Advertisement

Journal of Transatlantic Studies

, Volume 16, Issue 3, pp 295–316 | Cite as

Networking against Genocide during the First World War: the international network behind the British Parliamentary report on the Armenian Genocide

  • David MongerEmail author
Article

Abstract

In 1916, Lord Bryce and Arnold Toynbee produced a report to the British Parliament which became the first large-scale collection of evidence of the Armenian Genocide. The book was the product of a remarkable international collaborative network involving British, US, Swiss, German, Armenian and other contributors. This article provides a deep analysis of the network and its motivations, arguing that the collaborators mutually stimulated each other’s actions to go further than was possible through the resources of one part of the network alone, and assesses the book’s effectiveness as a tool of fundraising. Further, it argues that the transatlantic and transnational collaboration occurred at a point of wider transition, brought about by the First World War, in which presumed international leadership of opinion shifted from Britain to the United States.

Keywords

Armenian Genocide First World War humanitarianism international networks public opinion 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 1.
    For the best short account, see Donald Bloxham, ‘The Armenian Genocide of 1915–1916: Cumulative Radicalization and the Development of a Destruction Policy’, Past and Present 181 (2003)Google Scholar
  2. 1a.
    for the development of scholarship on the subject, see Ronald Grigor Suny, ‘Writing Genocide: the Fate of the Armenians’, in A Question of Genocide: Armenians and Turks at the End of the Ottoman Empire, ed. Fatma Müge Göçek Suny and Norman M. Naimark (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 2.
    Ugur Ümit Üngör, The Making of Modern Turkey: Nation and State in Eastern Anatolia, 1913–1950 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011), ch. 2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 3.
    Joint declaration, cited in Geoffrey Robertson, An Inconvenient Genocide (Sydney: Vintage Books, 2014), 30.Google Scholar
  5. 4.
    James Bryce and Arnold J. Toynbee, The Treatment of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire, 1915–1916: Documents Presented to Viscount Grey of Fallodon by Viscount Bryce (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1916).Google Scholar
  6. 4a.
    A modern, revised edition, with many of the anonymised names reinstated, may be found in Ara Sarafian (ed.), The Treatment of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire, 1915–1916: Documents Presented to Viscount Grey of Fallodon by Viscount Bryce, Uncensored Edition, 2nd ed. (Princeton: Gomidas Institute, 2005).Google Scholar
  7. 5.
    For useful extended discussions of denial of the Armenian Genocide, see, e.g., Fatma Müge Göçek, Denial of Violence: Ottoman Past, Turkish Present, and Collective Violence against the Armenians, 1789–2009 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015)Google Scholar
  8. 5a.
    Robertson, Inconvenient Genocide. For a comment on the need to conduct research into topics related to the genocide without permitting ‘deniers and obfuscators … to set the agenda’, see Donald Bloxham, The Great Game of Genocide: Imperialism, Nationalism and the Destruction of the Ottoman Armenians (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), 20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 6.
    Previous scholarly works addressing the book and its construction at some length include Ara Sarafian, ‘The Archival Trail: Authentication of The Treatment of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire, 1915–16‘, in Remembrance and Denial: The Case of the Armenian Genocide, ed. Richard G. Hovannisian (Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1998); Sarafian, ‘Introduction’, Uncensored Edition;Google Scholar
  10. 6a.
    David Miller, ‘The treatment of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire: A History of the Blue Book’, RUSI Journal 150, no. 4 (2005)Google Scholar
  11. 6b.
    Michelle Tusan, Smyrna’s Ashes: Humanitarianism, Genocide, and the Birth of the Middle East (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2012)Google Scholar
  12. 6c.
    Tusan, ‘“Crimes against Humanity”: Human Rights, the British Empire, and the Origins of the Response to the Armenian Genocide’, American Historical Review 119, no. 1 (2014)Google Scholar
  13. 6d.
    Tusan, ‘James Bryce’s Blue Book as Evidence’, Journal of Levantine Studies 5, no. 2 (2015).Google Scholar
  14. 7.
    For recent discussions of Barton’s work during the war, see Karine V. Walther, Sacred Interests: The United States and the Islamic World, 1821–1921 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2015), esp. ch. 8; Walther, ‘For God and Country: James Barton, the Ottoman Empire and missionary diplomacy during World War I’, First World War Studies 7, no. 1 (2016).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 8.
    Place-names in the text follow those used in Bryce and Toynbee’s report, rather than modern versions.Google Scholar
  16. 9.
    American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions Archives, 1810–1961, Houghton Library, Harvard University (henceforth ABCFMA, HLHU), ABC 16.9.3, vol. 48, Henry H. Riggs to WW. Peet, 9 July 1915; Peet to James L. Barton, 17 August 1915 (stamped received, via Washington, 2 October 1915). These and all subsequent references to ABCFM papers reproduced by permission of the Houghton Library, Harvard University, and used by permission, United Church of Christ Wider Church Ministries.Google Scholar
  17. 10.
    ABCFMA, HLHU, ABC 16.9.3, vol. 48, Peet to Barton, 19 September 1914.Google Scholar
  18. 11.
    ABCFMA, HLHU, ABC 16.9.3, vol. 48, Peet to Barton, 2 February 1915.Google Scholar
  19. 12.
    ABCFMA, HLHU, ABC 16.9.3, vol. 48, Peet to Barton, 9 April 1915.Google Scholar
  20. 13.
    Holy Bible, King James Version, Hebrews 11: 36–37, from: (accessed November 27, 2017).Google Scholar
  21. 14.
    ABCFMA, HLHU, ABC 16.9.3, vol. 48, Peet to Barton, 12 July 1915.Google Scholar
  22. 15.
    ABCFMA, HLHU, ABC 16.9.3, vol. 48, Peet to Barton, 14 December 1915.Google Scholar
  23. 16.
    See, e.g. Justin McCarthy, The Turk in America: Creation of an Enduring Prejudice (Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 2010), p. 172 on ‘anonymous sources’, used by Barton and his co-campaigners, ‘who made the most damning claims of Turkish misdeeds’.Google Scholar
  24. 17.
    ‘The Doyen of Armenia’s British Champions’, Ararat 3, no. 25 (July 1915): 16–20.Google Scholar
  25. 18.
    Barton sent Bryce a letter, mostly regarding Armenia, regretting Bryce’s departure as Ambassador in April 1913: Bodleian Library, Oxford (henceforth BLO), Bryce Papers, MS Bryce USA 3, James Barton to Bryce, 17 April 1913.Google Scholar
  26. 19.
    BLO Bryce Papers, MS Bryce 199, George E. White to Bryce, 19 September 1903; Alice Stone Blackwell to Bryce, 13 October 1903. Like many other members of the network, Blackwell was celebrated in Ararat as A Devoted Friend of Armenians’, Ararat 4, no. 46 (April 1917): 443–8.Google Scholar
  27. 20.
    For the pro-Armenian circles in Britain, see Akaby Nassibian, Britain and the Armenian Question, 1915–1923 (London: CroomHelm, 1984)Google Scholar
  28. 20a.
    Laycock, Imagining Armenia: Orientalism, Ambiguity and Intervention (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2009).Google Scholar
  29. 21.
    BLO, A.J. Toynbee uncatalogued Papers, Box 80, ‘Individuals described by Veronica Toynbee (D)’, Robert Selby Darbishire to Toynbee, 12 June 1915.Google Scholar
  30. 22.
    For criticisms, see Arthur Ponsonby, Falsehood in Wartime: Containing an Assortment of Lies Circulated Throughout the Nations during the Great War (London: Allen & Unwin, 1928)Google Scholar
  31. 22a.
    J.M. Read, Atrocity Propaganda, 1914–1919 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1941)Google Scholar
  32. 22b.
    Trevor Wilson, ‘Lord Bryce’s Investigation into Alleged German Outrages in Belgium, 1914–1915’, Journal of Contemporary History 14, no. 3 (1979).Google Scholar
  33. 22c.
    for revision, see John Horne and Alan Kramer, German Atrocities, 1914: A History of Denial (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2001), esp. 232–7Google Scholar
  34. 22d.
    Taner Akçam, ‘Anatomy of Genocide Denial: Academics, Politicians and the “Remaking” of History’, University of Minnesota Center for Holocaust and Genocide Studies Occasional Paper, 2005: http://chgs.umn.edu/histories/occasional/Akcam_Anatomy_of_Denial.pdf(accessed October 16, 2013).
  35. 23.
    See esp. McCarthy, Turk in America, ch. 10.Google Scholar
  36. 24.
    ABCFMA, HLHU, ABC 11.4, Box 2, Barton to G. Bie Ravndal (US Consul-General, Constantinople), 12 April 1911; for an earlier example, see Barton to Herbert Pierce (State Department), 18 June 1903.Google Scholar
  37. 25.
    ABCFMA, HLHU, ABC 3.2, vol. 327, ABCFM Foreign Department Letter Book, Dec 18 1916-Feb 8 1917: Barton to William Walker Rockwell, 25 Jan. 1917. See also similar letters to Frederick Dixon and William T. Ellis, 24 January 1917 in the same volume.Google Scholar
  38. 26.
    For scholarly discussion of Barton’s political influence, see Joseph L. Grabill, Protestant Diplomacy and the Near East: Missionary Influence on America Policy, 1810–1927 (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1971); Walther, Sacred Interests, esp. ch. 8; Walther, ‘For God and Country’.Google Scholar
  39. 27.
    James Barton, ‘Reminiscences of James L. Barton. XI. I’ll Tell the World’, Missionary Herald, November 1927, clipping in ABCFMA HLHU, ABC 11.4, Box 12.1. See also Barton’s comments in his unpublished ‘Autobiographical notes’, c. 1934–36, pp. 172–8, in ABC 11.4, Box 12.2.Google Scholar
  40. 28.
    ‘Report of Committee on Armenian Atrocities’, marked ‘Release for publication in Papers of Monday, Oct. 4, 1915’. A copy is held in the British Library: American Committee for Armenian and Syrian Relief, ‘[Reports, Appeals etc.]’ (New York, 1915–16), shelfmark General Reference Collection 10077.h.3. For two post-war accounts of the Committee’s formation, see James L. Barton, Story of Near East Relief (1915–1930): An Interpretation (Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1930), 9–18Google Scholar
  41. 28a.
    Charles H. Levermore, Samuel Train Dutton: A Biography (New York: Macmillan, 1922), 158–63.Google Scholar
  42. 29.
    ABCMFA HLHU, ABC 2.1: Letters: foreign (Copy-book series), 1836–1916, vol. 289, Barton to Peet, 21 September 1915.Google Scholar
  43. 30.
    For examples of Barton supplying Bryce with information, see, e.g., ABCMFA HLHU, ABC 2.1: Letters: foreign (Copy-book series), 1836–1916, vol. 287, Barton to Bryce, 22 July 1915; vol. 288, Barton to Bryce, 5 August 1915. For Bryce’s help with introductions for Nubar, see BLO, Bryce Papers, MS Bryce 201, H.N. Mosditchian to Bryce, 12 July 1915; Nubar to Bryce, 7 August 1915. Further examples are in Boghos Nubar’s Papers and the Armenian Question, 1915–1918: Documents, ed. Vatche Ghazarian (Waltham, MA: Mayreni Publishing, 1996).Google Scholar
  44. 31.
    ABCMFA HLHU, ABC 2.1: Letters: foreign (Copy-book series), 1836–1916, vol. 289, Enoch F Bell to FW Macallum (c/o Leopold Favre), 22 September 1915.Google Scholar
  45. 32.
    Arnold Toynbee, Armenian Atrocities: The Murder of a Nation, 2 eds., (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1915).Google Scholar
  46. 33.
    The National Archives: Public Record Office, Kew (henceforth TNA:PRO), FO 96/207, Toynbee Armenia papers, Bryce to Toynbee, 17 October 1915.Google Scholar
  47. 34.
    BLO, Bryce papers, MS Bryce 201, Tchobanian to Bryce, 24 September 1915.Google Scholar
  48. 35.
    See, e.g., BLO, Bryce Papers, MS Bryce 199, Tcobanian to Bryce, 16 May 1899, 23 May 1899, 10 September 1900, 11 August 1901, 2 June 1902.Google Scholar
  49. 36.
    See, e.g., BLO, Bryce papers, MS Bryce 201, Nubar to Bryce, 13 September 1915 (enclosing letter from Nubar to Williams of same date); Tchobanian to Bryce, 26 September 1915; A. Safrastian to Bryce, 7 October 1915; A. Hacopian to Bryce, 8 November 1915; Williams to Bryce, 12 November 1915.Google Scholar
  50. 37.
    For discussion of Toynbee’s role at Wellington House, see M.L. Sanders and Philip M. Taylor, British Propaganda during the First World War, 1914–1918 (London: Macmillan, 1982), 145–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 37a.
    Stuart Wallace, War and the Image of Germany: British Academics, 1914–1918 (Edinburgh: John Donald, 1988), 186–90.Google Scholar
  52. 38.
    BLO, Bryce papers, MS Bryce 201, Williams to Bryce, 12 November 1915; TNA:PRO, FO 96/205, Gregory to Toynbee 30 November 1915, Toynbee to Gregory, 16 December 1915.Google Scholar
  53. 39.
    TNA:PRO, FO96/207, Bryce to Toynbee, 19,20 and 25 October, 8 and 11 December 1915.Google Scholar
  54. 40.
    TNA:PRO, FO 96/207, Bryce to Toynbee, 19 October 1915. See also Bryce to Toynbee, 6 November 1915. Despite this, some anti-German material did appear in the pamphlet: Armenian Atrocities, 106–16.Google Scholar
  55. 41.
    TNA:PRO FO 96/205, Robinson to Toynbee, 15 November 1915.Google Scholar
  56. 42.
    BLO, Bryce papers, MS Bryce 20, Barton to Bryce, 18 November 1915. ABCMFA HLHU, ABC 2.1, vol. 291, Barton to Robinson, 19 January 1916.Google Scholar
  57. 43.
    TNA:PRO FO 96/205, Rockwell to Toynbee, 15 May 1916.Google Scholar
  58. 44.
    TNA:PRO FO 96/207, Bryce to Toynbee, 21 December 1915 first indicates the book’s genesis. For Toynbee’s later account, see Arnold J. Toynbee, Acquaintances (London: Oxford University Press, 1967), 149–52.Google Scholar
  59. 45.
    TNA:PRO FO 96/207, Bryce to Toynbee, 19 October 1915; see also his letters of 25 October and 25 November for similar care about secrecy.Google Scholar
  60. 46.
    ABCFMA HLHU, ABC 2.1, vol. 289, Barton to Thomas D. Christie, 24 September 1915.Google Scholar
  61. 47.
    Treatment of Armenians, Doc. 141, 552–3.Google Scholar
  62. 48.
    Rouben P. Adalian, ‘American Diplomatic Correspondence in the Age of Mass Murder: The Armenian Genocide in the US Archives’, in America and the Armenian Genocide, ed. Jay Winter (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), 180–1.Google Scholar
  63. 49.
    Re. Rohner’s work, see Hans-Lukas Kieser, ‘Beatrice Rohner (1876–1947) and the Armenian Genocide’, in A Quest for Belonging: Anatolia Beyond Empire and Nation (19th–21st Centuries) (Istanbul: Isis Press, 2007).Google Scholar
  64. 50.
    ABCMFA HLHU, ABC 16.9.3, vol. 48, Peet to Barton, 12 January 1916.Google Scholar
  65. 51.
    Re. Wolff-Metternich’s role, see, e.g., Eric D. Weitz, ‘Germany and the Young Turks: Revo-lutionaries into statesmen’, in Suny et al., Question of Genocide, 194–5; Ronald Grigor Suny, ‘They Can Live in the Desert but Nowhere Else’: A History of the Armenian Genocide (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2015), 301–2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 51a.
    Stefan Ihrig, Justifying Genocide: Germany and the Armenians from Bismarck to Hitler (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2016), 127–8. For the German diplomatic record, see The Armenian Genocide: Evidence from the German Foreign Office Archives, 1915–1916, ed. Wolfgang Gust (New York: Berghahn Books, 2014).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 52.
    BLO, Bryce Papers, MS Bryce USA 3, Barton to Bryce, 11 November 1915; ABCFMA HLHU, ABC 3.2, vol. 321, Barton to Toynbee, 25 April 1916.Google Scholar
  68. 53.
    ABCFMA HLHU, ABC 11.4, Box 12.2, James Barton, ‘Autobiographical notes, written 1934–36’, 255.Google Scholar
  69. 54.
    TNA:PRO FO96/205, letters to Barton, 1 February 1916; ‘Monsieur le Redacteur’, 1 Febuary 1916 (replied to by Léopold Favre of the Comité des Secours aux Arméniens, 15 February 1916). For further early contacts consulted in the UK, France and Egypt, see also Toynbee’s letters to Gregory, 15 February 1916; Herbert Adams Gibbons, 22 February 1916; I.N. Camp (American Red Cross), 20 March 1916.Google Scholar
  70. 55.
    Obituary by A. Krafft-Bonnard from the Semaine religieuse de Genève, 29 April 1922, reproduced in Léopold Favre, 1846–1922: Hommages Rendus a sa Mémoire; Ses Lettres écrites du Proche-Orient; La Bulle Pontificale, ed. Edouard Favre (Geneva: Imprimerie Albert Kundig, 1923), 19–22.Google Scholar
  71. 56.
    ‘A Distinguished Gentleman and Philanthropist’, Ararat 4, no. 47 (May 1917): 492–5.Google Scholar
  72. 57.
    Re. Favre’s Armenian relief work, see Favre, Léopold Favre. Edmond Barde considered Favre the Armenians’ ‘most devoted and compassionate friend’ during the war (p. 11). Louis Debarge (pp. 13–16) stressed his connections with ‘influential’ supporters of the Armenian cause around the world, including Bryce, Lepsius and missionary and relief representatives William Peet and Charles Vickrey in the US. For Nubar’s opinion see Nubar to Catholicos Kevork V, 15 December 1916, in Ghazarian, Boghos Nubar’s Papers, p. 420. For Favre’s connections with the ABCFM, see, e.g. ABCFMA HLHU, ABC 2.1, vol. 288, Barton to Frederick W. McCallum, c/o Leopold Favre, Geneva, 2 September 1915; BA 16.9.3, vol. 48, Peet to Favre, 30 March 1917; Peet to Barton, 5 June 1917, and discussions of Peet’s further meetings with Favre in letters between July and September 1917.Google Scholar
  73. 58.
    Bryce to Nubar, 9 May 1915; Williams to Nubar, 10 May; Gregory to Nubar, 20 May; notes of Meeting between Nubar and Count Benckendorff, 12 July; Memorandum to the Foreign Office, 16 July; notes of Meeting between Nubar and Delcassé, 14 September; notes of meeting between Nubar and Count Izvolski, 22 September, in Ghazarian, Boghos Nubar’s Papers, 23, 25–6, 46,152–4,170–6, 282–3, 287. For Barton and Bryce’s discussion of Nubar see, e.g., ABCFMA HLHU, ABC 2.1, vol. 286, Barton to Bryce, 7 June 1915.Google Scholar
  74. 59.
    On Lepsius, see Margaret Lavinia Anderson, ‘Down in Turkey Far Away: Human Rights, the Armenian Massacres and Orientalism in Wilhelmine Germany’, Journal of Modern History 79, no. 1 (2007) and ‘Who Still Talked about the Extermination of the Armenians? German Talk and German Silences’, in Suny et al., Question of Genocide; Ihrig, Justifying Genocide.Google Scholar
  75. 60.
    BLO Bryce Papers, MS Bryce 199, Countess Elisabeth Groeben to Bryce, 5 April 1899; MS Bryce 200, Lepsius to Bryce, 17 May 1904.Google Scholar
  76. 61.
    TNA:PRO FO96/205, Paelian to Toynbee, 22 February 1916, answering questions addressed to Gregory, is the first of several letters from Paelian to Toynbee in his correspondence. For an example of Paelian’s guidance on a source’s value, see, e.g., the exchange between Paelian and Toynbee re. the value of an Armenian account of the defence of Jibal Mousa (Musa Dagh), 26–30 April 1916.Google Scholar
  77. 62.
    ABCMFA HLHU, ABC 2.1, vol. 288, Barton to Edward Woodley, 30 August 1915; vol. 289, Enoch Bell to FW Macallum, 22 September 1915; Barton to Bryce, 6 October 1915; vol. 290, Barton to Mrs. J. Kingsley Birge, 1 December 1915; Barton to Aneurin Williams, 4 December 1915; ABC 3.2, vol. 320, Barton to Lillian C. Sewny, 7 March 1916; vol. 324, Barton to Robert Lansing, 15 September 1916; Barton to Henry Kelsey and Joseph Tory, 15 September 1916.Google Scholar
  78. 63.
    On Woodrow Wilson’s formation and delivery of such perspectives, see Erez Manela, The Wilsonian Moment: Self-determination and the International Origins of Anticolonial Nationalism (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007), esp. chs. 1–2.Google Scholar
  79. 64.
    ABCFMA HLHU, ABC 11.4, Box 3, Bryce to Barton, 1 August 1916.Google Scholar
  80. 65.
    See, e.g., BLO, Bryce Papers, MS Bryce 204, Barton to Bryce, 25 January 1917; Frederick Dixon (Christian Science Monitor, Boston) to Bryce, 27 February 1917; MS Bryce 243, Toynbee to Bryce, 31 January 1917, re. request from Rockwell for prominent British writers, especially Bryce, to contribute to next ACASR publicity campaign; MS Bryce USA 3, Barton to Bryce, 18 May 1918.Google Scholar
  81. 66.
    BLO, Bryce Papers, MS Bryce 199, Blackwell to Bryce, 13 October 1903.Google Scholar
  82. 67.
    ABCFMA HLHU, ABC 2.1, vol. 288, Barton to Bryce, 5 August 1915; Barton to Macallum, 2 September 1915.Google Scholar
  83. 68.
    ABCFMA HLHU, ABC 2.1, vol. 289, Barton to Peet, 5 October 1915.Google Scholar
  84. 69.
    TNA:PRO FO 96/205, Toynbee to Rev. Harold Stevens, 12 February 1916. For a similar sentiment by another member of the network, see BLO, Bryce Papers, MS Bryce 201, Boghos Nubar to Bryce, 7 August 1915.Google Scholar
  85. 70.
    Grabill, Protestant Diplomacy, pp. 33; See also David Gaunt, Massacres, Resistance, Protectors: Muslim-Christian Relations in Eastern Anatolia During World War I (Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2006), 15–17.Google Scholar
  86. 71.
    Karine V. Walther, Sacred Interests: The United States and the Islamic World, 1821–1921 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2015), 244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 72.
    Laycock, Imagining Armenia, 30–6.Google Scholar
  88. 73.
    Nassibian, Armenian Question, 10–11.Google Scholar
  89. 74.
    For a clear evocation of Liberal sympathy for small nations, see Jonathan Parry, The Poli-tics of Patriotism: English Liberalism, Nationalism, and Europe, 1830–1886 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), esp. chs. 5 and 7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. 75.
    Laycock, Imagining Armenia, 48; John T. Seaman, A Citizen of the World: The Life of James Bryce (London: I.B. Tauris, 2006), 80–2, 94, 171–3.Google Scholar
  91. 76.
    Nassibian, Armenian Question, 38–48; see also Roy Douglas, ‘Britain and the Armenian Question, 1894–97’, Historical Journal, 19 (1976).Google Scholar
  92. 77.
    Grabill, Protestant Diplomacy, 63–7, 46–9. Others go further, suggesting missionaries’ testimonies cannot be trusted because they actively sought to destroy the Ottoman Empire to enable greater conversion: McCarthy, Turk in America, 202.Google Scholar
  93. 78.
    See, E.g., ABCFMA HLHU ABC 16.9.3, vol. 48, Peet to Barton, 17 August 1915; ABC 2.1, vol. 291, Barton to Rev. Robert Christie 9 February 1916.Google Scholar
  94. 79.
    Hans-Lukas Kieser, ‘Missionary America and Ottoman Turkey. The Seminal Break of World War I’, in A Quest for Belonging, 34–48, at 45. On missionaries’ capacity to act, see Tusan, Smyrna’s Ashes, ch. 4.Google Scholar
  95. 80.
    Davide Rodogno, Against Massacre: Humanitarian Interventions in the Ottoman Empire, 1815–1914: The Emergence of a European Concept and International Practice (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2012). See also Grabill, Protestant Diplomacy, 68–9.Google Scholar
  96. 81.
    Nassibian, Armenian Question, 52.Google Scholar
  97. 82.
    ABCFMA HLHU, ABC 3.3, vol. II, Bryce to Barton, 30 March 1915; ABC 2.1, vol. 286, Barton to Bryce, 16 April 1915; vol. 287, Barton to Bryce, 15 June 1915, 22 July 1915.Google Scholar
  98. 83.
    See, e.g., Bryce, ‘Preface’, Treatment of Armenians, xxviii; Toynbee, ‘A Summary of Armenian History up to and including the year 1915’, Treatment of Armenians, 653.Google Scholar
  99. 84.
    Toynbee, Acquaintances, 149–52.Google Scholar
  100. 85.
    On this topic, see Stephane Audoin-Rouzeau and Annette Becker, 1914–1918: Understanding the Great War (London: Profile Books, 2002).Google Scholar
  101. 85a.
    For its application in the US, see esp. Jessica Bennett and Mark Hampton, ‘World War I and the Anglo-American Imagined Community: Civilization vs. Barbarism in British Propaganda and American Newspapers’, in Joel H. Wiener and Mark Hampton (eds.), Anglo-American Media Interactions, 1850–2000 ( Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007).Google Scholar
  102. 86.
    Tusan, Smyrna’s Ashes, 124.Google Scholar
  103. 87.
    See, e.g. TNA:PRO, Press Bureau files, ‘D’ Notices, HO 139/43, D186, 16 March 1915, prohibiting discussion of a war between Christians and Muslims; HO 139/44, D363, 21 February 1916, explicitly prohibiting negative comments on the Ottoman Empire that might affect Indian Muslims; HO 139/45, D607, 15 November 1917, on avoiding discussion of a ‘holy war’ with the Ottoman Empire.Google Scholar
  104. 88.
    Nassibian, Armenian Question, 78–9; Seaman, Citizen of the World, 209–13; McCarthy, Turk in America, 223.Google Scholar
  105. 89.
    For an officially endorsed statement of this perspective, see the article by Justin McCarthy, ‘The Bryce Report: British propaganda and the Turks’, reproduced on the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ website, from which the quotation is taken: http://www.mfa.gov.tr/the-bryce-report_-british-propaganda-and-the-turks.en.mfa (accessed January 24, 2014). By 30 January 2015, this page was no longer accessible and the web-link redirected to the Foreign Ministry homepage. However, a snapshot was captured on the Internet Archive Wayback Machine (archive.org) in 2012: http://web.archive.org/web/20120214212329/http://www.mfa.gov.tr/the-bryce-report_-britishpropaganda-and-theturks.en.mfa (accessed November 28, 2017).Google Scholar
  106. 89a.
    For a very similar, but footnoted, version see McCarthy, Turk in America, ch. 10. For a less direct discussion which nonetheless seeks to invalidate the book, see Guenter Lewy, The Armenian Massacres in Ottoman Turkey: A Disputed Genocide (Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 2005), 137–9.Google Scholar
  107. 90.
    Sarafian, ‘Introduction’; Miller, ‘The Treatment of Armenians’; Akçam, ‘Anatomy of Gen-ocide denial’; Tusan, Smyrna’s Ashes, 121–29; Tusan, ‘James Bryce’s Blue Book’.Google Scholar
  108. 91.
    Propaganda scholarship largely does not address the book. For two examples of critical commentary by propaganda scholars, however, see Read, Atrocity Propaganda, 216–22; Wallace, War and the Image, 186–90.Google Scholar
  109. 92.
    Trevor Wilson, The Myriad Faces of War: Britain and the Great War, 1914–1918 (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1986), 733.Google Scholar
  110. 93.
    See, for example, TNA:PRO FO96/205, G.H. Fitzmaurice to Toynbee, 21 February 1916, discussing Toynbee’s ‘Armenian propaganda work’; FO96/207; Toynbee to Gregory, 3 February 1917, which notes Gregory’s knowledge of his employment in a ‘propaganda office’; and ABCFMA HLHU ABC 3.2 vol. 326, Barton to R.B. Boys (Melbourne Public Library), 24 November 1916, which encourages Boys to write to Toynbee at Wellington House for a copy of the book.Google Scholar
  111. 94.
    For Lepsius’s connections with other members of the network, see the references in TNA: PRO FO 96/205, Favre to Toynbee, 18 March 1916; FO96/206, Rockwell to Toynbee, 19 August 1916.Google Scholar
  112. 95.
    TNA:PRO FO96/206, Bryce to Toynbee, 23 September 1916; Bryce to Masterman, 28 September 1916. Bryce subsequently received another copy in October from Nubar, again illustrating the interconnected network assisting Bryce and Toynbee: BLO, Bryce Papers, MS Bryce 203, Nubar to Bryce, 6 October 1916.Google Scholar
  113. 96.
    BLO, Bryce Papers, MS Bryce 203, Johannes Lepsius to Bryce, 1 December 1916; Nubar to Bryce, 6 October 1916.Google Scholar
  114. 97.
    TNA:PRO FO96/206, Toynbee to Favre, 18 October 1916.Google Scholar
  115. 98.
    TNA:PRO FO96/207, Bryce to Toynbee, 18 July 1916; FO96/206, Bryce to Masterman, 20 September 1916; Toynbee to Stephen Gaselee, 20 September 1916; Masterman to Bryce, 21 September 1916; Bryce to Masterman, 21 September 1916.Google Scholar
  116. 99.
    Cf the gleeful exploitation of the former German ambassador to London’s memoirs: Harry F. Young, Prince Lichnowsky and the Great War (Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press, 1977), 145–59.Google Scholar
  117. 100.
    TNA:PRO FO96/205, Toynbee to Barton, 1 February 1916; to ‘Monsieur le Redacteur’ [Favre], 1 February 1916; to the Editor of Ararat (London) [Gregory], 8 February 1916.Google Scholar
  118. 101.
    TNA:PRO FO96/205, Toynbee to Enoch Bell, 2 March 1916.Google Scholar
  119. 102.
    TNA:PRO FO96/205, Favre to Toynbee, 15 February 1916; Toynbee to Gregory, 24 Feb-ruary 1916; Toynbee to Barton, 24 February 1916. For references to Favre’s extensive Armenian relief work, see Favre, Léopold Favre, esp. 11, 13–16.Google Scholar
  120. 103.
    TNA:PRO FO96/205, W Hornblower (Government Delegate for administration of refugees in Egypt, Alexandria) to Toynbee, 14 April 1916; reply by Toynbee, 6 May 1916. Jibal Mousa is more commonly labelled as Musa Dagh.Google Scholar
  121. 104.
    Toynbee, ‘Summary’, 627–33.Google Scholar
  122. 105.
    TNA:PRO FO96/205, letters, Toynbee to Rockwell, Barton and Favre, 20 June 1916. For examples of Toynbee’s repeated requests for more information, see several letters to representatives of the ABCFM and ACASR: Toynbee to Barton, 1 February 1916; Toynbee to Bell, 2 March 1916; Toynbee to Barton, 6 March 1916; Toynbee to Barton, 23 March 1916; Toynbee to Barton, 5 April 1916; Toynbee to Barton, 12 April 1916; Barton to Toynbee, 1 April 1916; Bell to Toynbee, 3 April 1916; Toynbee to Barton, 18 April 1916; Barton to Toynbee, 17 April 1916; Barton to Toynbee, 25 April 1916; Barton to Toynbee, 1 May 1916; Toynbee to Barton, 15 June 1916. Letters are listed in the order they appear in the file; part of the difficulty over securing complete information seemed to be long delays between despatch and receipt of letters.Google Scholar
  123. 106.
    Bryce, ‘Preface’, and Toynbee, ‘Memorandum by the Editor of the Documents’, Treatment of Armenians, xxiv–xxv, xxxvi. Barton also talked dismissively about the value of Arme-nian testimony. See, e.g., his letter to Bryce indicating that he was avoiding using Armenian reports that were ‘liable to be much tinged with rumour’: ABCFMA HLHU, ABC 2.1, vol. 289 Barton to Bryce, 16 October 1915. Note, however, that Bryce also used the term ‘excitement’ in discussing Belgian testimony, suggesting this was not an idea confined to ‘orientals’. See Report of the Committee on Alleged German Outrages (London: HMSO, 1915), 7.Google Scholar
  124. 107.
    TNA:PRO FO96/207, Bryce to Toynbee, 18 July 1916; Toynbee to Bryce, 22 July 1916; Bryce to Toynbee, 22 July 1916; Toynbee to Bryce, 1 August 1916. Tusan, Smyrna’s Ashes, 124–5.Google Scholar
  125. 108.
    On strained charitable generosity, see Wilson, Myriad Faces, 774–6.Google Scholar
  126. 109.
    For observations on the difficulty and necessity of identifying elements discussed in propa-ganda material besides the most prominent topic, see David Monger, Patriotism and Propaganda in First World War Britain: the National War Aims Committee and Civilian Morale (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2012), 7–9 and ch. 4.Google Scholar
  127. 110.
    Treatment of Armenians, Doc 139, 550.Google Scholar
  128. 111.
    Doc. 31, 150.Google Scholar
  129. 112.
    Doc. 9, 21. For the letter’s progress, see Sarafian, Uncensored Edition, 60.Google Scholar
  130. 113.
    Bloxham, Great Game of Genocide, esp. ch. 6; Manoug J. Somakian, Empires in Conflict: Armenia and the Great Powers, 1895–1920 (London: Tauris Academic Studies, 1995), esp. ch. 5.Google Scholar
  131. 114.
    For a series of letters relating to the conference and Barton’s increasing frustration, and eventual sense of resignation, see ABCFMA HLHU, ABC 11.4 Box 2, folder 9, letters from Barton, 15 November 1922–19 January 1923.Google Scholar
  132. 115.
    Daniel Steel, ‘Genocide on Fleet Street: The Armenian Genocide in the British Press, 1915–1918’ (Honours dissertation, University of Canterbury, 2016).Google Scholar
  133. 116.
    See the statistics reported by GH. Paelian for the ACASR in his article ‘The Situation in Armenia’, and Harold Buxton’s report of the ‘Armenian Refugees (Lord Mayor’s) Fund’ in Ararat 5, no. 56 (February-March 1918): 345, 357.Google Scholar
  134. 117.
    Thanks to Adrian Gregory for this suggestion, based on his knowledge of the Archbishop of Canterbury’s papers.Google Scholar
  135. 118.
    Steel, ‘Genocide on Fleet Street’; Keith David Watenpaugh, Bread from Stones: The Middle East and the Making of Modern Humanitarianism (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2015); Laycock, Imagining Armenia.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  136. 119.
    ABCFMA HLHU, ABC 3.2, vol. 325, Barton to Samuel T. Dutton, 25 September 1916.Google Scholar
  137. 120.
    ABCFMA HLHU, ABC 3.2, vol. 325, Barton to Bryce, 9 October 1916.Google Scholar
  138. 121.
    For further examples of Barton’s publicity mobilisation, see, e.g., ABCFMA HLHU, ABC 3.2, vol. 324, Barton to Toynbee, 24 August 1916; Barton to Charles Vickrey, 8 September 1916; Barton to Bryce, 18 September 1916.Google Scholar
  139. 122.
    For extended discussion of the impact of Wilson’s rhetoric and actions on this point, see Manela, Wilsonian Moment.Google Scholar
  140. 123.
    TNA:PRO FO 96/206, Masterman to Bryce, 21 September 1916.Google Scholar
  141. 124.
    BLO, Bryce Papers, MS Bryce 207, Williams to Bryce, 15 May 1920.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Board of Transatlantic Studies 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.History DepartmentUniversity of CanterburyChristchurchNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations