ottoman official attitudes towards american missionaries ÇAĞRI ERHAN.pdf

7/27/2019 ottoman official attitudes towards american missionaries ÇAĞRI ERHAN.pdf

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/ottoman-official-attitudes-towards-american-missionaries-cagri-erhanpdf 1/22

o t t o m a n o f f i c i a l a t t ı t u d e st o w a r d s a m e r ı c a n m i s s i o n a r i e s *

Ç A Ğ R I ER H A N

ABSTRACT

Members of various American missionary organizations, mainlyaffiliates of American Board of Comm issioners for Foreign Missions(ABCFM, the Board) started to visit the Levant region in the second decadeof the nineteenth century. M oving out from Beirut, the missionariesestablished protestant churches, schools, hospitals and other social facilitiesmostly in non-Muslim populated areas of the Empire. While during earlyyears of Ottoman-American encounters the Sublime Porte was indifferenttowards m issionary activities among its subjects, the official attitudegradually changed and became negative in the follovving years, paralleling the

increase in the number of complaints from non-Muslim clergy, the Muslimsand the government officials. While the missionary activities gave impetusto the awakening of nationalism among some of the non-Muslim subjects ofthe Empire, such as Armenians and Bulgarians, Ottoman negative approachto American missionaries reached its climax during the last quarter of thenineteenth century. Accordingly, this article evaluates the causes and processof the change in the Ottoman official attitude tovvards the Americanmissionaries.

KEYW ORDS

Turkey and the United States; Ottoman Empire; American

Missionaries; American Philanthropy; United States and the Middle East

*This is a revised and enlarged version of a paper delivered to InternationalConference on "The United States and the Middle East: Cu lturalEncounters", Yale University, 7-8 December 2000.



1 92 THE TURKISH YEARBOOK [VOL. XXX

1. Introduction

The history of Turkish-American relations has a long pastdating back to 1790s when American sailors met with Turks in theNo rth Africa (Barb ary C oast). During the period betvveen 1800and 1830s American travelers and merchants frequently visitedTurkish harbors, such as İzmir (Smyrna), Alexandria and Beirut.Th e official diplom atic relations vvere inaugurated in 1830 vvhen

the Treaty of Co mm erce and Navigation vvas signed in İstanbuland a charge d'affaires, David Porter vvas appointed as theAmerican representative to the Sublime Porte (the Ottoman Court)in 1831.1

Along vvith the commercial relations, American missionaryefforts in the Ottoman lands alvvays occupied a high place in thebilateral ag enda. In fact, most of the diplomatic conflicts in thenineteenth and early tvventieth century Turkish-American relationsoriginated from the American missionaries' gradually expandingactivities in the Ottoman lands.

This paper, after a brief information on the expansion of themissionary activities in the Ottoman Empire, vvill examine the mainpoints of dispute betvveen the Sublime Porte and the missionariesunder three titles, namely "Missionaries and Ottoman Subjects"; "Missionary Schools and other Facilities" and "Publishing Activitiesof the Missionaries". Finally it vvill evaluate the affects of theexistence of American m issionaries throughout the Ottoman lands.

When American Board of Commissioners for ForeignMissions (ABC FM, the Board) vvas formed in Boston by m emb ersof the Congregational, Presbyterian and Reformed churches in1810, its main target vvas to evangelize the Indians and Catholics inAm erican continent. Hovvever, shortly after its establishme nt, the

Board identified a nevv target, "evan gelization of the vvhole W orld",and started to enlarge the scope of its activ ities. 2 In accordancevvith the decision taken in a meeting of the Board in 1818, tvvo

İJohn P. Brovvn, "An Audience vvith Sultan Abdul Mejid", TheKnickerbocker, Vol. XIX, June 1842, p. 497.

2 A. C. A Schneider, Letters from Broosa Asia Minör, Pennsylvania, 1846,p. 39.



2 0 0 0 ] OTTOMAN ATıTTUDES 193

American missionaries Pliny Fisk and Levi Parsons were appointedto implement preparatory work in the Ottoman Empire.3

The first attempts at missionary work in the Ottoma n landsvvere not directed particularly tovvard the Muslims, nor to theOriental Churches, but to the Jevvs, as in November 1819, Fisk andParsons vvere sent out to vvork in Palestine, vvith their anticipatedheadquarters at Jerusalem. But their instructions gave them amplerange. From the heights of Zion they vvere to survey, not only the

Holy Land, but surrounding countries, and then put to themselvestvvo main questions: "What good can be done?" and "By vvhatmean s?": "What can be done for M ohamm edans? What forChristians? What for the people in Palestine? What for those inEgypt, in Syria, in Persia, in Armenia, in other countries to vvhichyour inquiries may be extended?".4

Soon after they reached the Ottoman land, Parsons died in1821. But Fisk continued his mission. He visited Beirut, Tripoli,Baalbe k, Jaffa, Jerusalem , Hebron, Alexandretta and Latakia,collecting information on Turks, A rabs, Kurds, Druzes, Maronites,Greeks and Armenians. He vvas able to convert some Armenians

includ ing tvvo eccle siastics, Grego ry W ortabet and GarabedD i o n y s i u s .5 Fisk also established a missionary printing house inMalta in 1822 to publish religious books in regional languagessuch as Greek, Armenian and Arabic.6

As the first contacts vvith the missiona ries vvere vvelcomed bythe Armenian people, the Prudential Com mittee of the Boarddecided to establish a mission among Armenians in the OttomanEmpire in 1829. Accordingly, Eli Smith and Henry Otis Dvvightvvere chosen to explore the fıeld. The y started their tour in thespring of 1830, and after more than a year, returned vvith a mass ofnevv information, both in regard to Armenians and Nestorians. In

3 Uygur Kocabaşoğlu, Kendi Belgeleriyle Anadolu'daki Amerika, istanbul,Arba, 1989, p. 22.

4William E. Strong, The Story of the American Board, Boston, The PilgrimPress, 1910, p. 80.

5H. G. Dvvight, Christianity Revived in the East, Nevv York, Baker &Scribner, 1850, pp. 10-11; Suong, The Story, p. 84.

6Kocabaşoğlu, Kendi Belgeleriyle Anadolu'daki Amerika, p. 33.



194 THE TURKISH YEARBOOK [VOL. XXX

1831 William Goodell was instructed to proceed to İstanbul toestablish a new station there vvith special reference to A rm eni ans .7

Missionary vvork, started in 1820s in a modest manner,turned into a systematic and large scale activity in 1840s andreached its climax d uring the last quarter of the nineteen thcentury. The numb er of missionaries sent to the Ottoman E mpirereached 41 until 1836, and betvveen 1836-1844, 54 nevvmissionaries vvere appointed to the posts in the Levant. 8 Finally, the

number reached 137 in 1875, 177 in 1890 and 209 in 1913.9

Missio nary influx to the O ttoman Em pire vvas in parallel vviththe grovvth of their religious and educ ational activities. W hile therevvere only seven churches and seven schools in 1850 under thecontrol of Am erican m issionaries in the Empire, the numb er vventup to 49 churches and 114 schools in 1860, 97 churches and 331schools in 1880, and 163 churches and 450 schools in 1913. Thenum ber of the Ottoman subjects attending those scho ols vvas13.095 in 1880 and 25.992 in 1913. 1 0

At the beginning, the relations betvveen the Sublime Porte

and the missionaries vvere conducted vvithout any problems. Whilethere vvas no diplomatic treaty and relations betvveen the OttomanEmpire and the United States up until 1830 and the United Statesvvas not officially recognized by the Porte, American citizens,including the missionaries, conducted their activities in theOttoman lands under patronage of the British Embassy in İstanbuland through British consu lates located in various cities of theEmpire. For instance the missionaries in Beirut gained travelpermits (seyahat tezkeresi) from the Porte through the British

7Dwight, Christianity Revived, pp. 19-21.8 H. G. Dvvight, Constantinople, Settings and Traits, Nevv York, Harper &Brother, 1916, p. 227.

9Rober t Danie l , American Philantrophy in the Near East, 1820-1960,Athens, Ohio University Press, 1970, p. 94.

1 0 Joseph L. Grabill , Protestant Diplomacy and the Near East: Missionaryinfluence on American Policy 1810-1927, Minneapolis, University ofMinnesota Press, 1971, p. 17; Daniel, American Philantrophy, p. 94.



200 0] OTTOMAN AT TU DE S 195

Consulate in that tovvn. This m ethod was valid for ali those w hocame to İstanbul before an Am erican Legation was op en ed .1 1

Since, as early as 1813, the British Bible Society becameinterested in the spiritual condition of the non-Muslim Ottom ansubjects and their members paid visits to the Empire to distributethousands of copies of the Bible, the Sublime Porte did not makeany distinction betvveen the British clericals and the Americanmissio naries and evaluated the mem bers of English speaking

Protestant churches under the same identity, i.e. "British". On theother hand, as the British Embassy and consulates had a grovvinginfluence on the Ottoman central government and local authorities,British m issiona ries did no t face any difficulties vvhile traveling inthe Emp ire. Thus Am ericans benefited the same privilege as theyvvere bearing documents of protege signed by British offıcials.Finally, during 1820-1830, the missionary activities vvere limitedvvith certain areas far from the capital such as Palestine andLebano n and did not take much attention of the Sublime Porte.

When a treaty Finally signed betvveen the Ottoman Empireand the United States in 1830, the missionaries as vvell as otherAm erican citizens lost their privilege of being "British" subjectsbefore the O ttoman C ourt. Since the American legation in İstanbulvvas not as influential as the British on e and the A me ricanconsulates vvere not spread around the Empire, the Americanmissionaries continued to seek close relations vvith the Britishdiplomats in order to secure their presence in the Ottoman lands.Parallel to the increase in the missionary activities in 1830s and1840s, more and more problems arose and the official attitude ofthe Sublime Porte tovvards the missionaries became less elastic insucceeding years.

The problems of this period may be classifıed under threemain groups. First, the missionary activities among non-Muslim

subjects of the Em pire causcd an initial reaction from the elergy ofthe Oriental churches, then the issue became a concern of theSublime Porte. Second, opening of missionary schools sometimescaused difficulties. And, third, the scope of missionary publishing

^VVilliam Goodell, Forty Years in the Turkish Empire, Nevv York, RobertCarter & Brothers, 1883, p. 99.



196 THE TURKISH YEARBOOK [VOL. XXX

activities contradictory to the Ottoman law beca me a m ajör field ofpermanent fr iction.

2. Missionaries and the Ottoman Subjects

The Christian population of the Emp ire was not the primaryobjective of the Am erican missionaries. But since the Jews as areligiously well organized com mu nity vvere isolated from foreign

intervention and the M uslims vvere kept avvay from religiousconversion by heavy regulations including the death penalty forthose vvho convert to any other religion, the missionaries soonchanged their areas of activity and mostly intensified on the no n-Protestant Christian sub jects of the Ottoman Em pire. This nevvdomain included the Greek and Arab Orthodox community, theGregor ian Armenians and Armenian Cathol ics , the Druze, theNestorians and the Maronites vvho vvere Arab Catholics.

W hen the Syrian mission vvas established in Beirut in the firsthalf of 1820s, i ts main o bjective vvas to conduct religious andeducational activities among Christians other than Protestants. Thevvork expanded speedily. In 1827, there vvere 13 missionary

schoo ls in and around Beirut vvith 600 pupils. The first oppo sitionagainst the missionaries came during those early years. Startedamong the Roman Cathol ics rather than among the Turks orArmenians, i t vvas particularly directed against the missionaryschools and printing p ress. To the influence of Rom e, vvorkingthrou gh its priests, vvas added that of French and R ussian offıcials,schem ing to crush out missionary efforts. With such ecclesiasticalinterference and the political disturbance of the Greek insurrectionin 1826, the situation appeared alarming to the missionaries. In thegeneral lavvlessness, houses of some missiona ries vvere plund ered,and the Maronite Bishop (Pa triarch), com ing dovvn from hismonastery in the Mount Lebanon (Cebel- i Lübnan) ,asked his

people to drive out the missionaries, threatening at the same time toexcommunicate anyone vvho should rent a house to them. 1 2

After a peaceful period of 15 years, in 1841 another seriousreaction of Maronites occurrcd in Cebel-i Lübnan. The Maroni teBishop , vvho had earlier applicd to the gove rnor of Syria, Ze keriya

12Strong, The Story, p. 83-84.



2 0 0 0 ] OTTOM AN A T U D E S 197

Pasha, to complain abo ut the "destructive" works of m issionariesamong the local population, asked the Ottoman authorities tosuspend their activities. When the governor communicated thesituation in Lebanon to capital as alarming, the Sublime Portedelivered a note verbal to David Porter, then the United Statesminister resident in İstanbul, in May 1841 and asked him to urgethe missionaries to leave Lebanon. The Porte also emphasized itsconcern about the lives of the missionaries should the tensioninerease. Hovvever Porter, in his reply to the Porte, stated that the

Am erican leg ation could n either force the mission aries to vvithdravvfrom the region, nor bear their respon sibility.1 3

Thus the missionaries continued their presence in MountLebanon. According to Chapseaud, the United States consul inBeirut, the tension in the region vvas not caused by the missionaries,and the missionary schools vvere built outside the Maronite area. 1 4

Th e facts vvere different. The re vvas a historical feud betvveen theMaro nites and the Druzes, vvho both had a large nu mb er of kinsliving in the Cebel-i Lübnan. American missionaries, vvhilebuilding schools in the area dominated by the Druze, vvere usingthe intercommunal conflict to protect themselves from Maronite

intervention. But the "Druze Shield" failed to protect them, vvhenelashes betvveen the Maronites and the Druze increased in Fail1841. Along vvith many Druze buildings, some American missionstations and schools vvere also destroyed by the Maronites. TheSublime P orte's vvarning this time vvas critical and the missionariesvvithdrevv from the Cebel-i Lübnan to Bei ru t . 1 5 They did notinitiate any efforts in the region for a coup le of years.

From 1844 onvvards, the Armenian elergy also began tocomplain about the missionaries to the Sublime Porte. Matteos, theArm enian Patriarch of İstanbul, vvhom the Ottoman g overnm entrecognized as the only representative of the Armenian millet(nation), accused the missionaries of forcing the Armenians to

change their rel igion. During the early years of Am ericanmissionary activities among the Armenians, the general atmosphere

13National Archives and Records Administration, Maryland, USA ("NARA"hereafter), M-46 (Dcspatches from US Ministers to Turkey to theDeparment, 1818-1906), May 16, 1841.

14 NARA, M-46, August 1, 1841.15 NARA, M-46, October 1, 1841.



19 8 THE TURKISH YEARBOOK [VOL. XX X

was friendly. Arm enians, benefıted from Am erican educationalactivities in a positive way, welcomed the missionaries. But, as thenum ber of Arm enian converts to Protestantism inereased, theArmenian elergy changed its attitude. In 1839, only in İstanbul,there were 800 converts, a disturbing num ber for the ArmenianPat r ia rchate . 1 6 In order to prevent more Armenians to change theirreligion, Matteos called ali Armenians to cut any sort of relationsvvith the American missionaries and threatened those who were in"warm" contacts vvith the Am ericans, by isolation from the

c o m m u n i t y .1 7

Mov es of the Armenian patriarchate vvere supported by theSublime Porte that did not rccognize a Protestant millet, thusinterpreted the existence of Protestant A rmenian su bjects as illegal.One should also keep in mind that many Armenian Gregoriansoccupied high places in the Ottoman bureaucracy, and they vverein touch vvith the Patriarchate in opposition to the missionaries.When m ore complaints from the Armenians reached to the Porte,Ottom an governm ent once more confronted the United Stateslegation in İstanbul. In June 1844, Arm enians from Erzurum,Trabzon (Trebizond) and Bursa (Broosa) applied to the Porte andvvanted the Am erican missiona ries to be expelled from their tovvns.The basic reason of the com plaint vvas conversion. Rıfat Pasha, theMinister of Foreign Affairs, sent a note to the United StatesLeg ation and cali for m issionaries ' vvithdravval. Bu t, as in theLebanon case, John P. Brovvn, the American charge, stated that hecould not urge the missionaries to leave the tovvns. But, this timeth e Porte vvas more determinant and by orders to the localauthorities in those three tovvns, missionaries' conversion effortsvvere banned and Protestantism among Armenians once moreproelaimed i l legal .1 8

Another com plaint from Armenians to the Porte came in1845, vvhen an Armenian vvoman in Beirut accused the American

missionaries for kidnaping her three children and forcing them to

1 6 Go o d e l l , Forty Years, p. 132.17 Strong, The Story, p. 105; Grabill, Protestant Diplomacy, p. 13; Dvvight,

Constantinople an d Settings, p. 269.18Başbakanlık Osmanlı Arşivi (Prime Ministery, Ottoman Archives),

İstanbul, Turkey ("BOA" hereafter), C.H. (Cevdet Hariciye), 2 C. 1260,June 19, 1844; 8 C. 1260, June 25, 1844.



2 0 0 0 ] OTTOMAN ATTTUDES 199

change their religion. When the Ottoman governor in Damascusapplied to the United S tates Consul in Beirut for release of thechild ren, he vvas replied that vvithout an official instruc tion fromthe Lega tion in İstanbul, the Consu l could not interfere in theaffair. The Sublime Porte then sent a definite note to the A mericanLegation and asked their cooperation. As the American Consul,instructed from İstanbu l, took the issue in han d, the children vveregiven back to their parents. 1 9

Betvveen the years 1844 and 1845, the numb er of notes fromthe Sublime Porte to the United States Legation vvas increased.Dabney S. Carr, vvho vvere appointed as the American ministerresident to İstanbul in 1843, dispatched to the D epartment of Statein 1844 and 1845, that the Sublime Porte vvas not disturbed by thehum anitarian dimension of the missionary activities but, due to thepressures from Chrislian clergy, the issue became a majör point ofconflict. Carr summ arized the basic objection of the Porte in threetitles. Acco rding to C arr, first, the Ottoman governm ent vvas againstconversion among its Christian subjects and found this practice asillegal. Second, the Porte vvas in fear that if the number of convertsvvould increase, it vvould cause a chaos in administration. And third,the increase in the number of protege documents released to the

Protestants in the Ottoman Empire by the United States consulscaused a deep concern in the Porte,

20

Armenian Patr iarch Matteos expelled the ProtestantArm enians from the Armenian Gregorian C hurch in 1846. He alsovvrote a com prehensive letter of complaint to the Sublime Porte.Therefore the Porte once more applied to the United StatesLegation and vvanted the American minister to stop the activities ofmissionaries among the Armenians. This cali, as previous ones, hadno affirmative ansvver neilher from the Legation, nor from themiss ionar ies .2 1

The Matteos' move against Protestant Armenians created anadministrative problem. The Sublime Porte classified the O ttomansubjects according to their religion. There vvere Müslim, Greek-Orthodox, Armenian, Jevvish and Catholic millets in the Ottoman

1 9BOA, C.H., 24 M. 1261, February 2, 1845.20 N A R A , M-46, Decembcr 9, 1844; March 27, 1845.21 NARA, M-46, March 1, 1846.



2 0 0 THE TURKISH YEARBOOK [VOL. XXX

population. Since there was not a Protestant nation recognized bythe Porte, those who converted to Protestantism vvere losing theirofficial identity before the Sublime Porte. Thus, there vvas no anauthority representing them . As the numb er of converts inereased,the problem of identity and representation became more c ritical,and in order to obtain a status of nation, the American missionariesduring the 1840s ran an intensive camping through the BritishEmbassy and the United States Legation över the Sublime Porte.

Th e United K ingdom , vvho proelaime d h erself as theproteetor of the Protestants in the Ottoman Emp ire, in seeking therecognition of a Protestant nation status, gave support to Am ericanmission aries. British Amb assadors in İstanbul, Stratford Canning(in future Viscount Stratford de Redcliffe) and Lord Covvley, intheir contac ts vvith Mustafa Reşid Pa sha, the Grand V izier, mo stlyemp hasized the British Em pire's vvill of the creation of Protestantnation. After a period of heavy diplom atic pressures on the Porte,Sultan Abdülmecid issued a imperial order {irade) on 15November 1847 and granted the status. Follovving the decree, theProtestants of the Ottoman E mpire cho se a representative {vekil)vvho vvould in future con duct their relation ship vvith the SublimePorte.

22 Som e im portant poinls of the o rder vvere as follovvs:

To His Excellency, the Pasha Controller of the City Revenue,

Whereas the Christian subjects of the Ottoman Governmentprofessing Protestantism have experienced difficulty andembarrassment from not being hitherto under a special and separatejurisdietion, and naturally the Patriarch and the heads of the sects fromvvhich they have separated not being able to superintend their affairs,and vvhereas it is in contravcnıion to the supreme vvill of his imperialMajesty our Gracious Lord and Benefactor (may Allah inerease him inyears and povver) animaled as he is vvith feelings of deep interest andclemency tovvards ali elasses of his subjects, that any of them should

be subjected to grievance, and vvhereas the aforesaid Protestants, inconformity vvith the creed professed by them, do form a separatecommunity, it is His imperial M ajesty's supreme vvill and commandthat for the sole purpose of facilitating their affairs, and of securingthe vvelfare of said Protestants, the administration thereof should be

2 2Dwight , Christianity Revived, pp. 252-285; William Goodell, The Oldan d the New or Changes ofThirty Years in the East, Nevv York, 1854, p.83.



2 0 0 0 ] OTTOMAN ATıTTUDES 20 1

hencefonvard confided to Your Excellency, together vvith the allotmentof the taxes to vvhich they are subjected by lavv, that you do keep aseparate register of their births and deaths in the bureau of yourdepartment, according to the system observed vvith regard to Latinsubjects, that you do issue passports and permits of marriage, and thatany person of established character and good conduct chosen by themto appear as their agent at the Porte for the transaction and setüementof their current affairs, be duly appointed for that p urpo se....23

After the proclamation of the order, American missionaries

in İstanbul sen t a letter to the British am bassador, and offered their"sincere congratulations on the successful termination of [his]efforts in behalf of the Protestant subjects of the Porte." T hemissio naries depicted their gratitude in the follovving sentence s:

Through the humane interposition of his excellency, Sir StratfordCanning, the Protestant subjects of Turkey found substantial relieffrom the persecutions under vvhich they vvere then suffering; and since,by the untiring efforts of your Lordship, the very important point hasbeen conceded for them, that in regard to liberty of conscience and theenjoyment of civil rights, they shall be placed on the same footingvvith ali other Christian subjects of the Porte.24

Although the Protestant irade maintained a relief and m oreproper climate for the Protestant subjects of the Porte, it did notcurtail the American misisonary vvorks in the Ottoman Empire.Missionary efforts continued to be an area of complaint for theOttoman Government.

3. Problems Arising from the Missionary Schools andOther Facilities

Missionary spread in the Ottoman Empire vvas through tvvovvays: missio n stations and missionary sc hools. After establish me nt

of a m ission in İstanbul as a ccntcr for ali m issionary activities inthe Ottoman Empire, more stations vvere opened in Asian andEuropean Turkey. Stations in Trabzon (1835), Erzurum (1839),Aintab (1849), Marash (1855), Adana, Aleppo, Tarsus, Hadjin,

23 Dwight, Christianity Revived, pp. 285-286.2 4 Ibid., p. 287.




Alexandretta, Kilis, Salonica (1850) and İzmir (1859) werees tabl i shed. 2 5

Alongside the missionary churches and stations, missionaryschools established widely in various parts of the Empire. Thisextensive educational activity caused problems mainly stemmingfrom tvvo different levels. First problem vvas the reaction of localpopulat ion and local authori t ies against the missionaryestablishment. Second and more important problem vvas the

attitude of the Sublime Porte, vvhich vvas basically formed throughthe local reactions.

Ali mis sionar ies after 1840, vvho applied the Sublime Porteto obtain travel permits, vvere vvarned not to build schools in themountainous areas. The Sublime Porte, as explained in a note tothe United States Legation, vvas trying to prevent the missionariesfrom any kind of local assaults, because of their educationalefforts. Therefore the Sublime Porte repeatedly stated that it hadno res pon sibility of the vvell-bcing of Am ericans vvho vvithout animperial permit committed to build schools. 2 6 Parallel to buildingof more m issionary schools, the notes of complaint from theSublime Porte to the Legation inereased. The American ministerresident Carr, in one of his dispatehes to the State Dep artment in1848, stressed the chang e in the attitude of the Sublime Portetovvards Am erican s in a nega tive vvay and confessed that themissionaries, vvho behaved solely independe nt from any authority,either Ottoman or American, vvould cause more complaints inf u t u r e .2 7

The missionary schools vvere a permanent m atter of disputethroughout the nineteenth century, as besides their numbers, theirsize enlarged too. Beginning in 1860s, the American missionariesinitiated to build high schools or colleges, in certain populationcenters of the Ottoman land. With opening of the colleges, more

Ottoman students, mostly non-M uslim, attended these facilities, andmore estates ovvned by Ottoman subjects vvent under the control of

2 5James Barton, Daybreak in Turkey, Boston, The Pilgrim Press, 1908, p.138.

26 N A R A , M-46, August 7, 1843.27 N A R A , M-46, August 2, 1848.



2 0 0 0 ] OTTOMAN AT TU DE S 2 0 3

Am erican missionaries. These two factors incited the Porte to moveagainst the missionaries.

First college initiated by the American was opened in Beirutin 1866 under the name of Syria Protestant College (It becam eBeirut American University in the tvventieth century). Thelangua ge of the courses vvas Arabic and the people in the regiongot a chance to take education in medicine and pharmacy as vvellas social sciences. 2 8 Leaving aside minör local objections, the

Beirut C ollege did not attract any reaction from the cap ital.Hovvever, vvhen Cyrus Hamlin, a senior missionary, vvho maintaineda generous fınancial contribution from an American businessman,Christopher R. Robert, intensified his efforts to built an A mericancollege ou t of a small seminary in Bebek, İstanbul, the SublimePorte refused to give required permits to open a college and toconstruct buildings.

Although not stated official ly in any corresp ondenc ebetvveen the Porte and the American Legation, one of the reasonsof this attitude vvas the Sublime P orte's discontent vvith the openingof such a comprehensive foreign educational institution in itscap ital. Th is step, as an exam ple, vvould be follovved by theEuropean povvers such as France and Russia, and establishment offoreign colleges for the attendance of the non-Muslim pupilsvvould cre ate a nevv area of conflict betvveen the Otto ma nGovernment and the "Great Povvers". Secondly, the Sublime Portehad a great concern about the "negative" effects of the curricula ofsuch institutions on its non-Muslim subjects. Some of the W esternvalues such as liberalism and nationalism, vvhich could have"destructive" reflections on a multi-national em pire, should be keptavvay from the O ttoman subjects. If the role of gradua tes fromAm erican colleges in the r ise of Bulgarian, Armenian andAlbanian nationalism in the last quarter of the nineteenth centuryis taken into consideration, one might understand the sensitivity of

the Sublime Porte.

Neve rtheless, contacts of the American minister in İstanbul,Edvvard Joy M orris vvho vvas instructed by the Dep artmen t of State,vvith the Sublime Porte gave an aff irmative result for themissionaries, and the objection to establish an American College in

28 Grabill, Protestant Diplomacy, p. 24.




İstanbul vvas vvithdravvn. But, the Ottom an obje ction for the p laceof the school continued to be a point of dispute. The SublimePorte, namely Ali Pasha, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, vvasagainst to the construction of a college building at Rum elihisarı,the land vvhich vvas bough t by the m issionaries solely for thatpurpose. Rumelihisarı vvas then a quarter largely occupied byMuslims and such an institution vvas likely to cause moreproblems. In İstanbul, certain quarters, such as Pera, Fener and St.Stephanos vvere the places vvhere non-Muslims lived and the

Sublime Porte vvanted to limit the churches, mission stations andmissionary schools vvithin those areas. 2 9

Soon the building place of the İstanbul C ollege becam e asubject of the bilateral diplomatic nego tiations. The United StatesSecretary of State V/illiam Sevvard gave a note to the O ttomanminister resident in Washington, Blacque Bey, in the summer of1868 and asked him to persuade the Sublime Porte to allocate theafore mentioned estate in Rumelihisarı for college bu ildi ng .3 0

If it is remembered that the m ajör donor for the College vvasan notable American businessman, it is easier to understand thebasic m otive behind Sevvard's intervention to the case. Just after thisnote to Blacque Bey, the Department of Navy instructed Adm iralFar ragut , com mander of the Uni ted Sta tes Medi ter raneanSquadron, to move to İstanbul on the deck of an Am erican frigateand to "shovv his utmo st effort" in the favor of a cons tructionpermit. Farragut's mission in İstanbul in August 1868, resulted vvithan happy ending for the American missionaries. The SublimePorte could n ot resist before an admiral's insist and allovved themissionaries to build the school, vvhich vvould be named RobertCollege for Christopher Robert 's con tributio n. 31

Establishment of Robert C ollege gave an impetus to otherinitiatives. During the period betvveen 1871-1903, seven more

American Colleges vvere established throughout the Ottoman lands:

2 9Howard Joseph Kerner, Turco-American Diplomatic Relations, 1860-1880, unpublished Ph.D Thesis, Washington D.C., GeorgetovvnUniversity, 1948, pp. 160-171.

3 0NARA, M-99/96 (Notes to the Turkish Legation in the United Statesfrom the Department), July 1, 1868.

3 1 K e r n e r , Turco-American Diplomatic Relations, p. 181.



200 0] OTTOMAN AT TU DE S 2 0 5

American Girls' College in İstanbul, Euphrates College in Harput(Kharput), American College in Van, Central Turkey College inMaraş, St. Paul College in Tarsus, Anatolian College in Merzifon(Marsovan) and International College in İzmir (Smyrna). 3 2

Establishmen t processes of ali the Am erican colleges causedsome minör problems vvith the local authorities, but thosediffıculties vvere solved by peaceful me ans. Hovvever, in 1880's and1890s, tvvo majör problems, Sultan Abdülhamid's centralized

education al reforms and Am erican connection vvith the Arm eniannationalism emerged and became the top priority m atter for theOttoman-American relations.

Sultan Abdülhamid, ascended to the Ottoman throne in1875, centralized the vvhole povver in his hands and the SublimePorte, vvhich vvas the main center of gov ernme nt for almost 50years, lost its privileges to conduct internal and diplomatic affairsalon e. A bdü lham id, vvho found a correlation betvveen the foreignintervention of the "Great Povvers" and the increasing num ber ofnational insurrections of non-Muslim Ottoman subjects, decided tocut their means of external supp ort. Along vvith some othermeasures, he banned the transfer of property or the granting of abuilding permit for a nevv missionary scho ol. For the schoolsalready built, he utilized nevv school lavv that established standardsfor teach er certiFıcation, the curriculum , and the physical facilitiesof the school. In some cases, the latter measure caused examinationof the teaching certifıcates of ali teachers of A merican schools, andsometimes the schools vvere closed because the teachers could nolonger produce their credentials. 3 3

The American missionaries, claiming the right to unrestrictedoperation of three categories of schools (those ovvned and taughtby American citizens, those ovvned and directed by Americans buttaught by the Ottoman subjects, and those ovvned and taught by the

Ottoman subjects vvith a subsidy and some supervision fromAmericans) entered an uneasy struggle vvith Yıldız (Abdülhamid'sPalace in vvhich he ruled the Empire). The American legationvigorou sly defended the missionary claims on the first category,vvhile it held that sch ools in the third group, the m ajority of the

3 2 Gr ab i l l , Protestant Diplomacy, p. 26.3 3 D a n i e l , American Philantrophy, p. 114.




American schools in the Empire, had no recognizable rights vvhichcould be protected by the United States government. The status ofthe second group of schools remained obscure. In addition, theAmerican legation in its correspondence vvith the OttomanMinistry of Foreign Affairs, repeatedly stressed that the nevvlyorganized schools should submit their programs of study, theirtextbook lists, and the diplomas or certificates of their teachers tothe examination of the Turkish authorities, but objected for thesame measures for existing sch oo ls. 3 4

When Armenian nationalists started a large scale insurrectionin ma jör tovvns of central and eastern Anatolia in 1890, theOttoman attitude tovvards the missionary schools sharpened.Because m ost of the A merican schools in problematic areas hadArmenian students and Armenian teachers vvho vvere in contactvvith the rebels. The crisis came in 1893-1895 period vvhenAmerican colleges and houses of some American missionaries inMerzifon, Harput and M araş vvere damaged during the O ttomanarmy's intervention to Armenian upheavals. B esides, some of theArm enian tea chers of those schools vvere arrested u nder theaccusa t ion of he lp ing the reb el s . 3 5 For the destruction ofAnato lian College in Merzifon in 1893, the Ottoman go vernme ntpaid 500 Turkish pounds to the United States Legation in İstanbul,granted a permit for rebuilding of damaged parts, and released tvvoArmenian teachers after the reports of confirmation prepared byJevvett, the American Consul in Sivas, and Nevvsberry, secretary ofthe American Legation. 3 6

Hovvever, for the claims of destruction of Euph rates Collegein Harput and Central Turkey College in Maraş in 1895, theproc ess did not follovv the same road. Am erican mis siona ries,through the American Legation, vvanted the Ottoman Governmentto pay an indemnity of 100.000 dollars for the dam ages in thosetvvo colleges.3 7 But the Ottoman Government did not accept the

responsibility of the damage and refused to pay an i nd em nit y. 3 8

3 4 K e r n e r , Turco-American Diplomalic Relations, p. 115.35 NARA, M-46, February 5, 1893; Frcdcrick Davis Greene, The Rule of the

Turk, Nevv York, G. P. Puuıam's Sons, 1896, pp. 35-39.3 6NARA, April 27, 1893; July 5, 1893.3 7NARA, M-46, November 27, 1895.3 8NARA, M-46, December 4, 1895.



2 0 0 0 ] OTTOMAN ATTTUD ES 2 0 7

On 4 December 1895, the United States Senate resolved that thePresident would com municate ali kinds of information about thedamages to American citizens' property in the Ottoman Empire tothe Senate .3 9 Follovving this resolution, President Cleveland gave along report to the Senate in vvhich he affirmed that no A mericancitizen had been injured during the incidents, but a damage around100.000 dollars had been incurred. President also informed theSenate that he had instructed three battleships, (San Fransisco,Marblehead and Minneapolis) to visit Ottoman ports in order to

prevent any assaults to the American citizens and to secure anindemnity for the los se s. 4 0 After the Presidential report, the Senatein January 27, 1896, passed a resolution, drafted by S enatörShelby M . Cullom, Chairman of the Com mittee of Foreign Affairs,vvhich called on the President to initiate necessary steps to obtainindemnity from the Ottoman G ove rnm ent. 4 1

The problem of indemnity remained unsolved until 1901,vvhen an American cruiser, Kentucky vvas sent to İzmir harbor vvithorders to sustain pressure on the Ottoman Government until thepayment vvas made. This military threat vvorked in United States'favor and the Ottoman G overnm ent paid 10 0.000 dollars to the

United States Legation in June 1901.

4 2

The same scenario vvas repeated in 1904. When the Ottomanauthorities elosed some American schools and arrested someArmenians vvho vvere naturalized United States citizens, PresidentRoo sevelt sent a povverful fleet to İzmir harb or and the U nitedStates minister Leishman, in his audience vvith the Sultan,mentioned the possibility of a bombardment of İzmir. As a result,Armeno-Americans vvere releascd and the schools vvere permittedto re-open.

Hovvever, they did not enjoy normalized conditions untilSulta n A bdü lham id vvas overthrovvn from the povver and a

39Foreign Relations of the United S ta tes, Washington D.C. , USGovernment Printing Office, 1895, p. 1256.

4 0 Ibid., pp. 1256-1265.41Congressional Record (Senate), Washington D.C., US Government

Printing Office, Vol. 28, No. 54-1, 1895-996, pp. 959-996.4 2NARA, M-46, June 12, 1901; BOA, ISKD (lrade-i Seniyye Kayıt

Defteri), 30 N. 1317, No: 1269.




constitutional gove rnmen t vvas formed in 1909. The d etails of thisperiod vvill be taken up in the concluding part.

4. Publishing Activities of the Missionaries

Anothe r dimen sion of the missionary vvork in the O ttomanEm pire vvas publicat ion and distr ibution of rel igious and

educational books and pamphlets. Printing house in Malta that vvasestablished by Pliny Fisk in 1822, published 350.000 copies ofdifferent books in Greek, Italian and Arme no-Turkish vvithin justnine years. The printing house vvas moved to İzmir in 1833 and tothe miss ion ce nter, İstanbu l, in 1852. After serv ing in Pera for 20years, the printing house that vvas named as the "Bible House", vvasmoved once more to Rıza Pasha Yokuşu, a region very elose to theSublime Porte

43

From its establishment to 1860, the number of pages of thebooks published and distributed by the missionaries vvere morethan 191 million. W hile the majority of the books vvere onreligious subjects, some popular magazines and scientifıc booksvvere also published. For instance, Avedaper, a politico-culturalmagazine in Armeno-Turkish vvas printed by the missionaries.4 4

Publishing activities, targeted the non-Muslim subjects of theEmpire, did not disturb the Sublime Porte. Hovvever, vvhen in1860s, some Muslims converted to Christianity as a result ofmissionary efforts, and the Bible House began to publish books inTurkish for the use of Muslims, Sublime Porte started to imposerestrictions on missionary publications. On the other hand, agene ral concern tovvards ali foreign p ublicatio ns, inelud ing theones distributed by Russians and Greeks, calling the Orthodoxpopulation to seek independence from the Ottoman Em pire, arose

suspicion in the Sublime Porte in 1860s. As a result, the Porteenforced nevv regulations for printing activities of the Ottomansubjects and the foreigners.

4 3 Uygur Kocabaşoğlu, Osmanlı İmparatorluğunda XIX. Yüzyılda AmerikanYüksek Okulları, Ankara, M ülkiyeliler Birliği Vakfı, 1988, pp. 270-271.

^Daniel , American Philantrophy, p. 102.



2 0 0 0 ] OTTOMAN ATTTUDES 20 9

Ali Pasha, M inister of Foreign Affairs, sent a circular to aliembassies and legations in İstanbul on 27 November 1862, statingthat the Sublime Porte vvill censor ali books vvith contents ofpol i t ica l or re l ig ious propaganda . 4 5 The effects of this nevvregulation vvere seen in a short time. Beginning vvith the firstmo nths of 1863, the Ottoman authorities started to collect bookspublished by foreigners, including a vast number of m issionarypublication that created a discontent among the Americans. Thescope of this uncomfort increased vvhen offıcials from the Ottoman

poliçe department {Zaptiye Nezareti) sealed a book shop ovvned bymission aries and confiscated some books in July 1864. When theAmerican Minister Resident, Morris, applied to the Sublime Portefor return of the books , Ali Pasha replied that the mission arieslargely distributed material among the Muslims containing falseknovvledge about is lam , and therefore such a ctivities vvill not beallovved by the government. 4 6

The Sublime Porte enlarged the restrictions by an Act ofPub lication that vvas entered into force at the end of 1864.According to the nevv legal regulation, ali published materials,either printed in the Ottoman Em pire or imported from foreigncountries, vvere subject to the prior control and permission of theSublime Porte for their distribu tion.47 Morris vvho visited Ali Pashaseveral times on behalf of the Am erican missionaries, vvas told thatth e Sublime Porte vvas not against any religious material such asthe B ible that vvas freely publishe d and distribu ted, hovvever anymaterial that included Christianity propaganda tovvards theMuslims vvould not be tolerated.4 8

The restrictions on the publications vvere eased in the firsthalf of the 1870, parallel to the intensive efforts of the American,British, French and Russian diplomatic missions. But, vvhen theBulgarian revolt erupted during spring 1875, more restrictionsvvere enforced. Acco rding to a nevv regulation, ali pu blication s

vvere subjected to the approval of the Ministry of Public Instructionbefore printing. M oreover, a sentence of identifıcation vvas to beplaced in the front p age of the publication, indicating its character,

4 5N A R A , M-46, November 27; December 11, 1862.4 6NARA, M-46, July 23, 1864.4 7NARA, M-46, January 15, 1865.48 N A R A , M-46, October 18, 1865; May 17, 1866.




such as scientific, religious, literary ete. The ma jör objectionagainst those new rules came from the missionaries who asked theSublime Porte to make an exception for the publications that vvereordered before the regulation, and vvere replied ne ga tiv ely .4 9

Despite the strict limitations, the missionaries continued theirpub lication activities vvith or vvithout permission of the Porte. Thisattitude inereased the disputes. In 1880s, Ottoman authoritiesbegan to confiscate missionary books at the customs. A lthough

some publications, containing solely religious subjects, vverereturned to the ovvners due to the American Legation's initiatives,some of them vvith a political content vvere kept and even destroyedby the Porte.

50 For instance in 1880, an American missionaryfrom the Church of Missionary Society, vvithout permission of theSublime Porte, imported some religious books to İstanbul andhired an Ottoman Su bject, Hoca Ahmet Efendi, to translate thepublications into Turkish. When the Porte learned the issue, theboo ks vvere confiscated by the poliçe and the tran slator vvassentenced to fıfteen years in p ris on .5 1

One of the interesting exam ples of the Ottoman attitude

tovvards missionary publication took place in 1883. Levvis Wallace,the United States Minister Resident in İstanbul, applied to theMinistry of Pub lic Instruction to obtain a permit for republishingof the B ible, vvhich vvas out of print in the O ttoman E m pi re . 5 2

Getting no ansvver from the department, W allace this time app liedto the Sublime Porte vvith a note verbal. The Porte, in its reply toWallace, stated that the Ottoman Government vvill allovvrepublishing of the Bible only if a sentence, "Solely for the use ofProtestan ts" vvas printed in the first page of the book. W allace,asserting that such a statement could not be found in any of thecop ies of B ible, vvhich vvas translated into 250 lang uage s, rejectedth e Sublime P orte's cond i t i on .5 3 Therefore the publication of theBible vvas stopped in the Ottoman Empire.

4 9N A R A , M-46, June 30, 1875.5 0NARA, M-46, April 29, 1881; December 18, 1881; April 25, 1882.5 1NARA, M-46, January 4, 1880.5 2NARA, M-46, May 15, 1883.53 N A R A , M-46, June 13, 1883.



200 0] OTTOMAN AT TU DE S 2 1 1

The American missionaries sometimes applied to theOttoman Government to seek redress for their confiscated books.But the Sublime Porte mostly did not make any payments andtook an attitude of negligence against such applications. Like otheractivities of the missionaries, the publishing efforts continued to bea source of dispute at the end of the nineteenth and in the firstyears of the twentieth centuries.

5. Conclusion

After the foundation of a constitutional g overnmen t in 1908,the Ottoman attitude tovvards the American missionaries changedin a positive vvay. John G. Leishman, the United States ambassadorin İstanbu l, vvrote in his report to the D epartm ent of State that theconstitutional government vvould not only contribute to thedevelo pm ent of the Ottoman society, but also ease the pressuresöver the American citizens, including the missionaries. 5 4 Earlystatements on the rights of education and pu blication, from theme mb ers of the nevv governm ent vvere satisfactory for themissionaries. In late September 1908, the restrictions on printingand distr ibution of books and l imitat ions for travels of themissionaries vvere abolished.5 5

The nevv rule in the Empire vvas vvelcomed in the UnitedStates Congress, too, and both the Senate and the House ofRepresentatives passed resolutions, in vvhich they congratulated andvvished good luck to the nevv Ottoman government.5 6

Changing atmosphere also gave a nevv impetus to themissionary activities mostly in the Eastern provinces of the Em pire.Old schools vvere renovated and nevv ones vvere opened. Thenum ber of the American schools in the Empire reached 209 in1913, and the n umber of pupils cnrolling in those schools reached

2 5 . 9 2 2 . 5 7

5 4NARA, M-46, August 20; September 28, 1908.5 5 NARA, M-46, September 28, 1908; Foreign Relations of the United

States, 1908, pp. 755-756.Foreign Relations of the United States, 1908, pp. 753-754.

5 7 D a n i e l , American Philantrophy, p. 94.




Hovvever, as the Great War started in 1914, the Ottomanofficial attitude tovvards ali foreigners once m ore chang ed. A t thebeginning , the Am erican missionaries, as citizens of a neutralpovver enjoyed some privileges in comparison to British andFrench. But, after 1917, parallel to the United States' accession tothe War, they vvere also subjected to heavy restrictions.

The long adventure of the American m issionaries in theOttoman Empire ended in 1918 vvith the de facto collapse of theEmpire. After 4 years of chaos in Anatol ia , M ustafa Kemalfounded the Turkish R epublic in 1923. This vvas the opening of anevv period of missionary activities in the region, and thecircumstances vvere not easier than before.

Documents

ottoman official attitudes towards american missionaries ÇAĞRI ERHAN.pdf