diplomats when their Turkish colleagues were in their cradles; which, as Ismet Pasha sometimes complains, "gives them no chance for a fair fight." But when I dined with them as his guests, there was no fighting; and our host, I felt, was very well qualified to promote friendly relations, by the cultured ease of his hospitality.
To my thinking, British "underlings" are very able men, and not pro-Russian as the Turks are disposed to fear. They were all anxious for peace, and quite sincerely eager to understand the nationalist point of view.
During the conference both M. Poincaré and M. Mussolini visited Lausanne and dined with Lord Curzon.
I have had many talks about the Patriarch, whom Mustapha Kemal declares must be removed: "He must be got rid of, with the other relics of Byzantium!" The problem is especially hard on Turkey, because it arose from what ought to have been considered the great strength of the nation, though—in this case—it has been exaggerated into weakness, her immense tolerance for other people's religion.
When the Byzantians conquered the Turkish tribes who had emigrated into Asia Minor, they compelled the tribesmen to be converted, and join the Orthodox Church. The Bible, and all their prayers, were translated into Turkish; whence, without design, the Turkish Orthodox Church came into being. When, later, under the Seldjoucides and Osmanli, Anatolia passed into Moslem hands, no attempt was made to interfere with the Orthodox religion of the people.
It was only when the Ottomans ruled in Constantinople and the Sultans used their growing power to support the Greek Patriarch, that the Anatolians began to see they were being manœuvred into the power of the Helenes. During the war, the Patriarch's intrigues became more daring and more obvious; until Papas Eftim Effendi proposed in the Assembly that Fanar should be separated from the Orthodox Church, and
