Mitteilungen des Österreichischen Staatsarchivs 41. (1990)
BEVERIDGE, Kent D.: „Worthy Representative of Europe“. Anton Graf Prokesch von Osten
Rent D. Beveridge believe that they can make an impression on the „Penthousiasme tout jeune de la nouvelle foi“. According to Gobineau, Bahá’u’lláh „s’est adressé ä moi, il y a déjá plusieurs mois, pour me signaler des pérsecutions commises contre les [Bahá’ís] ä Mansúríyyah, en Egypte, sur la demande et avec la participation du consul persan.“60) Gobineau states his conviction that the Sublime Porte has a very serious interest in this matter, and not only because the Bahá’ís in Persia, if properly cultivated, could serve as a counterweight to the Qájárs61 62). Gobineau enclosed a letter he had written to Bahá’u’lláh, not only describing the actions Prokesch-Osten had taken to Bahá’u’lláh’s behalf but also attempting to reassure him, and asked Prokesch-Osten to see that it was forwarded to him. From Gobineau’s letter it is clear that Prokesch-Osten had spoken with more than one member of the Turkish government regarding Bahá’u’lláh. Camerloher had responded to Prokesch-Osten’s letter of 19 August on 22 August with a critique of the Ottoman policy regarding the Bahá’ís very similiar to that of Gobineau82). Prokesch-Osten must have admonished him that the parallels drawn by Camerloher between the Turkish treatment of the Bahá’ís and their treatment of the Bulgarian Catholic Union were incorrect, for in a later dispatch dated 12 September Camerloher states that he was referring less to the concrete case of the Bahá’ís than to the general consequences derived from Fu’ád Pasha’s actions63). Camerloher reports in the latter dispatch that he has arranged for Gobineau’s letter to Bahá’u’lláh to be delivered via Gallipoli, and encloses a photograph of Bahá’u’lláh, „dem edelherzigen Märtyrer“, characterizing the portait as „wohlgetroffen“ (a good likeness), which would imply that he had seen him. Another enclosure to Cam- erloher’s dispatch was a German translation of a letter written in Turk60) Bahá’u’lláh „has turned to me several times with reports of persecutions in Mansúríyyah, Egypt, which were instigated by the Persian consul there“. For instance, the extortion of money from Haji ’Abdu’l-Qásim,-i-Shírází, the arrest and exile of Hájí Mírzá Haydar-‘Ali and six other Bahá’ís to the Sudan, and the imprisonment of Nabil-i-Azam. See Shoghi Effendi God Passes By 178; Balyuzi Bahá’u’lláh 265 f. and Stories from the Delight of Hearts; The Memoirs of Hájí Mírzá Haydar-Äli trans. A. Q. Faizi (Los Angeles 1980) 29 et sec. 61) Gobineau to Prokesch-Osten, 31 August 1868 Correspondance 333: „I recognize you very well indeed in that which you did for the Bahá’ís. I am delighted that there were exaggerations in the reports, but I believe that Fu’ád is not fully informed.“ 62) Camerloher to Prokesch-Osten, 22 August 1868 Nachlaß Prokesch-Osten, Consular & Diplomat. Korrespondenz 1864-1871, HFIStA. 63) Camerloher to Prokesch-Osten, 12 September 1868 Nachlaß Prokesch-Osten Consular & Diplomat. Korrespondenz 1864-1871, HHStA. He also noted that Khurshid Pasha had been absent from Adrianople for the past four weeks on an „inspection tour in bulgaricis“, i.e. Bulgarian affairs. 152
