. Bristol criticized the actions of American organizations to help Armenians. His cynical quote about the attempt of “Middle East Aid” to take Armenian orphans out of Turkey is well known. Professor Donald Bloxham cites it in his study: “ better to sacrifice these orphans if necessary to establish trust" He in every possible way interfered with attempts to free Armenian women who ended up in Turkish families. Bristol stated that the Armenians and Greeks are “leeches that have been sucking blood for centuries.” Later, in 1923, the American Friends of Turkey organization was created in the United States, which was later headed by Bristol. As you know, the United States has still not officially recognized the Armenian Genocide, which was one of Barack Obama’s election promises to the Armenian community of America.

The second question that requires clarification. Many opponents of Armenian-Russian relations claim that the Armenian genocide was committed in front of the Russian army, and that it did nothing to prevent it. Let's try to consider the veracity of this thesis.

At the beginning of 1915, Russian troops in Turkey behaved strangely. The army moved constantly and chaotically, often advancing and then inexplicably retreating from captured territories. Naturally, the Young Turks acted only where there were no Russian troops at that moment. The great Armenian historian Leo wrote: “ Almost immediately, at the same time, an incomprehensible and panicky retreat began from Van and Manazkert to the Russian border" The same topic was studied by Professor A. Harutyunyan. He also noted “ intentional or unjustified movements of Russian troops", who played " catastrophic role in the fate of the Armenian people". In his work he tries to explain them.

The historian comes to the conclusion that Nicholas II, Minister of War General V.A. Sukhomlinov, Chief of the General Staff General N.N. Yanushkevich, Minister of Foreign Affairs S.D. Sazonov, Commander-in-Chief Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolaevich and other officials were completely immersed in business Western Front and did not pay any attention to the Caucasian Front, which was entirely left to the discretion of the governor of the Caucasus, Count I. I. Vorontsov-Dashkov, who from the very beginning of the war came down with a serious illness. Almost without getting out of bed, the count could not adequately deal with the affairs of the front, where chaos began. The professor writes that it would be absolutely absurd to look for malicious intent. Naturally, the tsarist leadership did not want the independence of Western Armenia, but it cannot be assumed that it was interested in the destruction of the allied Christian population. It is impossible to simultaneously organize and arm Armenian troops for the liberation of Western Armenia and at the same time want to exterminate the Armenian population.

To summarize what has been said, we note that the main reason why the Russian army was unable to prevent genocide was due to incorrect, thoughtless orders, and often their absence. By the time command was fully restored, the main atrocities of the Young Turks had already been committed.

To support this version, it is useful to recall another event of that period. As is known, the Armenians raised uprisings and organized centers of self-defense against the Turkish punitive forces. One of the most famous uprisings is Van. The heroic self-defense of the city of Van lasted from April 20 to May 19. The Young Turks sent an entire division to suppress it. Despite the heroism of the defenders, the fall of Van would have been only a matter of time if the 4th Caucasian Army Corps of the Russian army and the Armenian volunteers who had joined it had not intervened. Going on the offensive, they came to the aid of the rebel Van Armenians. As a result, the Turks retreated, and the Russians liberated a number of settlements, including Van itself. Russian general Nikolaev proclaimed an Armenian government in Van. The arrival of Russian troops on May 19 saved thousands of Armenians from imminent death. Six weeks later, retreating from Van, the Russians took with them those Armenians who could and wanted to leave. In general, many Western Armenians managed to escape the genocide with the help of Russian troops and move to the Caucasus. During 1914–1916, about 350 thousand people moved there.

The news of the victory of the February Revolution throughout Russia was greeted with jubilation. Rallies were held in Yerevan, Kars, Alexandropol, Etchmiadzin and other cities, at which the assembled people welcomed the overthrow of the autocracy. It seemed to people that peace and democracy would be established in the country, that pressing agrarian and national issues would be resolved.

However, as you know, the Provisional Government did not fulfill a single promise and showed its complete inability to govern the country. It continued the colonial policy of the times of the Empire, the right of peoples to self-determination was again forgotten. Throughout the country, including in Armenia, Soviets began to be formed, which took on more and more functions. In essence, a dual power was established.

Shortly after the victory of the Great October Revolution and the proclamation of Soviet power, on December 29, 1917, the Bolsheviks issued the so-called “Decree on Turkish Armenia,” in which the Council of People’s Commissars announced to the Armenian people that the new Russian government supported the rights of Armenians in “Turkish Armenia” occupied by the Russian Empire "to free self-determination up to complete independence. However, the local parties of Transcaucasia - the Socialist Revolutionaries, Georgian Mensheviks, Musavatists and Dashnaks did not recognize the Soviet government. The establishment of Soviet power in Transcaucasia was stopped. The Bolsheviks managed to take power only in Baku, headed by the Baku Council of Workers' Deputies, headed by the most prominent Armenian Bolshevik S. Shaumyan. The remaining Transcaucasian Soviets in November 1917 created their own government body in Tbilisi, the Transcaucasian Seimas. These developments were greatly welcomed by Russia's recent Entente allies, Germany and, most importantly, Turkey.

Thus, a short period of cooling in Armenian-Russian relations began.

Political movement in the Ottoman Empire that succeeded in overthrowing the Sultan. It is also responsible for the Armenian Genocide.

The Entente (French entente - agreement) is a military-political bloc that included Russia, England and France, it was created as a counterweight to the “Triple Alliance” of Germany, Austria-Hungary and Italy.

D. Bloxham , The great game of genocide: imperialism, nationalism, and the destruction of the Ottoman Armenians, Oxford, 2005, p. 195.

Ibid., pp. 185-197.

Leo, From the Past, Tiflis, 1925.

A. O. Harutyunyan, Caucasian Front 1914–1917, Yerevan, 1971, p. 186.

History of the Armenian People from ancient times to the present day, Yerevan, 1980, p.268.

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: - revealing the features of migration 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, changes in the ethnic composition and population density, directions of the main migration flows in the territory of Eastern Armenia are characterized.
The book is the first to introduce into scientific circulation and analyze 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. The ethnic situation in the region at the end of the 18th - beginning of the 19th century.

CHAPTER II. Dynamics of the ethnic composition of the population of Eastern Armenia in the first half of the 19th century.

§ 1. Stages of the annexation of Eastern Armenia to Russia and features of resettlement processes
§ 2. Population of Eastern Armenia in the middle of the 19th century. and the process of stabilization of the ethnic composition

CHAPTER III. Ethnodemographic 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 region’s population in the second half of the 19th century.
§ 2. Ethnic composition of the population of Eastern Armenia at the beginning of the 20th century. and features of ethnodemographic processes

CONCLUSION

SUMMARY (in Armenian)

SUMMARY (in English)

LIST OF SOURCES AND REFERENCES

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

APPLICATION(Cards)

I. Eastern Armenia on the eve of annexation to 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 centuries)
VII. Main historical and ethnographic regions of Eastern Armenia (late 19th - early 20th centuries)
VIII. Ethnic composition of the population of the Yerevan province (according to 1886 data)
IX Ethnic composition of the population of Eastern Armenia (based on 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 19th century.
XIII. Population density of Eastern Armenia (according to 1914 data)

VLADIMIR GRIGORYANTS

Armenian Church of 1903 in Krasnovodsk (Turkmenbashi"

Some ethnic groups of Transcaspia and Central Asia at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries. devoted to 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 Trans-Caspian region is limited to only indicating that from the beginning of the 80s. XIX century In the Trans-Caspian region, cities with immigrant Russian and Armenian populations appear (2).

The basis for writing this article was the materials of the tsarist administration published in the “Reviews of the Transcaspian Region” for 1882-1911, data from the 1897 census, 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 region occurred in line with the development of Russian-Turkmen relations. Already from the beginning of the 19th century. individual representatives from the Armenians, mainly of the military and trading classes, 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 traders 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).

Fish merchants from the Astrakhan Armenians also took an active part in the development of Russian-Turkmen relations; according to the testimony of the Russian traveler and naturalist G.S. Karelin, already in the 30s of the 19th century. conducted quite a lively barter trade with the Mangishlak Turkmens. After the creation of the Russian maritime station on the island of Ashur-Ada (1842) and the Novo-Petrovskaya fortress on Mangishlak (1846), Astrakhan fish merchants from Armenians and Russians founded trading posts here, buying fishery products from the Turkmens (4). By the beginning of the 80s. Astrakhan Armenian fish farmers had already firmly established themselves in Fort Aleksandrovsky (the Novo-Petrovsky fortification on Mangishlak was later renamed Fort Aleksandrovsky). The vast majority of them had families, their own houses, and ran shops with various small and manufactured goods (5). It should be noted that the Armenian trading population living on the southeastern coast of the Caspian Sea was noted back in the 70s. XVII century sent as consul to Iran by M. Skibinevsky (6). As for the trading class of Armenians living in Iran, it appeared in Iran relatively long ago (7).

In 1869, the foundation of the city of Krasnovodok was laid when Caucasian troops landed on the eastern shore of the Caspian Sea. From this time on, the systematic advance of Russian troops deep into the territory of the Transcaspian region began. In the process of advancing, Russian troops needed constant provision of vehicles, food and fodder. Armenian traders played a very noticeable role in supplying the Russian army. As can be seen from the book by N.I. Grodekov, Armenian merchant-contractors of Russian citizenship Gukasov, Ter-Oganov, Khublarov and others were suppliers of food and fodder for the Russian army (8).

The Russian army advancing into the Transcaspian region was accompanied by a mass of small traders (9). Kuropatkin (later the head of the Transcaspian region), a direct participant in the conquest of Turkmenistan, wrote: “Armenians actually arrived in the Transcaspian region at the same time as the troops that occupied the region, serving as sutlers for parts of the troops, and also as small traders” (10). Moreover, the supply of the Russian army was carried out by Armenian traders not only from the western coast of the Caspian Sea; Armenian merchants also bought fodder and food in Iran and delivered them to the fortified points of the Transcaspian region, where Russian troops were located. Thus, in 1881, Shusha resident Avel Manukov appealed to the chief of staff of the troops of the Trans-Caspian region with a complaint that he, who was buying barley in Kochansky district from Persian subjects, and who wanted to deliver the purchased barley to the fortification of Ashkhabad, was detained in the Persian village Ovvaz. The certificate issued to Manukov by the headquarters of the troops of the Trans-Caspian region noted that “... there are no obstacles to his trip to the Persian possessions to buy grain fodder and other food items, and therefore the regional headquarters asks the Persian border commanders to give Manukov free and unhindered passage there and back" (11).

Armenian traders sometimes delivered information from Iran that was very important for the Russian army. Thus, in 1881, merchant Pavel Abelov, having arrived from Mashhad at the fortification of Ashkhabad, reported to the head of the department of the Ahal-Tekin district about the mood of the population of the city of Merv and how the Turkmens of Merv viewed the prospect of Merv joining Russia (according to the words of the Merv people who arrived in Mashhad) (12).

Merchants carrying out trade operations between Iran and the Transcaspian region very often had to deal with the unfriendly attitude of the Persian population of the border regions. The head of the department of the Ahal-Tekin district reported to the head of the Trans-Caspian region that “...our traders, 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 immigrants from the western shore of the Caspian Sea rushed to the Transcaspian region. A significant part of the migration flow was made up of Armenian traders, artisans, artisans, workers and peasants from the Erivan, Elisavetpol and Baku provinces. The bulk of the Armenian migrants came from the territory of Azerbaijan.

In the economy of Azerbaijan in the second half of the 19th century. The Armenian commercial and industrial bourgeoisie occupied a fairly prominent place. A significant part of the capital in the oil and fishing industries, flour milling, rice cleaning, silk reeling, distillery, winemaking and tobacco production was concentrated in the hands of the Armenian bourgeoisie (14). However, mostly small Armenian traders moved to the Trans-Caspian region, hoping to use the lack of competition to enrich themselves.

The agrarian reform of 1870 in Armenia and Azerbaijan further worsened the already difficult situation of the peasantry. Okhodnichestvo especially intensifies 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 region (15).

Many Armenian artisans and artisans, who were going bankrupt as a result of the rapid development of industrial production, also moved to the Trans-Caspian region. A well-known incentive for their resettlement was also the lack of any developed industry in the Transcaspian region. 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 Trans-Caspian region associated with the construction of the railway and the formation of cities.

The policy of inciting national hatred carried out in Transcaucasia by tsarism together with the bourgeoisie professing nationalism, in particular the policy of pitting Armenians against Muslims, was certainly another reason for the resettlement of the Armenian population to the Transcaspian region.

When moving to the Trans-Caspian region, Armenians (like the incoming population in general) usually settled in places where Russian troops were fortified, 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 urban settlements in the region grew mainly from Persians who came from Iran, Armenians and Russians; the population of other newcomer nationalities was insignificant. Thus, in Krasnovodsk in 1883 there were 184 Persians, 89 Armenians and 40 Russians with a total population of 349 people. 300 Russians, 250 Persians and 200 Armenians lived in Kizil-Arvat, with a total population 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). The ratio of the Armenian, Russian and Persian populations was approximately the same in the period 1882-1890. in general for counties and on a regional scale (17).

The rapid growth of the Armenian population during this period is explained by the fact that the penetration of Armenians into the region was mostly voluntary; Armenian traders, artisans, workers and peasants flocked to the region, hoping to find more suitable work there and improve their living conditions. The Armenian settlers could withstand the hot climate of Turkmenistan relatively easily; in addition, a significant part of the settlers had a good command of eastern languages, in particular Azerbaijani, which to a certain extent facilitated contacts with the local Turkmen population of Transcaspia. Knowing the local language, Armenians also settled in smaller urban settlements in the region. According to data for 1883-1884, the number of Armenians in such relatively small urban settlements as Chikishlyar, Kazandzhik, Bami, Serakhs exceeded the population of any other newcomer nationality (18).

By 1885, the number of Armenians living in Krasnovodsk had grown to 322 people, but by 1890 it had dropped again to 89 people. The population of the city of Krasnovodsk as a whole changed approximately the same during this period. From 339 in 1883, it rose to 1,263 in 1886, but then fell to 384 by 1690(19). This was apparently caused by the further relocation of the newcomer population to the newly formed urban settlements of the region, primarily to Askhabad, Kizil-Arvat, and also to Merv, the newcomer population of which grew especially sharply in 1886-1887.

The Armenian population of Kizil-Arvat increased by 1890 to 480 people and amounted to 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 Armenian population increased with the construction 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 Armenian population in Askhabad decreases. By 1890, the source noted 1,500 Armenians in Askhabad, which amounted to 17.6% of the city’s population. The largest number was of Persians - 3200 people, Transcaucasian Tatars numbered 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 had decreased to 490 people (21). A completely insignificant number of Armenians were noted by 1890 in the Tejen district. Of the smaller urban settlements of the region, the Armenian population was relatively high in the period 1883-1890. noted by sources in Chikishlyar, Uzun-Ada, Kaakhka and Serakhs (22).

In general, during the noted period, the Armenian population of Transcaspia increased from 1,583 people to 3,437 people, i.e., more than doubling, 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 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 newcomer population as a whole) is apparently explained by the completion of the Trans-Caspian railway to Askhabad, and then to Merv. On the contrary, the subsequent decrease in the number of the Armenian population (and newcomers) is explained by the fact that the stay in the region in the period 1882-1890. for a significant part of the settlers it was still temporary. Thus, when in 1883 the Armenians asked the head of the Trans-Caspian region to allow them the right to choose a foreman, they were refused on the grounds that their stay in the region was temporary. “...In Askhabad,” the head of the Ahal-Tekin district reported to the head of the region, “there is not a single merchant who would settle here for permanent residence...” (24). Data on the ratio of the male and female population can also serve as confirmation of the temporary nature of the stay of migrants in the region in the first decade after the annexation of Turkmenistan to Russia.

Thus, in Askhabad in 1884, out of 268 Armenians, 261 were men and only 7 were women (25). Apparently, many of the Armenians who came to the region with the expectation of earning money or for trading purposes were, however, not sure how successful the resettlement would be, and left their families in Transcaucasia. The first wave of migrants to the Transcaspian region encountered certain difficulties here associated with a change of place of residence, and soon some of the Armenians returned to Transcaucasia.

In the period from 1890 to 1895. the number of Armenians in the region changed slightly. By 1892 it drops to 2871 people. Fleeing from the cholera epidemic that struck the region, some of the Armenians left the Transcaspian region, but by 1893 the number of Armenians in the region amounted to over 3,500 people (26).

In subsequent years, the growth of the Armenian population in the region continues. In 1897, 4,256 Armenians already lived in the Trans-Caspian region. Of these, 3975 people lived in cities and 261 in counties outside cities (27). In 1900, 3,399 Armenians lived in Askhabad, 835 in Krasnovodsk, 678 in Kizil-Arvat, 549 in Merv, which respectively accounted for 14.4%, 12.0%, 18.9% and 10.7% of the population the specified cities. In total, the source noted 6,136 Armenians living in the region, which accounted for 12.4% of the total newcomer population of the region (28).

By the end of the 19th century. The ratio of the male and female population among 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, 478 people were unmarried girls, 1894 unmarried men, 547 married women, 1150 married men, 128 widows, 51 widowers, 2 divorced women, and no divorced men (29). As can be seen from the data presented, 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 who left their families behind. outside the Transcaspian region. At the same time, the change in the ratio of the male and female population compared to 1883 suggests that a significant part of the Armenian migrants have already settled in the Trans-Caspian region.

The establishment of the Armenian population in Transcaspia soon caused concern among the tsarist administration. The head of the Transcaspian region, Kuropatkin, wrote in 1892 to the chief of the main headquarters of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, Obruchev, that “... the Transcaspian region turned out to be a largely Armenian corner in 10 years, both in terms of the number of the Armenian population, and most importantly in the role that this population occupied themselves in the region, seizing trade, crafts, contracts into their own hands...” “Even now,” he continued, “Armenians in the Trans-Caspian region form friendly, united societies in the main points, in Askhabad, Merv, and Kizil-Arvat. These societies draw all their spiritual and political hopes from the Caucasus” (30).

In 1894, in response to a request from the War Ministry on the issue of Turkish Armenians who fled to the Trans-Caspian region, the head of the Trans-Caspian region, categorically objecting to the settlement of Armenian immigrants from Turkey, expressed the opinion that a rapid increase in the number of the Armenian population in the Trans-Caspian region was extremely undesirable. He considered the correct resolution of the issue to be the return resettlement of Armenian immigrants to Turkey. “...It seems most desirable,” wrote the head of the region, “that this hardworking agricultural population should live within Turkey, on our border with Asian Turkey” (31).

Despite this, the number of the Armenian population in the Transcaspian region continued to increase in the first years of the 20th century. In 1902, there were already 7,658 Armenians living in the region, which amounted to 12.6% of the total newcomer population in the Trans-Caspian region (32). In 1903, the number of Armenians in the region increased even more and reached 8,414 people (33). According to information from the tsarist administration, a significant increase in the newcomer population in 1902-1903. was a consequence of unemployment in the eastern Caucasus, particularly in Baku, and famine in Khorasan (34). The number of Armenians living in large cities in the region has increased. In Askhabad in 1902 there were 4,690 Armenians, in Krasnovodsk - 922, in Kizil-Arvat - 782 and in Merv - 642, which respectively accounted for 22.0%, 13.4%, 22.8% and 10.0% of the population specified cities (35).

The increase in the number of Armenian population in the region is accompanied by a steady decrease in the share of the Armenian population in the total number of newcomers. This is happening due to the extremely high population growth of the Russian and Persian nationalities. Thus, for 1902, the number of Russians in the region was determined to be 31,425 people, and the number of Persians - 12,717 people, which respectively accounted for 51.9% and 21.0% of the total number of newcomers in the region (36).

By 1905-1906 the number of Armenians living in the region decreases to 6,500 people on average. The reasons for such a sharp decrease in the Armenian population are not yet clear enough. The tsarist authorities, trying to weaken the revolutionary movement, sought to incite national discord among the population of the Transcaspian region and, perhaps, some 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, the district warden was brought to justice for pitting Muslims against Armenians (37). In July 1905, a special “Committee for the pacification” 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 Armenian population of the Trans-Caspian region grew again. By the beginning of the second decade of the 20th 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, and 2140 (41) in Merv.

By 1911, the ratio of the number of men and women in the Armenian population of the region had become relatively equal. Thus, out of 11,479 Armenians, the source noted 6,450 men and 5,029 women, in particular in Askhabad there were 3,071 women for 3,596 men, in Krasnovodsk for 410 men - 272 women, in Merv for 1,285 men - 885 women (42).

Thus, the ratio of men and women of the Armenian population, which has changed in comparison with the initial settlement of Armenians in the region, 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.

This is, in general terms, the picture of resettlement and the dynamics of growth of the Armenian population in the Trans-Caspian region at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries.
__________________________________

1. G. B. Nikholskaya, On the issue of the Uyghurs in the Transcaspian region (“Proceedings of Tashkent State University”, new series, 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. (collection "Iran", 1973); him. Materials for the history of the Iranian anthropologist in Ashgabat (1907-1911) (“Proceedings of SAGU”, new
-ser., Historical Sciences, book. South 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 Tashkent State University”, issue 425, Historical Sciences,
book 4, Tashkent, 1972).
2. “The peoples of Central Asia and Kazakhstan. Ethnographic essays,” vol. 2. M., 1963, p. 8.
3. X. Agayev. Relations between the Caspian Turkmen and Russia in the 19th century,
Ashgabat, 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 referred to as TsGA TSSR), f. I-1, op. 1, no. 186, pp. 4-9.
6. N. G. Kukanova, Coverage of Russian-Iranian economic relations at the end
XVIII-early XIX centuries. in little-known archival documents (collection “Iran”, M., 1973, p. 186).
7. Zakari Kayakertsi, Chronicle, M., 1969, pp. 47-48 (see also editor's note on p. 283); “History of Foreign Asian Countries 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, pp. 220. 238-241, ch. VIII, pp. 195-296.
9. A. I. Maslov, Conquest of Ahal-Tepe, St. Petersburg, 1887, p. 167.
10. TsGA TSSR, f. 1-1-1, op. 2, d. 2718, l. 20.
11. Ibid., no. 38, pp. 13-13 rev.
12. Ibid., no. 66, pp. 33-33 rev.
13. Ibid., l. 34 rev.
14. “History of Azerbaijan”, vol. 2, Baku, 1960, pp. 254-258.
15. Ibid., pp. 260-262.
1b. “Review of the Transcaspian region for 1882-1890”, Askhabad, 1897, tables 12, 13, 14 (Data for Merv for 1884). Here and below, calculations are made based on
reports on the number of newcomers to the region, published in the “Reviews of the Trans-Caspian Region” for different years.
17. Ibid.
18. Ibid.
19. Ibid., table. 12.
20. Ibid., table. 13.
21. Ibid., table. 14.
22. Ibid., table. 12, 13, 14.
23. Ibid.
24. TsGA TSSR, f. I-1, op. 2, d. 580, l. 3.
25. “Review of the Transcaspian region for 1882-1890,” table. 13.
26. “Review of the Transcaspian region for 1890-18915”, Askhabad, 1897, pp. 29, 31.
27. “The first general census 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 Russian Empire,” pp. 90-91.
30. TsGA TSSR, f. I-1, op. 2, no. 2718, pp. 20 rev., 22.
31. Ibid., no. 8773, pp. 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 Trans-Caspian region for 1902”, pp. 10, 11.
36. Ibid.
37. “Askhabad”, 13. IV. 1905, p. 2.
38. Ibid., 12. VII. 1905, p. 1.
39. Ibid., 9.XI. 1905. pp. 2-3.
40. “Review of the Trans-Caspian region for 1911”, Askhabad, 1915, pp. 64, 70.
41. Ibid., Appendix No. I.
42. Ibid.

At the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th centuries. The national liberation struggle of the non-Turkish peoples of the Ottoman Empire intensified, striving to separate 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 was for this reason that the Young Turks at the end of the 19th century adopted the concept of Ottomanism. Yu.A. Petrosyan writes: “When the active propaganda activities of the Union and Progress society began in the 90s of the 19th century, Pan-Osmanism, as an ideological concept, took a leading place in it. It essentially became the basis of the Young Turks’ program on the national issue.” Petrosyan Yu A. Towards 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 Muslim and non-Muslim peoples living on its territory. The Young Turk ideologists sought, with the help of the doctrine of Ottomanism, to ensure that these peoples abandoned the national liberation struggle and the desire to create independent national states, and 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 peoples of the multinational Ottoman Empire. The Young Turks argued that they were striving to achieve, through the regime of a constitutional monarchy, “the equality of all compatriots - Turks, Kurds, Bulgarians, Arabs and Armenians”, they 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 movement. Turkological collection. - M., 1966. P. 68. They argued that it was possible to achieve “sincere unity” of all the Ottomans, to unite them with common “patriotic feelings.” Meanwhile, on the pages of the Young Turk newspapers one can often find discussions about the special position and role of the Turks in the historical development and modern situation of the Ottoman Empire Ibid., p.143..

Having subsequently become 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.

Genocide presupposes a coordinated plan of action aimed at destroying the foundations of existence of national groups with the aim of eradicating them Sahakyan R.G. The Armenian genocide in the assessment of the progressive public. - "Bulletin of Social Sciences" of the Academy of Sciences of Armenia. SSR, - Yerevan, No. 4, 1965. P.43.. For this purpose, the destruction of political and social institutions, culture, language, national identity, religion, economic foundations of the existence of ethnic groups is carried out, as well as the deprivation of personal security, freedom, health, dignity and 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 a people as a certain set of people and is a crime against humanity, since such destruction violates the hereditary gene pool, reproductive ability, intelligence, and spirituality of representatives of the human race.

A.R. Anklaev views genocide as a certain regulation of an ethnopolitical conflict “based on a strategy of eliminating and/or politicizing 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-scale and longest-lasting crime of genocide. The period of the Armenian Genocide falls into two main periods: 1876 - 1914. and 1915 - 1923 Barsegov Yu. The Armenian Genocide is a crime against humanity (on the legality 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 question from the agenda of international diplomacy. This would prevent the great powers from interfering 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. The Armenian question. Encyclopedia. /Under. Ed. Khudaverdyan 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 a systemic national crisis, the failure of the reform era of the “Tanzimat”, the emergence of bourgeois relations, the awakening of the national liberation struggle of the subject non-Turkish peoples of the empire and with the corresponding geopolitics of the great powers. Right 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, certain imbalances emerged associated with the emergence of bourgeois relations and the concentration of national capital in the hands of non-titular nations of the empire: 45% of production capital ended up in the hands of the Greeks, 25% - in the Armenians and only 13% - in the Turks, while in trade the Armenians controlled from 60 to 80% of the capital. Mandelstam A.N. Young Turk Power. 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); a political program for the liberation of Western Armenia with the support and alliance with Russia, France and England; a self-sufficient national intelligentsia and political elite, formed in confrontation with the reactionary policies of the Ottomans; support from Russia. The desire of the Armenians of Western Armenia for liberation from Turkish enslavement was complemented by the positive example of the fate of their compatriots from Eastern Armenia, which was 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 faced society, unable to ensure the evolutionary process of development of the state and overcoming the crisis. This led the Turks to a rollback to the Middle Ages and the adoption of simplified decisions, which, in turn, turned into a destructive policy in relation to the subject non-Turkish peoples, that is, to the destruction of the Armenians and other peoples of the empire. Right there. P. 178.

Since 1878 Turkey crossed out the word “Armenia” from the official geography and began the mass extermination of Armenians using the ethno-religious factor. Regular cavalry detachments "hamidiye", created in 1891, were actively used in punitive expeditions against Armenians and to form a military barrier on the Turkish-Russian border Kirakosyan D.S. The Young Turks in the face of history. - Yerevan, 1986. P.28..

In the mid-90s. XIX century The Armenian population of the Ottoman Empire was subjected to deadly attacks by 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. P.10.. The 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 Amphitheaters A.V. The Armenian question. - St. Petersburg: Pushkinskaya skoropechat, 1906. P. 182.. The Armenians, scattered throughout the empire, he wrote, freely used the Turkish language, communicated with their Muslim neighbors and, in the opinion of 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-style schools, conducted successful trade and “became an influential active force in the Muslim state.” He was hostile to the Armenians, who successfully developed trade with Europe Mandelstam A.N. Young Turk Power. Historical and political essay. - M., 1975. P. 68..

Characterizing 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 massacre, from where the people fled in horror to Persia and Transcaucasia." Marunov Yu.V. The policy of the Young Turks on the national question (1908-1912). - M., 1961. P.172.

When familiarizing yourself with foreign documents, as well as materials of the Turkish press of 1890-1893. What is striking is the fact that official Turkish circles initially refrained from attributing more or less serious political intentions to the Armenians. Marunov Yu.V. The policy of the Young Turks on the national question (1908-1912). - M., 1961. P.128.. But soon the situation changed dramatically. After the events in Lesser Armenia, when details of the beatings of Armenians became public, even uttering the words “Hnchak”, “freedom”, “revolution” could be regarded as a crime. Now “the Sultan was determined to massacre the Armenians,” to nullify 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 vigorous effort to arrest Hunchak propagandists. Those arrested were gathered in Ankara. Young wrestlers were brought here from Marzwan, Yozgat, Siverek, Kayseri. During the trial, the Armenians sharply criticized the existing order in the country, the management system, and spoke out against oppression and injustice. The court sentenced 17 people to death by hanging, but the Sultan “magnanimously” brought their number to five (the sentence was carried out on July 10, 1893) Ibid. P.136..

Soviet orientalist G. Bondarevsky writes that as a result of the policy of settling Muslim immigrants on Armenian lands in the eastern provinces, a peasant uprising broke out in Sasun in 1894, which served as a convenient pretext for Abdul Hamid II and his ministers to deal with them. He notes that “the Turkish pashas received the order personally from the Sultan to drown the uprising in blood” Bondarevsky G.L. The Baghdad Road and the penetration of German imperialism into the Middle East (1888-1903). - Tashkent, 1955. P. 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.. Avetis Nazarbek, in an article published in 1896 in the Contemporary Review magazine, explained that the demonstration that took place on September 18, 1895 was a peaceful event, about which the Hunchak organizing committee for two -For three days he officially informed both the Sublime Porte and the embassies of the six powers. History of diplomacy. T. II. - M., 1963. P.337.

The wild beatings of Armenians in 1895 began on September 30. On October 3, pogroms took place against the Armenian population in Ak. Hisar, 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 Kharput, November 2 - in Sivas, November 5 - in Amasya, November 18 - in Marash, November 30 - in Kayseri, etc. The most terrible was the second massacre in Urfa (December 28-29, 1895 .), when the Turkish executioners locked 3 thousand people in the church and burned them there. P.339..

For many months, 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 qualifications). - Yerevan: Hayastan, 1990. P. 162.. He sums up what he said with these words: “Abdul-Hamid sowed death with one wave of his hand.” History of diplomacy. T. II. - M., 1963. P.338..

And here is what A. Vitlin says about the massacre organized by Abdul-Hamid in Istanbul: “He went so far that he decided what weapons should be used. He did not like small arms. The loud noise got on his nerves. He ordered to arm his army of thugs with clubs 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 mechanics were working was heard, fulfilling his order. For three days in a row, the noise from the blows of the batons did not subside, until a dead silence fell on the Armenian streets." History of diplomacy. T. II. - M., 1963. P.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 killed, hundreds of thousands were forced to flee and leave their historical homeland. Rotshtein F.A. International relations at the end of the 19th century. - M. - L., 1960. P.172.

Pointing to the fact of pre-prepared mass beatings and the vile role of the Turkish rulers in this matter, German General von der Goltz wrote in the newspaper “Military Voshenblat” in 1897: “The beatings of Armenians in Asia Minor and Constantinople are not the result of Turkish fanaticism, but a consequence in advance conceived political conspiracy, so that these victims should be blamed on a few people, and not on the people." Ibid. P.174..

During the years of pogroms, some Western Armenians took up arms and organized self-defense; in some places this resistance was successful. The defense of the Armenian population of Zeytun is worthy of special mention. In the fall of 1895, the Sultan's troops made a campaign against Zeytun. Fierce fighting took place, the Turkish troops suffered heavy losses, but were unable to 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 Zeytun people spread to many countries. Based on diplomatic considerations, representatives of the great powers intervened in the matter. Negotiations began between the Sultan's government and the Zeytun people, and the parties made mutual concessions. According to the agreement, Turkish troops were withdrawn outside of Zeytun. Ibid. P. 172..

In 1896, armed self-defense was also organized by the Armenians of the city of Van. They heroically fought against the Turkish pogromists, but were defeated.

During the period of massacres in the 1890s, representatives of various sectors of Armenian society repeatedly turned to the great powers, asking for their intercession and help. These appeals, however, had no consequences; no state took effective steps to prevent or stop the massacre. On the contrary, some of these states pursued a protective policy towards the Sultan's government Darbinyan A. Since the time of the Armenian liberation movement. - Paris, 1947. P.79.. The massacre of Armenians caused outrage among the progressive world community in many countries. Rallies and protest demonstrations took place, Abdul Hamid was called a “pogromist” and “bloody.” Prominent writers, publicists and political figures acted as defenders of Western Armenians and denouncers 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 arrival 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 19th century. - M. - L., 1960. P.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. Genesis of the catastrophe: The formation of the Armenian question in the 10th century. - Yerevan: NTV Publishing House, 2006 - 140 p. 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, the Albanians, then the Macedonians, Bulgarians, Arabs and others. These events led to the fact that “Armenians stopped believing the Young Turks” Grigoryan M. Genocide: memory and responsibility: // Voice of Armenia. - 1998. - October 22. P.17.. The English author Benson called the massacre in Adana “experimental”, a test in the policy of the Young Turks. Grigoryan M. Genocide: memory and responsibility: // Voice of Armenia. - 1998. - October 22. P.17. .

The collapse of the Young Turks and the fall of the Ottoman Empire seemed to provide Western Armenians with the opportunity to take a breath, get back on their feet and 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 fair as the struggle of the Turkish people for their independence was, the struggle carried out in 1920-1923 was unfair. Nationalist Turkey's policy of depriving the ancestral land of the aborigines of Western Armenia - the tormented Armenian population scattered throughout the world.

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 towards the Armenian people of the Ottoman Empire Harutyunyan A.A. The First World War and Armenian refugees (1914-1917). - Yerevan, 1989. P. 145. Having received the refusal of 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 complete and widespread extermination and deportation of more than 1.5 million Armenians Zakharyan K. Genesis of the disaster: The formation of the Armenian question in the 10th century. - Yerevan: NTV Publishing House, 2006 - 140 pp..

From May-June 1915, mass deportation and massacre of Armenians in 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 really a new method of massacre” Zakharyan K. Genesis of the disaster: 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 reasons for the Armenian massacres of 1915, emphasizes that “the crime plan was developed and decreed by the central committee of Ittihad” Hakobyan Seyran Yurievich. Ethnopolitical and international legal consequences of the Armenian genocide in Turkey: dis. ...cand. watered Sciences: 23.00.02..

The Armenians removed from their places of permanent residence were brought into caravans, which were sent to the interior of the country, Mesopotamia and Syria, where special camps were created for the deportees Nersisyan M.G., Sahakyan R.G. Armenian genocide in the Ottoman Empire. - Yerevan, 1966. P. 164.. Armenians were destroyed both in their places of residence and along the route of the caravans. As a result, only a portion of the deported Armenians reached their destinations. But those who reached the deserts of Mesopotamia were also in danger: there are known cases when Armenians were taken out of camps and slaughtered in the desert.

The actions of the Turkish pogromists were distinguished by cruelty. The leaders of the Young Turks demanded this. Thus, the Minister of Internal Affairs Talaat demanded that the existence of Armenians cease, that no attention should be paid 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 correspondence about the massacre of Armenians in the village of Baskan: “We saw how the unfortunates were first stripped of everything valuable, 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, 600 thousand became refugees Ibid. P.85..

The leaders of the Young Turks did not hide their satisfaction at 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. XIX century Events and people. - L., 1991. P.165..

The relative ease with which the pogromists managed to carry out the Armenian genocide is partly explained by the unpreparedness of the Armenian population, as well as the Armenian political parties, for the impending destruction. A certain role was also played by the fact that in some Armenian societies there was an idea that disobedience to the Young Turks would lead to even greater casualties. 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 enemy’s attacks and held the city in their hands until the arrival of Russian troops.

October Revolution 1917 allowed the Turks to prevent the liberation of Western Armenia and Armenian Cilicia, as well as the revival of independent Armenia under the US protectorate Sargsyan 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 Transcaucasia twice in 1918 and 1920, as well as carry out the Armenian Genocide of Eastern (Russian) Armenia.

During the aggression against Armenia in 1918, the Turks, having occupied Karaklis, committed a massacre of the Armenian population, killing several thousand people. Ibid. P.99.. This was a direct continuation of the Armenian genocide of 1915-1916. In September 1918, Turkish troops occupied Baku, and, together with Azerbaijani nationalists, carried out a massacre of 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, and Alexandropol was 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 policies 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 occupiers carried out a massacre of the Armenian civilian population. One message described the state of affairs in the Alexandropol district: “All the villages have been robbed, there is no shelter, no grain, no clothing….. 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, ravaging 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 the 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 Shushi. The forces of the pogromists were constantly replenished; there were many Turkish officers in the city. In June 1919, the first pogroms of the Armenians of Shushi took place; on the night of June 5, at least 500 Armenians were killed in the city and in the surrounding area. On March 22, 1920, Turkish gangs committed a terrible pogrom against the Armenian population of Shushi, killing over 30 thousand people and setting fire to the part of the city where the Armenians lived. The Armenian Question. Encyclopedia. /Under. Ed. Khudaverdyan 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 military operations and launched a general offensive against the Greek troops. On September 9, the Turks invaded Izmir and massacred the Greek and Armenian population. The Turks sank ships stationed in the ports of Izmir, on which there 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, Ardahan, Artvin, Surmalinsky district with Greater and Lesser Ararat, as well as seize the territories of Nakhichevan and 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. P.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 aspects of the nationalists' domestic policy are still poorly covered in Soviet Turkish literature. For a long time, the prevailing practice was that historians tried to avoid the facts of hostile actions of the Kemalists against national minorities. In particular, the fact of the burning of the city of Izmir and the extermination of its Greek and Armenian population is still passed over in silence.

Total from 1919 to 1923. 400 thousand Armenians were killed. 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 carried out 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.