As Islamism has changed the demeanour of the Turks, so doubtless it has in other ways materially innovated on their Tartar nature. It has given an aim to their military efforts, a political principle, and a social bond. It has laid them under a sense of responsibility, has moulded them into consistency, and taught them a course of policy and perseverance in it. But to treat this part of the subject adequately to its importance would require, Gentlemen, a research and a fulness of discussion unsuitable to the historical sketch which I have undertaken. I have said enough for my purpose upon this topic; and indeed on the general question of the modification of national character to which the Turks were at this period subjected. FOOTNOTES: [15] Univ. Hist. Modern, vol. iii. p. 346. [16] I am here assuming that the Magyars are not of the Turkish stock; vid. Gibbon and Pritchard. [17] Vol. v. p. 248. [18] P. 127, ed. 1817. [19] Travels in Syria, vol. i. p. 369, ed. 1787. [20] Hor. Epist. ii 1, 155. [21] _Supr._ p. 26. [22] Montesquieu. [23] Murray. [24] Caldecott's Baber. [25] Vid. Quarterly Review, vol. lii. p. 396-7. [26] Univ. Hist. mod. vol. v. p. 262, etc. [27] Ibid. vol. iv. p. 353. [28] Meyendorff. [29] Moorcroft. [30] Vid. Elphinstone. [31] Wood's Oxus. [32] Elphinstone's Cabul. [33] _Supr._ p. 59. [34] Gibbon. LECTURE IV. _The Turk and the Saracen._ 1. Mere occupation of a rich country is not enough for civilization, as I have granted already. The Turks came into the pleasant plains and valleys of Sogdiana; the Turcomans into the well-wooded mountains and sunny slopes of Asia Minor. The Turcomans were brought out of their dreary deserts, yet they retained their old habits, and they remain barbarians to this day. But why? it must be borne in mind, they neither subjugated the inhabitants of their new country on the one hand, nor were subjugated by them on the other. They never had direct or intimate relations with it; they were brought into it by the Roman Government at Constantinople as its auxiliaries, but they never naturalized themselves there. They were like gipseys in England, except that they were mounted freebooters instead of pilferers and fortune-tellers. It was far otherwise with their brethren in Sogdiana; they were there first as conquerors, then as conquered. First they held it in possession as their prize for 90 or 100 years; they came into the usufruct and enjoyment of it. Next, their political ascendancy over it involved, as in the case of the White Huns, some sort of moral surrender of themselves to it. What was the first consequence of this? that, like the White Huns, they intermarried with the races they found there. We know the custom of the Tartars and Turks; under such circumstances they would avail themselves of their national practice of polygamy to its full extent of licence. In the course of twenty years a new generation would arise of a mixed race;