PREFACE. Xiii whom I refer in the body of this work, I may be allowed to point out that my own object is different from that of any of them. AVhile occupied during my residence in Constanti- nople in the study of Byzantine history, I arrived at the cour elusion that the diversion of the Fourth Crusade caused the introduction of the Turks into Europe, that the destruction of the Empire of the New Rome was then virtually accom- plished, notwithstanding its struggle for existence after the recapture of the city by the Greeks in 1261, and that this great European calamity was only brought about by a series of cir- cumstances which rendered the New Eome at the moment of the attack by the Crusaders exceptionally weak. I came to the conclusion that the fall of Constantinople in 1204 was the necessary prelude to the Ottoman conquest in 1453, and that the political consequences of the Latin conquest thus place it among the most important events in European history. My object is to call attention to the political aspect of the conquest of Constantinople, to point out that the empire had fought continuously, and in the main successfully, for one hundred and fifty years against the forces of Asia, and had spent its strength partly in this struggle and partly in educat- ing the races which had flowed into the empire, and that it was only when it was struck in the rear that the New Home was unable to defend itself ; that the conquest of the empire was the final blow given after a long series of attacks by ene- mies on every side, and that the capture of Constantinople by the Crusaders was the cause which brought about the fall of the Eoman Empire in the East, and rendered its ultimate capture by the Turks both certain and easy. The conquest of Constantinople was the first great blunder committed by the West in dealing with the Eastern question. That question really means whether Asiatic influences and an Asiatic re- ligion are to be tolerated in Europe. "Europe for the Euro-
