The Greeks in America

Introduction

The New American Series consists of studies of the following racial groups, together with a study of the Eastern Orthodox Churches :

Those studies, made under the auspices of the Interchurch World Movement, were undertaken to show, in brief outline, the social, economic and religious background, European or Asiatic, of each group and to present the experience — social, economic and religious — of the particular group in America, with special reference to the contact of the given people with religious institutions in America.

It was designed that the studies should be sympathetic but critical.

It is confidently believed that this series will help America to appreciate and appropriate the spiritual wealth represented by the vast body of New Americans, each group having its own peculiar heritage and potentialities ; and will lead Christian America, so far as she will read them, to become a better lover of mankind.

The writer, in each case, is a kinsman or has had direct and intimate relationship with the people, or group of peoples, presented. First hand knowledge and the ability to study and write from a deeply

Ti INTRODUCTION

sympathetic and broadly Christian viewpoint were primary conditions in the selection of the authors.

The author of this volume, Eev. J. P. Xenides, was born of Greek parents in CsBsarea, Asia Minor. His preparatory education was obtained in Asia Minor and Greece, his college course in Marsovan and his theological training at New College, Edinburgh. He taught for 20 years in Anatolia College and Marsovan Theological Seminary. He has traveled extensively in Greece and Asia Minor. He is secretary of the Greek Eelief Committee in New York. His nationality, education and work peculiarly fit him to write this book.

These manuscripts were published through the courtesy of the Interchurch World Movement with the cooperative aid of various denominational boards, through the Home Missions Council of America, and the Council of Women for Home Missions.

At this writing arrangements have been made for the publication of only six of the Series, namely: Czecho-Slovak, Greek, Italian, Magyar, Polish and Kussian, but other manuscripts will be published as soon as funds or advance orders are secured.

A patient review of all manuscripts, together with a checking up of facts and figures, has been made by the Associate Editor, Dr. Frederic A. Gould, to whom we are largely indebted for statistical and verbal accuracy. The editor is responsible for the general plan and scope of the studies and for questions of policy in the execution of this work.

Charles Hatch Seaes.

Preface

The subject of the present study is one dear to the writer's heart, and on which he has been brooding for years. Many statements express the outcome of his long experience as an educator and worker in the Greek Field in Asia Minor, Greece and the United States.

Valuable information was obtained from personal interviews and discussion of the topics treated here with prominent clergymen and laymen in the Greek communities in the United States. Among them, he would mention Archbishop Meletis of Athens; Bishop Alexander Kodostolou of New York ; Rev. J. Alexopoulos of Pittsburgh, Pa. ; Prof. Carrol Brown of the College of the City of New York; Prof. Theodore Ion, attorney and member of the Hellenic American Society, New York City; Mr. Frank W. Jackson, attorney and chairman of the Relief Committee for Greeks of Asia Minor ; Rev. Thos. Lacey of Brooklyn, N. Y.; Prof. A. E. Phoutrides of Harvard University; Rev. D. Callimahos of Brooklyn, N. Y.; M. Geo. Caranicholas, New York City; Dr. R. Demos of Harvard; Dr. S. I. Paul, Springfield, Mass.; representatives of the prominent Greek papers, especially Atlantis and National Herald, and many other friends and acquaintances.

As a speaker of the Near East Relief, the writer visited several of the outstanding Greek communities of the country, such as Boston, Lowell, Haverhill, Springfield, Holyoke, and Pittsfield, Mass.; Newark, Trenton, and Orange, N. J.; Albany, Troy,

vii viu PREFACE

Schenectady, Utica, Syracuse, Rochester, and Buffalo, K Y.; Erie, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, and S. Bethlehem, Pa. ; Washington, D. 0. ; Canton, Cleveland, Toledo, and Youngstown, Ohio; Detroit and Ann Arbor, Mich. ; and Chicago, HI. Local matters were observed and leaders interviewed at each place.

Questionnaires were sent out in the spring of 1920 to all the Priests, Greek Protestant pastors and other prominent orthodox leaders in different parts of America. Those who responded to the request supplied valuable, suggestive and informing material.

Among the various books and articles consulted, the following should be mentioned with grateful acknowledgment : Hellenism, or Greeks m America, by S. G. Canoutas, New York; Greek Immigration, by Prof. H. P. Fairchild, of N. Y. University; Greeks in America, by Rev. Thomas Burgess. Much valuable information was derived from the Atlantis and National Herald, as both give daily important and interesting news about the Greeks in America.

The writer would take this opportunity to thank warmly all the friends who gave time and attention to answering his questions and giving valuable help. He begs specially to thank Rev. Thos. Burgess of New York, who kindly read the manuscript and made many helpful and valuable suggestions. The present work was prepared in the spring of 1920 for the Literchurch World Movement. Owing to the discontinuance of that organization, its printing was delayed. Meanwhile— between the summer of 1920 and the end of 1921— such significant events took place in Greece and the JSTear East as to affect greatly conditions in the Greek conmiunities in America. Under the pressure of other duties the writer revised a number of paragraphs and added some new material to meet and explain the new conditions and changes.

PREFACE ix

The work is incomplete and sketchy, as there was no time to make a complete survey of the entire field and all did not answer the questionnaire. Still the ground covered is representative of the whole field and throws light on the entire subject under discussion.

J. P. X.

Contents

CHAPTER PAGE

I EUROPEAN BACKGROUND: . . ,, . 15

History and Racial Relationship ... 15

II Cliapter I EUROPEAN BACKGEOUND

HISTORY AND RACIAL RELATIONSHIP

Greeks and greater Greece. — The Greeks call themselves Hellenes and their country Hellas. They belong to the Aryan or Indo-European group of nations and have inhabited more than 3000 years the Grecian Peninsula and the islands surrounding it. Hellas was wherever Greeks lived. So there was and is to-day a greater Greece extending to Macedonia, Thrace and Western Asia Minor, characteristically Greek, from time immemorial, in language, customs, manners, religion and folklore.

Greek colonies. — The Greeks, like the Phoenicians of old, and the British in modern times, were a seafaring, trading and colonizing people. Since the sixth century B. C, there have been Greek colonies all along the coasts of the Bosphorus and the ^gean, Marmora and Black Seas, which regions continue to be Greek in character, speech and influence.

Spread of Greek Influence. — Greek influence and colonization were further spread through the ex^ pedition of Alexander the Great (334-323 B. C.) into Asia Minor and the further East, comprising the whole Persian Empire. Alexander's policy to bring the East into relationship with the West was effectively continued by his successors, especially the

Seleucidse in Syria and the Ptolemies in Egypt. Thus wider areas came under the spell of Hellenism in Asia and many different races and people were Hellenized.

Connections between the ancient and modern Greece. — There has been much valuable time and space wasted with discussions as to the physical descent of the modem, from the ancient Greeks, or the connection between them. The Greek race has never ceased to exist in history, so that there must at least be some descendants of the ancient, among the modern Greeks. And it is equally true that many races and people in Asia Minor and elsewhere have been thoroughly assimilated and Hellenized. All the people bearing the name of Greek at present are imbued with the same national consciousness, and cherish the same national ideals. They are Hellenic in speech, manners, customs, religion, folklore, and temperament. The modern Greeks present the same traits and characters, intellectual and moral, as characterized the ancient. ^ ' There can be no doubt that spiritually the modern Greeks are the direct inheritors of the ancients. A familiarity with the modern people brings countless illustrations of the similarity of thought and character between the old and the new'* (Professor H. P. Fairchild). ^^In the Greeks who seek our shores and those of whom Homer sang or whom Aristophanes caricatured, there is the same alertness of mind, inventiveness and plausibility, the same liveliness of disposition, the same courtesy and hospitality to strangers, the same capacity for selfsacrifice, the same love of adventure and readiness to take a chance, the same delight in haggling over a bargain, and the same proneness to disputation often running into dissension'' (Professor William Cole, Immigrant Races in Massachusetts: The Greeks),

Romans spread Hellenism. — As students of history know, though Eome conquered Greece physically, she was conquered by her captive intellectually — '^the captured took captives of their captors." The Eomans spread Greek ideas, language and civilization far and wide as missionaries of Greek culture. It is indeed remarkable how the Eastern Eoman, or Byzantine, Empire was thoroughly Hellenized, became Greek in reality, though continuing Eoman in name. Its long rule of 1,000 years constitutes one of the most significant periods of Grecian history. In order to understand the modern Greek in his church and theology, customs and superstition, we must study the Byzantine history. The modem Greek church is a fine picture of Byzantine times — especially in architecture, painting, ritual and religious ideas and usages.

Fall of Constantinople. — During the Dark Ages Constantinople was the main center of learning, education, and Hellenic civilization. It is needless to remind the reader of the connection between the Fall of Constantinople (1453 A. D.) and the Eenaissance or the revival of learning in Europe.

Turkish conquest and oppression. — Through the Turkish invasion into Greek Territories, especially the conquest of Constantinople (1453 A.D.) there begins the real Dark Ages of Hellenism. For four centuries, or more, the Greeks were subjected to untold oppression and persecution. The Turkish rule in Greek territories — in fact, wherever the Turk set his foot — ^meant age-long slavery, torture and martyrdom. Still in the midst of all the oppression and tyranny the Greeks kept the torch of Hellenic culture and Christian civilization burning, even though dimly, thus keeping alive the mtness for truth. It is indeed a matter of real wonder that Hellenism and Christianity were not wiped out entirely under Moslem tyranny. Though weakened, crippled, and even amputated in many parts, the church continued in life steadfastly and perseveringly, and through the church there survived the Hellenic people and ideas also.

War of Greek Independence. — As it was in the ark of the church that the Greek nation was preserved and kept alive, so it was through the representatives of the church that the banner of freedom was unfurled and the War of Greek Independence started, March 25 (O. S.), 1821 A.D.* For seven years (1821-27) the Greek people were engaged in an unequal struggle against the unscrupulous hordes of Turks (in Turkey) who were still quite able to inflict vengeance and death on the adventurous Greeks who dared to rise against the Sultan. The Greek Patriarch, as the head of the Greek people, was hanged at one of the gates of the Patriarchate at Phanar, Constantinople, which gate continues closed to the present day, and will be opened only when the Greek race is emancipated from the foreign yoke. Many bishops and other clergymen were executed also.

A fit parallel to the modern Armenian massacres, — Greeks were massacred in many places, including women and children. The massacres on the island of Chios (1822) were among the darkest of such outrages. Almost all the Greeks on the island were either killed or sold into slavery. Comparatively few escaped. The Greeks fought valiantly throughout the revolutionary period of seven years. In the first three years it seemed as if Greece had won. In three months the Turk was driven out of Peloponnesus and a provisional government established. The great fleet swept clean the seas, and everywhere brilliant deeds of Greek valor were recorded. But the weakened Sultan called in the aid of his vassal,

* On the Day of Annunciation. This day continued to be the Greek Independence Day.

IbraMin Pasha of Egypt, who boasted he would reduce the whole of Peloponnesus into an Arabian desert, which he almost succeeded in doing. But Greece was destined to live. Her day of deliverance came at last. The admirals of Britain, France, and Eussia burned the Turkish fleet at Navarino, 1827 A.D., and proclaimed Greece free and independent. This was formally confirmed by the Treaty of Adrianople in 1828, after Turkish defeat by Eussia.

Small size of Greece handicapped progress. — Unfortunately only a small portion of Greek Territory was set free, consisting of Peloponnesus and the mainland of Greece to the south of Thessaly. Although the Greeks kept under the Turkish yoke, took a prominent part in the revolution, they were excluded from joining the new State owing to the selfish intrigues of certain European Powers, especially because of the opposition of Austria and the Holy Alliance, Greece was kept within impossibly narrow boundaries, thus being condemned from the very start to economic struggles and hardships, even foreboding failure. After the assassination of Capo d'Istrias, the first President of Greece, Prince Otho, the son of the King of Bavaria, was put at the head of the kingdom. It had a population of but 650,000. A monarchy was established with all the consequent expenses of a royal court, a host of officials at home, and ambassadors and ministers abroad. The resources of the country were limited. The portions constituting the new state, especially Peloponnesus, consists of isolated mountains which divide the country as it was in its ancient history, into small separate city states. To add further handicaps there were no means of communication and transportation in the country.

National aspiration continued. — Such difficulties, however, did not discourage the Greek people. The national aspiration for the ultimate emancipation of the Greek race continued to inspire the Greeks everywhere. Thus we have a chronic state of restlessness and a series of uprisings among the Greeks, kept under Turkish rule — especially in Crete and Macedonia. Every such movement drove hosts of refugees into Greece. The care and sheltering of these refugees added greatly to the burdens and expenses of the treasury, creating at the same time feelings of indignation and protest among the people, thus threatening all the time the outbreak of war.

Change of dynasty. — The autocratic rule of Otho caused another Revolution in 1862 and he was forced to abdicate. He was replaced by the second son of the King of Denmark, who became George I. England, which since 1815, had kept possession of the Ionian Islands (Corfu, Leukas, Cephalonia, Ithaca, and Zante), returned them to Greece in 1863. The new constitution of 1864 had established a parliamentary regime with a single assembly elected by universal suffrage.

Union of Thessaly. — Thessaly was united with Greece in 1882, although promised along with Epirus at the Berlin Conference, in 1878, at the end of the Russo-Turkish War. Epirus, however, was kept under the Turkish yoke and was delivered at last in part at the Balkan War, in 1913, the fate of Northern Epirus still remaining unsettled even after the Great War.

Greco-Turkish war. — As a result of an uprising in Crete there took place the War of 1897 between Greece and Turkey in which the former was defeated, and compelled to pay a war indemnity. Still it ultimately led to the gradual deliverance of Crete from Turkish tyranny and its union with Greece. The Great Powers compelled Turkey to withdraw its troops from Crete which was made autonomous, with Prince George of Greece as high commissioner.

Balkan wars. — The emancipation of wider areas from Turkish oppression was achieved as a result of the Balkan War (1912-13). Thus Epirus with Yanina, southern and a part of eastern Macedonia, including" Salonica, with the Islands of Mytilene, Chios, Samos, Lemnos, Imbros, and Crete were all united with the Kingdom of Greece. Thus Greece was doubled in population.

Great idea. — Still the *^ Great idea/' (Megali idea), cherished by all the Greeks — the emancipation of all Greeks from the Turkish yoke, and the Union of the Grecian territories with the mother country — ^was far from realization.

The World War.— The Great War broke the chains of many races, and people enslaved for centuries to autocratic rule. This it seems will effect the deliverance of further numbers of Greeks from Turkish oppression and their union with their beloved Hellas.

Treaty of Sevres. — ^According to the terms of the treaty of Sevres, that ended the war between Greece and Turkey, the greater part of the Greeks subject to Turkey were to be freed and join with Greece. Such important centers of Greek life and influence as western and eatern Thrace, thus became parts of Greece at once, and the Smyrna region will ultimately do the same. According to special arrangements Venizelos concluded with Italy, Northern Epirus and the Dodecanese would in due time join the mother country.* But the unfortunate Near East was not to enjoy peace and settled conditions in this way. While the Sultan's government in Constantinople sanctioned the treaty of Sevres (Aug. 9, 1920) the nationalist Turks under Mustapha Kemal Pasha started a rebellion in the interior of

* See speech of Venizelos at the Greek Parliament, New YorJfi Times, June 13, 1920.

Asia Minor with Angora as their capital, organized a so-called National Assembly claiming to represent the Turkish Empire, repudiated the Treaty of Sevres, and declared they would fight to a finish for the integrity of Turkey, asserting that Thrace and Smyrna were integral parts of the Empire. Greece had to fight to defend her cause, which is not imperialistic as some mistakenly assert, but a war of emancipation. Both sides are determined to fight to the end. The outcome is problematical. The war against Kemal was started by Venizelos with the approval of the Entente Powers, but since the return of King Constantine, the Entente declared neutrality and Greece fought single-handed during 1921.

The Nationalist program of extermination. — The Nationalists, taking advantage of the war with Greece, have been carrying out their program of extermination of the non-Turkish elements in Asia Minor. They have deported almost all the male Greeks and Armenians from Pontus (modern Trebizond), the towns and villages along the southern shore of the Black Sea and plundered their possessions. Many regions in the interior of Asia Minor have been scenes of deportation, massacre, imprisonment and execution of innocent people after mock trial. The deportees wander in inhospitable Turkish and Kurdish regions in the interior. The Armenian deportations of 1915-1919 had already demonstrated what an effective means of extermination deportation is in the hands of the Turk. If Greece achieves the union of the greater part of her children under her rule, 75 to 80 percent of the ten million Greeks in the world will be united. The rest are scattered mostly in what remains as Turkey, Caucasus, Egypt, U. S. A., England, France, etc. The rights and security of those remaining in Turkey are guaranteed by treaty amendments.

PEESENT POLITICAL. SITUATION

Military revolution. — To understand the present political situation in Greece we must review the main events leading to, and following the military revolution or uprising there in 1909, and the appearance in affairs of Eleutherios Venizelos of Crete. The defeat in the Turkish War of 1897 aroused the indignation of the leaders in the army and created wide discontent against the royal family, particularly against the Crown Prince, later, King Constantine, who was field marshal. The prevalence of favoritism and the want of proper discipline in the army and in fact in all the other departments of the little state, the political corruption and rank partizanship throughout the country gave ground to much complaint and stirred up the indignation of patriotic and ardent army men, which at last burst into the rebellion of Ghoudi in 1909, a military uprising that aimed at clearing the army of corruption, restoring order and discipline, and thus giving the country a military force worthy of its national aims and aspirations. Constantine had to leave the country, and the patriotic officers took charge of the situation.

Greece had long been suffering through lack of good leadership. There were too many leaders and petty politicians hunting offices. Greece needed a man, a leader, and he was found in the person of Eleutherios Venizelos of Crete. He was called from Crete to come over and help the country in her work of regeneration, and preparation for the fulfillment of her national program.

Eleutherios Venizelos. — ** Venizelos, a chivalrous character and a true patriot, had taken a leading part in the affairs of Crete in her uprising as well as in time of peace. His father was one of the heroes of the Greek War of Independence (1821-27) and had left him as his only legacy, an ardent patriotism. He was for order and discipline in the army, and throughout the state. He believed in the rule of principle, rather than the personal whims of the former political leaders.'' He recalled the crown prince from exile and Constantine was reinstated in the army. Thus the two principal factors in the recent events and the present political situation in Greece appear on the stage, and Venizelos began with Constantine to cooperate first, unanimously for the good of Greece.

''The arrival on the scene of a single man, of an upright, unselfish and decided character, was enough to coordinate all the active and capable men of the country, and to give Greece an exceptional forward movement. By appealing to France for a military mission in order to reorganize the army, and to England for a naval mission to do the same for the navy he put his country in shape^ to participate gloriously in the Balkan War against Turkey in 1912-13, and victoriously to counter the treachery of Bulgaria in June, 1913.''

Balkan league. — Mr. Venizelos as a true and farsighted statesman was for friendship with Bulgaria and other Balkan states and thought a league among them would be the best means for the pacification and prosperity of the Balkans and Europe at large.

Turkish revolution. — He saw that the so called Turkish Revolution of 1908 with its motto of *' Liberty, Equality, Fraternity and Justice" was a mere artifice intended to deceive Europe and the world, whereas the Young Turks aimed in reality at the Turkification of the non-Turkish and non-Moslem elements in Turkey, in accordance with their open program ''Turkey for the Turks." The Young Turks' program was detrimental to the best interests of all the Balkan nations as well as of the Armenians, Arabs, Jews and other non-Turkish elements. It aimed at the ultimate assimilation and absorption of these superior elements in Turkey by the inferior Turanian Turks.

Balkan wars. — The Balkan League gave a fatal blow to the Young Turks. The first Balkan War demonstrated the weakness and rottenness of the Turkish State on the one hand, the vitality and the strength of the Union and cooperation of the Balkan nations on the other. Had the league continued in harmony, or rather had the intrigues of the Central Powers allowed it, the Balkan allies could easily have marched on Constantinople and driven the Turks, bag and baggage out of Europe.

Unfortunately the intrigues of Germany and Austria combined with the treachery and insatiable greed of Bulgaria, led to the second Balkan War (June, 1913) ending with the defeat of Bulgaria. The Treaty of Bucharest gave a decided superiority to Eumania, Serbia and Greece in the Balkans.

World War. — This upset subtle and long planned schemes of Germany and Austria, as well as Bulgaria and Turkey, and thus served as a precursor of the terrible World War, 1914-18.

Constantine and Venizelos differ. — So far Constantine and Venizelos as well as all the leaders in Greece worked harmoniously. But when the matter of Greece joining the Great War was taken up, opinion was divided. Venizelos was from the very start for joining the Entente Allies ; the very interests of Greece, he thought, required it; her geographic position, the historical, traditional friendship of the Entente to Greece, as well as economic reasons demanded it; besides, by the terms of a treaty with Serbia, Greece was in honor bound to join the conflict. Not so thought King Constantine and the General Military Staff. They regarded Prussian militarism invincible, and repudiated or explained away the Serbian Treaty. They thought the best interests of Greece required her remaining neutral. To join the war, Constantine asserted, would mean entire ruin for Greece, and he wanted to save her from the fate of Serbia and Rumania. Besides, if Greece joined the Entente, he further asserted, the hatred of the Turks would be aroused and millions of Greeks residing in Turkey would be in danger of massacre and outrage.

Venizelists and Royalists. — Thus developed the two groups or parties of Venizelists and Royalists. The latter claim to have been for neutrality, but the Venizelists charge them with pro-Germanism.

Venizelos ousted. — As Constantine did not approve the policy of Venizelos, he dismissed him from office, February, 1915, though he was elected by the people by a great majority. Venizelos was reelected in May, 1915, but contrary to the constitution, Constantine ousted him again, October, 1915.

Revolutionary government at Salonica. — Failing to persuade the king to follow the majority of the Grecian people and thus save Greece and his dynasty, Venizelos, along with General Danglis and Admiral Coundouriotis, left Athens, June, 1917, and went to Crete and then to Salonica, and started the revolutionary movement which resulted in the dethronement of King Constantine by the Allies at the request of the revolutionary government of Venizelos. Alexander, the second, son of Constantine, ascended the throne.

Services of the Greek army. — The Greek army rendered a great service to the Entente cause in Macedonia. The first shaft was driven into the Bulgarian front by the Greeks, and the yielding of Bulgaria was the precursor of the total break of the Central Powers. Venizelos was hailed by prominent statesmen as one of the foremost leaders at the Peace Conference in Paris and San Remo. He secured for Greece the main points she fought for. While Greece was rejoicing over the success of the treaties Venizelos secured, there happened an untoward accident that caused upheavals in the political history of Greece. King Alexander was bitten by a monkey in Tatoi, the royal summer resort near Athens, as the result of which he died. Admiral Coundouriotis was made regent and the crown was offered to Prince Paul, the youngest son of Constantine. He refused on the ground that it belonged first to his father and his elder brother George, the Crown Prince. It was then election time. Venizelos made it clear in his appeal to the people that it was a contest between himself and Constantine. They must choose one or the other. November 14, 1920, was a signal day in Greek history. In spite of all the diplomatic victories and unprecedented advantages he had secured for Greece, Venizelos was defeated. He at once left Greece. In his farewell to his party followers he asked them to respect the vote of the people and support the party in power. The aged statesman, Demetrius Ehallis, headed the new government, and the dowager Queen Olga took the regency as Admiral Coundouriotis resigned. Although the vote of November 14 was at the same time a plebiscite on the question of the return of Constantine, still a separate plebiscite was taken on December 5th in which a vast majority voted for the return of King Constantine to the throne. According to newspaper reports the Venizelists took little part in the plebiscite. On December 19, 1920, the king and queen returned to Athens, after living in Switzerland since June, 1917. Their family had preceded them. The main causes for the defeat of Venizelos were (1) The war weariness of the Greek people.

Causes for Venizelos* defeat. — Venizelos, himself, gave this reason, during his visit to New York.

He said that though by nature peace-loving, it so happened that there was war whenever he was in power. So the people thought there would be no peace as long as he was in power. His opponents promised the disbanding of the troops and a proclamation of peace. (2) Absorbed in diplomatic fights in the interest of Greece, he was often absent from home and internal affairs were left to his followers. Abuses ascribed to some of them embittered the people and spoiled the internal policy of Venizelos. He is assailed by his opponents as arrogant, overbearing, tyrannous and dictatorial. (3) Constantino was viewed by many under the glamor of the halo given him as a result of the victories in the Balkan ,Wars. They could not believe their great field marshal could have ever been unpatriotic. Consequently they thought a great injustice was done him when he was removed by the Allies. Many also resented it as an interference in the internal affairs of Greece. (4) The long delays by the powers in the settlement of Greek affairs caused much tension and strain on the nerves of the people. After the armistice they were left to their own resources in the fight against the Turks. There seemed no end of fighting and no peace in sight, while the powers shifted from place to place the discussions of Greco- Turkish affairs. The long pent-up feelings burst at the election, as Venizelos was a3Sociated and identified in the minds of the Greek people with the Entente Powers. (5) Old party leaders, while differing among themselves, worked together to overthrow him.