Aubrey Nigel Henry Molyneux Herbert (1880–1923), second son of Henry Herbert, fourth Earl of Carnarvon (the “second sons” of the British aristocracy had traditionally been the great reservoir of manpower for overseas service), was born with a silver spoon in his mouth. Herbert’s family estate was the impressive Highclere Castle (now famous as the setting for the popular television show Downton Abbey). He was educated at Eton. His half brother George Herbert was one of the discoverers of the tomb of Tutankhamen. Aubrey Herbert was father-in-law to novelist Evelyn Waugh. Herbert possessed all the essential features of a man who came from the British ruling class.

In addition, Herbert was a part of that small subset who thought of themselves as “Orientalists,” men fluent in Turkish and with a great fondness for, and curiosity about, things Middle Eastern. As Britain became more and more involved in Middle Eastern affairs, first in Egypt, then Persia, and then Mesopotamia and Palestine, these specialists (T. E. Lawrence being the most famous of the bunch), with their wide-ranging if disorganized knowledge of all things Arabic and “Oriental,” became integral to British foreign policy. These men and women loved the exoticism and visceral excitement of exploring Muslim lands and society.²⁶

After the war, with the rise of fascism in Italy and Germany and the success of the Bolsheviks in Russia, the political scene in Europe became highly dynamic. Scotland Yard had its hands full tracking and reporting on the multitude of political factions vying for power in Europe, the Middle East, and India. Perhaps Aubrey Herbert was not a spy per se, but he was often where the action was, and he was trusted by those in the highest positions. Herbert had proven himself in World War I by negotiating an armistice in Gallipoli and attempting to secure the release of British prisoners in Kut (Mesopotamia). He had strong bonds with a number of significant players in the Middle East of the early twentieth century, specifically Gertrude Bell (who had a hand in the creation of Iraq in 1921), Mark Sykes (who negotiated the Sykes-Picot agreement), and T. E. Lawrence. Although historians have barely focused on Herbert, he was a key actor behind the scenes in the acquisition of oil territories.

In 1919, when Herbert received the letter from Talat, the war had been over for barely one year. Tensions between Great Britain and Turkey were still running high. Not only was the former minister of the interior a onetime enemy leader; he was also a fugitive from justice. In his letter, Talat proposed that he and Herbert meet in any “neutral country of his choosing.” Talat wanted an opportunity to convince Herbert that “good relations between Britain and Turkey were essential to the welfare of both peoples” and that “he was not responsible for the Armenian massacres. That he could prove it and was anxious to do so.”²⁷

Unsure of how he should reply, Herbert contacted a good friend described in his memoirs as “a distinguished man who is famous for his spotless integrity.” This man was Viscount Cecil of Chelwood (Lord Edgar Algernon Robert Gascoyne Cecil), who would be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1937 for his role as a founder and supporter of the League of Nations. (Cecil was also a patron of the Bryce report on the Armenian Genocide.) According to Herbert, upon reading the letter, the viscount leaped to his feet “as if he’d been stung.”

“What did you want to bring me into this for? Couldn’t you have left me out? It’s illegal to correspond with the enemy!” Chagrined, Herbert wrote back to Talat to say, “I was very glad to hear that it was not he who was responsible for the Armenian massacres, but… I did not think any useful purpose could be served by our meeting at that time.” But the matter did not end there. Word of Talat’s letter found its way to Sir Basil Thomson, at Scotland Yard (and the Directorate),²⁸ the man who had been coordinating all wartime intelligence. Thomson decided there would be much to gain by a meeting between Aubrey Herbert and Talat. Scotland Yard and the Directorate had been keeping tabs on the former Grand Vizier. Secret memos from October 1920 confirm that British intelligence knew where Talat was living, even if the Armenians didn’t. They also knew that Talat had been very active, meeting with his former government in Berlin and in Rome.

On February 18, 1921, Basil Thomson suggested that Herbert meet with Talat in Germany. Though Soghomon Tehlirian could not have known it on that freezing day when he doggedly chased Dr. Shakir halfway across Berlin, Shakir’s visit to the British embassy marked the moment when communications between Talat and the British resumed. This is why Talat had not lingered in Rome. He was needed in Germany for the meeting with Herbert. It is also why he disappeared from sight a few days later.

Aubrey Herbert left Victoria Station in London on the afternoon of Friday, the twenty-fifth of February, 1921, took the ferry from Dover to Calais, then boarded a train, arriving in Cologne early the next morning. On the evening of the twenty-sixth, Herbert arrived in Hamm, a small town about four hours from Berlin, which he describes as “a miserable industrial village, that seemed to be inhabited by potential suicides.”²⁹ Herbert checked in at the hotel, and Talat joined him around nine p.m. They ordered dinner sent up to Talat’s room in order to maintain secrecy. According to Herbert, Talat had grown thinner, his black hair streaked with gray. “His eyes were very bright, glittering while he talked like the eyes of a wild animal in the dusk.” Herbert, evaluating Talat’s overall dress, could see that he was “obviously poor.” Finding Hamm shabby and lacking the proper facilities, Herbert suggested that the two men take a short train ride to Dusseldorf, where they could converse in more civilized surroundings. Over the two days they spent together, Talat explained his position as Herbert patiently listened.

Talat Pasha, perhaps believing that the British would welcome any scheme that caused distress for the Soviet Union, informed Herbert that he and Enver were planning to stir up Islamic revolution against the Russians in the Muslim Soviet republics. In describing the “six Red republics” (the Muslim states of the Communist Russian Federation), Talat observed, “They are red, but not deep red”—in other words, these former khanates were ready to break away from their Soviet masters if given the opportunity. Talat made threats (as quoted by Herbert): “Turkey is at war with England, and we are engaged in propaganda throughout the East, and inciting India, though not very effectually. Turkey is, in fact, pursuing a policy of enlisting as many people as she can against Great Britain and undertaking all possible reprisals open to her.”

Talat made this menacing point only moments after claiming great affection for Britain, stating, “Before the war, I was anxious that England should be her [Turkey’s] teacher.”³⁰ In his next breath Talat explained how Turkey would fight Britain to the last man: “Our geography is a fortress to us, a very strong fortress. Our mountains are the strongest of our forces. You cannot pursue us into the mountains of Asia; and stretching back into Central Asia are six republics, composed of men of our blood, cousins, if not brothers, and united now by the bond of misfortune.”

After hearing him out, Herbert assured Talat that he would deliver the message to his superiors in England. Herbert also asked Talat a strangely prophetic question: “Aren’t you afraid of assassination?” Talat answered that “he never thought of it. Why should anyone dislike him?” Herbert continues: “I said that Armenians might very well desire vengeance.… He brushed this aside.” This was not the first time Herbert had asked Talat about assassination. Years before, in Constantinople, he had queried him along the same lines. According to Herbert, Talat had then replied, “Life was so hard that, if one had to fear death also, the burden would be too heavy to bear.”