Armenian Orphans of 1894-1896 and Interested Relief in Missionary Orphanages*

Nazan MAKSUDYAN 47 “∞BEING SAVED TO SERVE∞”∞: Armenian Orphans of 1894-1896 and interested relief in Missionary Orphanages* A fter a long tradition of seeing charity and charitable institutions largely as a manifestation of religious values, Middle Eastern scholars have begun to assert the importance of self-interest, or at least collective self-interest in motivating elites to offer charitable assistance.1 It is under- Nazan MAKSUDYAN, Post-Doctoral Fellow of “∞Europe in the Middle East — The Middle East in Europe∞” (EUME) 2009/2010, a research program of the Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Sciences and Humanities, the Fritz Thyssen Foundation, and the Wissen- schaftskolleg zu Berlin. Zentrum Moderner Orient (ZMO), Kirchweg 33, 14129 Berlin, Germany. [email protected] * This paper has been largely built upon the final chapter of my PhD dissertation, “∞Hearing the Voiceless — Seeing the Invisible∞: Orphans and Destitute Children as Actors of Social, Economic, and Political History in Nineteenth-Century Ottoman Empire∞” (Sabancı University, Istanbul, 2008). I am grateful to the Scientific and Technical Research Council of Turkey (TÜBITAK) for supporting my PhD researches by the “Integrated PhD Program∞” from 2005 to 2007. 1 Adam SABRA, Poverty and Charity in Medieval Islam∞: Mamluk Egypt, 1250-1517, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2000∞; Amy SINGER, Constructing Ottoman Beneficence∞: An Imperial Soup Kitchen in Jerusalem, Albany, State University of New York Press, 2002∞; Michael BONNER, «∞Definition of the Poverty and the Rise of the Mus- lim Poor∞», JRAS 6/3, series 3, 1996, p. 335-44∞; Mine ENER, Amy SINGER and Michael BONNER ed., Poverty and Charity in the Middle Eastern Contexts, Albany, State University of New York Press, 2003∞; Nadir ÖZBEK, «∞Osmanlı Imparatorlugu’nda “Sosyal Yardım∞” Uygulamaları, 1839-1918∞», Toplum ve Bilim, 1999/2000, p. 111-132∞; IDEM, «∞Philan- thropic Activity, Ottoman Patriotism, And The Hamidian Regime, 1876–1909∞», IJMES 37, 2005, p. 59-81∞; IDEM, «∞The Politics of Poor Relief in the Late Ottoman Empire∞: Turcica, 42, 2010, p. 47-88. doi: 10.2143/TURC.42.0.2084398 © 2010 Turcica. Tous droits réservés. 994208_Turcica42_05_Maksudyan-CS5.indd4208_Turcica42_05_Maksudyan-CS5.indd 4477 220/06/110/06/11 114:094:09 48 NAZAN MAKSUDYAN lined that at its simplest level, charity is a reflection of a donor’s wishes, inspired by spiritual, social, economic, or political motives, possibly including self-interest and ambition. Attaining paradise in the afterlife or social standing among the living, seeking economic advantage through tax reduction or protection of property, and consolidating the support of constituencies all constitute possible motives for what may be termed charitable or beneficent acts.2 Marco Van Leeuwen argues, for another context, that for elites, poor relief held out the promise of a number of social and economic benefits∞: the maintenance of a reserve of workers∞; the confirmation of the proper place of the poor in a static and hierarchi- cal society∞; the maintenance of public order∞; the control of epidemic infections∞; and the moral improvement, or “∞civilizing∞” of the poor.3 In order to account for the existence and/or emergence of orphanages, it is necessary to refer to a complex web of interrelated forces, including economic, social, political and ideological factors, which lay behind the establishment and maintenance of such architectural and human monu- ments. In the presence of such traditional forms of orphan care, such as being raised in the larger family, foster care or apprenticeship, the opening of orphanages in the Ottoman Empire is a multi-dimensional topic as well, comprising many of the above mentioned factors. In fact, the establishment of the institutional context for the care of orphans has been interpreted from a number of approaches. On the one hand, this choice of an institution was related in some way to the emergence of an increas- ingly modern capitalist economy in the urban areas. The other theoretical approach is coming from what Michel Foucault has identified as “∞the great confinement∞”.4 The issue of charity is also valuated from the basic sides of “∞supply and demand∞”, in other words, it is possible to make an analysis by taking the agents in two sides of the relation∞: those who provide charity and those who receive it. In line with the Foucauldian interpretation, supply side, meaning economically favored, give to the unfavored out of pure 1876-1914∞» New Perspectives on Turkey 21, 1999, p. 1-33∞; Oded PERI, «∞Waqf and Otto- man Welfare Policy∞: the Poor Kitchen of Hasseki Sultan in Eighteenth Century Jerusa- lem∞», Journal of Economic and Social History of the Orient 35, 1992, p. 167-86. 2 Amy SINGER, «∞Serving Up Charity∞: The Ottoman Public Kitchen∞», Journal of Inter- disciplinary History 35/3, Winter 2005, p. 481–500. 3 Marco VAN LEEUWEN, «∞Logic of Charity∞: Poor Relief in Preindustrial Europe∞», Journal of Interdisciplinary History 24, 1994, p. 589-613. 4 Michel FOUCAULT, Histoire de la folie à l’âge classique∞: folie et déraison, Paris, Plon, 1961. 994208_Turcica42_05_Maksudyan-CS5.indd4208_Turcica42_05_Maksudyan-CS5.indd 4488 220/06/110/06/11 114:094:09 ARMENIAN ORPHANS OF 1894-1896 49 self-interest∞; charity is thus an elaborate ploy by the privileged to main- tain a fundamental inequality in all spheres of life. On the other hand, the demand side, meaning economically unfavored, somehow achieve power over the favored and force them to engage in redistribution of resources. Therefore, charity had the added benefit of eliciting from the poor a respect for the very social system that kept them in poverty.5 It is possible to interpret the roles of “∞supply and demand∞” from another angle as well. It is true that charity often requires the presence of needy people or specific recipients. Yet, it is not necessarily inspired by them. According to some researchers in the field of philanthropy, welfare and charity, the idea that any activity of charity is dependent on the number or condition of those who are the potential “∞customers∞” of this charity should be criticized. In fact, there is sometimes an inverse relation between the two∞: the demand is created after the emergence of the supply. Moreover, charity is offered in response to a giver’s percep- tion of both the need and the deservedness of the recipient. In that respect, in theorizing upon the emergence of the orphanages, one needs to con- sider cautiously various purposes of the providers of charity. Some historical instances of utmost necessity may facilitate the under- standing of the importance of these theoretical assumptions. One way of analysis may be based on the number of orphans, which could oscillate from decade to decade, and from place to place. In fact, these oscillations were closely tied to political, military, and social problems. In the case of the orphans, it seems that the pressing needs for some sort of orphan relief, either in the form of orphanages or foster-care, are created in emer- gency situations such as warfare and conflicts. In these circumstances, the number of destitute children becomes so great that the institutional or private care of them was regarded inevitable by interested parties. Warfare, especially an endemic state of guerrilla conflict, thus, could create a larger number of homeless children and necessitate the opening of many new orphanages.6 Yet, it should be emphasized that certain material conditions, namely wars, massacres, conflicts, were necessitating only certain parties to take 5 Anne C. MCCANTS, Civic Charity in a Golden Age∞: Orphan Care in Early Modern Amsterdam, Urbana (Chicago), University of Illinois Press, 1997, p. 3-15. Together with underlining the importance of economic and urban factors, McCants points to the importance of religious variables. 6 Timothy S. MILLER, The Orphans of Byzantium∞: Child Welfare in the Christian Empire, Washington, D.C., Catholic University of America Press, 2003. 994208_Turcica42_05_Maksudyan-CS5.indd4208_Turcica42_05_Maksudyan-CS5.indd 4499 220/06/110/06/11 114:094:09 50 NAZAN MAKSUDYAN actual measures in order to tackle with the “∞problem∞” of only certain orphans. In other words, although the volume of the constituency is a meaningful variable, it is obligatory to look beyond that in order to guess at intricacies of orphan relief. As a case study, it can be argued that the nineteenth century Ottoman Empire could have been a suitable candidate for the mushrooming of orphanages all over the place, since all parts of country was shaking with independence movements, regional conflicts, the intervention of the great powers, shrinkage of the territories and flooding of the refugees. However, not every “∞orphan problem∞” led to the opening of orphanages. Curiously, only some orphans motivated certain parties to take part over their rescue. Therefore, orphanages targeted more than sheltering and feeding orphans. Looking closer into a number of human crises taken place in the long nineteenth century of the Ottoman Empire may help clarify the above mentioned interpretation. For instance, the victims of the Crimean War of 1854-56 or Russo-Ottoman War of 1877-78 did not really receive much attention from the missionary societies. Actually, both wars had caused the entry of enormous numbers of refugees (muhacir) into the Empire especially from the region around the Black Sea. These hundreds of thousands people who were forced to leave their homes were usually widows and orphans. However, the missionaries of the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions (ABCFM)7 were not really involved in providing for these miserable people.8 This was definitely related to the fact that the missionary societies operating in the Ottoman Empire subconsciously knew that they had no chances of, leaving aside converting, even educating, the Muslims, due to administrative and political obstacles put forward by the authorities and their previous experience of failure with the Muslims.

Load more