Scholarship on the Armenian Genocide as a gendered event and process

production patterns. How did the property transfer affect the crops and goods in the production of which Armenians played vital roles? Could the new Muslim bourgeoisie whose start-up capital was the Armenian properties become successful economic actors? Did this process of property transfer contribute to class stratification? Or did it open the way for social mobility? These questions can only be answered through detailed studies on different localities. Armenian sources, including the archives of the Patriarchate and Armenian foundations, have been largely sidelined in historical studies conducted in Turkey. As explained by Bedross Der Matossian in detail, there are several Armenian sources, which can provide valuable information for research projects that can be formulated around these questions. The fact that more scholars have been learning Armenian in recent years hints that Armenian sources will be incorporated into more studies in years to come. Considering the importance of regional differences in the Ottoman Empire, regional comparisons with regards to these questions can provide valuable insights regarding economic and social history. Another issue, which remains understudied in the literature on the confiscation, appropriation and distribution of Armenian properties, is the links betweenmaterial motives and choices of the ordinary people. How did the Muslim immigrants settled on Armenian properties react to the prospects of their return? Beyond theoretical reasoning, did the distribution of Armenian properties serve as a means to re-establish state-society relations in different localities? If so, is it possible to trace this in the acts of those who benefited from this process in the Republican period? Academic research seeking to answer these questions can enrich our understanding of the history of the Armenian Genocide, the late Ottoman Empire and Republican Turkey.