The church of Sourp Giragos, in old Diyarbakir, fell into
ruins after 1915. A few years ago, the town rebuilt it. “Our grandparents,” the
mayor said, “committed wrongs, but we, their grandchildren, will not repeat
them.”
CREDIT PHOTOGRAPHS BY PARI DUKOVIC
I. RESURRECTION
When I try to imagine my grandfather, the face that appears
to me is a variation of a pencil drawing that hangs in my parents’ house. The
drawing captures the earliest image of him that we have in our family. He
appears to be in his thirties, and he stares down from the wall with a serious
countenance, a sharply groomed mustache, a tall, stiff collar, a tie pin. He
seems like a self-possessed man, with an air of formality: a formidable person.
I never had the chance to meet him. I was born in the
nineteen-seventies, on Long Island, and he was born in the eighteen-eighties,
in the Ottoman Empire, near the Euphrates River. He died in 1959—the year that
the first spacecraft reached the moon, Fidel Castro seized power in Cuba, and
Philip Roth published “Goodbye, Columbus,” though I suspect he would have known
nothing of those things. What he knew was privation, mass violence, famine,
deportation—and how to survive, even flourish, amid such circumstances.
My grandfather spent most of his life in Diyarbakir, a
garrison town in southeastern Turkey. Magnificent old walls surround the city;
built of black volcanic rock, they were begun by the Romans and then added to
by Arabs and Ottomans. In 1915, the Ottomans turned the city, the surrounding
province, and much of modern-day Turkey into a killing field, in a campaign of
massacres and forced expulsions that came to be known as the Armenian genocide.
The plan was to eradicate the empire’s Armenians—“a deadly illness whose cure
called for grim measures”—and it was largely successful. The Ottomans killed
more than a million people, but, somehow, not my grandfather.
He guided his family safely through the tumult, and he
remained in the city long afterward, enduring the decades of subtler
persecution that followed. There was no real reckoning for the perpetrators of
the genocide; many of them helped build the modern Turkish republic, founded in
1923. The violence may have been over, but its animating ideology persisted. As
İsmet İnönü, the President of Turkey from 1938 to 1950, said, “Our duty is to
make Turks out of all the non-Turks within the Turkish country, no matter what.
We will cut out and throw away any element that will oppose Turks and
Turkishness.” The state cut away Armenians from its history. At the ruins of
Ani, an ancient Armenian city near the country’s northeastern border, there was
no mention of who built or inhabited it. In Istanbul, no mention of who
designed the Dolmabahçe Palace, once home to sultans. This policy of erasure
was called “Turkification,” and its reach extended to geography: my
grandfather’s birthplace, known since the days of Timur as Jabakhchour
(“diffuse water”), was renamed Bingöl (“a thousand lakes”). By a law enacted in
1934, his surname, Khatchadourian (“given by the cross”), was changed to
Özakdemir (“pure white iron”).
Diyarbakir became a city of wounded cosmopolitanism, its
minorities—Christians, Jews, Yazidis—greatly diminished. Still, my grandfather
persisted, until 1952. My father, the twelfth of his children, grew up in
Diyarbakir, and I grew up listening to his stories about it. At parties, over
glasses of coffee or raki, he described the place in mythic terms, as a kind of
Anatolian Macondo, populated by people with names like Haji Mama, Deli Weli,
Apple Popo. But my grandfather was always elusive in those stories, his path to
survival a mystery. For nearly a century, the Turkish state has denied the
Armenian genocide—until recently, you could be prosecuted even for referring to
it—and so any inquiry into such things would have been fraught. But not long
ago a curious thing happened. Diyarbakir, breaking with the state policy, began
to indicate that, once again, its people wanted it to serve as a shared
homeland. The centerpiece of the city’s experiment in renewal is a cathedral
that once touched all the city’s Armenian inhabitants, my grandfather among
them.
Cartoon
“The water for your fishbowl was approved, but it looks like
for now you’re not getting the fish.” BUY THE PRINT »
The Church of Sts. Cyriacus and Julietta, named for an
early-Christian child martyr and his mother, is a wide, imposing structure,
made of carved volcanic rock, that stands at the center of old Diyarbakir. In
Italian, the child is San Quirico; in Armenian, Sourp Giragos. The largest
Armenian church in the Middle East, it was built in the nineteenth century to a
design of ecclesiastical minimalism, with a basilica containing seven altars,
and a flat wooden roof supported by sixteen monolithic stone columns and rows
of gracefully tapering arches. The church has gone through many cycles of
destruction. In 1880, it burned to ashes, and was rebuilt. In 1913, lightning
destroyed its bell tower. Its replacement, a semi-Gothic spire housing an
expensive eight-sided clock and a bell cast in Istanbul, was destroyed during
the genocide—struck down on May 28, 1915, by cannon fire, because the spire
surpassed the height of the city’s minarets. Or so one account claims. I should
mention a more authentic-sounding story passed down in my family: One day, the
spire’s architect turned up at my grandfather’s door with his tools and
treasured belongings, urging him to keep them all, relaying a plan to
disappear. Days later, one of the spire’s builders turned up, too, full of
conflict, explaining that officials had ordered him to dismantle the spire so
that its carvings and contents could be repurposed or sold.
After the genocide, the church and the few remaining
Armenians of Diyarbakir became locked in a ruinous spiral, diminishing
together. For a time, Sourp Giragos served as a warehouse for a state-owned
bank, and as a provisional military facility. My father remembers, as a boy,
looking into the basilica and seeing recruits line up to be dipped into barrels
of insecticide. By the time my grandfather emigrated, the church’s most active
members could fit in one photo, which my aunt keeps, carefully annotated, in
one of her albums. As could be expected, the great basilica fell into disuse,
with the community instead assembling in a small chapel, which my grandfather
helped finance. But even this modest chapel was not small enough. People
continued to leave. By 1985, there was no longer a priest: Father Arsen
suddenly absent, young Kurdish boys no longer teasing him in the stone
alleyways (“a monk, a monk, a glass in his rump”). Eight years later, with snow
accumulating on Sourp Giragos’s neglected roof, the whole thing collapsed.
Eventually, there was just Antranik Zor, a strange old man, the guardian of the
ruins, who told visitors, “Everyone is gone, they have become part of the
earth, only I am left.”
My sister visited Sourp Giragos at its nadir, about fifteen
years ago, and found Uncle Anto, as he was known, sitting on a rock,
dishevelled: loose shirt, cardigan tucked into sweatpants. Through a friend,
she spoke to him in Turkish, but he just sat there, mute, empty-sighted. Later
that afternoon, she returned and spoke to him in Armenian, and he jolted into
alertness: Who are you? Where did you come from? We haven’t had a priest for so
long. Do you know the Lord’s Prayer? She recited it, and he wept, and then he
led her into a shed behind the ruins, a cluttered place illuminated by a single
light bulb. He rummaged among his things, telling my sister that he had been
waiting for her so she could protect a relic he had been guarding. He emerged
with a Bible, its cover torn away, and told her to take the book to where it
might be safe. He spoke with desperate urgency of what they would do if it
remained, if they found it. My sister took the Bible, of course, and kept it at
her house. Shortly afterward, I visited Diyarbakir, too, and went looking for
Uncle Anto, but people near Sourp Giragos said he had been hospitalized—in
fact, he would never leave his bed again. In the church, Kurdish boys were
playing soccer, their ball arcing across the vandalized basilica, passing
through the shadows of columns and arches that by then held up only sky.
The news of the city’s changed atmosphere came quietly, five
or six years ago, with the unlikely talk that Sourp Giragos was going to be
rehabilitated as a functioning church—even though there was no congregation for
it anymore. Then, in 2011, an item in the Armenian Weekly (which has arrived at
my parents’ house for as long as I can remember) made clear that the talk was
real. “SOURP GIRAGOS OPENS TO THE FAITHFUL,” it noted, adding that the
structure “stood as defiant as ever to the forces suppressing freedom in
Turkey.” Several hundred people turned up for the reconsecration, nearly all of
them having flown in, mostly from Istanbul, or from abroad. Diyarbakir’s mayor,
Osman Baydemir, told the Armenian visitors, “You are not our guests. We are
your guests.” Abdullah Demirbaş, the mayor of the city’s old district, where my
family had lived, even made reference to the great taboo—the genocide—saying,
“Our grandparents, incited by others, committed wrongs, but we, their
grandchildren, will not repeat them.”
Hundreds of people began coming to Sourp Giragos every day,
the visits minor acts of curiosity, atonement, remembrance, a reckoning with a
distant Armenian identity. Some came trying to piece together family history,
lost stories of survival. Last April, I packed a bag (and the old Bible) and
made the journey, too—to solve the mystery of my grandfather’s survival, if
possible, and to learn how the cathedral had been resurrected, how the city had
so unexpectedly changed, and how a century of contested history could finally
appear to be resolved.
Cartoon
“He brought joy to tens.”
BUY THE PRINT »
Diyarbakir’s walls loom from a distance as you approach, but
inside them the old city feels small, almost cloistered. My father told me that
during his childhood the walls were ruins infested with snakes and scorpions,
and he wouldn’t have dreamed of going near them. Like Sourp Giragos, the walls
are now being renovated; new parks line the fortifications, which people are
free to climb. Throughout the old city, historic buildings are being restored,
the urban renewal accompanied by deeper social and political changes. For more
than ten years, Diyarbakir was under “emergency rule”; ethnic tensions were
high, and the fears that Uncle Anto had felt—of what they would do if they
came—were discernible. These days, if a stranger, a shopkeeper, a person
offering directions learns that you are Armenian and of Diyarbakir ancestry,
you will be ushered into a home, welcomed with tea, treated like a long-lost
relative deserving honor. You will be hemşerim: a person of this place.
When I met with Abdullah Demirbaş, the old city’s mayor, he
had just completed his second term, and he was between political appointments.
Demirbaş is Kurdish, and it quickly became apparent that the story of Sourp
Giragos’s revival was inseparable from the interweaving narratives of political
violence that bound together Armenians, Kurds, and Turks for more than a
century. The municipality’s welcoming atmosphere, and its willingness to
challenge orthodoxies about the genocide, is in many ways a Kurdish story.
In 1915, in Diyarbakir, Kurds were among the main executors
of the genocide; members of prominent Kurdish clans helped plan the massacres
for the Ottoman bureaucracy and grew rich by the seizure of property. In the
countryside, Kurdish tribal chieftains carried out the killings with pitiless
savagery. But then, not long after Mustafa Kemal Atatürk formed the modern Turkish
republic, the Kurds themselves became the objects of Turkification, as the
state initiated a process to eradicate their culture. The irony was not lost on
foreign observers: “It is a curious trick of fate that the Kurds, who were the
principal agent employed for the deportation of Armenians, should be in danger
of suffering the same fate as the Armenians only twelve years later,” the
British Ambassador in Ankara reported, in 1927.
Eventually, a pathological, contradictory view of Kurds
gained currency in Ankara, a view that denied that Kurds existed as a distinct
ethnicity while at the same time holding that they would be irrevocably foreign
unless they renounced all that made them distinct. The state insisted that
Kurds were merely “Mountain Turks,” a form of Turkish peasantry. An armed
nationalist movement, led by the Kurdistan Workers’ Party—the P.K.K.—emerged,
and with it came the “emergency rule” in the region. The state’s agents razed
villages, clearing the countryside. Extrajudicial killings were rampant, and
Diyarbakir’s prison became notorious for torture and disappearances. As a
Kurdish politician recalled, “They hung me up by my arms, nude, and attached
electric wires to my genitals and anus. When they turned on the current, my
whole body would tremble; they call this ‘doing the plane.’ ”
As the villagers fled to Diyarbakir from the surrounding
areas, it became a Kurdish city. In time, the Diyarbakir Kurds began to
recognize that their role in the genocide was a kind of original sin in their
modern political history. “I remember this one Armenian priest,” Demirbaş told
me. “A Kurd was insulting him, and this priest told him, ‘We were the breakfast
for them, you will be the lunch. Don’t forget.’ And that was important for me.”
Demirbaş, a big man with an easy smile, was born in 1966, in
a Kurdish village called Sise; his family moved to Diyarbakir when he was one.
“When I first went to primary school, I wasn’t able to speak Turkish,” he said.
“The teacher asked me a question, and I didn’t understand, and the next thing I
remember she was holding my ears and bashing my head against the wall. I didn’t
go to school for a week.” The school he attended was Süleyman Nazif Elementary,
named for an Ottoman notable. Thirty years earlier, my father had attended the
same school, and I recalled similar stories from him about everyday
aggression—about the insult gâvur, meaning “infidel,” the epithet carrying
echoes of 1915. For my father, the atmosphere was intolerable, and he dropped
out; my grandfather bought his diploma with bags of rice.
Demirbaş had the opposite reaction: inspired by Socrates, he
became a teacher of philosophy. Between 1983 and 1991, the Kurdish language was
illegal, but he and his wife named their daughter Berfin, the Kurdish name for
a pale-colored flower—a decision that instantly triggered prosecution. The
legal battle went to Turkey’s Supreme Court, and by the time Demirbaş won, his
daughter was a year old. As a teacher, he confronted the bureaucracy of
Turkification with similarly mild gestures, each time eliciting a severe legal
reaction. The government moved Demirbaş from school to school. In 2001, he was
posted to Sivas, a deeply conservative city, where he wrote a press release
stating that all people in Turkey had a right to education in their native
languages. He was fired. Destitute, he returned to Diyarbakir, and was elected
to lead a teachers’ union. From there, he entered politics, and in 2004 he
became mayor of Diyarbakir’s old city.
When a newspaper asked Abdullah Demirbaş, the old town’s
mayor, for his message to Turkey’s uprooted Armenians, he said, “Return!”
When a newspaper asked Abdullah Demirbaş, the old town’s
mayor, for his message to Turkey’s uprooted Armenians, he said, “Return!”
At the time he lost his teaching job, he had been charged in
as many as a hundred cases. Some of them, owing to changes in the law, were
dropped; many others were added, and now he does not know how many there are.
His lawyer told him that if he lost every case his combined prison term would be
four hundred and eighty-three years. It seemed strange that Demirbaş could not
keep track of his legal affairs, but as he spoke about his cases, I began to
understand his confusion. Shortly after he was elected, a twelve-year-old
Kurdish boy was fatally shot while police were gunning down his father, in
front of their house; Demirbaş erected a sculpture to mark the tragedy, with
thirteen holes carved into it, representing the boy’s gunshot wounds. He was
prosecuted: misuse of municipal office and resources. (Three years.) The case
went to the Supreme Court, which remanded it to a terrorism court, which threw
it out—though now, on appeal, it has made its way back to the Supreme Court. In
2006, at a conference in Vienna, he presented a paper, “Municipal Services and
Local Governments in Light of Multilingualism.” This time, the charge against
him was “propagandizing for a terrorist organization.” (Five years.) When he
issued a multilingual tourist brochure, in Turkish, Kurdish, Armenian, and
Assyrian, he was charged. He was charged for speaking Kurdish while officiating
at a wedding.
In 2007, the government forced Demirbaş out of office, and
so he phoned a friend who owned a house near the municipal headquarters and set
himself up there as shadow mayor. Journalists, dignitaries, and assemblymen
still sought his advice, as did his constituents, who came by the hundreds,
with offerings of tea and sugar. Members of his former staff raised funds to
cover a small budget and volunteered during off hours. Demirbaş’s teen-age
children took jobs to support the family. In this way, he continued his term.
And the state continued finding new ways to charge him.
In 2009, Diyarbakir Armenians—living, as many did, in
Istanbul—came to Demirbaş to discuss restoring the cathedral. Demirbaş had just
been reëlected, by a wide margin, and the national attitude toward the Armenian
minority and toward the genocide was slowly beginning to soften. The ascendancy
of Recep Erdoğan, of the Justice and Development Party, to the office of Prime
Minister, in 2003, initially signalled a new willingness to confront Turkish
political orthodoxies. In Istanbul, the Armenian journalist Hrant Dink founded
Agos, a newspaper—and when Dink was assassinated, in 2007, a hundred thousand
people protested, many holding up signs that said, “We are all Armenians!”
Thirty thousand people also put their names to a statement of apology, which
read, “My conscience does not accept the denial of, and the insensitivity
toward, the Great Catastrophe that the Ottoman Armenians were subjected to in
1915. I reject this injustice and I share the feelings and pain of my Armenian
brothers and sisters. I apologize to them.” The Ministry of Culture restored an
important Armenian cathedral on an island in Lake Van.
But the limits to these gestures were unmistakable. The
state had renovated the Lake Van cathedral, but as a museum; for three years,
it would not allow a Mass to be held there. Turkification had not fully abated.
As recently as 2005, the Environment and Forestry Ministry announced plans to
correct the “ill intent” of scientific nomenclature that violated “Turkish
unity”: thus, the species of deer known as Capreolus capreolus armenus became
Capreolus capreolus capreolus. Even as people mourned Hrant Dink, death threats
poured into his former office. And when the Turkish President, Abdullah Gül,
responding to the apology campaign, offered a woolly statement about the
possibility of “dialogue,” a nationalist accused him of having Armenian
ancestry. Gül, rushing to prove a genealogy of Turkishness “for centuries,”
sued for defamation—and won. In parliament, a legislator’s motion to adopt the
apology caused an uproar; the chairman cut him off, accusing him of “insulting
the society in which you live.” A new campaign—“I do not apologize”—got far
more signatories.
The Diyarbakir Armenians went to the Ministry of Culture,
seeking financial assistance to renovate the church. The ministry agreed to pay
the full cost, more than two million dollars, but only in exchange for the
deed, intending to convert the structure into a museum. Vartkes Ergün Ayık, the
head of the Sourp Giragos Foundation, which led the restoration effort, told me
that it took no time to decline: better to let it remain in ruins than stand as
an empty symbol. Instead, he brought a delegation to see Diyarbakir’s mayor,
Osman Baydemir, whose jurisdiction spanned the entire city. Baydemir, whose
family had sheltered Armenians a century earlier, agreed to help, but argued
that a majority of the financing should come from Armenians, so that they would
be invested in the project. In the end, Ayık secured most of the funding from
private donors.
Ayık’s family had left Diyarbakir the same year that mine
had, in 1952, and I learned that my grandparents had arranged for my father to
work a few summers in his father’s haberdashery, near the Great Mosque. By the
standards of the city, this practically made us family. In the
nineteen-fifties, Ayık’s father had campaigned to have Sourp Giragos returned
to Armenians from the state-owned bank, and Ayık was in many ways following in
his footsteps. One night at his home, he showed me binders of notes that his
father had made: survival testimonies typed up on onionskin paper, folk poems,
Ottoman deeds, lists of Armenian villages, their old and new names—the basis of
a lost manuscript that he was trying to find. Although Ayık acknowledged the
Kurds’ regret, he seemed unwilling to relinquish his caution. Already,
academics had coined a new term, “Kurdification,” to describe the Kurds’ effort
to claim their place in the region’s culture. He recalled one day asking
Demirbaş, “If Kurdish autonomy were granted, then would your embrace of
minority rights remain?” Demirbaş laughed and said yes.
Cartoon
BUY THE PRINT »
In truth, the benevolent conspiracy to rebuild Sourp
Giragos—Armenians and Kurds working in an unlikely partnership—was fragile.
Just as reconstruction began, in 2009, both Diyarbakir mayors were indicted in
a dragnet, apparently designed to crush the region’s Kurdish political
leadership. Demirbaş’s home was raided at 5:30 A.M. Police detained him at gunpoint,
and, at the station, he found himself being handcuffed by a former student—with
the student, eyes full, hesitating, and Demirbaş assuring him that there was no
point in delay. The charge was grave—membership in an illegal affiliate of the
P.K.K.—and Demirbaş denied it. He stayed in the Diyarbakir prison until 2010,
when he was released for medical reasons. The case is ongoing.
Still, he kept at it. He set out to rename three streets for
local writers: a Kurd, an Armenian, and an Assyrian. He used municipal funds to
run Armenian-language courses and erected a signboard in Armenian welcoming
visitors. Within his jurisdiction, seventeen parcels of land that had been
taken from the church were returned. He told the Armenian Weekly, “We want the
people living in the city to realize that, historically, Diyarbakir has always
been a multicultural city.” When the Weekly asked, “What is your message to the
Armenians who were uprooted from their ancestral lands?” Demirbaş said,
“Return!”
My grandfather arrived in the city as a young child in dire
circumstances. His story begins in Jabakhchour, about a hundred miles north of
Diyarbakir, where his father, Khatchadour, was a prominent landowner.
Khatchadour had two stepsons, and, in the eighteen-eighties, one of them shoved
a Kurdish man in a fight, and the man fell to his death. The stepson was
imprisoned and sentenced to death by hanging, but Khatchadour paid to have his
life spared. Outraged, the Kurdish man’s family burned his fields, stole his
livestock, and threatened murder. Khatchadour took his family—including my
grandfather, who was probably no more than two years old—and fled toward
Diyarbakir, where Sourp Giragos had established itself as a haven for pilgrims.
Along the way, they met an Armenian tailor—a terzi, in Turkish—who lived in the
city, and he invited them to stay with him. Not long after, another disaster
struck: a cholera epidemic swept through Diyarbakir, killing Khatchadour and
two of his children. My grandfather and his mother were spared, though, and the
tailor looked after them.
Diyarbakir was in a state of upheaval. The empire was
declining precipitously, and Ottoman leaders, hoping to maintain a dominion
that extended from Tunis to Basra, had imposed reforms, meant to unify peoples
of different faiths and languages around an Ottoman identity. The new measures
augmented individual rights, upending an old theocratic order that placed the
empire’s Christians beneath its Muslims, and they promised greater equality for
Armenians. But the reforms were fitfully enacted, and for the most part they
only made life worse. Many Kurds, feeling that their divinely ordained status
was threatened, lashed out violently at their neighbors.
The sense of popular resentment was compounded after
Ottomans lost territory in the Russo-Turkish War. In the Treaty of Berlin, the
Great Powers sought to dictate the fate of the empire, committing the sultan to
implementing reforms “in the provinces inhabited by Armenians, and to guarantee
their security against the Circassians and Kurds.” The sultan, Abdülhamid II,
saw the Armenians’ strengthening ties to the West as evidence of treason. He
formed a Kurdish militia, to bring fiefs under tighter state control, and he
used it to exact punishment, massacring a hundred thousand Armenians.
In Diyarbakir, fears that the reforms would grant Armenians
too much autonomy erupted into a pogrom. (Süleyman Nazif wrote, “Like our
grandfathers before us, our principal task is to work for the glory of the
Caliphate and to augment its population. This is the road upon which we will
travel, to death.”) For three days in November, 1895, the city was engulfed in
ethnic violence. Gunfire broke out near the Great Mosque, and Muslims pillaged
Armenian shops and homes, going door to door, killing hundreds. The market was
set aflame, and the smoke was visible for thirty-five miles.
No one in my family knows how my grandfather survived, but
it is clear that he was finding a place for himself. When he was about ten, the
tailor decided to teach him his trade. “What is your family name?” the tailor
asked. My grandfather didn’t know, nor did his mother. So the tailor said,
“Well, what was your father’s name?” My grandfather said it was Khatchadour.
“Then your name will be Khatchadourian.”
My grandfather’s given name was Hagop—Armenian for Jacob—but
at some point he also adopted a Muslim street name, Sait, and among
non-Armenians became known as Terzi Sait—Sait the tailor. Eventually, he opened
a store near the Great Mosque, in the center of the city, and on Easter morning
I went looking for the old storefront. Nothing of it remained, but the area was
still filled with tiny shops, lining an avenue that bisects old Diyarbakir.
Easter Mass this year in Sourp Giragos. Because the church
still has no priest assigned to it, a priest flies in from Istanbul.
Easter Mass this year in Sourp Giragos. Because the church
still has no priest assigned to it, a priest flies in from Istanbul.
It was a short walk from there to Sourp Giragos, past tea
stalls, produce venders, and a five-hundred-year-old minaret precariously
balanced atop four small columns. Closer to the church, the shops and street
clutter fell away; the narrow stone alleys became more uniform, the turns
easier to confuse. In places, the reconstructed bell tower loomed into view.
The effect of entering the large church courtyard—with its garden, its sycamore
maples, and its wooden tea tables—was similar to driving out of a tunnel and
emerging into the clear. Nothing of Sourp Giragos’s dilapidation remained. The
church had been built from “female basalt,” volcanic rock so porous that it
breathed. Because female basalt had been mined to depletion, the porosity in
many of the reconstructed stone blocks was ersatz; still, one had the sense of
entering a living structure.
That Sunday was the first Easter to be celebrated at the
cathedral since its reconstruction, and a gruff priest named Father Kevork had
flown in from Istanbul to conduct Mass. Although the church was open every day,
the patriarchy was slow to assign it a permanent priest. Likewise, Armenians
living overseas seemed hesitant about supporting the church, in a place where
there was no obvious community for it. Ayık was still struggling to raise four
hundred thousand dollars to pay outstanding bills. His daughter asked me if I
knew how to reach Kim Kardashian.
Part of the apathy was surely rooted in a general suspicion
about investing in a country where “Armenian” is a form of slander. But Ayık
thought there might also be a deeper cultural pathology at work. To get behind
a functioning church would mean shedding the posture of enraged victim, he
argued. There was also a more obvious question: What was the building’s
purpose? Demirbaş said that the reconstruction was an act of self-criticism, an
apology, a symbol of harmony. Ayık said the church served as a monument to
those who had once been there. Yet these things it could do just fine as a
semi-dormant religious structure, with Father Kevork now and again flying in.
It did not, however, take long, sitting in that courtyard on
Easter morning, to understand that the new Sourp Giragos needed to function as
a church to fulfill its particular purpose in the climate of residual
Turkification. Uncle Anto had said, “Only I am left,” but it turned out that
all around the ruins of Sourp Giragos there were people of mixed Armenian
heritage, people whose fathers or mothers or grandmothers had been taken in by
Turks or Kurds in 1915, married into Muslim families, and assumed new names and
identities. In villages, where no one’s ancestry was ever very secret, they
were often recognized, and became known by the epithet “remnants of the sword.”
No one knows the true size of this hidden population across Turkey, and
estimates range from thirty thousand to three million; the secret identities
are only now starting to emerge. A few years ago, a group of these people had
come to Sourp Giragos to be baptized, their names kept quiet for security
reasons. But that they had stepped forward was significant, and I could see how
a working church would signal, in ways a token one could not, that being
Armenian in Turkey was becoming acceptable.
On Easter morning, the two church caretakers, Aram
Khatchigian and Armen Demirjian, were rushing around with preparations, but
they took a few minutes to have tea with me in the courtyard. “If you really
dig deep, sixty per cent of the people in the city have some Armenian
background,” Khatchigian told me. “I’m basing this on the people who come to
the church. From my family, seven people survived 1915. Actually, there were
seven orphans who had come together and supported each other—my grandfather was
one of them—and by supporting each other they ended up becoming a family. If
you look at their descendants, these people do accept that they are Armenian,
but nearly all of them are Muslims. From the day I was born, I have known
myself to be Armenian—unlike Armen, who did not learn about it until he was
twenty-five years old.” Both men, given Muslim names at birth, renamed themselves
in honor of Armenian ancestors.
At nine or so in the morning, Khatchigian walked to the
entrance of the church and rang the bell. Inside, pews were slowly filling, the
air thickening with incense. In my father’s childhood, Armenians gathered for
Easter at the Chaldean Catholic Church; they stayed past midnight on Holy
Thursday, and at the ceremony’s climax the lights were extinguished and hymns
resounded in the dark. Here the ceremony was informal, almost formless, with
people dropping in and out of attentiveness. Wandering among the eight hundred
people at Sourp Giragos—many of them Muslim—I could see that what they were
celebrating was not Easter but the idea that Easter had been resurrected. As
the crowd dispersed, I introduced myself to an elderly man in the front pew.
“Who’s your grandfather?” he asked.
“Hagop Khatchadourian.”
“I don’t know anyone by that name. Who’s your father?”
“Puzant Khatchadourian.”
“I don’t know him, either.” The old man gazed past me. “I
did know a Puzant, once,” he said. “A long time ago—Terzi Sait’s son.”
“But Terzi Sait was my grandfather,” I said.
“Yes, yes, Terzi Sait,” the man said. “I remember. A good
man.”
It is unknown how many people in Turkey have hidden Armenian
ancestry. Estimates range from thirty thousand to three million.
It is unknown how many people in Turkey have hidden Armenian
ancestry. Estimates range from thirty thousand to three million.
My grandfather’s assumed name means “happy” in Arabic, and I
thought about this the next day, on my way to a part of the old city called the
Citadel. Built upon an embankment overlooking the Tigris, the Citadel once
contained a prison, official buildings, gardens, a church, and a mosque. A
later addition was an office for the special-intelligence branch of the
gendarmerie. Many Kurds, taken there in the nineties, never returned. In recent
years, more than forty-five Kurdish mass graves had been identified in the
region, and in 2012 a cache of bones was discovered at the Citadel. They were
delivered to the Forensic Medicine Institute, in Istanbul, which concluded that
“the bones were lying in the earth for at least one hundred years.” A century
ago, the Citadel was a departure point for the deportations of Armenians:
forced marches, the vast majority ending in death. Mass violence was buried in
the city like strata of rock. My grandfather used to say that in 1915 he heard
screams from the Citadel; the dead, he had recalled, were dumped onto
blood-soaked earth below.
II. INFERNO
A century after the Armenian genocide, many details of its
origins remain obscure. The pervasive state denial has corrupted access to
official archives—with some closed, and others open in limited ways—and forced
upon the research the distortions of politics. Key Ottoman records are missing
or have been destroyed. Still, it is clear that the violence of the genocide
flowed from deep streams of political insecurity. Hitler spoke of Germany being
“broken and defenseless, exposed to the kicks of all the world.” His Ottoman
counterparts felt a similar civilizational crisis.
In 1908, a group of reformers called the Young Turks emerged
from the empire’s periphery and began to wrest control from the sultan.
Pragmatic, fractious, and ideologically malleable, they came to power promising
greater freedoms and imperial unity; they named their political party the
Committee of Union and Progress (C.U.P.). But the empire that they sought to
unify was inexorably unravelling. Within several years, they settled on a
principle called Turkism, which envisioned an ethnically unified state. The
idea was to create “an ideal homeland that gathers in all the Turks and
excludes foreigners.”
A C.U.P. office was opened in Diyarbakir by one of the
movement’s central ideologues. There is this story in our family: Near my
grandfather’s shop, by the Great Mosque, there was a khan where a mufti named
Haji İbrahim—who belonged to the prominent Pirinççizade clan—drank tea. My
grandfather began joining him, and they grew close. One day, as they sat
together, a young man approached: the mufti’s son, Şeref—handsome, full of
revolutionary fervor, the author of an article arguing that Armenians were
“treacherous.” Şeref spoke of joining the C.U.P., but his father expressed
uneasiness with the movement. “It smells of blood,” he said. Gesturing toward
my grandfather, he added, “No harm will come to him.”
In 1914, my grandfather was about thirty—a bachelor, still,
unusually for his age. By then, he had established a reputation for making
Western clothing, and he took trips to Lebanon and Syria to buy sewing
equipment and luxurious fabric. He bought a house by Diyarbakir’s Gâvur
Mahallesi, the Infidel District—a gracious building with a large courtyard, a
well, and an old tree.
One day, he met a coppersmith who shared his surname. Kevork
Khatchadourian had a thin face, a long nose, big eyes. He, too, had survived
the pogrom of 1895. When the violence began, and Armenian shopkeepers debated
what to do, Kevork made his way to Sourp Giragos, brought his children home
from the school, and fortified the door with a stone. His shop was destroyed.
For a time, to escape cholera, the family fled to a village. After they
returned to Diyarbakir, his financial situation remained dire, and he was
forced to sell his house.
Kevork and his family became tenants in my grandfather’s
home. For my grandfather’s mother, their arrival was fortuitous. She wanted her
aging son to marry—she said it, and said it, and said it, enough to engrave it
into time itself—and Kevork had a daughter, Zevart, an intelligent,
strong-willed girl with dark hair and dark eyes. Kevork’s wife was protective
of her: she was a schoolgirl, and my grandfather was twice her age. But my grandfather’s
mother was driven, and on Zevart’s sixteenth birthday—February 14, 1914—they
married. The First World War had not yet begun, and perhaps the two had reason
for optimism.
Still, the empire was falling to pieces. Ethnic tensions
were growing. In the Balkan Wars, a series of mostly Christian rebel groups,
abetted by foreign allies, stripped the Ottomans of nearly all their European
territories. One military officer wrote, “Our anger is strengthening: revenge,
revenge, revenge.” A few months later, he became the Minister of War. During
the Armistice, the Great Powers again imposed reforms to improve treatment of
the Armenians, but they were never enacted. As imperial unity became paramount,
the C.U.P. began to enforce Turkism through deportation. A system of quotas
took shape, in which no Ottoman territory should be more than ten per cent
Armenian.
In January, 1915, the empire suffered another catastrophic
loss, this time on the Russian front: tens of thousands of Ottoman soldiers lay
dead, and a deep Russian incursion seemed imminent. The loss was a result of
the First World War, but the crisis of war also offered an opportunity for even
more drastic measures. In March, a member of the C.U.P. noted, “It has been
decided to wash our hands of responsibility for this stain that has been
smeared across Ottoman history.” An élite security apparatus, the Special
Organization, insured that deportation meant annihilation; it helped mobilize
bands of irregulars, most prominent among them Kurds who knew the landscape in
detail. A new governor was dispatched to Diyarbakir. He had vowed to take the
“most decisive measures.”
At front, the author’s grandmother, his father, and his
grandfather.
COURTESY KHATCHADOURIAN FAMILY
On April 24th, in Istanbul, more than two hundred Armenian
intellectuals—poets, doctors, writers, members of parliament—were arrested and,
with a few exceptions, killed. The date marks the official shackling of the
empire’s salvation to genocide. Convoys were directed into Diyarbakir Province
or on into the Syrian Desert, to camps where people were massacred or allowed
to die from privation. Eventually, the genocide became its own rationale. When
the U.S. Ambassador implored the Interior Minister to reverse course, he was
told, “The hatred between the Turks and the Armenians is now so intense that we
have got to finish with them. If we don’t, they will plan their revenge.”
Like many Armenians outside Turkey, I grew up in an
atmosphere where the desire for revenge was not always easy to separate from
the desire for justice. In community centers, it was often possible to find
posters of Armenians who had murdered Turkish officials during a spate of
political assassinations in the seventies and eighties. They were
heroes—fedayeen—and children were encouraged to honor them, to write to them if
they were in prison. The idea of reconciliation was unimaginable. Any
distinction between Kurds and Turks was immaterial; they were the same, worthy
of the same suspicion, mockery, and hatred.
There was an attendee at Sourp Giragos on Easter who knew
this sense of vengeance as well as anyone: Ara Sarafian, an independent
historian, activist, and combatant in the war over Anatolian history.
Sarafian’s family had mostly survived the genocide and afterward had moved to
Cyprus, where he spent his childhood. But, in 1974, while he and his parents
were in London on a family vacation, the Turkish Army invaded Cyprus, and they
were suddenly refugees. Perhaps it was inevitable that he would come to hate
Turks, with a deep teen-age hatred. As a graduate student, he vowed to learn
Turkish to confront the state’s official denials as a scholar. “I wanted to
hurt Turks,” he told me. He applied for a fellowship in Ankara, and when he was
turned down (his Armenian surname the deciding factor, he was certain) he went
anyway, paying his tuition by teaching English. Coming to Turkey transformed
him, in an unexpected way. The combined effect of getting to know Turkish
citizens, of higher education, of maturity, and of changing Turkish politics
eroded the teen-age hatred until he began to seek out opportunities for
reconciliation. In London, he founded a small press, called the Gomidas
Institute, with a straightforward mission: unearthing and publishing firsthand
accounts of 1915. But in the past few years he has widened his portfolio,
making trips to Turkey to investigate how the genocide remains a part of lived experience
there, and how official denials are at odds with local memory. Sarafian regards
his new work as ambassadorial, engaging in a cautious handshake with
politicians like Abdullah Demirbaş.
Recently, Sarafian went to Bitlis, the ancestral home of
William Saroyan, to encourage its mayor to name a street after the writer. A
friend there took him into the countryside. “We went to this one village,” he
told me. “And we met this Kurdish man who owned a fish farm, and there was an
old church, a very small church, and this guy made us tea and said, ‘You know,
I own this church.’ And I could have said nothing, I could have let it go, but
I asked him, ‘How can you own a church?’ And he said, ‘It’s quite simple,
really. In 1915, an order came down to kill all the Armenians, and afterward we
divided up the property, and that is how our family got this church.’ As I was
leaving, he came to me and said, ‘You tell me what you want me to do with this
church, and I will do it.’ Now, how can I hate this guy? I have to embrace
him.”
Last year, Sarafian obtained permission from Diyarbakir’s
leadership to commemorate the genocide there—the first time such a thing had
been achieved. He organized a ceremony on a bridge spanning the Tigris, from
which mourners tossed rose petals into the river. A few months later, Demirbaş
urged the Turkish government to follow the city’s example: “We Kurds, in the
name of our ancestors, apologize for the massacres and deportations of the
Armenians and Assyrians in 1915. We will continue our struggle to secure
atonement and compensation for them.”
During his stay in Diyarbakir, Sarafian had ventured into
the countryside, to conduct interviews with villagers. In his research, he
stumbled on the descendants of a Kurdish tribe that had gone to war in 1915 to
protect Armenians. Since that visit, Sarafian had wanted to plant rosebushes at
the tribal leader’s grave. The gesture was necessary, he said, to show
reciprocity, to underscore that the common Armenian biases against Kurds—as
bloodthirsty savages—could also be relinquished. “Kurds are very apologetic,”
he told me. “They know massacres took place, they know Kurds were involved. It
is up to us to say, ‘I appreciate your sincerity and the manner in which you
are dealing with this, that you are feeling guilty—but we are in no way
accusing Kurds as a nation of being somehow predisposed to commit genocide.’ My
criticism of Armenians is that we shouldn’t just wallow in victimhood. It
doesn’t help us, either.”
Cartoon
“It’s probably bad news if she refers to the second date as
‘mission creep.’ ”
BUY THE PRINT »
The day after Easter, I met Sarafian at his hotel to
accompany him on the trip. He has cropped graying hair and a perpetually
furrowed brow. In a rented car, we drove for about an hour and a half, and
stopped near a cluster of modest homes in isolated rock-strewn pastures.
Several men—gray suits, white shirts, open collars—approached. Sarafian
embraced one of them. The tribal leader in 1915 was Haji Mehmet Mishte, and
this was one of his grandsons, Recep Karabulut. Before long, Sarafian was
saying that Karabulut was like a brother, and Karabulut was saying that
Sarafian was kin. There were handshakes, callused grips. Sarafian conversed
quickly with the others:
“I brought two roses, so we can plant them.”
“Let us go, let us go together.”
“We must pray.”
“Of course we will pray.”
The village cemetery was just up the hill, one of the men
said. We climbed back into our car. “We have a common culture here,” Sarafian
said as he drove. “You can’t separate Armenians from Kurds.” When we reached
the graveyard, Sarafian took the rosebushes from the car and, giving one to
Karabulut, told him, “We have been separated by a hundred years.” Karabulut
said, “History has unified us now.” Then the men walked to an Ottoman-era
grave. The headstone had weathered, rounded edges, and Arabic script carved on
its face. A village cleric read the inscription, a line of poetry about the
impermanence of life, and then read the date that concluded Mishte’s
impermanence—which, it was determined after much debate about the Ottoman
calendar, was probably 1917. Sarafian tied a strip of cloth to a nearby bush,
an ancient ritual marking a pilgrimage, and said a few words honoring Mishte.
At the foot of the grave, he began to dig. The shovel broke. But he continued,
knees in the soil, until the roses were firmly anchored. Everyone prayed.
The tribe had slaughtered a lamb, and we headed to a house
on a hill, where it was served. While everyone ate, my eyes drifted to a muted
TV, to a news item about April 24th, the Armenian Day of Remembrance. For the
past several years, commemorations have been held in Istanbul. April 24th was
just days away, and the story included file footage of a previous year’s event:
people sitting on pavement, holding photos of the Armenian intellectuals who
had been rounded up in the capital and murdered. No calls for justice, no
demands, just sitting, holding pictures—each portrait, from a century ago,
capturing its subject in a hopeful act, innocent of what was to come.
For Diyarbakir, the genocide came in the form of the newly
assigned vali, or regional governor, Dr. Mehmet Reşid—an Ottoman middle manager
of startling effectiveness, responsible for the deaths of more than a hundred
thousand people. Reşid was a Muslim Circassian from the Russian-controlled
Caucasus, where his family had survived an earlier violent purge. Beginning in
1860, the Tsar forced hundreds of thousands of Muslims from the region,
pursuing them to the shores of the Black Sea, from which they were delivered to
the Ottoman Empire on ships that became known as “floating graveyards.” Reşid
was born in 1873, and his family moved to Istanbul a year later. He enrolled in
the Military School of Medicine and, preoccupied with the sultan’s despotism,
helped found the C.U.P. “I always desired law and justice,” he wrote in his
memoirs. “I always had the friendship and confidence of all my companions; I
never took part in certain villainous behavior.”
With the Ottoman state collapsing around him, Reşid’s
outlook began to harden. He served in various official posts—the Aegean, Mosul,
Baghdad—growing increasingly concerned that the empire’s Christians posed a
grave internal threat. Ottoman Greeks, one C.U.P. member had declared, “needed
to be broken and destroyed,” and Reşid came to agree. On the Aegean, he
aggressively deported them, hoping to replace them with Turkish refugees. By
the time he arrived in Baghdad, he was a changed man. As Süleyman Nazif
recalled, “Instead of the old poised character and calm, there was an appalling
arrogance and anger.”
In Diyarbakir, Reşid confronted crumbling state authority.
Corruption was entrenched, and soldiers were deserting. Many deserters were
Armenian, and when they took to the city’s flattened rooftops they became known
as the Roof Battalion. Reşid saw in them an élite unit to massacre Muslims; he
arrested them and tried to extract information by torture, but he discovered no
plot. He imposed censorship, and proclaimed the confiscation of all weapons.
The Diyarbakir Armenians gathered to discuss what to do; my grandfather later
spoke of a meeting where a man announced that he had stockpiled guns beyond the
city walls. But the community decided that militancy was too risky and
surrendered their weapons. Reşid, believing that Sourp Giragos had become a
makeshift armory, had it searched, its prelate murdered. He found nothing. In
time, the cathedral was looted. “Some poured out of the church clutching
thuribles, chalices, and other sacred vessels,” one observer recalled. “They roamed
streets sounding the cymbals and fly-flaps and treading on the pages torn from
the Bible.”
In the countryside, Kurds have passed down memories of their
part in the killings. One said, “The Armenians taken away were saying, ‘We have
animals up on the mountain, and if you don’t milk them the animals will
suffer.’ ”
In the countryside, Kurds have passed down memories of their
part in the killings. One said, “The Armenians taken away were saying, ‘We have
animals up on the mountain, and if you don’t milk them the animals will
suffer.’ ”
Quickly, Reşid created a strike force, designed to conduct
“special measures” and acts of “punishment” throughout the province. The unit
became known as the Butcher’s Battalion. Seeking to assemble Kurdish
irregulars, he pardoned exiled members of a tribe known for banditry. He
reached out to the tribe’s leaders and described a plan to put Armenians onto
rafts called keleks (branches piled atop inflated goat skins) and send them
down the Tigris. “I will give you convoy after convoy of Armenians,” he said,
according to an account by the grandson of one tribal leader. “You will bring
them by kelek across the Tigris. When you arrive at a place where no one can
see or hear, you will kill them all.” Reşid recommended that the bodies be
filled with rocks, in order to sink them. “Of the gold, money, and jewels, half
of it is yours, the other half you will bring to me to give to the Red
Crescent. But no one can hear or know about this secret.”
In Diyarbakir, Reşid had imprisoned nearly two thousand
prominent Christians, mostly Armenians, and in May, 1915, they were called into
the prison courtyard, where mufti İbrahim read a document explaining that they
had been pardoned but would be deported to Mosul: “You may return to your homes
once the war is terminated. You are delivered from a great responsibility.”
Late that month, more than six hundred Armenians were sent down the river and
killed. Reşid had notified his counterpart in Mosul to expect the rafts, but
they arrived empty, followed by bloated corpses and decomposed body parts.
That summer, Fa’iz el-Ghusein, an Arab lawyer and a former
Ottoman official from Syria, travelled to Diyarbakir. In a book titled
“Martyred Armenia,” he wrote about the surrounding desolation. A hundred miles
north of Damascus, he encountered men and women huddled under tents made from
sheets and rugs. He picked up stories of the death marches heading south. Then
he began to witness convoys—from a distance they looked like troops marching to
battle, but up close he could see that they were devastated crowds, mostly
women, barefoot, exhausted. “Whenever one of them lagged behind, a gendarme
would beat her with the butt of his rifle, throwing her on her face, till she
rose terrified and rejoined her companions,” he wrote. “If one lagged from
sickness, she was either abandoned, alone in the wilderness, without help or
comfort, to be a prey to wild beasts, or a gendarme ended her life by a
bullet.” At the city of Urfa, there were Ottoman soldiers from Aleppo—an officer
with a cannon had “turned the Armenian quarters into a waste place.”
On the final approach to Diyarbakir, the landscape grew
bleaker still. “We went on amid the mangled forms of the slain,” Ghusein
recalled. “The same sight met our view on every side; a man lying, his breast
pierced by a bullet; a woman torn open by lead; a child sleeping his last sleep
beside his mother; a girl in the flower of her age, in a posture which told its
own story. Such was our journey until we arrived at a canal, called Kara
Pounâr, near Diyarbakir, and here we found a change in the method of murder and
savagery. We saw here bodies burned to ashes. God, from whom no secrets are
hid, knows how many young men and fair girls, who should have led happy lives
together, had been consumed by fire in this ill-omened place. We had expected
not to find corpses of the killed near to the walls of Diyarbakir, but we were
mistaken, for we journeyed among the bodies until we entered the city gate.”
Others had similar stories. Süleyman Nazif found that the
“smell of rotting corpses permeated the atmosphere.” Responding to a complaint
from an Ottoman official in Syria that the rivers were clogged with the dead,
Reşid noted, “Those who were killed here are either being thrown into deep deserted
caves or, as has been the case for the most part, are being burnt.” Eventually,
the Interior Minister wrote with an order: “Bury the deceased lying on the
roads, throw their corpses into brooks, lakes, and rivers, and burn their
property left behind on the roads.”
Within the city walls, my grandfather’s shop was destroyed,
so he worked from home, and people often turned up. There was an Armenian
photographer who had been engaged by the Turks to take propaganda pictures; he
came to share news, until one day he said he thought that he had seen too much,
and soon after he disappeared. There were relatives from Jabakhchour, among
them my grandfather’s remaining sister, ill with tuberculosis, who left him a
two-year-old girl. There was a woman whose husband had been murdered, and an
underfed Armenian soldier—“a man, very nice, and pathetic, if you need him,” a
priest from Sourp Giragos said, my aunt, who knew the story, recalled. More and
more people came, perhaps as many as thirty, and hid in a charcoal pit, behind
piles of wood, in an underground tunnel.
The mufti’s son, Şeref, also came; people were bringing him
orphaned boys, my aunt recalled, and he told my grandfather, “Let me give one
or two to you.” He brought a teen-ager from Bitlis named Kapriel. “My father
began asking around, trying to find his father, looking in the newspaper, even
contacting the Armenian cathedral in Istanbul,” my aunt said. “There was news
of someone who met Kapriel’s father’s description. Kapriel wanted to go, and my
father arranged for his travel. By the time Kapriel got there, his father was
dead for two days.”
Cartoon
“For someone who believes in personal responsibility, you
spend a lot of time blaming government.”
BUY THE PRINT »
My grandfather had created a sanctuary, but it was not
invulnerable. Once, my father told me, a high-ranking police officer came to
visit my grandfather. My grandmother brought food, and my grandfather, who had
a habit of quietly nudging plates in the direction of guests, sat waiting. The
officer ate and, when he was done, began to speak. He had been walking on the
riverbank when he saw an Armenian woman my grandfather knew, who was about to
be raped; to spare her from misery, he had shot her. My grandfather, unable to
control his anger, kicked the officer out, and the officer vowed that by
morning the family would be put on the caravans: a death sentence. (In my
uncle’s version, the source of the argument differs, but not the outcome.) My
grandmother’s father, Kevork, said that he would bolt the door, douse the house
with gasoline, and destroy the family rather than surrender. A sleepless night
followed; at dawn, the muezzin at the mosque called out. The streets were
quiet. My grandfather turned to one of the people in his house, an Armenian man
who passed as a Kurd in public. “Go to the mosque,” he said, “and tell us what
is happening.” The scout went, and found a funeral in progress. The police
officer had died shortly after leaving, of a heart attack. On the way back, the
scout broke cover, calling out in Armenian, “The man is dead!” My grandfather
went to see for himself, mixing among the mourners, nodding, saying, “A good
man.”
After planting the roses, Ara Sarafian wanted to travel
south, to the banks of the Tigris, where Reşid had conspired with Kurds to
attack the keleks. In an old diplomatic report, he had found references to the
location, and on a previous visit he had gone looking for it. The report was
off by several miles, it turned out, but villagers corrected him. “Kurds have
an everyday memory of Armenians, whether it is a particular house or a building
or a field,” he said in the car. “The memory is still there.”
Sarafian didn’t know the way, but at a courthouse we found
someone who could guide us: İkram Sevim, a law clerk, tall and thin, in a
checkered blazer. As we drove past a village built on an Armenian graveyard,
Sevim spoke of 1915: “The Armenians taken away were saying, ‘We have animals up
on the mountain, and if you don’t milk them then the animals will suffer.’ We
didn’t say anything. They were looking after their animals, and we were not
looking after them.”
Ten minutes later, we were in empty hills, the grass
vibrant. A sign marked a military outpost: “Special Security Zone—Entrance
Forbidden.” Sevim drove briskly past, turning right, then left, until the paved
road gave way to a network of rutted tracks. Stones on the road grew larger and
sharper. Fearing that they would puncture his tires, Sevim did not want to
proceed. But we went on in Sarafian’s car, driving no faster than a stroll,
while a few of us, in front of the vehicle, chucked large rocks out of the way.
Still, it was evident that we wouldn’t reach the ravine before nightfall.
The sky faded to the color of slate. Looking at a jagged
hilltop before us—a scrim blocking the river—I thought of a moment in the
Armenian liturgy when the priests step behind a curtain to prepare the
Eucharist. On the other side, churchgoers can hear chants and singing, but the
ritual is obscured, in a symbol of faith. Had we made it to the other side of
the outcropping, what would we have seen? The Tigris flowing, as always, with
no hint of the violent history attached to that spot.
As we carefully turned around, I decided that where we stood
was as good as anywhere. Then someone made a joke about the military outpost
and what we might say if we were stopped—the truth would raise too many
suspicions—and I realized that I was only concocting a justification for
failing to reach a place of real importance. There is, perhaps, an element of
contrivance in any pilgrimage—the idea that arriving at a far-off destination
will be personally transformative. But we were not attempting a pilgrimage in
the conventional sense. We were hoping to transform our destination, to employ
our presence as witnesses, even if a century too late, to raise it out of
officially imposed obscurity.
In the car, Sarafian mentioned that he was planning an event
in Diyarbakir the following day, and then he had to rush to Paris for an
academic conference. But he intended to return. A dam was being built
downstream, he said, and by the time it was finished the site would be flooded,
its erasure complete. Local memory of the event was also vanishing. During his
earlier trip, he had met an eighty-three-year-old village leader named Hussein
Karakuş, whose uncle had participated in the slaughter at the ravine. The story
of the keleks had been told and retold in his family, and Sarafian, with his
phone, recorded Karakuş as he relayed what he knew: the Armenians had been sent
down the river from Diyarbakir by keleks on the vali’s order, and they “were
all killed and burned.” When Sarafian asked if there had been any Armenians in
the area, the man began to list dozens of villages—Keferzo, Bazboot, Deri,
Tmiz, Baraso—that had been emptied of inhabitants. “They were all massacred,”
he said, and added, “It was a sin.” Sarafian promised to return, but Karakuş
died shortly after their meeting, taking with him whatever else he knew.
On the road back to Diyarbakir, I dozed, then awoke. Rain
hit the window in diagonals. My thoughts turned to my grandfather. The more I
learned about his survival, the more precarious it seemed. Most of the survivor
stories I had heard from Armenians in Diyarbakir were of children—orphaned, or
spared with their mothers—who were taken in by Turks or Kurds. My grandfather
had survived as an adult, relatively openly, sheltering other Armenians in a way
that doesn’t seem to have been completely disguised.
Cartoon
BUY THE PRINT »
Perhaps he was not prominent enough to be put on the keleks
and robbed, as the city’s wealthiest Armenians were. But he had not been
deported and killed on a roadside, either. Certainly, he had useful skills. In
a telegram, Reşid reported that two hundred Armenian craftsmen had been allowed
to remain in the province, because they were valuable to the military. My
grandfather, as far as I was able to learn, never made things for the Army. But
my father and his siblings say that he provided Western garments to members of
the city’s Kurdish and Turkish élite, even as they were planning the massacres.
In essence, he was bartering for his life.
There is a story that all my grandfather’s living children
recall: as the killings and deportations were winding down, he received an
unwanted invitation from the vali himself. He was brought before him, and the
vali asked, Why are you still alive? When my grandfather explained that he was
a master tailor, someone produced a bolt of fabric. Make me a coat, the vali
said. My grandfather saw that there was not enough fabric, but, realizing that
he could not refuse, he took it home and proclaimed that the family would live
or die by this coat. He worked desperately. When the coat was finished, he
brought it to the vali, who tried it on and said that it was good—but then,
just as my grandfather was leaving, the vali called out, “Wait! I would like
these buttons to be covered in fabric, too.” My grandparents struggled to cover
the buttons, using whatever scraps were left. Then my grandfather returned with
the coat, and he was spared.
The story has the contours of a parable; some details may
have been burnished in the retelling. But on the whole it appears to match the
historical record. As a young revolutionary, Reşid was arrested by the sultan’s
men, and in his memoirs he gave special attention to the treatment of his
clothes, bemoaning their confiscation and mocking their replacements: “a fez on
my head that was rather narrow and too long” and “a pair of pants that still
sagged even though I had folded the waist three times (they must have been
tailored for one of the palace eunuchs).” Reşid understood from experience how
small indignities could be used as an instrument of persecution.
A historian who spent years studying the extirpation of
Diyarbakir’s Armenians told me, “It is highly unlikely that anybody not
entirely reliable was ever allowed to get close to Reşid and take his
measurements.” Ghusein, the author of “Martyred Armenia,” recalled that Reşid
retained a few Armenian craftsmen in Diyarbakir, but he suggested that there
were other forms of patronage, too. “The last family deported from Diyarbakir
was that of Dunjian, about November, 1915,” he wrote. “This family was
protected by certain Notables.” Our family, it seems, was the same.
My grandfather knew mufti İbrahim and the members of his
clan, prominent local Kurds who belonged to Reşid’s inner circle. In
particular, he associated with the mufti’s son, Şeref—a man one diplomat listed
as No. 12 under “Persons Responsible for the Armenian Massacres in the Vilayet
of Diyarbakir.” From conversations with my father, I came to regard their
relationship as a matter of cold convenience. After the war, Şeref often
visited the family home, and my father told me that pleasantries were
exchanged, that children were expected to kiss his hand, and that my
grandfather often muttered a mild curse after he left. But not long ago my
mother found an old tape of my father’s eldest living sister, Ani, interviewed
by my parents, and she talked with my father about Şeref:
ANI: He was a kind man.
PUZANT: He was not that kind.
ANI: Yes, Father did say that from appearances he seemed
kind, but if the opportunity arose he was still a Turk.
PUZANT: He wasn’t that good. He was a very bad man, but
among bad men he was good.
ANI: He didn’t do anything bad to my father.
My aunt was the second daughter in the family to be named
Ani. In 1915, at the height of the genocide, my grandmother gave birth to her
first child, and named her Ani, but she died young. The next child, born in
1916, inherited her name. “I asked my father, ‘How did I get my name?’ ” my
aunt said on the tape. “And he told me it was given by Şeref bey, who said,
‘You know, your people are fighting at the front, and it’s possible that you
might get the Kars-Ardahan provinces back, and also the ancient city of Ani, so
you should call your daughter Ani.’ And so when Ani died the name was left for
me.”
Cartoon
SEPTEMBER 21, 2009
“I’m done—I only jog far enough to burn off the cheesecake I
had for breakfast.”
BUY THE PRINT »
This is not cold convenience. Perhaps it is impossible to
fully grasp the mixture of friendship and animosity, suspicion and mistrust
between my grandfather and the mufti’s son—the complexities of a relationship
that transcended not only communal and religious differences but also the rift
of genocide. In 1915, Şeref had a secret knock for my grandfather’s door, and
on at least one occasion warned him that the house was under suspicion as a
sanctuary. My grandfather sent away the people who were hiding there, some of
the men disguised in women’s veils. Searchers came with dogs, but found
nothing. Why Şeref decided to help, risking his own life, is hard to know. Just
before leaving Diyarbakir, my grandfather asked him. Şeref said, “The Russians
were advancing. They had reached as far as Erzerum. Had they made it to
Diyarbakir, then I would have been like you. In that case, you would have
protected me.”
As it turned out, Şeref’s fears were misplaced. In
Diyarbakir, many people involved in the genocide remained prominent in local
life. Şeref became mayor. Another member of his clan, who had been key to the
genocidal program, entered parliament. And the vali? He was unrepentant. The
C.U.P. party secretary recalled saying to him later, “You are a doctor. And,
being a doctor, you are charged with saving lives, so how is it that you let so
many innocent people go to their death?” Reşid described a condition of
existential threat: “I saw that my country was going to be lost. So, eyes
closed, I pushed on ahead without fear, convinced it was for the good of my
nation.” A bit later, he added, “You asked me how, being a doctor, I could have
taken a life. Well, here is my answer: Those Armenian bandits were a bunch of
harmful microbes pestering the body of this nation. A doctor’s duty is to kill
microbes, isn’t it?”
Reşid was ready to be judged, he boasted: “If, because of my
actions, my own country’s history holds me responsible, then so be it.” At the
war’s end, in 1918, he was arrested, and prosecuted by an Ottoman tribunal,
which operated briefly under foreign pressure. But he fled detention, and while
the authorities tried to hunt him down he wrote a rambling letter to his wife.
“The Armenian hounds have joined them,” he said. Friends advised him to turn
himself in, but he chastised them. “I feel the result will be dark. I am
thinking of committing suicide.” He armed himself with a revolver, and in
February, 1919, he killed himself. His family was granted a state stipend—for
“services to the fatherland”—and, in time, Turkish society came to honor him: a
street in central Ankara still bears his name.
After the war, my grandfather strove to navigate a city that
remained in turmoil. In 1925, a Kurdish rebellion was crushed, its leaders
executed by hanging in the city center. Four years later, my grandfather said,
of his eldest daughters, “These girls have to leave.” He smuggled them and one
of his sons to Aleppo. He, too, was desperate to go. At one point, he sold his
house and all his belongings, and moved the family into a small apartment,
waiting for permits that would allow them to leave. But the permits never came.
There were other attempts, also unsuccessful. My aunt told me that a friend of
his, a Turkish official, looked up his records and told him that he would never
get permission: “You are supposed to stay here and work.” The city’s
entrepreneurial class had been wiped out.
My grandfather went into business with one of the
“notables,” a prominent member of the clan that had helped protect him. He also
opened a sesame-oil factory, and he did well. In his quiet way, he continued to
help people; my Aunt Ani said he was an “anonymous philanthropist,” adding,
“Everyone called him dayi”—uncle. But, outside his family, I sense, he kept
himself at some remove. In his home, he permitted only Armenian to be spoken,
and yet he forbade himself and his family to speak it on the streets. Though he
liked to wear expensive clothes, he always had his children trample on them
before he went out. Conspicuousness was still a risk. When he learned that
another of his sons was secretly planning to go, he helped him. One of his
daughters visited from Aleppo; he brought her a Ramadan sweet wrapped in paper
and told her that if she could guess what it was he would give her anything.
When she guessed correctly, she asked to take one of her brothers with her, and
he obliged.
Even as his family emigrated in waves, my grandfather
prospered, moving closer to the Great Mosque (and farther from the Infidel
District). By the time my father was born, in 1936, he had built a grand house,
with a stable facing the avenue, a courtyard, and a flat roof in the Diyarbakir
style. In those years, during the intense Anatolian summer heat, just about the
entire city would retreat to the rooftops at night, to wooden daybeds open to
the night sky. My grandfather’s house had them, too. But my family’s stories of
life in that house give the sense that a century of modernity moved there at an
accelerated pace. My father recalls going from meals on a carpet, in the Near
Eastern style, to Western dining, with table, chairs, and china; my grandmother
returning from Aleppo with nylons. There was a new camera, and a small darkroom
to go with it.
Cartoon
MAY 1, 2006
“Do you want a clean one?”
BUY THE PRINT »
In an old suitcase crammed with pictures, I found a photo
taken in that house; on the back, my mother had written, “circa 1950.” My
grandfather, near seventy, is at the center: hair short, neatly combed, pure
white; tie in a crisp knot. He is surrounded by thirty people, pressed tightly
together. Looking at that picture, it is possible to see that the house was
intended to accommodate generations, and yet, only a year or two later, my
grandfather would abandon it: a train for Syria, forged papers, a ship for
Beirut.
In exile, he succumbed to a medley of ailments: prostate
surgery, a leg lost to gangrene, gathering isolation. He lived to see one son
die in a car accident and another shot while standing on the balcony—a stray
bullet from one of Beirut’s warring factions proving fatal. My grandfather
spent his final years bedridden in his Beirut apartment. The family’s money was
nearly gone; his last words to my father, who left for America in 1958, were a
request for a wooden leg. Death arrived before the request could be fulfilled.
He was buried in an unmarked grave.
My father had told me his childhood address, 2 Çiçek Street,
and before leaving Diyarbakir I went to search for it. In a narrow cobblestoned
alley, I found the number sloppily painted on an apartment building made of
brick, crumbling mortar, and rebar. The street was about the width of a man
standing with arms stretched apart, and the buildings were covered in graffiti
honoring the P.K.K. Kurdish children played unattended. Since 1990, countless
villages had been razed, and the villagers who came to Diyarbakir had put up
buildings rapidly to exploit legal loopholes. The buildings were called
gecekondu, Demirbaş told me, meaning “built in the night.” The structure at 2
Çiçek Street looked to me like a variant of gecekondu, and I imagined that in
ten years it, too, would be torn down and replaced. The only discernible
remnant of our family house was a heavy stone that once served as a threshold.
III. REMEMBRANCE
State-sponsored denial is not a void, a simple absence of
truth; it is a wounding instrument. And, after a hundred years of it, it is
hard to feel Armenian in a meaningful way without defining oneself in
opposition to it. But the centenary of the genocide, in 2015, may be more than
just an occasion for reflection. Some anniversaries offer the promise of
release, and the historical distance, combined with the changes unfolding in
liberal Turkish society, may be significant. “This government has an unusual
aspect to it,” Demirbaş told me, sitting in Sourp Giragos’s courtyard. “It
punishes us, but it also implements our projects. I was dismissed as mayor for
providing multilingual municipal services, but then the state started
multilingual TV programming.” As we spoke, a reporter rushed over to ask if
anyone had heard about Erdoğan’s “apology” for 1915. As it turned out, Erdoğan
did not apologize. He offered a perplexing statement—sympathetic in tone but in
its substance still consistent with the official denial. He said, “It is a duty
of humanity to acknowledge that Armenians remember the suffering of that
period, just like every other citizen of the Ottoman empire.” A week later, he
argued in an interview that the genocide never happened, echoing a sentiment
that he expressed before the reconstruction of the cathedral: “If there is a
crime, then those who committed it can offer an apology. My nation, my country,
has no such issue.”
On April 24th, the Day of Remembrance, I went to Sourp
Giragos early in the morning to see who would turn up. The church door was
padlocked, but a few people arrived and sat down for tea. There was a man from
Istanbul who spoke about his grandfather, who had owned three-quarters of a
village nearby. The man asked if the church had kept land registers; it had,
but most of them had long since disappeared. Five or six years ago, he said, he
had told a lawyer friend that he wanted to sue the state to reclaim his
family’s land, but the lawyer advised against it: two families who sued had
disappeared. “Things are changing,” someone said. “Yes,” the man said. “But if
you have a hundred years’ worth of fear in you, it’s hard to change from one
day to the next.”
Cartoon
MAY 28, 2001
“Now let’s see if we can’t scatter the trash all over his
desktop.”
BUY THE PRINT »
While he was talking, another man arrived and sat down, a
man in his forties or fifties, with dark hair, a thick mustache, a sad and
uncertain bearing. Later, someone told me that his name was Abbas Ercan. In a
deep voice, he poured out a flood of loosely consecutive memories. His grandfather
had survived the massacres, he began to say, but just as he began to speak he
had to stop, and, after a small gasp, he wept. A woman at the table comforted
him: Yes, yes, she said, we have all cried over things like this. Ercan resumed
his story, about how his grandfather and great-aunt had been orphaned, how they
were taken in by neighbors, how they earned money cleaning wool, working a
loom, dyeing cloth. But, as he continued, it became clear that the source of
all that emotion was not so much the difficulty of surviving 1915 but the
difficulty of surviving the denial. Decades later, he said, during the Second
World War, his grandfather—a Muslim convert named Ahmet—was bathing alone in a
river when some people stumbled upon him and asked, “What are you doing?” Ahmet
explained that he was performing Muslim ablutions, but the visitors took one
look at him and said, “No, no, we know who you are”—by which they meant that
they knew he was Armenian. Ahmet was overcome with terror, thinking, Oh, God, they’re
going to eliminate me right now.
Ercan began to choke up again, but he continued, explaining
that the people who had found Ahmet understood his fear. They told him, “We are
like you,” meaning they were also Armenian, and they all promised to stay in
touch, but they never did.
Ercan emphasized that he held no grudge against anyone, that
he simply had come that morning to do something he could not do for most of his
life: to speak about who he was and about his family’s experience. I could see
that for this man April 24th was not so much about commemorating the past as it
was about finding some release from the present. He was likely Muslim, but for
him Sourp Giragos was an enclave beyond the denial. “Every morning, my
grandfather, without exception, would go and pray at the mosque, even if he was
the only person there,” Ercan said. “What he was probably doing was saying to
himself, ‘If something like this ever happens again, I want the community to
say, “No, no, no, Ahmet was a good Muslim—even if he is a convert, he is a good
Muslim, anyway.” ’ So they wouldn’t hurt him. I am not exactly sure how much he
believed.” Someone said that this was a common trait among converts, that they
become zealous to demonstrate their faith. “They figure something would happen
to them if they talked,” Ercan added. “But we don’t hold a grudge,” he said
again. “We only want one thing: when we meet someone who has been through all
this, we want to console one another.”
That evening, Ara Sarafian wanted to visit the ruins of
another, far older church, called Sourp Sarkis. It was a short walk, but we got
lost, taking one turn, then another, through narrow alleys where old women sat
on doorsteps.
“Do you know where the old church is?”
“The mosque?”
“No, the church. It’s a ruin.”
Eventually, we found the church compound. The gate was
locked, so I followed Sarafian through a hole in the outer wall. Inside, a
family had improvised a simple house beside the ruin. Across the entrance, they
had strung up a nylon rope for laundry. The scene reminded me of what Sourp
Giragos had looked like years ago. The roof had collapsed, but a network of
stone arches supported by pillars remained. Because the church had been used to
store rice, a third of it had been walled off in cinder block. Dirt and grass
filled the basilica, pretty much wall to wall. The floor appeared to undulate
like sea swells, with the fallen basalt rocks floating among them. As we fanned
out, a freckled Kurdish woman emerged from the house with her children.
Sarafian spoke with her. She was in her twenties. Her husband was in prison.
Like Sourp Giragos, this church had endured cycles of
collapse and rebirth: in 1915, a treasured relic—a fragment of a nail,
supposedly among those hammered into Jesus’ Cross—went missing. “This is the
reality of the Armenian genocide,” Sarafian said. “Sourp Giragos represents a
future wish.” He studied the fallen architecture, and then left, making his way
back through the hole in the wall. I decided to linger. Four generations
ago—decades before my grandfather was born—a member of my grandmother’s family,
Sarkis Kazanjian, had been at that church, helping to renovate it. He is the
earliest identifiable person in our family tree; beyond him, our ties to
Diyarbakir vanish into black earth.
As I walked across the ruins, it occurred to me that, though
Kazanjian had not lived to see 1915, he had been touched by it, too. This is
one of the strange features of genocide denial and of Turkification: erasure,
by design, works both forward and backward in time. My grandfather had
preserved the future for his family. But his past, our past, whatever
contributions we had made to Ottoman society, had been effectively eradicated.
I had been travelling with family photos, showing them to people, and the photo
of Kazanjian always evoked the strongest reaction. The picture is of a
broad-shouldered man with intense eyes, wearing a fez, vest, coat, and
embroidered caftan. Kazanjian was a merchant, apparently also with a role in
officialdom. A Kurdish intellectual, a good friend of Hrant Dink, wept when she
saw it, and when I asked her why, she didn’t answer. I could speculate. There
was no way to look at such a man and believe that he belonged to any other part
of the world, and yet it was also obvious that in Turkey, whatever progress had
been made in the past century, this man, and many others like him, could not be
offered acceptance without painful complications.
Cartoon
NOVEMBER 5, 2001
“Look, I’m sorry your wife doesn’t understand you, but this
is a dry cleaner’s.”
BUY THE PRINT »
As a boy working to restore the church, Kazanjian had caught
his hand between two stones and lost a finger. If you knew the right piece of
basalt, you could reach out and touch it, but there was no way to know. My aunt
said the finger had been buried beneath one of the altars: he had lost it in an
act of piety, and it was given a pious resting place. The story had its
uncertainties, but memory—kept alive now by only a few—was all that was left.
I went farther into the church, making a list of the things
that the people of Diyarbakir had left there. Dried scraps of bread. Automotive
carpeting. An old shoe. A fragment of a transistor radio. Corrugated plastic,
some of it burned. Where the main altar had been, there was a fire pit; among the
ashes, a wrapper for a candy called Coco Fino and empty cans of Efes beer. A
rusted wire. Coils of shit. In the inset of a wall, someone had arranged
several stones in a neat line. Hundreds of daisies reached upward. And as the
sun descended behind the high city walls the smell of grilled meat drifted over
from nearby homes, and the sound of children playing began to fill the streets.
A ball was kicked and it hit the side of a building and bounced. Some boys
clambered over the wall that surrounded the church. Women left their kitchens,
and climbed to their roofs to collect carpets that had been put out to air. TVs
wired to satellite dishes came on, filling spare rooms with their ethereal
glow. All of Diyarbakir, it seemed, except the church, drifted forward in time.
Overhead, a flock of common swifts darted and circled among the old stone
arches. Their black wings arced like boomerangs as they swooped through the
ruins—above the piles of earth, the weeds and the wildflowers, all the
trash—and their movements were ceaseless, careless, as if unweighted by
anything. ♦
Raffi Khatchadourian became a staff writer at The New Yorker
in 2008.
BIO ALL WORK

















Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder
Not: Yalnızca bu blogun üyesi yorum gönderebilir.