Latest / The Story of Armenia: Survival Through Empires and Genocide — Fexingo History / The Armenian Genocide: The First Modern Lie
Transcript
- Lucas: We’ve walked through the mountains of Musa Dagh and the camps of Der Zor, but today I want to step away from the battlefield and into a courtroom in Berlin, 1921. It’s a place where the smoke of the Ottoman Empire still lingered in the air, but the real battle was being fought with words, evidence, and a single gunshot. Luna: A courtroom in Berlin? That feels like a strange place for an Armenian story to take center stage. Lucas: It does, until you realize that this trial would fundamentally change how the world understands mass violence. Soghomon Tehlirian had killed Talaat Pasha, the architect of the genocide, in broad daylight on a Berlin street. The question wasn't just about murder, but about justification. Luna: So the trial was really about whether his act of revenge could be excused by what he survived. Lucas: Exactly. The defense team, led by the socialist lawyer Hugo Haase, didn’t deny the killing. Instead, they put the entire Ottoman government on trial. They brought in dozens of witnesses—diplomats, doctors, missionaries—to paint a picture of systematic destruction that the jury needed to see to understand why Soghomon acted. Lucas: Among these witnesses was Johannes Lepsius, a German missionary who had been one of the few voices speaking out against the massacres while they were happening. His testimony was devastating because it came from someone inside the system who had tried to stop it and failed. Luna: Did Lepsius actually see the orders that started the deportations? Lucas: He did. He described how the Teskilat-i Mahsuse, those special organization units, operated with impunity. He showed the jury that this wasn't just chaos or war; it was a calculated policy designed to erase a people. The sheer volume of documents he presented made it impossible for the court to look away. Lucas: Then there was George Horton, the American consul in Constantinople. He was a man who had watched the burning of Smyrna and the displacement of Armenians up close. His account brought the horror home to the German audience, many of whom were still grappling with their own recent defeat in the Great War. Luna: It must have been surreal for them to hear about crimes committed by a former ally while they were trying to rebuild their own nation. Lucas: Precisely. And this is where the political stakes got incredibly high. The Ottoman government, now effectively defunct but still claiming legitimacy, sent envoys to disrupt the trial. They wanted to discredit the witnesses and protect the reputation of the Young Turks. But the facts were too heavy to bury. Lucas: The verdict itself was a shock. The jury found Soghomon not guilty by reason of self-defense, arguing that no sane person could withstand the trauma he described without reacting violently. It was a victory for empathy, but it also highlighted a gap in international law. Luna: How did that gap lead to something bigger than just one acquittal? Lucas: That’s where Raphael Lemkin comes in. He was a young Polish Jewish lawyer watching these events unfold, realizing that existing laws couldn't adequately address the crime of destroying a group. The Armenian case became a primary example in his thinking, eventually leading him to coin the word 'genocide' in 1944. Luna: So the trial planted the seed for the modern definition of genocide decades later. Lucas: It did. But let's pause here for a moment to talk about how this show exists. A handful of listeners chip in monthly through buy me a coffee dot com slash fexingo, and that's literally what funds making these conversations possible. Luna: It’s good to know the support keeps the archive growing. Lucas: It really is. Without that community, we wouldn't have the space to dig into these deep, complicated histories. So if you value having access to ad-free, long-form historical narratives, consider joining that small group of supporters over at buy me a coffee dot com slash fexingo. Luna: And we’ll dive back into the legal aftermath right after. Lucas: Back to Berlin. The acquittal of Soghomon Tehlirian was celebrated by Armenians worldwide, but it also exposed the weakness of the post-war diplomatic order. While the courts offered some measure of moral justice, the political treaties were failing to deliver security. Luna: You mentioned the Treaty of Sèvres earlier. Why did that fall apart so quickly? Lucas: Boghos Nubar, the Armenian delegate at the Paris Peace Conference, worked tirelessly to secure Article 89, which guaranteed protection for Armenians in Turkey. But the rising tide of Turkish nationalism under Mustafa Kemal Atatürk rejected these terms entirely. The treaty was never ratified, and the promises made in Paris were left empty. Lucas: Nubar was a dignified man, often compared to a statesman of old Europe, but he found himself powerless against the shifting geopolitical winds. The Western powers, distracted by their own economic crises and the rise of fascism, simply abandoned their commitments to the Armenian cause. Luna: It feels like the survivors were left holding the bag while the empires rearranged themselves. Lucas: That’s a fair assessment. Meanwhile, the Near East Relief, a massive humanitarian effort funded largely by American donations, was trying to pick up the pieces. They ran orphanages and rehabilitation centers, helping thousands of children like Hagop Margosian to survive when all else had collapsed. Lucas: These organizations became lifelines, but they couldn't replace sovereignty. The diaspora grew, scattering communities from Beirut to Los Angeles, carrying the memory of the homeland in their language and liturgy, preserved in the ancient script of Grabar. Luna: Is that script still used in religious contexts today? Lucas: Yes, absolutely. Mesrop Mashtots’ invention remains central to Armenian identity. Even as people adapt to new countries, the liturgical language ties them back to the monasteries of Geghard and Haghpat, those stone sanctuaries carved into cliffs that have witnessed centuries of change. Lucas: So when we look at the Berlin trial, we aren't just seeing a legal proceeding. We are seeing the moment the world began to formally recognize the concept of crimes against humanity, even if the political mechanisms to prevent them were still half-formed. Luna: It’s a tragic but crucial bridge between the past and modern human rights. Lucas: It is. And it leaves us wondering: how many other tragedies had to occur before the world felt compelled to write down these rules? The Armenian experience forced that question into the open, long before the Holocaust brought it to a head. Lucas: Soghomon Tehlirian lived out the rest of his life in relative obscurity, but his name remains a symbol of resilience. He proved that while empires can crush bodies, they cannot always silence the demand for accountability. Luna: It’s a powerful reminder that history is often made by those who refuse to be erased. Lucas: Indeed. And as we move forward, we’ll continue to trace those threads of survival, from the mountains of the Caucasus to the courts of Europe, asking what it means to remember when the official records try to forget.