The Talat-Tehlirian Complex: Contentious Narratives of Martyrdom and Revenge in Post-Conflict Societies

Abstract

The assassination of Talat Pasha by Soghomon Tehlirian on 15 March 1921 in Berlin, as well as Tehlirian’s trial and acquittal on 2–3 June 1921, have contributed to the formation of conflicting legacies of the Armenian Genocide. Though minuscule in terms of violence and legal ramifications, these events and their reimagination in contentious narratives have shaped a dominant prism of sensemaking in Turkish-Armenian relations. In the imagination of rival groups, Talat and Tehlirian compete for the very same normative categories of hero and victim at once and each are demonized as a villain and perpetrator. Moreover, it is each figure’s embodiment of martyrdom and revenge that explains why their heroizations have proved so enduring and effective across time and space. This mutual framework of sensemaking, which I call the Talat-Tehlirian complex, ultimately denies the chances of historical reconciliation. In terms of its theoretical implications, this case study explains how a martyr-avenger complex can continuously demand solidarity, sustain grievances, and sacralize violence in post-conflict societies. Based on a thick description of what happened in Berlin in 1921 and its contentious narratives across different generations, this paper calls for a transition to a post-heroic age in Turkish-Armenian relations.

Hamlet after Genocide: The Haunting of Soghomon Tehlirian and Empirical Fabulation

“…: 48). Alp Yenen, who refers to Tehlirian as a “hitman,” posits the necessity of an “anti-hero” framework as well as of doing away with feelings of revenge if we want to walk the path toward what he calls “Turkish-Armenian reconciliation” (2022). Both authors assume a clear understanding of where “vigilante justice” begins and “legal justice” ends.…”

“…Drawing on this scholarship, I develop a concept I call “empirical fabulation,” which, I will argue, allows us to fathom the balancing act between fact and fabulation calibrated by Tehlirian during his court testimony and in his unexamined memoir. I diverge from existing designations of Tehlirian as “a hitman” (Yenen 2022), an assassin who was transformed into a “righteous avenger” through the crafting of a legal narrative “that was exculpatory and redemptive at once” (Dean 2019: 53, 48). My reading of Tehlirian as an empirical fabulist recognizes him as a genocide survivor with an aspiration for collective justice, a son haunted by his mother’s ghost, and a historical actor who gave a fabricated testimony that was nonetheless based on the empirical facts of genocide.…”

“… 1 See Alexander 1991; Bogosian 2017; Dean 2019; Derogy 1990; Garibian 2018; Ihrig 2016; Jacobs 2019; MacCurdy 2015; Resta 2016; and most recently, in this journal, Yenen 2022. …”