The events referred to as the Armenian genocide, are subject of debate. A lot of this debate has to do with the definition of the events. This subject is also highly debated amongst historians. Two primary schools of thought regarding this subject exist, with some historians claiming that the events can be described as genocide and other historians disagreeing. We have looked at that debate in this project. We are not aiming to find out whether the events are to be regarded as genocide or not. Instead, we have focused on the debate as the subject. We have looked at the UN Genocide Convention and Gregory Stantons theory regarding the 8 phases of genocide, in order to obtain theories on genocide. We have compared these theories with historic source material from around the time of the events. We have used historic sources, which are as objective as possible in order to have a description of the events that are as neutral as possible. We have compared our historic source material with the theories, in order to show how historic material can be used to either confirm or dismiss these and to show the possible room for interpretation, and how that room can be a reason behind the creation of the debate. Furthermore, in order to show this, we have looked at two historians who are representing opposing views on the Armenian question. We have shown how they use material from historic sources to support their theories and stance on the subject.
|Uddannelser||Historie, (Bachelor/kandidatuddannelse) Bachelor el. kandidat|
|Udgivelsesdato||12 jan. 2016|
- Ottoman empire