According to one source, when news of a mutiny in Constantinople arrived in Adana, speculation circulated among the Muslim population of an imminent Armenian insurrection.
By April 14 the Armenian quarter was attacked by a Muslim mob, and many thousands of Armenians were killed in the ensuing weeks.

Other reports emphasize that a "skirmish between Armenians and Turks on April 13 set off a riot that resulted in the pillaging of the bazaars and attacks upon the Armenian quarters."
Two days later, more than 2,000 Armenians had been killed as a result.

In his August 1909 report on the massacre, Charles Doughty-Wylie asserts that "The theory of an armed revolution on the part of the Armenians is now generally discredited with the more intelligent people."
Doughty-Wylie explained that an uprising could not be said to be taking place without some concentration of forces, or without any effort to make use of the various available strongholds, and in any case the number of Armenians would be "an easy match for the regular Ottoman army." "
They would not have left their sons and brothers scattered widely through the province for harvest without arms, without any hope of escape."

During the decline of the Ottoman Empire, the Armenians were also believed to be a target owing to their relative wealth, and their quarrels with imperial taxation.

A report by England's Adana Vice-Consul Major Charles Doughty-Wylie considers "The Causes of the Massacre".
 From this document the historian Vahakn Dadrian culls the text:
The Turks, masters for centuries, found their great stumbling block in equality with the Christians... Among the fiercer professors of Islam resentment grew.
 Were God's adversaries to be the equals of Islam?
 In every cafe the heathen were speaking great mouthing words of some godless and detested change...
Abdul Hamid became celebrated, in this context, according to Doughty-Wylie, because he "had set the fashion of massacres".
 From the same document, the Turkish political scientist Kamuran Gurun emphasizes that the right to bear arms had caused a popular fashion of arms-bearing.
But, "worse followed", in Doughty-Wylie's words:
The swagger of the arm-bearing Armenian and his ready tongue irritated the ignorant Ottoman Muslims.
Threats and insults passed on both sides.
Certain Armenian leaders, delegates from Constantinople, and priests (an Armenian priest is in his way an autocrat) urged their congregations to buy arms.
It was done openly, indiscreetly, and, in some cases, it might be said wickedly.
What can be thought of a preacher, a Russian Armenian, who in a church in this city where there had never been a massacre, preached revenge for the martyrs of 1895?
Constitution or none, it was all the same to him. '
Revenge,' he said, 'murder for murder.
Buy arms.
An Ottoman Muslim for every Armenian of 1895.'

Stephan Astourian has meanwhile highlighted other causes, including growing resentment among Muslims as a result of increasing Armenian Christian immigration into Adana, Armenian landholders' introduction of new technological machinery that would displace a great many Turkish artisans and craftsmen, and a popular rumor that a well-known Armenian landowner was to be crowned the ruler of an Armenian kingdom of Cilicia.
According to one source, when news of a mutiny in Constantinople arrived in Adana, speculation circulated among the Muslim population of an imminent Armenian insurrection. By April 14 the Armenian quarter was attacked by a Muslim mob, and many thousands of Armenians were killed in the ensuing weeks.
Other reports emphasize that a "skirmish between Armenians and Turks on April 13 set off a riot that resulted in the pillaging of the bazaars and attacks upon the Armenian quarters." Two days later, more than 2,000 Armenians had been killed as a result.
In his August 1909 report on the massacre, Charles Doughty-Wylie asserts that "The theory of an armed revolution on the part of the Armenians is now generally discredited with the more intelligent people." Doughty-Wylie explained that an uprising could not be said to be taking place without some concentration of forces, or without any effort to make use of the various available strongholds, and in any case the number of Armenians would be "an easy match for the regular Ottoman army." "They would not have left their sons and brothers scattered widely through the province for harvest without arms, without any hope of escape."
During the decline of the Ottoman Empire, the Armenians were also believed to be a target owing to their relative wealth, and their quarrels with imperial taxation.
A report by England's Adana Vice-Consul Major Charles Doughty-Wylie considers "The Causes of the Massacre".  From this document the historian Vahakn Dadrian culls the text:
The Turks, masters for centuries, found their great stumbling block in equality with the Christians... Among the fiercer professors of Islam resentment grew.  Were God's adversaries to be the equals of Islam?  In every cafe the heathen were speaking great mouthing words of some godless and detested change...
Abdul Hamid became celebrated, in this context, according to Doughty-Wylie, because he "had set the fashion of massacres".  From the same document, the Turkish political scientist Kamuran Gurun emphasizes that the right to bear arms had caused a popular fashion of arms-bearing. But, "worse followed", in Doughty-Wylie's words:
The swagger of the arm-bearing Armenian and his ready tongue irritated the ignorant Ottoman Muslims. Threats and insults passed on both sides. Certain Armenian leaders, delegates from Constantinople, and priests (an Armenian priest is in his way an autocrat) urged their congregations to buy arms. It was done openly, indiscreetly, and, in some cases, it might be said wickedly. What can be thought of a preacher, a Russian Armenian, who in a church in this city where there had never been a massacre, preached revenge for the martyrs of 1895? Constitution or none, it was all the same to him. 'Revenge,' he said, 'murder for murder. Buy arms. An Ottoman Muslim for every Armenian of 1895.'
Stephan Astourian has meanwhile highlighted other causes, including growing resentment among Muslims as a result of increasing Armenian Christian immigration into Adana, Armenian landholders' introduction of new technological machinery that would displace a great many Turkish artisans and craftsmen, and a popular rumor that a well-known Armenian landowner was to be crowned the ruler of an Armenian kingdom of Cilicia.
Adana massacre of 1909