It is the country which has furnished the best soldiers during the war. The chief military leaders of the Greeks have been of Acarnanian or Ætolian families. Subsequently to the arrival in Greece of the protocol of the 22d March, 1829, and the publication of the assent of the Turks to the excluded frontier in the treaty of Adrianople, all the families which had survived the war returned, and commenced rebuilding their houses and towns, and cultivating their lands. These people will never submit again to the Turkish yoke without resistance, and the other Greeks will not, cannot abandon them to their fate. The British journals loudly reproached the prince for his resignation, ascribing it to fright at the picture which the president, Capo d'Istria, drew of the state of the country, or to the hope of becoming regent of the British empire, in case of the accession of the minor princess Victoria, It is hardly necessary, however, to look for motives beyond the distaste which a man of good feelings would naturally feel to assuming the government of a nation contrary to their will, and becoming, as he must become in such case, a tyrant. Since the resignation of Leopold, several princes have been proposed as candidates for the throne of Greece, without its ever seeming to have occurred to the powers that a Greek might be raised to that honor, or that it would be worth while to pay any attention to the wishes of the nation. According to the latest accounts, it seems that prince Paul of Würtemberg is the most prominent candidate. By the protocol of Feb. 3, 1830, the boundary of Greece was settled as follows: On the north, beginning at the mouth of the Aspropotamos (Achelous), it runs up the southern bank to Angelo Castro; thence through the middle of the

The correspondence of prince Leopold with the ministers, and with president Capo d'Istria, is highly interesting, as showing the arbitrary spit with which the powers of Europe have been disposed to act towards Greece. It is to be found in the American papers of the middle of July,

1830.

emperor

+ Prince Paul (Charles Frederic Augustus) is the brother of the king of Würtemberg; born Jan. 19, 1785; married, 1805, to Charlotte (Catharine), princess of Saxe-Altenburg, born 1787. He has four children. His eldest daughter is married to the grand-prince Michael, brother to the of Russia: his eldest son Frederic (Charles Augustus) was born Feb. 21, 1808. Prince Paul William of Würtemberg (the traveller), who returned Nov. 29, 1830, to New Orleans, from a journey into the western regions of North America, is the son of Eugene Frederic Henry, the second brother of the reigning king of Würtemberg.

lakes Sacarovista and Vrachori to mount Artoleria; thence to mount Axiros, and along the valley of Culouri and the top of Eta to the gulf of Zeitun. Acarnania and a great part of Ætolia and Thessaly are thus excluded from the Greek state, and a Turkish barrier interposed between Greece and the Ionian Islands. Candia, Samos, Psarra, &c., are not included. The population of the state is estimated at about 635,000: 280,000 in the Peloponnesus; 175,000 in the islands; 180,000 on the Greek main-land.-Anderson's Observations on the Peloponnesus and the Greek Islands, made in 1829 (Boston, 1830). For further information, we refer the reader to Greece in 1823 and 1824, by colonel Leicester Stanhope (Philadelphia, 1825); also, the Picture of Greece in 1825 (2 vols., New York, 1826); the History of Modern Greece, with a View of the Geography, Antiquities and present Condition of that Country (Boston, 1827); the Historical Sketch of the Greek Revolution, by Samuel G. Howe (New York, 1828); Travels in Greece, by J. P. Miller (Boston, 1828); Visit to Greece and Constantinople, in the Years 1827 and 1828, by H. A. V. Post (New York, 1830); Raffenel's (editor of the Spectateur Oriental at Smyrna, continued afterwards by Tricorni) Histoire des Evènemens de la Grèce (Paris, 1822); Considérations sur la Guerre actuelle entre les Grecs et les Turks, par un Grec (Paris, 1821); colonel Voutier's (who fought, in 1821 and 1822, in Greece) Mémoires sur la Guerre actuelle des Grecs (Paris, 1822); Agratis' Précis des Opérations de la Flotte Grecque, durant la Révolution de 1821 et 1822 (Paris, 1822), (chiefly after the log-book of the Hydriot Jacob Tumbasis, who commanded a fleet, and fell in an engagement, in 1822); several publications by eye-witnesses, interesting as historical memoirs, by Müller, Lieber, &c. Ed. Blaquière wrote, on the spot, the Greek Revolution, its Origin and Progress, together with some Remarks on the Religion, &c., in Greece (London, 1824), with plates. Maxime Raybaud, an officer in the corps of Philhellenes, published Mémoires sur la Grèce pour servir à l'Histoire de la Guerre de l'Indépendance, 1821 et 1822, with topographical maps, (Paris, 1825, 2 vols.), See, also, Pouqueville's Histoire de la Régénération de la Grèce, &e., or the History from 1740 to 1824, with maps (Paris, 1824, 2d ed., 1826, 4 vols.); Villemain's Lascaris (Paris, 1826); La Grèce en 1821 et 1822; Correspondence politique, publiée par un Grec (Paris, 1823). The Courier de Smyrne is often

quoted as an authority in regard to Greek affairs. Of its trustworthiness we may judge from a letter addressed by count Capo d'Istria, March 12, 1830, to the French resident, baron de Rouen, in which he mentions the publication of two decrees, attributed to the Greek government, which are mere forgeries, and requests that proper measures may be taken to compel the editor to avow their falsehood.

Modern Greek Language (called Romaic) and Literature. The manly attitude, assumed by the Greeks since 1821, has attracted attention to their language, which, even in its degeneracy, recalls the beauties of the ancient tongue. Grateful for the culture bestowed on it, the Greek language seems to have preserved its purity longer than any other known to us; and even long after its purity was lost, the echo of this beautiful tongue served to keep alive something of the spirit of ancient Greece, All the supports of this majestic and refined dialect seemed to fail, when the Greeks were enslaved by the fall of Constantinople (A. D. 1453). All the cultivated classes, who still retained the pure Greek, the language of the Byzantine princes, either perished in the conflict, or took to flight, or courted the favor of their rude conquerors, by adopt ing their dialect. In the lower classes, only, did the common Greek survive (the κοινή δημώδης, ἁπλη, ιδιωτικη διαλεκτος) the vulgar dialect of the polished classes, the traces of which occur, indeed, in earlier authors, but which first appears distinctly in the sixth century. This Greek patois departed still more from the purity of the written language, which took refuge at court, in the tribunals of justice, and the halls of instruction, when the Frank crusaders augmented it by their own peculiar expressions, and the barbarians in the neighborhood engrafted theirs also upon it. This popular dialect first appears as a complete written language in the chronicles of Simon Sethos, in 1070-80. After the Ottomans had become masters of the country, all the institutions which had contributed to preserve a better idiom perished at once. The people, left to themselves, oppressed by the most brutal despot ism, would finally have abandoned their own dialect, which became constantly more corrupt, had not the Greeks possessed a sort of rallying point in their church. Their patriarch remaining to them at the conquest of their capital (Panagiotacchi, who was appointed, in 1500, interpreter of the sultan), they turn

ed to him as their head, and saw, in the synod of their church, his senate, and in the language of the works of the fathers of the church, and the Old and New Testaments, a standard which tended to give a uniform character to the different dialects. Neglected and exposed to the vicissitudes of fortune, destitute of a creed which could elevate their moral sentiments, thwarted in all their pursuits, urged by the state of things around them to indolent voluptuousness or vindictive malice, the impoverished institutions for instruction were of little efficiency. As the proper guardians of morality and education,, the clergy and monks were themselves ignorant and corrupt. The debasement of this fine dialect continued till the middle of the last century; for the few writers of that period disdained to use the language of the people, and resorted to the ancient Greek, then, unhappily, an extinct dialect. The Greek spirit, not yet extinguished by all the adversities the nation had undergone, finally revived with increased vigor; for the mildest of climates, ever maintaining and cherishing a serenity of feeling, the imperishable heritage of hallowed names and associations, and even the love of song, kept alive some sparks of patriotic sentiment. With Rhizos, we may divide this revival into three distinct periods. The first, from 1700 to 1750, gave the Fanariots influence and efficiency in the seraglio, especially after Mavrocordato (Alex.) became dragoman of the Porte, and his son first hospodar of Moldavia and Walachia. During the second period, from 1750 to 1800, the Greeks resorted for instruction to the universities of the west, and returned thence to their native country. Naturally inclined to commerce, they soon manifested a dexterity and shrewdness, which enabled many to amass considerable wealth. Kept together by external pressure, it became necessary for them to rely on their own countrymen. Necessity taught them the value of education, and their admission to the administration of the government of Moldavia and Walachia raised their views to political life. They became desirous of making nearer approaches to the more civilized nations of Europe, so as not to remain behind in the general progress. The Greeks began to pay more attention to their mother tongue, and this tendency was increased by intercourse with the more refined West, by means of more frequent visits from intelligent men of that quarter to the ruins of Grecian greatness. The patriarch (Samuel Eu

gene Bulgaris Theotocos) of Corfu, and the unfortunate Rhigas, may be mentioned as eminent at this period. But in the third period, from 1800 to the present time, this increase of the means of education first exerted a powerful influence on the nation, which, favored by external circumstances, now really began to be conscious of the oppression under which they suffered. Schools were formed at Odessa, Venice, Vienna, Jassy, Bucharest, and in the Ionian Islands, most of which have since ceased to exist. Even in Constantinople, in the reign of Selim III, some Fanariots (q. v.), especially the noble prince Demetrius Merousi, who founded a national academy at Kuru Tschesme in 1805, rendered great services to the modern Greek language and literature. Gratitude to the mother was, with the rest of Europe, a motive for attention to the daughter; and the language gained alike by the influence of the natives and of foreigners. The works printed at Jassy, Bucharest (where Spiridon Valetas, the ornament of the court in that place, translated, under the name of Aristomenes, the celebrated treatise of Rousseau, Sur l'Inegalité des Conditions), Venice and Leipsic were, at first, mostly theological; but, with the increase of industry and commerce, particularly among the Hydriots, and of the wealth of individuals, the circulation of books was also enlarged by the assistance of foreign and cordial friends of the nation. The language itself, which in its degradation was not destitute of melody and flexibility, gained energy and vivacity from their efforts, although the attempts of some individuals to bring it nearer to the ancient classic dialect, did violence to its idiomatic character. (See Coray.) The attempt to bring the existing idiom nearer the Byzantine Greek and the language of the patriarchs, made by the Athenian Codrica,-the warm adversary of Coray,-Jacobakis Rhizos, and many others, was more rational; and the periodical 'Eons Moyos, established at Vienna by the influence of Coray, with the other similar works which it called into existence, was not without effect. But every attempt will be vain to deprive the modern Greek language of its peculiar character, especially after a conflict which has excited so violently the feelings of the nation. The wealth of the modern Greek language, which former dictionaries show but very imperfectly, because it can only be fully exhibited by the assistance of many glossaries -Vendoti, Mod. Gr. Ital. and French (Vi

enna, 1790); Weigel, Mod. Gr. Germ. and Ital. (Leipsic, 1796); Cumas, Mod. Gr. Russ. and French (Moscow, 1811); Vlani, Mod. Gr.and Ital.(Venice, 1806); Schmidt's Mod. Gr. and Germ. Dict. (Leipsic, 1825), would have been more fully displayed by the large dictionary, intended to fill six folio volumes, the superintendence of which was undertaken at Constantinople in 1821, by the patriarch Gregory (q. v.), but which was interrupted by the murder of the old man, April 22, 1821, with the destruction of so many institutions of learning fostered by him.* For acquiring a knowledge of the language itself, which differs from the ancient chiefly in the formation of the tenses and in the terminations of the nouns, the means have now increased. The grammar of Christopylus, published in Vienna in 1805, which considers the modern Greek as Æolic-Doric, Schmidt's Modern Greek Grammar (Leipsic, 1808), and another German and Greek grammar, by Bojadschi (Vienna, 1821 and 1823), besides Jules David's very valuable Méthode pour étudier la Langue Grecque Moderne (Paris, 1821), and a Συνοπτικός παραλληλισμός της ελληνικής και paukins yλwoons (Paris, 1820), W. Münnich's Mod. Greek Grammar (Dresden, 1826),Von Lüdemann's Manual of the Mod Greek Language (Leipsic, 1826), furnish important assistance. German philologists, such as Friedemann and Poppo, have, moreover, considered the relations of the modern Greek to the ancient. A work which is highly important for the language, as it exists, is the Remarks of H. Leake on the Languages spoken in Greece at the present Day, to be found in his Researches in Greece (1814). (See also the Diction. Français Grec Moderne précédé d'un Discours sur la Grammaire et la Syntaxe de l'une et l'autre Langue par Greg. Zalicoglos; Paris, 1824.) The literature of the modern Greeks, which had consisted chiefly of translations from the French, could not very much elevate the spirit of the people, as the matter presented was, in most cases, uncongenial to their character; but after the noble Coray, and others of similar sentiments, had devoted themselves to its improvement,a higher activity was perceptible. The school at Scio (unhappily destroyed by the massacre of April 11, 1822), which had existed since 1800; the academy at Yanina, whose director, Athanasius Psali

*The first and second volumes of this Ark of the Greek Language, appeared at Constantinople in 1819, etc. from the press of the patriarch in the Fanar.

da, was regarded as the first modern Greek scholar; and the academy founded by the French on the Ionian Islands, were points of union for the Greek youth, not without influence on the Greek people. Under the protection of England, and lord Guilford's wise care, the Greek spirit was gradually developed. An Ionic Greek university was opened at Cor fu, by the direction of Canning, May 19, 1824. It consists of four faculties, for theology, law, medicine and philosophy. Its chancellor was lord Guilford. The lectures are in the modern Greek language. The most distinguished professors are, Bambas of Scio, Asopios, and Piccolo (who delivers lectures on modern philosophy). In Paris, a distinct professorship of the modern Greek has existed for several years, and M. Clonaris delivers a course of very popular lectures on it. Those delivered by Jacobakis Rhizos Nerulos, at Geneva, were printed in a French translation (Geneva, 1827). In Munich, a professorship was afterwards established. In Vienna, Petersburg, Trieste, wealthy Greeks afforded important aid to the lite rature of their countrymen. In Odessa, a Greek theatre has existed for several years, where ancient Greek tragedies, translated into the modern language, delight the spectators. Such experiments were followed by original productions of Jacobakis Rhizos (Aspasia and Polyxena), of Piculos, and by translations of modern dramatic works by Oiconomos, Coccinakis, &c. The inspiring strains of Rhigas (q. v.) and Polyzois roused the military spirit of their countrymen. Christopylus, in the style of the Teian bard, pours out his cheerful strains; nor must Kalbo and Salomo of Zante be forgotten; the tone of the productions of Jannacateky Tinnites, of Constantinople, is more melancholy. Sakellario's muse is grave (Vienna, 1817), and Perdicari's, satirical. As an improvisatore, Nicolopylus met with applause at Paris. Andreas Mustoxidi (q.v.), historian of the island of Corfu, is an ornament of modern Greek literature, equally distinguished as an Italian author, by his Life of Anacreon. Among the mul titude of translators engaged on political works, Iskenteri, who translated Voltaire's Zadig into modern Greek, is highly esteemed. Bambas, Cumas (the translator of Krug's System of Philosophy), Alexandridis, Anthimos Gazis, Ducas, Gubdelas, Codricas, Condos, Mich. Schinas, Spyridon Tricoupi, Solyzoides, were names distinguished before the beginning of the late desolating troubles. The Melissa

(the Bee), a modern Greek journal, published by Spyridon Condos and Agathophron, in Paris, in 1821, was discontinued when the contributors engaged in the war of liberty. On the whole, about 3000 works in the modern Greek language have appeared within 50 years. Fauriel, a Frenchman, collected all the popular modern Greek songs (Paris, 1824-25, 2 vols.), and in them has given the public a commentary on the events of the day. For more minute information, we refer to Iken's Hellenion and Leucothea, and to the periodicals. Consult Jul. David's Comparison of the Ancient and Modern Greek Languages (translated from the modern Greek by Struve, Berlin, 1827); Minoides Minas, Traité sur la véritable Prononciation de la Langue Grecque (Paris, 1827). Coray's system is at present generally adopted, to enrich and ennoble the modern Greek language from the treasures of the ancient Greek, avoiding the too difficult inflections, and removing the Germanisms and Gallicisms introduced by translations.

Greek Church; that portion of Christians who conform, in their creed, usages and church government, to the views of Christianity introduced into the former Greek empire, and perfected, since the 5th century, under the patriarchs of Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem. Christendom, which, with difficulty, had been brought to a state of concord in the 4th and 5th centuries, already contained the germ of a future schism, by reason both of its extent, as it embraced the whole east and west of the Roman empire, and of the diversity of language, modes of thinking and manners, among the nations professing it. The foundation of a new Rome in Constantinople; the political partition of the Roman empire into the Oriental, or Greck, and the Occidental, or Latin; the elevation of the bishop of Constantinople to the place of second patriarch of Christendom, inferior only to the patriarch of Rome, effected in the councils of Constantinople, A. D. 381, and of Chalcedon, A. D. 451; the jealousy of the latter patriarch towards the growing power of the former,-were circumstances, which, together with the ambiguity of the edict known under the name of the Henoticon, granted by the Greek emperor Zeno, A. D. 482, and obnoxious to the Latins on account of the appearance of a deviation from the decrees of the council of Chalcedon, produced a formal schism in the Christian church. Felix II, patriarch of Rome, pronounced sentence

of excommunication against the patriarchs of Constantinople and Alexandria, who had been the leading agents of the Henoticon, A. D. 484, and thus severed all ecclesiastical fellowship with the congregations of the East, attached to these patriarchs. The sentiments of the imperial court being changed, the Roman patriarch Hormidas was able, indeed, to compel a reunion of the Greek church with the Latin, in 519; but this union, neyer seriously intended, and loosely compacted, was again dissolved by the obstinacy of both parties, and the Roman sentence of excommunication against the Iconoclasts among the Greeks, A. D. 733, and against Photius, the patriarch of Constantinople, A. D. 862. The augmentation of the Greek church, by the addition of newly converted nations, as the Bulgarians, excited anew, about this time, the jealousy of the Roman pontiff; and his bearing towards the Greeks was the more haughty since he had renounced his allegiance to the Greek emperor, and had a sure protection against him in the new Frankish-Roman empire. Photius, on the other hand, charged the Latins with arbitrary conduct in inserting an unscriptural addition into the creed respecting the origin of the Holy Ghost, and in altering many of the usages of the ancient orthodox church; for example, in forbidding their priests to marry, repeating the chrism, and fasting on Saturday, as the Jewish sabbath. But he complained, with justice, in particular, of the assumptions of the pope, who pretended to be the sovereign of all Christendom, and treated the Greek patriarchs as his inferiors. The deposition of this patriarch, twice effected by the pope, did not terminate the dispute between the Greeks and Latins; and when the patriarch of Constantinople, Michael Cerularius, added to the charges of Photius, against the Latins, an accusation of heresy, in 1054, on account of their use of unleavened bread at the communion, and of the blood of animals that had died by strangulation, as well as on account of the immorality of the Latin clergy in general, Pope Leo IX, having, in retaliation, excommunicated him, in the most insulting manner, a total separation ensued of the Greek church from the Latin. From this time, pride, obstinacy and selfishness frustrated all the attempts which were made to reunite the severed churches, partly by the popes, in order to annex the East to their see, partly by the Greek em perors (equally oppressed by the crusaders and Mohammedans), in order to secure the

assistance of the princes of the West. Neither would yield to the other in respect to the contested points, on which we have touched above. While the Catholic religion acquired a more complete and peculiar character under Gregory VII, and through the scholastic philosophy, the Greek church retained its creed, as arranged by John of Damascus, in 730, and its ancient constitution. The conquest of Constantinople by the French crusaders and the Venetians, A. D. 1204, and the cruel oppressions which the Greeks had to endure from the Latins and the papal legates, only increased their exasperation; and although the Greek emperor Michael II (Palæologus, who had reconquered Constantinople in 1261) consented to recognise the supremacy of the pope, and by his envoys and some of the clergy, who were devoted to him, abjured the points of separation, at the assembly, at Lyons, A. D. 1274; and though a joint synod was held at Constantinople, in 1277, for the purpose of strengthening the union with the Latin church, the mass of the Greek church was nevertheless op posed to this step; and pope Martin IV, having excommunicated the emperor Michael, in 1281, from political motives, the councils held at Constantinople, in 1283 and 1285, by the Greek bishop, restored their old doctrines and the separation from the Latins. The last attempt was made by the Greek emperor John VII (Palæologus, who was very hard pressed by the Turks), together with the patriarch Joseph, in the councils held, first at Ferrara, in 1438, and the next year at Florence, pope Eugene IV presiding; but the union concluded there had the appearance of a submission of the Greeks to the Roman see, and was altogether rejected by the Greek clergy and nation, so that, in fact, the schism of the two churches continued. The efforts of the Greek emperors, on this point, who had always had most interest in these attempts at union, ceased with the overthrow of their empire and the conquest of Constantinople by the Turks, A. D. 1453; and the exertions of the Roman Catholics to subject the Greek church, effected nothing but the acknowledgment of the supremacy of the pope by some congregations in Italy (whither many Greeks had fled before the Turks), in Hungary, Galicia, Poland and Lithuania, which congregations are now known under the name of United Greeks. In the 7th century, the territory of the Greek church embraced, besides East Illyria,