I024 GREECE AND THE BALKAN STATES 



THEOBALD FISCHER (b. 1846), the geographer, died on September 17, at Marburg, 

 where he had been professor of geography since 1883. He devoted himself specially to the 

 study of Mediterranean lands, and his most important work is his Mittelmeerbilder. 



MARTIN KIRSCHNER (b. 1842), Chief Burgomaster of Berlin, died at Ehrwalt, Tirol, on 

 September 13. After holding administrative posts in Breslau he became second Burgo- 

 master of Berlin in 1892 and First (or Chief) Burgomaster in 1898. 



OTTO KRUMMEL (b. 1854), the geographer, died at Cologne on October 12. In 1883 he 

 became professor of geography at Kiel, and latterly was transferred to Marburg. He was 

 recognised as the leading German oceanographer, and was a member of the International 

 Council for the Study of the Sea. He was joint author of the article "Ocean and Oceanog- 

 raphy" in the E. B. and in 1911 completed a standard treatise on oceanography. 



OTTO LIEBMANN (b. 1841), the philosopher, died at Jena on January 15. He had been 

 professor at Jena for thirty years. For an account of his philosophy see E. B. xviii, 236d. 



PAUL WALLOT (b. 1842), the architect, died on August II. He designed the present 

 Reichstag buildings (see E. B. ii, 442c), and was a professor in the Dresden Academy of Arts. 



Literature. Among recent books (in English) bearing on Germany and German life, 

 the following will be found useful: J. Ellis Barker, Modern Germany, 4th and enlarged edi- 

 tion, brought down to July 1912; W. H. Dawson, Social Insurance in Germany (1912), as 

 well'as his Growth of Modern Germany (1909); Herbert Ferris, Germany and the German Em- 

 peror, (1912); Whitman, German Memories (1912); The Report on the Trade and Industries of 

 Germany for 1910, by Consul General Sir F. Oppenheimer (Cd. 5,465-166). 



(M. EPSTEIN.) 



GREECE AND THE BALKAN STATES 



POLITICAL HISTORY, 1909-12 



i pop. The agitation in Servia caused by the annexation of Bosnia and Herzegovina 

 b'y Austria-Hungary in 1908 had led the country to the brink of war with its powerful 

 _ . . neighbour. The only chance of a Servian success in such a conflict lay in 



The Bos- the hoped-for support of Russia, but when that Power, acting under pressure 

 alan crisis from Germany, declared that she no longer insisted on the provisions of 



Article XXV of the Berlin Treaty which regulated the Austrian tenure of 

 the two provinces, the Servian cabinet, in which MM. Milovanovich, Pashich and 

 Ribaratz were the principal figures, recognized the uselessness of further resistance, and 

 on March 31, 1909, Servia addressed to Austria-Hungary a declaration, the text of 

 which had been drawn up by the British Government, to the effect that she would con- 

 form to the decisions of the Powers relative to Article XXV of the Berlin Treaty and 

 abandon the attitude of protest and opposition she had hitherto maintained towards 

 Austria-Hungary, reducing her army to its peace effective and disarming her bands of 

 volunteers. At the same time the representatives of the Powers at Belgrade gave assur- 

 ances to the Servian Government that Austria-Hungary meditated no attack upon the 

 independence or territorial integrity of Servia. On April ist the Austrian reply express- 

 ing satisfaction at the resumption of friendly relations was delivered at Belgrade. By a 

 strange coincidence, a provisional commercial arrangement between the two countries 

 expired that very day, and the political struggle was replaced by a war of tariffs. 



Europe had scarcely been delivered from the Servian nightmare when the outbreak 

 of a reactionary movement at Constantinople (April i3th) once more produced excursions 



and alarums in the Balkan Peninsula (see TURKEY). After the successful 

 retoJuf'ton"' marcn of Mahmoud Shefket with the army of Salonika on Constantinople 

 in Turkey: the Young Turk faction, which had been driven from power, re-established 

 on e thc*Bai- its autnorit y> ancl thc Sultan Abdul Hamid II was deposed (April 27, 1909). 

 kaa states. Notwithstanding their profession of Liberal principles, the triumph of the 



Young Turks was productive of little or no improvement in the condition 

 of the subject races of the Ottoman Empire. An increase of militarism in the adminis- 

 tration followed, and the doctrine of " Ottomanism," which was explained to the outer 

 world as implying the perfect equality of all Ottoman subjects, was interpreted at home 

 as justifying the abrogation of the ancient rights of the non-Turkish nationalities. The 

 privileges of the Christian churches were interfered with, political clubs were suppressed, 

 public meetings were forbidden, and every effort was made to extinguish the national 

 sentiments of the various races. The result was the formation of secret conspiracies 



