Let us see what ''Peace*' under Turkish rule really
meant and who is the real invader in this war. Here is
a very friendly and impartial witness — Sir Charles Elliot
— who paints for us the character of the Turk as an
** administrator'*:

The Turk in Europe has an overweening sense of his superiority,
and remains a nation apart, mixing little with the conquered popu-
lations, whose customs and ideas he tolerates, but makes little effort
to understand. The expression, indeed, " Turkey in Europe " means
indeed no more than "England in Asia," if used as a designation for
India. . . . The Turks have done little to assimilate the people
whom they have conquered, and still less, been assimilated by them.
In the larger part of the Turkish dominions, the Turks themselves
are in a minority. . . . The Turks certainly resent the dismember-



On Recent Events in Europe 391

ment of their Empire, but not in the sense in which the French resent
the conquest of Alsace-Lorraine by Germany. They would never
use the word "Turkey" or even its oriental equivalent, "The High
Country" in ordinary conversation. They would never say that
Syria and Greece are parts of Turkey which have been detached, but
merdy that they are tributaries which have become independent,
provinces once occupied by Turks where there are no Turks now.
