OLIVIA HENNESSY, BA HISTORY, Year 3, 2022-2023.

When you only remember the photograph, this ‘eclipses other forms of understanding and remembering’ (Sontag, 2003; 89).

Perhaps this is a good reflection on how photographic narratives can be shaped for specific audiences; cameras were a new technology that purported to report the truth and they were more trusted than newspapers, paintings, and other forms of media. Therefore, this blog will look at depictions of the presence of Armenian women in photography of the Armenian Genocide relief efforts and the agenda for ‘documentation’ of the various activist observers. The Armenian genocide was the physical extermination of the Ottoman Empire’s Armenian population as a prerequisite for the establishment of a Turkish nation-state (Kévorkian, 2011, 1). The phrase ‘presence in Absence’ is a significant tool with which to grasp how the ‘past continues to inhabit the present… embedded within the photograph, a trace of the very materiality of the image.’ (Elspeth, ‘Feeling in Photography’, 163). In particular, the lived experiences are inscribed for the audiences of the photo, those in front of the camera, and the person taking the photograph. Furthermore, the images of these women were especially important to relief efforts, particularly how women and children continue to be a way to encourage sympathy in white audiences for non-white peoples (Rogers, 2020; 31). During and after World War One, humanitarianism became a significant movement and the ‘humanitarian aspect increasingly came to the forefront of Christian missions.’ (Okkenhaugh and Summerer, 2020; 6). Christian missionaries endorsed welfare activities that involved ‘ideas and practises for improving people’s lives’, which were mostly ‘presented as subservient to Christian preaching.’ (Okkenhaugh and Summerer, 2020; 1). Although the missionaries had different aims and methods to humanitarians, the ideas of saving people united them together; particularly, women were the especially important in the movements for the ‘survival of the Armenian nation’ (Okkenhaugh and Summerer, 2020; 6). Therefore, this blog will argue that multiple photographic narratives of Armenian women are not actively present due to the unifying effort of the missionary and humanitarian photographer-activists. The chosen photographs that will be analysed are the deportation of Armenian women by Armin Wegner, a humanitarian, a Widow called Jeghsa Muradian through the photographic documentation of Bodil Biørn, a Danish Missionary, and finally, a tattooed Armenian woman taken by Karen Jeppe, a Scandinavian Missionary. Overall, this blog will consider the themes of deportation, abduction, and assimilation of Armenian women through these photographs.

Deportation: As Viewed by Wegner

As part of a ‘brutal state-building project,’ the Turkish-led Committee of Union and Progress (CUP) deported Ottoman-Armenians between 1915 and 1916. (Jinks, 2018; 95). Since the deportations followed the deliberate extermination of Armenian military-aged males, women and children were disproportionately affected (Derderian, 2005; 20). Significantly, age and stage of life at the time of the Genocide were crucial factors in Armenian women’s health and well-being: a woman could become sterile as a result of an ‘unsanitary miscarriage during the deportations’ (Kaprielian-Churchill, 1993; 16). Armin T. Wegner, a humanitarian activist and writer, ‘witnessed the massacres and forced relocation of Armenian deportees’ while stationed in Ottoman Turkey for the duration of the First World War (Payne, 2012; 25). Wegner secretly photographed the ‘carnage and smuggled desperate letters’ from Armenians to the American Embassy (Rooney, 2000; 117). The humanitarian activist presented himself as a ‘mediator of reconciliation’, attempting to persuade his ‘German and international audiences’ to look at photographs and listen to stories of Armenian deportation (Payne, 2012; 26). As a German, Wegner felt especially strongly of the need to convince the audience of what was going on, highlighting the voice of German conscience. Wegner’s open letter to President Woodrow Wilson of the United States of America focuses specifically on the forced deportation of Armenians into the Mesopotamian desert:

‘As one of the few Europeans who have been eyewitnesses of  the dreadful destruction of the Armenian people from the beginning in the flourishing towns and fruitful fields of Anatolia to the wiping out of their miserable remains on the banks of the Euphrates and the desolate, stony Mesopotamian desert, I dare claim the right of bringing to your attention this picture of misery and terror which passed before my eyes for nearly two years, and which will never be obliterated from my mind.’

This ‘misery and terror’ viewed by Wegner is presented in various photographs he took. Particularly, Wegner was attempting to do what he thought was best while also trying to assist these people. However, he took the photographs through the Western eyes and with a Western audience in mind, and thus did not or could not document it entirely. 

Armin T. Wegner. (1915) Armenian Deportees, Armenian Genocide Museum and Institute, Wallstein Verlag, Germany. All rights reserved http://www.genocide-museum.am/eng/armin_wegner.php

For instance, one of the photographs Wegner captured and represented was primarily of Armenian female deportees, highlighting how the humanitarian purpose in framing the genocide in a certain way contributed to making this image iconic. The photograph was taken in 1915 and is currently displayed on the Armenian Genocide Museum Website. Despite the presence of two Armenian men in the background, the photograph centres on an Armenian woman who is presumably holding her child. The Armenian woman walking alone alludes to her isolation as a deportee, particularly given how the majority of Armenian men were systematically exterminated.  The reality that the deportee is carrying and caring for a baby in the middle of the desert heightens the image of her plight. By considering Wegner’s view on deportation, he constructs this image as an empty landscape. His description of the ‘flourishing towns and fruitful fields of Anatolia’ to the ‘miserable remains’ and ‘desolate, stony Mesopotamian desert’ from the letter to Wilson further demonstrates the image is shaped by his vision of what had happened and how he wished to communicate it. The landscape in the image is desolate, with no signs of habitation; the mountains in this setting appeared to be fading. This photograph was created specifically for western audiences, reinforcing the suffering women endured and the relief efforts Wegner worked for. Saving women was a major concern of the humanitarian movement because it ensured the ‘survival of the Armenian nation’, reuniting with remaining family members, and women were the ones left who needed a home (Watenpaugh, 2014; 167). By emphasising the desolate space, looming figures, and position of the Armenian female deportee, Wegner creates an image of isolation to raise awareness of the Armenian genocide’s atrocities. Consequently, the image became iconic due to the image’s composition and the isolated figure against the landscape, as well as the content of the woman alone with the baby, struggling for survival. Therefore, Wegner’s image of the female Armenian deportee considers the humanitarian objectives, primarily rescuing women, and constructs an empty landscape for Western audiences for his best intentions.

Widows: As Viewed by Bodil Biørn

In the absence of the Armenian male population, there was the growth of Armenian female widows (Derderian, 2005; 14). Armenian widows were also considered orphans during the genocide (Ekmekcioglu, 2016; 28). Hasmik described her mother’s orphaned survival: 

‘My mother lost all of her family… didn’t have one person, not one person!  She was all by herself with some older ladies… mother was the only one in the family left’. (Manoogian, Walker and Richards, 2007; 576)

Bodil Biørn, a member of the Women’s Missionary Workers (Kvindelige Missions Arbejdere, henceforth KMA), travelled from Norway to the Ottoman empire in 1905 and utilized her ‘personal camera’ to take ‘photographs’, writing ‘accounts…the events [that] surround them’. (Bermúdez, 2021; 111). The KMA was Scandinavia’s first independent women’s mission organisation who saw their profession as the ‘protestant calling of missionary work’ (Bermúdez, 2021; 113). Newsletters were used by Biørn and her colleagues to share their work, experiences, solicit funding, and communicate with colleagues all over the world (Okkenhaugh, 2020; 91; Bermúdez, 2021; 116). The photographs that have survived to this day supplement the written texts, providing a picture of the ‘Armenians in Mush’ through the eyes of the missionaries (Bermúdez, 2021; 116). These photographs reflect the mission, specifically focusing on evangelization, healing, and welfare, which was practiced by Biørn (Okkenhaugh and Summerer, 2020; 9).

Bodil Biørn. Widow Jeghsa Muradian, Collection of Bodil Biørn, Armenian Genocide Museum and Institute, http://www.genocide-museum.am/eng/bodil_biorn.php

The missions, as seen by Biørn, reshapes the photograph of an Armenian widow, where she is standing alone and surrounded by the snow. The account from Hasmik’s mother similarly alludes to the image- she was ‘all by herself’ (Manoogian, Walker and Richards, 2007; 576). The image was donated to the Genocide Museum Institute in Yerevan, Armenia, and is prominently displayed in the Museum’s photographic exhibits, both online and in person (Bermúdez, 2021; 129). The website serves not only as a public engagement tool, but also as a news platform for the most recent updates and events related to the Armenian Genocide (Bermúdez, 2021; 129). The Genocide Museum and Institute is a state organ in Armenia and the director plays an important role in public life. This institution displays these photographs so prominently, which meant that the missionary and humanitarian agenda became internalised by Armenia in its fight for recognition. By considering Armenian women’s memories of loss and grieving, this photographic narrative illustrates the orphaned nature of the woman. The widowed Armenian woman, like the deportation photograph, is looking away from the camera. However, as the image was produced by Biørn, it was generated for a missionary purpose, alleviating the suffering of the Armenian women in order to demonstrate the importance of the assistance Biørn and other missionaries provided following the genocide. This reinforces further the encouragement to join the relief effort; the setting appears to be a monastery, which relates to one of Biørn’s missions of evangelization. These women are shown covered and dressed in plain rag-like clothing, almost appearing as nuns. The widow is alone in the snow, but the implication is that she is within the walls of a monastery, dressed as a nun, and hence protected by the missionaries and God. As such, this photograph highlights the widow’s own shadowy presence and how it was reshaped by Biørn’s missionary perspectives and efforts.

Abduction and Assimilation: As Viewed by Karen Jeppe

Abduction and violence against Armenian women were some of the common fates during the genocide, where they were subjected to torture, assimilation, forced marriage, rape, and forced conversion to Islam. Nevzat, a young Kurdish man, recalled his knowledge on the stories about:

 ‘Two Armenian women in his family who had been abducted and – after they had converted to Islam – had been married to his great-uncles.’ (Zerrin Özlem Biner 2010; 80)

Karen Jeppe was a Danish missionary and crucial in trying to ‘rescue’ Islamized Armenian women. Jeppe was a prominent League of Nations relief worker, frequently contributing narratives, and images of ‘rescued Armenian girls to the London-based periodical the Slave Market News’ (Watenpaugh, 2015; 136). The mandate system of the League of Nations established a ‘new framework’ for Catholic and Protestant missions; although volunteer and relief efforts continued, humanitarianism in the Middle East was then brought under the purview of the League of Nations (Okkenhaugh and Summerer, 2020; 95). Jeppe was not attempting to convert Armenians to her brand of Protestant Christianity, but rather ‘actively’ defending the moral fortitude of their own traditional religion, which she saw as an integral part of their national identity and the foundation of their humanity (Watenpaugh, 2014; 167).

Karen Jeppe Alboom. (1920s) Islamized and tattooed Armenian woman with a close up of the tattoos, Armenian Genocide Museum and Institute  http://www.genocide-museum.am/eng/online_exhibition_2.php

This photograph taken by Jeppe depicts an Islamized and tattooed Armenian woman from the 1920s; as a tribal custom, the Arab, Kurdish, or Turkish men who forced Armenian women into marriage marked specific tattoos.  Many of these women despised their tattoos, and some of them disfigured themselves while attempting to remove them with acid (Ekmekcioglu, 2013; 549). Simple geometrical black lines and dots are scattered over her forehead and chin, with a curved line with a dot in the middle on her forehead. Her hand displays various lines on it, including black circular lines and cultural patterns, and she has a solemn expression on her face. This image alludes to the hidden legacy of tattooed Armenian women, the numbers of which are unknown, whose marks appeared to make them the property of their new owner. Indeed, humanitarians and missionaries, such as Jeppe, considered the Armenian women and children sequestered in Muslim homes in this manner to be slaves, consistently referring to their situation as slavery and documenting not only a lack of wages but also ‘child marriage, forced conversion, and trafficking’ as factors in their enslavement (Watenpaugh, 2015; 136). By taking Jeppe’s position as a Danish missionary into account, the Armenian woman’s image has been reshaped to document relief perspectives of the tattooed woman’s ‘slavery’, highlighting what happened during the genocide rather than allowing the woman her distinctness. As a result, the photograph highlights her slavery by restricting the woman’s Armenianness, demonstrating the divide between Armenian and non-Armenian identities, as well as the humanitarian and missionary objectives of constructing these images; the tattoos ‘mark and modify the boundary between self and world’ (Derderian, 2005; 126). From this, these tattoos represent the trauma and alienation of Armenian women in a non-Armenian society. As tattoos are permanent reminders of the suffering Armenian women have endured and their relationships with Arab, Kurdish, or Turk men, this photo has captured the corruption of women’s purity and innocence (Derderian, 2005; 136). Furthermore, because the tattoos are the first thing that we see, the viewer loses the presence of the woman, further diminishing the sense of identity and highlighting her slavery. There is also an element of exoticism in the image, which would pique the interest of western observers and possibly entice them to join the humanitarian effort while depriving the sitter of her own honour. Honour was a crucial component in Armenian society, whereby men in the Diaspora stepped in to marry rescued women, thereby rescuing the Armenian nation’s ‘power, honour, and masculinity’ (Ekmekcioglu, 2016; 38). Therefore, the ‘branded’ nature of these Armenian women might also have encouraged pathos and action from men in the Diaspora, who wanted to recapture their own masculinity at a time when they felt otherwise helpless to prevent the destruction of their people in the Ottoman Empire.

Conclusion

Overall, Armenian women are not actively present in photographic narratives of the Armenian Genocide. Their ‘presence in absence’ is a common anomaly within the photographs that have been analysed, where the images have been reshaped for varying aspects of the relief efforts. The permanent reminders of individuals in the photographs are absent for the viewers, de-personalizing the photographic narratives for Western and Diaspora audiences. These women have been made into categories in a way: the deportee, the widow, the tattooed woman. Wegner, Biørn, and Jeppe developed and presented these categories to the world as a way of representing the Armenian genocide and encouraging participation in the relief effort. However, these photographs are destructive because they overshadow the identities of the Armenian women. For example, the photograph depicting an Islamized and tattooed Armenian woman, which was taken by Jeppe, highlights her slavery by restricting the woman’s Armenianness, demonstrating the divide between Armenian and non-Armenian identities, as well as the humanitarian and missionary objectives of constructing these images. The fact that the Armenian Genocide Museum displays these photos so prominently now suggests that the missionary and humanitarian agenda got internalised by Armenia in its fight for recognition. Through uncritically fore grounding these photographs, taken by humanitarian activists and missionaries, we are extending a process that has eclipsed the understanding and knowledge of Armenian women’s full experiences during the genocide. 

Bibliography

Primary Material

Abloom, Karen Jeppe. (1920s) Islamized and tattooed Armenian woman with a close up of the tattoos, Armenian Genocide Museum and Institute, accessed 10th November 2022 http://www.genocide-museum.am/eng/online_exhibition_2.php

Biørn, Bodil. Widow Jeghsa Jeghiasarian, Armenian Genocide Museum and Institute, accessed 10th November 2022 http://www.genocide-museum.am/eng/bodil_biorn.php

Wegner, Armin T. (1915) Armenian Deportees, Armenian Genocide Museum and Institute, accessed 10th November 2022 http://www.genocide-museum.am/eng/armin_wegner.php

Wegner, Armin T. (2000) An open letter to the President of the United States of America, Woodrow Wilson, on the mass deportation of the Armenians into the Mesopotamian desert, Journal of Genocide Research, 2 (1), 127-132.

Secondary Material

Alloa, E. (2015) ‘Afterimages: Belated Witnessing in the Photographs of the Armenian Catastrophe’ Journal of Literature and Trauma Studies 4 (1-2), pp. 43-65.

Bermúdez Qvortrup, N. (2021) ‘The Bodil Biørn collection and its community of records: A responsibility with the victims’ Norsk arkivforum, (27), pp. 111-142.

Derderian, K. (2005) ‘Common Fate, Different Experience: Gender-Specific Aspects of the Armenian Genocide, 1915-1917’ Holocaust and Genocide Studies, 19 (1), pp. 1–25.

Ekmekcioglu, L. (2016) Recovering Armenia: The Limits of Belonging in Post-Genocide Turkey California: Stanford University Press.

Eknekcioglu, L. (2013) ‘A Climate for Abduction, a Climate for Redemption: The Politics of Inclusion during and after the Armenian Genocide’ Comparative Studies in Society and History 55 (3), pp. 522-553.

Glum, L. (2021) ‘The Tattoos of Armenian Genocide Survivors: Inscribing the Female Body as a Practice of Regulation’ Journal for Religion, Film and Media 7 (1) pp. 123-143.

Jinkins, R. (2018) “Marks Hard to Erase”: The Troubled Reclamation of “Absorbed” Armenian Women, 1919–1927’’ The American Historical Review 123 (1) pp. 86-123.

Kaprielian-Churchill, I. (1993) ‘Armenian Refugee Women: The Picture Brides, 1920-1930’ Journal of American Ethnic History 12 (3), pp. 3-29.

Kévorkian, R. (2011) The Armenian Genocide : A Complete History London: I.B.Tauris.

Low, D. (2022) Picturing the Ottoman Armenian World: Photography in Erzerum, Harput, Van and Beyond. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.

Low, D. (2015) ‘Photography and the Empty Landscape: Excavating the Armenian Image World’ Towards Inclusive Art Histories: Ottoman Armenian Voices Speak Back, pp. 1-64.

Low, D. (2016) The Returning Hero and the Exiled Villain: The Image of The Armenian in Ottoman Society, 1908-1916′ International Journal of Armenian Genocide Stories 3 (1) pp. 51-71. 

Monoogian, M. Walker A, Richards, L. (2007) ‘Gender, Genocide, and Ethnicity: The Legacies of Older Armenian American Mothers’ Journal of Family Issues 28 (1) pp. 567-589.

Michels, S. (2020) ‘Re-framing Photography – Some Thoughts’ in Sissy Helff and Stefanie Michels (eds.) Global Photographies Oxford: Routledge, pp. 9-17.

Moller, F. (2010) ‘Rwanda Revisualised: Genocide, Photography, and the Era of the Witness’ Alternatives 35 (2010), 113-136. 

Okkenhaugh, Marie I. (2015) ‘Religion, Relief and Humanitarian Work among Armenian Women Refugees in Mandatory Syria, 1927-1934′ Scandanavian Journal of History 40 (3), pp. 432-454. 

Okkenhaugh, Maire I. (2020) ‘Spiritual Reformation and Engagement with the World: Scandinavian Mission, Humanitarianism, and Armenians in the Ottoman Empire, 1905-1914′ in Inger Marie Okkenhaug and Karene Sanchez Summerer (eds.) Christian Missions and Humanitarianism in The Middle East, 1850-1950: Ideologies, Rhetoric, and Practices, Leiden: Brill.

Ozlem Biner, Z. (2010) ‘Acts of Defacement, Memories of Loss: Ghostly Effects of the “Armenian Crisis” in Mardin, Southeastern Turkey’ History and Memory 22 (2), pp. 68-94.

Payne, C. (2012) “A Question of Humanity in its Entirety”: Armin T. Wegner as Intermediary of Reconciliation between Germans and Armenians in Interwar German Civil Society’ in Birgit Schwelling (ed.) Reconciliation, Civil Society, and the Politics of Memory. Germany: Transcript Verlag, pp. 25-50.

Rogers, M. (2020) ‘Twice Captured: the Work of Atrocity Photography’ in Msrk Durden and Jane Tormey (eds.) The Routledge Companion to Photography Theory. London: Routledge, pp. 228-242.

Rooney, M. (2000) ‘A Forgotten Humanist: Armin T. Wegner’ Journal of Genocide Research 2 (1), pp. 117-119.

Sontag, S. (1979) On Photography. London: Penguin.

Sontag, S. (2006) ‘The image-world’ in Sunil Manghani; Arthur Piper; Jon Simons (eds.) Images: A Reader. London: SAGE Publications Ltd, pp. 80-94.

Sontag, S. (2003) Regarding the Pain of Others. London: Penguin.

Tusan, M. (2014) “Crimes against Humanity”: Human Rights, the British Empire, and the Origins of the Response to the Armenian Genocide’ The American Historical Review 119 (1), pp. 47-77.

Twomey, C. (2012) ‘Framing Atrocity: Photography and Humanitarianism’. History of Photography, 36 (3), pp. 255-264.

Watenpaugh, K. (2015) Bread from Stones: The Middle East and the Making of Modern Humanism California: University of California Press.

Watenpaugh, K. (2014) ‘Between Communal Survival and National Aspiration: Armenian Genocide Refugees, the League of Nations, and the Practices of Interwar Humanitarianism’ Humanity: An International Journal of Human Rights, Humanitarianism, and Development, 5 (2), pp. 159-181.