THE SPIRIT OF CHANGE IN SOUTHERN EUROPE.

BY JAMES HENRY SKENE, Esq.

In the many changes of ministry which have taken place in Greece, there have been at least forty persons, not natives of the kingdom, who have held the high position of secretary of state; and the judges, the other civil functionaries, and the employés of the public offices, were for the most part Greeks of Turkey, by reason of their better education, until the late decision of their chamber of representatives turned them out, in order to put Moreotes or other natives in their places, who were unworthy of trust, and incapable of fulfilling the duties required. The best and highest officers of the Greek army are either foreign Philhellenes, Roumeliotes from Souli and other places of European Turkey, Albanians, or young men from Constantinople, who have been educated as cadets at the military schools of Germany. The navy, it is true, possesses many natives of celebrity; but Hydra has already been named as an honourable exception to this statement; and, moreover, there are several of the most distinguished naval officers who are Ipsariotes, or Greeks of the other Turkish islands. There are some poets and authors of great merit in Greece; and yet not one of them is of native origin. The professors of the University of Athens are about thirty in number, and are, or ought to be, the most remarkable for their acquirements in their respective branches of learning and science; but they are almost all considered as foreigners, although belonging to the race of Greeks. The best lawyers, physicians, or surgeons, if not Germans, are Ionians or Smyrniotes; and the island of Scio provides the principal merchants and bankers. Of the artisans, the majority are lonians, Smyrniotes, or Vlachs from Epirus. The Cyclades furnish the carpenters and masons, who are native free Greeks; but the migrating craftsmen of the Turkish provinces also spread all over the Greek kingdom, and most of the shepherds are Vlachs. The blacksmiths in general are gipsies; the oil-pressers are chiefly from Aivali or Cydonia in Asia Minor; many of the gardeners are Sciotes for Maltese; and most of the common labourers are Bulgarians, with the exception of the streetporters, who are Maltese.

Hence it appears that the native free Greeks, generally peasants, do not contribute much, if we except in agriculture and other country occupations, to the prosperity of the kingdom; so that a general emigration from Greece of the so-considered foreign Greeks would be as detrimental to her as it would be profitable to their native localities.

Not only is it fortunate that Thessaly, Epirus, and Macedonia were not within the line of separation, as events have now most unexpectedly proved, but it is almost to be regretted that the kingdom of Greece had not been confined to the Morea. The unity of the government would have been more complete; the disputes between the Moreotes and the Roumeliotes would have been avoided; and, supposing that the failure had still occurred, Attica, Boeotia, Etolia, Acarnania, Phocis, Locris, Phthiotis, and the beautiful island of Eubea, would have had a second chance.

An appeal to England or to Europe in favour of the provinces which

have remained under the Turks, although Christians, and notwithstanding that they have powerfully co-operated in the struggle for independence, may possibly be met by the expressions of dislike and disgust which have of late been constantly lavished on the character of the Greeks. The accounts of them given by most travellers have put an end to the admiration and consequent sympathy which were felt towards them during their combat for independence; and it cannot be denied that there are some grounds for the opinions so spread. Formerly, everything that was Greek derived a halo from their ancient fame and history; whereas now, the bare truth becomes even more repulsive than it really deserves to be, from the unmasked selfishness and venality which exist. But the fact of some of them not being patterns of morality and honesty, does not deprive the remainder of their claims as being unfortunate. Their sufferings in the Turkish provinces are real, and the remedy is possible; and these two statements, if they are admitted as axioms, should suffice to induce those who have it in their power to seek out the means of relieving them.

It is not necessary to arrogate for the Greeks any very eminent virtues and excellences of character, to entitle them to compassion for the positive and palpable misery which, as rayahs to the Turk, they evidently undergo. It is taking the effect for the cause, to assert that the Greeks should obtain no sympathy so long as they remain deceitful, treacherous, and selfish: on the contrary, this very turpitude is a claim on the kind offices of humanity; for it is the natural result of their degraded position, and of the wrongs which they have long endured, and still suffer under their infidel oppressors. These vices are the only arms left to them with which they can avoid the cruel exactions to which they are subjected; and they might reasonably look to brother Christians to aid them in throwing off the cause as well as the effect of this baseness, which obscures their better qualities, by placing them above the necessity of resorting to it in self-defence.

Allowing, however, for the sake of argument, that the Turk is more honest and worthy than the Greek, this can be no reason for permitting the one to oppress and grind down the other; or that fellow-Christians, more fortunate than the Greek in the enjoyment of civilisation and independence, should not be roused to take the part of the oppressed against the oppressor. Without going to the chivalrous extreme of a crusade against Islam, liberal nations and enlightened statesmen can still do much towards the bettering of the actual condition of the Greeks who have been compelled to remain as Ottoman subjects; and researches might be instituted as to the means of alleviating at least their burden, if the yoke of servitude cannot be altogether removed, notwithstanding their brave efforts in the cause.

When we talk of the heroes of the Greek Revolution, their protectors may well blush when they reflect that, in establishing the independence of the present limited kingdom, they left enslaved the very provinces which furnished two-thirds of the combatants in that cause; and most of the leaders whose names were distinguished, with the exception of a few, such as Colocotroni, Mavromichali, and Botzari. Many of the distinguished characters, and among others Karaiskaki, Mavrocordato, Coletti, Ypsilanti, and Odysseus, besides thousands less conspicuous, either died in Greece or now live there as exiles.

Their native places and their kindred are still oppressed, and the more so, perhaps, on account of their own exploits. Have these, therefore, no claim now on the friendly hand which gave the signal for action in the Bay of Navarino? The events of that day filled the Greeks with joy, and confidence in the kind intentions of the allied powers towards them, and in their friendly assistance after they had so effectually destroyed the enemy's force which was destined for their extirpation. These powers constituted themselves the permanent protectors of the new state, and proceeded to negotiate with the sultan for the determination of the frontier line. The Macedonians, Epirotes, and Thessalians, who had been engaged in the war, indulged in the anticipation of the just fruits of their labours, which they had every apparent reason to expect, when their hopes became suddenly blasted by the publication of a protocol depriving them of liberty, country, and home. All their long sacrifices proved nugatory, and their trust in the protecting powers delusive.

Under these disastrous circumstances they repaired in crowds to Greece, trusting to the clause in the protocol, which secured to them at least an asylum there; and many others, who had not taken an active part in the War of Independence, settled also within the boundary of the new kingdom as a common refuge for the Greek nation in general; thus bringing to the country a mass of talent, enterprise, commercial industry and pecuniary funds. Those possessing the latter purchased land or embarked in trade, while others exercised such professions as their superior education fitted them for; and the necessary and natural consequence of this was, that the progress of the kingdom of Greece was far more accelerated than it could have been had it been left to the mere force of its native resources. But although fully understanding and appreciating these advantages, the native Greeks, ever devoted to their sordid interests, now repulsed the strangers, as they chose to call them, and threw back their betrayed country to the state of intellectual indigence and political insignificance from which it was on the point of emerging.

The reign of ignorance and prejudice in the persons of the Palicari chiefs, and the illiterate primates of the Morea, was renewed when it had already begun to disappear and give place to that of education and enlightenment; for everything that was modern and polished at Athens was owing to the new class of Greeks who had settled there; and many of them having been brought up in the different capitals of Europe, strove to raise the country to an approximate level with the nations of the West. Greece has receded to the state of incipient civilisation in which the declaration of her independence found her; and however much might with confidence have been expected from the unity of the Greek nation, it has again been severed anew.

A remarkable illustration of the character of the Palicari chiefs, and of that which they gave to their chamber of deputies, was furnished by one of them bearing the name of General Grizioti. Addressing Mr. Mavrocardoto, a Fanariote gentleman of good family, a scholar and man of high principle, in the assembly of representatives, he called him TUXodiάKTηs, or an adventurer. Another member rose and answered, "If that adventurer had not come to Greece, you would have remained what you were before the revolution, a xaσáñŋs, or butcher," which was in fact the previous calling of the general.

The Fanariotes, or Greeks of Constantinople, who have settled in the

free kingdom, have exercised a greater influence on the fortunes of the new country than any other class of the nation; and yet they are considered as strangers. They are the most civilised and best educated of the higher ranks of society at Athens, but they are generally accused of being addicted to diplomatic chicane; the Peloponnesians are also considered as very intriguing the Roumeliotes, or inhabitants of continental Greece, are the most warlike; and the Hydriotes, Spezziotes, and in general the Greeks of the Cyclades, are the most honest and industrious. There are likewise Greeks of Smyrna, Corfu, and other countries, not included in liberated Hellas, who have played prominent parts in the political affairs of the kingdom, but they are not in so great a number as those of Turkey in Europe. The Fanariotes are entitled to the first place from their superior learning and talents, as well as from the important services which they have rendered to their adopted country. They are the descendants of the Byzantines of the Lower Empire; and, having remained in a part of the city of Constantinople which was allotted to them by their Turkish conquerors, they devoted themselves to a peaceful life of study. Too proud to occupy themselves in trade, and being excluded from the other resources which were open to the Turks, they withdrew from society and lived in perfect seclusion. The patriarch and the archbishops of the Eastern Church also retired to the Fanar, and with the remnants of the imperial families and the most distinguished of the Greeks they formed a community which, if not totally independent, enjoyed at least an undisturbed exercise of the Christian religion.

The Turks, being prohibited by the Mahommedan laws from learning any language except those in use among the followers of the Prophet, soon found the impossibility of carrying on the public business with European states, which their domiciliation on the shores of the Bosphorus entailed on them, without the assistance of interpreters, and agents better versed than themselves in the subtle science of diplomacy. A total ignorance of the principles of civilised administration thus led them into frequent embarrassments, which their novel position rendered dangerous to their prospects of permanently retaining possession of their brilliant conquest. The necessity of organising and supporting a naval force especially placed them in a dilemma, from which their inadequate knowledge and skill in nautical affairs was incapable of extricating them; and another difficulty which tended to weaken the unstable fabric of the Ottoman power, was the incompatible difference of character and habits which existed between the conquered people and their victorious rulers. The Greeks, active, cunning, and peculiarly remarkable for the keen perspicuity which enables them to penetrate the dispositions and discover the weak points of others, were more than a match for the dull and phlegmatic Turks. The craft and acuteness of the former not only eluded the weight of the superior strength with which they had to combat, but found the means of overreaching their oppressors in the many and heavy exactions demanded of them. The Turks were, therefore, induced to conciliate the Fanariotes, who were universally esteemed, and who were the only subjects of the Ottoman empire combining the necessary qualifications. Accustomed to rule the volatile and wayward inhabitants of European Turkey they proved most valuable councillors, while their knowledge of Christian languages facilitated the diplomatic relations existing between the Porte and the foreign ambassadors. The first ap

pointment of a Greek to the important functions of dragoman or interpreter was in the latter end of the seventeenth century; and it was soon followed by that of secretary to the navy. In these high offices the Fanariotes acquired the favour of the Turks, and were progressively elevated in dignities and privileges until the year 1730, when the sovereignty of the tributary provinces of Wallachia and Moldavia was conferred on them. They retained the absolute monarchy of these countries for nearly a century, and only lost it at the commencement of the Greek revolution, which diverted their attention to the more worthy objects of the liberation of their country, and its organisation as an independent kingdom.

The administration of the Fanariote princes of Wallachia and Moldavia was of the most tyrannical and self-interested nature, extorting from the peasants and the Boyards, or nobles, a taxation totally out of proportion with the resources of the country, and thus enriching themselves at the expense of their subjects, whom they treated with the same despotic injustice which they experienced in their turn at the hands of the Turks.

The nominations to these productive governments were obtained by dint of intrigue and flattery; and the reigning prince was only enabled to retain his crown on his head, and consequently the latter on his shoulders, by the vigilance of a diplomatic agent at Constantinople, who was intrusted with the dangerous task of watching the motions of the Divan, and opposing countermines to the frequently attempted mines and manoeuvres of his patron's rivals. The prince provided for their numerous relations by appointing them to the highest and most lucrative offices in the provinces, which thus formed the principal source of their riches. At the fall of a Hospodar, or reigning prince, the Fanariote functionaries would return to the Fanar at Constantinople with the spoils of the Boyards; and, being comparatively civilised, they were wont to indulge in a life of the most splendid luxury, which was only checked by the dread of attracting too much notice from the sultan; as the inevitable consequence would be a prison, the doors of which could not be thrown open otherwise than by an exorbitant ransom. They were of studious habits, and were frequently distinguished by profound learning, though it partook generally of an excessively scholastic nature, as described in the historical romances of "Anastasius" and the "Count of Paris," by Mr. Hope and Sir Walter Scott.

The descendants of this remarkable race are all to be found in Greece, and they occupy a pre-eminent position in the scientific professions, although they are treated as strangers. Many of their young men have been educated at Paris and in Germany, where they became imbued with democratical principles; and they constitute the centre and focus of the the spirit of change in Greece, for their ruling passion is the extension of King Otho's dominions.

The Greeks of the Fanar have therefore been deprived of their promised asylum. Is it not then incumbent on those who prepared it for them to endeavour to devise some means of making up for so disastrous a loss? Have they not a claim on the subscribers of the protocol? The failure of the intended advantage is certainly not owing to them, and the high protecting powers are undoubtedly free from all responsibility or blame in this; but will an appeal to them made under these circumstances remain unheard? Would it not be wisdom on the part of the great powers to satisfy the desire of change, as far as prudence will admit, before the