one of the obstacles which lie in the path of the european when he wants to arrive at the true opinion of the oriental is that the european, especially if he be an official, is almost always in a hurry. if, he thinks, the oriental has anything to say to me, why does he not say it and go away? i am quite prepared to listen most attentively, but my time is valuable and i have a quantity of other business to do; i must, therefore, really ask him to come to the point at once. this frame of mind is quite fatal if one wishes to arrive at the truth. in order to attain this object, the oriental must be allowed to tell his story and put forward his ideas in his own way; and his own way is generally a lengthy, circuitous, and very involved way. but if any one has the patience to listen, he will sometimes be amply rewarded for his pains.
i once asked a high moslem authority how he reconciled the fact that an apostate could now no longer be executed with the alleged immutability of the sacred law. the casuistry of his reply would have done honor to a spanish inquisitor. the kadi, he said, does not recognise any change in the law. he would, in the case of an apostate, pronounce sentence of death according to the law, but it was for the secular authorities to carry out the sentence. if they failed in their duty, the sin of disobeying the law would lie on their heads. cases of apostasy are very rare, but during my tenure of office in egypt, i had to interfere once or twice to protect from maltreatment moslems who had been converted to christianity by the american missionaries.
the reasons why islam as a social system has been a complete failure are manifold.
first and foremost, islam keeps women in a position of marked inferiority. in the second place, islam, speaking not so much through the koran as through the traditions which cluster round the koran, crystallises religion and law into one inseparable and immutable whole, with the result that all elasticity is taken away from the social system. if to this day an egyptian goes to law over a question of testamentary succession, his case is decided according to the antique principles which were laid down as applicable to the primitive society of the arabian peninsula in the seventh century.
—lord cromer
in “modern egypt.”
no other country is so hard to understand, in its political, intellectual, industrial, and religious conditions, as the turkish empire. this difficulty is augmented by the fact that no one of these conditions can be even measurably understood without a knowledge of the others. it is this which accounts for the widely divergent opinions expressed by casual travelers, and makes well-nigh impossible an explanation of turkish phenomena to one who as yet knows nothing of the country and people, of actual conditions and the reasons for them.
turkey differs in almost every respect from all other countries. its government has no parallel either in fundamental principles of organization or in methods of administration. it is unique in its religious beliefs, unexampled in its educational conditions, and incalculable in its dealings with moral and religious questions. we entertain notions of right and wrong that are generally accepted by the nations of christendom as well as by many others not so classed. these conceptions constitute the fundamental principles of international usage and form the basis for what we call international law. to conclude, however, that these generally accepted principles will command recognition in turkey as the basis for its international relations is to invite disappointment. turkey recognizes no such law as having force in its empire.
in the dealings of one nation with another it is customary to regard the verbal pledge of a sovereign or cabinet minister as worthy of credence, and a basis for negotiations, at least, if not for final [pg 12] adjustment. this notion must be laid aside as purely academic and visionary, in dealing with turkey.
in view of such facts, it is plain that no phase of turkish life or affairs can be clearly understood without considerable knowledge of the country and its history, the government and its administrative processes, the diversified religions of its people, and their interdependence. such a knowledge is especially necessary to anything like an intelligent comprehension of the problems and methods of mission work in the empire of turkey.
all the chapters of this book except the last were written as they stand, some months before the promulgation of the constitution on july 24, 1908. a reading of this manuscript suggests no alterations in the light of recent facts except the addition of a statement of the immediate events that led to the overthrow of the old régime and the inauguration of the new order. obviously only the transitions can be recorded here. the new constitutional government has yet to demonstrate its stability.
