is wanted to start and keep up a modern Government, and so far the Turks have produced eminent generals and an occasional diplomatist-although most of their diplomatists have been of other races-but hardly a single great administrator. Midhat shared the fate of a reformer who was before his time; and no second Midhat has yet appeared. Already it is evident that the trade of Smyrna cannot be revived without the presence of a Christian population there, so that massacres and expulsions are not only moral crimes but economic blunders. History is herein repeating itself; the destruction of 'Giaour Smyrna ' in 1922 is a financial loss similar to that caused by the massacres of the mastic-island of Chios in 1822. Yet a hundred years have not taught 'the unchanging East' this lesson.

'There is a soul of good in things evil,' and the return of the Turks to Europe, temporary as we believe it to be, may prove to have been not without some benefit, if it only convinces the Balkan States of the necessity for putting their own houses in order in face of the common enemy. This is especially the case with Greece, the country which has lost most by this rapid revision of the map of the Sèvres treaty. It is high time in their own interest that the Greeks should bury the hatchet of civil dissension-always the bane of Greek history, ancient, medieval, and modern. Royalists and Republicans should unite for the common defence of what remains, forget the past, and work for the future. This should be all the easier, because M. Venizelos has plainly stated that he has no intention of returning to political life in Greece, but will be content to serve the interests of his country by remaining abroad. As ex-King Constantine is dead, the two protagonists of the civic drama are removed from the stage, and with their disap pearance much personal bitterness has vanished from public life-for M. Papanastasiou, the first Republican Premier, had no past and no enemies. In her external relations Greece has already made further concessions to Jugoslavia at the port of Salonika, thus remedying an old-standing Jugoslav grievance. Bulgarian aspirations to an outlet on the Egean, awarded at Bucharest in 1913 but taken away at Sèvres in 1920, are more difficult to gratify; but, in view of possible

urko-Bulgarian combinations, some amicable arrangenent between Greece and Bulgaria seems desirable. There are signs that the Greeks are anxious for the olution of their pending questions with Italy and the talians of theirs with Greece, foremost among them hat of the Dodekanese. Signor Brambilla, the new talian Minister in Athens, is credited with the desire, ot shown by his predecessors since the pre-war mission f that cultured and charming Philhellene, the late Marchese Carlotti, of making Italy and her repreentative popular among the Greeks. M. Karapanos, he new Greek Minister in Rome, whose selection was xcellent for he knows the country and speaks Italian well-may be expected, whenever a favourable moment rrives, to signalise this, his second, occupancy of the Greek Legation there by discussing Italo-Greek differnces with Signor Mussolini, who, if no Philhellene, at east possesses the great merit of knowing what he wants and of being able to enforce even an unpopular solution upon his recalcitrant followers. Moreover, a Greek naval programme which should include an adequate force of submarines-two have already been ordered-should make the Hellenic Republic a neighbour calculated to inspire respect in those Italian statesmen who know the sterling qualities of the Greek sailors and he great natural possibilities of the indented coasts of Greece-both of them factors only equalled by those of Jugoslavia Dalmatia. Possibly, one day Italy and Greece may collaborate in the pacific penetration of Asia Minor -a result economically worth more than Italy gets out of the thirteen Southern Sporades. British interests are to see Italian and Greek differences amicably settled on a permanent basis, which, while safeguarding Italian amour propre, will recognise the incontrovertible ethnological claims of Hellenism.

But, above all, the events culminating in the treaty of Lausanne should teach the Greeks to rely rather upon themselves than upon any Great Power, however much of a Philhellene its Premier may be. Byron warned them in Don Juan' to

6 Trust not for freedom to the Franks,'

and he was a true prophet. The brilliant success of

1912 was due to their own work; the failure of 1922, like that of 1897, was partly due to the exaggerated hopes if of foreign backing. There is apt to be an erroneous, natural, conception in the Near East that, because the Eastern question perforce occupies the foremost place in the public controversies of Athens, Belgrade, and Sofia, this elusive problem forms likewise the constant occupation of politicians in London, whose attention, on the contrary, it engages only spasmodically, in the rare intervals of their domestic controversies. The calf of the leg,' as Theokritos wrote, 'is farther off than the knee'; the Dardanelles are more remote from Westminster than Ditchborough. All friends of Greece, too, must deplore, but face, the fact of the lamentable decline of classical education in England—I am informed that at Byron's old school last spring only sixteen boys were learning Greek. This is, unfortunately, likely to diminish interest in Greek affairs among those cultured classes, who have not yet realised that the Greece of MM. Papanastasiou and Sophoules may be worth studying as well as that of Pericles and Socrates, whereas we do not confine our reading of English history exclusively to the golden age of Elizabeth. But Greek scholars are not necessarily interested in Greece. Professors of ancient Greek history and literature are not always well posted in modern Greek affairs: indeed, one of the most famous of them, an Englishman of European reputation and a delegate to the League of Nations, asked the present writer, who had drawn his attention at Geneva to the sacrifice of the heroic Cheimarra, what and where that place was. To him the Acroceraunian Mountains were only interesting as a poetic trope; the secular liberties of their inhabitants under their hereditary archegós, were 'post classical' and, therefore, outside his period.' Byzantine studies, indeed, which give the clue to much of Greek policy, are still only in their infancy in England. Besides, as we have seen in a recent instance, not all Byzantine professors are Philhellenes. All these things show that Greece should rely above all on herself; and, if she be united, she will not rely on herself in vain.

To sum up, the Powers can scarcely regard with satisfaction the result of the fighting in Asia Minor and

Che Conference at Lausanne. They have not thereby Increased their prestige; their solemn treaty has been cut to pieces by the sword of a Turkish commander; heir diplomatists have had to wait on the good pleasure of a dilatory Turkish negotiator. The Balkan States are once more alarmed; Greece has been deprived, not only of Eastern Thrace but of all that M. Venizelos had bestowed upon her in Asia Minor with perhaps too avish or too hasty a hand, for it is possible that his Overseas creation presupposed his presence for its preservation. But historical students cannot accept the return of the Turks as final. The whole trend of the ast two centuries is against it, and there will probably be written one day another chapter in blood upon the plains of Thrace before the Turks at last leave Europe for ever.

WILLIAM MILLER.

Art. 8.-SPORT AND SPORTSMANSHIP.

RECENT events have brought into prominence certain questions connected with a very interesting but by no means simple subject: namely, Sport, and the kind of behaviour of those who take part in it, known in this country as Sporting. It is a common expression that so-and-so is a 'real sportsman': common, that is, not among those groups of our fellow-countrymen who scrupulously weigh the exact meaning of every word before they utter it, but rather among those who may be described as men of action rather than of words: men with more belief in intuition than in ratiocination; men more at home in the smoking-room of a West-end club than in the chamber-wherever it may be-devoted to the proceedings of the Aristotelian Society. Among such critics of men and things the expression 'a sportsman' would always be one of high praise; and may not unfrequently be bestowed on one who is giving his energies neither to field sports, such as shooting and hunting, nor to games of ball. Similarly, 'unsportsmanlike would be applied to certain kinds of conduct with almost as much freedom and over nearly as wide an area as the word 'ungentlemanlike.' Most of the derivatives of the word Sport in many of their connotations can hardly be said yet to belong to the most dignified kind of English diction. We can hardly imagine our greatest orators, sticklers for loftiness and purity of speech in public and private, using any of them. Nor can we remember that among their warmest admirers the term a 'real sportsman' was ever applied to Mr Gladstone or Lord Beaconsfield. Nevertheless, it is not only interesting but desirable at the present time that the signification of the adjectives 'sporting' and 'sportsmanlike' should be considered with a view to their being used with some approach to precision. We need hardly say that in addressing ourselves to the task we forbear from passing even the most cursory judgment on the questions that have come up in connexion with the Olympic Games.

Clearly some rough definition of the substantive Sport is required before the adjectives can be analysed. As soon as man subjugated or extirpated those wild creatures which were a constant menace to society,