In Constantinople one does not fail to meet Greeks and Armenians who are bright and entertaining and obliging, or Mohammedans who are noble and courteous¹, and thoughtful enough to make their acquaintance an acquisition. But every study of the people in mass is a revelation of arrested development, absence of initiative, and general uselessness by reason of narrow selfishness. The city, and with it the millions to whom the city is model, seems hostile to what is best in the world’s work. High-sounding phrases of lofty principle are heard in the city. Custom provides for this much of concession² to the sensibilities of others. But the centuries seem to have frayed³ off the last semblance⁴ of meaning from the words. To quote a remark of a sage⁵ official in India which applies to the whole of Asia, “Whilst the mouth is proclaiming its enlightenment and progress, the body is waddling⁶ backward as fast as the nature of the ground will permit.” The bane of Constantinople is not solely⁷ poverty of resources; it is poverty of ideals.

—Henry Otis Dwight, LL. D.
in “Constantinople and its Problems.”

[Pg 93]

While the political and commercial importance of Constantinople is supreme⁸, when considered in relation to the Powers of Europe and the far East, this is insignificant⁹ in comparison with its religious importance in relation to the Mohammedan world. So far as we can learn, this fact did not receive large consideration at the time missions in Turkey were begun. The truth is that it did not then hold the commanding relations to the Mohammedans of other countries that it holds to-day. The present

分享到：