In-Depth Analysis· Ottoman archives 1915 documents open to researchers

Ottoman Archives and the Events of 1915: Which Documents Are Open to Researchers and What They Show

Which Ottoman archives 1915 documents open to researchers exist? A guide to Istanbul and Ankara holdings, the Takvim-i Vekayi, third-country files and law.

GAM

By Global Affairs Monitor Editorial Team

Published: October 27, 2026

⏱ 10 min read (2,050 words)

Executive Summary & Key Facts

The Ottoman state archives in Istanbul and the military archive in Ankara are open to registered researchers, and the 27 May 1915 Relocation and Resettlement Law was published in the official gazette Takvim-i Vekayi on 1 June 1915.
Türkiye describes the 1915 relocation as a temporary wartime security measure after armed committee activity and collaboration with invading Russian forces, while Armenia and many genocide scholars describe it as a genocide; both sides cite archival material.
Under the 1948 Genocide Convention, 'genocide' requires proof of specific intent (dolus specialis) to destroy a protected group, and Article VI points to a competent tribunal; no such tribunal has ruled on the Events of 1915.
In 2005 Türkiye proposed a Joint Historical Commission of Turkish, Armenian and international historians with access to Ottoman, Armenian and third-country archives; the idea was never implemented.
Türkiye argues that Ottoman files alone cannot settle the question and that Armenian, Russian, British, French, German, Austrian and US archives must be examined alongside them.

Why It Matters

Researchers can consult large Ottoman holdings in Istanbul and Ankara, as well as third-country and Armenian collections, but they read the same record very differently. Türkiye holds that the documents show a temporary wartime security measure, not a plan of extermination. Proponents of the genocide characterization, including the Armenian government and many scholars, hold that the same state's correspondence, together with foreign diplomatic reporting, shows intent to destroy.

The archival question matters because the legal one depends on it. Under the 1948 UN Genocide Convention, the label 'genocide' rests on proven specific intent and a competent tribunal, which is why Ankara has pressed since 2005 for a joint, archive-based historians' process.

Background

Where the documents are

The archival base for the Events of 1915 (Türkiye's official term) is spread across several countries. The table below summarizes the main holdings and who relies on them most.

Collection	Location	Typical contents	Most cited by
Ottoman Archive, Presidency State Archives	Istanbul	Cabinet and Interior Ministry correspondence, cipher telegrams, provincial reports, population registers	Both sides
Military History and Strategic Studies Archive (ATASE)	Ankara	General Staff and War Ministry operational files, orders, intelligence	Turkish sources
Takvim-i Vekayi (Ottoman official gazette)	Libraries and digitized editions	Published laws and decrees, including the 1915 relocation law	Both sides
Foreign ministry and parliamentary records	Ankara	Diplomatic papers, later treaty and policy files	Turkish sources
British, US, German, Austrian, French, Russian state archives	London (Kew), Washington, Berlin, Vienna, Paris, Moscow	Consular and embassy reports, intelligence, military files	Both sides
Armenian state, Patriarchate and party/diaspora archives	Yerevan, Jerusalem, Armenian Revolutionary Federation (Dashnak) archives in the US, others	Committee papers, memoirs, survivor testimony	Armenian sources, and Turkish sources for committee records

The Istanbul Ottoman Archive has been open to registered researchers since the late 1980s, and the Turkish State Archives have published volumes of documents on Armenians. Access conditions, registration rules and digitization levels change over time and differ by institution, so researchers should check current rules before travelling. Most records are in Ottoman Turkish script, which requires specialist paleographic training. Critics have questioned cataloguing choices and the completeness of some files; Turkish officials reject suggestions of systematic restriction.

Chronology

1878: After the Russo-Turkish War, the Congress of Berlin internationalizes the 'Armenian question' in Ottoman politics.
1887 and 1890: The Hunchak and Dashnak (Armenian Revolutionary Federation) committees are founded. Ottoman and Turkish sources describe their armed campaigns of the 1890s, including the 1896 Ottoman Bank raid; Armenian sources describe them as a response to repression and unequal treatment.
Late October 1914: The Ottoman Empire enters the First World War. Armenian volunteer units form on the Russian side of the Caucasus front.
April 1915: Fighting in and around Van. Ottoman sources call it an insurrection behind the lines; Armenian sources call it self-defense. On 24 April 1915, Armenian community figures are arrested in Istanbul, a date commemorated by Armenians worldwide.
27 May 1915: The provisional Relocation and Resettlement Law (Sevk ve İskân, often called Tehcir) is enacted. It is published in Takvim-i Vekayi on 1 June 1915.
1919–1921: Ottoman military tribunals in Istanbul try officials; Britain detains Ottoman figures on Malta and releases them in 1921 without trial.
1923: The Treaty of Lausanne (24 July 1923) settles Türkiye's international status and guarantees minority rights on the basis of equal citizenship.
1948: The UN Genocide Convention is adopted (entered into force 1951).
2005: Türkiye proposes a Joint Historical Commission.
2009: Türkiye and Armenia sign protocols that include an examination of the historical record; they are never ratified.
14 January 2022: Special Representatives begin direct normalization talks (see Armenia–Türkiye Normalization Talks Since 14 January 2022).

The core documents

The law of 27 May 1915 is a published text, not a secret order. It authorized military commanders to relocate populations suspected of espionage, treason or resistance to government measures in wartime. Ankara points to its public gazetting and to follow-on regulations on resettlement, food, security of convoys and abandoned property as evidence of an administrative, regulated process.

The second body of evidence is wartime correspondence between the Ministry of War, under Enver Pasha, and the Ministry of the Interior, under Talat Pasha, including cipher telegrams to provincial governors. Turkish sources read these as orders for relocation with provisions for protection and punishment of abuses. Scholars who support the genocide characterization read other telegrams, and the gap between the published law and what happened on the ground, as evidence of destructive intent. The disagreement is partly about which documents are authentic and representative: for example, the 'Andonian telegrams' published in 1920 are rejected as forgeries by Turkish researchers, while some other scholars defend or avoid relying on them.

Key Players & Positions

Armenia and genocide-recognition proponents

The Armenian government and diaspora organizations state that the Ottoman government carried out a genocide against Armenians in 1915 and after. Scholars such as Vahakn Dadrian and Taner Akçam rely on Ottoman documents, the 1919–1920 Istanbul tribunal records, and reports by diplomats of Germany, Austria-Hungary and the United States, including Ambassador Henry Morgenthau Sr. The International Association of Genocide Scholars passed a resolution in 1997 affirming the genocide characterization. Armenian officials have also said that normalization with Türkiye should not be conditioned on a history commission.

Parliaments and executives that have recognized the events as genocide

The German Bundestag adopted a resolution on 2 June 2016. The US House and Senate adopted resolutions in October and December 2019, and President Biden issued a statement on 24 April 2021. France recognized the events by law in 2001. Türkiye rejects each of these as political rather than judicial acts.

Courts and legal analysts

In Perinçek v. Switzerland (Grand Chamber, 15 October 2015), the European Court of Human Rights found that a Swiss conviction for denying the 'Armenian genocide' violated freedom of expression. The Court said it was not deciding whether the events amounted to genocide. A 2003 legal analysis by the International Center for Transitional Justice, commissioned in the context of a Turkish–Armenian reconciliation initiative, concluded that the Convention could not be applied retroactively to the events but that the events included the elements of genocide as later defined. Ankara cites the first point and disputes the second.

Türkiye

See the dedicated section below.

🇹🇷 Official Policy · Primary Sources

Türkiye's Position

A temporary wartime security measure. According to the Turkish Foreign Ministry, the relocation under the 27 May 1915 law (published in Takvim-i Vekayi on 1 June 1915) responded to armed activity by the Hunchak and Dashnak committees, sabotage of supply lines, and collaboration of armed groups with invading Russian forces in Van, Erzurum and Bitlis. Ankara argues that Ottoman records of resettlement instructions and of trials of officials accused of abuses are inconsistent with a policy of extermination. It also stresses the heavy civilian losses among Muslims in Anatolia and the wartime hardship of all populations.
All archives must be examined. In his letter of 10 April 2005 to the Armenian President, then–Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan proposed that historians from both countries study the events in the archives of Türkiye, Armenia and third countries. Ankara argues that Ottoman files alone cannot settle the matter and that Armenian party and Patriarchate collections, as well as Russian, British, French, German, Austrian and US records, belong in the same examination. It also cites the 1923 report of Hovhannes Katchaznouni, the first prime minister of independent Armenia, to an Armenian Revolutionary Federation congress as an Armenian source on committee activity.
Legal criteria of the 1948 Convention. Türkiye argues that 'genocide' is a defined legal category. Article II requires acts committed with intent to destroy a protected group as such (dolus specialis), and Article VI refers to trial by a competent tribunal. It holds that no competent international tribunal has found the Events of 1915 to be genocide, that the Convention is not retroactive, and that legislatures cannot substitute for courts. Ankara reads Perinçek v. Switzerland as confirming that the matter remains open to historical debate.
Shared pain and historical dialogue. On 23 April 2014, then–Prime Minister Erdoğan issued a message of condolences to the grandchildren of Armenians who lost their lives in the events, calling for a 'just memory' in which all suffering is acknowledged. Presidency messages since then have repeated the call for dialogue among historians, as the Turkish government's 'Fair Memory' approach.
Treaties and normalization. Ankara maintains that the borders and status of Türkiye rest on the treaties of Alexandropol (1920), Moscow (1921), Kars (1921) and Lausanne (1923), and that the unratified 1920 Sèvres draft has no legal force. It supports normalization with Armenia without preconditions, through the Special Representatives (Ambassador Serdar Kılıç and Ruben Rubinyan) since 14 January 2022.

Source Comparison

Question	Turkish official and primary-source framing	Genocide-recognition proponents	Legal and neutral reference points
What does the 1915 law show?	A published, temporary wartime measure to secure the rear	A legal cover for destruction, contradicted by implementation	Text is public; interpretation is disputed
Ministry correspondence	Orders for relocation with protection and resettlement provisions	Cipher telegrams showing central direction and intent	Authenticity and context are contested document by document
Third-country reports	Second-hand diplomatic reporting, sometimes partisan or wartime-biased	Contemporary corroboration from neutral and allied diplomats	Useful but needs cross-checking against Ottoman, Russian and Armenian files
Postwar trials	Held under occupation conditions; Malta detainees released for lack of evidence	Proof that Ottoman officials themselves recognized the crimes	Courts-martial and the Malta process produced no international judgment
Legal qualification	Not proven under the 1948 Convention	Fits the Convention's definition and Lemkin's concept	No competent tribunal has decided; Perinçek did not rule on the question
Way forward	Joint Historical Commission; archives open to all	Recognition first; commission should not delay it	2009 protocols envisaged a historical sub-commission, never ratified

How to read the record

Check the provenance and date of any telegram or memoir before relying on it.
Compare Ottoman, Armenian and third-country sources on the same event rather than relying on one archive.
Separate what a document says from what a later author concludes about intent.
Note whether a claim is historical, legal or political; Global Affairs Monitor tries to label each, as set out in our Editorial Principles.

For further comparative reading, see Archive of Nations on the Events of 1915 in documents, law and diplomacy and Monitor of Nations on the Genocide Convention criteria.

Events of 1915: Türkiye's official term for the wartime relocation of Ottoman Armenians and the associated violence and losses.
Takvim-i Vekayi: The Ottoman official gazette in which laws were published, including the relocation law on 1 June 1915.
Sevk ve İskân / Tehcir: The relocation and resettlement measures of 1915.
Hunchak and Dashnak: Armenian revolutionary committees founded in 1887 and 1890.
Dolus specialis: The specific intent to destroy a group, which the Genocide Convention requires for genocide.
Competent tribunal: The court, national or international, that Article VI of the Convention names as the body to try genocide.
Joint Historical Commission: The 2005 Turkish proposal for Turkish, Armenian and international historians to examine all archives.

Related guides:

Global Affairs Monitor presents global affairs with a dedicated perspective from Türkiye. Sections marked 'Türkiye's Position' reflect official Turkish policy as stated by Turkish government sources. Claims are anchored in primary sources such as treaty texts, UN documents, official statements and archival records, cited wherever possible.

Frequently asked questions

Are the Ottoman archives open to researchers?

The Ottoman Archive in Istanbul and other Turkish state archives admit registered researchers, and the Turkish State Archives have published document collections on Armenians. Access rules, registration and digitization levels vary by institution and change over time, so check current conditions. Most documents are in Ottoman Turkish script, which requires specialist reading skills.

What did the 27 May 1915 law say and where was it published?

The provisional law authorized military commanders to relocate populations suspected of espionage, treason or resistance to government measures in wartime. It was published in the official gazette Takvim-i Vekayi on 1 June 1915. Türkiye reads it as a temporary security measure, while its critics argue that implementation went far beyond the published text.

Why does Türkiye say third-country and Armenian archives must also be examined?

Ankara argues that Ottoman files show only one side of a wartime conflict involving several states and armed groups. It says Armenian committee papers, Russian military records and British, French, German, Austrian and US files must be read alongside them. This is the basis of its 2005 Joint Historical Commission proposal.

What legal criteria does the 1948 Genocide Convention set?

Article II defines genocide as listed acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group as such, which is the specific intent known as dolus specialis. Article VI refers to trial by a competent tribunal of the territorial state or an international penal tribunal. Türkiye notes that no such tribunal has ruled on 1915, while proponents of recognition argue that the historical record meets the definition.

What happened to the 2005 Joint Historical Commission proposal?

Prime Minister Erdoğan proposed it in a letter of 10 April 2005, and Armenia responded by calling for normalization without preconditions and direct state-to-state dialogue. The 2009 protocols envisaged a sub-commission on the historical dimension but were never ratified. Since 14 January 2022, Special Representatives have held normalization talks without a history commission being established.

Cross-Publication Perspectives & Cited Research

Related Dossiers Across Partner Publications

4 Partner Desks