The Balkan Peninsula by Frank Fox - HTML preview

PLEASE NOTE: This is an HTML preview only and some elements such as links or page numbers may be incorrect.
Download the book in PDF, ePub, Kindle for a complete version.

CHAPTER III

THE FALL OF THE TURKISH POWER

In the nineteenth century the Turkish dominion was pushed back in

all directions from the Balkan Peninsula. At the dawn of that century

Montenegro was the only Balkan state entirely free from occupation,

vassalage, or the duty of tribute to the Sublime Porte. At the close of

that century Montenegro, Serbia, Roumania, Greece, and Bulgaria

were all practically free and self-governing.

In 1804, as has been recorded, Kara George in Serbia raised the

standard of revolt against Turkey. In 1806 the Serbs defeated the

Turks in a pitched battle, and for a moment Serbia was free. But in 1812 when the Turkish power resolved upon a great invasion of

Serbia, the heart of Kara George failed him and he left his country to

its fate, taking refuge in Austria. Thus

[38]

deserted by their leader, the Serbs did not abandon the struggle

altogether. Milosh Obrenovic stepped to the front as the national

champion, and though he could make no stand against the Turkish

troops in the open field he kept up an active revolt from a base in the

mountains. The contest for national liberty went on with varying

fortune. Troubles at this time were thickening around Turkey, and

whenever she was engaged in war with Russia the oppressed

nationalities within her borders took the opportunity to strike a blow for liberty. By 1839—it is not possible to make a record of all the dynastic changes and revolutions which filled the years 1812-1839—

Serbia was practically free, with the payment of an annual tribute to Turkey as her only bond. During the Crimean War she kept her

neutrality as between Russia and Turkey. The Treaty of Paris (1856)

confirmed her territorial independence, subject to the payment of a tribute to Turkey. In 1867 the Turkish garrisons were withdrawn from

Serbia; but the tribute was still left in existence until the date of the Treaty of Berlin.

[39]

Exclusive News Agency

THE KING OF ROUMANIA

Roumania in 1828 (then Wallachia and Moldavia) had won her

territorial independence of Turkey subject only to payment of a

tribute. The Treaty of Paris (1856) left her under a nominal suzerainty

to Turkey. In 1859 the two kingdoms united to form Roumania, and in

1866 the late King Charles, as the result of a revolution, was elected

prince of the united kingdom.

Bulgaria had remained a fairly contented Turkish province until the rising of 1875, and its cruel suppression by the Bashi-Bazouks. As a

direct consequence of that massacre European diplomacy turned its

serious attention to the Balkan Peninsula, and at a Conference

demands were made upon Turkey for a comprehensive reform

applying to Serbia, Montenegro, Bosnia, Herzegovina, and Bulgaria.

The proposed reform was particularly drastic as applied to Bulgaria, which was still in effect Turkish territory, whilst all the other districts had achieved a practical freedom. It was proposed to create two

Bulgarian provinces divided into Sandjaks and Kazas as

administrative units, these to be subdivided into districts. Christian and Mohammedans were to be settled homogeneously in these

districts. Each district was to have at its head a mayor and a district

council,

[40]

elected by universal suffrage, and was to enjoy entire autonomy in local affairs. Several districts would form a Sandjak with a prefect ( mutessarif) at its head who was to be Christian or Mohammedan, according to the majority of the population of the Sandjak. He would

be proposed by the Governor-General, and nominated by the Porte

for four years. Finally, every two Sandjaks were to be administered by

a Christian Governor-General nominated by the Porte for five years, with consent of the Powers. He would govern the province with the help of a provincial assembly, composed of representatives chosen

by the district councils for a term of four years. This assembly would

nominate an administrative council. The provincial assembly would

be summoned every year to decide the budget and the redivision of taxes. The armed force was to be concentrated in the towns and

there would be local militia besides. The language of the predominant

nationality was to be employed, as well as Turkish. Finally, a

Commission of International Control was to supervise the execution

of these reforms.

The Sublime Porte was still haggling about these reforms when

Russia lost patience and

[41]

declared war upon Turkey on April 12, 1877. Moving through the

friendly territory of Roumania, Russia attacked the Turkish forces in Bulgarian territory. In that war the Russians found that the Turks were

a gallant foe, and the issue seemed to hang in the balance until Roumania and Bulgaria went actively to the help of the Russian

forces. The Roumanian aid was exceedingly valuable. Prince Charles

crossed the Danube at the head of 28,000 foot soldiers and 4000

cavalry. He was appointed Commander-in-Chief of the forces against

Plevna, and his soldiers were chiefly responsible for the taking of the

Grivica Redoubt which turned the tide of victory against the Turks.

The Bulgarians did but little during the campaign: it was not possible

that they should do much seeing that they could only put irregulars in

the field. Nevertheless some high personal reputations for courage

were made. During my stay with the Bulgarian army in 1912 I noted

that there were of the military officers three classes, the men who had

graduated in foreign military colleges—usually Petrograd,—very

smart, very insistent on their military dignity, speaking usually three or

four languages; officers who had been educated

[42]

at the Military College, Sofia; and the older Bulgarian type, dating sometimes from before the War of Liberation. Of these last the

outstanding figure was General Nicolaieff, who as captain of a

Bulgarian company rushed a Turkish battery beneath Shipka after the

Russians had been held up so long that they were in despair. A fine

stalwart figure General Nicolaieff showed when I met him at Yamboli,

a hospital base town of which he was military commandant. Another

soldier of the War of Liberation, a captain in rank, I travelled with for a

day once between Kirk Kilisse and Chorlu. We chummed up and

shared a meal of meat balls cooked with onions, rough country wine

(these from his stores), and dates and biscuits (from my stores). He spoke neither English nor French, but a Bulgarian doctor who spoke

French acted as interpreter, and the old officer, who after long

entreaty at last had got leave to go down to the front in spite of his age, yarned about the hardships and tragedies of the fighting around

Stara Zagora and the Shipka Pass. Some of the Bulgarians, he said,

took the field with no other arms than staves and knives, and got their

first rifles from the dead of the battle-fields.

THE SHIPKA PASS

[43]

Serbia took a hand in this campaign, too, though she hesitated for some time, going to the aid of Russia through fear of Austria.

Beginning late, at a time when the mountains were covered in the

winter snows, the Serbians suffered severely from the weather, but

won notable victories at Pirot, at Nish, and at Vranga. The Turks were

in full retreat on Constantinople when the armistice and Treaty of San

Stefano put an end to the war.

It seems to be one of the standing rules of Balkan wars and Balkan peace treaties that those who do the work shall not reap the reward,

and that a policy of standing by and waiting is the wisest and most profitable. In this Russo-Turkish war the Roumanians had done

invaluable work for the Russian cause. In return the Treaty of San Stefano robbed them shamefully. The Bulgarians had done little,

except to stain the arms of the allies with a series of massacres of the

Turks in reprisal for the previous atrocities inflicted upon them by the

Bashi-Bazouks. The Bulgarians were awarded a tremendous prize of

territory. If the grant had been confirmed it would have made Bulgaria

the paramount power of the Balkan Peninsula. By the Treaty

[44]

of San Stefano, Bulgaria was made an autonomous principality

subject to Turkey, with a Christian government and national militia.

The Prince of Bulgaria was to be freely chosen by the people and accepted by the Sublime Porte, with the consent of the Powers. As regards internal government, it was agreed that an assembly of

notables, presided over by an Imperial Commissioner and attended

by a Turkish Commissioner, should meet at Philippopolis or Tirnova

before the election of the Prince to draw up a constitutional statute similar to those of the other Danubian principalities after the Treaty of

Adrianople in 1830. The boundaries of Bulgaria were to include all that is now Bulgaria, and the greater part of Thrace and Macedonia.

The European Congress of Berlin which revised the Treaty of San

Stefano recognised that the motive of Russia was to create in

Bulgaria a vast but weak state, which would obediently serve her

interests and in time fall into her hands: and that the injury proposed

to be done to Roumania was inspired by a desire to limit the progress

of a courageous but an unfortunately independent-minded friend. The

Congress was suspicious of the Bulgarian arrangement, and

[45]

clipped off much of the territory assigned to the new principality. The

injury done to Roumania was allowed to stand. Then, as in 1912-

1913, when Balkan boundaries were again under the discussion of an

inter-European Conference, the vital interests of the great Powers

surrounding the Balkan Peninsula were to keep its peoples divided

and weak. Both Russia and Austria had more or less defined

territorial ambitions in the Balkans: and it suited neither Power to see

any one Balkan state rise to such a standard of greatness as would enable it to take the lead in a Balkan Union. Especially was it not the

wish of Austria that any Balkan state should grow to be so strong as

to kill definitely the hope she cherished of extending down the Adriatic

and towards the Aegean.

By the Treaty of Berlin, which followed the Congress of Berlin, the greater part of the Balkan Peninsula was freed altogether from

Turkish rule. Roumania and Serbia were relieved from all suggestion

of tribute or vassalage. Bulgaria was left subject to a tribute (which was very quickly afterwards repudiated). Where the Turkish power

was left in existence in European Turkey it was a threatened

existence, for the

[46]

newly freed Christian peoples began at once to conspire to help to freedom their nationals left still under Turkish rule. The war of 1912

began to be prepared in 1878.

There was, however, a period of comparative peace. Roumania,

though discontented, decided to bide her time. Her prince was

crowned king with a crown made from the metal of Turkish cannon

taken at Plevna. That was the only hint that she gave of keeping in mind the greatness of her services which had been so poorly

rewarded.

Montenegro, whilst deprived of the great and the well-deserved

expansion which the Treaty of San Stefano offered, had some benefit

from the Treaty of Berlin. The area of the kingdom was doubled and it

won access to the Adriatic. A little later the harbour of Dulcigno was

ceded to Montenegro by Turkey under pressure from the Powers,

and she was left with only one notable grievance, that of being shut off from Serbia by the Sanjak of Novi-Bazar, which Austria secured for Turkey, apparently with the idea of one day seizing it on her way

down to Salonica.

Chusseau Flaviens

KING FERDINAND OF BULGARIA

Serbia increased her territory by one-fourth under the Treaty of

Berlin, but was not allowed to extend towards the Adriatic, and,

nurturing

[47]

as she did a dream of reviving the old Serbian Empire, was but poorly

satisfied.

Bulgaria, if it had not been for the promises of the Treaty of San Stefano, might have been fairly content with the provisions of the Treaty of Berlin. She had been the first nation in the Balkans to yield

to the Turks. She had allowed her sons to act as mercenary soldiers

to aid the Turks against other Christians: and during the period of oppression she had suffered less than any from the rigours of the invader, had protested less than any by force of arms. Yet now she was given freedom as a gift won largely by the sacrifices of others.

But, though having the most reason to be content, Bulgaria was the least contented of all the Balkan States. The restless ambition of the

people guiding her destinies was manifested in an internal revolution

which displaced the first prince (Alexander of Battenberg) and put on

the throne the present king (Ferdinand of Coburg). Bulgaria, too,

repudiated the friendly tutelage which Russia wished to exercise over

her destinies.

The territorial settlement made by the Berlin Treaty was first broken by Bulgaria. That treaty had cut the ethnological Bulgaria into two,

[48]

leaving the southern half as a separate province under the name of Eastern Rumelia. In 1885 Eastern Rumelia was annexed to Bulgaria

with the glad consent of its inhabitants, but in spite of the wishes of Russia. Serbia saw in this the threat of a Bulgarian hegemony in the

Balkans, and demanded some territorial compensation for herself.

This was refused. War followed. The Bulgarians were victorious at

the Battle of Slivnitza, an achievement which was in great measure due to the organising ability of Prince Alexander. The victory secured

Rumelia for Bulgaria. But no sense of gratitude to Prince Alexander survived, and the Russian intrigue which secured his abdication and

flight was undoubtedly aided by a large section of the Bulgarian

people. Stambouloff, a peasant leader of the Bulgarians and its

greatest personality since the War of Liberation, was faithful to

Alexander, but was not able to save him.

Underwood & Underwood

KING FERDINAND'S BODYGUARD

The Bulgarian throne after Alexander's abdication was offered to the

King of Roumania. The acceptance of the offer would possibly have

led to a real Balkan Federation. The united power of Roumania and Bulgaria, exercised wisely, could have gently pressed the other

Balkan

[49]

peoples into a union. That, however, would have suited the aims

neither of Russia nor of Austria, the two Empires which guided the destinies of the Balkans, chiefly in the light of their own selfish ends.

The Roumanian king refused the throne of Bulgaria, and in 1887

Prince Ferdinand of Coburg became Prince of the State. It was not long before he fell out with Stambouloff, the able but personally

unamenable patriot who chiefly had made modern Bulgaria. In the

conflict between the two Prince Ferdinand proved the stronger.

Stambouloff was dismissed from office, and in 1895 was

assassinated in the streets of Sofia. No attempt was made to punish

his murderers.

In 1908 Bulgaria shook off the last shred of dependence to Turkey.

The bold action was the crown of a clever diplomatic intrigue by

Prince Ferdinand. Since the murder of Stambouloff the Prince had

been sedulously cultivating in public the friendship of Russia: but that

had not prevented him carrying to a great pitch of mutual confidence

a secret understanding with Austria. The Austrian Empire was

anxious to annex formally the districts of Bosnia and Herzegovina, of

which it had long been in

[50]

occupation. Objection to this would surely have come from Russia;

but Russia was impotent for the time being after the disastrous war with Japan. Just as surely it would come from Serbia which would

see thus definitely pass over to the one Power, which she had reason

to fear, a section of Slav-inhabited country clearly connected to the Serbs by racial ties. Serbia, it might be expected, would have the support of France and England as well as Russia. For Bulgaria the offer to neutralise Serbia made to Austria all the difference between an action which was a little risky and an action which had no risk at all. Bulgaria supported Austria in the annexation, and, as was to have

been expected, Serbia found protest impossible, since Russia,

France, and England swallowed the affront to treaty obligations to

which they were parties. It was Bulgaria's reward to have the support

of the Triple Alliance in throwing off all fealty and tribute to the Sublime Porte. Prince Ferdinand became the Czar Ferdinand of

Bulgaria.

Nor was that the end of Bulgarian ambition. The "big" Bulgaria of the San Stefano treaty floated before the eyes of her rulers constantly, and she began to prepare for a war against

[51]

Turkey, of which the prize should be Thrace and Macedonia. An

obstacle in Macedonia was not only that the Turks were in

occupation, but that the Greeks considered themselves entitled to the

reversion of the estate. Rivalry between the three nations was

responsible for the Macedonian horrors, which went on from year to year, and made one district of the Balkans a veritable hell on earth.

These horrors have been set at the door of the "Unspeakable Turk."

The Turk has quite enough to answer for in the many hideous crimes

which he has undoubtedly committed. It is not quite just to hold him wholly responsible for the terrible state of Macedonia during the last few years. Greek and Bulgarian were alike interested in making it

appear to the world that Turkish rule in Macedonia was impossible.

To effect this they insisted that rapine and massacre should become

normal. If the Turk did not wish for massacres he was stirred up to massacres. Christian pastors were not prevented by their Christian

faith from murders of their own people, if it could be certain that the Turks would have the discredit of them. Side by side with the

atrocities which were committed by Turks against Christians and

Christians

[52]

against Turks, the two sets of warring Christians, the Bulgarian

Exarchates and the Greek Patriarchates, attacked one another with a

fiendish relentlessness, which equalled the most able efforts of the Turks in the way of rape, murder, and robbery.

In excuse for part of this, i.e. that part which stirred up the Turks to atrocities even when they wished to be peaceful, there could be

pleaded the good object of striving for the end of all Turkish rule in Christian districts of the Balkans. The excuse will serve this far: that without a doubt a Christian community cannot be governed justly by

the Turk, and the very strongest of steps are warranted to put an end

to Turkish domination of a district largely inhabited by Christians. But

no consideration, even that of exterminating Turkish rule, could justify

all the Christian atrocities perpetrated in Macedonia: and there is certainly no shadow of an excuse for the atrocities with which

Bulgarian sought to score against Greek and Greek against

Bulgarian. The era of those atrocities has not yet closed. The Turk has been driven from Macedonia, but Greek and Bulgarian continue

their feud. For the time the Greek is in the ascendant, whilst the Bulgarian broods over a revenge.

[53]

BULGARIAN INFANTRY