^{page 133 note 1} The most useful primary source material on this question is unpublished but is available in the Archives of the Quai d'Orsay: France, Ministère des Affaires étrangères. Saint-Siège. Protectorat catholique de la France. Dossier général (1897–1918), N.S. 28 N.S. 38; Ecoles et missions françaises (1897–1918), N.S. 39-N.S. 50; Ecoles et missions étrangères (1897–1914), N. S. 52-N.S. 57. Interesting but often polemical sources include: André, Bruneau, Traditions et politique de la France au Levant (Paris, 1932); Pierre, Ghalib, Le protectorat religieux de la France en Orient (Avignon, 1920);Google Scholar René, Ristelhueber, Traditions françaises au Liban (Paris, 1918). Also of value on this question are the articles from 1905 to 1914 in the Bulletin du Comité de l'Asie française.Google Scholar

^{page 133 note 2} Primary source material on this matter can be found unpublished in the Quai d'Orsay. France. Ministère des Affaires étrangères: Turquie. Politique intérieure. Dossier général, Syrie-Liban (1897–1914), N.S. 104-N.S. 124. Useful published material includes: Négib, Azoury, Le Réveil de la nation arabe dans l'Asie turque (Paris, 1906); Eugène, Jung, Les puissances devant la révolte arabe (Paris, 1906);Google Scholar Turquie, . IV^eme Armée, , La Verité sur la question syrienne (Stamboul, 1916);Google Scholar George, Antonjus, The Arab Awakening, The Story of the Arab National Movement (New York, 1946);Google Scholar Elie, Kedourie, England and the Middle East (London, 1956);Google Scholar Zeine, N. Zeine, Arab-Turkish Relations and the Emergence of Arab Nationalism (Beirut, 1958).Google Scholar

^{page 134 note 1} Herbert, Feis, Europe, the World's Banker (New York, 1961), p. 53;Google Scholar Harry, N. Howard, The Partition of Turkey, 1913–1923 (Norman, Oklahoma, 1931), pp. 49–50;Google Scholar Gottlieb, W. W., Studies in Secret Diplomacy during the First World War (London, 1957), pp. 20–1, 80.Google Scholar

^{page 134 note 2} Howard, , op. cit. pp. 49–50.Google Scholar

^{page 135 note 1} Bulletin du Comité de l'Asie française, vol. II (December 1902), pp. 549–50; France, Ministère des Affaires étrangères, Turquie, N.S. 321, 120–8. (Hereinafter these unpublished French diplomatic documents will be abbreviated M.A.E.) It must also be noted that the term ‘Syria’ was understood to mean the provinces of both Syria and the Lebanon.Google Scholar

^{page 135 note 2} Edward, M. Earle, Turkey, the Great Powers and the Bagdad Railway (New York, 1923), pp. 62–3.Google Scholar

^{page 136 note 1} For example see: Bulletin de Comité de l'Asie française, I (April, 1901), pp. 23–8;Google Scholar Le Petit Parisien, 19 August 1901. (The latter was a rather sensational newspaper but politically moderate, with the largest daily circulation in Paris at the time.)Google Scholar

^{page 136 note 2} France, , Annales de la Chambre des députds, Débats parlementaires vol. 66 (part 2), pp. 1856–7.Google Scholar

^{page 136 note 3} Ibid. p. 1857.

^{page 137 note 1} France, Commission de Publication des Documents relatifs aux Origines de la Guerre de 1914–1918, Documents diplomotiques français, series 2, vol. III, no. 36. (Hereinafter abbreviated D.D.F.)

^{page 137 note 2} D.D.F., series 2, vol. III, no. 303.

^{page 137 note 3} Ibid. no. 302.

^{page 138 note 1} Ibid. no. 347. The agreements mentioned by Delcassé indeed did exist. They had been signed by the Deutsche Bank and the Imperial Ottoman Bank on 13 and 21 May 1901 and accorded to the German group the exploitation of all junctions and branch lines between the Baghdad Railway and the main French Syrian network of the Damascus-Hama line. These arrangements, however, were not revealed officially until 1903. (See M.A.E., , Turquie, N.S. 337, pp. 74–82.)Google Scholar

^{page 138 note 2} D.D.F., series 2, vol. III, nos. 361, 367.

^{page 138 note 3} M.A.E., , Turquie, N.S. 174, pp. 226–7. Germany was correct in this respect. France eventually did consent to the unification of the Ottoman Public Debt, but not until 1908.Google Scholar

^{page 138 note 4} M.A.E., , Turquie, N.S. 337, pp. 24–5.Google Scholar

^{page 138 note 5} D.D.F., series 2, vol. IV, nos. 34,106.

^{page 139 note 1} F.O. 800/174, ME/06/6 (unpublished papers of Sir Francis Bertie, Public Record Office, London).

^{page 139 note 2} John, B. Wolf, The Diplomatic History of the Bagdad Railroad in The University of Missouri Studies, vol. xi (Columbia, Missouri, 1936), pp. 45–6.Google Scholar

^{page 139 note 3} Pierre, Renouvin, La politique extárieure de Théophile Delcassé (Paris, 1954), pp. 16–17.Google Scholar

^{page 139 note 4} D.D.F., series 2, vol. III, nos. 135, 199, 260.

^{page 140 note 1} M.A.E., Turquie, N.S. 336, pp. 131–3.

^{page 140 note 2} Papiers Delcassé, vol. xv, ‘Constantinople-Moyen-Orient, 1903–5904’ (unpublished papers at the Quai d'Orsay), pp. 4–6.Google Scholar

^{page 141 note 1} M.S.E., Turquie, N.S. 319, pp. 8–9.

^{page 141 note 2} M.S.E., , Turquie, N.S. 321, p. 141.Google Scholar

^{page 141 note 3} M.A.E., , Turquie, N.S. 322, pp. 63–4.Google Scholar This suggestion was relayed by Delcassé to the Ministry of Finance on 30 June 1904. Rouvier added his approval to that of the Foreign Minister. (See: Archives, Nationales, F³⁰ 356.)Google Scholar

^{page 141 note 4} D.D.F., series 2, vol. vi, no. 180. One reason the D.H.P. was losing so much money on the Damascus–Muzeirib connexion, according to the British consul general in Beirut, was that it was ‘making prohibitive charges for the conveyance of goods’. Hence, shippers were turning to the Hijaz line, whose charges were more reasonable. (F.O. 195/2165, 28 January 1904.)Google Scholar

^{page 142 note 1} M.A.E., , Turquie, N.S. 324, 189–90.Google Scholar

^{page 142 note 2} M.A.E., , Turquie, N.S. 325, pp. 204–6, 235–7; N.S. 326, p. 33.Google Scholar

^{page 142 note 3} M.A.E., , Turquie, N.S. 329, p. 174.Google Scholar

^{page 143 note 1} M.A.E., , Turquie, N.S. 328, pp. 294–5.Google Scholar

^{page 143 note 2} Mahmud, Moukhtar Pasha, La Turquie, I'Allemagne et l'Europe (Paris, 1921), pp. 204–10.Google Scholar

^{page 143 note 3} André, Mandeistam, Le sort de I'Empire ottoman (Paris, 1917), pp. 64–5.Google Scholar

^{page 144 note 1} For more details on this incident see: Challaye, F., ‘Politique international et journalisme d'affaires’ in La revue du mois, vol. 2 (10 06 1911), pp. 749–53;Google Scholar Charles, PaixSéailles, La diplomatie sécrète sous la troisième République, 1910–1911; Homs-Bagdad; du Quai d'Orsay à la correctionnelle; Recueil documentaire (Paris, 1911).Google Scholar The best account in English appears in Rudolph, Binion, Defeated Leaders, The Political Fate of Caillaux, Jouvenel and Tardieu (Morningside Heights, N.Y., 1960), pp. 214–39.Google Scholar

^{page 144 note 2} F.O. 800/193 B, part 4, pp. 126–7 (Lowther Papers).Google Scholar

^{page 145 note 1} D.D.F., series 2, vol. xii, no. 479, vol. xiii, no. 109.

^{page 145 note 2} D.D.F., series 2, vol. xiii, no. 128.

^{page 145 note 3} Great, Britain, British and Foreign State Papers, cv (London, 1915), pp. 657–8.Google Scholar

^{page 145 note 4} Wolf, , op. cit. pp. 62–3.Google Scholar

^{page 146 note 1} D.D.F., series 2, vol. XIII, no. 329.

^{page 146 note 2} Count, R. J. M. Cressaty, ‘Les intérêts français en Syrie’ (Paris, 1913), p. 13.Google Scholar

^{page 146 note 3} Alfred, Durand, Jeune Turquie, vieille France (Paris, 1909).Google Scholar

^{page 146 note 4} For example see: Eliot, G. Mears, Modern Turkey, 1908–1923 (New York, 1924), p. 349;Google Scholar Annuaire du commerce extérieurfrançais, 1908 (Paris, 1908);Google Scholar Great Britain, Diplomatic and Consular Reports, nos. 2950 (1902) and 4835 (1910–1911);Google Scholar Great Britain, House of Commons Accounts and Papers, vol. LXXXVII (1911), cmd. 5701, pp. 616–19.Google Scholar

^{page 147 note 1} M.A.E., , Turquie, N.S. 119, pp. 42–5.Google Scholar

^{page 147 note 2} M.A.E., , Turquie, N.S. 120, pp. 238–42 N.S. izi, pp. 50–52.Google Scholar

^{page 147 note 3} F.O. 195/2370, 20 April 1911.Google Scholar Great Britain, Foreign Office, British Documents on the Origins of the War, 1898–1914, eds. Gooch, G. P. and Harold, Temperley, vol. X, no. 73.Google Scholar

^{page 147 note 4} M.A.E., , Turquie, N.S. 122, pp. 2–6.Google Scholar

^{page 147 note 5} Maurice, Bompard, ‘L'Entrée en guerre de la Turquie’, La Revue de Paris (1 July 1921), pp. 64–5.Google Scholar

^{page 148 note 1} M.A.E., , Turquie, N.S. 403, pp. 151–68, 181–4.Google Scholar

^{page 148 note 2} D.D.F., series, vol. II, no. 128.

^{page 148 note 3} D.D.F., series 3, vol. III, no. 23.

^{page 149 note 1} D.D.F., series 3, vol. iv, no. 38. See also no. 359.

^{page 149 note 2} D.D.F., series 3, vol. VI, no. 518.

^{page 149 note 3} D.D.F., series 3, vol. VII, no. 5.

^{page 149 note 4} D.D.F., series 3, vol. VI, no. 646.

^{page 150 note 1} D.D.F., series 3, vol. VIII, no. 488.

^{page 150 note 2} M.A.E., , Turquie, N.S. 186, pp. 26–8. D.D.F., series, vol. VI, no. 144.Google Scholar

^{page 150 note 3} Djemal, Pasha, Memories of a Turkish Statesman, 1913–1919 (London, n.d.), pp. 73–6.Google Scholar

^{page 150 note 4} M.A.E., , Turquie, N.S. 299, pp. 176–82.Google Scholar

^{page 151 note 1} F.O. 424/240, flO. 287.

^{page 151 note 2} Raymond, Poincaré, Au service de la France, vol. iv (Paris, 1928), p. 14.Google Scholar

^{page 151 note 3} The text of the accord of 15 February 1914 can be found in D.D.F., series 3, vol. ix, no. 313. Accounts of the negotiations leading up to the accord can be found in a number of sources, among them: Earle, , op. cit., and Wolf, , op. cit.Google Scholar

^{page 152 note 1} Poincaré, , op. cit. p. 18.Google Scholar

^{page 152 note 2} Le Petit Parisien, Le Temps, Le Gaulois, all for 17 February 1914.Google Scholar

^{page 152 note 3} D.D.F., series, vol. X, no. 90.

^{page 153 note 1} F.O. 800/80, 23 March 1914.Google Scholar

^{page 153 note 2} Great Britain, House of Commons Debates, 1914, vol. LIX, cols. 2169–70.Google Scholar