CON5TANTINGPLE TODAf THE PATH FINDER SURVEY OF CONS'L^TlNpPLE CLARENCE R,. JOHNSON CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY WILLIAM EDMUND AUGHINBAUGH M.D., LL.B., LL.M. 1871, October 12, Washington, D. C. ■ New York, N. Y„ December 17, 1940 President of The Adventurers' Club 1919-1925 "/ Swear by Apollo" DATE DUE ;! fiid >' : j^ J-^i mr ! 'i J I ■•-> , ' ^ moimsB^mi a& ftfMSHm&ft) 1 %'^j j GAYLORD PRINTED IN U S A Cornell University Library HN620.I8 J66 Constantinople to-day or, The oathflnde olln 3 1924 030 261 063 CONSTANTINOPLE TO-DAY THE MACMILLAN COMPANY NEW YORK • BOSTON • CHICAGO - DAU.AS ATLANTA • SAN FILANCISCO MACMILLAN & CO., LrauKD LONDON ■ BOUBAY • CALCUTTA UELBOUIU4& THE MACMILLAN CO. OP CANADA. Ltd. TORONTO »»-'^ ; < i^jSr'^^^3ft Jr^n"***-- Photograph by Bergren Interior of St. Sophia CONSTANTINOPLE TODAY OR THE PATHFINDER SURVEY OF CONSTANTINOPLE A Study in Oriental Social Life UNDER THE DIRECTION OF CLARENCE RICHARD JOHNSON, M.A. PROFESSOR OF SOCIOLOGY, ROBERT COLLEGE, CONSTANTINOPLE CAX^EB/f." GATES, D.b:.\l3L.p. • . hieSlDENT OF ROBERT COLLEGE' '.'.• • THE MACMILLAN COMPANY 1922 AH rights reserved \ 1/ 4_ o 8*^ PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA /. Copyright, 1922, By the MACMILLAN COMPANY. Set up and printed. Published November, 192a. Fresa of J. J. Little & Ives Company New York, U. S. A. f]r] Dedicated To THE Organizer of this Survey JAMES PERRY A LOVER OF TRUTH KILLED IN ASIA MINOR BETWEEN AINTAB AND ALEPPO BY BANDITS WTHLE ON AN ERRAND OF MERCY, FEBRUARY I, 1920 Acknowledgments to those who aided the Council of Fifteen in various ways in making the Pathfinder Survey possible. -Mr. Altabev Miss Arousiag Avedian Mrs. Peter Barton Miss Louise Benson Mrs. Braunstein Miss Ann M. Bltrgess Miss Caldwell Mrs. Edith Childs Mrs. Melville Chater Prof. Constas Constantinou Mr. Demetriades Mr. Constantine Diamantoglou Prof. Mihran Djedjizian Miss P. Dzalian Prof. Stavros Emmanuel Feridoun Bey Prof. Edgar J. Fisher Mrs. Gabrielides Miss Victoria Galajikian Miss Mary Gleason Dr. E. R. Graff The Late Greek Locum Tenens, Dorotheos Mr. Christo Guiochas Prof. Abraham Der Hagopian Mr. Theodore Haralambides Hassan Tahsin Bey Miss Glee Hastings Lt. Rickatson-Hatt Mrs. James M. Hester Mme. Hourchid Bey Hussein Bey Mrs. H. S. Huntington Miss Elsie Jenison Kemal Mehmed Bey Mr. B. a. Kitchibeyan Miss Gertrude Knox Mme. Kousneczoff Mrs. Luvajian Mrs. George H. Manning Mr. R. F. Markham Miss Blanche Maruca Dr. and Mrs. J. P. McNaughton Miss Grace Morey Rev. D. Minas Mr. Achilles Mouradoglou Mouzaffer Bey Baron H. Murmurian Mr. George Popoff Miss Loretta Quinn Mr. William J. Rapp Prof. P. H. Robinson Rev. Arthur C. Ryan Miss Sarah Snell Mme. N. Somoff Shafak Bey Shevketi Effendi > Miss Lomie Lee Smith Brousalu Tahir Bey Dr. Tavitian Miss Alice M. True Mrs. Lorine Wilson Whitaker Miss Elsie Van Zandt Prof. Peter Voicoff Miss G. L. Youngman The Armenian Patriarch Zaven V^ ,P0 REWORD ;, A survey of the social 3i}d economfq conditions in Con- stantinople was sadly" ne*e4eda'n"d it is to be hoped that this work will be extended and cbr;*tiniLie'd through the years to come. Constantinople is a city which stands out from all the cities of the world in a class by itself. Mythology, tra- dition, and history make it a place of the deepest interest to scholars; its strategic position makes it a center of the greatest importance to the whole world, and around it gather questions which agitate the rulers of Europe and which will determine the peace of the Near East and of the world. In spite of its importance, which can easily be seen, Constantinople is a city without any civic conscious- ness. Since the time of the Mohammedan Conquest the life of the city has been divided into communities, each having a life of its own more or less independent of the others and sometimes hostile one to another. There has been no union of effort on the part of all citizens to improve the physical conditions of a city occupying one of the most beautiful sites in the world, or to regulate its economic con- ditions, or to build up a common system of education. The citizens of Constantinople have been divided by religion, by language, and by different. If not conflicting, interests, so that the efforts for Improvement have been largely con- fined within the community lines. This Survey has already done much to awaken a sense of common needs and at least to suggest that it may be possible for the members of all communities to unite and cooperate In efforts for the com- mon good and for the improvement of the city life. It is a commonplace to say that peoples who live In the FOREWORD xi for common and sound education and the application of the spirit of Christ, who taught us to love God with all our hearts and our neighbor as ourselves. The Survey is the beginning of the exposition of needs which it is incumbent upon all the world to fill. We can no longer divide the world into West and East. We must realize that there is no peace for the West while the East is at war, and that it is in the interest of the West to see that peace and pros- perity and progress are secured for the East. Caleb F. Gates. ADVISORY COMMITTEE President Caleb F. Gates, D.D., LL.D. President Mary Mills Patrick, Ph.D., Oscar Gunkel, Esq. LL.D. COUNCIL OF FIFTEEN Mr. F. F. Goodsell, Chairman Mr. Charles T. Riggs, Vice-Chair'n Mrs. Anna Welles Brown, Secretary Prof. Floyd H. Black, Treasurer W. W. Peet, LL.D. D^ G. Gilbert Deaver Major C. Claflin Davis ,, „ , . , _ , T r. »i Mr. Samuel Anderson Prof. Laurence S. Moore Miss Mabelle C. Phillips ^''^ Warren E. Bristol Miss Margaret B. White Mrs. A. R. Hoover Mrs. Elizabeth Dodge Huntington Mr. Frank D. Steger SURVEY OFFICE AND FIELD STAFF Miss Mabel F. Hale Moustafa Nebil Bey Mr. Harold Alpin Moustafa Nedjati Bey Mrs. Leona S. Areson Mrs. Alice Peloubet Norton Miss Ruth Cornwall Mrs. Edna R. Strumsky Miss Lillian L. Dyer Miss Ruth F. Woodsmall Miss Alexandra Joannides Prof. Clarence Richard Johnson, Mr. Alphonse Lusenberg Director of Survey. Organizations cooperating in making the Pathfinder Survey through repre- sentatives on the Council of Fifteen: Robert College American Chamber of Commerce The American Board The Young Men's Christian Associa- The Near East Relief tJo° Constantinople College The Young Women's Christian As- The American Red Cross CONTENTS Acknowledgments Foreword CHAPTER I. Introduction II. Historical Setting . III. Civic Administration , Caleb F. Gates .... . Clarence Richard Johnson . Fred Field Goodsell . . . tVilliam JVheelock Feet . IV. Community Organization . Elizabeth Dodge Huntington v. SomePhasesopIndustrialiLii'e Laurence S. Moore VI. Refugees C. Clafiin Davis . VII. Orphanages .... . Anna Welles Brown . VIII. Recreation G. Gilbert Deaver . IX. Widowhood Mabelle C. Phillips . X. Adult Delinquency . . . Charles Tros Advisory Committee: Pl><5lDt"r M«nY HILLS PATHICI Council of Fifteen Clarence Richahd Johnson J Rue Taxih, Pera. Survey Staff; F. W0OD«M*LL Organizations cooperating through ropraaentalives on the Council of Fiftaen: fV^-l wUjJ«" «jJ_;^ J^IL-\ I (^'j" j^Vj' i_.\s^-jI o-i^Jf • J^V.!: O-^^jl- J^^' cr^ .^lii [ u-JT] , [ ^jTi^- ] , \ ty.^ ] --^ti [ Jjj'.^v ] £>" ^^J.j Statement in Turlcish of the Purpose of the Survey. II HISTORICAL SETTING FRED FIELD GOODSELL OUTLINE I. Introduction 1. The Diversity of Constantinople 2. Population of Constantinople 3. Nationality Map of Constantinople II. The Greek Community in Constantinople I. Relationship between Ancient and Modern Greeks jL. Early Byzantium 3. The New Rome 4. The Byzantine Empire 717-1453 5. Contribution of the Byzantine Greeks to Civilization 6. The Greeks under Turkish Dominion 7. Evidences of Greek Influence in Modern Constantinople III. The Armenian Community in Constantinople 1. The First Armenians — ^Priests and Soldiers 2. Social Amalgamation with the Greeks — Vth to Vlllth century 3. Retarded Growth of Colony — IXth to XVth century 4. Armenians at the Time of the Ottoman Conquest 5. Armenian Interests 1500-1750 6. Stirrings of National Consciousness 1750-1825 7. Revival of Learning among Armenians 1825-1855 8. Political Action and Reaction 1855-1921 IV. Constantinople the Capital of the Ottoman Empire 1. The Beginnings of the Struggle for the City 2. Early Ottoman Inhabitants of Constantinople 3. Mohammed the Conqueror — 1453 4. Outline of Ottoman History: Analysis, Synthesis, Summary 5. Sources of Ottoman Culture 6. "Our Spirit": An Ottoman Interpretation of Ottoman History 7. Social Characteristics of Early Ottoman Stamboul 8. Efforts to Renew the Bases of National Power 9. Constantinople and the Present-Day Turk 10. Minor Nationalities in Constantinople V. Three Common Historical Traditions of Constantinople 1. Militarism 2. Ecclesiasticism 3. Trade I. Introduction /. The Diversity of Constantinople No other city in the world presents such a baffling diver- sity as Constantinople. The ties which ordinarily unite the inhabitants of American or European, and most Ori- ental municipalities, are hardly to be found in Constan- tinople. Language, religion, nationality, race, education, customs, and to a great extent, government, separate rather than unite people in Constantinople. The late Dr. van Millingen of Robert College, who wrote the article on Constantinople in the eleventh edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica, seems to have been keenly aware of this diversity. He says : "The inhabitants present a remarkable conglomeration of different races, various nationalities, divers languages, distinctive costumes, and conflicting faiths, giving, it is true, a singular interest to what may be termed the human scenery of the city, but rendering impossible any close so- cial cohesion or the development of a common civic life. Constantinople has been well described as 'a city not of one nation but of many, and hardly more of one than of an- other 1'" The very geography of the city stands for diversity. Like great rivers, the Golden Horn and the Bosphorus divide the city into the three very distinct sections of Stam- boul, Pera, and Scutari. Stamboul, on the site of ancient Byzantium, is the most populous and homogeneous sec- tion. The city Turk is most at home here. Pera, across the Golden Horn, maintains its traditions as the European quarter, while Scutari, on the Asiatic side of the Bos- phorus, gives the visitor a real glimpse of Anatolian life. 13 14 CONSTANTINOPLE TO-DAY Climate is perhaps the most common possession, and yet one can never be quite sure whether his umbrella, most use- ful as he leaves his home, will not be an unnecessary burden as he journeys to a distant part of the city. How then can one hope to know Constantinople "as a whole"? We must accept the fact that it is not a whole except in the minds of those who do not know it. Social cohesion at the present stage is indeed unimaginable. 2. Population of Constantinople Exact records of the population of the city at various periods have not been kept. Nothing approaching a scien- tific census has ever been made. Estimates are amusing in their variety. The Edinburgh Encyclopaedia conducted by David Brew- ster, Article "Constantinople" First American Edition, 1832: "The population of Constantinople has been vari- ously stated. Habesci makes it a million and a half, while Eton reduces it to less than 300,000 ! Dallaway calculates it at about 400,000 which is the most probable computa- tion; and tells us, that according to the registry of the Stam- boul effendissy, or mayor of Constantinople, in the end of the last century, there were 88,185 houses and 130 public baths. Of its inhabitants, scarcely one-half are Turks, the rest are Greeks, Jews, Armenians, and Franks." Encyclopjedia Britannica IXth Edition (1877), Article "Constantinople" : "It is true of the capital as of the coun- try at large that no point is so hard to ascertain as the sum total of the inhabitants and the relative proportion of its parts. Byzantius in 1851 reckoned the population of the city and its suburbs at about one million; 500,000 Turks, 220,000 or 300,000 Greeks, 50,000 or 120,000 Armenians, 70,000 Jews, 10,000 Franks, and 70,000 mis- cellaneous. Official statistics return the population of the city and suburbs as not exceeding 700,000 in 1877." HISTORICAL SETTING 16 The Greek Patriarchate at Constantinople is authority for the following statement: "According to foreign statis- tics during the Russo-Turkish War (i 876-1 878) the popu- lation of Constantinople was 680,000, the Greeks being 250,000." Grosvenor, Constantinople, Vol. I, pp. 8-9 (1895): "The number of human beings inhabiting the city has been till the last decade a theme for the wildest conjecture. Dr. Pococke, usually so judicious and discreet, a century and a half ago estimated the population as consisting of 3,340,000 Moslems, 60,000 Christians, and 100,000 Jews; or 3,600,000 altogether. In Constantinople, Andreassy half a century later, supposed there were 633,000. So there was the slight discrepancy of 3,000,000 souls between their respective figures. The official census or guess of the Government in 1855 found 873,565. The houses were declared with equal accuracy in 1877 to number 62,262. The resident population to-day can be but little less than one million, 450,000 Mussulmans, 225,000 Greeks, 165,000 Armenians, 50,000 Jews, 60,000 others." Harper's Book of Facts (New York, 1895) makes the statement that in 1893 the estimated population of Con- stantinople was 925,000. Murray's Handbook for Travelers in Constantinople, Brusa, and the Troad (1900) : "The numbers according to religious beliefs are said to be : Moslems 384,910 Greeks '52.741 Greek Latins 1,082 Armenians 220,000 Roman Catholics (Native) 6>442 Protestants (Native) 819 Bulgars 4.377 Jews 44)36i Foreigners 129,343 943.975 New International Encyclopaedia (1903), Article "Con- stantinople" : "The population of Constantinople proper 16 CONSTANTINOPLE TO-DAY numbers about 650,000. This figure is increased to 1,100,000 by including the suburbs. In the city proper nearly two-thirds of the population are Mohammedans." The Year-book published by the New International Encyclopaedia in 1909 reckons the population at 1,106,000. Encyclopffidia Britannica Xlth Edition (1911), Article "Constantinople" : "The number of the population of the city is an uncertain figure, as no accurate statistics can be obtained. It is generally estimated between 800,000 and 1,000,000. The following figures are given as an approxi- mate estimate of the size of the communities which com- pose the population. Moslems 384,910 Greeks I52i74i Greek Latins 1,082 Armenians 149,590 Roman Catholics (Native) ^,442 Protestants (Native) 819 Bulgars 4,377 Jews 44.361 Foreigners 129,243 873.56s It is interesting to note that the Encyclopedia of Islam (Leyden, 19 12), a most carefully written and edited pro- duction, in its article on Constantinople, written by J. H. Mordtmann, conspicuously avoids discussing the population of the city. Reference is made on page 875 to "Pera with its 100,000 inhabitants" (1912), but no summary of the total population is attempted. Population Given by Miscellaneous Foreign Authorities: Black's Guide Book 1910 1,200,000 Whitaker's Almanack 1914 1,200,000 Almanack de Gotha 1920 1,200,000 Annuaire general de la France et d'Etranger 1920-1921 1,200,000 Whitaker's Almanack 1921 1,000,000 Persistent and careful investigation on the spot during April, 1 92 1, resulted in the following information. According to two Turkish maps drawn by Major Hadji HISTORICAL SETTING 17 Mehmed NasrouUah Effendl and Adjutant Mehmed Rushdi Effendi in 1322 (1906), the city population was 1,125,000. The population of the city is 1,200,000 according to a Turkish geography printed in 1332 (1916). The author of this geography is Savfet Bey, at that time Director of Education of the vilayet of Constantinople, formerly professor of Economic Geography in the University of Stamboul and in the School of Commerce and Finance. Savfet Bey estimates the population of the city apart from its suburbs at 993,000. The J static Review (January, 19 19) states that the figure 1,104,984 as the population of the city is based upon Turkish official statistics for 19 10. We have not been able to locate exact "Turkish official statistics !" The population of the city is 909,978 according to a Turkish map issued by Captain Mehmed Salih Bey, based upon statistics of 1330 ( 1914), and printed in 1336 (1920) by the Matba'a-i-Amire (Government Printing Office). In the absence of anything which might be called a sys- tematic census, the usual Turkish method of estimating population is to depend upon the records of the imams of each ward (mahalleh) of the city. These imams are the officials connected with mosques who furnish information concerning the population, whenever it may be demanded for purposes of military conscription, sanitary administra- tion, food and relief distribution, etc. In similar manner, the priests of the various Christian parishes and the officials of Jewish and other communities are the source of the most reliable statistics available. Population by Major Religious Communities: According to Captain Mehmed Salih Bey, referred to above, there were 560,434 Moslems in the city (1330/1914). This figure includes Turks, Arabs, Alban- ians, Kurds, Circassians, and Persians. 18 CONSTANTINOPLE TO-DAY The Greek Patriarchate in Constantinople is authority for the statement that in 19 12 there were 384,689 Greeks in the city. The figure 309,657 quoted in the Asiatic Re- view (January, 1919) does not include the Greeks of the dioceses of the Archbishops of Kadikeuy and Derkos, both of which are ordinarily included in estimates of the city population. The Armenian Patriarchate in Constantinople sent a list to the Protestant Armenian Chancery in 1919, which is authority for the statement that there are 118,000 Arme- nians in the city. It is estimated that 32,000 Armenian refugees have come to Constantinople since 19 14. It has not been possible to secure an accurate estimate of the number of Jews in the city. The figure quoted in the Asiatic Review (January, 1919) as of 1912 is 44,765. All nationalities are at present seriously embarrassed in any effort to estimate population by the large numbers of floating and refugee population and by the difficulties caused by the Great War. It is difficult also to determine exactly how large a territory is included In any given total estimate, unless very specific statements are made. Both shores of the Bosphorus and of the Marmora are famous suburbs of Constantinople. It Is perfectly apparent from these figures that three nationalities essentially have made Constantinople what it is to-day: Greeks, Armenians, and Turks. There Is no other city In the world where so many Turks are at home. The same is true of both Greeks and Armenians. There are more Greeks In Constantinople than there are in Athens, Smyrna, or Salonica. There are more Armenians in Con- stantinople than there are in any other city. J. Nationality Map of Constantinople The accompanying map indicates the general results of investigations concerning the national complexion of vari- '^ ri^ HISTORICAL SETTING 19 ous parts of the city. Population in Constantinople does not readily shift from one section to another. Tradition as to residence section is very strong. The only considerable movement at the present day which has come to notice is the steady removal of Armenians from Stamboul to Pera and Shishli. II. The Greek Community in Constantinople /. Relationship between Ancient and Modern Greeks Of the three leading nationalities of Constantinople — Turk, Armenian, Greek — the Greek alone claims kinship with the founders of the city. The men who first settled on the site in 657 B.C. were adventurous merchants from Argos and Megara near Athens. The city was generally known as Byzantium from Byzas, the Greek navigator who led the first Greek colonists. Its real importance in history begins with the Roman Emperor, Constantine the Great, who chose the Greek settlement on the Bosphorus as the spot where he intended to build the New Rome.^ The name, Constantinople, refers to Constantine the Great. From 330 to 1453 a.d. — 1123 years — Constantinople was the capital of the Eastern Roman Empire. It is com- mon to think and speak of this as Greek. Historians imply, however, that we should not assume that the Greeks of Constantinople or even of modern Greece are blood de- scendants of the ancient Greeks. Finlay makes the follow- ing statement: "The modern identification of the Christian Greeks with pagan Hellenes is the growth of the new series of ideas disseminated by the French Revolution." ^ Fin- lay's editor, H. F. Tozer, calls attention to the fact that "until the commencement of the Greek revolution the name ^For a masterly description of the site of Constantinople, setting forth features which attracted both the early colonists and the ambitious emperor, see Gibbon, "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire," vol. II, p. 156. ' Finlay, "History of Greece," vol. V, p. 7. 20 CONSTANTINOPLE TO-DAY of Hellenes was forgotten, that of Graikoi little used, and that of Romaioi universal."' He adds: "The educated, though they called themselves Romaioi and looked to the Byzantine Empire as the stock from which they sprang, were not altogether forgetful of a connection with the ancient people whose language they used." ^ 2. Early Byzantium Until recent years it has been the habit of historians to undervalue the Byzantine period In history and to fail to see the important contribution which this period has made to the development of the civilization of the world. Dur- ing the last half-century this contribution has been more justly appreciated. In considering the Influence of the Greeks In the political, social, and industrial life of Constantinople before the Ottoman Conquest in 1453, one Is mainly Interested in the period called In common parlance "Byzantine," when the Greek Influence was predominant. This period extends from the accession of Leo the Isaurlan in 717 to the con- quest by the Crusaders in 1204. There Is also the early Greek colony of Byzantium to consider, and the period from Constantine the Great (330) to the reign of Justinian in the early sixth century. We should think of this latter as more Roman or Latin in its character. From Justinian to Leo the Isaurlan Is a period of transition in which the Greek element is slowly making Its way to the front in the empire. Byzantium was founded by traders, and because of Its superb position It was destined from its beginning to become a great trading city. This commercial stamp has never left It. It became rich through its trade and through the tolls taken from ships passing up and down the Bosphorus. The ' Finlay, "History of Greece,'' vol. V, p. 5. 'Ibid., vol. V, p. 7. # HISTORICAL SETTING 21 Greeks became luxurious In their life. The city was in a strategic military position, as well as in a good commercial location, so war often Interfered with the expansion of its trade. Between the years 506 B.C. and 350 B.C. the city was taken and retaken six times by Medes, Spartans, Athenians, and Thebans, but never held for any length of time. With the advance of the Roman Empire it was for some time an Independent ally of Rome. At the end of the second century A.D. in the struggle of Severus for the throne It was practically destroyed. In 323 Liclnius was efeated by Constantlne; in 328 Constantine chose the city s the future capital of the Roman Empire. J. The New Rome Though we may assume that Greek influence as a domi- nant force reasserted itself In the reign of Leo the Isaurlan in 717, it Is necessary to bridge the gap between Constantine and the accession of Leo by mentioning very briefly the social and economic changes which were taking place in the Empire. ^ ''1^ The most important point to be noted is the gradual de- Romanization of the governing classes and masses of the population during the fifth, sixth and seventh centuries. In the fourth century A.D. the Roman hold upon the city was very strong. Latin was a language known to every official as well as to all educated men. All the machinery of the government was Roman. Even in the sixth century the knowledge of the Latin language was still universal among educated men. By the seventh century the Roman element was gradually vanishing. Justinian, in the sixth century, was the last emperor who spoke Latin as his mother tongue. The second point to be noted is the growing power of Christianity In the Empire, showing itself In a decided attempt at social reforms. Gladiatorial shows are forbid- den. Infanticide is declared a crime. Slavery is modified 22 CONSTANTINOPLE TO-DAY and an attempt is made to stop immorality. The growing ascetic, monastic movement, in fact, weakens the resistance of the Empire to the attacks of the barbarians which in the later part of this period came fast upon it. Last to be noted are the evils, especially of the later Roman period between Justinian and Leo the Isaurian, which left to Leo so difficult a problem. Prominent among these evils were depopulation, disorganization in the cen- tral government, anarchy in the provinces, and powerless- ness before the invasion of the Saracens and the northern barbarians. Certain elements of strength must not be ove^^ looked — the Orthodox Church with its unifying influencHB^ the wonderful system of Roman law, and the gain in trade caused by the destruction of the Western Empire. The dense population of towns at this time made greater taxes and revenue possible. 4. The Byzantine Empire J I J— 14^^ The period from Leo the Isaurian 717, to the Latin Crusaders 1204, is commonly divided into three parts. The first period we may take as beginning with Leo III in 717, and ending with Michael III in 867. It begins with the repulse of the Saracens which meant the preserva- tion of Roman law and the Christian Church. It embraces the iconoclastic struggle, which was essentially an expres- sion of the desire of the emperors to increase the central power of their government, as much as a desire to purify the Church. Finlay says that "the true historical feature of this memorable period is the aspect of a declining empire saved by the moral vigor developed in society, and of the central authority struggling to restore national prosperity." * In this period a government was established which was to outlive any government contemporaneous with it. The second period commences with the reign of Basil I ' Finlay, "History of Greece," vol. II, p. 9. HISTORICAL SETTING 28 in 867, and ends in the deposition of Michael VI in 1057. During this time the throne was held by the Basilian family, whose sway was marked by the highest external power and the greatest internal prosperity which the Empire ever en- joyed. "The Saracens were driven into the plains of Syria. Antioch and Edessa were reunited to the Empire. The Bul- garian monarchy was reconquered and the Danube became again the northern frontier. The Slavonians in Greece were almost exterminated. Byzantine commerce filled the whole Mediterranean. The emperor of Constantinople was called the autocrat of the Mediterranean Sea. . . . Respect for administration of justice pervaded society more generally than it had ever done at any preceding period in the history of the world." ^ The third period extends from the accession of Isaac Comnenus, 1057, to the conquest of the Byzantine Empire by the Crusaders in 1204. This Is the period of the de- cline and fall of the Eastern Empire. It began with re- bellions of the great nobles of Asia, who instigated revo- lutions in the Empire. Despotism was set up, people were ground down by taxes, the central government lost control, and justice was corrupted. The Crusaders in 1204 ruined Constantinople, and from then until the conquest In 1453 its condition was deplorable. Life in the city during these centuries has been well dis- cussed by Sir Edwin Pears in his "Fall of Constantinople." Chief among the evils which he notes are : first, the internal divisions among the Greeks; second, the difficulty of as- similating the conquered Balkan races; third, the depopu- lation by the "Black Death," leaving the city with a popu- lation of only 80,000; and fourth, the lack of popular voice in the government. Among certain good points to be noted are : first, the good administration of law and the preserva- tion of the traditions of Roman law by Greek-speaking 'Finlay, "History of Greece," vol. II, p. 10. 24 CONSTANTINOPLE TO-DAY lawyers; second, great interest in philosophical thought and in preserving and imitating classical writers. 5. Contribution of the Greeks to Civilization during the Byzantine Period a. Politically The Byzantine Empire kept alive the principles of order, stability, and continuity, when all about it. East and West, things were in a state of chaos. To be sure, the pages of its history were stained with blood. It had its periods of anarchy. It had none of the latent power of future devel- opment such as existed in the Prankish kingdom. It was strongly conservative. In this conservatism, however, lay its strength. It held most tenaciously to its inheritance from Rome. The organization of the Empire was not entirely static. It adjusted itself to new problems, such, for example, as making the government more military and more centralized. Constantinople was able to keep this stability because, com- pared with the Western world, it was practically free from the barbarian invasions which had swept away all civiliza- tion in their advance. For five centuries the administration of the Empire, including its military and civil organization, remained continuous and effective under the same law, the same language, and the same religion. No better indication of the political stability and prosperity of the Empire and of its capital, Constantinople, can be offered than the fact that up to the time of Alexis Comnenus (1081) the Im- perial Government was never bankrupt. b. Economically From the seventh to the thirteenth century Constantinople was the largest, wealthiest, and most splendid city in Europe. This is witnessed to by all travelers of the time. It had HISTORICAL SETTING 26 almost exclusive control of Western commerce and a monopoly of the more refined manufactures and arts. Bury tells us that the total revenue of the Empire in the Armorian period, ninth century, was the equivalent of 125,000,000 pounds sterling.^ It had a finance ministry and treasury, a pure standard coinage accepted everywhere, and a commercial marine. Industries flourished in the city. The manufacture of silks, satins, and embroideries was almost a Greek monopoly. Diadems, scepters, robes, coins, and jewels of the early mediaeval princes were all Greek in type, usually Byzantine in origin. The Greek emperors had their own factories for weaving, dying, and paper making. After the Crusades trade still further increased, but slipped out of the hands of the Greeks into those of the Genoese and Venetians. Mr. Frothingham in the American Journal of Archa- ology, 1894, writes: "The debt to Byzantium is undoubtedly immense : — the difficulty consists in ascertaining what amount of originality can properly be claimed for the Western arts, industries, and institutions during the Middle Ages." c. In Learning and Education One of the traditions which the Empire inherited from antiquity was that of higher education. "lUiterateness was a reproach among reputable people; and the pursuance of literary education by laymen generally and women, was a deep-reaching distinction between Byzantine civilization and the barbarous West." ^ Names of great teachers and scholars stand out. For instance, that of Photius in the ninth century surpasses not only all contemporaries, but all Greeks of the Middle Ages. He "gave an impulse to classical learning, which ensured its cultivation among the 'Bury, "History of the Eastern Empire," p. aao. 'Ibid., p. 434. 26 CONSTANTINOPLE TO-DAY - Greeks till the fall of Constantinople." ^ The ninth cen- tury witnessed a renaissance. The cultivation of learning among the Saracens, especially at Bagdad, had its influence among the Greeks at this time. In the eleventh century we have a reorganization of the University of Constantinople, which had been founded by Theodosius II, and allowed to decay under the Heraclian and Isaurian dynasties. There was an awakened interest in zoology, botany, mineralogy, and geography, and a series of Greek writings and treatises on these subjects. The study of geometry and astronomy was kept alive. Leo VI in the ninth century lectured on geometry in the school of the forty martyrs at Constan- tinople, and wrote an essay on Euclid. In a literary way the Byzantine period produced nothing original, because of its enslavement to ecclesiastical tradi- tions, and also to classical traditions, but "we owe to them and to their tenacity of educational traditions an inestim- able debt for preserving the monuments of Greek literature which we possess to-day." ^ The preservation of the language and archeology of Greece is one of the indis- pensable services of Byzantine literature. From the fifth to the fifteenth centuries there took place a gradual renais- sance in Western Europe due more or less to the "infiltra- tion" of ideas from Constantinople. d. Law In the Empire there was systematic preservation and study of law. The use of the "Corpus Juris" of Justinian had nearly died out in the West. In Byzantium it was kept in translation, and taught in the school of law. During the seventh century bad conditions had brought about a decline in the study of law. Leo the Isaurian revived it, and in- terpreted it more humanely. The great advancement of the ' Bury, "History of the Eastern Empire," p. 447. 'Ibid., p. 449. HISTORICAL SETTING 27 Byzantine Age occurred during the rule of the Basilian dynasty. The publication of the "Basilica," in sixty volumes, about 809, was on a par with the "Corpus Juris" of Justinian. It was a systematic attempt to compile a complete code based on Roman law, but reformed accord- ing to the influence of Christianity and the changing ideals of society. It still forms the basis of civil law for Christian communities of the East and for the Greeks. Great social improvement is shown in it; concubinage is discountenanced, laws of divorce are better, and the position of woman is advanced. A new school of law was founded by Constan- tine Monomachus in the middle of the eleventh century. e. Art The Byzantines from the fifth to the eleventh centuries preserved the traditions and led the development of art. In the age of Justinian in the sixth century, with the building of St. Sophia, a model was set which was preserved in other buildings by the Greeks. Types of decoration were de- veloped in Constantinople at this time. The art of mosaic, and especially of glass mosaic, had its origin here, and from here was carried to Europe. In the end superstition and conservatism stifled the minor arts. Among those which survived were the carving of ivory and the illuminating of manuscripts. There are illuminated Byzantine manuscripts now in European museums executed for the Greek em- perors in the ninth and tenth centuries, that are superior to anything in Western Europe before the fourteenth century. In the Greek Empire of the eighth, ninth, and tenth centuries on the Bosphorus we may trace, then, a civiliza- tion which, though it contained many evils and the seeds of disease, yet was truly great. Bury sums up his valuation of this greatness in these words: "Throughout the Middle Ages till its collapse at the beginning of the thirteenth century, the Eastern Roman Empire was superior to all 28 CONSTANTINOPLE TO-DAY the states of Europe in the efficiency of its civil and military organization, in systematic diplomacy, in wealth, in the refinements of material civilization, and in intellectual culture. It was the heir of antiquity, and it prized its in- heritance — its political legacy from Rome, and its spiritual legacy from Hellas." ^ 6. The Greeks under Turkish Dominion Authorities living in Constantinople in 1425 estimate the population of the city at that time as "about seven times ten thousand." There was considerable emigration from the city on the part of non-combatants. On the other hand, shortly before the fall of the city in 1453, the conscription of villagers for the defense of the capital probably made up for all losses by emigration. Five thousand Greeks and two thousand non-Greeks made up the fighting forces under Constantine Palaeologos, the last Emperor. The clue which these figures give toward an estimate of the total population would tend to confirm the statement above. Byzantius is not to be believed when he says that In 1453 the population was 200,000.^* Critoboulos makes the statement that 4000 men were killed by the Turks at the time of the conquest and 50,000 prisoners were taken, most of whom were released on ransom. Other historians place the number of prisoners at 60,000.^ Mohammed found a desolate city. His first move was to repopulate it. He issued proclamations inviting all refugees to return, especially those who had fled to the Morea and to Adrianople. The city was captured May 29, 1453. Before September, according to Doucas, "thousands of families were inscribed." Immigrants were sent to Con- ' Bury, "History of the Eastern Empire," p. 437. " Byzantius, "Constantinople," vol. Ill, p. 296. ' Cf. Paspates, "Fall of Constantinople," p. 197; Schlumberger, "La prise et le sac de Constantinople," p. 393. HISTORICAL SETTING 29 stantinople from regions conquered later. Many came from Halkis, the Peloponnesus, Trebizond, and Sinope. The sultans following Mohammed continued this practice. Thus, for instance, Selim I (1512-1520) "levied on the conquered city (Tabriz) a contribution of a thousand of its most skillful artisans. These were sent by him to Con- stantinople and received houses and the means of carrying on their respective manufactures." ^ The most important booty which the same Selim brought back from his expedi- tion to Egypt was a host of craftsmen from Cairo. In the time of Suleiman (1521) the two Belgrade settlements were founded, one in Constantinople and one in the Derkos district, with immigrants forcibly brought from Belgrade. Neither military service nor child tribute was required of the Greeks in Constantinople, the reason being the Govern- ment's desire to develop its capital. Immediately following the conquest, Mohammed II es- tablished Gennadios as Patriarch of the Greeks, confirming his rights and privileges as a patriarch in much the same way as had the emperors. This practice still continues. This method of administration by partially autonomous communities is a very important feature of life in modern Constantinople. It is the chief reason for the lack of social cohesion throughout the city. People sense their loyalty to their community as such and not ordinarily toward their city as a whole. As noted elsewhere this feature of govern- ment was borrowed from Persia. Greeks were often employed by the Ottoman rulers as interpreters. Panayotaki Nicosion was the chief interpreter at the fall of Crete, 1669. Alexandros Navrokordatos was chief interpreter at the making of the treaty of Carlowitz, 1699. His sons, Nicolas and Icannis, were chief inter- preters at the making of the treaty of Passarowitz, 17 18. In the terrible year 1821 Stavrakis Aristarchis was the ' Creasy, "History of the Ottoman Turks," vol. I, p. 2*5. 30 CONSTANTINOPLE TO-DAY chief Greek interpreter for the Turkish Government (cf. Epaminondas Stamatiades "Biography of Prominent Interpreters of the Ottoman Empire," published in Greek only, 1865). The Greeks have translated a considerable number of books into Turkish. We note especially books dealing with military science ; for instance, the books of Wauban translated in the time of Selim III. Under the Turks the Greeks of Constantinople have ex- celled in commerce and industry. They have maintained to a large extent their position as merchants which they held during the Byzantine centuries. Industry was organized according to trades. Each trade had its own guild with special rules and a well-developed sense of community in- terest. Each guild chose a patron or a saint. For instance, the furriers regarded the prophet Elijah as their patron. A Greek architect, Christodoulos, built the Mosque of the Conqueror, and numbers of buildings connected with it in the latter part of the fifteenth century. The beautiful mosque of Suleiman the Magnificent was decorated by a Greek. The graceful Laleli Mosque was built in 1760 by a Greek architect, Constantine by name. During the sixteenth century certain descendants of the royal families of the Byzantine Empire were government contractors of one kind or another. The Kantakouzinos family, the Palaeologos family, the Ralli family, shared such contracts as the farming of taxes and the furnishing of provisions. Manolakis, who was a patron of the Great School of the Greeks, was a fur merchant who supplied the royal palace in the seventeenth century. Rizos Manes was a famous Greek physician of the eighteenth century. Dr. Emmanuel Timonis made certain experiments with inoculation for smallpox, the results of which he communicated to Lady Montague and to Dr. Woodward. Marko Pasha, a Greek, was director of the HISTORICAL SETTING 31 Imperial Medical School for many years. Xenophon Zographos was private physician to Sultan Abdul Mejid, as Spiridon Mavroyenis was for Sultan Abdul Hamid II. The city has never been without its Greek bankers. The names of Zarifi, Koronios, Syoutas, Stephenovik were famous during the eighteenth century. A well-known Greek firm, "Kastellaria," operated till 1866 at Valide Han in Stamboul. 7. Evidences of Greek Influence in Modern Constantinople The casual visitor to Constantinople who is not alert to detect evidences of Greek life and influence in the mod- ern city, will hardly gather the impression that it is in reality a great center of Greek life. He will notice many Greek flags and Greek names on ships, big and little, in the harbor; he will hear Greek spoken on every ferry, tram, and in most streets ; he will see many Greek school children coming and going; he will notice several Greek newspapers on the newsstands; he will be constantly reminded of the commercial activities of the Greek merchants, particularly the small shopkeepers and wine dealers; but he will measure the full scope of Greek influence only where he begins sys- tematically to probe deeper. After 475 years of Turkish rule the Greek complexion of the city has well-nigh disappeared. Of 400 Byzantine churches in the city at the time of the conquest only 50 can be identified to-day. One alone is in use by the Greeks as a church (Mouchliotissa), one was assigned to Armenians for worship, one is used to house a Turkish military museum (St. Irene) ; the remainder have been converted into mosques. The Latin occupation of the city from 1204 to 1261 caused irreparable loss to the Greeks, and what the Latins failed to despoil the Turks have utilized for their own purposes. But if the visitor goes from one Greek school to another, if he visits their churches, their clubs, their banks and busi- 32 CONSTANTINOPLE TO-DAY ness houses, their steamship offices and hotels, if he makes the acquaintance of Greeic editors, artists, clergymen, edu- cators, literary and professional men, he will gain a truer impression of the Greek community in the city. III. The Armenian Community in Constantinople I. The First Armenians — Priests and Soldiers The ties which bind Armenians to Constantinople are not political. Constantinople has never been an Armenian political possession. The few Armenian emperors during Greek domination were not representatives of Armenian political ambition, but rather exponents of Armenian ca- pacity, for which a much harassed fatherland had failed to provide adequate opportunity of expression. The most reliable traditions regarding the first Arme- nian settlements in Constantinople are given by the Arme- nian historians, Movses Khorenatzi, Gorun, and Giragos. In the time of Gregory, the Illuminator (fourth century), under whose leadership the Armenian nation accepted Chris- tianity, communication with Greek ecclesiastics in Con- stantinople began. St. Sahag, St. Mesrob, and some of their pupils were sent to the Agomidian convent in Con- stantinople to study Greek, so that they might translate Greek theological treatises into Armenian. The Greek patriarch, Addigos, conferred on St. Mesrob the title Agomid. A little later St. Mesrob went to Athens to study philosophy under David Anhaght (David the Invincible). During this fourth century Armenian military represen- tatives also were sent to Constantinople. Armenian mer- chants from the western region of Asia Minor began to drift into the Greek capital, so that by the fifth century approxi- mately 5000 Armenians were living there. Relations be- tween the Armenians and the Greeks were most cordial. It is recorded that 2000 Armenian soldiers participated HISTORICAL SETTING 33 with the Greeks in repelling the assaults of the Tatars from the north under Attila. This occurred during the last quarter of the fifth century. There is evidence to the effect that Armenians living in Constantinople ordinarily spoke Greek and not Armenian. They frequented the Greek churches in the absence of their own. They were well assimilated into the Greek life of the city. 2. Social Amalgamation with Greeks — Fifth to Eighth Century From the fifth to the eighth century communications between Armenia and Constantinople were so easy, and the advantages of trade and culture so attractive that the Armenian population of the city rose from 5000 to 10,000. This was a period when there was considerable immigration from Armenia westward into the large Greek cities of Asia Minor — Cesarea, Sivas, etc. It is significant of the good relations between the two peoples in Constantinople that the Armenians in the capital during these centuries had neither a special district assigned to them nor separate churches. As already intimated they commonly spoke Greek. The nationalistic fever had not seized them. When the schism between the Eastern and Western Churches occurred, the Armenians in Constantinople very plainly sympathized with the Greek Orthodox Church, al- though as a class they stood for liberal tendencies. The agitation of the question of church allegiance, however, re- sulted in large numbers of the Armenians allying themselves with the Greek Orthodox Church. Representatives of the Orthodox Armenian community exist at present. J. Retarded Growth of Colony — Ninth to Fifteenth Cen- tury The separation of the Eastern and Western Churches, 1054 A.D., brought about a reaction on the part of the 34 CONSTANTINOPLE TO-DAY Armenian Church unfavorable to the Greeks. The cele- brated Armenian Patriarch, Nerses Shnorhali, came to Constantinople to confer concerning the great ecclesiastical question, but with no favorable result. His return marks the close of communications between the Orthodox authori- ties and those of the Gregorian (Armenian) Church. The Armenian colony in Constantinople had in reality never achieved outstanding religious or ecclesiastical importance. In that colony the ruling interests were those of the com- mercial classes. Three noted Armenian emperors ruled in the Eastern Roman Empire, but without particular signifi- cance for the Armenians as a nation. In addition, two other reasons are responsible for the slow growth of the Armenian colony in Constantinople be- tween the ninth and the fifteenth centuries. During these centuries Armenia was well-nigh completely absorbed with its relations, sometimes peaceful, sometimes hostile, with Persia. Such emigration as there was out of Armenia moved largely into Persia. In the second place, an Ar- menian Patriarchate had been established in Jerusalem. This turned the eyes of Armenians toward Jerusalem rather than toward Constantinople. The Armenian Patriarchate in Constantinople dates from the time of Mohammed II. The circumstances of the origin of the first Armenian church and ecclesiastical organization which existed previ- ous to the time of the Conqueror have not been clearly traced. An Armenian manuscript of the Mukhitaryantz monastery in Vienna refers to the church of St. Sarkis in Constantinople as existing in the fourteenth century. We know that the Patriarch of Jerusalem in 1430 was repre- sented by Yesaiyi of Constantinople who was an aratchnort of the Armenian community. As early as this also the Cilician Armenian Catholicos had a representative in the capital. Bishop Hovhannes. Twenty years or more before the capture of the city by the Turks, a merchant named HISTORICAL SETTING 35 Gorus or Gozma, of Kefe in the Crimea, laid the founda- tion of the St. Purgitch Gregorian Church in Galata. He solicited contributions from brother merchants. A district in Galata near Kara Geumriik is called the Kefe district. Hither Armenians from the Kefe region were wont to congregate. The early religious leader of this community was Bishop Hiisik. 4. Armenians at the Time of the Ottoman Conquest An Armenian monk of Pera wrote a description in poetry of the capture of the city, entitled "Maghakia." In the course of this poem of one hundred and fifty lines, he alludes to the fact that Sultan Mohammed brought Armenian emi- grants from Angora to Constantinople. The Armenian colony in Constantinople seemed quite insignificant in size to the Conqueror, yet partly because he recognized their good qualities and partly probably for political reasons, he sent to Brousa for Bishop Hovagim, whom he recog- nized as the first Armenian Patriarch. He caused many Armenian emigrants to come from Brousa and its environs. They were settled in Galata near Kara Geumriik and were called the "six communities." A little later the Armenians were given the Greek Church "Soulou Monastir" in Psam- atia. At the end of the fifteenth century the number of Armenians in Constantinople had reached 25,000. They proved themselves readily adaptable to the prevailing Otto- man customs, learned and used the Turkish language, and distinguished themselves as industrious and useful subjects. 5. Armenian Interests i^oo-iy^o The great majority of the 40,000 Armenians in Con- stantinople about the year 1550 were immigrants or the immediate descendants of immigrants from cities in West- ern Asia Minor, such as Sivas, Angora, Konia, and Brousa. They were for the most part tradesmen, artisans, and work- 36 CONSTANTINOPLE TO-DAY men. The third Armenian church community came mto existence about the middle of this century, St. Sarkis, a church near Topkapou. This church was built by the Ar- menians themselves. We have no record of any Armenian schools or academies at this time. Few Armenians con- tinued to speak Armenian, and with the laying aside of their language they laid aside their provincial and national cus- toms in large part, and accepted Turkish habits and speech. Carpentry, blacksmi thing, goldsmithing, tailoring, and banking passed increasingly into the hands of Armenians. Armenians held the government bakery contracts; a large proportion of the employees in the luxurious establishments of Turkish pashas were Armenians, especially from Van and Erzroum. There were numbers of Armenians in the Janissary Corps. Immigration to the metropolis steadily increased. The settlements of Armenians in Armash, Chengiler, Kourdbelen, and Baghchejik, towns near Con- stantinople, were made by people from Sivas. The Arme- nians of Tekirdagh (near Gallipoli) trace their origin to emigrants from Kemakh. Scutari and Yenimahalle Arme- nians are of Moush origin, for the most part. The Armenians established a printing press in Constan- tinople in the early seventeenth century with the apparent purpose of aiding religious controversy among themselves. The Catholic Armenian community was growing; an Ar- menian bishop, Yeghiazar, from Aintab, Cilicia, was stir- ring up religious discussions. A certain Yeremia Chelebl Keumijrjlan had his own private printing press from which he issued fifteen or more works, translations and originals. Armenians claim as a renegade the great architect Sinan Kalfa, who lived and worked so successfully in the time of Suleiman the Magnificent. His masterpiece, the Siiley- manieh Mosque, is one of three hundred mosques which he built. Balat, a section of the city near Phanar on the Golden HISTORICAL SETTING 87 Horn, was becoming more and more a rendezvous for wealthy Armenians from Asia Minor. A group of them purposed to promote the building of churches for the grow- ing Armenian community. St. Hreshdagabed in Balat was constructed, or rather was the result of the remodeling by Armenians of an ancient Greek church. Other churches were built in Scutari and Ortakeuy. Psamatia was a prosperous Armenian section of Stamboul. Emigrants from Cilicia usually settled here, whereupon it was called in Turkish Karaman Mahallesl. The patriarchal seat was here for two centuries, being removed about 1650 to its present location in Koum Kapou, where St. Mary's Cathedral was constructed. Among others, emigrants from ancient Arri and Egni in Armenia settled at Koum Kapou. Armenians established a convent in Scutari called "Hoke- doun." This convent became the rallying point for scholars. A library of considerable value, containing some manu- scripts, was built up. Religious controversy between the Armenian Gregorian and Armenian Catholic bodies de- veloped into a bitter struggle, which culminated in the kid- napping of the Armenian Patriarch Avedik and his exile to France, where he died in a convent prison. The Armenian Bible was first printed in Constantinople by Bedros Ladinatzi in 1705, although a first edition had appeared at Amsterdam in 1666. Armenian national spirit and energy expressed itself during this century in the found- ing of convents. Nikhtar Abba of Sivas with the help of the Government of Venice founded St. Ghazaros in 17 17. This was designed to be an academy for Turkish Arme- nians and a means for perpetuating the Armenian language. Two important Armenian men in the life of Constantinople, Hovhannes Golod and Sheghtagagri, sprang from the Amrdolou Convent in Anatolia. The former became Pa- triarch in Constantinople, the latter in Jerusalem. Hovhan- nes Golod as Patriarch was able to calm the controversy 38 CONSTANTINOPLE TO-DAY with the Catholics. He stood for intellectual progress, opened a school for the training of the clergy, and cultivated good relations with the Turks, notably the Grand Vizier Raghib Pasha. Armenians rose occasionally into posts of governmental importance and were then known as "Amira." The "chief changer" at one time was an Armenian (Seghpisteos). The Armenian population of Constantinople in 17 15 is estimated at 70,000. Because of the influence of Venice and Armenians who had settled there, Italian became the most commonly studied European language among Constantinople Armenians. There being no public schools, only the children of wealthy Amiras received systematic education. This consisted for the most part in the study of the Armenian, Italian, and Turkish languages. Armenians had a worthy share as builders of important buildings. The Nouri Osmanie mosque was built by Minas Kalfa in 1748. The Siileymanie garrison was built by Baba Krikor Amura Balian. Armenian merchants and bankers made their chief head- quarters in a large khan called Karavanserai. Into their hands were given large responsibilities in connection with the financial side of the Ottoman military campaigns, in the management of which many Armenians acquired great wealth. For two hundred years the Imperial Mint and the goldsmith work of the imperial family were in the charge of the Catholic Armenian family, Duzian. Among other noted and wealthy families, the Caesarea Armenians were most famous. Immigrants continued to flow into the city, coming at this period especially from Persia and the Van region. The choirist, Balatagan Kevork, prepared a Persian dictionary for these immigrants. It is estimated that by 1750 the Armenian population of Constantinople numbered 100,000. HISTORICAL SETTING 39 6. Stirrings of National Consciousness — i'/£0—i82^ The controversy between Gregorian Armenians and Catholic Armenians, ever dormant, grew acute when ques- tions involving a united Armenian community arose. A period of intense nationalism developed with the agitation stirred up by the causes of the French Revolution. During this period many nations developed a keener national con- sciousness. Armenians in Constantinople shared this com- mon experience. They were stimulated by the appearance in 1784 of Chamchian's three-volume Armenian history. This history had a profound influence on Armenians, serv- ing to awaken their national consciousness and to promote an interest in history and in education in general. Arme- nian philology became a live subject. Interest in learning both Armenian and other languages developed. Iknadios Mouradjadohsen's "History of Eastern Nations" (two volumes), written in French, had a similar effect in so far as it dealt with Armenian history. Early in the nineteenth century Armenian intellectual life in Constantinople was greatly stirred by the productions of the Armenian Mukhitarian Press of Venice, notably a "Geography" by Akontz Appa in eleven volumes; a "Trans- lation of Roman and Archzeological History" by Rolen; and "The Archaeology of Armenia" by Injejian. Another aspect of the national awakening showed itself in increased religious interest. Church union and church reform were live subjects. Through the favor of American missionaries, four hundred Bibles published by the Armenian Press in Venice were distributed largely in Constantinople. One effect of these Bibles was greatly to stimulate common edu- cation and the study of the Armenian language. The first public school among the Armenians was opened by Shnorhk, one of the wealthy Armenians of the city. The sons of wealthy families were the only children to 40 CONSTANTINOPLE TO-DAY receive instruction beyond the simplest, after ten years of age. Most boys of eleven were apprentices in goldsmithing, tailoring, stonecutting, masonry, or blacksmithing. These were the industries In which Armenians excelled. Arme- nian goldsmiths were almost as famous as Armenian money changers. One gathers an impression of their handwork on rambling through the goldsmith section of the Grand Bazaar even to-day. The art of printing on thin muslins was also one in which Armenians acquired skill and fame (Kalemkiar work or yazmajilik). The best work in that line to-day is done by Armenians. The backbone of Armenian prosperity in Constantinople was the business of the Armenian money changers, or, as we would say, bankers. The Armenian "Amiras" were in- dispensable to the higher Ottoman officials. During the reign of Selim III (i 789-1 807), when venality in public office was so common, the business of the money lenders was of considerable importance. As a class the money lenders possessed great power. Creasy summarizes the situation thus: "It was seldom that the Turk, who intrigued among the officials and court-favorites at Constantinople for a Pacha- lic, was possessed of the necessary purchase and bribery- money. He usually borrowed the requisite sums from one of the wealthy Greeks of the Phanar, or from one of the Armenian bankers. The lender of the money became in reality the mortgagee of the Pachalic; and he may be said to have been a mortgagee in possession, inasmuch as his confidential agent accompanied the Pacha as secretary, and was often the real ruler of the province. As usually hap- pens when a few members of an oppressed race purchase power under the oppressors, these Raya agents of Moslem authority were the most harassing and merciless in their policy towards their fellow-countrymen. The Pasha, under the necessity of repurchasing his appointment at the end of each year, was prevented, in ordmary cases, from shak- ing off this financial bondage. Sojnetimes, before an appoint- HISTORICAL SETTING 41 merit could be obtained from the Porte, it was required that one of the Sarrafs, or Armenian bankers, should become surety for the due transmission of the imperial revenue." ^ As a class the Armenians were clever, industrious, adapt- able, and eager to receive and promote Western ideas in Industry, commerce, and education. A list of noted names among them would include the Zadayantz family, one of whom was "gunpowder master" for the Government, and the Balyantz family, of whom Krikor (1770-1832) be- came famous for his architectural skill. Sultan Mahmoud II ( 1 808-1 839) commissioned him to construct several palaces, the Selimiye garrison and other important build- ings. Other members of the Armenian aristocracy also achieved considerable influence with the Government. Many of them maintained ambitious establishments in Scutari, Hasskeuy, Ortakeuy, Koum Kapou, and Balat, Armenian writers attribute the ultimate loss of influence and wealth on the part of the Armenian aristocracy to their failure to persist in supporting a widespread scheme of public education. The Armenian population of the city at the turn of the century is estimated at 100,000. 7. Revival of Learning among Armenians — 182^—185^ Protestant missionaries from the United States found the Armenians in Constantinople the most approachable of the people in the city. The first Armenian high school in Constantinople was established at Koum Kapou in 1827 by Krikor Peshtimaljian, a learned and devoted man who owed many of his ideas to the Americans. A Protestant school was established in Pera in 1834. Evidences of the progressive spirit among Armenians center chiefly in their struggle for schools. Under the prevailing system of the 'Creasy, "History of the Ottoman Turks," vol. II, p. 318. 42 CONSTANTINOPLE TO-DAY Ottoman Government, education was a matter very largely left in the hands of the authorities of each nation. The Armenian aristocracy (Amiras) were slower to ap- preciate the value and necessity of popular education than were less prominent people. The movement for education gained momentum in spite of, rather than because of, the wealthy class. A national higher school was established in Scutari in 1839. Armenians generally regarded this school as a training ground for national leaders. It suf- fered from interference by wealthy conservatives. Dis- putes over its management ultimately resulted in the organi- zation by the Ottoman Government of two national coun- cils for the Armenians, or one council with two sections: The Religious Council and the Civil Council (May 6, 1847). The director of the high school in Scutari was the editor of an Armenian newspaper. It continued under the name of "Haiyastan" until 1852, when it was called "Masis." Under the general impulse of reform which was sweep- ing over Turkey, a good many Armenians began to find their way to Europe for advanced studies, in medicine and art particularly. Hovhannes Bey Dadlian was one of the most famous of these. In 1832 he had succeeded his brother as director of the Sultan's gunpowder factory. He made several trips to England and France for advanced study, and on his return exerted a remarkable influence in intro- ducing European methods of manufacture. He stood high both with the reforming Sultans, Mahmoud II and Abdul Mejid, and with certain European societies such as "The Oriental Society of Paris" and "The Society to Promote Art" in London. In 1850 there were thirty Armenian churches in Con- stantinople. In connection with most of these there were schools. Special higher shools were maintained at Psama- tia, Haskeuy, and Scutari. In addition to the simplest HISTORICAL SETTING 43 branches, these schools provided instruction in Armenian literature, French, mathematics, philosophy, and in some cases, English. Armenian merchants began to enter new fields. By 1855 ten Armenian firms were importing cloth from Manchester and other points in England. The Crimean War gave a great impetus to foreign trade. The demand for manu- factured goods steadily rose. Armenian merchants were among the first to take advantage of the new conditions. Leadership among Constantinople Armenians gradually passed from the hands of the aristocracy to the hands of merchants. The study of Italian steadily gave way to the study of French and Enghsh. Influences issuing from the French Revolution and related movements moved French literature and nationalism into the foreground of thought. Voltaire, Lamartine, Victor Hugo, and other French authors were being translated into modern Armenian. The reading of such books and the steadily increasing contacts with Europe along all lines, led to the wide adoption of European (a la Franka) clothing and to a more or less serious imitation of European customs and manners. Similar influences is- sue unfavorably for the Armenian bankers. This class of people endeavored to maintain their prestige and position through consolidation. Two companies were formed — an Anatohan and a Roumelian. They were entrusted with large tax-farming contracts, but owing to faulty methods and increasing competition by European firms, the Arme- nians gradually lost their dominant position as bankers. 8. Political Action and Reaction — i8£^-iQ2i The Crimean War marked the beginning of a new era for residents of Constantinople. The Armenians were quick to react to the new conditions in business, politics, and education. Contacts with the West multiplied rapidly. 44 CONSTANTINOPLE TO-DAY The momentum toward progress which was characteristic of the reigns of Mahmoud II (i 808-1 839) and Abdul Mejid ( 1 839-1 861) made the Armenians very happy. They were increasingly prosperous. As a nation they were the most responsive to new currents of life from the West. Their progressive democratic spirit is well attested in their reorganization of their community system in i860, whereby the Ottoman Government approved a constitution provid- ing for the election of a National Assembly, consisting of one hundred and forty representatives under the presidency of the Patriarch. Educational, religious, and other non- political questions came before this body. Under its leader- ship and inspiration the press, schools, and philanthropy were steadily developed and liberalized. The election of Mugerditch Khrimian as Patriarch at Constantinople in 1870 marked the approach of a climax of awakened national interest. Khrimian, as Bishop of Van, had turned the minds of Armenian young men especially to the glories of ancient Armenia. By his sermons and books he was doing what the poet, Alishan, was doing by his lyrics. The Shahnazar Noubaryan High School in Haskeuy, Constantinople, came to see in their Patriarch, Khrimian, the visible symbol of a glorified national life. Armenians to-day look back upon the years 1 865-1 875 almost as a "golden age" of national prosperity. As a matter of fact, it was a "golden age" of hope. Young men went to Europe for study; Armenian writers multiplied; many masterpieces of French and English literature were translated; schools were gowing in efficiency and number; rigid religious customs were adjusted to an easier observ- ance; and a sense of security and hope filled the air. The war with Russia (i 876-1 878) opened a political door. Three delegates, chosen by the Armenian National Assembly, were sent to the Congress of Berlin. The now famous sixty-first article dealt with Armenia. HISTORICAL SETTING 45 The hopes of Armenians, founded on Article 6i, fright- ened Abdul Hamid II. He set his will to curb and crush these national hopes. Rigid censorship of the Armenian press and an intricate spy system were the tools nearest at hand. Discontent grew under stern measures of steady repression, especially in the provinces. The Armenian Pa- triarchs, one after another, were placed in very difficult posi- tions. The "Hunchak" Society, secretly organized in 1888, was the channel for the natural protests of the more restless Armenian spirits. The "Tashnagtzagan" Society, secretly organized in 1895, pursued similar aims along somewhat different lines. Violence was resorted to in the effort to weaken Abdul Hamid's cruel purpose. His answer was carefully planned — widespread massacres of Armenians in 1895 and 1896. In 1895 10,000 Armenians of Constan- tinople were killed. Estimates of those who perished throughout the country vary from 50,000 to 500,000. The Armenian population of Constantinople, including the Pa- triarch, was helpless. The nation bowed before the ter- rible storm. Its life was crushed. Schools and newspapers were stifled. Tyranny had its way everywhere. Temporiz- ing, opportunist measures were the only policy that could be followed during the aftermath of the storm. Gradually privileges were regained, but not until 1908 was there any real rebirth of hope. The story of events since the re-granting of the consti- tution in 1908 is fresh in mind. Abdul Hamid's attempt to regain authority in 1909 bore heavily on the Armenians in Cilicia, when 20,000 or more perished as in 1895 and 1896. Blasted hopes and the sense of insecurity caused many thousands of Armenians to leave Turkey. Even Con- stantinople, the most secure spot in the Empire for Arme- nians, had few attractions for them. The Great War brought still greater suffering in its train. Owing largely to the natural affiliations of the Armenians with the Entente 46 CONSTANTINOPLE TO-DAY Powers, they were made the object of special measures which nearly succeeded in exterminating the whole nation. IV. Constantinople the Capital of the Ottoman Empire /. The Beginnings of the Struggle for the City Four hundred and sixty-eight years ago the 29th of May, when Mohammed II entered it in triumph, Constantinople became the capital of the Ottoman Empire. One hundred and fifty years earlier Osman, the founder of the Ottoman dynasty and empire in 1288, had dreamed of the day when Constantinople should be the Ottoman capital. Early Ottoman writers attach great importance to a dream in which Osman saw an "all over-arching tree; and every leaf of that tree was in shape like unto a scymetar. Suddenly there arose a mighty wind, and turned the points of the sword leaves towards the various cities of the world, but especially towards Constantinople. That city placed at the junction of two seas and two continents, seemed like a diamond set between two sapphires and two emeralds, to form the most precious stone In a ring of universal empire. Osman thought that he was in the act of placing that visloned ring on his finger, when he awoke." ^ Osman first encountered a regular Greek army In 1301. Muzaros, the commander of the guards, was sent against Osman by the Byzantine Emperor, Andronicus II, with a formidable army. The defeat he suffered at Koyounhlssar in the vicinity of the modern Izmid, marked the beginning of the struggle for Constantinople. The Important city of Brousa fell to the Turks In 1326. They made It at once their capital. Izmid was occupied the same year. Nicea, the modern Iznik, at that time second only to Con- ' Creasy, "Hiatory of the Ottoman Turks," vol. I, p. 10. HISTORICAL SETTING 47 stantinople In importance in the Greek Empire, surrendered to Orkhan, Osman's successor, In 1330. By 1336 nearly the whole of the northwest of Asia Minor was included in the Ottoman Empire. The Byzantine Emperor Andronicus III resorted to the arts of peace in his effort to stay the progress of the Turk. He gave his daughter Theodora in marriage to Orkhan. For twenty years there was peace until the Greeks and the Turks became involved in a war between the Genoese and the Venetians, one main arena of which was the harbor of Constantinople. Orkhan sent a force to support the Genoese who were settled in Galata, while the Greek Em- peror aided the Venetians. The Turks took advantage of the confused situation and made a permanent settlement on the European side of the Dardanelles (1356). From this as a base their armies soon overran Thrace. Adrianople fell Into their power In 1361 and was made their capital. The Greek armies were steadily forced back upon Con- stantinople. Bayazid I (1389-1402) was the first Otto- man who actually besieged the city. In 1393 he built the towers on the Asiatic side of the Bosphorus at the point now known as Anatoli Hissar. He did not succeed in cap- turing the city, but his efforts so filled the Greeks with terror and dismay that they were glad to treat with him. 2. Early Ottoman Inhabitants of Constantinople It is customary in the Moslem world to base a judgment as to the size of a community on the number of mosques maintained by that community. In the absence of anything approaching census returns. It is interesting to note that the mosque which Sultan Bayazid I caused to be built in Constantinople was the fourth to be built in the city. Centuries previous, three Seljuk sultans had exerted enough influence to lead to the erection of mosques, one in the name of each. That these mosques ministered to comparatively 48 CONSTANTINOPLE TO-DAY small communities may be Inferred from the fact that along with the mosques which Sultan Bayazld I built, the peace treaty between himself and the Greek Emperor allowed for the estabhshment for the first time of a court for Mos- lems and an Imamate or chancery. We must not Imagine that any great good fortune at- tended the life of the Turkish community In Constantinople previous to the conquest by the Turks In 1453. Their wel- fare depended largely upon the fortunes of the Greek Emperor in his contests with the Turks. As the tide of conquest surged about the city, the Greek Emperor used the colony as a pawn in the game of endurance. Thus when he came to terms with Bayazld I in 1396 he agreed to give the Turkish colony (1402) certain rights. No sooner had Bayazld fallen under the stroke of Timur in Anatolia than the Emperor gave the Turks In Constan- tinople twenty-four hours In which to leave the city on pain of death. As the Ottoman recovered and recommenced his triumphs in Thrace, making It only a question of a short time when he should envelope and capture Constantinople, the Greek Emperor became more Indulgent and affected some concern for the welfare of Turkish colonists. This concern was all the more natural In view of the fact that as the hinterland of the capital passed Into Turkish hands, the sources of food supply for the city were seriously menaced. The Turkish colony, which according to Evliya Chelebi numbered approximately 20,000 in 1396 (in all probability an exaggeration), was a very important factor in the matter of provisioning the city. The business of the small tradesmen, butchers, grocers, and dealers In country produce gradually came into the hands of the Turks, be- cause of their ability to maintain more easily steady rela- tions with the outlying districts. This fact gave the Turks a foremost position in the economic life of the city. Following the attack upon the city by Bayazld I In 1396, HISTORICAL SETTING 49 the Turks were too fully occupied defending and consolidat- ing their empire both in Europe and in Asia to concentrate again on Constantinople. It was not until 1422 that an Ottoman army again appeared to storm those historic walls. Mourad II (1421-1451), incensed by the intrigues against his sovereignty which the Byzantine Emperor started by releasing Prince Moustafa, a pretender, approached with 20,000 picked troops. For three months the Turks at- tacked with great persistence and skill, but in August were satisfied to retire, attributing their failure to an appearance of the Holy Virgin. Mourad hastened to Asia Minor to quell an insurrection under another pretender, and on his return did not renew the siege, but made a treaty by which the Greek Emperor agreed to pay annually a tribute of 10,000 ducats, and to surrender certain important military positions on the River Strania and the Black Sea coast. For the remainder of his reign Mourad was busy extending his empire into Hungary, Macedonia, and Greece. 5. Mohammed the Conqueror — 1453 Mohammed II received his title of "The Conqueror" from the fact that of the Sultans it was he who succeeded in becoming master of Constantinople. The Prophet Mo- hammed is said to have foretold the conquest of the city by the faithful. The tradition runs "Ye shall conquer Con- stantinople; peace be upon the prince and the army to whom this shall be granted." The siege was begun on April 16, 1453. A Turkish army numbering probably about 200,000 together with three hundred vessels made up the attacking forces. Two dramatic events stand out among the many which bore directly on the final result. The Turks executed a master stroke when they succeeded in transporting an important part of their war fleet from the Bosphorus to the Golden Horn. A huge chain, part of which can be seen to-day in the military museum near St. Sophia, pre- 60 CONSTANTINOPLE TO-DAY vented the passage of their ships up the Golden Horn from the Bosphorus. Mohammed resolved to take his ships overland. "An extraordinary feat it was but it was splendidly per- formed. A narrow canal was dug, paved, and set with rollers. The point of starting was between Tophaneh and Beshiktash, out of the range of the fort at Galata. Thence between two and three miles up the valley of Dolma Baghche, the seventy or eighty ships were drawn by night up the hill of Pera to the point where now the gardens stand just below the Hotel Bristol, and thence down the hill to the bay of Kassim Pasha where now stands the great Arsenal." ^ The other dramatic event which greatly aided the Turks was the finding of the tomb of Abu Eyoub. This man, long revered as a saint by both Greeks and Turks, was one of the Ansari (helpers) of Mohammed the Prophet. He took part in the third Arab attack on Constantinople in 48-52 of the Hejira (670 A.D.), and was buried beneath the walls. The discovery of his tomb by Mohammed, dur- ing his attack on the city nearly 800 years later, stirred the religious zeal and fanaticism of his followers to an irresist- ible pitch. The gallant defenders of the city were unable to hold out very long. The end came on May 29th, when scenes of indescribable joy and horror marked the close of more than a thousand years of Greek rule in old Byzantium. 4.. Outline of Ottoman History Analysis Von Hammer, the greatest historian of Ottoman for- tunes and misfortunes, divides their history into seven periods, bringing it down as far as 1774. "The seven great periods into which the course of the Ottoman Empire from its foundation till the Treaty of Kainardji divides itself are these: first, that of its rise from its foundation to the capture of Constantinople; ' Hutton, "Constantinople," p. 144. HISTORICAL SETTING 51 second, that of Its growth by conquest from the capture of Constantinople to the appearance of Suleiman the Legis- lator; third, that of its greatest development under the reign of Suleiman and that of his son, Selim II; fourth, that from the commencement of its decadence under Mourad III to the time when the sanguinary politics of Mourad IV restored It temporarily to its former splendor; fifth, that of total anarchy and disorganization to the time of the first Keupriilii; sixth, that of the fresh Impulse which It took under the administration of the Keupriilii family statesmen up to the treaty of Carlowltz; seventh, that of its decadence made known to the world by that treaty, and of the active intervention of European politics in the affairs of the Empire up to the treaty of KainardjI." ^ One might bring Von Hammer down to date by adding four periods. The eighth would cover a second great period of anarchy from the treaty of KainardjI to the accession of the first reforming sultan, Selim III; the ninth would cover the efforts of the reforming sultans from Selim III to the dissolution of the first parliament under the con- stitution by Abdul Hamid II In 1878; the tenth would em- brace the years of reaction and tyranny under Abdul Hamid II until he reaffirmed the constitution in 1908; the eleventh would Include the activities of the Young Turks as the power behind the throne, reaching their climax in their con- trol of Turkey during the World War. Summarizing these periods, we might chart the course of Ottoman history In this fashion. Foundation and Consolidation 1288-1453 Osman I to Mohammed II Growth and Glory 1453-1574 Mohammed II to Selim II Premonitions of Weakness 1574-1640 Mourad III to Mourad IV Anarchy and Insurrection 1 640-1 656 Ibrahim and Mohammed IV Arrested Degeneration 1656— 1688 Mohammed IV ^Von Hammer, "Histoire des Ottomans," XVII, p. 33. 62 CONSTANTINOPLE TO-DAY Disaster and Decline 1 688-1 774 Suleiman II to Moustafa III Disorganization and Anarchy 1 774-1 789 Abdul Hamid I A Century of Reform 1 789-1 878 Selim III to Abdul Hamid II Reaction and Tyranny 1 878-1 908 Abdul Hamid II The Rule of the Young Turks 1908-1918 Abdul Hamid II to Mohammed V. /.■50 /300 yJ50 /«o f*SO ISOO lS5t> /G£U IC50 I700 I750 teoo /aSO jatJO Synthesis More important for our purpose than the detailed analy- sis of any one particular period or all the periods, is the effort to get a bird's-eye view of the development of Otto- man history as a whole. If we take under consideration the entire period from 1288 to 1918 and seek to discover the lay of the land, we note two main features. The divid- ing line between these two features, like that of any land- scape, is more or less obscure. The passing from one into the other is very gradual. The change which comes over Ottoman history during the last half of the eighteenth cen- tury and the first half of the nineteenth may be character- ized as acknowledgment of the essential failure of the Asiatic regime and the acceptance of the necessity of more or less conformity to European standards. For more than four centuries the Turks had been masters in their own house. Their sway was scarcely challenged. They occa- sionally tolerated but they never respected foreigners and their governments. Russia first brought them to their knees. As the result of a long struggle, in the Treaty of Kainardji in 1774 they for the first time were forced to acknowledge their inability to maintain the old standards of contempt for foreign powers. From that time forward HISTORICAL SETTING 53 the question with them was, not how they might impose their will on foreign nations, but how they might avoid the humiliations which foreign nations were forcing upon them. From that time to the present day Europe has been making steady inroads into Ottoman life. No aspect of life has escaped the pressure of the West. Ottoman literature, art, education, science, philosophy, manners and customs, trade and industry, and least of all, politics and the science and art of government have been gradually though very slowly, laboriously, and in many cases, unwillingly yielding to West- ern ideals. The process is far from complete. It will be many decades before Constantinople will be thoroughly Europeanized. The Great War has hastened that process. Constantinople's life is bound up as never before with the life and civihzation of Europe and the West. Some day some great event may mark the beginning of a third great period since 1288, during which the Ottoman people, having mastered the best that the West has to offer while retaining the genius of their worthiest Oriental traditions, will come into their own. Summary In the outline as given above the first six periods, cover- ing roughly the fourteenth, fifteenth, sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth centuries — half a millennium — fall under a heading which might be phrased: Period of the Supremacy of Asiatic Ideas. During these centuries Ottoman sover- eigns acted as Oriental despots whose roots were deep in Asia. The following four periods covering the nine- teenth and a generation of the eighteenth as well as of the twentieth century, fall under a heading which might be phrased: Period of Attempted Adjustment to Modern European Ideas. During this epoch Ottoman sovereigns were facing a situation in which they could take their choice between complete destruction, or a serious attempt to join 64 CONSTANTINOPLE TO-DAY the European family of nations in deed as well as in name. A full statement concerning these two epochs would lead on the one hand to studies In the sources of Ottoman culture, and on the other to studies of the efforts of Ottoman sov- ereigns and people toward Internal reorganization. Both of these subjects are vitally related to the social life of Con- stantinople to-day. 5. Sources of Ottoman Culture The social characteristics of Ottoman culture present a striking contrast to the ideals and practices of the dominant types of culture In the West. One who lives among the Turks cannot but feel that he Is in another world of thought. Points of view, standards of action, habits of thought, and presuppositions regarding propriety and custom seem very strange. To say that the main differences are those of re- ligion, language, and social inheritance, is true enough, but that statement does not carry one very far. Foreigners in Constantinople all too often act as if the people they find here, and not they themselves, with their Western customs and social traditions and cultural presuppositions, are "strange." It is easy to fail to appreciate the fact that people here have had a great complex past. In contrast with which the history of European and American culture is simple. A foreigner's first duty is to make a serious effort to understand the sources and characteristics of his new cultural environment. A real effort to understand would tend to make hasty and unkind misjudgments less frequent. There are good reasons, for Instance, why the Ottoman Turk has loved war and conquest. He has never been afraid to shed blood. The old Tatar habit of rough and ready rule made conquest the life of a nation. "A Turkish tribe could maintain a political organization and a compact grouping only by war; without benefits from pillage and HISTORICAL SETTING 66 tributes, it would be obliged to dissolve and to disperse by clans, whose factions would group themselves anew, and form another nation about the strongest man." ^ The Tatar is the "rough rider" of Asiatic history, strong in the virtues of life in the open, where to live means to fight. How readily this trait and its consequences can be traced in Ottoman history! The first ten sultans built up a won- derful empire by conquest. War was their official business. And let us note that it was not necessarily war against Christian nations. Persia and Egypt, Moslem nations, suffered just as well as Hungary and Servia. When the Ottoman sultans ceased to make conquest their first con- cern, and prepare for it accordingly, the Empire began to dissolve. The only way to keep an army contented is to give it something hard to do. It is not easy to demobilize a victorious army. The Ottoman armies for centuries were never completely demobilized and were eager to set forth each spring for new fields to conquer. To refuse to support them or to attempt to restrain them was folly, if a sultan wanted to maintain his empire. Closely connected with the love of conquest, for which clans would group themselves around a promising leader, is the tendency which magnifies leadership and minimizes individual initiative. "Reversing the customs of other peoples, with the Turks it is the king who feeds his people, who clothes them, who pays them." ^ Initiative in Con- stantinople rests with the Government. It has always been so. The Government is there to do for its people what should be done; the people are not there to do for them- selves. How often in this or that social question, people in Constantinople make it clear that they feel wholly de- pendent upon the Government! Public opinion or private ' Cahun, "Introduction a Thistoire de I'Asie : Turcs et Mongols," p. 79. Quoted by Lybyer, "The Ottoman Empire during the Time of Suleiman," p. 19. ' Cf. Cahun, as above. 66 CONSTANTINOPLE TO-DAY initiative seems out of place. "What is the Government for?" the bewildered ask. Western tradition makes private initiative and public opinion largely responsible for many vital functions. "How little may we leave the Government to do and not how much," is the Western motto. This has never been true of Central Asia. The social obverse of this is noteworthy. The Turk knows how to obey. Given a strong central government, discipline whether of army or people is an easy matter. Speaking of the great Grand Vizier Keupriilii Mohammed, Hutton observes : "With him began the age of the Great Viziers, who for a time revived the glory of the Turks. He showed with severity that he Intended to rule; and the Turks have always submitted to one who knows how to command." ^ There are good reasons also why tradition should be the strongest social force among Turks in Constantinople to-day. Tradition rules in trade, tradition rules in religion; its hold on manners and customs has been slightly weakened during the last century, but Turks as a whole are backward- and not forward-looking. One might as well propose to stand on the island of Yap, and with a ten-foot fishing rod catch all the fish in the Pacific In one year, as to propose to revolutionize the rule of tradition In Constantinople in the same space of time. "The Tatar, possessed of the tenacious conservatism of a primitive people, predisposed the Otto- man to a close adherence to custom — to the doctrine that when a thing has been done once in a certain way, it should always thereafter be done in the same way." ^ This fact constitutes at once a blessing and a peril. The social worker who fails to consider it a blessing overlooks the necessity for cohesive forces, and he who fails to consider it as a peril will soon slip into the quagmire of the worship of things as they are. Many of the features of Ottoman life, which cannot be * Hutton, "Constantinople," p. i86. 'Lybyer, "The Ottoman Empire during the Time of Suleiman," p. 19. HISTORICAL SETTING 57 dwelt upon here, spring from their Tatar ancestry. When the Tatars came into contact with Persia and Arabia they gradually through centuries acquired a vast new kingdom of thought and habit. Their language was greatly enriched, they accepted Mohammedanism as their religion, and they began to develop a system of law. The Persian especially gave the Turk ideas of government. For instance, the Ottoman system of allowing subjects who adhere to an alien religion to govern themselves in large measure, is a Persian legacy of the greatest social consequences in Con- stantinople to-day. The Arabs have given the Ottoman Turks a complete religious, legal, and social system. One cannot begin to comprehend life in Constantinople to-day, without digging into the world of Mohammedan thought and Mohammedan tradition taken straight from the Arabs. The Ottoman Turks learned the method of the Janissary system from the Seljuk Turks at Bagdad. This has had a most astounding social influence on the life of Constan- tinople. It has made human life seem cheap. From the Byzantine Empire the Ottoman Turks learned many of the refinements of ceremony and governmental or- ganization. The feudal system, and ideals in stately archi- tecture as revealed in St. Sophia, were other important gifts. Thus with Constantinople as a center of Ottoman life, the present has grown out of a far-flung, complex past. An excursion now and then into its byways helps a modern, foreign resident of the city to be more just and charitable in his judgments and more hopeful in his outlook. 6. "Our Spirit." A Modern Ottoman Interpretation of Ottoman History ^ "In order to be able to govern a community well, it Is necessary to have understood it; in order to understand it, ^Translation of an article entitled "Our Spirit," written by Jenab Sheha- beddin Bey, Professor of the Turkish Language and Literature in the Uni- versity of Stamboul. This article appeared in a Constantinople daily paper, Peyam-Sabah {^Morning Ne