so far as americans are concerned, the missionary work in european turkey and asia minor is and long has been almost exclusively in the hands of the american board. in no part of the world has that board or any board had abler or more devoted representatives to preach the gospel, to conduct schools and colleges or to establish and administer hospitals. their original aim was to infuse new life into the native armenian and greek churches, to rescue them from mere formalism, and to imbue them with the spirit of a pure and active christianity. circumstances compiled them in due time to organize independent churches on which the old churches at first looked with unfriendly eyes. but of late years in many places a more friendly and sympathetic spirit has been manifested towards them by the clergy of the old order, and the life of some of the native churches has been quickened by the example of the missionary churches.
the excellence of our schools has been so manifest that its stimulating effect has been felt by not only the armenian and greek schools, but also by the turkish schools.
the medical work of our missionary physicians has also widely commended itself to men of all faiths and has awakened a decided interest not only in the religion which so humanely brings its generous hospital treatment to all who desire it, but also in the rational system of medicine and surgery which it illustrates. even the mohammedans who are generally inaccessible to the approaches of our missionaries cannot but have some appreciation of the benevolent and christlike work of our physicians.
wherever an american mission is established, there is a center of alert, enterprising american life, whose influence in a hundred ways is felt even by the lethargic oriental life.
—prof. james b. angell, ll. d., university of michigan,
ex. u. s. minister to turkey and china.
[pg 137]
smyrna was the first station of the levant occupied by american missionaries. this was an important city of turkey and, until constantinople was better understood, was considered the most important city to hold as the central station of the missions to turkey. since 1820 this place has been one of the stations of the american board and the residence of one or more missionary families. this was regarded as a good starting-point for work among the greeks, as well as other races centering there in large numbers.
beirut, after an attempt to locate in jerusalem, was occupied as a station three years later. while the original plans for work in syria had the jews most distinctly in mind, attention was quickly diverted to other races more alert and promising.
it was inevitable that constantinople should early become the headquarters of missions in the ottoman empire as it was the political capital and commercial metropolis. the climate is healthy, and being partly in europe and partly in asia, the city partakes in part of the character of both continents.
there was also another strong reason for making constantinople the headquarters of work in turkey, namely, the fact that it was the headquarters of every important religious sect in the empire. opposition to mission work must emanate from that center and difficulties could best be overcome right at their beginning. as it was also the seat of government from which governors and civil officers [pg 138] were sent to every part of the empire, this made it still more important that a strong mission force should reside here, in order that these men should not receive the impression that christian missionaries are advancing upon the empire only through remote interior districts. the capital was occupied as a mission station of the board in 1831, and has since been the base of operations for the work of the american board in the country. tours of exploration made in asia minor and into koordistan and persia started from this center.
preliminary explorations had been made by various scientific societies, as for instance that of john m. parker, f. g. s., f. r. g. s., under the auspices of the royal geographical society and the society for promoting christian knowledge, in 1839-40. they went overland from constantinople to cæsarea, malatia, diarbekr, mosul, koordistan, bitlis, marash, erzerum, trebizond, and thence back to constantinople. the report of this extended tour through asia minor, northern mesopotamia, koordistan, and armenia, published in two volumes, under the title “travels and researches in asia minor, mesopotamia, chaldea, and armenia,” was of great value to the missionaries in planning their locations. these researches were made largely from the purely scientific standpoint and in some cases needed to be supplemented by missionary observations.
the establishing of mission locations over the vast areas of asiatic and european turkey was not hastily carried out. the country was well mapped and explored before the stations were opened, and then only such places were chosen as promised to be central to large populations and healthful for missionary residences. the policy seems to have been early adopted to set the stations far apart, with two or more [pg 139] missionary families in each of them. the success of this plan has proven its wisdom, and even now the tendency is to greater consolidation in important centers rather than to a scattering of forces.
a few, and but a few, places early opened as stations were later abandoned. three of these were mosul, diarbekr, and arabkir. the former place proved to be exceedingly unhealthy and was made an outstation of mardin, while the two latter places were within one hundred miles of harpoot and were made outstations. the carefulness and foresight with which the early stations were chosen are proved by the test of over fifty years of successful occupancy.
trebizond, upon the southern shore of the black sea towards its eastern extremity, was occupied as a station, as already stated, in 1835. it is a large city of great influence, with a greek, armenian, and turkish population.
in 1839 a missionary family was sent to erzerum, one hundred and ten miles into the interior to the southeast of trebizond. as soon as these stations were opened they became the centers of exploration for securing and forwarding information to the headquarters of the missions in constantinople and to the board in boston.
aintab was opened in what was then called “southern armenia,” in 1849, and became the center for operations upon a large population dwelling in northern syria, extending from urfa on the east into the tarsus mountains upon the west, and including the important cities of marash, opened in 1855, adana, aleppo, tarsus, hadjin, antioch, kilis, and many other towns of less importance. later this became the center of what came to be known as the central turkey mission. this region is approached from the mediterranean and is inhabited chiefly by armenians [pg 140] and turks. in this section of country the armenians have lost, for the most part, their native tongue, and speak only the turkish language. as the koords and more savage races live in remote regions, the people have not endured the persecution here that their brethren in the north and east have been called upon to pass through.
in 1850 an investigation of the condition of the jews in salonica was made, which resulted in the opening of that station for work, especially among the jews. there seems to have been no thought of reaching from that station any other races. they found the jews there extremely ignorant, and divided between the rabbinicals and the mohammedans. the unhealthy condition of the city led in 1859 to the transfer of the station to smyrna.
the more interior stations, like marsovan, cæsarea, sivas, harpoot and bitlis, were occupied in the ’50s, while van, the most eastern mission station in turkey, was made such in 1872. from constantinople the missionaries had been gradually reaching out, nicomedia and brusa having been made stations in 1847 and 1848, respectively.
the languages used in these missions were the arabic and syrian in the syrian field with its center at beirut; the turkish language in the central turkey region with its center at aintab; the armenian language in the eastern turkey district with its center at harpoot; while arabic was the language of mardin, mosul and arabia, and the greek, armenian, bulgarian and turkish languages in the western turkey mission including trebizond. various plans were tried at first of grouping these various stations for purposes of control and administration. they could not all [pg 141] be classed together owing to the long distances separating them and the difficulties of travel in a country with no roads and no public conveyances. finally the above outlined arrangement of the stations was adopted and each separate mission became a little republic in itself, holding its annual meeting, in which delegates from all the stations belonging to it met and legislated for it as a whole. in 1872 the european turkey mission also became separate from the western turkey mission and has since been conducted as an entirely distinct organization.
the great extent of territory covered by these missions can best be understood by the fact that but few stations anywhere were less than one hundred miles apart. the nearest station to harpoot in eastern turkey was distant one hundred and fifty miles, a six days’ journey by the ordinary mode of conveyance. to reach some of the interior stations like bitlis, harpoot and mardin required an overland journey on horseback of from three to four weeks from the black sea coast. thus the country was dotted by mission stations which became at once centers for direct, aggressive, educational, philanthropic and christian work. in no case was one opened except upon the urgent invitation of a large number of the people themselves. a station meant then, as it means to-day, a center in which missionaries reside. it was understood also that this residence was permanent, and to make this clear to all, houses for the missionaries were purchased or erected and other arrangements completed for a life-work. this fact in itself made a profound impression upon the people of all classes and religions. when it was charged that the missionary movement would prove to be short-lived, no one was able to answer the question, “what mean these [pg 142] residences owned by the missionaries?” certainly, if it was the purpose to carry on only a temporary work, houses would have been leased. another fact, which gave the appearance and impression of permanency, was that the missionaries came with their wives and set up their homes there. these two facts had much to do in giving stability and strength to the earlier work. the three men and their wives who occupied the harpoot station in 1858 were there together in that same station until after the massacres of 1895, when owing to broken health and the destruction of their homes four of them were compelled to come to this country. three of the six are still living, two of them at harpoot. the policy of married missionaries permanently located in central stations and from there working together as a unit the large adjacent field, has proved itself to be a wise and efficient policy for all parts of turkey. this policy necessitates the wide use of trained native pastors, preachers, evangelists and teachers who occupy the outstations and push the work into the remoter districts.
each station became a social settlement, in which the christian home was the center and from which wholesome christian influences were exerted upon all with whom the missionaries came in contact. the plan involved the elevation and purification of the entire social fabric of the country, and, judged from our modern standpoint, no more effectual way of accomplishing this could have been devised. it is no small thing for devout philanthropists in england and the united states to give up their comfortable homes and establish their residence, as many have done and are still doing, among the downtrodden and oppressed in our great cities. it is well known, however, that this change of residence is not permanent and that, in cases of sickness, the old home and [pg 143] friends remain, to which return can be made. with those missionaries the case was different. their homes in america were broken up. they took up their abode in the interior cities of turkey for life. in times of sickness they remained. no friends from home visited them, and in case of their death, their bodies were buried in the soil of the land. there were their children born, and in multitudes of cases, because of the severity of the climate and the lack of proper facilities for safeguarding their health, there also were they buried. herein lie many elements of moral strength which appear in the foreign missionary movement. it is this feature which has made a profound impression upon the races of turkey and which is now reshaping its social system.
in 1860, after forty years of exploration and study in the turkish empire, so far as her people and their moral and spiritual needs were concerned, missionary work had been outlined for at least five different races. interest in the jews had been continued, and a missionary, dr. schauffler, intended exclusively for work among them, had been maintained, not at jerusalem but at constantinople. he was working in harmony with the three english and scottish societies, each of whom was maintaining missionaries to the jews, with headquarters at constantinople. the work done was quiet, exciting apparently less interest among the people of turkey than among the organizers of societies in the united states for work among this race. undoubtedly, during the first generation of work in the ottoman empire, the people of the united states and england were more stirred by appeals for work among the jews than by any other appeal which was or could be made.
the work for the greeks was promising in smyrna and constantinople. [pg 144] owing to greece obtaining her freedom from the rule of the sultan, greeks still living in turkey were drawn away in their sympathies and interest to greece, and the spirit of patriotism was strong in holding them to the national church.
among the syrians a hold was obtained in spite of the intense opposition of the roman catholics who claimed all syrians as belonging to them. the severest opposition during the first twenty-five years of mission effort in turkey came not from the turks but from the roman catholics, who did not stop at the employment of any measure which would tend to banish the printing-press and curtail the work of the protestant missionaries.
the mohammedans commanded early attention. they were drawn to the missionaries by the fact that no pictures or images were used in protestant worship nor gaudy display made in any public services. repeatedly turks said to the missionaries, “you are like us, you are good moslems.” as acquaintance increased, interest deepened in this dominant race. conditions were such that little directly aggressive effort could be wisely made for their immediate enlightenment. much was done in the way of private conversation and through the preparation and publication of a christian literature adapted to their needs.
it may be said, however, that the armenians most completely commanded both the interest of the missionaries and the attention of the constituency at home. the most of the stations in the country were established especially for this race. they were found at every center. even in syria and in all of the interior stations, armenians and turks were the chief people with whom the missionaries constantly came in contact. interest in armenians was strengthened by the intense [pg 145] persecutions through which the evangelicals passed in the early ’40s, at the hand of their own ecclesiastics. they were open-minded, able, and devout, and presented a wide opportunity for sowing the seeds of intelligent belief. at that time little had been done for the bulgarians in european turkey and macedonia. the more remote asiatic field had proved to be so large and so interesting that there had been scant pause to look into the conditions and needs of the people so near at hand, occupying the southeastern corner of europe.
levi parsons and pliny fisk, writing from smyrna to the board rooms in february, 1820, said, “in all the populous catholic and mohammedan countries on the north and south side of the mediterranean there is not a single protestant missionary. in all the turkish empire, containing perhaps twenty million souls, not one missionary station is permanently occupied and but a single missionary besides ourselves.” this one man did not long remain. besides the english work among the jews and turks in constantinople and palestine, the evangelization of the turkish empire was left from the first to the american board. in later years the disciples of christ and the seventh day adventists have sent a few missionaries into the country, but their work has been almost exclusively among the protestants and has resulted only in dividing churches already organized. the church missionary society of england has had some work in bagdad, and a scotch society in aden and the reformed church of the united states has recently begun operations upon the southern coast of arabia. with a few other minor exceptions, the turkish empire north of syria has been generally conceded to be the distinctive mission field of the american board of missions. [pg 146]
when the division of fields took place in 1870 between the american board and the newly organized presbyterian board of missions, southern syria and persia were assigned to that board, while the american board retained northern syria and all the rest of turkey. in european turkey the same board is in sole charge of all the evangelical work for and among the bulgarians south of the balkans, the methodist episcopal board of the united states having a work among the same people north of the balkans. thus macedonia and bulgaria south of the balkans, asia minor, armenia, koordistan, northern syria and northern mesopotamia are left the sole field of the american board, with the few exceptions mentioned above. this has put upon it a responsibility and placed before it an opportunity such as few mission agencies in modern times have had to face.
