Chapter 1: From the Outbreak of War until the Revolt in Van

In Turkish history, 20 April 1915 is considered to be the reason for the strong action taken against the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire, and this portrayal was accepted, although only officially, by the Germans. According to the Turkish portrayal, the Armenians in the eastern Armenian metropolis of Van revolted on this day against the Turkish government and, thus, attacked the fighting troops from the rear. The logical consequence was the evacuation of the Armenians from those regions close to the front.

Although official German policy at that time agreed to this version, to which the Turkish people have adhered until the present, reports of German observers did not. This version was accepted by only a few diplomats and for only a few weeks, as it was not possible to observe the situation in Van personally, for the German Empire did not have consular representation in Van, nor did it have much contact with the German and Swiss representatives of relief organisations there. Soon, the impression of the German diplomatic representatives in the Ottoman Empire was that the Turkish government was merely using the real or supposed revolt of the Armenians in Van as an excuse to deport and exterminate the Armenians.

For already before 20 April 1915, rigorous measures were taken by the Turks against the Armenians and these were described by the German observers. Until the obvious outbreak of the Armenian genocide the Germans’ relationship to the new Turkey of the Young Turks as well as speculations on Russian intentions and the Armenians’ reactions to this was at the foreground of German interest.

The Armenians, the most important minority in the Ottoman Empire, apart from the Greeks, had suffered greatly under Turkish rulership in the past, especially in the period from 1894 until 1896, when hundreds of thousands of Armenians were killed in massacres. However, since the Young Turks had taken over power the climate between the two ethnic groups had improved noticeably. Several German sources go into this new situation.

(I) Co-existence between the Turks and the Armenians

1) The Armenians’ relationship to the Young Turks after this group came into power

In a report on the beginning of 1915, the German journalist, von Tyszka, writes:

Until recently, in fact at the beginning of this year, the Armenians were regarded as the most reliable element, indeed the only reliable people within the Christian elements in Turkey. One could read it in all the newspapers and the important Turkish dignitaries confirmed this on every occasion, which presented itself. [1915-10-01-DE-001]

Those Germans in a position of responsibility kept raising this point particularly concerning the harmony in their justification reports. For example, the Secretary of State, Zimmermann, spoke to the Imperial Committee of Ways and Means on 29 September 1916:

When the Hamidic regime was overthrown and the Young Turks came into power, the Armenians took the side of the Young Turks. They put their revolutionary organisation at the disposal of the Young Turkish regime and produced even some ministers too. [1917-05-09-DE-001]

The German consuls also received official signals on the return to normality from the Armenians. The Armenian bishop in the city, Monsignore Seadetian, already reported to the German consul in Erzerum, Edgar Anders, in 1914 after the acceptance of European reform proposals by the Ottoman government, after which his fellow countrymen had been given extensive autonomy in the eastern provinces,

that the Armenians were completely appeased and considered themselves to be loyal Ottomans [1914-02-16-DE-001].

This appeasement was particularly evident in the fact that the majority of Ottoman Armenians wished for a certain amount of autonomy, but not the integration with Russian Armenia and, thus, the Russian Empire. The German ambassador in Constantinople, the capital at that time and today called Istanbul, Hans Baron von Wangenheim, reported after a conversation with the Armenian patriarch to his superior office in Berlin:

Generally speaking, the Patriarch observed that every reasonable Armenian would wish to remain under Turkish rule and would reject an annexation of the districts concerned to a foreign state [1914-12-29-DE-001]

The Russian Armenians also seemed to have the same aversion to an integration. Already in the autumn of 1913, Consul Anders had reported after an audience with the Catholicon of all Armenians in Etshmiadjin:

I gained the impression that, in the interest of preserving their national individuality, it would not suit the Russian Armenians at all if the Turkish Armenians came under Russian rule. [1913-09-26-DE-001]

2) Turkish repressions against the Armenians since the spring of 1915

After the outbreak of war, the relationship of the two peoples towards each other changed. Vice-Consul Max Erwin von Scheubner-Richter, who stood in as administrator for Consul Edgar Anders while he was in Russian captivity, reported from Erzerum in connection with the “purges”:

The Armenian population of the Vilajets of Erserum, especially the country people, is very worried because of a few incidents, which they see as harbingers of new massacres. … Even with the Turkish population, as one can see from certain symptoms, the old hatred is rising again. [1914-12-30-DE-001]

Consul Roessler received confirmation of the Turks’ actions against the Armenians in the far north-eastern part of the country from the highest Turkish provincial official personally. Roessler writes that the Wali of Aleppo, Djelal Bey, had reported to him,

that some inhabitants of Armenian villages on the Turkish side were killed by Muslims. [1915-04-12-DE-001]

Ambassador Wangenheim reports:

In two districts of Van formal butcheries took place under the connivance of the Kaymakams. [1915-04-15-DE-002]

The German Protestant Christians, who were also well informed by their missionaries in Turkey, speak in a petition addressed to the Imperial Chancellor of the Turkish acts of terror against the Armenians:

Since the commencement of the Russian-Turkish war, hundreds of Armenian villages have been plundered by the Kurds and irregular militias in the eastern Vilayets and thousands of defenceless Armenians have been murdered. [1915-11-10-DE-011]

Turkish opinion towards the Armenians had changed fundamentally. The German journalist, von Tysza, writes:

Since March, an about-turn has taken place which is as general and consequent as if the Turks had never known up until now what dangerous people had been living within their midst. [1915-10-01-DE-001]

This did not only apply to those Armenians near the Russian border. Vice-Consul Hermann Hoffmann-Foelkersamb reports from the Mediterranean harbour town of Alexandrette, today known as Iskenderun:

During the last few days house-to-house searches took place at all the homes of the Christian subjects of the Ottoman Empire residing here - Armenians, Syrians, Greeks – on order from higher up (most likely from Constantinople). In some houses, papers were confiscated, apparently only because they were in a foreign language. [1915-03-07-DE-011]

If Armenians were not the victims of the massacres, then of the hard measures carried out against them, for example when they were called up to do transport duty at the front. Wangenheim says that the Armenian side had maintained,

the Armenian farmers were being used like draft animals to transport ammunition and provisions and many of them died from this inhumane treatment; the least of them, it is said hardly a quarter, returned to their villages. [1915-04-15-DE-002]

This was also confirmed by Sister Alma Johansson. The German Consul General at the Embassy in Constantinople, Johann Heinrich Hermann Mordtmann, who was responsible for reporting on the Armenians, noted after a conversation with this Swedish lady, who was in the service of the “German Christian Charity Organisation for the Orient”:

During the winter the male Armenian population was used for provision and munitions colonies in the Eastern theatre of war. Out of those sent only a few returned: from 2-300 on average just 50. The Armenian villages were destroyed in spring after they had already been ravaged as a result of billeting and requisitioning. Between May and June, Bitlis was cleared of all Armenians. [1915-11-06-DE-012]

3) Disarming and desertion of the Armenian soldiers

After the conquest of Anatolia by the Turks in the Middle Ages until the Young Turk Revolution in 1908, Armenians, like all Christians, were not allowed to use weapons in military service. After only a few years of equal rights, the Turkish government again limited admittance to military service. Scheubner-Richter reports from Erzerum:

Military authorities have ordered severed measures; Armenians are also not permitted to use weapons in military service. [1915-03-03-DE-011]

As an explanation for this, the Turks reported that Armenian soldiers had shot at their Turkish superiors. From Constantinople, Wangenheim reports on the Armenian soldiers:

The reports about the behaviour of the Armenian soldiers in the Turkish army during the campaign in the Caucasus are particularly serious: they are said to have repeatedly turned their weapons against the Turks, a fact that is even being confirmed by German officers who were present during those combats. [1915-04-15-DE-002]

Undersecretary of State Zimmermann also supported this version at the meeting of the Imperial Committee of Ways and Means on 29 September 1916:

Shortly after Turkey had entered the war on our side, in October 1914, we already received the news from the Consul in Aleppo that the military conscription of the Armenians would be subject to great difficulties ... The complaints lodged about desertions and switching of numerous Armenians to the Russian side were ever increasing.

Shortly after Turkey had entered the war on our side, in October 1914, we already received the news from the Consul in Aleppo that the military conscription of the Armenians would be subject to great difficulties. … The complaints lodged about desertions and switching of numerous Armenians to the Russian side were ever increasing. [1917-05-09-DE-001]

After a discussion with Posseldt, the German general who was residing in Erzerum, Mordtmann noted with regard to these accusations:

It is correct that the Turkish Armenians repeatedly served as guides for the Russians in their advances against Erzerum. Also some of these were found among the prisoners who were seized from the Russians. On the other hand, he considers it to be out of the question that Armenians troops had fired at their Turkish comrades; they had always used the Armenians behind the front. [1915-04-26-DE-011]

At that time there were deserters in the Ottoman Empire, both among the Armenians as well as other nationalities, but also among the Turks. With the exception of Zeitun, the German observers did not confirm a large-scale desertion among the Armenian soldiers. Vice-Consul Hoffmann remarks:

But this claim is quite impossible, especially to such an extent, and has actually been proved to be wrong. [1916-01-03-DE-001]

(II) Supposed and Actual Armenian Revolts

In spring, events took place in several towns in the Ottoman Empire which were regarded by one side as being Armenian revolts and by other sides as inconsequentialities or purely defence on the part of the Armenians. German sources, in particular, give a great deal of information on the events in Zeitun (known today as Süleymanli, north of Marash) and in the coastal town of Dörtyol. German diplomatic representatives were not present in Van, but because of the importance of the occurrences there, German sources often speak of them.

1) The events in Zeitun

Zeitun is a town north of Marash, known today as Kahramanmaras, which has always been populated by Armenians. It made history, because for a long time it held a semi-autonomous status. Its inhabitants, exclusively Armenians, had always proven themselves to be particularly ready to show active resistance and withstood Turkish sieges several times. This won them the admiration of all the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire and the hatred of the Turks.

Ambassador Wangenheim reports in the middle of April 1915:

Without doubt, excesses and acts of terror have taken place against the Armenians in eastern Anatolia and, in general, the events have probably been related correctly by the Armenian side, even if they were somewhat exaggerated. In many cases they have been sparked off by the distress and suffering that every war, even in industrialised countries, brings with it; however, in other cases, the blame was actually on the Armenians, and one can only accuse the authorities of not taking the necessary precautions in good time and of taking unnecessarily rigorous measures afterwards instead. [1915-04-15-DE-002]

Specifically, Wangenheim is referring to the events in Zeitun, the Armenian stronghold. Armenian deserters from Zeitun and surrounding areas, but also from Marash barricaded themselves in a monastery there. In the beginning, the reports sent from Aleppo by the German Consul, Walter Roessler, were still confusing. Although he was responsible for Zeitun, he had not personally researched the situation there. Roessler:

German female missionaries from Marasch are reporting that the hitherto still active and passive opposition by the inhabitants of Zeitun against the enlisting into the army of the conscripts of this Armenian city has been broken from Turkish side. [1914-10-16-DE-001]

According to Ambassador Wangenheim, the Minister of the Interior, Talaat, passed on information regarding Zeitun which revealed that

despite the disarming of the inhabitants of Zeitun which was ordered some time ago, the refractory Armenians have weapons, and the reason for these clashes lies in the resistance to conscription. [1915-03-29-DE-001]

Wangenheim further: Roessler reported:

In Zeitun some Armenian deserters, who were to be arrested, shot a couple of Turkish gendarmes. [1915-03-26-DE-001]

Roessler’s colleague from Adana, Eugen Buege, excludes that the Armenians from the mountain town had even joined the deserters and rebelled against the Turkish administration, as was later on repeatedly maintained. Wangenheim reports to Berlin that concerning the background Eugen Buege reported that

it cannot be a question of an uprising of the Armenians. [1915-03-26-DE-001]

In a further report, Roessler defined more closely that the matter concerned an isolated monastery

in which deserters were staying. It was surrounded, the deserters broke out and about 150 people fled into the mountains. Some were killed in action, some wounded and taken prisoner. The monastery was pounded to pieces by artillery. Battles against the town of Zeitun no longer seem to be imminent. [1915-03-31-DE-001]

According to a very detailed report from Roessler, the disturbances in Zeitun

raised the question whether they were instigated from abroad. During my official trip from 28 March to 10 April to Marasch I could not confirm this. The chief judge of the court-martial told me though that there was foreign influence, but he did not provide any evidence. These unrests are rather fully explained by their seeds which exist locally and which stem from the deep suffering gripping Turkey. [1915-04-12-DE-001]

Something completely different could be read in a later attempt at justification made by the Undersecretary of State in the German Foreign Office, Arthur Zimmermann. At the end of September 1916, Zimmermann (who meanwhile had been promoted to Secretary of State) writes in a note meant for a discussion with the Grand Duchess of Baden, who had inquired of the German Emperor about the fate of the Armenians:

The first signs of storm brewing up involved by an incident at Zeitun. In this small town in South Armenia, which was almost exclusively inhabited by Armenians and built like a fortress, a group of Armenian deserters had gone into hiding in March 1915 and put up desperate resistance to their Turkish military pursuers. This led to a siege and storming of the town, whereby considerable stores of modern weapons were found. As a part of the population had made common cause with the revolutionaries, under martial law a regime of a strict criminal prosecution was imposed on the town. [1917-05-09-DE-001]

Neither the reports made by the German consuls nor those from other German sources agree with this account. In October 1914, the inhabitants of Zeitun had even handed deserters over to the government, for which they had been guaranteed immunity. But according to a very detailed report by Roessler, the president of the Turkish government had

those people arrested who had supplied information on the robbers and who had been promised immunity from prosecution. [1915-04-12-DE-001]

Roessler also reported on the fate of the deserters:

government is asking all deserters to surrender. By the end of March, 450 surrendered from Marasch and 125 from Zeitun; part of them are being used in a penal company and part are waiting for their verdict at the court-martial. [1915-04-12-DE-001]

The Catholicon of Sis, Sahak, sent a further detailed report on the events in Zeitun through German channels to the patriarch in Constantinople:

The only purpose of the unheard-of atrocities and ill-treatment committed by the Kaimakam of Zeitun, Hussein Hüssni, by Suleiman Bey’s sergeant-major, by the mufti and government officials, who merely succeeded in discrediting the government’s reputation, was to force these peaceful people to go to extremes in order to give the government a reason to annihilate them. [1915-04-26-DE-014]

This annihilation had indeed been planned. In a report on the events in Zeitun, Roessler writes:

The danger of other massacres has temporarily passed even though the Muslim instigators are still busy at work. On 31 March, they sent a telegram asking the central government to move the inhabitants of Zeitun (around 10000 souls) elsewhere and to level the town to the ground. [1915-04-12-DE-001]

The Armenians of Zeitun were the first to be deported. Roessler estimates figures of

at least a thousand, possibly several thousand. They are being replaced by Mohammedan refugees from Macedonia. [1915-05-03-DE-011]

The German missionary, Blank, reports in a letter to Roessler:

... If you could see in what sort of a condition the people are arriving from Setun. One does not like to behold such misery and when one even sees what kind of devilish joy it arouses in the Turks and that they are not even satisfied with what they see – they would most like to see the blood of those people flowing. [1915-05-27-DE-001]

And missionary Blank writes in a letter to his superior, Schuchardt:

On 11. 4. a transport of families (25) arrived from Setun in Marasch in a sorry state. When they approached the town, the Muslims from Marasch went out to meet them and they had fiendish joy in seeing the people of Setun captured. They could not refrain from adding to their misery by pestering them with words and abuse and the others had to calmly submit to all this. … When recently the government gave the order for some of the stray dogs on the street to be shot dead, many Turks took them into their houses quickly because they considered it to be a sin, but on the other hand to kill a person is still a merit, not a sin. The Christians are less than dogs in the eyes of many Turks. … The Turks have fiendish enjoyment in seeing these poor people herded together like a flock of sheep and led away, being pushed by the rough soldiers. [1915-05-27-DE-001]

In a later report on the events in Zeitun, the German journalist, von Tyszka, writes:

The Armenian Patriarch in Constantinople called upon Minister Talaat Bey to obtain first-hand information concerning the events there. Using this occasion, the Minister explained to the Patriarch that he was very satisfied with the attitude of the Armenian population in Zeitun. It must have been disconcerting for the Armenians to find that the entire population of Zeitun, including the women and children, had left Zeitun a few hours after the clashes, with 5000 being deported to Konia and the remaining being forced to Sort, south of Musch. On questioning the Turkish Government, the Patriarch received the answer that this involved an offence similar to that which occurred 40 to 50 years ago and nothing could be done against it while the war was on. [1915-10-01-DE-001]

Marash , where a significant Armenian colony lived, was directly affected by the events in Zeitun. The shooting of Turkish gendarmes in Zeitun had had a great effect on the Turkish population in Marash. Roessler reports:

The Islamic population of Marasch clearly was going to use this incident as a reason to start with a massacre but remained calm since the set-up of a court-martial was announced. ... Armenian population of Marasch is entirely peaceable. [1915-03-26-DE-001]

In his detailed report on Zeitun, Roessler also reports on the effects on Marash of the events there:

The proceedings at the court-martial are mostly against all rich and respected Armenians, most of whom apparently never had anything to do with the incidents in Zeitun and who would prefer to have all robbers removed so that Marasch can become a safe area again. [1915-04-12-DE-001]

Roessler reports that, as in Zeitun, the Armenians from Marash and the surroundings villages were already deported before the supposed revolt in Van:

These measures taken by the central government must obviously be based on false reports from Marash. They are a disaster for the province and the country, intended to systematically ruin an important part of the population. They are based on a false fundamental conception which sees the entire Armenian population as being suspect or even the enemy. [1915-04-20-DE-013]

It is conclusively evident from Roessler’s reports that the point for those Turks who were responsible was not to persecute the Armenian ringleaders. For example, the authorities also took action against a charitable society which had never bothered with political matters at all. Roessler:

It would have made more sense for the court-martial to proceed against the Daschnaksutiun, which do not shy away from arms smuggle, and the Hintschak. But this was not the case. It should be mentioned that the charitable society always refused to deal in arms and was never involved in politics, and never accepted members of the Daschnakzutiun. [1915-04-12-DE-001]

The German consul also reported on acts of brutality carried out by soldiers:

hot coals were put down the dress of a mother visiting her son in jail to bring him food – all prisoners had to be fed by their relatives. [1915-04-12-DE-001]

2) The events in Dörtjol:

Armenian deserters had also hidden in Dörtjol, a town on the Mediterranean coast heavily populated by Armenians. The consul in Adana, Eugen Buege, gives a detailed account based on the report of the Armenian auxiliary official, Simon Agabalian, concerning which Buege believes “that altogether the matter has been described accurately”. Agabalian:

The inhabitants of Dörtjol had to serve or to pay “bedel” during mobilisation. Because of the general lack of money, these people could not help themselves and many, or you can rather say all, of them deserted instead of responding to the military invitation. Some of the deserters fled far away and others stayed home. The attention of the government was arisen by these circumstances and by the mistrust of the Turks living in this area towards the Armenians, more so because the inhabitants of Dörtjol defended themselves against the Turks. [1915-03-13-DE-012].

Wangenheim also mentions the events in Dörtjol in a report:

At the beginning of March, after Englishmen from the fleet had repeatedly landed and made some purchases undisturbed, there were two Armenians staying in the Armenian town of Dörtjol who originated from that area and who were acting on behalf of the English. One of these emissaries fell into the hands of the Turkish authorities and was executed in Adana. A further consequence was that the whole of the male population of Dörtjol was enlisted and led to the Vilayet Aleppo where they were set to building roads. [1915-04-15-DE-002]

Simon Agabalian also mentions the affair carried out in the dead of night:

During one night all the male Armenians of the village were arrested and sent away from this area, due to the emphatic request from the Turkish population of the neighbouring residences to remove the Armenians from Dörtjol and because they wanted to arrest deserters and avoid any unforeseen actions. They were sent to Aleppo under strict supervision and are now doing roadwork. During the arrest the Armenians showed submission and did not resist the officials. Three people were shot while trying to flee. Even these did not use any weapons. [1915-03-13-DE-012]

Supposed counter-intelligence activities had also been reported from the Mediterranean town of Alexandrette (today known as Iskenderum), not far from Dörtjol. In a later report by Vice-Consul Hoffman, stationed in Alexandrette, he describes just how much these events were exaggerated, poking fun particularly at the report of the German expert on the Far East, Baron Max von Oppenheim, who determined that there were “traces of a militarily organised conspiracy” in Dörtjol among other places. According to Hoffman, such traces were

neither discovered in Alexandrette nor in Doertjol. In Alexandrette, a very thorough massive search of houses uncovered neither weapons nor any other incriminating documents. According to reports, however, some arms were found in Doertjol. But this was not surprising since the inhabitants of this area had been able to defend themselves only with weapons during the so-called Adana massacre in 1909 during which they were in danger of being butchered by their Muslim neighbours. [1916-01-03-DE-001]

3) The revolt in Van:

German diplomats were only able to report from hearsay on Van, the quasi-official trigger for the Armenian genocide, because there was no German consulate in Van. The news from German and Swiss members of relief organisations who were stationed there is only to be found in a very fragmentary manner in the files of the German Foreign Office. Thus, Turkish accounts predominate in the German diplomatic correspondence.

Due to a report from Erzerum also based on official Turkish statements, Wangenheim reports to Berlin:

Consul of Erzerum telegraphed on 24 April that according to official information the revolt in Van has been suppressed; about 400 Armenians were killed, the rest fled to Russia. Supposedly, Kurds were also involved in the revolt in order to revenge themselves for the execution of their sheik in Bitlis in 1914 and oppression by the government. [1915-04-27-DE-001]

In order to give at least some background information, Wangenheim quotes from a party report made to the international Congress of Socialists on the activities of the rulers in Van, Daschnakzutiun.

“Our party has its bands of fidais in all of the Turkish Armenian centres ; their purpose is to ensure that the reaction does not raise its head again.” [1915-04-30-DE-001]

Based on further Turkish reports, Scheubner-Richter reports from Erzerum:

In continuing unrests in Van, the Turks now have 1000 dead, the Armenians 3000. [1915-05-09-DE-011]

It is only in the middle of May that, obviously based on internal information, the German consul can report on the reasons behind the revolt in Van:

The apparent cause of the troubles in Van is the arrest and murder of some Armenian public personalities, especially that of Mr. Ischkhan and the Armenian deputy of Van, Vramiam, who both enjoyed great respect within the Armenian community. It remains to be seen whether these incidents have occurred with the knowledge of the authorities there. But the government should have known that through these actions they had finally caused the infuriation which had been brewing for a long time, but particularly since the beginning of the war, and which could only be suppressed by the leaders, to break out. [1915-05-15-DE-012]

It is not obvious from the contemporary reports by German observers collected at the German Foreign Office how high the toll was, taken by the so-called revolt of Van. The figures of Turkish and Armenian victims in Van available today lie in the region of several hundred, several thousand if the number of those who fled is added. Just how grotesquely awful the situation on information available to the Germans was at that time is proven by the report by the naval attaché, Hans Humann, who claims – even though he was a very close friend of Enver Pasha – after a conversation with his confidant (which was passed on without comment by von Wangenheim):

Induced and incited by Russian agents, the Armenians have waged war so thoroughly against the Ottoman population that in the Vilayet of Wan, which used to boast 150000 Turks, only 30000 Moslems are still alive. [1915-08-06-DE-012]

The German journalist, Tyszka, reports for the first time on the events in Van from an Armenian point of view:

The following occurred in Wan: A national service Armenian conscript was arrested by the Turkish gendarmes on 6 May O.S. in Schabak, south of Wan. As they wanted to commit him in Wan, several of his friends resisted the committal and freed the young man by force. The General Governor of Wan summoned a meeting of the Armenian revolutionary party, Tschanaksuition, and together they passed a resolution that the head of the party with the Chief of the Gendarmery, accompanied by several gendarmes and members of the Armenian Revolutionary Union, should go to Schatak and take the deserter into police custody. On the way to Schatak, the Armenian party head and the members were murdered by the Turkish gendarmes. As the Governor of Wan wanted to arrest the other members of Tschanaksuition, part of them put up armed resistance while the others moved into neighbouring villages. During the fighting between the Armenians and the Turkish troops a few hundred Armenians were killed. Ten days later Russian troops appeared in Wan, whereupon the Turkish Governor-General, Djevdet Bey, brother-in-law of Enver Pasha, fled. An Armenian Government was appointed in which Kurds also participated. [1915-10-01-DE-001]

Because he himself could not picture the situation, Tyszka also gives the Turkish version:

The head of the Security police in the Ministry of the Interior, Djembolad Bey, assigned me to Essad Bey, the head of Section 2, as he himself had been in office for too short a time to be able to offer information concerning the misdemeanours of Armenians against Muslims. Essad Bey, who wants to publish the collected materials in a brochure in a few months’ time, stated to me: Over the last few years, the Armenian movement has been seen in the eastern part of the Empire. At the outbreak of war they took on a more threatening character. Bands were formed out of the Armenian revolutionary party, Taschnaksuition. Pasdermadjan, a former deputy from Erzerum, was the leader. … In fact, he appeared again as the top commander of five Armenian bands which carried out acts of terrorism in villages around Wan and then spread terror through murder and all sorts of disgraceful deeds in Wan itself. The Moslem population had chartered seven ships in Wan in order to flee by crossing the lake from Van to Adelchivas at the northend of the lake. All seven barges with at least 400 people on each, in total 2800 people, went down with all hands due to explosions. 200 Muslim families were massacred by Armenian brigands in Wan. The elderly, women and children were not spared. In the American hospital in Wan, several hundred Muslim women and children sought refuge. They were discovered, petrol was poured over them and set light to. [1915-10-01-DE-001]

The account of the embassy councillor at the Turkish Embassy in Berlin, Edhem Bey, represents the height of Turkish fiction. In a discussion with the officer in charge in the Ministery of External Affairs, Rosenberg, he maintained that the “drastic change” in the treatment of the Armenians first came about in April,

when the Armenians revolted behind the Turkish army during the Turkish advance on Azerbaijan, during which no fewer than 180000 Mohammedans were killed. Thus, it was not surprising that the Mohammedans had taken their revenge for this. [1915-10-01-DE-004]

These supposedly 180000 dead Muslims in Van were never accepted by the Germans. In his notes for a discussion with the Grand Duchess of Baden at the end of September 1916, Secretary of State Zimmer did at least give figures:

Things took a disastrous turn the following month, in April 1915, when in Upper Armenia, in particular in the area around Wan, in the rear of the Turkish troops who were advancing against Azerbaidzhan, a general Armenian revolt broke out which cost the lives of thousands of Muslims within only a few days. For obvious reasons very little or even nothing was published in any press which was hostile to Turkey or Germany about this bloodbath which was to have such sad consequences for the Armenians. By way of mobilising superior forces and with considerable losses, the Turks succeeded in suppressing the revolt in the rear of their front. It is understandable that they then decided to make such occurrence impossible in future. [1917-05-09-DE-001]

Vice-Consul Hoffmann from Alexandrette regarded the events in Van in a much more down-to-earth manner, because he had had enough experience with Turkish statements and understood their mentality. He simply subtracted the 150000 Kurds in the Van area from the Turkish reports, because he knew:

The fact that in and around Wan, i.e. in the war zone, the Armenians, by way of treason, switched to the side of the enemy, is not surprising after all that had preceded; I suppose this development had been anticipated by the Turkish authorities. It is also a known fact that some of the Kurds were supporting the enemy. [1916-01-03-DE-001]

To sum up: According to German reports, the revolt in Dörtjol was not a revolt and the revolt in Zeitun happened differently from the way it was reported by the Turkish. The Germans had no authentic reports on Van, but their ultimate reserve in judgement of the supposed or actual revolt signalises great reservations towards the official Turkish version.