Notes from the battlefield known as 'history'

Abstract

That history is a battlefield of ideas, facts and interpretation is a truth every historian worthy of the description knows. In this article I raise some issues related to my own academic involvement in the history of the ‘Armenian question’. It would be incorrect to say that there is a ‘debate’ over this issue. Debate implies genuine engagement in the search for truth but in Europe, the US, Australia and numerous other countries around the world the truth is apparently known to people who have little or no knowledge of late Ottoman history. History is thus brought to a dead stop: when the truth is known, debate becomes pointless and even offensive – why would anyone want to challenge the truth when it is so manifestly the truth? The point here is that the mainstream narrative is not the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. It is more a mixture of truths, half truths, lies, exaggerations and omissions that would significantly shape perceptions were they are ever allowed into the mainstream. This short article examines, from a personal perspective, some of the issues that have taken the author’s attention.