“Further Papers Related to the Conditions of Christians in Turkey” is a set of reports that were written to correct the misunderstanding of the conditions of Christians living in Bosnia and Herzegovina under the Ottomans rule. The reports were dispatched by Vice-consul James Zohrab’s who was an interpreter, investigator as well as a diplomat of the Britain government to consul W. R. Holmes. Consul Holmes collected these reports and wrote a letter admitting that all the information stated in Consul Zohrab’s reports regarding the incident of Gasko were correct and true. Consul Holmes dispatched the full reports along with his letter to the Foreign Office and specifically to the Prime Minister of Britain at that time, Lord John Russell. The …show more content…
The massacre and profanation of churches were attributed to the Turkish troops in Gasko, where they were as consul James Zohrab concluded, not guilty of such offenses. It is important to note that these reports came four years after the Crimean war, in which Russia lost to the alliance of Britain, France, Sardinia and the Ottoman Empire. The Russian empire tried to influence the people of Bosnia and Herzegovina to weaken the alliance. Consul Holmes mentioned in his report how people in Mostar (Bosnia) “look for Russia to inspiration to what they shall say, or how they shall …show more content…
After Russia lost in the Crimean war to the alliance, one of its goals was to destroy this alliance or at least try to weaken it. The reports created by consul Zohrab to consul Holmes show in details why the Turkish troops could not have committed these offenses and why Russia was meddling with the alliance to secure its power.
Observing the incident of Gasko, consul Zohrab stated that he went to the lactations of these incidents and asked people of interest to comment and to discuss what truly had happened. Whereas Colonel Zekee Bey, Aide-de-camp of the Grand Vizier – Ali Riza Pasha-, investigated only some Christians in the expeditionary force of the headquarters at Metokhia. Although Zekee Bey showed affiliation to the Christians and allowed them to grieve, he seemed to be fed incorrect information regarding the number of Christians who lost their lives in the massacre.
The inconsistency of the observations of the events was led by Mr. Bezobrazoff, the Russian consul at Mostar. He investigated only the pillaged chapels and reported on it. In one of his reports to the Russian Government, he stated that the number of Christians who were massacred was 150 people, and the houses that were burnt were double than what the village contained. He misguided the Austrian consul of Mostar with this incorrect
August. C. Krey, The First Crusade: The Accounts of Eyewitnesses and Participants, (Princeton: 1921), 42-43
Moss, W., 2014. A History of Russia Volume 2: Since 1855. 1st ed. London, England: Anthem Press London, pp.112-113.
“Vladimir Christianizes Russia” effectively illuminates the supposedly positive sentiments felt towards the Slavic Christianization. This tale allows the reader to see the glorification of Vladimir’s grand triumph in choosing Eastern Orthodoxy and delivering the Slavs to redemption. The success in demonstrating Vladimir’s achievement in delivering Russia to salvation allows us to comprehend the importance of Christianity in the culture of Russia. Works Cited Zenkovsky, Serge A. & Co. Vladimir Christianizes Russia.
Though the book has no footnotes, it was researched methodically through documents and the work of other scholars. It is very detailed and specific for such a short book. The information about the foreign policy of Russia under Catherine’s rule, and her various wars and military maneuvers, helped explain some of the issues Russian is currently undergoing today in Crimea, the Ukraine and with Turkey. The central theme of reform was also examined in depth, and given the time in which she ruled, and the size of the country, it astonishes me the undertaking Catherine had in front of her. It could take 18 months for an imperial order to reach the far eastern side of Russia, then 18 more months for a reply to get back to her at the
struggle, however, fought under the guise of ethnic hatred. Bibliography Glenny M, "The Balkans, 1804-1999", 2000. Lampe JR, Yugoslavia as History. Twice There was a Country, 1996. Kegley and Wittkopf, "World Politics", 2001.
Thomassian, Vache. "The Constantinople War Crimes Trials: The Legal Response to the Armenian Genocide." Haytoug Magazine RSS. Haytoug: The Official Publication of the Armenian Youth Federation Western United States, 29 June 2011. Web. 05 Dec. 2013. .
Tolstoy’s The Death of Ivan Ilyich is a reminder that books can provide answers to questions we never asked, but yearned to know. For that reason alone, The Death of Ivan Ilyich should be considered a work of art. However due to the many subtle hints and clues pointing at the underlying Christian nature of the book, it deserves to be added to the list of great modern Christian literature.
New York: HarperCollins, 2003. Print. The. Bryce, Viscount. The Treatment of Armenians. London:
There was a long-standing rivalry between Austria-Hungary and Russia due to their interests in the Balkans. Russia saw her role as leading and supporting her fellow Slav peoples in the Balkans. This Pan-Slav concept provided an ideal excuse to interfere in the Balkans and to extend Russia's influence towards the Eastern Mediterranean. Ideally Russia wished to open the Dardenelles straits to its warships. Austria-Hungary was concerned that this Russian encouragement of nationalism may threaten her borders and inspire nationalism within her own empire. In turn, Germany recognised that as Austria's closest ally her fate was linked with that of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. Austria-Hungary was anxious to prevent Russian encroachment in the Balkans. This aim would be best served by the elimination of Serbia, Russia's Balkan ally. In 1878, Russia was humiliated at the Congress of Berlin when her proposal for a Greater Bulgarian state was rejected and Austria-Hungary occupied Bosnia to maintain order amongst the nationalist revolts.
Langer, William L. "The Franco-Russian Alliance (1890-1894)." The Slavonic Review 3.9 (1925): 554-75. JSTOR. Web. 28 Apr. 2014. .
Whenever the Turks invade foreign lands and capture their people an imperial scribe follows immediately behind them, and whatever boys there are, he takes them all into the janissaries and sends ...
Even today, it is hard to pinpoint exactly why Kirov was murdered and who orchestrated the endeavor. But many agree that Nikolaev was not the mastermind behind the hit. Roy Medvedev, a historian who lived through the terror as a teenager, seem to believe that Stalin was NOT as removed from Kirov’s murder as he led the world to believe. And to truly understand this accusation, it is important to note the history between the two men. The two shared a friendly relationship until their viewpoints digressed on the issue of repression against the peasants.
Wilk, Andrzej. "The Military Consequences of the Annexation of Crimea | OSW." Www.OSW.waw.pl. N.p., 19 Mar. 2014. Web. 2 Apr. 2014. .
Riasanovsky, Nicholas V., and Mark D. Steinberg. A History of Russia. 7th ed. Oxford: Oxford, 2005. Print.
However, the looseness and backwardness of their territories did not stop the Russians from wishing to extend their influence. " The Warner 5. Albert Seaton believes that the Tsar Nicholas did not want war, but it was part of his political strategy to bring Europe to the brink of hostilities in order to intimidate those who opposed him. " He would undoubtedly have taken even greater risks if only France and Turkey had been involved, but he was worried by the close interest taken by the British in the Middle East, for the islanders were already openly assessing the armed strengths there and did not conceal their low opinion of the value of the Black Sea Fleet."