Book Review: Cyprus and Makarios
| DOI | 10.1177/002070206101600218 |
| Date | 01 June 1961 |
| Published date | 01 June 1961 |
| Author | Mary E. White |
| Subject Matter | Book Review |
198
INTERNATIONAL
JOURNAL
Mr. Crozier is
perhaps
too
optimistic when
he
suggests
that
pure
re-
pression
by
itself
cannot
ultimately
succeed
or
that
terrorism
is
not an
efficient
weapon
for
those
in revolt.
The Soviet
Union's
repression
of
the Hungarian
Revolution
of
1956
was unaccompanied
by
any
far-
reaching
reforms,
but
it
was
nevertheless
completely successful.
No
one
can
really
maintain,
moreover,
that
the
use of
terror
was
not
primarily
responsible
for
the
success
of
Irgun
and
the
Stern
Gang
in
Palestine
or
of
EOKA
in Cyprus.
These
small
points aside,
Mr.
Crozier's
book
will
be
rewarding
reading
for
all
who
are
concerned
with
the
increase
of
vio-
lence
as
a political
method.
Ottawa
D.
J.
GOODSPEED
CYPRUS
AND
MAKARIOS.
By
Stanley
Mayes.
1960.
(London:
Putnam.
Toronto:
McClelland
&
Stewart.
xii,
260pp.
$5.00.)
"Myth
and
equivocation,"
so
the
author
sums
up
this
study
of
Arch-
bishop
Makarios
and
his
part
in
the
bitter
and
bloody
ten-year
struggle
in
Cyprus, resolved
only
in
the
autumn
of
1960
by
the
creation
of
the
Republic
of
Cyprus
with
Makarios
as
its
first
president.
The
myth,
which
Makarios has
exploited
throughout
the
struggle
and
will
doubt-
less continue
to exploit,
is
a
dangerous
one.
The
Archbishop of
Cyprus,
clad
in
imperial
purple
and
carrying
a
sceptre
instead
of
the
usual
pas-
toral
staff,
sits
upon
the
Throne
of
Barnabas
surmounted
by
the
double-
headed eagle of
Byzantium,
and
is
the
head
of
a branch
of
the
Orthodox
Church
independent
since
the
fifth
century
A.D.
By
virtue
of
this
in-
dependence
which
the
church
won
in
Cyprus
so
long ago,
it
has
ever
since
ranked
in
dignity with
the
four
original
Patriarchates;
moreover,
during the
period
of
Turkish
occupation
it
gained
great
political
power.
Because
of
the
indifference
and
incompetence
of
the
local
Turkish
ad-
ministration
it
was
allowed
to
assume
civil
authority
over
the
Greek
population;
the
Church took
the
responsibility
for
collecting
taxes,
amassed
property,
and
became
enormously
wealthy.
Hence
the
present
situation
that
the
Archbishop
is
both
the
head
of
an
autocephalous
church
with
absolute
spiritual
and
temporal
authority
within
it,
and
also
Ethnarch,
head
of
the
Greek
population
of
Cyprus,
a
position
in
which
he
claims
similar
autocratic
power,
enhanced
by
his
spiritual
prestige.
Makarios
has
never
relinquished
one
whit
of
this
dual
auth-
ority
and
has
never
allowed
anyone
else
to
speak
for
the
Greeks
in
Cyprus.
Under
his
leadership
the
Church
has
added
to
itself
control
of
education
in
the
Greek
schools
and
of
the
right-wing
trade
union
move-
ment.
Thus
the
schools
became
centres
of
political
indoctrination
for
Enosis
(union
with
Greece)
and
training
grounds
for
violence,
and
the
Church-sponsored
trade
unions
an
answer
to
the
Communist
challenge
to
the
long
political
domination
of
the
Church.
"Equivocation"
is
the
other
clue
to
Makarios'
policy.
He
was
never
willing
during
the
long
years
of
fighting
to
condemn
the terrorism
of
EOKA
under
Grivas'
leadership.
He
refused
the
repeated
British
offers
of
a constitution and
even
of
independence
for
Cyprus
because
he
would
not
give
up
Enosis.
In the
end
he
accepted
the
London
agreement
only
To continue reading
Request your trial