Besides, the opinions of German experts about Turkey and about Islâm, especially about their possibilities for reorganization, are not, at any rate were not before this war, at all the same as those which are now so warmly defended by Grothe and Becker. Professor Joh. Marquart, at present Professor in the University of Berlin, derides in the preface of his work, _The Benin-collection of the National Museum of Ethnology in Leiden_ (1913), “the alleged function of Islâm as a bearer of culture,” and he speaks with biting irony of the “blessings of the _jihâd_, predatory murder on the path of Allah turned into a religious duty,” _i. e._, that duty which Germany now has again impressed on Turkey. It was not only in German missionary circles that Islâm was considered as the enemy who was most of all to be fought, but in a German colonial congress this resolution was adopted: “_As the expansion of Islâm is a serious danger to the development of our colonies, the colonial congress suggests for earnest consideration_,” etc. Professor Martin Hartmann, who teaches the science of Islâm at the Seminary for Oriental Languages in Berlin, and whose pen has given us a number of notable writings on Islâm and on Turkey, never tires of pointing out that the Moslims are kept from participating in culture mainly by the institutions of Islâm, which scorns woman and despises non-believers.[7] He calls the Caliphate of the Ottoman Sultans a usurpation which could only have been committed through contempt for the holy tradition, a “_means of agitation_,” an “_easy way to be considered by the world of Islâm as a kind of fetish_”; he says that “_this double quality_ [of the Sultan-Caliph] _has never been recognized by the civilized powers_” and that the honest abandonment of this title would rather strengthen Turkey than weaken her. Of course he also has a few things to say about the holy war. About this he intentionally put his opinion on record when the word _jihâd_ was brought up by the Turks in their war with Italy over Tripoli, and he made use of this expression which has again become topical: “... _the threat of holy war, i. e., of war against all unbelievers, except against those who are expressly designated to the community by the leaders of Islâm as friends of Islâm. This idea is madness._” As the seat of the agitation was at that time in Berlin, he adds to this: “_Let this be a warning against the creation of unrest by the excitation of religious fanaticism. All civilized nations will unanimously stand together against any such attempt._” I could quote reams of print with similar contents; I content myself with one more: “_Islâm is a religion of hate and of war. It must not be suffered to be the ruling principle in a nation of the civilized world._”