diff options
| author | Roger Frank <rfrank@pglaf.org> | 2025-10-15 04:37:39 -0700 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Roger Frank <rfrank@pglaf.org> | 2025-10-15 04:37:39 -0700 |
| commit | 7d2723a1611588a2038e9abbef21bcacdf247143 (patch) | |
| tree | d168732ec1cef280028efd5d51385d84a9a787a5 /11716-h | |
Diffstat (limited to '11716-h')
| -rw-r--r-- | 11716-h/11716-h.htm | 12857 |
1 files changed, 12857 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/11716-h/11716-h.htm b/11716-h/11716-h.htm new file mode 100644 index 0000000..36007a0 --- /dev/null +++ b/11716-h/11716-h.htm @@ -0,0 +1,12857 @@ +<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" +"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> +<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> +<head> +<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=UTF-8" /> +<meta http-equiv="Content-Style-Type" content="text/css" /> +<title>The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Balkans, by Nevill Forbes, Arnold J. Toynbee, D. Mitrany, D.G. Hogarth</title> + +<style type="text/css"> + +body { margin-left: 20%; + margin-right: 20%; + text-align: justify; } + +h1, h2, h3, h4, h5 {text-align: center; font-style: normal; font-weight: +normal; line-height: 1.5; margin-top: .5em; margin-bottom: .5em;} + +h1 {font-size: 300%; + margin-top: 0.6em; + margin-bottom: 0.6em; + letter-spacing: 0.12em; + word-spacing: 0.2em; + text-indent: 0em;} +h2 {font-size: 150%; margin-top: 2em; margin-bottom: 1em;} +h3 {font-size: 130%; margin-top: 1em;} +h4 {font-size: 120%;} +h5 {font-size: 110%;} + +.no-break {page-break-before: avoid;} /* for epubs */ + +div.chapter {page-break-before: always; margin-top: 4em;} + +hr {width: 80%; margin-top: 2em; margin-bottom: 2em;} + +p {text-indent: 1em; + margin-top: 0.25em; + margin-bottom: 0.25em; } + +p.letter {text-indent: 0%; + margin-left: 10%; + margin-right: 10%; + margin-top: 1em; + margin-bottom: 1em; } + +a:link {color:blue; text-decoration:none} +a:visited {color:blue; text-decoration:none} +a:hover {color:red} + +</style> + +</head> + +<body> +<div>*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 11716 ***</div> + +<h1>The Balkans</h1> + +<h3>A HISTORY OF BULGARIA—SERBIA—GREECE—RUMANIA—TURKEY</h3> + +<h2 class="no-break">BY NEVILL FORBES, ARNOLD J. TOYNBEE, D. MITRANY, D.G. HOGARTH</h2> + +<hr /> + +<h2>Contents</h2> + +<table summary="" style=""> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#chap00">PREFACE</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#part01"><b>BULGARIA AND SERBIA. By NEVILL FORBES.</b></a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#chap01">1. Introductory</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#chap02">2. The Balkan Peninsula in Classical Times 400 B.C.— A.D. 500</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#chap03">3. The Arrival of the Slavs in the Balkan Peninsula, A.D. 500-650</a><br /><br /></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#part02"><b>BULGARIA.</b></a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#chap04">4. The Arrival of the Bulgars in the Balkan Peninsula, 600-700</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#chap05">5. The Early Years of Bulgaria and the Introduction of Christianity, 700-893</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#chap06">6. The Rise and Fall of the First Bulgarian Empire, 893-972</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#chap07">7. The Rise and Fall of ‘Western Bulgaria’ and the Greek Supremacy, 963-1186</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#chap08">8. The Rise and Fall of the Second Bulgarian Empire, 1186-1258</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#chap09">9. The Serbian Supremacy and the Final Collapse, 1258-1393</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#chap10">10. The Turkish Dominion and the Emancipation, 1393-1878</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#chap11">11. The Aftermath, and Prince Alexander of Battenberg, 1878-86</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#chap12">12. The Regeneration under Prince Ferdinand of Saxe-Coburg, 1886-1908</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#chap13">13. The Kingdom, 1908-13</a><br /><br /></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#part03"><b>SERBIA.</b></a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#chap14">14. The Serbs under Foreign Supremacy, 650-1168</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#chap15">15. The Rise and Fall of the Serbian Empire and the Extinction of Serbian Independence, 1168-1496</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#chap16">16. The Turkish Dominion, 1496-1796</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#chap17">17. The Liberation of Serbia under Kara-George (1804-13) and Miloš Obrenović (1815-30): 1796-1830</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#chap18">18. The Throes of Regeneration: Independent Serbia, 1830-1903</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#chap19">19. Serbia, Montenegro, and the Serbo-Croats in Austria-Hungary, 1903-8</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#chap20">20. Serbia and Montenegro, and the two Balkan Wars, 1908-13</a><br /><br /></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#part04"><b>GREECE. By ARNOLD J. TOYNBEE.</b></a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#chap21">1. From Ancient to Modern Greece</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#chap22">2. The Awakening of the Nation</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#chap23">3. The Consolidation of the State</a><br /><br /></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#part05"><b>RUMANIA: HER HISTORY AND POLITICS. By D. MITRANY</b></a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#chap24">1. Introduction</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#chap25">2. Formation of the Rumanian Nation</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#chap26">3. The Foundation and Development of the Rumanian Principalities</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#chap27">4. The Phanariote Rule</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#chap28">5. Modern Period to 1866</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#chap29">6. Contemporary Period: Internal Development</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#chap30">7. Contemporary Period: Foreign Affairs</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#chap31">8. Rumania and the Present War</a><br /><br /></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#part06"><b>TURKEY. By D. G. HOGARTH</b></a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#chap32">1. Origin of the Osmanlis</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#chap33">2. Expansion of the Osmanli Kingdom</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#chap34">3. Heritage and Expansion of the Byzantine Empire</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#chap35">4. Shrinkage and Retreat</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#chap36">5. Revival</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#chap37">6. Relapse</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#chap38">7. Revolution</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#chap39">8. The Balkan War</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#chap40">9. The Future</a><br /><br /></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#chap41"><b>INDEX</b></a></td> +</tr> + +</table> + +<h2>MAPS</h2> + +<table summary="" style=""> + +<tr> +<td>The Balkan Peninsula: Ethnological</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td>The Balkan Peninsula</td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td>The Ottoman Empire</td> +</tr> + +</table> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="chap00"></a>PREFACE</h2> + +<p> +The authors of this volume have not worked in conjunction. Widely separated, +engaged on other duties, and pressed for time, we have had no opportunity for +interchange of views. Each must be held responsible, therefore, for his own +section alone. If there be any discrepancies in our writings (it is not +unlikely in so disputed a field of history) we can only regret an unfortunate +result of the circumstances. Owing to rapid change in the relations of our +country to the several Balkan peoples, the tone of a section written earlier +may differ from that of another written later. It may be well to state that the +sections on Serbia and Bulgaria were finished before the decisive Balkan +developments of the past two months. Those on Greece and Rumania represent only +a little later stage of the evolution. That on Turkey, compiled between one +mission abroad and another, was the latest to be finished. +</p> + +<p> +If our sympathies are not all the same, or given equally to friends and foes, +none of us would find it possible to indite a Hymn of Hate about any Balkan +people. Every one of these peoples, on whatever side he be fighting to-day, has +a past worthy of more than our respect and interwoven in some intimate way with +our history. That any one of them is arrayed against us to-day is not to be +laid entirely or chiefly at its own door. They are all fine peoples who have +not obtained their proper places in the sun. The best of the Osmanli nation, +the Anatolian peasantry, has yet to make its physical and moral qualities felt +under civilized conditions. As for the rest—the Serbs and the Bulgars, +who have enjoyed brief moments of barbaric glory in their past, have still to +find themselves in that future which shall be to the Slav. The Greeks, who were +old when we were not as yet, are younger now than we. They are as incalculable +a factor in a political forecast as another Chosen Race, the Jews. Their past +is the world’s glory: the present in the Near East is theirs more than +any people’s: the future—despite the laws of corporate being and +decline, dare we say they will have no part in it? Of Rumania what are we to +think? Her mixed people has had the start of the Balkan Slavs in modern +civilization, and evidently her boundaries must grow wider yet. But the limits +of her possible expansion are easier to set than those of the rest. +</p> + +<p> +We hope we have dealt fairly with all these peoples. Mediaeval history, whether +of the East or the West, is mostly a record of bloodshedding and cruelty; and +the Middle Age has been prolonged to our own time in most parts of the Balkans, +and is not yet over in some parts. There are certain things salutary to bear in +mind when we think or speak of any part of that country to-day. First, that +less than two hundred years ago, England had its highwaymen on all roads, and +its smuggler dens and caravans, Scotland its caterans, and Ireland its +moonlighters. Second, that religious fervour has rarely mitigated and generally +increased our own savagery. Thirdly, that our own policy in Balkan matters has +been none too wise, especially of late. In permitting the Treaty of Bucarest +three years ago, we were parties to making much of the trouble that has ensued, +and will ensue again. If we have not been able to write about the Near East +under existing circumstances altogether <i>sine ira et studio</i>, we have +tried to remember that each of its peoples has a case. +</p> + +<h5>D.G. HOGARTH.</h5> + +<p> +<i>November</i>, 1915. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="part01"></a>BULGARIA AND SERBIA</h2> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="chap01"></a>1<br/> +<i>Introductory</i></h2> + +<p> +The whole of what may be called the trunk or <i>massif</i> of the Balkan +peninsula, bounded on the north by the rivers Save and Danube, on the west by +the Adriatic, on the east by the Black Sea, and on the south by a very +irregular line running from Antivari (on the coast of the Adriatic) and the +lake of Scutari in the west, through lakes Okhrida and Prespa (in Macedonia) to +the outskirts of Salonika and thence to Midia on the shores of the Black Sea, +following the coast of the Aegean Sea some miles inland, is preponderatingly +inhabited by Slavs. These Slavs are the Bulgarians in the east and centre, the +Serbs and Croats (or Serbians and Croatians or Serbo-Croats) in the west, and +the Slovenes in the extreme north-west, between Trieste and the Save; these +nationalities compose the southern branch of the Slavonic race. The other +inhabitants of the Balkan peninsula are, to the south of the Slavs, the +Albanians in the west, the Greeks in the centre and south, and the Turks in the +south-east, and, to the north, the Rumanians. All four of these nationalities +are to be found in varying quantities within the limits of the Slav territory +roughly outlined above, but greater numbers of them are outside it; on the +other hand, there are a considerable number of Serbs living north of the rivers +Save and Danube, in southern Hungary. Details of the ethnic distribution and +boundaries will of course be gone into more fully later; meanwhile attention +may be called to the significant fact that the name of Macedonia, the heart of +the Balkan peninsula, has been long used by the French gastronomers to denote a +dish, the principal characteristic of which is that its component parts are +mixed up into quite inextricable confusion. +</p> + +<p> +Of the three Slavonic nationalities already mentioned, the two first, the +Bulgarians and the Serbo-Croats, occupy a much greater space, geographically +and historically, than the third. The Slovenes, barely one and a half million +in number, inhabiting the Austrian provinces of Carinthia and Carniola, have +never been able to form a political state, though, with the growth of Trieste +as a great port and the persistent efforts of Germany to make her influence if +not her flag supreme on the shores of the Adriatic, this small people has from +its geographical position and from its anti-German (and anti-Italian) attitude +achieved considerable notoriety and some importance. +</p> + +<p> +Of the Bulgars and Serbs it may be said that at the present moment the former +control the eastern, and the latter, in alliance with the Greeks, the western +half of the peninsula. It has always been the ambition of each of these three +nationalities to dominate the whole, an ambition which has caused endless waste +of blood and money and untold misery. If the question were to be settled purely +on ethnical considerations, Bulgaria would acquire the greater part of the +interior of Macedonia, the most numerous of the dozen nationalities of which is +Bulgarian in sentiment if not in origin, and would thus undoubtedly attain the +hegemony of the peninsula, while the centre of gravity of the Serbian nation +would, as is ethnically just, move north-westwards. Political considerations, +however, have until now always been against this solution of the difficulty, +and, even if it solved in this sense, there would still remain the problem of +the Greek nationality, whose distribution along all the coasts of the Aegean, +both European and Asiatic, makes a delimitation of the Greek state on purely +ethnical lines virtually impossible. It is curious that the Slavs, though +masters of the interior of the peninsula and of parts of its eastern and +western coasts, have never made the shores of the Aegean (the White Sea, as +they call it) or the cities on them their own. The Adriatic is the only sea on +the shore of which any Slavonic race has ever made its home. In view of this +difficulty, namely, the interior of the peninsula being Slavonic while the +coastal fringe is Greek, and of the approximately equal numerical strength of +all three nations, it is almost inevitable that the ultimate solution of the +problem and delimitation of political boundaries will have to be effected by +means of territorial compromise. It can only be hoped that this ultimate +compromise will be agreed upon by the three countries concerned, and will be +more equitable than that which was forced on them by Rumania in 1913 and laid +down in the Treaty of Bucarest of that year. +</p> + +<p> +If no arrangement on a principle of give and take is made between them, the +road to the East, which from the point of view of the Germanic powers lies +through Serbia, will sooner or later inevitably be forced open, and the +independence, first of Serbia, Montenegro, and Albania, and later of Bulgaria +and Greece, will disappear, <i>de facto</i> if not in appearance, and both +materially and morally they will become the slaves of the central empires. If +the Balkan League could be reconstituted, Germany and Austria would never reach +Salonika or Constantinople. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="chap02"></a>2<br/> +<i>The Balkan Peninsula in Classical Times</i><br/> +400 B.C.–A.D. 500.</h2> + +<p> +In the earlier historical times the whole of the eastern part of the Balkan +peninsula between the Danube and the Aegean was known as Thracia, while the +western part (north of the forty-first degree of latitude) was termed +Illyricum; the lower basin of the river Vardar (the classical Axius) was called +Macedonia. A number of the tribal and personal names of the early Illyrians and +Thracians have been preserved. Philip of Macedonia subdued Thrace in the fourth +century B.C. and in 342 founded the city of Philippopolis. Alexander’s +first campaign was devoted to securing control of the peninsula, but during the +Third century B.C. Thrace was invaded from the north and laid waste by the +Celts, who had already visited Illyria. The Celts vanished by the end of that +century, leaving a few place-names to mark their passage. The city of Belgrade +was known until the seventh century A.D. by its Celtic name of Singidunum. +Naissus, the modern Nish, is also possibly of Celtic origin. It was towards 230 +B.C. that Rome came into contact with Illyricum, owing to the piratical +proclivities of its inhabitants, but for a long time it only controlled the +Dalmatian coast, so called after the Delmati or Dalmati, an Illyrian tribe. The +reason for this was the formidable character of the mountains of Illyria, which +run in several parallel and almost unbroken lines the whole length of the shore +of the Adriatic and have always formed an effective barrier to invasion from +the west. The interior was only very gradually subdued by the Romans after +Macedonia had been occupied by them in 146 B.C. Throughout the first century +B.C. conflicts raged with varying fortune between the invaders and all the +native races living between the Adriatic and the Danube. They were attacked +both from Aquileia in the north and from Macedonia in the south, but it was not +till the early years of our era that the Danube became the frontier of the +Roman Empire. +</p> + +<p> +In the year A.D. 6 Moesia, which included a large part of the modern kingdom of +Serbia and the northern half of that of Bulgaria between the Danube and the +Balkan range (the classical Haemus), became an imperial province, and twenty +years later Thrace, the country between the Balkan range and the Aegean, was +incorporated in the empire, and was made a province by the Emperor Claudius in +A.D. 46. The province of Illyricum or Dalmatia stretched between the Save and +the Adriatic, and Pannonia lay between the Danube and the Save. In 107 A.D. the +Emperor Trajan conquered the Dacians beyond the lower Danube, and organized a +province of Dacia out of territory roughly equivalent to the modern Wallachia +and Transylvania, This trans-Danubian territory did not remain attached to the +empire for more than a hundred and fifty years; but within the river line a +vast belt of country, stretching from the head of the Adriatic to the mouths of +the Danube on the Black Sea, was Romanized through and through. The Emperor +Trajan has been called the Charlemagne of the Balkan peninsula; all remains are +attributed to him (he was nicknamed the Wallflower by Constantine the Great), +and his reign marked the zenith of Roman power in this part of the world. The +Balkan peninsula enjoyed the benefits of Roman civilization for three +centuries, from the first to the fourth, but from the second century onwards +the attitude of the Romans was defensive rather than offensive. The war against +the Marcomanni under the Emperor Marcus Aurelius, in the second half of this +century, was the turning-point. Rome was still victorious, but no territory was +added to the empire. The third century saw the southward movement of the +Germanic peoples, who took the place of the Celts. The Goths invaded the +peninsula, and in 251 the Emperor Decius was killed in battle against them near +Odessus on the Black Sea (the modern Varna). The Goths reached the outskirts of +Thessalonica (Salonika), but were defeated by the Emperor Claudius at Naissus +(Nish) in 269; shortly afterwards, however, the Emperor Aurelian had +definitively to relinquish Dacia to them. The Emperor Diocletian, a native of +Dalmatia, who reigned from 284 to 305, carried out a redistribution of the +imperial provinces. Pannonia and western Illyria, or Dalmatia, were assigned to +the prefecture of Italy, Thrace to that of the Orient, while the whole centre +of the peninsula, from the Danube to the Peloponnese, constituted the +prefecture of Illyria, with Thessalonica as capital. The territory to the north +of the Danube having been lost, what is now western Bulgaria was renamed Dacia, +while Moesia, the modern kingdom of Serbia, was made very much smaller. +Praevalis, or the southern part of Dalmatia, approximately the modern +Montenegro and Albania, was detached from that province and added to the +prefecture of Illyria. In this way the boundary between the province of +Dalmatia and the Balkan peninsula proper ran from near the lake of Scutari in +the south to the river Drinus (the modern Drina), whose course it followed till +the Save was reached in the north. +</p> + +<p> +An event of far-reaching importance in the following century was the elevation +by Constantine the Great of the Greek colony of Byzantium into the imperial +city of Constantinople in 325. This century also witnessed the arrival of the +Huns in Europe from Asia. They overwhelmed the Ostrogoths, between the Dnieper +and the Dniester, in 375, and the Visigoths, settled in Transylvania and the +modern Rumania, moved southwards in sympathy with this event. The Emperor +Valens lost his life fighting against these Goths in 378 at the great battle of +Adrianople (a city established in Thrace by the Emperor Hadrian in the second +century). His successor, the Emperor Theodosius, placated them with gifts and +made them guardians of the northern frontier, but at his death, in 395, they +overran and devastated the entire peninsula, after which they proceeded to +Italy. After the death of the Emperor Theodosius the empire was divided, never +to be joined into one whole again. The dividing line followed that, already +mentioned, which separated the prefecture of Italy from those of Illyria and +the Orient, that is to say, it began in the south, on the shore of the Adriatic +near the Bocche di Cattaro, and went due north along the valley of the Drina +till the confluence of that river with the Save. It will be seen that this +division had consequences which have lasted to the present day. Generally +speaking, the Western Empire was Latin in language and character, while the +Eastern was Greek, though owing to the importance of the Danubian provinces to +Rome from the military point of view, and the lively intercourse maintained +between them, Latin influence in them was for a long time stronger than Greek. +Its extent is proved by the fact that the people of modern Rumania are partly, +and their language very largely, defended from those of the legions and +colonies of the Emperor Trajan. +</p> + +<p> +Latin influence, shipping, colonization, and art were always supreme on the +eastern shores of the Adriatic, just as were those of Greece on the shores of +the Black Sea. The Albanians even, descendants of the ancient Illyrians, were +affected by the supremacy of the Latin language, from which no less than a +quarter of their own meagre vocabulary is derived; though driven southwards by +the Romans and northwards by the Greeks, they have remained in their mountain +fastnesses to this day, impervious to any of the civilizations to which they +have been exposed. +</p> + +<p> +Christianity spread to the shores of the peninsula very early; Macedonia and +Dalmatia were the parts where it was first established, and it took some time +to penetrate into the interior. During the reign of Diocletian numerous martyrs +suffered for the faith in the Danubian provinces, but with the accession of +Constantine the Great persecution came to an end. As soon, however, as the +Christians were left alone, they started persecuting each other, and during the +fourth century the Arian controversy re-echoed throughout the peninsula. +</p> + +<p> +In the fifth century the Huns moved from the shores of the Black Sea to the +plains of the Danube and the Theiss; they devastated the Balkan peninsula, in +spite of the tribute which they had levied on Constantinople in return for +their promise of peace. After the death of Attila, in 453, they again retreated +to Asia, and during the second half of the century the Goths were once more +supreme in the peninsula. Theodoric occupied Singidunum (Belgrade) in 471 and, +after plundering Macedonia and Greece, settled in Novae (the modern Svishtov), +on the lower Danube, in 483, where he remained till he transferred the sphere +of his activities to Italy ten years later. Towards the end of the fifth +century Huns of various kinds returned to the lower Danube and devastated the +peninsula several times, penetrating as far as Epirus and Thessaly. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="chap03"></a>3<br/> +<i>The Arrival of the Slavs in the Balkan Peninsula</i>, A.D. 500–650</h2> + +<p> +The Balkan peninsula, which had been raised to a high level of security and +prosperity during the Roman dominion, gradually relapsed into barbarism as a +result of these endless invasions; the walled towns, such as Salonika and +Constantinople, were the only safe places, and the country became waste and +desolate. The process continued unabated throughout the three following +centuries, and one is driven to one of two conclusions, either that these lands +must have possessed very extraordinary powers of recuperation to make it worth +while for invaders to pillage them so frequently, or, what is more probable, +there can have been after some time little left to plunder, and consequently +the Byzantine historians’ accounts of enormous drives of prisoners and +booty are much exaggerated. It is impossible to count the number of times the +tide of invasion and devastation swept southwards over the unfortunate +peninsula. The emperors and their generals did what they could by means of +defensive works on the frontiers, of punitive expeditions, and of trying to set +the various hordes of barbarians at loggerheads with each other, but, as they +had at the same time to defend an empire which stretched from Armenia to Spain, +it is not surprising that they were not more successful. The growing riches of +Constantinople and Salonika had an irresistible attraction for the wild men +from the east and north, and unfortunately the Greek citizens were more +inclined to spend their energy in theological disputes and their leisure in the +circus than to devote either the one or the other to the defence of their +country. It was only by dint of paying them huge sums of money that the +invaders were kept away from the coast. The departure of the Huns and the Goths +had made the way for fresh series of unwelcome visitors. In the sixth century +the Slavs appear for the first time. From their original homes which were +immediately north of the Carpathians, in Galicia and Poland, but may also have +included parts of the modern Hungary, they moved southwards and +south-eastwards. They were presumably in Dacia, north of the Danube, in the +previous century, but they are first mentioned as having crossed that river +during the reign of the Emperor Justin I (518-27). They were a loosely-knit +congeries of tribes without any single leader or central authority; some say +they merely possessed the instinct of anarchy, others that they were permeated +with the ideals of democracy. What is certain is that amongst them neither +leadership nor initiative was developed, and that they lacked both cohesion and +organisation. The Eastern Slavs, the ancestors of the Russians, were only +welded into anything approaching unity by the comparatively much smaller number +of Scandinavian (Varangian) adventurers who came and took charge of their +affairs at Kiev. Similarly the Southern Slavs were never of themselves able to +form a united community, conscious of its aim and capable of persevering in its +attainment. +</p> + +<p> +The Slavs did not invade the Balkan peninsula alone but in the company of the +Avars, a terrible and justly dreaded nation, who, like the Huns, were of +Asiatic (Turkish or Mongol) origin. These invasions became more frequent during +the reign of the Emperor Justinian I (527-65), and culminated in 559 in a great +combined attack of all the invaders on Constantinople under a certain Zabergan, +which was brilliantly defeated by the veteran Byzantine general Belisarius. The +Avars were a nomad tribe, and the horse was their natural means of locomotion. +The Slavs, on the other hand, moved about on foot, and seem to have been used +as infantry by the more masterful Asiatics in their warlike expeditions. +Generally speaking, the Avars, who must have been infinitely less numerous than +the Slavs, were settled in Hungary, where Attila and the Huns had been settled +a little more than a century previously; that is to say, they were north of the +Danube, though they were always overrunning into Upper Moesia, the modern +Serbia. The Slavs, whose numbers were without doubt very large, gradually +settled all over the country south of the Danube, the rural parts of which, as +a result of incessant invasion and retreat, had become waste and empty. During +the second half of the sixth century all the military energies of +Constantinople were diverted to Persia, so that the invaders of the Balkan +peninsula had the field very much to themselves. It was during this time that +the power of the Avars reached its height. They were masters of all the country +up to the walls of Adrianople and Salonika, though they did not settle there. +The peninsula seems to have been colonized by Slavs, who penetrated right down +into Greece; but the Avars were throughout this time, both in politics and in +war, the directing and dominating force. During another Persian war, which +broke out in 622 and entailed the prolonged absence of the emperor from +Constantinople, the Avars, not satisfied with the tribute extorted from the +Greeks, made an alliance against them with the Persians, and in 626 collected a +large army of Slavs and Asiatics and attacked Constantinople both by land and +sea from the European side, while the Persians threatened it from Asia. But the +walls of the city and the ships of the Greeks proved invincible, and, quarrels +breaking out between the Slavs and the Avars, both had to save themselves in +ignominious and precipitate retreat. +</p> + +<p> +After this nothing more was heard of the Avars in the Balkan peninsula, though +their power was only finally crushed by Charlemagne in 799. In Russia their +downfall became proverbial, being crystallized in the saying, ‘they +perished like Avars’. The Slavs, on the other hand, remained. Throughout +these stormy times their penetration of the Balkan peninsula had been +peacefully if unostentatiously proceeding; by the middle of the seventh century +it was complete. The main streams of Slavonic immigration moved southwards and +westwards. The first covered the whole of the country between the Danube and +the Balkan range, overflowed into Macedonia, and filtered down into Greece. +Southern Thrace in the east and Albania in the west were comparatively little +affected, and in these districts the indigenous population maintained itself. +The coasts of the Aegean and the great cities on or near them were too strongly +held by the Greeks to be affected, and those Slavs who penetrated into Greece +itself were soon absorbed by the local populations. The still stronger Slavonic +stream, which moved westwards and turned up north-westwards, overran the whole +country down to the shores of the Adriatic and as far as the sources of the +Save and Drave in the Alps. From that point in the west to the shores of the +Black Sea in the east became one solid mass of Slavs, and has remained so ever +since. The few Slavs who were left north of the Danube in Dacia were gradually +assimilated by the inhabitants of that province, who were the descendants of +the Roman soldiers and colonists, and the ancestors of the modern Rumanians, +but the fact that Slavonic influence there was strong is shown by the large +number of words of Slavonic origin contained in the Rumanian language. +</p> + +<p> +[Illustration: THE BALKAN PENINSULA ETHNOLOGICAL] +</p> + +<p> +Place-names are a good index of the extent and strength of the tide of Slav +immigration. All along the coast, from the mouth of the Danube to the head of +the Adriatic, the Greek and Roman names have been retained though places have +often been given alternative names by the Slavonic settlers. Thrace, especially +the south-eastern part, and Albania have the fewest Slavonic place-names. In +Macedonia and Lower Moesia (Bulgaria) very few classical names have survived, +while in Upper Moesia (Serbia) and the interior of Dalmatia (Bosnia, +Hercegovina, and Montenegro) they have entirely disappeared. The Slavs +themselves, though their tribal names were known, were until the ninth century +usually called collectively S(k)lavini ([Greek: Sklabaenoi]) by the Greeks, and +all the inland parts of the peninsula were for long termed by them ‘the +S(k)lavonias’ ([Greek: Sklabiniai]). +</p> + +<p> +During the seventh century, dating from the defeat of the Slavs and Avars +before the walls of Constantinople in 626 and the final triumph of the emperor +over the Persians in 628, the influence and power of the Greeks began to +reassert itself throughout the peninsula as far north as the Danube; this +process was coincident with the decline of the might of the Avars. It was the +custom of the astute Byzantine diplomacy to look on and speak of lands which +had been occupied by the various barbarian invaders as grants made to them +through the generosity of the emperor; by this means, by dint also of lavishing +titles and substantial incomes to the invaders’ chiefs, by making the +most of their mutual jealousies, and also by enlisting regiments of Slavonic +mercenaries in the imperial armies, the supremacy of Constantinople was +regained far more effectively than it could have been by the continual and +exhausting use of force. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="part02"></a>BULGARIA</h2> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="chap04"></a>4<br/> +<i>The Arrival of the Bulgars in the Balkan Peninsula,</i> 600–700</h2> + +<p> +The progress of the Bulgars towards the Balkan peninsula, and indeed all their +movements until their final establishment there in the seventh century, are +involved in obscurity. They are first mentioned by name in classical and +Armenian sources in 482 as living in the steppes to the north of the Black Sea +amongst other Asiatic tribes, and it has been assumed by some that at the end +of the fifth and throughout the sixth century they were associated first with +the Huns and later with the Avars and Slavs in the various incursions into and +invasions of the eastern empire which have already been enumerated. It is the +tendency of Bulgarian historians, who scornfully point to the fact that the +history of Russia only dates from the ninth century, to exaggerate the +antiquity of their own and to claim as early a date as possible for the +authentic appearance of their ancestors on the kaleidoscopic stage of the +Balkan theatre. They are also unwilling to admit that they were anticipated by +the Slavs; they prefer to think that the Slavs only insinuated themselves there +thanks to the energy of the Bulgars’ offensive against the Greeks, and +that as soon as the Bulgars had leisure to look about them they found all the +best places already occupied by the anarchic Slavs. +</p> + +<p> +Of course it is very difficult to say positively whether Bulgars were or were +not present in the welter of Asiatic nations which swept westwards into Europe +with little intermission throughout the fifth and sixth centuries, but even if +they were, they do not seem to have settled down as early as that anywhere +south of the Danube; it seems certain that they did not do so until the seventh +century, and therefore that the Slavs were definitely installed in the Balkan +peninsula a whole century before the Bulgars crossed the Danube for good. +</p> + +<p> +The Bulgars, like the Huns and the Avars who preceded them, and like the +Magyars and the Turks who followed them, were a tribe from eastern Asia, of the +stock known as Mongol or Tartar. The tendency of all these peoples was to move +westwards from Asia into Europe, and this they did at considerable and +irregular intervals, though in alarming and apparently inexhaustible numbers, +roughly from the fourth till the fourteenth centuries. The distance was great, +but the journey, thanks to the flat, grassy, treeless, and well-watered +character of the steppes of southern Russia which they had to cross, was easy. +They often halted for considerable periods by the way, and some never moved +further westwards than Russia. Thus at one time the Bulgars settled in large +numbers on the Volga, near its confluence with the Kama, and it is presumed +that they were well established there in the fifth century. They formed a +community of considerable strength and importance, known as Great or White +Bulgaria. These Bulgars fused with later Tartar immigrants from Asia and +eventually were consolidated into the powerful kingdom of Kazan, which was only +crushed by the Tsar Ivan IV in 1552. According to Bulgarian historians, the +basins of the rivers Volga and Don and the steppes of eastern Russia proved too +confined a space for the legitimate development of Bulgarian energy, and +expansion to the west was decided on. A large number of Bulgars therefore +detached themselves and began to move south-westwards. During the sixth century +they seem to have been settled in the country to the north of the Black Sea, +forming a colony known as Black Bulgaria. It is very doubtful whether the +Bulgars did take part, as they are supposed to have done, in the ambitious but +unsuccessful attack on Constantinople in 559 under Zabergan, chief of another +Tartar tribe; but it is fairly certain that they did in the equally formidable +but equally unsuccessful attacks by the Slavs and Avars against Salonika in 609 +and Constantinople in 626. +</p> + +<p> +During the last quarter of the sixth and the first of the seventh century the +various branches of the Bulgar nation, stretching from the Volga to the Danube, +were consolidated and kept in control by their prince Kubrat, who eventually +fought on behalf of the Greeks against the Avars, and was actually baptized in +Constantinople. The power of the Bulgars grew as that of the Avars declined, +but at the death of Kubrat, in 638, his realm was divided amongst his sons. One +of these established himself in Pannonia, where he joined forces with what was +left of the Avars, and there the Bulgars maintained themselves till they were +obliterated by the irruption of the Magyars in 893. Another son, Asparukh, or +Isperikh, settled in Bessarabia, between the rivers Prut and Dniester, in 640, +and some years later passed southwards. After desultory warfare with +Constantinople, from 660 onwards, his successor finally overcame the Greeks, +who were at that time at war with the Arabs, captured Varna, and definitely +established himself between the Danube and the Balkan range in the year 679. +From that year the Danube ceased to be the frontier of the eastern empire. +</p> + +<p> +The numbers of the Bulgars who settled south of the Danube are not known, but +what happened to them is notorious. The well-known process, by which the Franks +in Gaul were absorbed by the far more numerous indigenous population which they +had conquered, was repeated, and the Bulgars became fused with the Slavs. So +complete was the fusion, and so preponderating the influence of the subject +nationality, that beyond a few personal names no traces of the language of the +Bulgars have survived. Modern Bulgarian, except for the Turkish words +introduced into it later during the Ottoman rule, is purely Slavonic. Not so +the Bulgarian nationality; as is so often the case with mongrel products, this +race, compared with the Serbs, who are purely Slav, has shown considerably +greater virility, cohesion, and driving-power, though it must be conceded that +its problems have been infinitely simpler. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="chap05"></a>5<br/> +<i>The Early Years of Bulgaria and the Introduction of Christianity</i>, +700–893</h2> + +<p> +From the time of their establishment in the country to which they have given +their name the Bulgars became a thorn in the side of the Greeks, and ever since +both peoples have looked on one another as natural and hereditary enemies. The +Bulgars, like all the barbarians who had preceded them, were fascinated by the +honey-pot of Constantinople, and, though they never succeeded in taking it, +they never grew tired of making the attempt. +</p> + +<p> +For two hundred years after the death of Asparukh, in 661, the Bulgars were +perpetually fighting either against the Greeks or else amongst themselves. At +times a diversion was caused by the Bulgars taking the part of the Greeks, as +in 718, when they ‘delivered’ Constantinople, at the invocation of +the Emperor Leo, from the Arabs, who were besieging it. From about this time +the Bulgarian monarchy, which had been hereditary, became elective, and the +anarchy of the many, which the Bulgars found when they arrived, and which their +first few autocratic rulers had been able to control, was replaced by an +anarchy of the few. Prince succeeded prince, war followed war, at the will of +the feudal nobles. This internal strife was naturally profitable to the Greeks, +who lavishly subsidized the rival factions. +</p> + +<p> +At the end of the eighth century the Bulgars south of the Danube joined forces +with those to the north in the efforts of the latter against the Avars, who, +beaten by Charlemagne, were again pressing south-eastwards towards the Danube. +In this the Bulgars were completely successful under the leadership of one +Krum, whom, in the elation of victory, they promptly elected to the throne. +Krum was a far more capable ruler than they had bargained for, and he not only +united all the Bulgars north and south of the Danube into one dominion, but +also forcibly repressed the whims of the nobles and re-established the +autocracy and the hereditary monarchy. Having finished with his enemies in the +north, he turned his attention to the Greeks, with no less success. In 809 he +captured from them the important city of Sofia (the Roman Sardica, known to the +Slavs as Sredets), which is to-day the capital of Bulgaria. The loss of this +city was a blow to the Greeks, because it was a great centre of commerce and +also the point at which the commercial and strategic highways of the peninsula +met and crossed. The Emperor Nikiphóros, who wished to take his revenge and +recover his lost property, was totally defeated by the Bulgars and lost his +life in the Balkan passes in 811. After further victories, at Mesembria (the +modern Misivria) in 812 and Adrianople in 813, Krum appeared before the +capital, where he nearly lost his life in an ambush while negotiating for +peace. During preparations for a final assault on Constantinople he died +suddenly in 815. Though Krum cannot be said to have introduced civilisation +into Bulgaria, he at any rate increased its power and gave it some of the more +essential organs of government. He framed a code of laws remarkable for their +rigour, which was undoubtedly necessary in such a community and beneficial in +its effect. He repressed civil strife, and by this means made possible the +reawakening of commerce and agriculture. His successor, of uncertain identity, +founded in 822 the city of Preslav (known to the Russians as Pereyaslav), +situated in eastern Bulgaria, between Varna and Silistria, which was the +capital until 972. +</p> + +<p> +The reign of Prince Boris (852-88) is remarkable because it witnessed the +definitive conversion to Christianity of Bulgaria and her ruler. It is within +this period also that fell the activities of the two great +‘Slavonic’ missionaries and apostles, the brothers Cyril and +Methodius, who are looked upon by all Slavs of the orthodox faith as the +founders of their civilisation. Christianity had of course penetrated into +Bulgaria (or Moesia, as it was then) long before the arrival of the Slavs and +Bulgars, but the influx of one horde of barbarians after another was naturally +not propitious to its growth. The conversion of Boris in 865, which was brought +about largely by the influence of his sister, who had spent many years in +Constantinople as a captive, was a triumph for Greek influence and for +Byzantium. Though the Church was at this time still nominally one, yet the +rivalry between Rome and Constantinople had already become acute, and the +struggle for spheres of spiritual influence had begun. It was in the year 863 +that the Prince of Moravia, anxious to introduce Christianity into his country +in a form intelligible to his subjects, addressed himself to the Emperor +Michael III for help. Rome could not provide any suitable missionaries with +knowledge of Slavonic languages, and the German, or more exactly the Bavarian, +hierarchy with which Rome entrusted the spiritual welfare of the Slavs of +Moravia and Pannonia used its greater local knowledge for political and not +religious ends. The Germans exploited their ecclesiastical influence in order +completely to dominate the Slavs politically, and as a result the latter were +only allowed to see the Church through Teutonic glasses. +</p> + +<p> +In answer to this appeal the emperor sent the two brothers Cyril and Methodius, +who were Greeks of Salonika and had considerable knowledge of Slavonic +languages. They composed the Slavonic alphabet which is to-day used throughout +Russia, Bulgaria, Serbia, and Montenegro, and in many parts of Austria-Hungary +and translated the gospels into Slavonic; it is for this reason that they are +regarded with such veneration by all members of the Eastern Church. Their +mission proved the greatest success (it must be remembered that at this time +the various Slavonic tongues were probably less dissimilar than they are now), +and the two brothers were warmly welcomed in Rome by Pope Adrian II, who +formally consented to the use, for the benefit of the Slavs, of the Slavonic +liturgy (a remarkable concession, confirmed by Pope John VIII). This triumph, +however, was short-lived; St. Cyril died in 869 and St. Methodius in 885; +subsequent Popes, notably Stephen V, were not so benevolent to the Slavonic +cause; the machinations of the German hierarchy (which included, even in those +days, the falsification of documents) were irresistible, and finally the +invasion of the Magyars, in 893, destroyed what was left of the Slavonic Church +in Moravia. The missionary brothers had probably passed through Bulgaria on +their way north in 863, but without halting. Many of their disciples, driven +from the Moravian kingdom by the Germans, came south and took refuge in +Bulgaria in 886, and there carried on in more favourable circumstances the +teachings of their masters. Prince Boris had found it easier to adopt +Christianity himself than to induce all his subjects to do the same. Even when +he had enforced his will on them at the price of numerous executions of +recalcitrant nobles, he found himself only at the beginning of his +difficulties. The Greeks had been glad enough to welcome Bulgaria into the +fold, but they had no wish to set up an independent Church and hierarchy to +rival their own. Boris, on the other hand, though no doubt full of genuine +spiritual ardour, was above all impressed with the authority and prestige which +the basileus derived from the Church of Constantinople; he also admired the +pomp of ecclesiastical ceremony, and wished to have a patriarch of his own to +crown him and a hierarchy of his own to serve him. Finding the Greeks +unresponsive, he turned to Rome, and Pope Nicholas I sent him two bishops to +superintend the ecclesiastical affairs of Bulgaria till the investiture of +Boris at the hands of the Holy See could be arranged. These bishops set to work +with a will, substituted the Latin for the Greek rite, and brought Bulgaria +completely under Roman influence. But when it was discovered that Boris was +aiming at the erection of an independent Church their enthusiasm abated and +they were recalled to Rome in 867. +</p> + +<p> +Adrian II proved no more sympathetic, and in 870, during the reign of the +Emperor Basil I, it was decided without more ado that the Bulgarian Church +should be directly under the Bishop of Constantinople, on the ground that the +kingdom of Boris was a vassal-state of the basileus, and that from the +Byzantine point of view, as opposed to that of Rome, the State came first and +the Church next. The Moravian Gorazd, a disciple of Methodius, was appointed +Metropolitan, and at his death he was succeeded by his fellow countryman and +co-disciple Clement, who by means of the construction of numerous churches and +monasteries did a great deal for the propagation of light and learning in +Bulgaria. The definite subjection of the Bulgarian Church to that of Byzantium +was an important and far-reaching event. Boris has been reproached with +submitting himself and his country to Greek influence, but in those days it was +either Constantinople or Rome (there was no third way); and in view of the +proximity of Constantinople and the glamour which its civilization cast all +over the Balkans, it is not surprising that the Greeks carried the day. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="chap06"></a>6<br/> +<i>The Rise and Fall of the First Bulgarian Empire</i>, 893–972</h2> + +<p> +During the reign of Simeon, second son of Boris, which lasted from 893 to 927, +Bulgaria reached a very high level of power and prosperity. Simeon, called the +Great, is looked on by Bulgarians as their most capable monarch and his reign +as the most brilliant period of their history. He had spent his childhood at +Constantinople and been educated there, and he became such an admirer of Greek +civilization that he was nicknamed <i>Hèmiargos</i>. His instructors had done +their work so well that Simeon remained spellbound by the glamour of +Constantinople throughout his life, and, although he might have laid the +foundations of a solid empire in the Balkans, his one ambition was to conquer +Byzantium and to be recognized as basileus—an ambition which was not to +be fulfilled. His first campaign against the Greeks was not very fruitful, +because the latter summoned the Magyars, already settled in Hungary, to their +aid and they attacked Simeon from the north. Simeon in return called the +Pechenegs, another fierce Tartar tribe, to his aid, but this merely resulted in +their definite establishment in Rumania. During the twenty years of peace, +which strange to say filled the middle of his reign (894-913), the internal +development of Bulgaria made great strides. The administration was properly +organized, commerce was encouraged, and agriculture flourished. In the wars +against the Greeks which occupied his last years he was more successful, and +inflicted a severe defeat on them at Anchialo (the modern Ahiolu) in 917; but +he was still unable to get from them what he wanted, and at last, in 921, he +was obliged to proclaim himself <i>basileus</i> and <i>autocratōr</i> of all +Bulgars and Greeks, a title which nobody else recognized. He reappeared before +Constantinople the same year, but effected nothing more than the customary +devastation of the suburbs. The year 923 witnessed a solemn reconciliation +between Rome and Constantinople; the Greeks were clever enough to prevent the +Roman legates visiting Bulgaria on their return journey, and thereby +administered a rebuff to Simeon, who was anxious to see them and enter into +direct relations with Rome. In the same year Simeon tried to make an alliance +with the Arabs, but the ambassadors of the latter were intercepted by the +Greeks, who made it worth their while not to continue the journey to Bulgaria. +</p> + +<p> +In 924 Simeon determined on a supreme effort against Constantinople and as a +preliminary he ravaged Macedonia and Thrace. When, however, he arrived before +the city the walls and the catapults made him hesitate, and he entered into +negotiations, which, as usual, petered out and brought him no adequate reward +for all his hopes and preparations. In the west his arms were more successful, +and he subjected most of the eastern part of Serbia to his rule. From all this +it can be seen that he was no diplomat, though not lacking in enterprise and +ambition. The fact was that while he made his kingdom too powerful for the +Greeks to subdue (indeed they were compelled to pay him tribute), yet +Constantinople with its impregnable walls, well-organized army, powerful fleet, +and cunning and experienced statesmen, was too hard a nut for him to crack. +</p> + +<p> +Simeon extended the boundaries of his country considerably, and his dominion +included most of the interior of the Balkan peninsula south of the Danube and +east of the rivers Morava and Ibar in Serbia and of the Drin in Albania. The +Byzantine Church greatly increased its influence in Bulgaria during his reign, +and works of theology grew like mushrooms. This was the only kind of literature +that was ever popular in Bulgaria, and although it is usual to throw contempt +on the literary achievements of Constantinople, we should know but little of +Bulgaria were it not for the Greek historians. +</p> + +<p> +Simeon died in 927, and his son Peter, who succeeded him, was a lover of peace +and comfort; he married a Byzantine princess, and during his reign (927-69) +Greek influence grew ever stronger, in spite of several revolts on the part of +the Bulgar nobles, while the capital Preslav became a miniature Constantinople. +In 927 Rome recognized the kingdom and patriarchate of Bulgaria, and Peter was +duly crowned by the Papal legate. This was viewed with disfavour by the Greeks, +and they still called Peter only <i>archōn</i> or prince (<i>knyaz</i> in +Bulgarian), which was the utmost title allowed to any foreign sovereign. It was +not until 945 that they recognized Peter as <i>basileus</i>, the unique title +possessed by their own emperors and till then never granted to any one else. +Peter’s reign was one of misfortune for his country both at home and +abroad. In 931 the Serbs broke loose under their leader Časlav, whom Simeon had +captured but who effected his escape, and asserted their independence. In 963 a +formidable revolt under one Shishman undermined the whole state fabric. He +managed to subtract Macedonia and all western Bulgaria, including Sofia and +Vidin, from Peter’s rule, and proclaimed himself independent <i>tsar +(tsar</i> or <i>caesar</i> was a title often accorded by Byzantium to relatives +of the emperor or to distinguished men of Greek or other nationality, and +though it was originally the equivalent of the highest title, it had long since +ceased to be so: the emperor’s designations were <i>basileus</i> and +<i>autocratōr</i>). From this time there were two Bulgarias—eastern and +western. The eastern half was now little more than a Byzantine province, and +the western became the centre of national life and the focus of national +aspirations. +</p> + +<p> +Another factor which militated against the internal progress of Bulgaria was +the spread of the Bogomil heresy in the tenth century. This remarkable +doctrine, founded on the dualism of the Paulicians, who had become an important +political force in the eastern empire, was preached in the Balkan peninsula by +one Jeremiah Bogomil, for the rest a man of uncertain identity, who made +Philippopolis the centre of his activity. Its principal features were of a +negative character, and consequently it was very difficult successfully to +apply force against them. The Bogomils recognized the authority neither of +Church nor of State; the validity neither of oaths nor of human laws. They +refused to pay taxes, to fight, or to obey; they sanctioned theft, but looked +upon any kind of punishment as unjustifiable; they discountenanced marriage and +were strict vegetarians. Naturally a heresy so alarming in its individualism +shook to its foundations the not very firmly established Bulgarian society. +Nevertheless it spread with rapidity in spite of all persecutions, and its +popularity amongst the Bulgarians, and indeed amongst all the Slavs of the +peninsula, is without doubt partly explained by political reasons. The +hierarchy of the Greek Church, which supported the ruling classes of the +country and lent them authority at the same time that it increased its own, was +antipathetic to the Slavs, and the Bogomil heresy drew much strength from its +nationalistic colouring and from the appeal which it made to the character of +the Balkan Slavs, who have always been intolerant of government by the Church. +But neither the civil nor the ecclesiastical authorities were able to cope with +the problem; indeed they were apt to minimize its importance, and the heresy +was never eradicated till the arrival on the scene of Islam, which proved as +attractive to the schismatics as the well-regulated Orthodox Church had been +the reverse. +</p> + +<p> +The third quarter of the tenth century witnessed a great recrudescence of the +power of Constantinople under the Emperor Nikiphóros Phokas, who wrested Cyprus +and Crete from the Arabs and inaugurated an era of prosperity for the eastern +empire, giving it a new lease of vigorous and combative life. Wishing to +reassert the Greek supremacy in the Balkan peninsula his first act was to +refuse any further payment of tribute to the Bulgarians as from 966; his next +was to initiate a campaign against them, but in order to make his own success +in this enterprise less costly and more assured he secured the co-operation of +the Russians under Svyatoslav, Prince of Kiev; this potentate’s mother +Olga had visited Constantinople in 957 and been baptized (though her son and +the bulk of the population were still ardent heathens), and commercial +intercourse between Russia and Constantinople by means of the Dnieper and the +Black Sea was at that time lively. Svyatoslav did not want pressing, and +arriving with an army of 10,000 men in boats, overcame northern Bulgaria in a +few days (967); they were helped by Shishman and the western Bulgars, who did +not mind at what price Peter and the eastern Bulgars were crushed. Svyatoslav +was recalled to Russia in 968 to defend his home from attacks by the Tartar +Pechenegs, but that done, he made up his mind to return to Bulgaria, lured by +its riches and by the hope of the eventual possession of Constantinople. +</p> + +<p> +The Emperor Nikiphóros was by now aware of the danger he had imprudently +conjured up, and made a futile alliance with eastern Bulgaria; but in January +969 Peter of Bulgaria died, and in December of the same year Nikiphóros was +murdered by the ambitious Armenian John Tzimisces,[1] who thereupon became +emperor. Svyatoslav, seeing the field clear of his enemies, returned in 970, +and in March of that year sacked and occupied Philippopolis. The Emperor John +Tzimisces, who was even abler both as general and as diplomat than his +predecessor, quietly pushed forward his warlike preparations, and did not meet +the Russians till the autumn, when he completely defeated them at Arcadiopolis +(the modern Lule-Burgas). The Russians retired north of the Balkan range, but +the Greeks followed them. John Tzimisces besieged them in the capital Preslav, +which he stormed, massacring many of the garrison, in April 972. Svyatoslav and +his remaining troops escaped to Silistria (the Durostorum of Trajan) on the +Danube, where again, however, they were besieged and defeated by the +indefatigable emperor. At last peace was made in July 972, the Russians being +allowed to go free on condition of the complete evacuation of Bulgaria and a +gift of corn; the adventurous Svyatoslav lost his life at the hands of the +Pechenegs while making his way back to Kiev. The triumph of the Greeks was +complete, and it can be imagined that there was not much left of the +earthenware Bulgaria after the violent collision of these two mighty iron +vessels on the top of it. Eastern Bulgaria (i.e. Moesia and Thrace) ceased to +exist, becoming a purely Greek province; John Tzimisces made his triumphal +entry into Constantinople, followed by the two sons of Peter of Bulgaria on +foot; the elder was deprived of his regal attributes and created +<i>magistros</i>, the younger was made a eunuch. +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: John the Little.] +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="chap07"></a>7<br/> +<i>The Rise and Fall of ‘Western Bulgaria’ and the Greek +Supremacy</i>, 963–1186</h2> + +<p> +Meanwhile western Bulgaria had not been touched, and it was thither that the +Bulgarian patriarch Damian removed from Silistria after the victory of the +Greeks, settling first in Sofia and then in Okhrida in Macedonia, where the +apostate Shishman had eventually made his capital. Western Bulgaria included +Macedonia and parts of Thessaly, Albania, southern and eastern Serbia, and the +westernmost parts of modern Bulgaria. It was from this district that numerous +anti-Hellenic revolts were directed after the death of the Emperor John +Tzimisces in 976. These culminated during the reign of Samuel (977-1014), one +of the sons of Shishman. He was as capable and energetic, as unscrupulous and +inhuman, as the situation he was called upon to fill demanded. He began by +assassinating all his relations and nobles who resented his desire to +re-establish the absolute monarchy, was recognized as <i>tsar</i> by the Holy +See of Rome in 981, and then began to fight the Greeks, the only possible +occupation for any self-respecting Bulgarian ruler. The emperor at that time +was Basil II (976-1025), who was brave and patriotic but young and +inexperienced. In his early campaigns Samuel carried all before him; he +reconquered northern Bulgaria in 985, Thessaly in 986, and defeated Basil II +near Sofia the same year. Later he conquered Albania and the southern parts of +Serbia and what is now Montenegro and Hercegovina. In 996 he threatened +Salonika, but first of all embarked on an expedition against the Peloponnese; +here he was followed by the Greek general, who managed to surprise and +completely overwhelm him, he and his son barely escaping with their lives. +</p> + +<p> +From that year (996) his fortune changed; the Greeks reoccupied northern +Bulgaria, in 999, and also recovered Thessaly and parts of Macedonia. The +Bulgars were subjected to almost annual attacks on the part of Basil II; the +country was ruined and could not long hold out. The final disaster occurred in +1014, when Basil II utterly defeated his inveterate foe in a pass near Seres in +Macedonia. Samuel escaped to Prilip, but when he beheld the return of 15,000 of +his troops who had been captured and blinded by the Greeks he died of syncope. +Basil II, known as Bulgaroctonus, or Bulgar-killer, went from victory to +victory, and finally occupied the Bulgarian capital of Okhrida in 1016. Western +Bulgaria came to an end, as had eastern Bulgaria in 972, the remaining members +of the royal family followed the emperor to the Bosphorus to enjoy comfortable +captivity, and the triumph of Constantinople was complete. +</p> + +<p> +From 1018 to 1186 Bulgaria had no existence as an independent state; Basil II, +although cruel, was far from tyrannical in his general treatment of the +Bulgars, and treated the conquered territory more as a protectorate than as a +possession. But after his death Greek rule became much more oppressive. The +Bulgarian patriarchate (since 972 established at Okhrida) was reduced to an +archbishopric, and in 1025 the see was given to a Greek, who lost no time in +eliminating the Bulgarian element from positions of importance throughout his +diocese. Many of the nobles were transplanted to Constantinople, where their +opposition was numbed by the bestowal of honours. During the eleventh century +the peninsula was invaded frequently by the Tartar Pechenegs and Kumans, whose +aid was invoked both by Greeks and Bulgars; the result of these incursions was +not always favourable to those who had promoted them; the barbarians invariably +stayed longer and did more damage than had been bargained for, and usually left +some of their number behind as unwelcome settlers. +</p> + +<p> +In this way the ethnological map of the Balkan peninsula became ever more +variegated. To the Tartar settlers were added colonies of Armenians and Vlakhs +by various emperors. The last touch was given by the arrival of the Normans in +1081 and the passage of the crusaders in 1096. The wholesale depredations of +the latter naturally made the inhabitants of the Balkan peninsula anything but +sympathetically disposed towards their cause. One of the results of all this +turmoil and of the heavy hand of the Greeks was a great increase in the +vitality of the Bogomil heresy already referred to; it became a refuge for +patriotism and an outlet for its expression. The Emperor Alexis Comnenus +instituted a bitter persecution of it, which only led to its growth and rapid +propagation westwards into Serbia from its centre Philippopolis. +</p> + +<p> +The reason of the complete overthrow of the Bulgarian monarchy by the Greeks +was of course that the nation itself was totally lacking in cohesion and +organization, and could only achieve any lasting success when an exceptionally +gifted ruler managed to discount the centrifugal tendencies of the feudal +nobles, as Simeon and Samuel had done. Other discouraging factors wore the +permeation of the Church and State by Byzantine influence, the lack of a large +standing army, the spread of the anarchic Bogomil heresy, and the fact that the +bulk of the Slav population had no desire for foreign adventure or national +aggrandizement. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="chap08"></a>8<br/> +<i>The Rise and Fall of the Second Bulgarian Empire,</i> 1186–1258</h2> + +<p> +From 1186 to 1258 Bulgaria experienced temporary resuscitation, the brevity of +which was more than compensated for by the stirring nature of the events that +crowded it. The exactions and oppressions of the Greeks culminated in a revolt +on the part of the Bulgars, which had its centre in Tirnovo on the river Yantra +in northern Bulgaria—a position of great natural strength and strategic +importance, commanding the outlets of several of the most important passes over +the Balkan range. This revolt coincided with the growing weakness of the +eastern empire, which, surrounded on all sides by aggressive +enemies—Kumans, Saracens, Turks, and Normans—was sickening for one +of the severe illnesses which preceded its dissolution. The revolt was headed +by two brothers who were Vlakh or Rumanian shepherds, and was blessed by the +archbishop Basil, who crowned one of them, called John Asen, as <i>tsar</i> in +Tirnovo in 1186. Their first efforts against the Greeks were not successful, +but securing the support of the Serbs under Stephen Nemanja in 1188 and of the +Crusaders in 1189 they became more so; but there was life in the Greeks yet, +and victory alternated with defeat. John Asen I was assassinated in 1196 and +was succeeded after many internal discords and murders by his relative Kaloian +or Pretty John. This cruel and unscrupulous though determined ruler soon made +an end of all his enemies at home, and in eight years achieved such success +abroad that Bulgaria almost regained its former proportions. Moreover, he +re-established relations with Rome, to the great discomfiture of the Greeks, +and after some negotiations Pope Innocent III recognized Kaloian as <i>tsar</i> +of the Bulgars and Vlakhs (roi de Blaquie et de Bougrie, in the words of +Villehardouin), with Basil as primate, and they were both duly consecrated and +crowned by the papal legate at Tirnovo in 1204. The French, who had just +established themselves in Constantinople during the fourth crusade, imprudently +made an enemy of Kaloian instead of a friend, and with the aid of the Tartar +Kumans he defeated them several times, capturing and brutally murdering Baldwin +I. But in 1207 his career was cut short; he was murdered while besieging +Salonika by one of his generals who was a friend of his wife. After eleven +years of further anarchy he was succeeded by John Asen II. During the reign of +this monarch, which lasted from 1218 till 1241, Bulgaria reached the zenith of +its power. He was the most enlightened ruler the country had had, and he not +only waged war successfully abroad but also put an end to the internal +confusion, restored the possibility of carrying on agriculture and commerce, +and encouraged the foundation of numerous schools and monasteries. He +maintained the tradition of his family by making his capital at Tirnovo, which +city he considerably embellished and enlarged. +</p> + +<p> +Constantinople at this time boasted three Greek emperors and one French. The +first act of John Asen II was to get rid of one of them, named Theodore, who +had proclaimed himself <i>basileus</i> at Okhrida in 1223. Thereupon he annexed +the whole of Thrace, Macedonia, Thessaly, and Epirus to his dominions, and made +Theodore’s brother Manuel, who had married one of his daughters, viceroy, +established at Salonika. Another of his daughters had married Stephen +Vladislav, who was King of Serbia from 1233-43, and a third married Theodore, +son of the Emperor John III, who reigned at Nicaea, in 1235. This daughter, +after being sought in marriage by the French barons at Constantinople as a wife +for the Emperor Baldwin II, a minor, was then summarily rejected in favour of +the daughter of the King of Jerusalem; this affront rankled in the mind of John +Asen II and threw him into the arms of the Greeks, with whom he concluded an +alliance in 1234. John Asen II and his ally, the Emperor John III, were, +however, utterly defeated by the French under the walls of Constantinople in +1236, and the Bulgarian ruler, who had no wish to see the Greeks re-established +there, began to doubt the wisdom of his alliance. Other Bulgarian tsars had +been unscrupulous, but the whole foreign policy of this one pivoted on +treachery. He deserted the Greeks and made an alliance with the French in 1237, +the Pope Gregory IX, a great Hellenophobe, having threatened him with +excommunication; he went so far as to force his daughter to relinquish her +Greek husband. The following year, however, he again changed over to the +Greeks; then again fear of the Pope and of his brother-in-law the King of +Hungary brought him back to the side of Baldwin II, to whose help against the +Greeks he went with a large army into Thrace in 1239. While besieging the +Greeks with indifferent success, he learned of the death of his wife and his +eldest son from plague, and incontinently returned to Tirnovo, giving up the +war and restoring his daughter to her lonely husband. This adaptable monarch +died a natural death in 1241, and the three rulers of his family who succeeded +him, whose reigns filled the period 1241-58, managed to undo all the +constructive work of their immediate predecessors. Province after province was +lost and internal anarchy increased. This remarkable dynasty came to an +inglorious end in 1258, when its last representative was murdered by his own +nobles, and from this time onwards Bulgaria was only a shadow of its former +self. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="chap09"></a>9<br/> +<i>The Serbian Supremacy and the Final Collapse,</i> 1258–1393</h2> + +<p> +From 1258 onwards Bulgaria may be said to have continued flickering until its +final extinction as a state in 1393, but during this period it never had any +voice in controlling the destinies of the Balkan peninsula. Owing to the fact +that no ruler emerged capable of keeping the distracted country in order, there +was a regular <i>chassé-croisé</i> of rival princelets, an unceasing tale of +political marriages and murders, conspiracies and revolts of feudal nobles all +over the country, and perpetual ebb and flow of the boundaries of the warring +principalities which tore the fabric of Bulgaria to pieces amongst them. From +the point of view of foreign politics this period is characterized generally by +the virtual disappearance of Bulgarian independence to the profit of the +surrounding states, who enjoyed a sort of rotativist supremacy. It is +especially remarkable for the complete ascendancy which Serbia gained in the +Balkan peninsula. +</p> + +<p> +A Serb, Constantine, grandson of Stephen Nemanja, occupied the Bulgarian throne +from 1258 to 1277, and married the granddaughter of John Asen II. After the +fall of the Latin Empire of Constantinople in 1261, the Hungarians, already +masters of Transylvania, combined with the Greeks against Constantine; the +latter called the Tartars of southern Russia, at this time at the height of +their power, to his help and was victorious, but as a result of his diplomacy +the Tartars henceforward played an important part in the Bulgarian welter. Then +Constantine married, as his second wife, the daughter of the Greek emperor, and +thus again gave Constantinople a voice in his country’s affairs. +Constantine was followed by a series of upstart rulers, whose activities were +cut short by the victories of King Uroš II of Serbia (1282-1321), who conquered +all Macedonia and wrested it from the Bulgars. In 1285 the Tartars of the +Golden Horde swept over Hungary and Bulgaria, but it was from the south that +the clouds were rolling up which not much later were to burst over the +peninsula. In 1308 the Turks appeared on the Sea of Marmora, and in 1326 +established themselves at Brussa. From 1295 to 1322 Bulgaria was presided over +by a nobleman of Vidin, Svetoslav, who, unmolested by the Greeks, grown +thoughtful in view of the approach of the Turks, was able to maintain rather +more order than his subjects were accustomed to. After his death in 1322 chaos +again supervened. One of his successors had married the daughter of Uroš II of +Serbia, but suddenly made an alliance with the Greeks against his +brother-in-law Stephen Uroš III and dispatched his wife to her home. During the +war which ensued the unwonted allies were utterly routed by the Serbs at +Kustendil in Macedonia in 1330. +</p> + +<p> +From 1331 to 1365 Bulgaria was under one John Alexander, a noble of Tartar +origin, whose sister became the wife of Serbia’s greatest ruler, Stephen +Dušan; John Alexander, moreover, recognized Stephen as his suzerain, and from +thenceforward Bulgaria was a vassal-state of Serbia. Meanwhile the Turkish +storm was gathering fast; Suleiman crossed the Hellespont in 1356, and Murad I +made Adrianople his capital in 1366. After the death of John Alexander in 1365 +the Hungarians invaded northern Bulgaria, and his successor invoked the help of +the Turks against them and also against the Greeks. This was the beginning of +the end. The Serbs, during an absence of the Sultan in Asia, undertook an +offensive, but were defeated by the Turks near Adrianople in 1371, who captured +Sofia in 1382. After this the Serbs formed a huge southern Slav alliance, in +which the Bulgarians refused to join, but, after a temporary success against +the Turks in 1387, they were vanquished by them as the result of treachery at +the famous battle of Kosovo in 1389. Meanwhile the Turks occupied Nikopolis on +the Danube in 1388 and destroyed the Bulgarian capital Tirnovo in 1393, exiling +the Patriarch Euthymus to Macedonia. Thus the state of Bulgaria passed into the +hands of the Turks, and its church into those of the Greeks. Many Bulgars +adopted Islam, and their descendants are the Pomaks or Bulgarian Mohammedans of +the present day. With the subjection of Rumania in 1394 and the defeat of an +improvised anti-Turkish crusade from western Europe under Sigismund, King of +Hungary, at Nikopolis in 1396 the Turkish conquest was complete, though the +battle of Varna was not fought till 1444, nor Constantinople entered till 1453. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="chap10"></a>10<br/> +<i>The Turkish Dominion and the Emancipation,</i> 1393–1878</h2> + +<p> +From 1393 until 1877 Bulgaria may truthfully be said to have had no history, +but nevertheless it could scarcely have been called happy. National life was +completely paralysed, and what stood in those days for national consciousness +was obliterated. It is common knowledge, and most people are now reasonable +enough to admit, that the Turks have many excellent qualities, religious +fervour and military ardour amongst others; it is also undeniable that from an +aesthetic point of view too much cannot be said in praise of Mohammedan +civilization. Who does not prefer the minarets of Stambul and Edirne[1] to the +architecture of Budapest, notoriously the ideal of Christian south-eastern +Europe? On the other hand, it cannot be contended that the Pax Ottomana brought +prosperity or happiness to those on whom it was imposed (unless indeed they +submerged their identity in the religion of their conquerors), or that its +Influence was either vivifying or generally popular. +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: The Turkish names for Constantinople and Adrianople.] +</p> + +<p> +To the races they conquered the Turks offered two alternatives—serfdom or +Turkdom; those who could not bring themselves to accept either of these had +either to emigrate or take to brigandage and outlawry in the mountains. The +Turks literally overlaid the European nationalities of the Balkan peninsula for +five hundred years, and from their own point of view and from that of military +history this was undoubtedly a very splendid achievement; it was more than the +Greeks or Romans had ever done. From the point of view of humanitarianism also +it is beyond a doubt that much less human blood was spilt in the Balkan +peninsula during the five hundred years of Turkish rule than during the five +hundred years of Christian rule which preceded them; indeed it would have been +difficult to spill more. It is also a pure illusion to think of the Turks as +exceptionally brutal or cruel; they are just as good-natured and good-humoured +as anybody else; it is only when their military or religious passions are +aroused that they become more reckless and ferocious than other people. It was +not the Turks who taught cruelty to the Christians of the Balkan peninsula; the +latter had nothing to learn in this respect. +</p> + +<p> +In spite of all this, however, from the point of view of the Slavs of Bulgaria +and Serbia, Turkish rule was synonymous with suffocation. If the Turks were all +that their greatest admirers think them the history of the Balkan peninsula in +the nineteenth century would have been very different from what it has been, +namely, one perpetual series of anti-Turkish revolts. +</p> + +<p> +Of all the Balkan peoples the Bulgarians were the most completely crushed and +effaced. The Greeks by their ubiquity, their brains, and their money were soon +able to make the Turkish storm drive their own windmill; the Rumanians were +somewhat sheltered by the Danube and also by their distance from +Constantinople; the Serbs also were not so exposed to the full blast of the +Turkish wrath, and the inaccessibility of much of their country afforded them +some protection. Bulgaria was simply annihilated, and its population, already +far from homogeneous, was still further varied by numerous Turkish and other +Tartar colonies. +</p> + +<p> +For the same reasons already mentioned Bulgaria was the last Balkan state to +emancipate itself; for these reasons also it is the least trammelled by +prejudices and by what are considered national predilections and racial +affinities, while its heterogeneous composition makes it vigorous and +enterprising. The treatment of the Christians by the Turks was by no means +always the same; generally speaking, it grew worse as the power of the Sultan +grew less. During the fifteenth century they were allowed to practise their +religion and all their vocations in comparative liberty and peace. But from the +sixteenth century onwards the control of the Sultan declined, power became +decentralized, the Ottoman Empire grew ever more anarchic and the rule of the +provincial governors more despotic. +</p> + +<p> +But the Mohammedan conquerors were not the only enemies and oppressors of the +Bulgars. The rôle played by the Greeks in Bulgaria during the Turkish dominion +was almost as important as that of the Turks themselves. The contempt of the +Turks for the Christians, and especially for their religion, was so great that +they prudently left the management of it to them, knowing that it would keep +them occupied in mutual altercation. From 1393 till 1767 the Bulgarians were +under the Greco-Bulgarian Patriarchate of Okhrida, an organization in which all +posts, from the highest to the lowest, had to be bought from the Turkish +administration at exorbitant and ever-rising prices; the Phanariote Greeks (so +called because they originated in the Phanar quarter at Constantinople) were +the only ones who could afford those of the higher posts, with the result that +the Church was controlled from Constantinople. In 1767 the independent +patriarchates were abolished, and from that date the religious control of the +Greeks was as complete as the political control of the Turks. The Greeks did +all they could to obliterate the last traces of Bulgarian nationality which had +survived in the Church, and this explains a fact which must never be forgotten, +which had its origin in the remote past, but grew more pronounced at this +period, that the individual hatred of Greeks and Bulgars of each other has +always been far more intense than their collective hatred of the Turks. +</p> + +<p> +Ever since the marriage of the Tsar Ivan III with the niece of the last Greek +Emperor, in 1472, Russia had considered itself the trustee of the eastern +Christians, the defender of the Orthodox Church, and the direct heir of the +glory and prestige of Constantinople; it was not until the eighteenth century, +however, after the consolidation of the Russian state, that the Balkan +Christians were championed and the eventual possession of Constantinople was +seriously considered. Russian influence was first asserted in Rumania after the +Treaty of Kuchuk-Kainardji, in 1774. It was only the Napoleonic war in 1812 +that prevented the Russians from extending their territory south of the Danube, +whither it already stretched. Serbia was partially free by 1826, and Greece +achieved complete independence in 1830, when the Russian troops, in order to +coerce the Turks, occupied part of Bulgaria and advanced as far as Adrianople. +Bulgaria, being nearer to and more easily repressed by Constantinople, had to +wait, and tentative revolts made about this time were put down with much +bloodshed and were followed by wholesale emigrations of Bulgars into Bessarabia +and importations of Tartars and Kurds into the vacated districts. The Crimean +War and the short-sighted championship of Turkey by the western European powers +checked considerably the development at which Russia aimed. Moldavia and +Wallachia were in 1856 withdrawn from the semi-protectorate which Russia had +long exercised over them, and in 1861 formed themselves into the united state +of Rumania. In 1866 a German prince, Charles of Hohenzollern, came to rule over +the country, the first sign of German influence in the Near East; at this time +Rumania still acknowledged the supremacy of the Sultan. +</p> + +<p> +During the first half of the nineteenth century there took place a considerable +intellectual renascence in Bulgaria, a movement fostered by wealthy Bulgarian +merchants of Bucarest and Odessa. In 1829 a history of Bulgaria was published +by a native of that country in Moscow; in 1835 the first school was established +in Bulgaria, and many others soon followed. It must be remembered that not only +was nothing known at that time about Bulgaria and its inhabitants in other +countries, but the Bulgars had themselves to be taught who they were. The +Bulgarian people in Bulgaria consisted entirely of peasants; there was no +Bulgarian upper or middle or ‘intelligent’ or professional class; +those enlightened Bulgars who existed were domiciled in other countries; the +Church was in the hands of the Greeks, who vied with the Turks in suppressing +Bulgarian nationality. +</p> + +<p> +The two committees of Odessa and Bucarest which promoted the enlightenment and +emancipation of Bulgaria were dissimilar in composition and in aim; the members +of the former were more intent on educational and religious reform, and aimed +at the gradual and peaceful regeneration of their country by these means; the +latter wished to effect the immediate political emancipation of Bulgaria by +violent and, if necessary, warlike means. +</p> + +<p> +It was the ecclesiastical question which was solved first. In 1856 the Porte +had promised religious reforms tending to the appointment of Bulgarian bishops +and the recognition of the Bulgarian language in Church and school. But these +not being carried through, the Bulgarians took the matter into their own hands, +and in 1860 refused any longer to recognize the Patriarch of Constantinople. +The same year an attempt was made to bring the Church of Bulgaria under that of +Rome, but, owing to Russian opposition, proved abortive. In 1870, the growing +agitation having at last alarmed the Turks, the Bulgarian Exarchate was +established. The Bulgarian Church was made free and national and was to be +under an Exarch who should reside at Constantinople (Bulgaria being still a +Turkish province). The Greeks, conscious what a blow this would be to their +supremacy, managed for a short while to stave off the evil day, but in 1872 the +Exarch was triumphantly installed in Constantinople, where he resided till +1908. +</p> + +<p> +Meanwhile revolutionary outbreaks began to increase, but were always put down +with great rigour. The most notable was that of 1875, instigated by Stambulóv, +the future dictator, in sympathy with the outbreak in Montenegro, Hercegovina, +and Bosnia of that year; the result of this and of similar movements in 1876 +was the series of notorious Bulgarian massacres in that year. The indignation +of Europe was aroused and concerted representations were urgently made at +Constantinople. Midhat Pasha disarmed his opponents by summarily introducing +the British constitution into Turkey, but, needless to say, Bulgaria’s +lot was not improved by this specious device. Russia had, however, steadily +been making her preparations, and, Turkey having refused to discontinue +hostilities against Montenegro, on April 24, 1877, war was declared by the +Emperor Alexander II, whose patience had become exhausted; he was joined by +Prince Charles of Rumania, who saw that by doing so he would be rewarded by the +complete emancipation of his country, then still a vassal-state of Turkey, and +its erection into a kingdom. At the beginning of the war all went well for the +Russians and Rumanians, who were soon joined by large numbers of Bulgarian +insurgents; the Turkish forces were scattered all over the peninsula. The +committee of Bucarest transformed itself into a provisional government, but the +Russians, who had undertaken to liberate the country, naturally had to keep its +administration temporarily in their own hands, and refused their recognition. +The Turks, alarmed at the early victories of the Russians, brought up better +generals and troops, and defeated the Russians at Plevna in July. They failed, +however, to dislodge them from the important and famous Shipka Pass in August, +and after this they became demoralized and their resistance rapidly weakened. +The Russians, helped by the Bulgarians and Rumanians, fought throughout the +summer with the greatest gallantry; they took Plevna, after a three +months’ siege, in December, occupied Sofia and Philippopolis in January +1878, and pushed forward to the walls of Constantinople. +</p> + +<p> +The Turks were at their last gasp, and at Adrianople, in March 1878, Ignatiyev +dictated the terms of the Treaty of San Stefano, by which a principality of +Bulgaria, under the nominal suzerainty of the Sultan, was created, stretching +from the Danube to the Aegean, and from the Black Sea to Albania, including all +Macedonia and leaving to the Turks only the district between Constantinople and +Adrianople, Chalcidice, and the town of Salonika; Bulgaria would thus have +regained the dimensions it possessed under Tsar Simeon nine hundred and fifty +years previously. +</p> + +<p> +This treaty, which on ethnological grounds was tolerably just, alarmed the +other powers, especially Great Britain and Germany, who thought they perceived +in it the foundations of Russian hegemony in the Balkans, while it would, if +put into execution, have blighted the aspirations of Greece and Serbia. The +Treaty of Berlin, inspired by Bismarck and Lord Salisbury, anxious to defend, +the former, the interests of (ostensibly) Austria-Hungary, the latter +(shortsightedly) those of Turkey, replaced it in July 1878. By its terms +Bulgaria was cut into three parts; northern Bulgaria, between the Danube and +the Balkans, was made an autonomous province, tributary to Turkey; southern +Bulgaria, fancifully termed Eastern Rumelia (Rumili was the name always given +by the Turks to the whole Balkan peninsula), was to have autonomous +administration under a Christian governor appointed by the Porte; Macedonia was +left to Turkey; and the Dobrudja, between the Danube and the Black Sea, was +adjudged to Rumania. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="chap11"></a>11<br/> +<i>The Aftermath, and Prince Alexander of Battenberg, 1878–86</i></h2> + +<p> +The relations between the Russians and the Bulgarians were better before the +liberation of the latter by the former than after; this may seem unjust, +because Bulgaria could never have freed herself so decisively and rapidly +alone, and Russia was the only power in whose interest it was to free her from +the Turks, and who could translate that interest so promptly into action; +nevertheless, the laws controlling the relationships of states and +nationalities being much the same as those which control the relationships of +individuals, it was only to be expected. +</p> + +<p> +What so often happens in the relationships of individuals happened in those +between Russia and Bulgaria. Russia naturally enough expected Bulgaria to be +grateful for the really large amount of blood and treasure which its liberation +had cost Russia, and, moreover, expected its gratitude to take the form of +docility and a general acquiescence in all the suggestions and wishes expressed +by its liberator. Bulgaria was no doubt deeply grateful, but never had the +slightest intention of expressing its gratitude in the desired way; on the +contrary, like most people who have regained a long-lost and unaccustomed +freedom of action or been put under an obligation, it appeared touchy and +jealous of its right to an independent judgement. It is often assumed by +Russophobe writers that Russia wished and intended to make a Russian province +of Bulgaria, but this is very unlikely; the geographical configuration of the +Balkan peninsula would not lend itself to its incorporation in the Russian +Empire, the existence between the two of the compact and vigorous national +block of Rumania, a Latin race and then already an independent state, was an +insurmountable obstacle, and, finally, it is quite possible for Russia to +obtain possession or control of Constantinople without owning all the +intervening littoral. +</p> + +<p> +That Russia should wish to have a controlling voice in the destinies of +Bulgaria and in those of the whole peninsula was natural, and it was just as +natural that Bulgaria should resent its pretensions. The eventual result of +this, however, was that Bulgaria inevitably entered the sphere of Austrian and +ultimately of German influence or rather calculation, a contingency probably +not foreseen by its statesmen at the time, and whose full meaning, even if it +had, would not have been grasped by them. +</p> + +<p> +The Bulgarians, whatever the origin and the ingredients of their nationality, +are by language a purely Slavonic people; their ancestors were the pioneers of +Slavonic civilization as expressed in its monuments of theological literature. +Nevertheless, they have never been enthusiastic Pan-Slavists, any more than the +Dutch have ever been ardent Pan-Germans; it is as unreasonable to expect such a +thing of the one people as it is of the other. The Bulgarians indeed think +themselves superior to the Slavs by reason of the warlike and glorious +traditions of the Tartar tribe that gave them their name and infused the +Asiatic element into their race, thus endowing them with greater stability, +energy, and consistency than is possessed by purely Slav peoples. These latter, +on the other hand, and notably the Serbians, for the same reason affect +contempt for the mixture of blood and for what they consider the Mongol +characteristics of the Bulgarians. What is certain is that between Bulgarians +and Germans (including German Austrians and Magyars) there has never existed +that elemental, ineradicable, and insurmountable antipathy which exists between +German (and Magyar) and Slav wherever the two races are contiguous, from the +Baltic to the Adriatic; nothing is more remarkable than the way in which the +Bulgarian people has been flattered, studied, and courted in Austria-Hungary +and Germany, during the last decade, to the detriment of the purely Slav Serb +race with whom it is always compared. The reason is that with the growth of the +Serb national movement, from 1903 onwards, Austria-Hungary and Germany felt an +instinctive and perfectly well-justified fear of the Serb race, and sought to +neutralize the possible effect of its growing power by any possible means. +</p> + +<p> +It is not too much to say, in summing up, that Russian influence, which had +been growing stronger in Bulgaria up till 1877-8, has since been steadily on +the decline; Germany and Austria-Hungary, who reduced Bulgaria to half the size +that Count Ignatiyev had made it by the Treaty of San Stefano, reaped the +benefit, especially the commercial benefit, of the war which Russia had waged. +Intellectually, and especially as regards the replenishment and renovation of +the Bulgarian language, which, in spite of numerous Turkish words introduced +during the Ottoman rule, is essentially Slavonic both in substance and form, +Russian influence was especially powerful, and has to a certain extent +maintained itself. Economically, owing partly to geographical conditions, both +the Danube and the main oriental railway linking Bulgaria directly with +Budapest and Vienna, partly to the fact that Bulgaria’s best customers +for its cereals are in central and western Europe, the connexion between +Bulgaria and Russia is infinitesimal. Politically, both Russia and Bulgaria +aiming at the same thing, the possession of Constantinople and the hegemony of +the Balkan peninsula, their relations were bound to be difficult. +</p> + +<p> +The first Bulgarian Parliament met in 1879 under trying conditions. Both +Russian and Bulgarian hopes had been dashed by the Treaty of Berlin. Russian +influence was still paramount, however, and the viceroy controlled the +organization of the administration. An ultra-democratic constitution was +arranged for, a fact obviously not conducive to the successful government of +their country by the quite inexperienced Bulgarians. For a ruler recourse had +inevitably to be had to the rabbit-warren of Germanic princes, who were still +ingenuously considered neutral both in religion and in politics. The choice +fell on Prince Alexander of Battenberg, nephew of the Empress of Russia, who +had taken part in the campaign of the Russian army. Prince Alexander was +conscientious, energetic, and enthusiastic, but he was no diplomat, and from +the outset his honesty precluded his success. From the very first he failed to +keep on good terms with Russia or its representatives, who at that time were +still numerous in Bulgaria, while he was helpless to stem the ravages of +parliamentary government. The Emperor Alexander III, who succeeded his father +Alexander II in 1881, recommended him to insist on being made dictator, which +he successfully did. But when he found that this only meant an increase of +Russian influence he reverted to parliamentary government (in September 1883); +this procedure discomfited the representatives of Russia, discredited him with +the Emperor, and threw him back into the vortex of party warfare, from which he +never extricated himself. +</p> + +<p> +Meanwhile the question of eastern Rumelia, or rather southern Bulgaria, still a +Turkish province, began to loom. A vigorous agitation for the reunion of the +two parts of the country had been going on for some time, and on September 18, +1885, the inhabitants of Philippopolis suddenly proclaimed the union under +Prince Alexander, who solemnly announced his approval at Tirnovo and +triumphantly entered their city on September 21. Russia frowned on this +independence of spirit. Serbia, under King Milan, and instigated by Austria, +inaugurated the policy which has so often been followed since, and claimed +territorial compensation for Bulgaria’s aggrandisement; it must be +remembered that it was Bismarck who, by the Treaty of Berlin, had arbitrarily +confined Serbia to its inadequate limits of those day. +</p> + +<p> +On November 13 King Milan declared war, and began to march on Sofia, which is +not far from the Serbo-Bulgarian frontier. Prince Alexander, the bulk of whose +army was on the Turkish frontier, boldly took up the challenge. On November 18 +took place the battle of Slivnitsa, a small town about twenty miles north-west +of Sofia, in which the Bulgarians were completely victorious. Prince Alexander, +after hard fighting, took Pirot in Serbia on November 27, having refused King +Milan’s request for an armistice, and was marching on Nish, when Austria +intervened, and threatened to send troops into Serbia unless fighting ceased. +Bulgaria had to obey, and on March 3, 1886, a barren treaty of peace was +imposed on the belligerents at Bucarest. Prince Alexander’s position did +not improve after this, indeed it would have needed a much more skilful +navigator to steer through the many currents which eddied round him. A strong +Russophile party formed itself in the army; on the night of August 21, 1886, +some officers of this party, who were the most capable in the Bulgarian army, +appeared at Sofia, forced Alexander to resign, and abducted him; they put him +on board his yacht on the Danube and escorted him to the Russian town of Reni, +in Bessarabia; telegraphic orders came from St. Petersburg, in answer to +inquiries, that he could proceed with haste to western Europe, and on August 26 +he found himself at Lemberg. But those who had carried out this <i>coup +d’état</i> found that it was not at all popular in the country. A +counter-revolution, headed by the statesman Stambulóv, was immediately +initiated, and on September 3 Prince Alexander reappeared in Sofia amidst +tumultuous applause. Nevertheless his position was hopeless; the Emperor +Alexander III forced him to abdicate, and on September 7, 1886, he left +Bulgaria for good, to the regret of the majority of the people. He died in +Austria, in 1893, in his thirty-seventh year. At his departure a regency was +constituted, at the head of which was Stambulóv. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="chap12"></a>12<br/> +<i>The Regeneration under Prince Ferdinand of Saxe-Coburg,</i> 1886–1908</h2> + +<p> +Stambulóv was born at Tirnovo in 1854 and was of humble origin. He took part in +the insurrection of 1876 and in the war of liberation, and in 1884 became +president of the Sóbraniye (Parliament). From 1886 till 1894 he was virtually +dictator of Bulgaria. He was intensely patriotic and also personally ambitious, +determined, energetic, ruthlessly cruel and unscrupulous, but incapable of +deceit; these qualities were apparent in his powerful and grim expression of +face, while his manner inspired the weak with terror and the strongest with +respect. His policy in general was directed against Russia. At the general +election held in October 1886 he had all his important opponents imprisoned +beforehand, while armed sentries discouraged ill-disposed voters from +approaching the ballot-boxes. Out of 522 elected deputies, there were 470 +supporters of Stambulóv. This implied the complete suppression of the +Russophile party and led to a rupture with St. Petersburg. +</p> + +<p> +Whatever were Stambulóv’s methods, and few would deny that they were +harsh, there is no doubt that something of the sort was necessary to restore +order in the country. But once having started on this path he found it +difficult to stop, and his tyrannical bearing, combined with the delay in +finding a prince, soon made him unpopular. There were several revolutionary +outbreaks directed against him, but these were all crushed. At length the, at +that time not particularly alluring, throne of Bulgaria was filled by Prince +Ferdinand of Saxe-Coburg, who was born in 1861 and was the son of the gifted +Princess Clémentine of Bourbon-Orleans, daughter of Louis-Philippe. This young +man combined great ambition and tenacity of purpose with extreme prudence, +astuteness, and patience; he was a consummate diplomat. The election of this +prince was viewed with great disfavour by Russia, and for fear of offending the +Emperor Alexander III none of the European powers recognized him. +</p> + +<p> +Ferdinand, unabashed, cheerfully installed himself in Sofia with his mother in +July 1886, and took care to make the peace with his suzerain, the Sultan Abdul +Hamid. He wisely left all power in the hands of the unattractive and to him, +unsympathetic prime minister, Stambulóv, till he himself felt secure in his +position, and till the dictator should have made himself thoroughly hated. +Ferdinand’s clever and wealthy mother cast a beneficent and civilizing +glow around him, smoothing away many difficulties by her womanly tact and +philanthropic activity, and, thanks to his influential connexions in the courts +of Europe and his attitude of calm expectancy, his prestige in his own country +rapidly increased. In 1893 he married Princess Marie-Louise of Bourbon-Parma. +In May 1894, as a result of a social misadventure in which he became involved, +Stambulóv sent in his resignation, confidently expecting a refusal. To his +mortification it was accepted; thereupon he initiated a violent press campaign, +but his halo had faded, and on July 15 he was savagely attacked in the street +by unknown men, who afterwards escaped, and he died three days later. So +intense were the emotions of the people that his grave had to be guarded by the +military for two months. In November 1894 followed the death of the Emperor +Alexander III, and as a result of this double event the road to a +reconciliation with Russia was opened. Meanwhile the German Emperor, who was on +good terms with Princess Clémentine, had paved the way for Ferdinand at Vienna, +and when, in March 1896, the Sultan recognized him as Prince of Bulgaria and +Governor-General of eastern Rumelia, his international position was assured. +Relations with Russia were still further improved by the rebaptism of the +infant Crown Prince Boris according to the rites of the eastern Church, in +February 1896, and a couple of years later Ferdinand and his wife and child +paid a highly successful state visit to Peterhof. In September 1902 a memorial +church was erected by the Emperor Nicholas II at the Shipka Pass, and later an +equestrian statue of the Tsar-Liberator Alexander II was placed opposite the +House of Parliament in Sofia. +</p> + +<p> +Bulgaria meanwhile had been making rapid and astonishing material progress. +Railways were built, exports increased, and the general condition of the +country greatly improved. It is the fashion to compare the wonderful advance +made by Bulgaria during the thirty-five years of its new existence with the +very much slower progress made by Serbia during a much longer period. This is +insisted on especially by publicists in Austria-Hungary and Germany, but it is +forgotten that even before the last Balkan war the geographical position of +Bulgaria with its seaboard was much more favourable to its economic development +than that of Serbia, which the Treaty of Berlin had hemmed in by Turkish and +Austro-Hungarian territory; moreover, Bulgaria being double the size of the +Serbia of those days, had far greater resources upon which to draw. +</p> + +<p> +From 1894 onwards Ferdinand’s power in his own country and his influence +abroad had been steadily growing. He always appreciated the value of railways, +and became almost as great a traveller as the German Emperor. His estates in +the south of Hungary constantly required his attention, and he was a frequent +visitor in Vienna. The German Emperor, though he could not help admiring +Ferdinand’s success, was always a little afraid of him; he felt that +Ferdinand’s gifts were so similar to his own that he would be unable to +count on him in an emergency. Moreover, it was difficult to reconcile +Ferdinand’s ambitions in extreme south-eastern Europe with his own. +Ferdinand’s relations with Vienna, on the other hand, and especially with +the late Archduke Francis Ferdinand, were both cordial and intimate. +</p> + +<p> +The gradual aggravation of the condition of the Turkish Empire, notably in +Macedonia, the unredeemed Bulgaria, where since the insurrection of 1902-3 +anarchy, always endemic, had deteriorated into a reign of terror, and, also the +unmistakably growing power and spirit of Serbia since the accession of the +Karageorgevich dynasty in 1903, caused uneasiness in Sofia, no less than in +Vienna and Budapest. The Young Turkish revolution of July 1908, and the triumph +of the Committee of Union and Progress, disarmed the critics of Turkey who +wished to make the forcible introduction of reforms a pretext for their +interference; but the potential rejuvenation of the Ottoman Empire which it +foreshadowed indicated the desirability of rapid and decisive action. In +September, after fomenting a strike on the Oriental Railway in eastern Roumelia +(which railway was Turkish property), the Sofia Cabinet seized the line with a +military force on the plea of political necessity. At the same time Ferdinand, +with his second wife, the Protestant Princess Eleonora of Reuss, whom he had +married in March of that year, was received with regal honours by the Emperor +of Austria at Budapest. On October 5, 1908, at Tirnovo, the ancient capital, +Ferdinand proclaimed the complete independence of Bulgaria and eastern Rumelia +under himself as King (<i>Tsar</i> in Bulgarian), and on October 7 +Austria-Hungary announced the annexation of Bosnia and Hercegovina, the two +Turkish provinces administered by it since 1879, nominally under Turkish +suzerainty. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="chap13"></a>13<br/> +<i>The Kingdom</i>, 1908–13</h2> + +<p> +(cf. Chaps. 14, 20) +</p> + +<p> +The events which have taken place in Bulgaria since 1908 hinge on the +Macedonian question, which has not till now been mentioned. The Macedonian +question was extremely complicated; it started on the assumption that the +disintegration of Turkey, which had been proceeding throughout the nineteenth +century, would eventually be completed, and the question was how in this +eventuality to satisfy the territorial claims of the three neighbouring +countries, Bulgaria, Serbia, and Greece, claims both historical and +ethnological, based on the numbers and distribution of their +‘unredeemed’ compatriots in Macedonia, and at the same time avoid +causing the armed interference of Europe. +</p> + +<p> +The beginnings of the Macedonian question in its modern form do not go farther +back than 1885, when the ease with which eastern Rumelia (i.e. southern +Bulgaria) threw off the Turkish yoke and was spontaneously united with the +semi-independent principality of northern Bulgaria affected the imagination of +the Balkan statesmen. From that time Sofia began to cast longing eyes on +Macedonia, the whole of which was claimed as ‘unredeemed Bulgaria’, +and Stambulóv’s last success in 1894 was to obtain from Turkey the +consent to the establishment of two bishops of the Bulgarian (Exarchist) Church +in Macedonia, which was a heavy blow for the Greek Patriarchate at +Constantinople. +</p> + +<p> +Macedonia had been envisaged by the Treaty of Berlin, article 23 of which +stipulated for reforms in that province; but in those days the Balkan States +were too young and weak to worry themselves or the European powers over the +troubles of their co-religionists in Turkey; their hands were more than full +setting their own houses in some sort of order, and it was in nobody’s +interest to reform Macedonia, so article 23 remained the expression of a +philanthropic sentiment. This indifference on the part of Europe left the door +open for the Balkan States, as soon as they had energy to spare, to initiate +their campaign for extending their spheres of influence in Macedonia. +</p> + +<p> +From 1894 onwards Bulgarian propaganda in Macedonia increased, and the +Bulgarians were soon followed by Greeks and Serbians. The reason for this +passionate pegging out of claims and the bitter rivalry of the three nations +which it engendered was the following: The population of Macedonia was nowhere, +except in the immediate vicinity of the borders of these three countries, +either purely Bulgar or purely Greek or purely Serb; most of the towns +contained a percentage of at least two of these nationalities, not to mention +the Turks (who after all were still the owners of the country by right of +conquest), Albanians, Tartars, Rumanians (Vlakhs), and others; the city of +Salonika was and is almost purely Jewish, while in the country districts +Turkish, Albanian, Greek, Bulgar, and Serb villages were inextricably confused. +Generally speaking, the coastal strip was mainly Greek (the coast itself purely +so), the interior mainly Slav. The problem was for each country to peg out as +large a claim as possible, and so effectively, by any means in their power, to +make the majority of the population contained in that claim acknowledge itself +to be Bulgar, or Serb, or Greek, that when the agony of the Ottoman Empire was +over, each part of Macedonia would automatically fall into the arms of its +respective deliverers. The game was played through the appropriate media of +churches and schools, for the unfortunate Macedonian peasants had first of all +to be enlightened as to who they were, or rather as to who they were told they +had got to consider themselves, while the Church, as always, conveniently +covered a multitude of political aims; when those methods flagged, a bomb would +be thrown at, let us say, a Turkish official by an <i>agent provocateur</i> of +one of the three players, inevitably resulting in the necessary massacre of +innocent Christians by the ostensibly brutal but really equally innocent Turks, +and an outcry in the European press. +</p> + +<p> +Bulgaria was first in the field and had a considerable start of the other two +rivals. The Bulgars claimed the whole of Macedonia, including Salonika and all +the Aegean coast (except Chalcidice), Okhrida, and Monastir; Greece claimed all +southern Macedonia, and Serbia parts of northern and central Macedonia known as +Old Serbia. The crux of the whole problem was, and is, that the claims of +Serbia and Greece do not clash, while that of Bulgaria, driving a thick wedge +between Greece and Serbia, and thus giving Bulgaria the undoubted hegemony of +the peninsula, came into irreconcilable conflict with those of its rivals. The +importance of this point was greatly emphasized by the existence of the +Nish-Salonika railway, which is Serbia’s only direct outlet to the sea, +and runs through Macedonia from north to south, following the right or western +bank of the river Vardar. Should Bulgaria straddle that, Serbia would be +economically at its mercy, just as in the north it was already, to its bitter +cost, at the mercy of Austria-Hungary. Nevertheless, Bulgarian propaganda had +been so effectual that Serbia and Greece never expected they would eventually +be able to join hands so easily and successfully as they afterwards did. +</p> + +<p> +The then unknown quantity of Albania was also a factor. This people, though +small in numbers, was formidable in character, and had never been effectually +subdued by the Turks. They would have been glad to have a boundary contiguous +with that of Bulgaria (with whom they had no quarrel) as a support against +their hereditary enemies, Serbs in the north and Greeks in the south, who were +more than inclined to encroach on their territory. The population of Macedonia, +being still under Turkish rule, was uneducated and ignorant; needless to say it +had no national consciousness, though this was less true of the Greeks than of +the Slavs. It is the Slav population of Macedonia that has engendered so much +heat and caused so much blood to be spilt. The dispute as to whether it is +rather Serb or Bulgar has caused interminable and most bitter controversy. The +truth is that it <i>was</i> neither the one nor the other, but that, the +ethnological and linguistic missionaries of Bulgaria having been first in the +field, a majority of the Macedonian Slavs had been so long and so persistently +told that they were Bulgars, that after a few years Bulgaria could, with some +truth, claim that this fact was so. +</p> + +<p> +Macedonia had been successively under Greek, Bulgar, and Serb, before Turkish, +rule, but the Macedonian Slavs had, under the last, been so cut off both from +Bulgars and Serbs, that ethnologically and linguistically they did not develop +the characteristics of either of these two races, which originally belonged to +the same southern Slav stock, but remained a primitive neutral Slav type. If +the Serbs had been first in the field instead of the Bulgars, the Macedonian +Slavs could just as easily have been made into Serbs, sufficiently plausibly to +convince the most knowing expert. The well-known recipe for making a Macedonian +Slav village Bulgar is to add <i>-ov</i> or <i>-ev</i> (pronounced <i>-off, +-yeff</i>) on to the names of all the male inhabitants, and to make it Serb it +is only necessary to add further the syllable <i>-ich, -ov</i> and +<i>-ovich</i> being respectively the equivalent in Bulgarian and Serbian of our +termination <i>-son,</i> e. g. <i>Ivanov</i> in Bulgarian, and <i>Jovanovit</i> +in Serbian = <i>Johnson</i>. +</p> + +<p> +In addition to these three nations Rumania also entered the lists, suddenly +horrified at discovering the sad plight of the Vlakh shepherds, who had +probably wandered with unconcern about Macedonia with their herds since Roman +times. As their vague pastures could not possibly ever be annexed to Rumania, +their case was merely used in order to justify Rumania in claiming eventual +territorial compensation elsewhere at the final day of reckoning. Meanwhile, +their existence as a separate and authentic nationality in Turkey was +officially recognized by the Porte in 1906. +</p> + +<p> +The stages of the Macedonian question up to 1908 must at this point be quite +briefly enumerated. Russia and Austria-Hungary, the two ‘most interested +powers’, who as far back as the eighteenth century had divided the +Balkans into their respective spheres of interest, east and west, came to an +agreement in 1897 regarding the final settlement of affairs in Turkey; but it +never reached a conclusive stage and consequently was never applied. The +Macedonian chaos meanwhile grew steadily worse, and the serious insurrections +of 1902-3, followed by the customary reprisals, thoroughly alarmed the powers. +Hilmi Pasha had been appointed Inspector-General of Macedonia in December 1902, +but was not successful in restoring order. In October 1903 the Emperor Nicholas +II and the Emperor of Austria, with their foreign ministers, met at Mürzsteg, +in Styria, and elaborated a more definite plan of reform known as the Mürzsteg +programme, the drastic terms of which had been largely inspired by Lord +Lansdowne, then British Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs; the principal +feature was the institution of an international gendarmerie, the whole of +Macedonia being divided up into five districts to be apportioned among the +several great powers. Owing to the procrastination of the Porte and to the +extreme complexity of the financial measures which had to be elaborated in +connexion with this scheme of reforms, the last of the negotiations was not +completed, nor the whole series ratified, until April 1907, though the +gendarmerie officers had arrived in Macedonia in February 1904. +</p> + +<p> +At this point again it is necessary to recall the position in regard to this +question of the various nations concerned. Great Britain and France had no +territorial stake in Turkey proper, and did their utmost to secure reform not +only in the <i>vilayets</i> of Macedonia, but also in the realm of Ottoman +finance. Italy’s interest centred in Albania, whose eventual fate, for +geographical and strategic reasons, could not leave it indifferent. +Austria-Hungary’s only care was by any means to prevent the +aggrandizement of the Serb nationality and of Serbia and Montenegro, so as to +secure the control, if not the possession, of the routes to Salonika, if +necessary over the prostrate bodies of those two countries which defiantly +barred Germanic progress towards the East. Russia was already fatally absorbed +in the Far Eastern adventure, and, moreover, had, ever since the war of 1878, +been losing influence at Constantinople, where before its word had been law; +the Treaty of Berlin had dealt a blow at Russian prestige, and Russia had ever +since that date been singularly badly served by its ambassadors to the Porte, +who were always either too old or too easy-going. Germany, on the other hand, +had been exceptionally fortunate or prudent in the choice of its +representatives. The general trend of German diplomacy in Turkey was not +grasped until very much later, a fact which redounds to the credit of the +German ambassadors at Constantinople. Ever since the triumphal journey of +William II to the Bosphorus in 1889, German influence, under the able guidance +of Baron von Radowitz, steadily increased. This culminated in the régime of the +late Baron Marschall von Bieberstein, who was ambassador from 1897 to 1912. It +was German policy to flatter, support, and encourage Turkey in every possible +way, to refrain from taking part with the other powers in the invidious and +perennial occupation of pressing reforms on Abdul Hamid, and, above all, to +give as much pocket-money to Turkey and its extravagant ruler as they asked +for. Germany, for instance, refused to send officers or to have a district +assigned it in Macedonia in 1904, and declined to take part in the naval +demonstration off Mitylene in 1905. This attitude of Germany naturally +encouraged the Porte in its policy of delay and subterfuge, and Turkey soon +came to look on Germany as its only strong, sincere, and disinterested friend +in Europe. For the indefinite continuance of chaos and bloodshed in Macedonia, +after the other powers had really braced themselves to the thankless task of +putting the reforms into practice, Germany alone was responsible. +</p> + +<p> +The blow which King Ferdinand had inflicted on the prestige of the Young Turks +in October 1908, by proclaiming his independence, naturally lent lustre to the +Bulgarian cause in Macedonia. Serbia, baffled by the simultaneous Austrian +annexation of Bosnia and Hercegovina, and maddened by the elevation of Bulgaria +to the rank of a kingdom (its material progress had hitherto been discounted in +Serbian eyes by the fact that it was a mere vassal principality), seemed about +to be crushed by the two iron pots jostling it on either side. Its +international position was at that time such that it could expect no help or +encouragement from western Europe, while the events of 1909 (cf. p. 144) showed +that Russia was not then in a position to render active assistance. Greece, +also screaming aloud for compensation, was told by its friends amongst the +great powers that if it made a noise it would get nothing, but that if it +behaved like a good child it might some day be given Krete. Meanwhile Russia, +rudely awakened by the events of 1908 to the real state of affairs in the Near +East, beginning to realize the growth of German influence at Constantinople, +and seeing the unmistakable resuscitation of Austria-Hungary as a great power, +made manifest by the annexation of Bosnia and Hercegovina, temporarily +reasserted its influence in Bulgaria. From the moment when Baron Aehrenthal +announced his chimerical scheme of an Austrian railway through the +<i>Sandjak</i> of Novi Pazar in January 1908— everybody knows that the +railway already built through Serbia along the Morava valley is the only +commercially remunerative and strategically practicable road from Berlin, +Vienna, and Budapest to Salonika and Constantinople—Russia realized that +the days of the Mürzsteg programme were over, that henceforward it was to be a +struggle between Slav and Teuton for the ownership of Constantinople and the +dominion of the Near East, and that something must be done to retrieve the +position in the Balkans which it was losing. After Baron Aehrenthal, in January +1909, had mollified the Young Turks by an indemnity, and thus put an end to the +boycott, Russia in February of the same year liquidated the remains of the old +Turkish war indemnity of 1878 still due to itself by skilfully arranging that +Bulgaria should pay off its capitalized tribute, owed to its ex-suzerain the +Sultan, by very easy instalments to Russia instead. +</p> + +<p> +The immediate effects of the Young Turk revolution amongst the Balkan States, +and the events, watched benevolently by Russia, which led to the formation of +the Balkan League, when it was joyfully realized that neither the setting-up of +parliamentary government, nor even the overthrow of Abdul Hamid, implied the +commencement of the millennium in Macedonia and Thrace, have been described +elsewhere (pp. 141, 148). King Ferdinand and M. Venezelos are generally +credited with the inception and realisation of the League, though it was so +secretly and skilfully concerted that it is not yet possible correctly to +apportion praise for the remarkable achievement. Bulgaria is a very democratic +country, but King Ferdinand, owing to his sagacity, patience, and experience, +and also thanks to his influential dynastic connexions and propensity for +travel, has always been virtually his own foreign minister; in spite of the +fact that he is a large feudal Hungarian landlord, and has temperamental +leanings towards the Central European Empires, it is quite credible that King +Ferdinand devoted all his undeniable talents and great energy to the formation +of the League when he saw that the moment had come for Bulgaria to realize its +destiny at Turkey’s expense, and that, if the other three Balkan States +could be induced to come to the same wise decision, it would be so much the +better for all of them. That Russia could do anything else than whole-heartedly +welcome the formation of the Balkan League was absolutely impossible. +Pan-Slavism had long since ceased to be the force it was, and nobody in Russia +dreamed of or desired the incorporation of any Balkan territory in the Russian +Empire. It is possible to control Constantinople without possessing the +Balkans, and Russia could only rejoice if a Greco-Slavonic league should +destroy the power of the Turks and thereby make impossible the further advance +of the Germanic powers eastward. +</p> + +<p> +That Russia was ever in the least jealous of the military successes of the +league, which caused such gnashing of teeth in Berlin, Vienna, and Budapest, is +a mischievous fiction, the emptiness of which was evident to any one who +happened to be in Russia during the winter of 1912-13. +</p> + +<p> +The years 1908 to 1912 were outwardly uneventful in Bulgaria, though a great +deal of quiet work was done in increasing the efficiency of the army, and the +material prosperity of the country showed no falling off. Relations with the +other Balkan States, especially with Serbia and Montenegro, improved +considerably, and there was ample room for such improvement. This was outwardly +marked by frequent visits paid to each other by members of the several royal +families of the three Slavonic kingdoms of the Balkans. In May 1912 agreements +for the eventual delimitation of the provinces to be conquered from Turkey in +the event of war were signed between Bulgaria and Serbia, and Bulgaria and +Greece. The most controversial district was, of course, Macedonia. Bulgaria +claimed central Macedonia, with Monastir and Okhrida, which was the +lion’s share, on ethnical grounds which have been already discussed, and +it was expected that Greece and Serbia, by obtaining other acquisitions +elsewhere, would consent to have their territories separated by the large +Bulgarian wedge which was to be driven between them. The exact future line of +demarcation between Serbian and Bulgarian territory was to be left to +arbitration. The possible creation of an independent Albania was not +contemplated. +</p> + +<p> +In August 1912 the twenty-fifth anniversary of King Ferdinand’s arrival +in Bulgaria was celebrated with much rejoicing at the ancient capital of +Tirnovo, and was marred only by the news of the terrible massacre of Bulgars by +Turks at Kochana in Macedonia; this event, however, opportune though mournful, +tended considerably to increase the volume of the wave of patriotism which +swept through the country. Later in the same month Count Berchtold startled +Europe with his ‘progressive decentralization’ scheme of reform for +Macedonia. The manner in which this event led to the final arrangements for the +declaration of war on Turkey by the four Balkan States is given in full +elsewhere (cf. p. 151). +</p> + +<p> +The Bulgarian army was fully prepared for the fray, and the autumn manoeuvres +had permitted the concentration unobserved of a considerable portion of it, +ready to strike when the time came. Mobilisation was ordered on September 30, +1912. On October 8 Montenegro declared war on Turkey. On October 13 Bulgaria, +with the other Balkan States, replied to the remonstrances of Russia and +Austria by declaring that its patience was at length exhausted, and that the +sword alone was able to enforce proper treatment of the Christian populations +in European Turkey. On October 17 Turkey, encouraged by the sudden and +unexpected conclusion of peace with Italy after the Libyan war, declared war on +Bulgaria and Serbia, and on October 18 King Ferdinand addressed a sentimental +exhortation to his people to liberate their fellow-countrymen, who were still +groaning under the Crescent. +</p> + +<p> +The number of Turkish troops opposing the Bulgarians in Thrace was about +180,000, and they had almost exactly the same number wherewith to oppose the +Serbians in Macedonia; for, although Macedonia was considered by the Turks to +be the most important theatre of war, yet the proximity of the Bulgarian +frontier to Constantinople made it necessary to retain a large number of troops +in Thrace. On October 19 the Bulgarians took the frontier town of Mustafa +Pasha. On October 24 they defeated the Turks at Kirk-Kilissé (or Lozengrad), +further east. From October 28 to November 2 raged the terrific battle of +Lule-Burgas, which resulted in a complete and brilliant victory of the +Bulgarians over the Turks. The defeat and humiliation of the Turks was as rapid +and thorough in Thrace as it had been in Macedonia, and by the middle of +November the remains of the Turkish army were entrenched behind the impregnable +lines of Chataldja, while a large garrison was shut up in Adrianople, which had +been invested by the end of October. The Bulgarian army, somewhat exhausted by +this brilliant and lightning campaign, refrained from storming the lines of +Chataldja, an operation which could not fail to involve losses such as the +Bulgarian nation was scarcely in a position to bear, and on December 3 the +armistice was signed. The negotiations conducted in London for two months led, +however, to no result, and on February 3, 1913, hostilities were resumed. +These, for the Bulgarians, resolved themselves into the more energetic +prosecution of the siege of Adrianople, which had not been raised during the +armistice. To their assistance Serbia, being able to spare troops from +Macedonia, sent 50,000 men and a quantity of heavy siege artillery, an arm +which the Bulgarians lacked. On March 26, 1913, the fortress surrendered to the +allied armies. +</p> + +<p> +The Conference of London, which took place during the spring of that year, +fixed the new Turco-Bulgarian boundary by drawing the famous Enos-Midia line, +running between these two places situated on the shores respectively of the +Aegean and the Black Sea. This delimitation would have given Bulgaria +possession of Adrianople. But meanwhile Greece and especially Serbia, which +latter country had been compelled to withdraw from the Adriatic coast by +Austria, and was further precluded from ever returning there by the creation of +the independent state of Albania, determined to retain possession of all that +part of Macedonia, including the whole valley of the Vardar with its important +railway, which they had conquered, and thus secure their common frontier. In +May 1913 a military convention was concluded between them, and the Balkan +League, the relations between the members of which had been becoming more +strained ever since January, finally dissolved. Bulgaria, outraged by this +callous disregard of the agreements as to the partition of Macedonia signed a +year previously by itself and its ex-allies, did not wait for the result of the +arbitration which was actually proceeding in Russia, but in an access of +indignation rushed to arms. +</p> + +<p> +This second Balkan war, begun by Bulgaria during the night of June 30, 1913, by +a sudden attack on the Serbian army in Macedonia, resulted in its undoing. In +order to defeat the Serbs and Greeks the south-eastern and northern frontiers +were denuded of troops. But the totally unforeseen happened. The Serbs were +victorious, defeating the Bulgars in Macedonia, the Turks, seeing Thrace empty +of Bulgarian troops, re-occupied Adrianople, and the Rumanian army, determined +to see fair play before it was too late, invaded Bulgaria from the north and +marched on Sofia. By the end of July the campaign was over and Bulgaria had to +submit to fate. +</p> + +<p> +By the terms of the Treaty of Bucarest, which was concluded on August 10, 1913, +Bulgaria obtained a considerable part of Thrace and eastern Macedonia, +including a portion of the Aegean coast with the seaport of Dedeagach, but it +was forced to ‘compensate’ Rumania with a slice of its richest +province (the districts of Dobrich and Silistria in north-eastern Bulgaria), +and it lost central Macedonia, a great part of which it would certainly have +been awarded by Russia’s arbitration. On September 22, 1913, the Treaty +of Constantinople was signed by Bulgaria and Turkey; by its terms Turkey +retained possession of Adrianople and of a far larger part of Thrace than its +series of ignominious defeats in the autumn of 1912 entitled it to. +</p> + +<p> +In the fatal quarrel between Bulgaria and Serbia which caused the disruption of +the Balkan League, led to the tragic second Balkan war of July 1913, and +naturally left behind the bitterest feelings, it is difficult to apportion the +blame. Both Serbia and Bulgaria were undoubtedly at fault in the choice of the +methods by which they sought to adjust their difference, but the real guilt is +to be found neither in Sofia nor in Belgrade, but in Vicuna and Budapest. The +Balkan League barred the way of the Germanic Powers to the East; its disruption +weakened Bulgaria and again placed Serbia at the mercy of the Dual Monarchy. +After these trying and unremunerative experiences it is not astonishing that +the Bulgarian people and its ambitious ruler should have retired to the remote +interior of their shell. +</p> + +<hr /> + +<p> +<i>Explanation of Serbian orthography</i> +</p> + +<p class="letter"> +c = ts<br/> +č = ch (as in <i>church</i>)<br/> +ć = ” ” ” but softer<br/> +š = sh<br/> +ž = zh (as z in <i>azure</i>)<br/> +gj = g (as in <i>George</i>)<br/> +j = y +</p> + +<p> +[Illustration: THE BALKAN PENINSULA] +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="part03"></a>SERBIA</h2> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="chap14"></a>14<br/> +<i>The Serbs under Foreign Supremacy</i>, 650–1168</h2> + +<p> +The manner of the arrival of the Slavs in the Balkan peninsula, of that of the +Bulgars, and of the formation of the Bulgarian nationality has already been +described (cf. p. 26). The installation of the Slavs in the lands between the +Danube, the Aegean, and the Adriatic was completed by about A.D. 650. In the +second half of the seventh century the Bulgars settled themselves in the +eastern half of the peninsula and became absorbed by the Slavs there, and from +that time the nationality of the Slavs in the western half began to be more +clearly defined. These latter, split up into a number of tribes, gradually +grouped themselves into three main divisions: Serbs (or Serbians), Croats (or +Croatians), and Slovenes. The Serbs, much the most numerous of the three, +occupied roughly the modern kingdom of Serbia (including Old Serbia and +northern Macedonia), Montenegro, and most of Bosnia, Hercegovina, and Dalmatia; +the Croats occupied the more western parts of these last three territories and +Croatia; the Slovenes occupied the modern Carniola and southern Carinthia. +Needless to say, none of these geographical designations existed in those days +except Dalmatia, on the coast of which the Latin influence and nomenclature +maintained itself. The Slovenes, whose language is closely akin to but not +identical with Serbian (or Croatian), even to-day only number one and a half +million, and do not enter into this narrative, as they have never played any +political rôle in the Balkan peninsula. +</p> + +<p> +The Serbs and the Croats were, as regards race and language, originally one +people, the two names having merely geographical signification. In course of +time, for various reasons connected with religion and politics, the distinction +was emphasized, and from a historical point of view the Serbo-Croatian race has +always been divided into two. It is only within the last few years that a +movement has taken place, the object of which is to reunite Serbs and Croats +into one nation and eventually into one state. The movement originated in +Serbia, the Serbs maintaining that they and the Croats are one people because +they speak the same language, and that racial and linguistic unity outweighs +religious divergence. A very large number of Croats agree with the Serbs in +this and support their views, but a minority for long obstinately insisted that +there was a racial as well as a religious difference, and that fusion was +impossible. The former based their argument on facts, the latter theirs on +prejudice, which is notoriously difficult to overcome. Latterly the movement in +favour of fusion grew very much stronger among the Croats, and together with +that in Serbia resulted in the Pan-Serb agitation which, gave the pretext for +the opening of hostilities in July 1914. +</p> + +<p> +The designation Southern Slav (or Jugo-Slav, <i>jug</i>, pronounced yug, = +<i>south</i> in Serbian) covers Serbs and Croats, and also includes Slovenes; +it is only used with reference to the Bulgarians from the point of view of +philology (the group of South Slavonic languages including Bulgarian, +Serbo-Croatian and Slovene; the East Slavonic, Russian; and the West Slavonic, +Polish and Bohemian). +</p> + +<p> +In the history of the Serbs and Croats, or of the Serbo-Croatian race, several +factors of a general nature have first to be considered, which have influenced +its whole development. Of these, the physical nature of the country in which +they settled, between the Danube and Save and the Adriatic, is one of the most +important. It is almost everywhere mountainous, and though the mountains +themselves never attain as much as 10,000 feet in height, yet they cover the +whole country with an intricate network and have always formed an obstacle to +easy communication between the various parts of it. The result of this has been +twofold. In the first place it has, generally speaking, been a protection +against foreign penetration and conquest, and in so far was beneficial. +Bulgaria, further east, is, on the whole, less mountainous, in spite of the +Balkan range which stretches the whole length of it; for this reason, and also +on account of its geographical position, any invaders coming from the north or +north-east, especially if aiming at Constantinople or Salonika, were bound to +sweep over it. The great immemorial highway from the north-west to the Balkan +peninsula crosses the Danube at Belgrade and follows the valley of the Morava +to Nish; thence it branches off eastwards, going through Sofia and again +crossing all Bulgaria to reach Constantinople, while the route to Salonika +follows the Morava southwards from Nish and crosses the watershed into the +valley of the Vardar, which flows into the Aegean. But even this road, +following the course of the rivers Morava and Vardar, only went through the +fringe of Serb territory, and left untouched the vast mountain region between +the Morava and the Adriatic, which is really the home of the Serb race. +</p> + +<p> +In the second place, while it has undoubtedly been a protection to the Serb +race, it has also been a source of weakness. It has prevented a welding +together of the people into one whole, has facilitated the rise of numerous +political units at various times, and generally favoured the dissipation of the +national strength, and militated against national organization and cohesion. In +the course of history this process has been emphasized rather than diminished, +and to-day the Serb race is split up into six political divisions, while +Bulgaria, except for those Bulgars claimed as ‘unredeemed’ beyond +the frontier, presents a united whole. It is only within the last thirty years, +with the gradual improvement of communications (obstructed to an incredible +extent by the Austro-Hungarian government) and the spread of education, that +the Serbs in the different countries which they inhabit have become fully +conscious of their essential identity and racial unity. +</p> + +<p> +No less important than the physical aspect of their country on the development +of the Serbs has been the fact that right through the middle of it from south +to north there had been drawn a line of division more than two centuries before +their arrival. Artificial boundaries are proverbially ephemeral, but this one +has lasted throughout the centuries, and it has been baneful to the Serbs. This +dividing line, drawn first by the Emperor Diocletian, has been described on p. +14; at the division of the Roman Empire into East and West it was again +followed, and it formed the boundary between the dioceses of Italy and Dacia; +the line is roughly the same as the present political boundary between +Montenegro and Hercegovina, between the kingdom of Serbia and Bosnia; it +stretched from the Adriatic to the river Save right across the Serb territory. +The Serbo-Croatian race unwittingly occupied a country that was cut in two by +the line that divides East from West, and separates Constantinople and the +Eastern Church from Rome and the Western. This curious accident has had +consequences fatal to the unity of the race, since it has played into the hands +of ambitious and unscrupulous neighbours. As to the extent of the country +occupied by the Serbs at the beginning of their history it is difficult to be +accurate. +</p> + +<p> +The boundary between the Serbs in the west of the peninsula and the Bulgars in +the east has always been a matter of dispute. The present political frontier +between Serbia and Bulgaria, starting in the north from the mouth of the river +Timok on the southern bank of the Danube and going southwards slightly east of +Pirot, is ethnographically approximately correct till it reaches the newly +acquired and much-disputed territories in Macedonia, and represents fairly +accurately the line that has divided the two nationalities ever since they were +first differentiated in the seventh century. In the confused state of Balkan +politics in the Middle Ages the political influence of Bulgaria often extended +west of this line and included Nish and the Morava valley, while at other times +that of Serbia extended east of it. The dialects spoken in these frontier +districts represent a transitional stage between the two languages; each of the +two peoples naturally considers them more akin to its own, and resents the fact +that any of them should be included in the territory of the other. Further +south, in Macedonia, conditions are similar. Before the Turkish conquest +Macedonia had been sometimes under Bulgarian rule, as in the times of Simeon, +Samuel, and John Asen II, sometimes under Serbian, especially during the height +of Serbian power in the fourteenth century, while intermittently it had been a +province of the Greek Empire, which always claimed it as its own. On historical +grounds, therefore, each of the three nations can claim possession of +Macedonia. From an ethnographic point of view the Slav population of Macedonia +(there were always and are still many non-Slav elements) was originally the +same as that in the other parts of the peninsula, and probably more akin to the +Serbs, who are pure Slavs, than to the Slavs of Bulgaria, who coalesced with +their Asiatic conquerors. In course of time, however, Bulgarian influences, +owing to the several periods when the Bulgars ruled the country, began to make +headway. The Albanians also (an Indo-European or Aryan race, but not of the +Greek, Latin, or Slav families), who, as a result of all the invasions of the +Balkan peninsula, had been driven southwards into the inaccessible mountainous +country now known as Albania, began to spread northwards and eastwards again +during the Turkish dominion, pushing back the Serbs from the territory where +they had long been settled. During the Turkish dominion neither Serb nor Bulgar +had any influence in Macedonia, and the Macedonian Slavs, who had first of all +been pure Slavs, like the Serbs, then been several times under Bulgar, and +finally, under Serb influence, were left to themselves, and the process of +differentiation between Serb and Bulgar in Macedonia, by which in time the +Macedonian Slavs would have become either Serbs or Bulgars, ceased. The further +development of the Macedonian question is treated elsewhere (cf. chap. 13). +</p> + +<p> +The Serbs, who had no permanent or well-defined frontier in the east, where +their neighbours were the Bulgars, or in the south, where they were the Greeks +and Albanians, were protected on the north by the river Save and on the west by +the Adriatic. They were split up into a number of tribes, each of which was +headed by a chief called in Serbian <i>župan</i> and in Greek <i>archōn</i>. +Whenever any one of these managed, either by skill or by good fortune, to +extend his power over a few of the neighbouring districts he was termed +<i>veliki</i> (=great) <i>župan</i>. From the beginning of their history, which +is roughly put at A.D. 650, until A.D. 1196, the Serbs were under foreign +domination. Their suzerains were nominally always the Greek emperors, who had +‘granted’ them the land they had taken, and whenever the emperor +happened to be energetic and powerful, as were Basil I (the Macedonian, +867-86), John Tzimisces (969-76), Basil II (976-1025), and Manuel Comnenus +(1143-80), the Greek supremacy was very real. At those times again when +Bulgaria was very powerful, under Simeon (893-927), Samuel (977-1014), and John +Asen II (1218-41), many of the more easterly and southerly Serbs came under +Bulgarian rule, though it is instructive to notice that the Serbs themselves do +not recognize the West Bulgarian or Macedonian kingdom of Samuel to have been a +Bulgarian state. The Bulgars, however, at no time brought all the Serb lands +under their sway. +</p> + +<p> +Intermittently, whenever the power of Byzantium or of Bulgaria waned, some Serb +princeling would try to form a political state on a more ambitious scale, but +the fabric always collapsed at his death, and the Serbs reverted to their +favourite occupation of quarrelling amongst themselves. Such wore the attempts +of Časlav, who had been made captive by Simeon of Bulgaria, escaped after his +death, and ruled over a large part of central Serbia till 960, and later of +Bodin, whose father, Michael, was even recognized as king by Pope Gregory VII; +Bodin formed a state near the coast, in the Zeta river district (now +Montenegro), and ruled there from 1081 to 1101. But as a rule the whole of the +country peopled by the Serbs was split into a number of tiny principalities +always at war with one another. Generally speaking, this country gradually +became divided into two main geographical divisions: (1) the <i>Pomorje</i>, or +country <i>by the sea</i>, which included most of the modern Montenegro and the +southern halves of Hercegovina and Dalmatia, and (2) the <i>Zagorje</i>, or +country <i>behind the hills</i>, which included most of the modern Bosnia, the +western half of the modern kingdom of Serbia, and the northern portions of +Montenegro and Hercegovina, covering all the country between the <i>Pomorje</i> +and the Save; to the north of the <i>Pomorje</i> and <i>Zagorje</i> lay +Croatia. Besides their neighbours in the east and south, those in the north and +west played an important part in Serbian history even in those early days. +</p> + +<p> +Towards the end of the eighth century, after the decline of the power of the +Avars, Charlemagne extended his conquests eastwards (he made a great impression +on the minds of the Slavs, whose word for king, <i>kral</i> or <i>korol</i>, is +derived directly from his name), and his son Louis conquered the Serbs settled +in the country between the rivers Save and Drave. This is commemorated in the +name of the mass of hill which lies between the Danube and the Save, in eastern +Slavonia, and is to this day known as <i>Fruška Gora</i>, or French Hill. The +Serbs and Bulgars fought against the Franks, and while the Bulgars held their +own, the Serbs were beaten, and those who did not like the rule of the +new-comers had to migrate southwards across the Save; at the same time the +Serbs between the rivers Morava and Timok (eastern Serbia) were subjected by +the Bulgars. With the arrival of the Magyars, in the ninth century, a wall was +raised between the Serbs and central and western Europe on land. Croatia and +Slavonia (between the Save and the Drave) were gradually drawn into the orbit +of the Hungarian state, and in 1102, on the death of its own ruler, Croatia was +absorbed by Hungary and has formed part of that country ever since. Hungary, +aiming at an outlet on the Adriatic, at the same time subjected most of +Dalmatia and parts of Bosnia. In the west Venice had been steadily growing in +power throughout the tenth century, and by the end of it had secured control of +all the islands off Dalmatia and of a considerable part of the coast. All the +cities on the mainland acknowledged the supremacy of Venice and she was +mistress of the Adriatic. +</p> + +<p> +In the interior of the Serb territory, during the eleventh and twelfth +centuries, three political centres came into prominence and shaped themselves +into larger territorial units. These were: (1) Raska, which had been +Caslav’s centre and is considered the birth-place of the Serbian state +(this district, with the town of Ras as its centre, included the south-western +part of the modern kingdom of Serbia and what was the Turkish <i>sandjak</i> or +province of Novi-Pazar); (2) Zeta, on the coast (the modern Montenegro); and +(3) Bosnia, so called after the river Bosna, which runs through it. Bosnia, +which roughly corresponded to the modern province of that name, became +independent in the second half of the tenth century, and was never after that +incorporated in the Serbian state. At times it fell under Hungarian influence; +in the twelfth century, during the reign of Manuel Comnenus, who was victorious +over the Magyars, Bosnia, like all other Serb territories, had to acknowledge +the supremacy of Constantinople. +</p> + +<p> +It has already been indicated that the Serbs and Croats occupied territory +which, while the Church was still one, was divided between two dioceses, Italy +and Dacia, and when the Church itself was divided, in the eleventh century, was +torn apart between the two beliefs. The dividing line between the jurisdictions +of Rome and Constantinople ran from north to south through Bosnia, but +naturally there has always been a certain vagueness about the extent of their +respective jurisdictions. In later years the terms Croat and Roman Catholic on +the one hand, and Serb and Orthodox on the other, became interchangeable. +Hercegovina and eastern Bosnia have always been predominantly Orthodox, +Dalmatia and western Bosnia predominantly Roman Catholic. The loyalty of the +Croatians to Austria-Hungary has been largely owing to the influence of Roman +Catholicism. +</p> + +<p> +During the first centuries of Serbian history Christianity made slow progress +in the western half of the Balkan peninsula. The Dalmatian coast was always +under the influence of Rome, but the interior was long pagan. It is doubtful +whether the brothers Cyril and Methodius (cf. chap. 5) actually passed through +Serb territory, but in the tenth century their teachings and writings were +certainly current there. At the time of the division of the Churches all the +Serb lands except the Dalmatian coast, Croatia, and western Bosnia, were +faithful to Constantinople, and the Greek hierarchy obtained complete control +of the ecclesiastical administration. The elaborate organisation and opulent +character of the Eastern Church was, however, especially in the hands of the +Greeks, not congenial to the Serbs, and during the eleventh and twelfth +centuries the Bogomil heresy (cf. chap, 6), a much more primitive and +democratic form of Christianity, already familiar in the East as the Manichaean +heresy, took hold of the Serbs’ imagination and made as rapid and +disquieting progress in their country as it had already done in the +neighbouring Bulgaria; inasmuch as the Greek hierarchy considered this teaching +to be socialistic, subversive, and highly dangerous to the ecclesiastical +supremacy of Constantinople, all of which indeed it was, adherence to it became +amongst the Serbs a direct expression of patriotism. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="chap15"></a>15<br/> +<i>The Rise and Fall of the Serbian Empire and the Extinction of Serbian +Independence</i>, 1168–1496</h2> + +<p> +From 1168 the power of the Serbs, or rather of the central Serb state of Raska, +and the extent of its territory gradually but steadily increased. This was +outwardly expressed in the firm establishment on the throne of the national +Nemanja dynasty, which can claim the credit of having by its energy, skill, and +good fortune fashioned the most imposing and formidable state the Serb race has +ever known. This dynasty ruled the country uninterruptedly, but not without +many quarrels, feuds, and rivalries amongst its various members, from 1168 +until 1371, when it became extinct. +</p> + +<p> +There were several external factors which at this time favoured the rise of the +Serbian state. Byzantium and the Greek Empire, to which the Emperor Manuel +Comnenus had by 1168 restored some measure of its former greatness and +splendour, regaining temporary control, after a long war with Hungary, even +over Dalmatia, Croatia, and Bosnia, after this date began definitively to +decline, and after the troublous times of the fourth crusade (1204), when for +sixty years a Latin empire was established on the Bosphorus, never again +recovered as a Christian state the position in the Balkan peninsula which it +had so long enjoyed. Bulgaria, too, after the meteoric glory of its second +empire under the Asen dynasty (1186-1258), quite went to pieces, the eastern +and northern parts falling under Tartar, the southern under Greek influence, +while the western districts fell to Serbia. In the north, on the other hand, +Hungary was becoming a dangerous and ambitious neighbour. During the thirteenth +century, it is true, the attention of the Magyars was diverted by the irruption +into and devastation of their country by their unwelcome kinsmen from Asia, the +Tartars, who wrought great havoc and even penetrated as far as the Adriatic +coast. Nevertheless Hungary was always a menace to Serbia; Croatia, Slavonia, +and the interior of Dalmatia, all purely Serb territories, belonged to the +Hungarian crown, and Bosnia was under the supremacy of the Magyars, though +nominally independent. +</p> + +<p> +The objects of the Magyars were twofold—to attain the hegemony of the +Balkan peninsula by conquering all the still independent Serb territories, and +to bring the peninsula within the pale of Rome. They were not successful in +either of these objects, partly because their wars with the Serbian rulers +always failed to reach a decision, partly because their plans conflicted with +those of the powerful Venetian republic. The relations between Venice and +Serbia were always most cordial, as their ambitions did not clash; those of +Venice were not continental, while those of Serbia were never maritime. The +semi-independent Slavonic city-republic of Ragusa (called Dubrovnik in Serbian) +played a very important part throughout this period. It was under Venetian +supremacy, but was self-governing and had a large fleet of its own. It was the +great place of exchange between Serbia and western Europe, and was really the +meeting-place of East and West. Its relations with Serbia were by no means +always peaceful; it was a Naboth’s vineyard for the rulers and people of +the inland kingdom, and it was never incorporated within their dominions. +Ragusa and the other cities of the Dalmatian coast were the home during the +Middle Ages of a flourishing school of Serbian literature, which was inspired +by that of Italy. The influence of Italian civilization and of the Italian +Church was naturally strong in the Serb province, much of which was under +Venetian rule; the reason for this was that communication by sea with Italy was +easier and safer than that by land with Serbia. The long, formidable ranges of +limestone mountains which divide the Serbian interior from the Adriatic in +almost unbroken and parallel lines have always been a barrier to the extension +of Serb power to the coast, and an obstacle to free commercial intercourse. +Nevertheless Ragusa was a great trade centre, and one of the factors which most +contributed to the economic strength of the Serbian Empire. +</p> + +<p> +The first of the Nemanja dynasty was Stephen, whose title was still only +<i>Veliki Župan</i>; he extended Serb territory southwards at the expense of +the Greeks, especially after the death of Manuel Comnenus in 1180. He also +persecuted the Bogomils, who took refuge in large numbers in the adjacent Serb +state of Bosnia. Like many other Serbian rulers, he abdicated in later life in +favour of his younger son, Stephen, called Nemanjié (= Nemanya’s son), +and himself became a monk (1196), travelling for this purpose to Mount Athos, +the great monastic centre and home of theological learning of the Eastern +Church. There he saw his youngest son, who some years previously had also +journeyed thither and entered a monastery, taking the name of Sava. +</p> + +<p> +It was the custom for every Serbian ruler to found a sort of memorial church, +for the welfare of his own soul, before his death, and to decorate and endow it +lavishly. Stephen and his son together superintended the erection in this sense +of the church and monastery of Hilandar on Mount Athos, which became a famous +centre of Serbian church life. Stephen died shortly after the completion of the +building in 1199, and was buried in it, but in 1207 he was reinterred in the +monastery of Studenica, in Serbia, also founded by him. +</p> + +<p> +The reign of Stephen Nernanjić (1196-1223) opened with a quarrel between him +and his elder brother, who not unnaturally felt he ought to have succeeded his +father; the Bulgarians profited by this and seized a large part of eastern +Serbia, including Belgrade, Nish, Prizren, and Skoplje. This, together with the +fall of Constantinople and the establishment of the Latin Empire in 1204, +alarmed the Serbs and brought about a reconciliation between the brothers, and +in 1207 Sava returned to Serbia to organise the Church on national lines. In +1219 he journeyed to Nicaea and extracted from the Emperor Theodore Lascaris, +who had fallen on evil days, the concession for the establishment of an +autonomous national Serbian Church, independent of the Patriarch of +Constantinople. Sava himself was at the head of the new institution. In 1220 he +solemnly crowned his brother King <i>(Kralj)</i> of Serbia, the natural +consequence of his activities in the previous year. For this reason Stephen +Nemanjić is called ‘The First-Crowned’. He was succeeded in 1223 by +his son Stephen Radoslav, and he in turn was deposed by his brother Stephen +Vladislav in 1233. Both these were crowned by Sava, and Vladislav married the +daughter of Tsar John Asen II, under whom Bulgaria was then at the height of +her power. Sava journeyed to Palestine, and on his return paid a visit to the +Bulgarian court at Tirnovo, where he died in 1236. His body was brought to +Serbia and buried in the monastery of Mileševo, built by Vladislav. This +extremely able churchman and politician, who did a great deal for the peaceful +development of his country, was canonized and is regarded as the patron saint +of Serbia. +</p> + +<p> +The reign of Vladislav’s son and successor, Stephen Uroš I (1242-76), was +characterized by economic development and the strengthening of the internal +administration. In external affairs he made no conquests, but defeated a +combination of the Bulgarians with Ragusa against him, and after the war the +Bulgarian ruler married his daughter. In his wars against Hungary he was +unsuccessful, and the Magyars remained in possession of a large part of +northern Serbia. In 1276 he was deposed by his son, Stephen Dragutin, who in +his turn, after an unsuccessful war against the Greeks, again masters of +Constantinople since 1261, was deposed and succeeded by his brother, Stephen +Uroš II, named Milutin, in 1282. This king ruled from 1282 till 1321, and +during his reign the country made very great material progress; its mineral +wealth especially, which included gold and silver mines, began to be exploited. +He extended the boundaries of his kingdom in the north, making the Danube and +the Save the frontier. The usual revolt against paternal authority was made by +his son Stephen, but was unsuccessful, and the rebel was banished to +Constantinople. +</p> + +<p> +It was the custom of the Serbian kings to give appanages to their sons, and the +inevitable consequence of this system was the series of provincial rebellions +which occurred in almost every reign. When the revolt succeeded, the father (or +brother) was granted in his turn a small appanage. In this case it was the son +who was exiled, but he was recalled in 1319 and a reconciliation took place. +Milutin died in 1321 and was succeeded by his son, Stephen Uroš III, who +reigned till 1331. He is known as Stephen Dečanski, after the memorial church +which he built at Dečani in western Serbia. His reign was signalized by a great +defeat of the combined Bulgarians and Greeks at Kustendil in Macedonia in 1330. +The following year his son, Stephen Dušan, rebelled against him and deposed +him. Stephen Dušan, who reigned from 1331 till 1355, was Serbia’s +greatest ruler, and under him the country reached its utmost limits. Provincial +and family revolts and petty local disputes with such places as Ragusa became a +thing of the past, and he undertook conquest on a grand scale. Between 1331 and +1344 he subjected all Macedonia, Albania, Thessaly, and Epirus. He was careful +to keep on good terms with Ragusa and with Hungary, then under Charles Robert. +He married the sister of the Bulgarian ruler, and during his reign Bulgaria was +completely under Serbian supremacy. The anarchy and civil war which had become +perennial at Constantinople, and the weakening of the Greek Empire in face of +the growing power of the Turks, no doubt to some extent explain the facility +and rapidity of his conquests; nevertheless his power was very formidable, and +his success inspired considerable alarm in western Europe. This was increased +when, in 1345, he proclaimed his country an empire. He first called together a +special Church council, at which the Serbian Church, an archbishopric, whose +centre was then at Peć (in Montenegro, Ipek in Turkish), was proclaimed a +Patriarchate, with Archbishop Joannice as Patriarch; then this prelate, +together with the Bulgarian Patriarch, Simeon, and Nicholas, Archbishop of +Okhrida, crowned Stephen Tsar of the Serbs, Bulgars, and Greeks. Upon this the +Patriarch of Constantinople gave himself the vain satisfaction of +anathematizing the whole of Serbia, as a punishment for this insubordination. +</p> + +<p> +In 1353 the Pope, Innocent VI, persuaded King Louis of Hungary to undertake a +crusade against Serbia in the name of Catholicism, but Stephen defeated him and +re-established his frontier along the Save and Danube. Later he conquered the +southern half of Dalmatia, and extended his empire as far north as the river +Cetina. In 1354 Stephen Dušan himself approached the Pope, offering to +acknowledge his spiritual supremacy, if he would support him against the +Hungarians and the Turks. The Pope sent him an embassy, but eventually Stephen +could not agree to the papal conditions, and concluded an alliance, of greater +practical utility, with the Venetians. In 1355, however, he suddenly died, at +the age of forty-six, and thus the further development and aggrandisement of +his country was prematurely arrested. +</p> + +<p> +Stephen Dušan made a great impression on his contemporaries, both by his +imposing personal appearance and by his undoubted wisdom and ability. He was +especially a great legislator, and his remarkable code of laws, compiled in +1349 and enlarged in 1354, is, outside his own country, his greatest title to +fame. During Stephen Dušan’s reign the political centre of Serbia, which +had for many years gradually tended to shift southwards towards Macedonia, was +at Skoplje (Üsküb in Turkish), which he made his capital. Stephen Dušan’s +empire extended from the Adriatic in the west to the river Maritsa in the east, +from the Save and Danube in the north to the Aegean; it included all the modern +kingdoms of Serbia, Montenegro, Albania, and most of Greece, Dalmatia as far +north as the river Cetina, as well as the fertile Morava valley, with Nish and +Belgrade—the whole eastern part of Serbia, which had for long been under +either Bulgar or Magyar control. It did not include the cities of Salonika or +Ragusa, nor any considerable part of the modern kingdom of Bulgaria, nor +Bosnia, Croatia, North Dalmatia, nor Slavonia (between the Save and Drave), +ethnologically all purely Serb lands. From the point of view of nationality, +therefore, its boundaries were far from ideal. +</p> + +<p> +Stephen Dušan was succeeded by his son, known as Tsar Uroš, but he was as weak +as his father had been strong. Almost as soon as he succeeded to the throne, +disorders, rebellions, and dissensions broke out and the empire rapidly fell to +pieces. With Serbia, as with Bulgaria, the empire entirely hinged on the +personality of one man, and when he was gone chaos returned. Such an event for +Serbia at this juncture was fatal, as a far more formidable foe than the +ruler’s rebellious relations was advancing against it. The Turkish +conquests were proceeding apace; they had taken Gallipoli in 1354 and Demotika +and Adrianople in 1361. The Serbs, who had already had an unsuccessful brush +with the advance guard of the new invaders near Demotika in 1351, met them +again on the Maritsa river in 1371, and were completely defeated. Several of +the upstart princes who had been pulling Stephen Dušan’s empire to pieces +perished, and Tsar Uroš only survived the battle of the Maritsa two months; he +was unmarried, and with him died the Nemanja dynasty and the Serbian Empire. +</p> + +<p> +After this disaster the unity of the Serbian state was completely destroyed, +and it has never since been restored in the same measure. +</p> + +<p> +That part of the country to the south of Skoplje fell completely under Turkish +control; it was here that the famous national hero, Marko Kraljević (or +King’s son), renowned for his prowess, ruled as a vassal prince and +mercenary soldier of the Turks; his father was one of the rebel princes who +fell at the battle of the river Maritsa in 1371. North of Skoplje, Serbia, with +Kruševac as a new political centre, continued to lead an independent but +precarious existence, much reduced in size and glory, under a native ruler, +Prince Lazar; all the conquests of Stephen Dušan were lost, and the important +coastal province of Zeta, which later developed into Montenegro, had broken +away and proclaimed its autonomy directly after the death of Tsar Uroš. +</p> + +<p> +In 1375 a formal reconciliation was effected with the Patriarch of +Constantinople; the ban placed on the Serbian Church in 1352 was removed and +the independence of the Serbian Patriarchate of Peć (Ipek) recognised. +Meanwhile neither Greeks, Bulgars, nor Serbs were allowed any peace by the +Turks. +</p> + +<p> +In 1389 was fought the great battle of Kosovo Polje, or the Field of +Blackbirds, a large plain in Old Serbia, at the southern end of which is +Skoplje. At this battle Serbian armies from all the Serb lands, including +Bosnia, joined together in defence of their country for the last time. The +issue of the battle was for some time in doubt, but was decided by the +treachery and flight at the critical moment of one of the Serb leaders, Vuk +Branković, son-in-law of Prince Lazar, with a large number of troops. Another +dramatic incident was the murder of Sultan Murad in his tent by another Serbian +leader, Miloš Obilić, who, accused of treachery by his own countrymen, vowed he +would prove his good faith, went over to the Turks and, pretending to be a +traitor, gained admission to the Sultan’s presence and proved his +patriotism by killing him. The momentary dismay was put an end to by the +energetic conduct of Bayezid, son of Murad, who rallied the Turkish troops and +ultimately inflicted total defeat on the Serbians. From the effects of this +battle Serbia never recovered; Prince Lazar was captured and executed; his +wife, Princess Milica, had to give her daughter to Bayezid in marriage, whose +son thus ultimately claimed possession of Serbia by right of inheritance. +Princess Milica and her son Stephen continued to live at Kruševac, but Serbia +was already a tributary of Turkey. In the north, Hungary profited by the course +of events and occupied Belgrade and all northern Serbia, but in 1396 the Turks +defeated the Magyars severely at the battle of Nikopolis, on the Danube, making +the Serbs under Stephen fight on the Turkish side. Stephen also had to help +Sultan Bajazet against the Tartars, and fought at the battle of Angora, in +1402, when Tamerlane captured Bayezid. +</p> + +<p> +After Stephen returned to Serbia he made an alliance with Hungary, which gave +him back Belgrade and northern Serbia; it was at this time (1403) that Belgrade +first became the capital, the political centre having in the course of fifty +years moved from the Vardar to the Danube. The disorders which followed the +defeat of Bayezid gave some respite to the Serbs, but Sultan Murad II (1421-51) +again took up arms against him, and invaded Serbia as far as Kruševac. +</p> + +<p> +At the death of Stephen (Lazarević), in 1427, he was succeeded as <i>Despot</i> +by his nephew, George Branković; but the Sultan, claiming Serbia as his own, +immediately declared war on him. The Serbian ruler had to abandon Belgrade to +the Magyars, and Nish and Kruševac to the Turks. He then built and fortified +the town of Smederevo (or Semendria) lower down on the Danube, in 1428, and +made this his capital. He gave his daughter in marriage to the Sultan, but in +spite of this war soon broke out again, and in 1441 the Turks were masters of +nearly the whole of Serbia. Later George Branković made another alliance with +Hungary, and in 1444, with the help of John Hunyadi, defeated the Turks and +liberated the whole of Serbia as far as the Adriatic, though he remained a +tributary of the Sultan. The same year, however, the Magyars broke the treaty +of peace just concluded with the Turks, and marched against them under their +Polish king, Ladislas; this ended in the disastrous battle of Varna, on the +Black Sea, where the king lost his life. In 1451 Sultan Murad II died and was +succeeded by the Sultan Mohammed. In 1453 this sultan captured Constantinople +(Adrianople had until then been the Turkish capital); in 1456 his armies were +besieging Belgrade, but were defeated by John Hunyadi, who, unfortunately for +the Serbs, died of the plague shortly afterwards. George Branković died the +same year, and at his death general disorder spread over the country. The Turks +profited by this, overran the whole of Serbia, and in 1459 captured Smederevo, +the last Serbian stronghold. +</p> + +<p> +Meanwhile Bosnia had been for nearly a hundred years enjoying a false security +as an independent Serb kingdom. Its rulers had hitherto been known by the title +of <i>Ban</i>, and were all vassals of the King of Hungary; but in 1377 Ban +Tvrtko profited by the embarrassments of his suzerain in Poland and proclaimed +himself king, the neighbouring kingdom of Serbia having, after 1371, ceased to +exist, and was duly crowned in Saint Sava’s monastery of Mileševo. The +internal history of the kingdom was even more turbulent than had been that of +Serbia. To the endemic troubles of succession and alternating alliances and +wars with foreign powers were added those of confession. Bosnia was always a no +man’s land as regards religion; it was where the Eastern and Western +Churches met, and consequently the rivalry between them there was always, as it +is now, intense and bitter. The Bogomil heresy, too, early took root in Bosnia +and became extremely popular; it was the obvious refuge for those who did not +care to become involved in the strife of the Churches. One of the kings of +Bosnia, Stephen Thomas, who reigned from 1444 till 1461, was himself a Bogomil, +and when at the insistence of the Pope and of the King of Hungary, whose +friendship he was anxious to retain, he renounced his heresy, became ostensibly +a Roman Catholic, and began to persecute the Bogomils, he brought about a +revolution. The rebels fled to the south of Bosnia, to the lands of one +Stephen, who sheltered them, proclaimed his independence of Bosnia, and on the +strength of the fact that Saint Sava’s monastery of Mileševo was in his +territory, announced himself Herzog, or Duke (in Serbian Herceg, though the +real Serb equivalent is <i>Vojvoda</i>) of Saint Sava, ever since when (1448) +that territory has been called Hercegovina. In spite of many promises, neither +the Pope nor the King of Hungary did anything to help Bosnia when the Turks +began to invade the country after their final subjection of Serbia in 1459. In +1463 they invaded Bosnia and pursued, captured, and slew the last king; their +conquest of the country was complete and rapid. A great exodus of the Serb +population took place to the south, west, and north; but large numbers, +especially of the landowning class, embraced the faith of their conquerors in +order to retain possession of their property. In 1482 a similar fate befell +Hercegovina. Albania had already been conquered after stubborn resistance in +1478. There remained only the mountainous coastal province of Zeta, which had +been an independent principality ever since 1371. Just as inland Serbia had +perished between the Turkish hammer and the Hungarian anvil, so maritime Serbia +was crushed between Turkey and Venice, only its insignificance and +inaccessibility giving it a longer lease of independent life. Ivan Crnojević, +one of the last independent rulers of Zeta, who had to fly to Italy in 1480, +abandoning his capital, Žabljak, to the Turks, returned in 1481, when the death +of Sultan Mohammed temporarily raised the hopes of the mountaineers, and +founded Cetinje and made it his capital. His son George, who succeeded him and +ruled from 1490 till 1496, is famous as having set up the first Serbian +printing-press there. Its activities were naturally not encouraged by the +Turkish conquest, but it was of great importance to the national Serbian +Church, for which books were printed with it. +</p> + +<p> +In 1496, Venice having wisely made peace with the Sultan some years previously, +this last independent scrap of Serb territory was finally incorporated in the +Turkish dominions. At the end of the fifteenth century the Turks were masters +of all the Serb lands except Croatia, Slavonia, and parts of Dalmatia, which +belonged to Hungary, and the Dalmatian coast and islands, which were Venetian. +The Turkish conquest of Serbia, which began in 1371 at the battle of the +Maritsa, and was rendered inevitable by the battle of Kosovo Polje, in 1389, +thus took a hundred and twenty-five years to complete. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="chap16"></a>16<br/> +<i>The Turkish Dominion</i>, 1496–1796</h2> + +<p> +The lot of the Serbs under Turkish rule was different from that of their +neighbours the Bulgars; and though it was certainly not enviable, it was +undoubtedly better. The Turks for various reasons never succeeded in subduing +Serbia and the various Serb lands as completely as they had subdued, or rather +annihilated, Bulgaria. The Serbs were spread over a far larger extent of +territory than were the Bulgars, they were further removed from the Turkish +centre, and the wooded and mountainous nature of their country facilitated even +more than in the case of Bulgaria the formation of bands of brigands and rebels +and militated against its systematic policing by the Turks. The number of +centres of national life, Serbia proper, Bosnia, Hercogovina, and Montenegro, +to take them in the chronological order of their conquest by the Turks, had +been notoriously a source of weakness to the Serbian state, as is still the +case to-day, but at the same time made it more difficult for the Turks to stamp +out the national consciousness. What still further contributed to this +difficulty was the fact that many Serbs escaped the oppression of Turkish rule +by emigrating to the neighbouring provinces, where they found people of their +own race and language, even though of a different faith. The tide of emigration +flowed in two directions, westwards into Dalmatia and northwards into Slavonia +and Hungary. It had begun already after the final subjection of Serbia proper +and Bosnia by the Turks in 1459 and 1463, but after the fall of Belgrade, which +was the outpost of Hungary against the Turks, in 1521, and the battle of +Mohacs, in 1526, when the Turks completely defeated the Magyars, it assumed +great proportions. As the Turks pushed their conquests further north, the Serbs +migrated before them; later on, as the Turks receded, large Serb colonies +sprang up all over southern Hungary, in the Banat (the country north of the +Danube and east of the Theiss), in Syrmia (or Srem, in Serbian, the extreme +eastern part of Slavonia, between the Save and the Danube), in Bačka (the +country between the Theiss and Danube), and in Baranya (between the Danube and +the Drave). All this part of southern Hungary and Croatia was formed by the +Austrians into a military borderland against Turkey, and the Croats and +immigrant Serbs were organized as military colonists with special privileges, +on the analogy of the Cossacks in southern Russia and Poland. In Dalmatia the +Serbs played a similar rôle in the service of Venice, which, like +Austria-Hungary, was frequently at war with the Turks. During the sixteenth +century Ragusa enjoyed its greatest prosperity; it paid tribute to the Sultan, +was under his protection, and never rebelled. It had a quasi monopoly of the +trade of the entire Balkan peninsula. It was a sanctuary both for Roman +Catholic Croats and for Orthodox Serbs, and sometimes acted as intermediary on +behalf of its co-religionists with the Turkish authorities, with whom it +wielded great influence. Intellectually also it was a sort of Serb oasis, and +the only place during the Middle Ages where Serbian literature was able to +flourish. +</p> + +<p> +Montenegro during the sixteenth century formed part of the Turkish province of +Scutari. Here, as well as in Serbia proper, northern Macedonia (known after the +removal northwards of the political centre, in the fourteenth century, as Old +Serbia), Bosnia, and Hercegovina, the Turkish rule was firmest, but not +harshest, during the first half of the sixteenth century, when the power of the +Ottoman Empire was at its height. Soon after the fall of Smederevo, in 1459, +the Patriarchate of Peć (Ipek) was abolished, the Serbian Church lost its +independence, was merged in the Greco-Bulgar Archbishopric of Okhrida (in +southern Macedonia), and fell completely under the control of the Greeks. In +1557, however, through the influence of a Grand Vizier of Serb nationality, the +Patriarchate of Peć was revived. The revival of this centre of national life +was momentous; through its agency the Serbian monasteries were restored, +ecclesiastical books printed, and priests educated, and more fortunate than the +Bulgarian national Church, which remained under Greek management, it was able +to focus the national enthusiasms and aspirations and keep alive with hope the +flame of nationality amongst those Serbs who had not emigrated. +</p> + +<p> +Already, in the second half of the sixteenth century, people began to think +that Turkey’s days in Europe were numbered, and they were encouraged in +this illusion by the battle of Lepanto (1571). But the seventeenth century saw +a revival of Turkish power; Krete was added to their empire, and in 1683 they +very nearly captured Vienna. In the war which followed their repulse, and in +which the victorious Austrians penetrated as far south as Skoplje, the Serbs +took part against the Turks; but when later the Austrians were obliged to +retire, the Serbs, who had risen against the Turks at the bidding of their +Patriarch Arsen III, had to suffer terrible reprisals at their hands, with the +result that another wholesale emigration, with the Patriarch at its head, took +place into the Austro-Hungarian military borderland. This time it was the very +heart of Serbia which was abandoned, namely, Old Serbia and northern Macedonia, +including Peć and Prizren. The vacant Patriarchate was for a time filled by a +Greek, and the Albanians, many of whom were Mohammedans and therefore +Turcophil, spread northwards and eastwards into lands that had been Serb since +the seventh century. From the end of the seventeenth century, however, the +Turkish power began unmistakably to wane. The Treaty of Carlowitz (1699) left +the Turks still in possession of Syrmia (between the Danube and Save) and the +Banat (north of the Danube), but during the reign of the Emperor Charles VI +their retreat was accelerated. In 1717 Prince Eugen of Savoy captured Belgrade, +then, as now, a bulwark of the Balkan peninsula against invasion from the +north, and by the Treaty of Passarowitz (Požarevac, on the Danube), in 1718, +Turkey not only retreated definitively south of the Danube and the Save, but +left a large part of northern Serbia in Austrian hands. By the same treaty +Venice secured possession of the whole of Dalmatia, where it had already gained +territory by the Treaty of Curlowitz in 1699. +</p> + +<p> +But the Serbs soon found out that alien populations fare little better under +Christian rule, when they are not of the same confession as their rulers, than +under Mohammedan. The Orthodox Serbs in Dalmatia suffered thenceforward from +relentless persecution at the hands of the Roman Catholics. In Austria-Hungary +too, and in that part of Serbia occupied by the Austrians after 1718, the Serbs +discovered that the Austrians, when they had beaten the Turks largely by the +help of Serbian levies, were very different from the Austrians who had +encouraged the Serbs to settle in their country and form military colonies on +their frontiers to protect them from Turkish invasion. The privileges promised +them when their help had been necessary were disregarded as soon as their +services could be dispensed with. Austrian rule soon became more oppressive +than Turkish, and to the Serbs’ other woes was now added religious +persecution. The result of all this was that a counter-emigration set in and +the Serbs actually began to return to their old homes in Turkey. Another war +between Austria-Hungary and Turkey broke out in 1737, in which the Austrians +were unsuccessful. Prince Eugen no longer led them, and though the Serbs were +again persuaded by their Patriarch, Arsen IV, to rise against the Turks, they +only did so half-heartedly. By the Treaty of Belgrade, in 1739, Austria had to +withdraw north of the Save and Danube, evacuating all northern Serbia in favour +of the Turks. From this time onwards the lot of the Serbs, both in +Austria-Hungary and in Turkey, went rapidly from bad to worse. The Turks, as +the power of their empire declined, and in return for the numerous Serb +revolts, had recourse to measures of severe repression; amongst others was that +of the final abolition of the Patriarchate of Peé in 1766, whereupon the +control of the Serbian Church in Turkey passed entirely into the hands of the +Greek Patriarchate of Constantinople. +</p> + +<p> +The Austrian Government similarly, perceiving now for the first time the +elements of danger which the resuscitation of the Serbian nationality would +contain for the rule of the Hapsburgs, embarked on a systematic persecution of +the Orthodox Serbs in southern Hungary and Slavonia. During the reign of Maria +Theresa (1740-80), whose policy was to conciliate the Magyars, the military +frontier zone was abolished, a series of repressive measures was passed against +those Serbs who refused to become Roman Catholics, and the Serbian nationality +was refused official recognition. The consequence of this persecution was a +series of revolts which were all quelled with due severity, and finally the +emigration of a hundred thousand Serbs to southern Russia, where they founded +New Serbia in 1752-3. +</p> + +<p> +During the reigns of Joseph II (1780-90) and Leopold II (1790-2) their +treatment at the hands of the Magyars somewhat improved. From the beginning of +the eighteenth century Montenegro began to assume greater importance in the +extremely gradual revival of the national spirit of the Serbs. During the +sixteenth and seventeenth centuries it had formed part of the Turkish +dominions, though, thanks to the inaccessible nature of its mountain +fastnesses, Turkish authority was never very forcibly asserted. It was ruled by +a prince-bishop, and its religious independence thus connoted a certain secular +freedom of thought if not of action. In the seventeenth century warlike +encounters between the Turks and the Montenegrins increased in frequency, and +the latter tried to enlist the help of Venice on their side but with +indifferent success. The fighting in Montenegro was often rather civil in +character, being caused by the ill-feeling which existed between the numerous +Montenegrins who had become Mohammedans and those who remained faithful to +their national Church. In the course of the eighteenth century the rôle which +fell to Montenegro became more important. In all the other Serb countries the +families which naturally took a leading part in affairs were either extinct or +in exile, as in Serbia, or had become Mohammedan, and therefore to all intents +and purposes Turkish, as in Bosnia and Hercegovina. Ragusa, since the great +earthquake in 1667, had greatly declined in power and was no longer of +international importance. In Montenegro, on the other hand, there had survived +both a greater independence of spirit (Montenegro was, after all, the ancient +Zeta, and had always been a centre of national life) and a number of at any +rate eugenic if not exactly aristocratic Serb families; these families +naturally looked on themselves and on their bishop as destined to play an +important part in the resistance to and the eventual overthrow of the Turkish +dominion. The prince-bishop had to be consecrated by the Patriarch of Peć, and +in 1700 Patriarch Arsen III consecrated one Daniel, of the house (which has +been ever since then and is now still the reigning dynasty of Montenegro) of +Petrović-Njegoš, to this office, after he had been elected to it by the council +of notables at Cetinje. Montenegro, isolated from the Serbs in the north, and +precluded from participating with them in the wars between Austria and Turkey +by the intervening block of Bosnia, which though Serb by nationality was +solidly Mohammedan and therefore pro-Turkish, carried on its feuds with the +Turks independently of the other Serbs. But when Peter the Great initiated his +anti-Turkish policy, and, in combination with the expansion of Russia to the +south and west, began to champion the cause of the Balkan Christians, he +developed intercourse with Montenegro and laid the foundation of that +friendship between the vast Russian Empire and the tiny Serb principality on +the Adriatic which has been a quaint and persistent feature of eastern European +politics ever since. This intimacy did not prevent the Turks giving Montenegro +many hard blows whenever they had the time or energy to do so, and did not +ensure any special protective clauses in favour of the mountain state whenever +the various treaties between Russia and Turkey were concluded. Its effect was +rather psychological and financial. From the time when the <i>Vladika</i> (= +Bishop) Daniel first visited Peter the Great, in 1714, the rulers of Montenegro +often made pilgrimages to the Russian capital, and were always sure of finding +sympathy as well as pecuniary if not armed support. Bishops in the Orthodox +Church are compulsorily celibate, and the succession in Montenegro always +descended from uncle to nephew. When Peter I Petrović-Njegoš succeeded, in +1782, the Patriarchate of Peć was no more, so he had to get permission from the +Austrian Emperor Joseph II to be consecrated by the Metropolitan of Karlovci +(Carlowitz), who was then head of the Serbian national Church. +</p> + +<p> +About the same time (1787) an alliance was made between Russia and +Austria-Hungary to make war together on Turkey and divide the spoils between +them. Although a great rising against Turkey was organised at the same time +(1788) in the district of Šumadija, in Serbia, by a number of Serb patriots, of +whom Kara-George was one and a certain Captain Koča, after whom the whole war +is called Kočina Krajina (=Koča’s country), another, yet the Austrians +were on the whole unsuccessful, and on the death of Joseph II, in 1790, a peace +was concluded between Austria and Turkey at Svishtov, in Bulgaria, by which +Turkey retained the whole of Bosnia and Serbia, and the Save and Danube +remained the frontier between the two countries. Meanwhile the Serbs of +Montenegro had joined in the fray and had fared better, inflicting some +unpleasant defeats on the Turks under their bishop, Peter I. These culminated +in two battles in 1796 (the Montenegrins, not being mentioned in the treaty of +peace, had continued fighting), in which the Turks were driven back to Scutari. +With this triumph, which the Emperor Paul of Russia signalized by decorating +the Prince-Bishop Peter, the independence of the modern state of Montenegro, +the first Serb people to recover its liberty, was <i>de facto</i> established. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="chap17"></a>17<br/> +<i>The Liberation of Serbia under Kara-George</i> (1804–13) <i>and Miloš +Obrenović</i> (1815–30): 1796–1830</h2> + +<p> +The liberation of Serbia from the Turkish dominion and its establishment as an +independent state were matters of much slower and more arduous accomplishment +than were the same processes in the other Balkan countries. One reason for this +was that Serbia by its peculiar geographical position was cut off from outside +help. It was easy for the western powers to help Greece with their fleets, and +for Russia to help Rumania and, later, Bulgaria directly with its army, because +communication between them was easy. But Serbia on the one hand was separated +from the sea, first by Dalmatia, which was always in foreign possession, and +then by Bosnia, Hercegovina, and the <i>sandjak</i> (or province) of +Novi-Pazar, all of which territories, though ethnically Serb, were strongholds +of Turkish influence owing to their large Mohammedan population. The energies +of Montenegro, also cut off from the sea by Dalmatia and Turkey, were absorbed +in self-defence, though it gave Serbia all the support which its size +permitted. Communication, on the other hand, between Russia and Serbia was too +difficult to permit of military help being rapidly and effectively brought to +bear upon the Turks from that quarter. Bessarabia, Wallachia, and Moldavia were +then still under Turkish control, and either they had to be traversed or the +Danube had to be navigated from its mouth upwards through Turkish territory. +The only country which could have helped Serbia was Austria, but as it was +against their best interests to do so, the Austrians naturally did all they +could not to advance, but to retard the Serbian cause. As a result of all this +Serbia, in her long struggle against the Turks, had to rely principally on its +own resources, though Russian diplomacy several times saved the renascent +country from disaster. +</p> + +<p> +Another reason for the slowness of the emancipation and development of modern +Serbia has been the proneness of its people to internal dissension. There was +no national dynasty on whom the leadership of the country would naturally +devolve after the first successful revolution against Turkish rule, there was +not even any aristocracy left, and no foreign ruler was ever asked for by the +Serbs or was ever imposed on them by the other nations as in the case of +Greece, Rumania, and Bulgaria. On the other hand the rising against Turkey was +a rising of the whole people, and it was almost inevitable that as soon as some +measure of independence was gained the unity the Serbs had shown when fighting +against their oppressors should dissolve and be replaced by bitter rivalries +and disputes amongst the various local leaders who had become prominent during +the rebellion. +</p> + +<p> +These rivalries early in the nineteenth century resolved themselves into a +blood-feud between two families, the Karagjorgjević and the Obrenović, a +quarrel that filled Serbian history and militated against the progress of the +Serb people throughout the nineteenth century. +</p> + +<p> +The same reasons which restricted the growth of the political independence of +Serbia have also impeded, or rather made impossible, its economic development +and material prosperity. Until recent years Austria-Hungary and Turkey between +them held Serbia territorially in such a position that whenever Serbia either +demurred at its neighbours’ tariffs or wished to retaliate by means of +its own, the screw was immediately applied and economic strangulation +threatened. Rumania and Bulgaria economically could never be of help to Serbia, +because the products and the requirements of all three are identical, and +Rumania and Bulgaria cannot be expected to facilitate the sale of their +neighbours’ live stock and cereals, when their first business is to sell +their own, while the cost of transit of imports from western Europe through +those countries is prohibitive. +</p> + +<p> +After the unsuccessful rebellion of 1788, already mentioned, Serbia remained in +a state of pseudo-quiescence for some years. Meanwhile the authority of the +Sultan in Serbia was growing ever weaker and the real power was wielded by +local Turkish officials, who exploited the country, looked on it as their own +property, and enjoyed semi-independence. Their exactions and cruelties were +worse than had been those of the Turks in the old days, and it was against them +and their troops, not against those of the Sultan, that the first battles in +the Serbian war of independence were fought. It was during the year 1803 that +the Serbian leaders first made definite plans for the rising which eventually +took place in the following year. The ringleader was George Petrović, known as +Black George, or Kara-George, and amongst his confederates was Miloš Obrenović. +The centre of the conspiracy was at Topola, in the district of Šumadija in +central Serbia (between the Morava and the Drina rivers), the native place of +Kara-George. The first two years of fighting between the Serbians and, first, +the provincial janissaries, and, later, the Sultan’s forces, fully +rewarded the bravery and energy of the insurgents. By the beginning of 1807 +they had virtually freed all northern Serbia by their own unaided efforts and +captured the towns of Požarevac, Smederevo, Belgrade, and Šabac. The year 1804 +is also notable as the date of the formal opening of diplomatic relations +directly between Serbia and Russia. At this time the Emperor Alexander I was +too preoccupied with Napoleon to be able to threaten the Sultan (Austerlitz +took place in November 1805), but he gave the Serbs financial assistance and +commended their cause to the especial care of his ambassador at Constantinople. +</p> + +<p> +In 1807 war again broke out between Russia and Turkey, but after the Peace of +Tilsit (June 1807) fighting ceased also between the Turks and the Russians and +the Serbs, not before the Russians had won several successes against the Turks +on the Lower Danube. It was during the two following years of peace that +dissensions first broke out amongst the Serbian leaders; fighting the Turks was +the sole condition of existence which prevented them fighting each other. In +1809-10 Russia and the Serbs again fought the Turks, at first without success, +but later with better fortune. In 1811 Kara-George was elected <i>Gospodar</i>, +or sovereign, by a popular assembly, but Serbia still remained a Turkish +province. At the end of that year the Russians completely defeated the Turks at +Rustchuk in Bulgaria, and, if all had gone well, Serbia might there and then +have achieved complete independence. +</p> + +<p> +But Napoleon was already preparing his invasion and Russia had to conclude +peace with Turkey in a hurry, which necessarily implied that the Sultan +obtained unduly favourable terms. In the Treaty of Bucarest between the two +countries signed in May 1812, the Serbs were indeed mentioned, and promised +vague internal autonomy and a general amnesty, but all the fortified towns they +had captured were to be returned to the Turks, and the few Russian troops who +had been helping the Serbs in Serbia had to withdraw. Negotiations between the +Turks and the Serbs for the regulation of their position were continued +throughout 1812, but finally the Turks refused all their claims and conditions +and, seeing the European powers preoccupied with their own affairs, invaded the +country from Bosnia in the west, and also from the east and south, in August +1813. The Serbs, left entirely to their own resources, succumbed before the +superior forces of the Turks, and by the beginning of October the latter were +again masters of the whole country and in possession of Belgrade. Meanwhile +Kara-George, broken in health and unable to cope with the difficulties of the +situation, which demanded successful strategy both against the overwhelming +forces of the Turks in the field and against the intrigues of his enemies at +home, somewhat ignominiously fled across the river to Semlin in Hungary, and +was duly incarcerated by the Austrian authorities. +</p> + +<p> +The news of Napoleon’s defeat at Leipsic (October 1813) arrived just +after that of the re-occupation of Belgrade by the Turks, damped +<i>feu-de-joie</i> which they were firing at Constantinople, and made them +rather more conciliatory and lenient to the Serbian rebels. But this attitude +did not last long, and the Serbs soon had reason to make fresh efforts to +regain their short-lived liberty. The Congress of Vienna met in the autumn of +1814, and during its whole course Serbian emissaries gave the Russian envoys no +peace. But with the return of Napoleon to France in the spring of 1815 and the +break-up of the Congress, all that Russia could do was, through its ambassador +at Constantinople, to threaten invasion unless the Turks left the Serbs alone. +Nevertheless, conditions in Serbia became so intolerable that another rebellion +soon took shape, this time under Miloš Obrenović. This leader was no less +patriotic than his rival, Kara-George, but he was far more able and a +consummate diplomat. Kara-George had possessed indomitable courage, energy, and +will-power, but he could not temporize, and his arbitrary methods of enforcing +discipline and his ungovernable temper had made him many enemies. While the +credit for the first Serbian revolt (1804-13) undoubtedly belongs chiefly to +him, the second revolt owed its more lasting success to the skill of Miloš +Obrenović. The fighting started at Takovo, the home of the Obrenović family, in +April 1815, and after many astonishing successes against the Turks, including +the capture of the towns of Rudnik, Čačak, Požarevac, and Kraljevo, was all +over by July of the same year. The Turks were ready with large armies in the +west in Bosnia, and also south of the Morava river, to continue the campaign +and crush the rebellion, but the news of the final defeat of Napoleon, and the +knowledge that Russia would soon have time again to devote attention to the +Balkans, withheld their appetites for revenge, and negotiations with the +successful rebels were initiated. During the whole of this period, from 1813 +onwards, Miloš Obrenović, as head of a district, was an official of the Sultan +in Serbia, and it was one of his principles never to break irreparably with the +Turks, who were still suzerains of the country. At the same time, owing to his +skill and initiative he was recognized as the only real leader of the movement +for independence. From the cessation of the rebellion in 1815 onwards he +himself personally conducted negotiations in the name of his people with the +various pashas who were deputed to deal with him. While these negotiations went +on and the armistice was in force, he was confronted, or rather harassed from +behind, by a series of revolts against his growing authority on the part of his +jealous compatriots. +</p> + +<p> +In June 1817 Kara-George, who had been in Russia after being released by the +Austrians in 1814, returned surreptitiously to Serbia, encouraged by the +brighter aspect which affairs in his country seemed to be assuming. But the +return of his most dangerous rival was as unwelcome to Miloš as it was to the +Turkish authorities at Belgrade, and, measures having been concerted between +them, Kara-George was murdered on July 26,1817, and the first act in the +blood-feud between the two families thus committed. In November of the same +year a <i>skupština</i>, or national assembly, was held at Belgrade, and Miloš +Obrenović, whose position was already thoroughly assured, was elected +hereditary prince (<i>knez</i>) of the country. +</p> + +<p> +Meanwhile events of considerable importance for the future of the Serb race had +been happening elsewhere. Dalmatia, the whole of which had been in the +possession of Venice since the Treaty of Carlowitz in 1699, passed into the +hands of Austria by the Treaty of Campo Formio in 1797, when the Venetian +republic was extinguished by Napoleon. The Bocche di Cuttaro, a harbour both +strategically and commercially of immense value, which had in the old days +belonged to the Serb principality of Zeta or Montenegro, and is its only +natural outlet on the Adriatic, likewise became Venetian in 1699 and Austrian +in 1797, one year after the successful rebellion of the Montenegrins against +the Turks. +</p> + +<p> +By the Treaty of Pressburg between France and Austria Dalmatia became French in +1805. But the Montenegrins, supported by the Russians, resisted the new owners +and occupied the Bocche; at the Peace of Tilsit in 1807, however, this +important place was assigned to France by Russia, and Montenegro had to submit +to its loss. In 1806 the French occupied Ragusa, and in 1808 abolished the +independence of the ancient Serb city-republic. In 1812 the Montenegrins, +helped by the Russians and British, again expelled the French and reoccupied +Cattaro; but Austria was by now fully alive to the meaning this harbour would +have once it was in the possession of Montenegro, and after the Congress of +Vienna in 1815 took definitive possession of it as well as of all the rest of +Dalmatia, thus effecting the complete exclusion of the Serb race for all +political and commercial purposes from the Adriatic, its most natural and +obvious means of communication with western Europe. +</p> + +<p> +Though Miloš had been elected prince by his own people, it was long before he +was recognized as such by the Porte. His efforts for the regularization of his +position entailed endless negotiations in Constantinople; these were enlivened +by frequent anti-Obrenović revolts in Serbia, all of which Miloš successfully +quelled. The revolution in Greece in 1821 threw the Serbian question from the +international point of view into the shade, but the Emperor Nicholas I, who +succeeded his brother Alexander I on the Russian throne in 1825, soon showed +that he took a lively and active interest in Balkan affairs. Pan-Slavism had +scarcely become fashionable in those days, and it was still rather as the +protector of its co-religionists under the Crescent that Russia intervened. In +1826 Russian and Turkish delegates met at Akerman in Bessarabia, and in +September of that year signed a convention by which the Russian protectorate +over the Serbs was recognized, the Serbs were granted internal autonomy, the +right to trade and erect churches, schools, and printing-presses, and the Turks +were forbidden to live in Serbia except in eight garrison towns; the garrisons +were to be Turkish, and tribute was still to be paid to the Sultan as suzerain. +These concessions, announced by Prince Miloš to his people at a special +<i>skupština</i> held at Kragujevac in 1827, evoked great enthusiasm, but the +urgency of the Greek question again delayed their fulfilment. After the battle +of Navarino on October 20, 1827, in which the British, French, and Russian +fleets defeated the Turkish, the Turks became obstinate and refused to carry +out the stipulations of the Convention of Akerman in favour of Serbia. +Thereupon Russia declared war on Turkey in April 1828, and the Russian armies +crossed the Danube and the Balkans and marched on Constantinople. +</p> + +<p> +Peace was concluded at Adrianople in 1829, and Turkey agreed to carry out +immediately all the stipulations of the Treaty of Bucarest (1812) and the +Convention of Akerman (1826). The details took some time to settle, but in +November 1830 the <i>hatti-sherif</i> of the Sultan, acknowledging Miloš as +hereditary prince of Serbia, was publicly read in Belgrade. All the concessions +already promised were duly granted, and Serbia became virtually independent, +but still tributary to the Sultan. Its territory included most of the northern +part of the modern kingdom of Serbia, between the rivers Drina, Save, Danube, +and Timok, but not the districts of Nish, Vranja, and Pirot. Turkey still +retained Bosnia and Hercegovina, Macedonia, the <i>sandjak</i> of Novi-Pazar, +which separated Serbia from Montenegro, and Old Serbia (northern Macedonia). +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="chap18"></a>18<br/> +<i>The Throes of Regeneration: Independent Serbia,</i> 1830–1903</h2> + +<p> +During his rule of Serbia, which lasted virtually from 1817 till 1839, Prince +Miloš did a very great deal for the welfare of his country. He emancipated the +Serbian Church from the trammels of the Greek Patriarchate of Constantinople in +1831, from which date onwards it was ruled by a Metropolitan of Serb +nationality, resident at Belgrade. He encouraged the trade of the country, a +great deal of which he held in his own hands; he was in fact a sort of +prototype of those modern Balkan business-kings of whom King George of Greece +and King Carol of Rumania were the most notable examples. He raised an army and +put it on a permanent footing, and organized the construction of roads, +schools, and churches. He was, however, an autocratic ruler of the old school, +and he had no inclination to share the power for the attainment of which he had +laboured so many years and gone through so much. From his definite installation +as hereditary prince discontent at his arbitrary methods of government amongst +his ex-equals increased, and after several revolts he was forced eventually to +grant a constitution in 1835. This, however, remained a dead letter, and things +went on as before. Later in the same year he paid a prolonged visit to his +suzerain at Constantinople, and while he was there the situation in Serbia +became still more serious. After his return he was, after several years of +delay and of growing unpopularity, compelled to agree to another constitution +which was forced on him, paradoxically enough, by the joint efforts of the Tsar +and of the Sultan, who seemed to take an unnatural pleasure in supporting the +democratic Serbians against their successful colleague in autocracy, who had +done so much for his turbulent subjects. Serbia even in those days was +essentially and uncompromisingly democratic, but even so Miloš obstinately +refused to carry out the provisions of the constitution or in any way to submit +to a curtailment of his power, and in 1839 he left his ungrateful principality +and took refuge in Rumania, where he possessed an estate, abdicating in favour +of his elder son Milan. This Prince Milan, known as Obrenović II, was seriously +ill at the time of his accession, and died within a month of it. He was +succeeded by his younger brother Michael, known as Obrenović III, who was then +only sixteen years of age. This prince, though young, had a good head on his +shoulders, and eventually proved the most gifted ruler modern Serbia has ever +had. His first reign (1840-2), however, did not open well. He inaugurated it by +paying a state visit to Constantinople, but the Sultan only recognized him as +elective prince and insisted on his having two advisers approved and appointed +by the Porte. Michael on his return showed his determination to have nothing to +do with them, but this led to a rebellion headed by one of them, Vučić, and, +though Michael’s rule was not as arbitrary as his father’s, he had +to bow to the popular will which supported Vučić and cross the river to Semlin. +After a stormy interval, during which the Emperor Nicholas I tried to intervene +in favour of Michael, Alexander Karagjorgjević, son of Kara-George, was elected +prince (1843). No sooner was this representative of the rival dynasty +installed, however, than rebellions in favour of Michael occurred. These were +thrown into the shade by the events of 1848, In that memorable year of +revolutions the Magyars rose against Austria and the Serbs in southern Hungary +rose against the Magyars. Prince Alexander resolved to send military help to +his oppressed countrymen north of the Save and Danube, and, though the +insurgents were unsuccessful, Prince Alexander gained in popularity amongst the +Serbs by the line of action he had taken. During the Crimean War, on the other +hand, Serbia remained strictly neutral, to the annoyance of the Tsar; at the +Congress of Paris (1856) the exclusive protectorate of Russia was replaced by +one of all the powers, and Russian influence in the western Balkans was thereby +weakened. Prince Alexander’s prudence, moreover, cost him his popularity, +and in 1858 he in his turn had to bid farewell to his difficult countrymen. +</p> + +<p> +In December of the same year the veteran Prince Miloš Obrenović I was recalled +to power as hereditary prince. His activities during his second reign were +directed against Turkish influence, which was still strong, and he made efforts +to have the Turkish populations removed from the eight garrison towns, +including Belgrade, where they still lived in spite of the fact that their +emigration had been stipulated for in 1830. Unfortunately he did not live long +enough to carry out his plans, for he fell ill at Topchider, the summer palace +near Belgrade, in the autumn of 1860, and died a few days afterwards. He was +again succeeded by his son Michael Obrenović III, who was already thirty-six +years of age. This able prince’s second reign was brilliantly successful, +and it was a disaster for which his foolish countrymen had to pay dearly, when, +by their fault, it was prematurely cut short in 1868. His first act was with +the consent of a specially summoned <i>skupština</i> to abolish the law by +which he could only appoint and remove his counsellers with the approval of the +Porte. Next he set about the organization and establishment of a regular army +of 30,000 men. In 1862 an anti-Turkish rebellion broke out amongst the Serbs in +Hercegovina (still, with Bosnia, a Turkish province), and the Porte, accusing +Prince Michael of complicity, made warlike preparations against him. +</p> + +<p> +Events, however, were precipitated in such a way that, without waiting for the +opening of hostilities, the Turkish general in command of the fortress of +Belgrade turned his guns on the city; this provoked the intervention of the +powers at Constantinople, and the entire civilian Turkish population had to +quit the country (in accordance with the stipulations of 1830), only Turkish +garrisons remaining in the fortresses of Šabac, Belgrade, Smederevo, and +Kladovo, along the northern river frontier, still theoretically the boundary of +the Sultan’s dominions. After this success Prince Michael continued his +military preparations in order to obtain final possession of the fortresses +when a suitable occasion should arise. This occurred in 1866, when Austria was +engaged in the struggle with Prussia, and the policy of Great Britain became +less Turcophil than it had hitherto been. On April 6, 1867, the four +fortresses, which had been in Serbian possession from 1804 to 1813, but had +since then been garrisoned by the Turks, were delivered over to Serbia and the +last Turkish soldier left Serbian soil without a shot having been fired. Though +Serbia after this was still a vassal state, being tributary to the Sultan, +these further steps on the road to complete independence were a great triumph, +especially for Prince Michael personally. But this very triumph actuated his +political opponents amongst his own countrymen, amongst whom were undoubtedly +adherents of the rival dynasty, to revenge, and blind to the interests of their +people they foolishly and most brutally murdered this extremely capable and +conscientious prince in the deer park near Topchider on June 10, 1868. The +opponents of the Obrenović dynasty were, however, baulked in their plans, and a +cousin of the late prince was elected to the vacant and difficult position. +This ruler, known as Milan Obrenović IV, who was only fourteen years of age at +the time of his accession (1868), was of a very different character from his +predecessor. The first thing that happened during his minority was the +substitution of the constitution of 1838 by another one which was meant to give +the prince and the national assembly much more power, but which, eventually, +made the ministers supreme. +</p> + +<p> +The prince came of age in 1872 when he was eighteen, and he soon showed that +the potential pleasures to be derived from his position were far more +attractive to him than the fulfilment of its obvious duties. He found much to +occupy him in Vienna and Paris and but little in Belgrade. At the same time the +Serb people had lost, largely by its own faults, much of the respect and +sympathy which it had acquired in Europe during Prince Michael’s reign. +In 1875 a formidable anti-Turkish insurrection (the last of many) broke out +amongst the Serbs of Bosnia and Hercegovina, and all the efforts of the Turks +to quell it were unavailing. In June 1876 Prince Milan was forced by the +pressure of public opinion to declare war on Turkey in support of the +‘unredeemed’ Serbs of Bosnia, and Serbia was joined by Montenegro. +The country was, however, not materially prepared for war, the expected +sympathetic risings in other parts of Turkey either did not take place or +failed, and the Turks turned their whole army on to Serbia, with the result +that in October the Serbs had to appeal to the Tsar for help and an armistice +was arranged, which lasted till February 1877. During the winter a conference +was held in Constantinople to devise means for alleviating the lot of the +Christians in Turkey, and a peace was arranged between Turkey and Serbia +whereby the <i>status quo ante</i> was restored. But after the conference the +heart of Turkey was again hardened and the stipulations in favour of the +Christians were not carried out. +</p> + +<p> +In 1877 Russia declared war on Turkey (cf. chap. 10), and in the autumn of the +same year Serbia joined in. This time the armies of Prince Milan were more +successful, and conquered and occupied the whole of southern Serbia including +the towns and districts of Nish, Pirot, Vranja, and Leskovac, Montenegro, which +had not been included in the peace of the previous winter, but had been +fighting desperately and continuously against the Turks ever since it had begun +actively to help the Serb rebels of Hercegovina in 1875, had a series of +successes, as a result of which it obtained possession of the important +localities of Nikšić, Podgorica, Budua, Antivari, and Dulcigno, the last three +on the shore of the Adriatic. By the Treaty of San Stefano the future interests +of both Serbia and Montenegro were jeopardised by the creation of a Great +Bulgaria, but that would not have mattered if in return they had been given +control of the purely Serb provinces of Bosnia and Hercegovina, which +ethnically they can claim just as legitimately as Bulgaria claims most of +Macedonia. The Treaty of San Stefano was, however, soon replaced by that of +Berlin. By its terms both Serbia and Montenegro achieved complete independence +and the former ceased to be a tributary state of Turkey. The Serbs were given +the districts of southern Serbia which they had occupied, and which are all +ethnically Serb except Pirot, the population of which is a sort of cross +between Serb and Bulgar. The Serbs also undertook to build a railway through +their country to the Turkish and Bulgarian frontiers. Montenegro was nearly +doubled in size, receiving the districts of Nikšić, Podgorica, and others; +certain places in the interior the Turks and Albanians absolutely refused to +surrender, and to compensate for these Montenegro was given a strip of coast +with the townlets of Antivari and Dulcigno. The memory of Gladstone, who +specially espoused Montenegro’s cause in this matter, is held in the +greatest reverence in the brave little mountain country, but unfortunately the +ports themselves are economically absolutely useless. Budua, higher up the +Dalmatian coast, which would have been of some use, was handed over to Austria, +to which country, already possessed of Cattaro and all the rest of Dalmatia, it +was quite superfluous. Greatest tragedy of all for the future of the Serb race, +the administration of Bosnia and Hercegovina was handed over +‘temporarily’ to Austria-Hungary, and Austrian garrisons were +quartered throughout those two provinces, which they were able to occupy only +after the most bitter armed opposition on the part of the inhabitants, and also +in the Turkish <i>sandjak</i> or province of Novi-Pazar, the ancient Raska and +cradle of the Serb state; this strip of mountainous territory under Turkish +administrative and Austrian military control was thus converted into a +fortified wedge which effectually kept the two independent Serb states of +Serbia and Montenegro apart. After all these events the Serbs had to set to +work to put their enlarged house in order. But the building of railways and +schools and the organization of the services cost a lot of money, and as public +economy is not a Serbian virtue the debt grew rapidly. In 1882 Serbia +proclaimed itself a kingdom and was duly recognized by the other nations. But +King Milan did not learn to manage the affairs of his country any better as +time went on. He was too weak to stand alone, and having freed himself from +Turkey he threw himself into the arms of Austria, with which country he +concluded a secret military convention. In 1885, when Bulgaria and +‘Eastern Rumelia’ successfully coalesced and Bulgaria thereby +received a considerable increase of territory and power, the Serbs, prompted by +jealousy, began to grow restless, and King Milan, at the instigation of +Austria, foolishly declared war on Prince Alexander of Battenberg. This +speedily ended in the disastrous battle of Slivnitsa (cf. chap. II); Austria +had to intervene to save its victim, and Serbia got nothing for its trouble but +a large increase of debt and a considerable decrease of military reputation. In +addition to all this King Milan was unfortunate in his conjugal relations; his +wife, the beautiful Queen Natalie, was a Russian, and as he himself had +Austrian sympathies, they could scarcely be expected to agree on politics. But +the strife between them extended from the sphere of international to that of +personal sympathies and antipathies. King Milan was promiscuous in affairs of +the heart and Queen Natalie was jealous. Scenes of domestic discord were +frequent and violent, and the effect of this atmosphere on the character of +their only child Alexander, who was born in 1876, was naturally bad. +</p> + +<p> +The king, who had for some years been very popular with, his subjects with all +his failings, lost his hold on the country after the unfortunate war of 1885, +and the partisans of the rival dynasty began to be hopeful once more. In 1888 +King Milan gave Serbia a very much more liberal constitution, by which the +ministers were for the first time made really responsible to the +<i>skupština</i> or national assembly, replacing that of 1869, and the +following year, worried by his political and domestic failures, discredited and +unpopular both at home and abroad, he resigned in favour of his son Alexander, +then aged thirteen. This boy, who had been brought up in what may be called a +permanent storm-centre, both domestic and political, was placed under a +regency, which included M. Ristić, with a radical ministry under M. Pašić, an +extremely able and patriotic statesman of pro-Russian sympathies, who ever +since he first became prominent in 1877 had been growing in power and +influence. But trouble did not cease with the abdication of King Milan. He and +his wife played Box and Cox at Belgrade for the next four years, quarrelling +and being reconciled, intriguing and fighting round the throne and person of +their son. At last both parents agreed to leave the country and give the +unfortunate youth a chance. King Milan settled in Vienna, Queen Natalie in +Biarritz. In 1893 King Alexander suddenly declared himself of age and arrested +all his ministers and regents one evening while they were dining with him. The +next year he abrogated the constitution of 1888, under which party warfare in +the Serbian parliament had been bitter and uninterrupted, obstructing any real +progress, and restored that of 1869. Ever since 1889 (the date of the accession +of the German Emperor) Berlin had taken more interest in Serbian affairs, and +it has been alleged that it was William II who, through the wife of the +Rumanian minister at his court, who was sister of Queen Natalie, influenced +King Alexander in his abrupt and ill-judged decisions. It was certainly German +policy to weaken and discredit Serbia and to further Austrian influence at +Belgrade at the expense of that of Russia. King Milan returned for a time to +Belgrade in 1897, and the reaction, favourable to Austria, which had begun in +1894, increased during his presence and under the ministry of Dr. Vladan +Gjorgjević, which lasted from 1897 till 1900. This state of repression caused +unrest throughout the country. All its energies were absorbed in fruitless +political party strife, and no material or moral progress was possible. King +Alexander, distracted, solitary, and helpless in the midst of this unending +welter of political intrigue, committed an extremely imprudent act in the +summer of 1900. Having gone for much-needed relaxation to see his mother at +Biarritz, he fell violently in love with her lady in waiting, Madame Draga +Mašin, the divorced wife of a Serbian officer. Her somewhat equivocal past was +in King Alexander’s eyes quite eclipsed by her great beauty and her wit, +which had not been impaired by conjugal infelicity. Although she was +thirty-two, and he only twenty-four, he determined to marry her, and the +desperate opposition of his parents, his army, his ministers, and his people, +based principally on the fact that the woman was known to be incapable of +child-birth, only precipitated the accomplishment of his intention. This +unfortunate and headstrong action on the part of the young king, who, though +deficient in tact and intuition, had plenty of energy and was by no means +stupid, might have been forgiven him by his people if, as was at first thought +possible, it had restored internal peace and prosperity in the country and +thereby enabled it to prepare itself to take a part in the solution o£ those +foreign questions which vitally affected Serb interests and were already +looming on the horizon. But it did not. In 1901 King Alexander granted another +constitution and for a time attempted to work with a coalition ministry; but +this failed, and a term of reaction with pro-Austrian tendencies, which were +favoured by the king and queen, set in. This reaction, combined with the +growing disorganization of the finances and the general sense of the discredit +and failure which the follies of its rulers had during the last thirty years +brought on the country; completely undermined the position of the dynasty and +made a catastrophe inevitable. This occurred, as is well known, on June 10, +1903, when, as the result of a military conspiracy, King Alexander, the last of +the Obrenović dynasty, his wife, and her male relatives were murdered. This +crime was purely political, and it is absurd to gloss it over or to explain it +merely as the result of the family feud between the two dynasties. That came to +an end in 1868, when the murder of Kara-George in 1817 by the agency of Miloš +Obrenović was avenged by the lunatic assassination of the brilliant Prince +Michael Obrenović III. It is no exaggeration to say that, from the point of +view of the Serbian patriot, the only salvation of his country in 1903 lay in +getting rid of the Obrenović dynasty, which had become pro-Austrian, had no +longer the great gifts possessed by its earlier members, and undoubtedly by its +vagaries hindered the progress of Serbia both in internal and external +politics. The assassination was unfortunately carried out with unnecessary +cruelty, and it is this fact that made such a bad impression and for so long +militated against Serbia in western Europe; but it must be remembered that +civilization in the Balkans, where political murder, far from being a product +of the five hundred years of Turkish dominion, has always been endemic, is not +on the same level in many respects as it is in the rest of Europe. Life is one +of the commodities which are still cheap in backward countries. +</p> + +<p> +Although King Alexander and his wife can in no sense be said to have deserved +the awful fate that befell them, it is equally true that had any other course +been adopted, such as deposition and exile, the wire-pulling and intriguing +from outside, which had already done the country so much harm, would have +become infinitely worse. Even so, it was long before things in any sense +settled down. As for the alleged complicity of the rival dynasty in the crime, +it is well established that that did not exist. It was no secret to anybody +interested in Serbian affairs that something catastrophic was about to happen, +and when the tragedy occurred it was natural to appeal to the alternative +native dynasty to step into the breach. But the head of that dynasty was in no +way responsible for the plot, still less for the manner in which it was carried +out, and it was only after much natural hesitation and in the face of his +strong disinclination that Prince Peter Karagjorgjević was induced to accept +the by no means enviable, easy, or profitable task of guiding Serbia’s +destiny. The Serbian throne in 1903 was a source neither of glory nor of +riches, and it was notoriously no sinecure. +</p> + +<p> +After the tragedy, the democratic constitution of 1888 was first of all +restored, and then Prince Peter Karagjorgjević, grandson of Kara-George, the +leader of the first Serbian insurrection of 1804-13, who was at that time +fifty-nine years of age, was unanimously elected king. He had married in 1883 a +daughter of Prince Nicholas of Montenegro and sister of the future Queen of +Italy, but she had been dead already some years at the time of his accession, +leaving him with a family of two sons and a daughter. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="chap19"></a>19<br/> +<i>Serbia, Montenegro, and the Serbo-Croats in Austria-Hungary,</i> 1903–8</h2> + +<p> +It was inevitable that, after the sensation which such an event could not fail +to cause in twentieth-century Europe, it should take the country where it +occurred some time to live down the results. Other powers, especially those of +western Europe, looked coldly on Serbia and were in no hurry to resume +diplomatic intercourse, still less to offer diplomatic support. The question of +the punishment and exile of the conspirators was almost impossible of solution, +and only time was able to obliterate the resentment caused by the whole affair. +In Serbia itself a great change took place. The new sovereign, though he +laboured under the greatest possible disadvantages, by his irreproachable +behaviour, modesty, tact, and strictly constitutional rule, was able to +withdraw the court of Belgrade from the trying limelight to which it had become +used. The public finances began to be reorganized, commerce began to improve in +spite of endless tariff wars with Austria-Hungary, and attention was again +diverted from home to foreign politics. With the gradual spread of education +and increase of communication, and the growth of national self-consciousness +amongst the Serbs and Croats of Austria-Hungary and the two independent Serb +states, a new movement for the closer intercourse amongst the various branches +of the Serb race for south Slav unity, as it was called, gradually began to +take shape. At the same time a more definitely political agitation started in +Serbia, largely inspired by the humiliating position of economic bondage in +which the country was held by Austria-Hungary, and was roughly justified by the +indisputable argument: ‘Serbia must expand or die.’ Expansion at +the cost of Turkey seemed hopeless, because even the acquisition of Macedonia +would give Serbia a large alien population and no maritime outlet. It was +towards the Adriatic that the gaze of the Serbs was directed, to the coast +which was ethnically Serbian and could legitimately be considered a heritage of +the Serb race. +</p> + +<p> +Macedonia was also taken into account, schools and armed bands began their +educative activity amongst those inhabitants of the unhappy province who were +Serb, or who lived in places where Serbs had lived, or who with sufficient +persuasion could be induced to call themselves Serb; but the principal stream +of propaganda was directed westwards into Bosnia and Hercegovina. The +antagonism between Christian and Mohammedan, Serb and Turk, was never so bitter +as between Christian and Christian, Serb and German or Magyar, and the Serbs +were clever enough to see that Bosnia and Hercegovina, from every point of +view, was to them worth ten Macedonias, though it would he ten times more +difficult to obtain. Bosnia and Hercegovina, though containing three +confessions, were ethnically homogeneous, and it was realised that these two +provinces were as important to Serbia and Montenegro as the rest of Italy had +been to Piedmont. +</p> + +<p> +It must at this time be recalled in what an extraordinary way the Serb race had +fortuitously been broken up into a number of quite arbitrary political +divisions. Dalmatia (three per cent. of the population of which is Italian and +all the rest Serb or Croat, preponderatingly Serb and Orthodox in the south and +preponderating Croat or Roman Catholic in the north) was a province of Austria +and sent deputies to the Reichsrath at Vienna; at the same time it was +territorially isolated from Austria and had no direct railway connexion with +any country except a narrow-gauge line into Bosnia. Croatia and Slavonia, +preponderatingly Roman Catholic, were lands of the Hungarian crown, and though +they had a provincial pseudo-autonomous diet at Agram, the capital of Croatia, +they sent deputies to the Hungarian parliament at Budapest. Thus what had in +the Middle Ages been known as the triune kingdom of Croatia, Slavonia, and +Dalmatia, with a total Serbo-Croat population of three millions, was divided +between Austria and Hungary. +</p> + +<p> +Further, there were about 700,000 Serbs and Croats in the south of Hungary +proper, cast and north of the Danube, known as the Banat and Bačka, a district +which during the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries was the hearth and +home of Serb literature and education, but which later waned in importance in +that respect as independent Serbia grew. These Serbs were directly dependent on +Budapest, the only autonomy they possessed being ecclesiastical. Bosnia and +Hercegovina, still nominally Turkish provinces, with a Slav population of +nearly two million (850,000 Orthodox Serbs, 650,000 Mohammedan Serbs, and the +rest Roman Catholics), were to all intents and purposes already imperial lands +of Austria-Hungary, with a purely military and police administration; the +shadow of Turkish sovereignty provided sufficient excuse to the <i>de facto</i> +owners of these provinces not to grant the inhabitants parliamentary government +or even genuine provincial autonomy. The Serbs in Serbia numbered nearly three +millions, those in Montenegro about a quarter of a million; while in Turkey, in +what was known as Old Serbia (the <i>sandjak</i> of Novi-Pasar between Serbia +and Montenegro and the vilayet of Korovo), and in parts of northern and central +Macedonia, there were scattered another half million. These last, of course, +had no voice at all in the management of their own affairs. Those in Montenegro +lived under the patriarchal autocracy of Prince Nicholas, who had succeeded his +uncle, Prince Danilo, in 1860, at the age of nineteen. Though no other form of +government could have turned the barren rocks of Montenegro into fertile +pastures, many of the people grew restless with the restricted possibilities of +a career which the mountain principality offered them, and in latter years +migrated in large numbers to North and South America, whither emigration from +Dalmatia and Croatia too had already readied serious proportions. The Serbs in +Serbia were the only ones who could claim to be free, but even this was a +freedom entirely dependent on the economic malevolence of Austria-Hungary and +Turkey. Cut up in this way by the hand of fate into such a number of helpless +fragments, it was inevitable that the Serb race, if it possessed any vitality, +should attempt, at any cost, to piece some if not all of them together and form +an ethnical whole which, economically and politically, should be master of its +own destinies. It was equally inevitable that the policy of Austria-Hungary +should be to anticipate or definitively render any such attempt impossible, +because obviously the formation of a large south Slav state, by cutting off +Austria from the Adriatic and eliminating from the dual monarchy all the +valuable territory between the Dalmatian coast and the river Drave, would +seriously jeopardize its position as a great power; it must be remembered, +also, that Austria-Hungary, far from decomposing, as it was commonly assumed +was happening, had been enormously increasing in vitality ever since 1878. +</p> + +<p> +The means adopted by the governments of Vienna and Budapest to nullify the +plans of Serbian expansion were generally to maintain the political +<i>émiettement</i> of the Serb race, the isolation of one group from another, +the virtually enforced emigration of Slavs on a large scale and their +substitution by German colonists, and the encouragement of rivalry and discord +between Roman Catholic Croat and Orthodox Serb. No railways were allowed to be +built in Dalmatia, communication between Agram and any other parts of the +monarchy except Fiume or Budapest was rendered almost impossible; Bosnia and +Hercegovina were shut off into a watertight compartment and endowed with a +national flag composed of the inspiring colours of brown and buff; it was made +impossible for Serbs to visit Montenegro or for Montenegrins to visit Serbia +except via Fiume, entailing the bestowal of several pounds on the Hungarian +state steamers and railways. As for the <i>sandjak</i> of Novi-Pazar, it was +turned into a veritable Tibet, and a legend was spread abroad that if any +foreigner ventured there he would be surely murdered by Turkish brigands; +meanwhile it was full of Viennese ladies giving picnics and dances and tennis +parties to the wasp-waisted officers of the Austrian garrison. Bosnia and +Hercegovina, on the other hand, became the model touring provinces of +Austria-Hungary, and no one can deny that their great natural beauties were +made more enjoyable by the construction of railways, roads, and hotels. At the +same time this was not a work of pure philanthropy, and the emigration +statistics are a good indication of the joy with which the Bosnian peasants +paid for an annual influx of admiring tourists. In spite of all these +disadvantages, however, the Serbo-Croat provinces of Austria-Hungary could not +be deprived of all the benefits of living within a large and prosperous customs +union, while being made to pay for all the expenses of the elaborate imperial +administration and services; and the spread of education, even under the +Hapsburg régime, began to tell in time. Simultaneously with the agitation which +emanated from Serbia and was directed towards the advancement, by means of +schools and religious and literary propaganda, of Serbian influence in Bosnia +and Hercegovina, a movement started in Dalmatia and Croatia for the closer +union of those two provinces. About 1906 the two movements found expression in +the formation of the Serbo-Croat or Croato-Serb coalition party, composed of +those elements in Dalmatia, Croatia, and Slavonia which favoured closer union +between the various groups of the Serb race scattered throughout those +provinces, as well as in Serbia, Montenegro, Bosnia, Hercegovina, and Turkey. +Owing to the circumstances already described, it was impossible for the +representatives of the Serb race to voice their aspirations unanimously in any +one parliament, and the work of the coalition, except in the provincial diet at +Agram, consisted mostly of conducting press campaigns and spreading propaganda +throughout those provinces. The most important thing about the coalition was +that it buried religious antagonism and put unity of race above difference of +belief. In this way it came into conflict with the ultramontane Croat party at +Agram, which wished to incorporate Bosnia, Hercegovina, and Dalmatia with +Croatia and create a third purely Roman Catholic Slav state in the empire, on a +level with Austria and Hungary; also to a lesser extent with the intransigent +Serbs of Belgrade, who affected to ignore Croatia and Roman Catholicism, and +only dreamed of bringing Bosnia, Hercegovina, and as much of Dalmatia as they +could under their own rule; and finally it had to overcome the hostility of the +Mohammedan Serbs of Bosnia, who disliked all Christians equally, could only +with the greatest difficulty be persuaded that they were really Serbs and not +Turks, and honestly cared for nothing but Islam and Turkish coffee, thus +considerably facilitating the germanization of the two provinces. The coalition +was wisely inclined to postpone the programme of final political settlement, +and aimed immediately at the removal of the material and moral barriers placed +between the Serbs of the various provinces of Austria-Hungary, including Bosnia +and Hercegovina. If they had been sure of adequate guarantees they would +probably have agreed to the inclusion of <i>all</i> Serbs and Croats within the +monarchy, because the constitution of all Serbs and Croats in an independent +state (not necessarily a kingdom) without it implied the then problematic +contingencies of a European war and the disruption of Austria-Hungary. +Considering the manifold handicaps under which Serbia and its cause suffered, +the considerable success which its propaganda met with in Bosnia and +Hercegovina and other parts of Austria-Hungary, from 1903 till 1908, is a +proof, not only of the energy and earnestness of its promoters and of the +vitality of the Serbian people, but also, if any were needed, of the extreme +unpopularity of the Hapsburg régime in the southern Slav provinces of the dual +monarchy. Serbia had no help from outside. Russia was entangled in the Far East +and then in the revolution, and though the new dynasty was approved in St. +Petersburg Russian sympathy with Serbia was at that time only lukewarm. +Relations with Austria-Hungary were of course always strained; only one single +line of railway connected the two countries, and as Austria-Hungary was the +only profitable market, for geographical reasons, for Serbian products, Serbia +could be brought to its knees at any moment by the commercial closing of the +frontier. It was a symbol of the economic vassalage of Serbia and Montenegro +that the postage between both of these countries and any part of +Austria-Hungary was ten centimes, that for letters between Serbia and +Montenegro, which had to make the long détour through Austrian territory, was +twenty-five. But though this opened the Serbian markets to Austria, it also +incidentally opened Bosnia, when the censor could be circumvented to propaganda +by pamphlet and correspondence. Intercourse with western Europe was restricted +by distance, and, owing to dynastic reasons, diplomatic relations were +altogether suspended for several years between this country and Serbia. The +Balkan States Exhibition held in London during the summer of 1907, to encourage +trade between Great Britain and the Balkans, was hardly a success. Italy and +Serbia had nothing in common. With Montenegro even, despite the fact that King +Peter was Prince Nicholas’s son-in-law, relations were bad. It was felt +in Serbia that Prince Nicholas’s autocratic rule acted as a brake on the +legitimate development of the national consciousness, and Montenegrin students +who visited Belgrade returned to their homes full of wild and unsuitable ideas. +However, the revolutionary tendencies, which some of them undoubtedly +developed, had no fatal results to the reigning dynasty, which continued as +before to enjoy the special favour as well as the financial support of the +Russian court, and which, looked on throughout Europe as a picturesque and +harmless institution, it would have been dangerous, as it was quite +unnecessary, to touch. +</p> + +<p> +Serbia was thus left entirely to its own resources in the great propagandist +activity which filled the years 1903 to 1908. The financial means at its +disposal were exiguous in the extreme, especially when compared with the +enormous sums lavished annually by the Austrian and German governments on their +secret political services, so that the efforts of its agents cannot be ascribed +to cupidity. Also it must be admitted that the kingdom of Serbia, with its +capital Belgrade, thanks to the internal chaos and dynastic scandals of the +previous forty years, resulting in superficial dilapidation, intellectual +stagnation, and general poverty, lacked the material as well as the moral +glamour which a successful Piedmont should possess. Nobody could deny, for +instance, that, with all its natural advantages, Belgrade was at first sight +not nearly such an attractive centre as Agram or Sarajevo, or that the +qualities which the Serbs of Serbia had displayed since their emancipation were +hardly such as to command the unstinted confidence and admiration of their as +yet unredeemed compatriots. Nevertheless the Serbian propaganda in favour of +what was really a Pan-Serb movement met with great success, especially in +Bosnia, Hercegovina, and Old Serbia (northern Macedonia). +</p> + +<p> +Simultaneously the work of the Serbo-Croat coalition in Dalmatia, Croatia, and +Slavonia made considerable progress in spite of clerical opposition and +desperate conflicts with the government at Budapest. Both the one movement and +the other naturally evoked great alarm and emotion in the Austrian and +Hungarian capitals, as they were seen to be genuinely popular and also +potentially, if not actually, separatist in character. In October 1906 Baron +Achrenthal succeeded Count Goluchowski as Minister for Foreign Affairs at +Vienna, and very soon initiated a more vigorous and incidentally anti-Slav +foreign policy than his predecessor. What was now looked on as the Serbian +danger had in the eyes of Vienna assumed such proportions that the time for +decisive action was considered to have arrived. In January 1908 Baron +Achrenthal announced his scheme for a continuation of the Bosnian railway +system through the <i>sandjak</i> of Novi-Pazar to link up with the Turkish +railways in Macedonia. This plan was particularly foolish in conception, +because, the Bosnian railways being narrow and the Turkish normal gauge, the +line would have been useless for international commerce, while the engineering +difficulties were such that the cost of construction would have been +prohibitive. But the possibilities which this move indicated, the palpable +evidence it contained of the notorious <i>Drang nach Osten</i> of the Germanic +powers towards Salonika and Constantinople, were quite sufficient to fill the +ministries of Europe, and especially those of Russia, with extreme uneasiness. +The immediate result of this was that concerted action between Russia and +Austria-Hungary in the Balkans was thenceforward impossible, and the Mürzsteg +programme, after a short and precarious existence, came to an untimely end (cf. +chap. 12). Serbia and Montenegro, face to face with this new danger which +threatened permanently to separate their territories, were beside themselves, +and immediately parried with the project, hardly more practicable in view of +their international credit, of a Danube-Adriatic railway. In July 1908 the +nerves of Europe were still further tried by the Young Turk revolution in +Constantinople. The imminence of this movement was known to Austro-German +diplomacy, and doubtless this knowledge, as well as the fear of the Pan-Serb +movement, prompted the Austrian foreign minister to take steps towards the +definitive regularization of his country’s position in Bosnia and +Hercegovina—provinces whose suzerain was still the Sultan of Turkey. The +effect of the Young Turk coup in the Balkan States was as any one who visited +them at that time can testify, both pathetic and intensely humorous. The +permanent chaos of the Turkish empire, and the process of watching for years +its gradual but inevitable decomposition, had created amongst the neighbouring +states an atmosphere of excited anticipation, which was really the breath of +their nostrils; it had stimulated them during the endless Macedonian +insurrections to commit the most awful outrages against each other’s +nationals and then lay the blame at the door of the unfortunate Turk; and if +the Turk should really regenerate himself, not only would their occupation be +gone, but the heavily-discounted legacies would assuredly elude their grasp. At +the same time, since the whole policy of exhibiting and exploiting the horrors +of Macedonia, and of organizing guerilla bands and provoking intervention, was +based on the refusal of the Turks to grant reforms, as soon as the +ultra-liberal constitution of Midhat Pasha, which, had been withdrawn after a +brief and unsuccessful run in 1876, was restored by the Young Turks, there was +nothing left for the Balkan States to do but to applaud with as much enthusiasm +as they could simulate. The emotions experienced by the Balkan peoples during +that summer, beneath the smiles which they had to assume, were exhausting even +for southern temperaments. Bulgaria, with its characteristic +matter-of-factness, was the first to adjust itself to the new and trying +situation in which the only certainty was that something decisive had got to be +done with all possible celerity. On October 5, 1908, Prince Ferdinand sprang on +an astonished continent the news that he renounced the Turkish suzerainty (ever +since 1878 the Bulgarian principality had been a tributary and vassal state of +the Ottoman Empire, and therefore, with all its astonishingly rapid progress +and material prosperity, a subject for commiseration in the kingdoms of Serbia +and Greece) and proclaimed the independence of Bulgaria, with himself, as Tsar +of the Bulgars, at its head. Europe had not recovered from this shock, still +less Belgrade and Athens, when, two days later. Baron Aehrenthal announced the +formal annexation of Bosnia and Hercegovina by the Emperor Francis Joseph. +Whereas most people had virtually forgotten the Treaty of Berlin and had come +to look on Austria as just as permanently settled in these two provinces as was +Great Britain in Egypt and Cyprus, yet the formal breach of the stipulations of +that treaty on Austria’s part, by annexing the provinces without notice +to or consultation with the other parties concerned, gave the excuse for a +somewhat ridiculous hue and cry on the part of the other powers, and especially +on that of Russia. The effect of these blows from right and left on Serbia was +literally paralysing. When Belgrade recovered the use of its organs, it started +to scream for war and revenue, and initiated an international crisis from which +Europe did not recover till the following year. Meanwhile, almost unobserved by +the peoples of Serbia and Montenegro, Austria had, in order to reconcile the +Turks with the loss of their provinces, good-naturedly, but from the Austrian +point of view short-sightedly, withdrawn its garrisons from the <i>sandjak</i> +of Novi-Pazar, thus evacuating the long-coveted corridor which was the one +thing above all else necessary to Serbia and Montenegro for the realization of +their plans. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="chap20"></a>20<br/> +<i>Serbia and Montenegro, and the two Balkan Wars,</i> 1908–13 (cf. Chap, +13)</h2> + +<p> +The winter of 1908-9 marked the lowest ebb of Serbia’s fortunes. The +successive <i>coups</i> and <i>faits accomplis</i> carried out by Austria, +Turkey, and Bulgaria during 1908 seemed destined to destroy for good the +Serbian plans for expansion in any direction whatever, and if these could not +be realized then Serbia must die of suffocation. It was also well understood +that for all the martial ardour displayed in Belgrade the army was in no +condition to take the field any more than was the treasury to bear the cost of +a campaign; Russia had not yet recovered from the Japanese War followed by the +revolution, and indeed everything pointed to the certainty that if Serbia +indulged in hostilities against Austria-Hungary it would perish ignominiously +and alone. The worst of it was that neither Serbia nor Montenegro had any legal +claim to Bosnia and Hercegovina: they had been deluding themselves with the +hope that their ethnical identity with the people of these provinces, supported +by the effects of their propaganda, would induce a compassionate and generous +Europe at least to insist on their being given a part of the coveted territory, +and thus give Serbia access to the coast, when the ambiguous position of these +two valuable provinces, still nominally Turkish but already virtually Austrian, +came to be finally regularized. As a matter of fact, ever since Bismarck, +Gorchakóv, and Beaconsfield had put Austria-Hungary in their possession in +1878, no one had seriously thought that the Dual Monarchy would ever +voluntarily retire from one inch of the territory which had been conquered and +occupied at such cost, and those who noticed it were astonished at the +evacuation by it of the <i>sandjak</i> of Novi-Pazar. At the same time Baron +Achrenthal little foresaw what a hornet’s nest he would bring about his +ears by the tactless method in which the annexation was carried out. The first +effect was to provoke a complete boycott of Austro-Hungarian goods and trading +vessels throughout the Ottoman Empire, which was so harmful to the Austrian +export trade that in January 1909 Count Achrenthal had to indemnify Turkey with +the sum of £2,500,000 for his technically stolen property. Further, the +attitude of Russia and Serbia throughout the whole winter remained so +provocative and threatening that, although war was generally considered +improbable, the Austrian army had to be kept on a war footing, which involved +great expense and much popular discontent. The grave external crisis was only +solved at the end of March 1909; Germany had had to deliver a veiled ultimatum +at St. Petersburg, the result of which was the rescue of Austria-Hungary from +an awkward situation by the much-advertised appearance of its faithful ally in +shining armour. Simultaneously Serbia had to eat humble pie and declare, with +complete absence of truth, that the annexation of Bosnia and Hercegovina had +not affected its interests. +</p> + +<p> +Meanwhile the internal complications in the southern Slav provinces of +Austria-Hungary were growing formidable. Ever since the summer of 1908 arrests +had been going on among the members of the Croato-Serb coalition, who were +accused of favouring the subversive Pan-Serb movement. The press of +Austria-Hungary magnified the importance of this agitation in order to justify +abroad the pressing need for the formal annexation of Bosnia and Hercegovina. +The fact was that, though immediate danger to the monarchy as a result of the +Pan-Serb agitation was known not to exist, yet in the interests of Austrian +foreign policy, the Serbs had to be compromised in the eyes of Europe, the +Croato-Serb coalition within the Dual Monarchy had to be destroyed to gratify +Budapest in particular, and the religious and political discord between Croat +and Serb, on which the foundation of the power of Austria-Hungary, and +especially that of Hungary, in the south rested, and which was in a fair way of +being eliminated through the efforts of the coalition, had to be revived by +some means or other. It is not possible here to go into the details of the +notorious Agram high treason trial, which was the outcome of all this. It +suffices to say that it was a monstrous travesty of justice which lasted from +March till October 1909, and though it resulted in the ostensible destruction +of the coalition and the imprisonment of many of its members, it defeated its +own ends, as it merely fanned the flame of nationalistic feeling against Vienna +and Budapest, and Croatia has ever since had to be governed virtually by +martial law. This was followed in December 1909 by the even more famous +Friedjung trial. In March 1909 Count Achrenthal had begun in Vienna a violent +press campaign against Serbia, accusing the Serbian Government and dynasty of +complicity in the concoction of nefarious designs and conspiracies against the +integrity of Austria-Hungary. This campaign was thought to be the means of +foreshadowing and justifying the immediate military occupation of Serbia. +Unfortunately its instigator had not been sufficiently particular as to the +choice of his tools and his methods of using them. Among the contributors of +the highly tendencious articles was the well-known historian Dr. Friedjung, who +made extensive use of documents supplied him by the Vienna Foreign Office. His +accusations immediately provoked an action for libel on the part of three +leaders of the Croato-Serb coalition who were implicated, in December 1909. The +trial, which was highly sensational, resulted in the complete vindication and +rehabilitation both of those three Austrian subjects in the eyes of the whole +of Austria-Hungary and of the Belgrade Foreign Office in those of Europe; the +documents on which the charges were based were proven to be partly forgeries, +partly falsified, and partly stolen by various disreputable secret political +agents of the Austrian Foreign Office, and one of the principal Serbian +‘conspirators’, a professor of Belgrade University, proved that he +was in Berlin at the time when he had been accused of presiding over a +revolutionary meeting at Belgrade. But it also resulted in the latter +discrediting of Count Achrenthal as a diplomat and of the methods by which he +conducted the business of the Austrian Foreign Office, and involved his country +in the expenditure of countless millions which it could ill afford. +</p> + +<p> +There never was any doubt that a subversive agitation had been going on, and +that it emanated in part from Serbia, but the Serbian Foreign Office, under the +able management of Dr. Milovanović and Dr. Spalajković (one of the principal +witnesses at the Friedjung trial), was far too clever to allow any of its +members, or indeed any responsible person in Serbia, to be concerned in it, and +the brilliant way in which the clumsy and foolish charges were refuted +redounded greatly to the credit of the Serbian Government. Count Achrenthal had +overreached himself, and moreover the wind had already been taken out of his +sails by the public recantation on Serbia’s part of its pretensions to +Bosnia, which, as already mentioned, took place at the end of March 1909, and +by the simultaneous termination of the international crisis marked by +Russia’s acquiescence in the <i>fait accompli</i> of the annexation. At +the same time the Serbian Crown Prince George, King Peter’s elder son, +who had been the leader of the chauvinist war-party in Serbia, and was somewhat +theatrical in demeanour and irresponsible in character, renounced his rights of +succession in favour of his younger brother Prince Alexander, a much steadier +and more talented young man. It is certain that when he realized how things +were going to develop Count Achrenthal tried to hush up the whole incident, but +it was too late, and Dr. Friedjung insisted on doing what he could to save his +reputation as a historian. In the end he was made the principal scapegoat, +though the press of Vienna voiced its opinion of the Austrian Foreign Office in +no measured tones, saying, amongst other things, that if the conductors of its +diplomacy must use forgeries, they might at any rate secure good ones. +Eventually a compromise was arranged, after the defendant had clearly lost his +case, owing to pressure being brought to bear from outside, and the Serbian +Government refrained from carrying out its threat of having the whole question +threshed out before the Hague Tribunal. +</p> + +<p> +The cumulative effect of all these exciting and trying experiences was the +growth of a distinctly more sympathetic feeling towards Serbia in Europe at +large, and especially a rallying of all the elements throughout the Serb and +Croat provinces of Austria-Hungary, except the extreme clericals of Agram, to +the Serbian cause; briefly, the effect was the exact opposite of that desired +by Vienna and Budapest. Meanwhile events had been happening elsewhere which +revived the drooping interest and flagging hopes of Serbia in the development +of foreign affairs. The attainment of power by the Young Turks and the +introduction of parliamentary government had brought no improvement to the +internal condition of the Ottoman Empire, and the Balkan peoples made no effort +to conceal their satisfaction at the failure of the revolution to bring about +reform by magic. The counter-revolution of April 1909 and the accession of the +Sultan Mohammed V made things no better. In Macedonia, and especially in +Albania, they had been going from bad to worse. The introduction of universal +military service and obligatory payment of taxes caused a revolution in +Albania, where such innovations were not at all appreciated. From 1909 till +1911 there was a state of perpetual warfare in Albania, with which the Young +Turks, in spite of cruel reprisals, were unable to cope, until, in the summer +of that year, Austria threatened to intervene unless order were restored; some +sort of settlement was patched up, and an amnesty was granted to the rebels by +the new Sultan. This unfortunate man, after being rendered almost half-witted +by having been for the greater part of his life kept a prisoner by his brother +the tyrant Abdul Hamid, was now the captive of the Young Turks, and had been +compelled by them to make as triumphal a progress as fears for his personal +safety would allow through the provinces of European Turkey. But it was obvious +to Balkan statesmen that Turkey was only changed in name, and that, if its +threatened regeneration had slightly postponed their plans for its partition +amongst themselves, the ultimate consummation of these plans must be pursued +with, if possible, even greater energy and expedition than before. It was also +seen by the more perspicacious of them that the methods hitherto adopted must +in future be radically altered. A rejuvenated though unreformed Turkey, bent on +self-preservation, could not be despised, and it was understood that if the +revolutionary bands of the three Christian nations (Greece, Serbia, and +Bulgaria) were to continue indefinitely to cut each others’ throats in +Macedonia the tables might conceivably be turned on them. +</p> + +<p> +From 1909 onwards a series of phenomena occurred in the Balkans which ought to +have given warning to the Turks, whose survival in Europe had been due solely +to the fact that the Balkan States had never been able to unite. In the autumn +of 1909 King Ferdinand of Bulgaria met Crown Prince Alexander of Serbia and +made an expedition in his company to Mount Kopaonik in Serbia, renowned for the +beauty of its flora. This must have struck those who remembered the bitter +feelings which had existed between the two countries for years and had been +intensified by the events of 1908. Bulgaria had looked on Serbia’s +failures with persistent contempt, while Serbia had watched Bulgaria’s +successful progress with speechless jealousy, and the memory of Slivnitsa was +not yet obliterated. In the summer of 1910 Prince Nicholas of Montenegro +celebrated the fiftieth anniversary of his reign and his golden wedding. The +festivities were attended by King Ferdinand of Bulgaria and the Crown Prince +Boris, by the Crown Prince Alexander of Serbia and his sister, grandchildren of +Prince Nicholas, by his two daughters the Queen of Italy and the Grand Duchess +Anastasia of Russia, and by their husbands, King Victor Emmanuel and the Grand +Duke Nicholas. The happiness of the venerable ruler, who was as respected +throughout Europe as he was feared throughout his principality, was at the same +time completed by his recognition as king by all the governments and sovereigns +of the continent. The hopes that he would simultaneously introduce a more +liberal form of government amongst his own people were unfortunately +disappointed. +</p> + +<p> +The year 1911, it need scarcely be recalled, was extremely fateful for the +whole of Europe. The growing restlessness and irritability manifested by the +German Empire began to make all the other governments feel exceedingly uneasy. +The French expedition to Fez in April was followed by the Anglo-Franco-German +crisis of July; war was avoided, and France was recognized as virtually master +of Morocco, but the soreness of the diplomatic defeat rendered Germany a still +more trying neighbour than it had been before. The first repercussion was the +war which broke out in September 1911 between Italy and Turkey for the +possession of Tripoli and Cyrenaica, which Italy, with its usual insight, saw +was vital to its position as a Mediterranean power and therefore determined to +acquire before any other power had time or courage to do so. In the Balkans +this was a year of observation and preparation. Serbia, taught by the bitter +lesson of 1908 not to be caught again unprepared, had spent much money and care +on its army during the last few years and had brought it to a much higher state +of efficiency. In Austria-Hungary careful observers wore aware that something +was afoot and that the gaze of Serbia, which from 1903 till 1908 had been +directed westwards to Bosnia and the Adriatic, had since 1908 been fixed on +Macedonia and the Aegean. The actual formation of the Balkan League by King +Ferdinand and M. Venezelos may not have been known, but it was realized that +action of some sort on the part of the Balkan States was imminent, and that +something must be done to forestall it. In February 1912 Count Aehrenthal died, +and was succeeded by Count Berchtold as Austro-Hungarian Minister for Foreign +Affairs. In August of the same year this minister unexpectedly announced his +new and startling proposals for the introduction of reforms in Macedonia, which +nobody in the Balkans who had any material interest in the fate of that +province genuinely desired at that moment; the motto of the new scheme was +‘progressive decentralization’, blessed words which soothed the +great powers as much as they alarmed the Balkan Governments. But already in May +1912 agreements between Bulgaria and Greece and between Bulgaria and Serbia had +been concluded, limiting their respective zones of influence in the territory +which they hoped to conquer. It was, to any one who has any knowledge of Balkan +history, incredible that the various Governments had been able to come to any +agreement at all. That arrived at by Bulgaria and Serbia divided Macedonia +between them in such a way that Bulgaria should obtain central Macedonia with +Monastir and Okhrida, and Serbia northern Macedonia or Old Serbia; there was an +indeterminate zone between the two spheres, including Skoplje (Üsküb, in +Turkish), the exact division of which it was agreed to leave to arbitration at +a subsequent date. +</p> + +<p> +The Macedonian theatre of war was by common consent regarded as the most +important, and Bulgaria here promised Serbia the assistance of 100,000 men. The +Turks meanwhile were aware that all was not what it seemed beyond the +frontiers, and in August 1912 began collecting troops in Thrace, ostensibly for +manoeuvres. During the month of September the patience of the four Governments +of Greece, Bulgaria, Serbia, and Montenegro, which had for years with the +utmost self-control been passively watching the awful sufferings of their +compatriots under Turkish misrule, gradually became exhausted. On September 28 +the four Balkan Governments informed Russia that the Balkan League was an +accomplished fact, and on the 30th the representatives of all four signed the +alliance, and mobilization was ordered in Greece, Bulgaria, and Serbia. The +population of Montenegro was habitually on a war footing, and it was left to +the mountain kingdom from its geographically favourable position to open +hostilities. On October 8 Montenegro declared war on Turkey, and after a series +of brilliant successes along the frontier its forces settled down to the +wearisome and arduous siege of Scutari with its impregnable sentinel, Mount +Taraboš, converted into a modern fortress; the unaccustomed nature of these +tasks, to which the Montenegrin troops, used to the adventures of irregular +warfare, were little suited, tried the valour and patience of the intrepid +mountaineers to the utmost. By that time Europe was in a ferment, and both +Russia and Austria, amazed at having the initiative in the regulation of Balkan +affairs wrested from them, showered on the Balkan capitals threats and +protests, which for once in a way were neglected. +</p> + +<p> +On October 13 Greece, Bulgaria, and Serbia replied that the offer of outside +assistance and advice had come too late, and that they had decided themselves +to redress the intolerable and secular wrongs of their long-suffering +compatriots in Macedonia by force of arms. To their dismay a treaty of peace +was signed at Lausanne about the same time between Turkey and Italy, which +power, it had been hoped, would have distracted Turkey’s attention by a +continuance of hostilities in northern Africa, and at any rate immobilized the +Turkish fleet. Encouraged by this success Turkey boldly declared war on +Bulgaria and Serbia on October 17, hoping to frighten Greece and detach it from +the league; but on the 18th the Greek Government replied by declaring war on +Turkey, thus completing the necessary formalities. The Turks were confident of +an early and easy victory, and hoped to reach Sofia, not from Constantinople +and Thrace, but pushing up north-eastwards from Macedonia. The rapid offensive +of the Serbian army, however, took them by surprise, and they were completely +overwhelmed at the battle of Kumanovo in northern Macedonia on October 23-4, +1912. On the 31st King Peter made his triumphal entry into Skoplje (ex-Üsküb), +the ancient capital of Serbia under Tsar Stephen Dušan in the fourteenth +century. From there the Serbian army pursued the Turks southward, and at the +battles of Prilep (November 5) and Monastir (November 19), after encountering +the most stubborn opposition, finally put an end to their resistance in this +part of the theatre of war. On November 9 the Greeks entered Salonika. +</p> + +<p> +Meanwhile other divisions of the Serbian army had joined hands with the +Montenegrins, and occupied almost without opposition the long-coveted +<i>sandjak</i> of Novi-Pazar (the ancient Serb Raška), to the inexpressible +rage of Austria-Hungary, which had evacuated it in 1908 in favour of its +rightful owner, Turkey. At the same time a Serbian expeditionary corps marched +right through Albania, braving great hardships on the way, and on November 30 +occupied Durazzo, thus securing at last a foothold on the Adriatic. Besides all +this, Serbia, in fulfilment of its treaty obligations, dispatched 50,000 +splendidly equipped men, together with a quantity of heavy siege artillery, to +help the Bulgarians at the siege of Adrianople. On December 3 an armistice was +signed between the belligerents, with the condition that the three besieged +Turkish fortresses of Adrianople, Scutari, and Yanina must not be +re-victualled, and on December 16, 1912, peace negotiations were opened between +representatives of the belligerent countries in London. Meanwhile the Germanic +powers, dismayed by the unexpected victories of the Balkan armies and +humiliated by the crushing defeats in the field of the German-trained Turkish +army, had since the beginning of November been doing everything in their power +to support their client Turkey and prevent its final extinction and at the same +time the blighting of their ambitions eventually to acquire the Empire of the +Near East. During the conference in London between the plenipotentiaries of the +belligerents, parallel meetings took place between the representatives of the +great powers, whose relations with each other were strained and difficult in +the extreme. The Turkish envoys prolonged the negotiations, as was their +custom; they naturally were unwilling to concede their European provinces to +the despised and hated Greek and Slavonic conquerors, but the delays implied +growing hardships for their besieged and starving garrisons in Thrace, Epirus, +and Albania. On January 23, 1913, a quasi-revolution occurred in the Turkish +army, headed by Enver Bey and other Young Turk partisans, and approved by the +Austrian and German embassies, with the object of interrupting the negotiations +and staking all on the result of a final battle. As a result of these events, +and of the palpable disingenuousness of the Turks in continuing the +negotiations in London, the Balkan delegates on January 29 broke them off, and +on February 3, 1913, hostilities were resumed. At length, after a siege of +nearly five months, Adrianople, supplied with infinitely better artillery than +the allies possessed, was taken by the combined Serbian and Bulgarian forces on +March 26, 1913. The Serbian troops at Adrianople captured 17,010 Turkish +prisoners, 190 guns, and the Turkish commander himself, Shukri Pasha. +</p> + +<p> +At the outbreak of the war in the autumn of 1912 the Balkan States had observed +all the conventions, disavowing designs of territorial aggrandizement and +proclaiming their resolve merely to obtain guarantees for the better treatment +of the Christian inhabitants of Macedonia; the powers, for their part, duly +admonished the naughty children of south-eastern Europe to the effect that no +alteration of the territorial <i>status quo ante</i> would under any +circumstances be tolerated. During the negotiations in London, interrupted in +January, and resumed in the spring of 1913 after the fall of Adrianople, it was +soon made clear that in spite of all these magniloquent declarations nothing +would be as it had been before. Throughout the winter Austria-Hungary had been +mobilizing troops and massing them along the frontiers of Serbia and +Montenegro, any increase in the size of which countries meant a crushing blow +to the designs of the Germanic powers and the end to all the dreams embodied in +the phrase ‘Drang nach Osten’ (‘pushing eastwards’). +</p> + +<p> +In the spring of 1913 Serbia and Montenegro, instead of being defeated by the +brave Turks, as had been confidently predicted in Vienna and Berlin would be +the case, found themselves in possession of the <i>sandjak</i> of Novi-Pazar, +of northern and central Macedonia (including Old Serbia), and of the northern +half of Albania. The presence of Serbian troops on the shore of the Adriatic +was more than Austria could stand, and at the renewed conference of London it +was decided that they must retire. In the interests of nationality, in which +the Balkan States themselves undertook the war, it was desirable that at any +rate an attempt should be made to create an independent state of Albania, +though no one who knew the local conditions felt confident as to its ultimate +career. Its creation assuaged the consciences of the Liberal Government in +Great Britain and at the same time admirably suited the strategic plans of +Austria-Hungary. It left that country a loophole for future diplomatic efforts +to disturb the peace of south-eastern Europe, and, with its own army in Bosnia +and its political agents and irregular troops in Albania, Serbia and +Montenegro, even though enlarged as it was generally recognized they must be, +would be held in a vice and could be threatened and bullied from the south now +as well as from the north whenever it was in the interests of Vienna and +Budapest to apply the screw. The independence of Albania was declared at the +conference of London on May 30, 1913. Scutari was included in it as being a +purely Albanian town, and King Nicholas and his army, after enjoying its +coveted flesh-pots for a few halcyon weeks, had, to their mortification, to +retire to the barren fastnesses of the Black Mountain. Serbia, frustrated by +Austria in its attempts, generally recognized as legitimate, to obtain even a +commercial outlet on the Adriatic, naturally again diverted its aims southwards +to Salonika. The Greeks were already in possession of this important city and +seaport, as well as of the whole of southern Macedonia. The Serbs were in +possession of central and northern Macedonia, including Monastir and Okhrida, +which they had at great sacrifices conquered from the Turks. It had been agreed +that Bulgaria, as its share of the spoils, should have all central Macedonia, +with Monastir and Okhrida, although on ethnical grounds the Bulgarians have +only very slightly better claim to the country and towns west of the Vardar +than any of the other Balkan nationalities. But at the time that the agreement +had been concluded it had been calculated in Greece and Serbia that Albania, +far from being made independent, would be divided between them, and that +Serbia, assured of a strip of coast on the Adriatic, would have no interest in +the control of the river Vardar and of the railway which follows its course +connecting the interior of Serbia with the port of Salonika. Greece and Serbia +had no ground whatever for quarrel and no cause for mutual distrust, and they +were determined, for political and commercial reasons, to have a considerable +extent of frontier from west to east in common. The creation of an independent +Albania completely altered the situation. If Bulgaria should obtain central +Macedonia and thus secure a frontier from north to south in common with the +newly-formed state of Albania, then Greece would be at the mercy of its +hereditary enemies the Bulgars and Arnauts (Albanians) as it had previously +been at the mercy of the Turks, while Serbia would have two frontiers between +itself and the sea instead of one, as before, and its complete economic +strangulation would be rendered inevitable and rapid. Bulgaria for its own part +naturally refused to waive its claim to central Macedonia, well knowing that +the master of the Vardar valley is master of the Balkan peninsula. The first +repercussion of the ephemeral treaty of London of May 30, 1913, which created +Albania and shut out Serbia from the Adriatic, was, therefore, as the diplomacy +of the Germanic powers had all along intended it should be, the beginning of a +feud between Greece and Serbia on the one hand, and Bulgaria on the other, the +disruption of the Balkan League and the salvation, for the ultimate benefit of +Germany, of what was left of Turkey in Europe. +</p> + +<p> +The dispute as to the exact division of the conquered territory in Macedonia +between Serbia and Bulgaria had, as arranged, been referred to arbitration, +and, the Tsar of Russia having been chosen as judge, the matter was being +threshed out in St. Petersburg during June 1913. Meanwhile Bulgaria, determined +to make good its claim to the chestnuts which Greece and Serbia had pulled out +of the Turkish fire, was secretly collecting troops along its temporary +south-western frontier[1] with the object, in approved Germanic fashion, of +suddenly invading and occupying all Macedonia, and, by the presentation of an +irrevocable <i>fait accompli</i>, of relieving the arbitrator of his invidious +duties or at any rate assisting him in the task. +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: This was formed by the stream Zletovska, a tributary of the river +Bregalnica, which in its turn falls into the Vardar on its left or eastern bank +about 40 miles south of Skoplje (Üsküb).] +</p> + +<p> +On the other hand, the relations between Bulgaria and its two allies had been +noticeably growing worse ever since January 1913; Bulgaria felt aggrieved that, +in spite of its great sacrifices, it had not been able to occupy so much +territory as Greece and Serbia, and the fact that Adrianople was taken with +Serbian help did not improve the feeling between the two Slav nations. The +growth of Bulgarian animosity put Greece and Serbia on their guard, and, well +knowing the direction which an eventual attack would take, these two countries +on June 2, 1913, signed a military convention and made all the necessary +dispositions for resisting any aggression on Bulgaria’s part. At one +o’clock in the morning of June 30 the Bulgarians, without provocation, +without declaration of war, and without warning, crossed the Bregalnica (a +tributary of the Vardar) and attacked the Serbs. A most violent battle ensued +which lasted for several days; at some points the Bulgarians, thanks to the +suddenness of their offensive, were temporarily successful, but gradually the +Serbs regained the upper hand and by July 1 the Bulgarians were beaten. The +losses were very heavy on both sides, but the final issue was a complete +triumph for the Serbian army. Slivnitsa was avenged by the battle of the +Bregalnica, just as Kosovo was by that of Kumanovo. After a triumphant campaign +of one month, in which the Serbs were joined by the Greeks, Bulgaria had to bow +to the inevitable. The Rumanian army had invaded northern Bulgaria, bent on +maintaining the Balkan equilibrium and on securing compensation for having +observed neutrality during the war of 1912-13, and famine reigned at Sofia. A +conference was arranged at Bucarest, and the treaty of that name was signed +there on August 10, 1913. By the terms of this treaty Serbia retained the whole +of northern and central Macedonia, including Monastir and Okhrida, and the +famous <i>sandjak</i> of Novi-Pazar was divided between Serbia and Montenegro. +Some districts of east-central Macedonia, which were genuinely Bulgarian, were +included in Serbian territory, as Serbia naturally did not wish, after the +disquieting and costly experience of June and July 1913, to give the Bulgarians +another chance of separating Greek from Serbian territory by a fresh surprise +attack, and the further the Bulgarians could be kept from the Vardar river and +railway the less likelihood there was of this. The state of feeling in the +Germanic capitals and in Budapest after this ignominious defeat of their +protégé Bulgaria and after this fresh triumph of the despised and hated +Serbians can be imagined. Bitterly disappointed first at seeing the Turks +vanquished by the Balkan League—their greatest admirers could not even +claim that the Turks had had any ‘moral’ victories—their +chagrin, when they saw the Bulgarians trounced by the Serbians, knew no bounds. +That the secretly prepared attack on Serbia by Bulgaria was planned in Vienna +and Budapest there is no doubt. That Bulgaria was justified in feeling +disappointment and resentment at the result of the first Balkan War no one +denies, but the method chosen to redress its wrongs could only have been +suggested by the Germanic school of diplomacy. +</p> + +<p> +In Serbia and Montenegro the result of the two successive Balkan Wars, though +these had exhausted the material resources of the two countries, was a +justifiable return of national self-confidence and rejoicing such as the +people, humiliated and impoverished as it had habitually been by its internal +and external troubles, had not known for very many years. At last Serbia and +Montenegro had joined hands. At last Old Serbia was restored to the free +kingdom. At last Skoplje, the mediaeval capital of Tsar Stephen Dušan, was +again in Serbian territory. At last one of the most important portions of +unredeemed Serbia had been reclaimed. Amongst the Serbs and Croats of Bosnia, +Hercegovina, Dalmatia, Croatia, Slavonia, and southern Hungary the effect of +the Serbian victories was electrifying. Military prowess had been the one +quality with which they, and indeed everybody else, had refused to credit the +Serbians of the kingdom, and the triumphs of the valiant Serbian peasant +soldiers immediately imparted a heroic glow to the country whose very name, at +any rate in central Europe, had become a byword, and a synonym for failure; +Belgrade became the cynosure and the rallying-centre of the whole +Serbo-Croatian race. But Vienna and Budapest could only lose courage and +presence of mind for the moment, and the undeniable success of the Serbian arms +merely sharpened their appetite for revenge. In August 1913 Austria-Hungary, as +is now known, secretly prepared an aggression on Serbia, but was restrained, +partly by the refusal of Italy to grant its approval of such action, partly +because the preparations of Germany at that time were not complete. The +fortunate Albanian question provided, for the time being, a more convenient rod +with which to beat Serbia. Some Serbian troops had remained in possession of +certain frontier towns and districts which were included in the territory of +the infant state of Albania pending the final settlement of the frontiers by a +commission. On October 18, 1913, Austria addressed an ultimatum to Serbia to +evacuate these, as its continued occupation of them caused offence and disquiet +to the Dual Monarchy. Serbia meekly obeyed. Thus passed away the last rumble of +the storms which had filled the years 1912-13 in south-eastern Europe. +</p> + +<p> +The credulous believed that the Treaty of Bucarest had at last brought peace to +that distracted part of the world. Those who knew their central Europe realized +that Berlin had only forced Vienna to acquiesce in the Treaty of Bucarest +because the time had not yet come. But come what might, Serbia and Montenegro, +by having linked up their territory and by forming a mountain barrier from the +Danube to the Adriatic, made it far more difficult for the invader to push his +way through to the East than it would have been before the battles of Kumanovo +and Bregalnica. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="part04"></a>GREECE</h2> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="chap21"></a>1<br/> +<i>From Ancient to Modern Greece</i></h2> + +<p> +The name of Greece has two entirely different associations in our minds. +Sometimes it calls up a wonderful literature enshrined in a ‘dead +language’, and exquisite works of a vanished art recovered by the spade; +at other times it is connected with the currant-trade returns quoted on the +financial page of our newspapers or with the ‘Balance of Power’ +discussed in their leading articles. Ancient and Modern Greece both mean much +to us, but usually we are content to accept them as independent phenomena, and +we seldom pause to wonder whether there is any deeper connexion between them +than their name. It is the purpose of these pages to ask and give some answer +to this question. +</p> + +<p> +The thought that his own Greece might perish, to be succeeded by another Greece +after the lapse of more than two thousand years, would have caused an Ancient +Greek surprise. In the middle of the fifth century B.C., Ancient Greek +civilization seemed triumphantly vigorous and secure. A generation before, it +had flung back the onset of a political power which combined all the momentum +of all the other contemporary civilizations in the world; and the victory had +proved not merely the superiority of Greek arms—the Spartan spearman and +the Athenian galley—but the superior vitality of Greek politics—the +self-governing, self-sufficing city-state. In these cities a wonderful culture +had burst into flower—an art expressing itself with equal mastery in +architecture, sculpture, and drama, a science which ranged from the most +practical medicine to the most abstract mathematics, and a philosophy which +blended art, science, and religion into an ever-developing and ever more +harmonious view of the universe. A civilization so brilliant and so versatile +as this seemed to have an infinite future before it, yet even here death lurked +in ambush. +</p> + +<p> +When the cities ranged themselves in rival camps, and squandered their strength +on the struggle for predominance, the historian of the Peloponnesian war could +already picture Athens and Sparta in ruins,[1] and the catastrophe began to +warp the soul of Plato before he had carried Greek philosophy to its zenith. +This internecine strife of free communities was checked within a century by the +imposition of a single military autocracy over them all, and Alexander the +Great crowned his father Philip’s work by winning new worlds for +Hellenism from the Danube to the Ganges and from the Oxus to the Nile. The +city-state and its culture were to be propagated under his aegis, but this +vision vanished with Alexander’s death, and Macedonian militarism proved +a disappointment. The feuds of these crowned condottieri harassed the cities +more sorely than their own quarrels, and their arms could not even preserve the +Hellenic heritage against external foes. The Oriental rallied and expelled +Hellenism again from the Asiatic hinterland, while the new cloud of Rome was +gathering in the west. In four generations[2] of the most devastating warfare +the world had seen, Rome conquered all the coasts of the Mediterranean. Greek +city and Greek dynast went down before her, and the political sceptre passed +irrevocably from the Hellenic nation. +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: Thucydides, Book I, chap. 10.] +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 2: 264-146 B.C.] +</p> + +<p> +Yet this political abdication seemed to open for Hellenic culture a future more +brilliant and assured than ever. Rome could organize as well as conquer. She +accepted the city-state as the municipal unit of the Roman Empire, thrust back +the Oriental behind the Euphrates, and promoted the Hellenization of all the +lands between this river-frontier and the Balkans with much greater intensity +than the Macedonian imperialists. Her political conquests were still further +counterbalanced by her spiritual surrender, and Hellenism was the soul of the +new Latin culture which Rome created, and which advanced with Roman government +over the vast untutored provinces of the west and north, bringing them, too, +within the orbit of Hellenic civilization. Under the shadow of the Roman +Empire, Plutarch, the mirror of Hellenism, could dwell in peace in his little +city-state of Chaeronea, and reflect in his writings all the achievements of +the Hellenic spirit as an ensample to an apparently endless posterity. +</p> + +<p> +Yet the days of Hellenic culture were also numbered. Even Plutarch lived[1] to +look down from the rocky citadel of Chaeronea upon Teutonic raiders wasting the +Kephisos vale, and for more than three centuries successive hordes of Goths +searched out and ravaged the furthest corners of European Greece. Then the +current set westward to sweep away[2] the Roman administration in the Latin +provinces, and Hellenism seemed to have been granted a reprieve. The Greek +city-state of Byzantium on the Black Sea Straits had been transformed into the +Roman administrative centre of Constantinople, and from this capital the +Emperor Justinian in the sixth century A.D. still governed and defended the +whole Greek-speaking world. But this political glamour only threw the symptoms +of inward dissolution into sharper relief. Within the framework of the Empire +the municipal liberty of the city-state had been stifled and extinguished by +the waxing jungle of bureaucracy, and the spiritual culture which the +city-state fostered, and which was more essential to Hellenism than any +political institutions, had been part ejected, part exploited, and wholly +compromised by a new gospel from the east. +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: About A.D. 100] +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 2: A.D. 404-476] +</p> + +<p> +While the Oriental had been compelled by Rome to draw his political frontier at +the Euphrates, and had failed so far to cross the river-line, he had maintained +his cultural independence within sight of the Mediterranean. In the hill +country of Judah, overlooking the high road between Antioch and Alexandria, the +two chief foci of Hellenism in the east which the Macedonians had founded, and +which had grown to maturity under the aegis of Rome, there dwelt a little +Semitic community which had defied all efforts of Greek or Roman to assimilate +it, and had finally given birth to a world religion about the time that a Roman +punitive expedition razed its holy city of Jerusalem to the ground.[1] +Christianity was charged with an incalculable force, which shot like an +electric current from one end of the Roman Empire to the other. The +highly-organized society of its adherents measured its strength in several +sharp conflicts with the Imperial administration, from which it emerged +victorious, and it was proclaimed the official religious organization of the +Empire by the very emperor that founded Constantinople.[2] +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: A.D. 70.] +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 2: Constantine the Great recognized Christianity in A.D. 313 and +founded Constantinople in A.D. 328.] +</p> + +<p> +The established Christian Church took the best energies of Hellenism into its +service. The Greek intellectuals ceased to become lecturers and professors, to +find a more human and practical career in the bishop’s office. The Nicene +Creed, drafted by an ‘oecumenical’ conference of bishops under the +auspices of Constantine himself,[1] was the last notable formulation of Ancient +Greek philosophy. The cathedral of Aya Sophia, with which Justinian adorned +Constantinople, was the last original creation of Ancient Greek art.[2] The +same Justinian closed the University of Athens, which had educated the world +for nine hundred years and more, since Plato founded his college in the +Academy. Six recalcitrant professors went into exile for their spiritual +freedom, but they found the devout Zoroastrianism of the Persian court as +unsympathetic as the devout Christianity of the Roman. Their humiliating return +and recantation broke the ‘Golden Chain’ of Hellenic thought for +ever. +</p> + +<p> +Hellenism was thus expiring from its own inanition, when the inevitable +avalanche overwhelmed it from without. In the seventh century A.D. there was +another religious eruption in the Semitic world, this time in the heart of +Arabia, where Hellenism had hardly penetrated, and under the impetus of Islam +the Oriental burst his bounds again after a thousand years. Syria was reft away +from the Empire, and Egypt, and North Africa as far as the Atlantic, and their +political severance meant their cultural loss to Greek civilization. Between +the Koran and Hellenism no fusion was possible. Christianity had taken +Hellenism captive, but Islam gave it no quarter, and the priceless library of +Alexandria is said to have been condemned by the caliph’s order to feed +the furnaces of the public baths. +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: A.D. 325.] +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 2: Completed A.D. 538.] +</p> + +<p> +While Hellenism was thus cut short in the east, a mortal blow was struck at its +heart from the north. The Teuton had raided and passed on, but the lands he had +depopulated were now invaded by immigrants who had come to stay. As soon as the +last Goth and Lombard had gone west of the Isonzo, the Slavs poured in from the +north-eastern plains of Europe through the Moravian gap, crossed the Danube +somewhere near the site of Vienna, and drifted down along the eastern face of +the Alps upon the Adriatic littoral. Rebuffed by the sea-board, the Slavonic +migration was next deflected east, and filtered through the Bosnian mountains, +scattering the Latin-speaking provincials before it to left and right, until it +debouched upon the broad basin of the river Morava. In this concentration-area +it gathered momentum during the earlier part of the seventh century A.D., and +then burst out with irresistible force in all directions, eastward across the +Maritsa basin till it reached the Black Sea, and southward down the Vardar to +the shores of the Aegean. +</p> + +<p> +Beneath this Slavonic flood the Greek race in Europe was engulfed. A few +fortified cities held out, Adrianople on the Maritsa continued to cover +Constantinople; Salonika at the mouth of the Vardar survived a two hundred +years siege; while further south Athens, Korinth, and Patras escaped +extinction. But the tide of invasion surged around their walls. The Slavs +mastered all the open country, and, pressing across the Korinthian Gulf, +established themselves in special force throughout the Peloponnesos. The +thoroughness of their penetration is witnessed to this day by the Slavonic +names which still cling to at least a third of the villages, rivers, and +mountains in European Greece, and are found in the most remote as well as in +the most accessible quarters of the land.[1] +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: For example: Tsimova and Panitsa in the Tainaron peninsula +(Maina); Tsoupana and Khrysapha in Lakonia; Dhimitzana, Karytena, and +Andhritsena in the centre of Peloponnesos, and Vostitsa on its north coast; +Dobrena and Kaprena in Boiotia; Vonitza on the Gulf of Arta; Kardhitsa in the +Thessalian plain.] +</p> + +<p> +With the coming of the Slavs darkness descends like a curtain upon Greek +history. We catch glimpses of Arab hosts ranging across Anatolia at will and +gazing at Slavonic hordes across the narrow Bosphorus. But always the Imperial +fleet patrols the waters between, and always the triple defences of +Constantinople defy the assailant. Then after about two centuries the floods +subside, the gloom disperses, and the Greek world emerges into view once more. +But the spectacle before us is unfamiliar, and most of the old landmarks have +been swept away. +</p> + +<p> +By the middle of the ninth century A.D., the Imperial Government had reduced +the Peloponnesos to order again, and found itself in the presence of three +peoples. The greater part of the land was occupied by +‘Romaioi’—normal, loyal, Christian subjects of the +empire—but in the hilly country between Eurotas, Taygetos, and the sea, +two Slavonic tribes still maintained themselves in defiant savagery and +worshipped their Slavonic gods, while beyond them the peninsula of Tainaron, +now known as Maina, sheltered communities which still clung to the pagan name +of Hellene and knew no other gods but Zeus, Athena, and Apollo. Hellene and +Slav need not concern us. They were a vanishing minority, and the Imperial +Government was more successful in obliterating their individuality than in +making them contribute to its exchequer. The future lay with the Romaioi. +</p> + +<p> +The speech of these Romaioi was not the speech of Rome. ‘Romaikà,’ +as it is still called popularly in the country-side, is a development of the +‘koinè’ or ‘current’ dialect of Ancient Greek, in which +the Septuagint and the New Testament are written. The vogue of these books +after the triumph of Christianity and the oncoming of the Dark Age, when they +were the sole intellectual sustenance of the people, gave the idiom in which +they were composed an exclusive prevalence. Except in Tzakonia—the +iron-bound coast between Cape Malea and Nauplia Bay—all other dialects of +Ancient Greek became extinct, and the varieties of the modern language are all +differentiations of the ‘koinè’, along geographical lines which in +no way correspond with those which divided Doric from Ionian. Yet though Romaic +is descended from the ‘koinè’, it is almost as far removed from it +as modern Italian is from the language of St. Augustine or Cicero. Ancient +Greek possessed a pitch-accent only, which allowed the quantitative values of +syllables to be measured against one another, and even to form the basis of a +metrical system. In Romaic the pitch-accent has transformed itself into a +stress-accent almost as violent as the English, which has destroyed all +quantitative relation between accented and unaccented syllables, often wearing +away the latter altogether at the termination of words, and always +impoverishing their vowel sounds. In the ninth century A.D. this new +enunciation was giving rise to a new poetical technique founded upon accent and +rhyme, which first essayed itself in folk-songs and ballads,[1] and has since +experimented in the same variety of forms as English poetry. +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: The earliest products of the modern technique were called +‘city’ verses, because they originated in Constantinople, which has +remained ‘the city’ <i>par excellence</i> for the Romaic Greek ever +since the Dark Age made it the asylum of his civilization.] +</p> + +<p> +These humble beginnings of a new literature were supplemented by the rudiments +of a new art. Any visitor at Athens who looks at the three tiny churches [1] +built in this period of first revival, and compares them with the rare +pre-Norman churches of England, will find the same promise of vitality in the +Greek architecture as in his own. The material—worked blocks of marble +pillaged from ancient monuments, alternating with courses of contemporary +brick—produces a completely new aesthetic effect upon the eye; and the +structure—a grouping of lesser cupolas round a central dome— is the +very antithesis of the ‘upright-and-horizontal’ style which +confronts him in ruins upon the Akropolis. +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: The Old Metropolitan, the Kapnikaria, and St. Theodore.] +</p> + +<p> +These first achievements of Romaic architecture speak by implication of the +characteristic difference between the Romaios and the Hellene. The linguistic +and the aesthetic change were as nothing compared to the change in religion, +for while the Hellene had been a pagan, the Romaios was essentially a member of +the Christian Church. Yet this new and determining characteristic was already +fortified by tradition. The Church triumphant had swiftly perfected its +organisation on the model of the Imperial bureaucracy. Every Romaios owed +ecclesiastical allegiance, through a hierarchy of bishops and metropolitans, to +a supreme patriarch at Constantinople, and in the ninth century this +administrative segregation of the imperial from the west-European Church had +borne its inevitable fruit in a dogmatic divergence, and ripened into a schism +between the Orthodox Christianity of the east on the one hand and the +Catholicism of the Latin world on the other. +</p> + +<p> +The Orthodox Church exercised an important cultural influence over its Romaic +adherents. The official language of its scriptures, creeds, and ritual had +never ceased to be the Ancient Greek ‘koinè’ and by keeping the +Romaios familiar with this otherwise obsolete tongue it kept him in touch with +the unsurpassable literature of his Ancient Greek predecessors. The vast body +of Hellenic literature had perished during the Dark Age, when all the energies +of the race were absorbed by the momentary struggle for survival; but about a +third of the greatest authors’ greatest works had been preserved, and now +that the stress was relieved, the wreckage of the remainder was sedulously +garnered in anthologies, abridgements, and encyclopaedias. The rising +monasteries offered a safe harbourage both for these compilations and for such +originals as survived unimpaired, and in their libraries they were henceforth +studied, cherished, and above all recopied with more or less systematic care. +</p> + +<p> +The Orthodox Church was thus a potent link between past and present, but the +most direct link of all was the political survival of the Empire. Here, too, +many landmarks had been swept away. The marvellous system of Roman Law had +proved too subtle and complex for a world in the throes of dissolution. Within +a century of its final codification by Justinian’s commissioners) it had +begun to fall into disuse, and was now replaced by more summary legislation, +which was as deeply imbued with Mosaic principles as the literary language with +the Hebraisms of the New Testament, and bristled with barbarous applications of +the <i>Lex Talionis</i>. The administrative organization instituted by Augustus +and elaborated by Diocletian had likewise disappeared, and the army-corps +districts were the only territorial units that outlasted the Dark Age. Yet the +tradition of order lived on. The army itself preserved Roman discipline and +technique to a remarkable degree, and the military districts were already +becoming the basis for a reconstituted civil government. The wealth of Latin +technicalities incorporated in the Greek style of ninth-century officialdom +witnesses to this continuity with the past and to the consequent political +superiority of the Romaic Empire over contemporary western Europe. +</p> + +<p> +Within the Imperial frontiers the Romaic race was offered an apparently secure +field for its future development. In the Balkan peninsula the Slav had been +expelled or assimilated to the south of a line stretching from Avlona to +Salonika. East of Salonika the empire still controlled little more in Europe +than the ports of the littoral, and a military highway linking them with each +other and with Constantinople. But beyond the Bosphorus the frontier included +the whole body of Anatolia as far as Taurus and Euphrates, and here was the +centre of gravity both of the Romaic state and of the Romaic nation. +</p> + +<p> +A new Greek nation had in fact come into being, and it found itself in touch +with new neighbours, whom the Ancient Greek had never known. Eastward lay the +Armenians, reviving, like the Greeks, after the ebb of the Arab flood, and the +Arabs themselves, quiescent within their natural bounds and transfusing the +wisdom of Aristotle and Hippokrates into their native culture. Both these +peoples were sundered from the Orthodox Greek by religion[1] as well as by +language, but a number of nationalities established on his opposite flank had +been evangelized from Constantinople and followed the Orthodox patriarch in his +schism with Rome. The most important neighbour of the Empire in this quarter +was the Bulgarian kingdom, which covered all the Balkan hinterland from the +Danube and the Black Sea to the barrier-fortresses of Adrianople and Salonika. +It had been founded by a conquering caste of non-Slavonic nomads from the +trans-Danubian steppes, but these were completely absorbed in the Slavonic +population which they had endowed with their name and had preserved by +political consolidation from the fate of their brethren further south. This +Bulgarian state included a large ‘Vlach’ element descended from +those Latin-speaking provincials whom the Slavs had pushed before them in their +original migration; while the main body of the ‘Rumans’, whom the +same thrust of invasion had driven leftwards across the Danube, had established +itself in the mountains of Transylvania, and was just beginning to push down +into the Wallachian and Moldavian plains. Like the Bulgars, this Romance +population had chosen the Orthodox creed, and so had the purely Slavonic Serbs, +who had replaced the Rumans in the basin of the Morava and the Bosnian hills, +as far westward as the Adriatic coast. Beyond, the heathen Magyars had pressed +into the Danubian plains like a wedge, and cut off the Orthodox world from the +Latin-Teutonic Christendom of the west; but it looked as though the two +divisions of Europe were embarked upon the same course of development. Both +were evolving a system of strongly-knit nationalities, neither wholly +interdependent nor wholly self-sufficient, but linked together in their +individual growth by the ties of common culture and religion. In both the +darkness was passing. The future of civilization seemed once more assured, and +in the Orthodox world the new Greek nation seemed destined to play the leading +part. +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: The Armenians split off from the Catholic Church four centuries +before the schism between the Roman and Orthodox sections of the latter.] +</p> + +<p> +His cultural and political heritage from his ancient predecessors gave the +Romaic Greek in this period of revival an inestimable advantage over his cruder +neighbours, and his superiority declared itself in an expansion of the Romaic +Empire. In the latter half of the tenth century A.D. the nest of Arab pirates +from Spain, which had established itself in Krete and terrorized the Aegean, +was exterminated by the Emperor Nikiphóros Phokas, and on the eastern marches +Antioch was gathered within the frontier at the Arabs’ expense, and +advanced posts pushed across Euphrates. In the first half of the eleventh +century Basil, ‘Slayer of the Bulgars’, destroyed the Balkan +kingdom after a generation of bitter warfare, and brought the whole interior of +the peninsula under the sway of Constantinople. His successors turned their +attention to the cast again, and attracted one Armenian principality after +another within the Imperial protectorate. Nor was the revival confined to +politics. The conversion of the Russians about A.D. 1000 opened a boundless +hinterland to the Orthodox Church, and any one who glances at a series of Greek +ivory carvings or studies Greek history from the original sources, will here +encounter a literary and artistic renaissance remarkable enough to explain the +fascination which the barbarous Russian and the outlandish Armenian found in +Constantinople. Yet this renaissance had hardly set in before it was paralysed +by an unexpected blow, which arrested the development of Modern Greece for +seven centuries. +</p> + +<p> +Modern, like Ancient, Greece was assailed in her infancy by a conqueror from +the east, and, unlike Ancient Greece, she succumbed. Turkish nomads from the +central Asiatic steppes had been drifting into the Moslem world as the vigour +of the Arabs waned. First they came as slaves, then as mercenaries, until at +last, in the eleventh century, the clan of Seljuk grasped with a strong hand +the political dominion of Islam. As champions of the caliph the Turkish sultans +disputed the infidels encroachment on the Moslem border. They challenged the +Romaic Empire’s progress in Armenia, and in A.D. 1071—five years +after the Norman founded at Hastings the strong government which has been the +making of England—the Seljuk Turk shattered at the battle of Melasgerd +that heritage of strong government which had promised so much to Greece. +</p> + +<p> +Melasgerd opened the way to Anatolia. The Arab could make no lodgement there, +but in the central steppe of the temperate plateau the Turk found a miniature +reproduction of his original environment. Tribe after tribe crossed the Oxus, +to make the long pilgrimage to these new marches which their race had won for +Islam on the west, and the civilization developed in the country by fifteen +centuries of intensive and undisturbed Hellenization was completely blotted +out. The cities wore isolated from one another till their commerce fell into +decay. The elaborately cultivated lands around them were left fallow till they +were good for nothing but the pasturage which was all that the nomad required. +The only monuments of architecture that have survived in Anatolia above ground +are the imposing khans or fortified rest-houses built by the Seljuk sultans +themselves after the consolidation of their rule, and they are the best +witnesses of the vigorous barbarism by which Romaic culture was effaced. The +vitality of the Turk was indeed unquestionable. He imposed his language and +religion upon the native Anatolian peasantry, as the Greek had imposed his +before him, and in time adopted their sedentary life, though too late to repair +the mischief his own nomadism had wrought. Turk and Anatolian coalesced into +one people; every mountain, river, lake, bridge, and village in the country +took on a Turkish name, and a new nation was established for ever in the heart +of the Romaic world, which nourished itself on the life-blood of the Empire and +was to prove the supreme enemy, of the race. +</p> + +<p> +This sequel to Melasgerd sealed the Empire’s doom. Robbed of its +Anatolian governing class and its Anatolian territorial army, it ceased to be +self-sufficient, and the defenders it attracted from the west were at least as +destructive as its eastern foes. The brutal régime of the Turks in the +pilgrimage places of Syria had roused a storm of indignation in Latin Europe, +and a cloud gathered in the west once more. It was heralded by adventurers from +Normandy, who had first served the Romaic Government as mercenaries in southern +Italy and then expelled their employers, about the time of Melasgerd, from +their last foothold in the peninsula. Raids across the straits of Otranto +carried the Normans up to the walls of Salonika, their fleets equipped in +Sicily scoured the Aegean, and, before the eleventh century was out, they had +followed up these reconnoitring expeditions by conducting Latin Christendom on +its first crusade. The crusaders assembled at Constantinople, and the Imperial +Government was relieved when the flood rolled on and spent itself further east. +But one wave was followed by another, and the Empire itself succumbed to the +fourth. In A.D. 1204, Constantinople was stormed by a Venetian flotilla and the +crusading host it conveyed on board, and more treasures of Ancient Hellenism +were destroyed in the sack of its hitherto inviolate citadel than had ever +perished by the hand of Arab or Slav. +</p> + +<p> +With the fall of the capital the Empire dissolved in chaos, Venice and Genoa, +the Italian trading cities whose fortune had been made by the crusades, now +usurped the naval control of the Mediterranean which the Empire had exercised +since Nikiphóros pacified Krete. They seized all strategical points of vantage +on the Aegean coasts, and founded an ‘extra-territorial’ community +at Pera across the Golden Horn, to monopolize the trade of Constantinople with +the Black Sea. The Latins failed to retain their hold on Constantinople itself, +for the puppet emperors of their own race whom they enthroned there were +evicted within a century by Romaic dynasts, who clung to such fragments of +Anatolia as had escaped the Turk. But the Latin dominion was less ephemeral in +the southernmost Romaic provinces of Europe. The Latins’ castles, more +conspicuous than the relics of Hellas, still crown many high hills in Greece, +and their French tongue has added another strain, to the varied nomenclature of +the country.[1] Yet there also pandemonium prevailed. Burgundian barons, +Catalan condottieri, and Florentine bankers snatched the Duchy of Athens from +one another in bewildering succession, while the French princes of Achaia were +at feud with their kindred vassals in the west of the Peloponnesos whenever +they were not resisting the encroachments of Romaic despots in the south and +east. To complete the anarchy, the non-Romaic peoples in the interior of the +Balkan peninsula had taken the fall of Constantinople as a signal to throw off +the Imperial yoke. In the hinterland of the capital the Bulgars had +reconstituted their kingdom. The Romance-speaking Vlachs of Pindus moved down +into the Thessalian plains. The aboriginal Albanians, who with their back to +the Adriatic had kept the Slavs at bay, asserted their vitality and sent out +migratory swarms to the south, which entered the service of the warring +princelets and by their prowess won broad lands in every part of continental +Greece, where Albanian place-names are to this day only less common than +Slavonic. South-eastern Europe was again in the throes of social dissolution, +and the convulsions continued till they were stilled impartially by the numbing +hand of their ultimate author the Turk. +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: e.g. Klemoutsi, Glarentsa (Clarence) and Gastouni—villages +of the currant district in Peloponnesos—and Sant-Omeri, the mountain that +overlooks them.] +</p> + +<p> +The Seljuk sultanate in Anatolia, shaken by the crusades, had gone the way of +all oriental empires to make room for one of its fractions, which showed a most +un-oriental faculty of organic growth. This was the extreme march on the +north-western rim of the Anatolian plateau, overlooking the Asiatic littoral of +the Sea of Marmora. It had been founded by one of those Turkish chiefs who +migrated with their clans from beyond the Oxus; and it was consolidated by +Othman his son, who extended his kingdom to the cities on the coast and +invested his subjects with his own name. In 1355 the Narrows of Gallipoli +passed into Ottoman hands, and opened a bridge to unexpected conquests in +Europe. Serbia and Bulgaria collapsed at the first attack, and the hosts which +marched to liberate them from Hungary and from France only ministered to +Ottoman prestige by their disastrous discomfiture. Before the close of the +fourteenth century the Ottoman sultan had transferred his capital to +Adrianople, and had become immeasurably the strongest power in the Balkan +peninsula. +</p> + +<p> +After that the end came quickly. At Constantinople the Romaic dynasty of +Palaiologos had upheld a semblance of the Empire for more than a century after +the Latin was expelled. But in 1453 the Imperial city fell before the assault +of Sultan Mohammed; and before his death the conqueror eliminated all the other +Romaic and Latin principalities from Peloponnesos to Trebizond, which had +survived as enclaves to mar the uniformity of the Ottoman domain. Under his +successors the tide of Ottoman conquest rolled on for half a century more over +south-eastern Europe, till it was stayed on land beneath the ramparts of +Vienna,[1] and culminated on sea, after the systematic reduction of the +Venetian strongholds, in the capture of Rhodes from the Knights of St. John.[2] +The Romaic race, which had been split into so many fragments during the +dissolution of the Empire, was reunited again in the sixteenth century under +the common yoke of the Turk. +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: 1526.] +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 2: 1522.] +</p> + +<p> +Even in the Dark Age, Greece had hardly been reduced to so desperate a +condition as now. Through the Dark Age the Greek cities had maintained a +continuous life, but Mohammed II depopulated Constantinople to repeople it with +a Turkish majority from Anatolia. Greek commerce would naturally have benefited +by the ejection of the Italians from the Levant, had not the Ottoman Government +given asylum simultaneously to the Jews expelled from Spain. These Sephardim +established themselves at Constantinople, Salonika, and all the other +commercial centres of the Ottoman dominion, and their superiority in numbers +and industry made them more formidable urban rivals of the Greeks than the +Venetians and Genoese had ever been. +</p> + +<p> +Ousted from the towns, the Greek race depended for its preservation on the +peasantry, yet Greece had never suffered worse rural oppression than under the +Ottoman régime. The sultan’s fiscal demands were the least part of the +burden. The paralysing land-tax, collected in kind by irresponsible middlemen, +was an inheritance from the Romaic Empire, and though it was now reinforced by +the special capitation-tax levied by the sultan on his Christian subjects, the +greater efficiency and security of his government probably compensated for the +additional charge. The vitality of Greece was chiefly sapped by the ruthless +military organization of the Ottoman state. The bulk of the Ottoman army was +drawn from a feudal cavalry, bound to service, as in the mediaeval Latin world, +in return for fiefs or ‘timaria’ assigned to them by their +sovereign; and many beys and agas have bequeathed their names in perpetuity to +the richest villages on the Messenian and Thessalian plains, to remind the +modern peasant that his Christian ancestors once tilled the soil as serfs of a +Moslem timariot. But the sultan, unlike his western contemporaries, was not +content with irregular troops, and the serf-communes of Greece had to deliver +up a fifth of their male children every fourth year to be trained at +Constantinople as professional soldiers and fanatical Moslems. This corps of +‘Janissaries’[1] was founded in the third generation of the Ottoman +dynasty, and was the essential instrument of its military success. One race has +never appropriated and exploited the vitality of another in so direct or so +brutal a fashion, and the institution of ‘tribute-children’, so +long as it lasted, effectually prevented any recovery of the Greek nation from +the untimely blows which had stricken it down. +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: Yeni Asker—New soldiery.] +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="chap22"></a>2<br/> +<i>The Awakening of the Nation</i></h2> + +<p> +During the two centuries that followed the Ottoman conquest of Constantinople, +the Greek race was in serious danger of annihilation. Its life-blood was +steadily absorbed into the conquering community—quite regularly by the +compulsory tribute of children and spasmodically by the voluntary conversion of +individual households. The rich apostasized, because too heavy a material +sacrifice was imposed upon them by loyalty to their national religion; the +destitute, because they could not fail to improve their prospects by adhering +to the privileged faith. Even the surviving organization of the Church had only +been spared by the Ottoman Government in order to facilitate its own political +system—by bringing the peasant, through the hierarchy of priest, bishop, +and patriarch, under the moral control of the new Moslem master whom the +ecclesiastics henceforth served. +</p> + +<p> +The scale on which wholesale apostasy was possible is shown by the case of +Krete, which was conquered by the Turks from Venice just after these two +centuries had closed, and was in fact the last permanent addition to the +Turkish Empire. No urban or feudal settlers of Turkish blood were imported into +the island. To this day the uniform speech of all Kretans is their native +Greek. And yet the progressive conversion of whole clans and villages had +transferred at least 20 per cent. of the population to the Moslem ranks before +the Ottoman connexion was severed again in 1897. +</p> + +<p> +The survival of the Greek nationality did not depend on any efforts of the +Greeks themselves. They were indeed no longer capable of effort, but lay +passive under the hand of the Turk, like the paralysed quarry of some beast of +prey. Their fate was conditional upon the development of the Ottoman state, +and, as the two centuries drew to a close, that state entered upon a phase of +transformation and of consequent weakness. +</p> + +<p> +The Ottoman organism has always displayed (and never more conspicuously than at +the present moment) a much greater stability and vitality than any of its +oriental predecessors. There was a vein of genius in its creators, and its +youthful expansion permeated it with so much European blood that it became +partly Europeanized in its inner tissues—sufficiently to partake, at any +rate, in that faculty of indefinite organic growth which has so far revealed +itself in European life. This acquired force has carried it on since the time +when the impetus of its original institutions became spent—a time when +purely oriental monarchies fall to pieces, and when Turkey herself hesitated +between reconstruction and dissolution. That critical period began for her with +the latter half of the seventeenth century, and incidentally opened new +opportunities of life to her subject Greeks. +</p> + +<p> +Substantial relief from their burdens—the primary though negative +condition of national revival—accrued to the Greek peasantry from the +decay of Ottoman militarism in all its branches. The Turkish feudal +aristocracy, which had replaced the landed nobility of the Romaic Empire in +Anatolia and established itself on the choicest lands in conquered Europe, was +beginning to decline in strength. We have seen that it failed to implant itself +in Krete, and its numbers were already stationary elsewhere. The Greek peasant +slowly began to regain ground upon his Moslem lord, and he profited further by +the degeneration of the janissary corps at the heart of the empire. +</p> + +<p> +The janissaries had started as a militant, almost monastic body, condemned to +celibacy, and recruited exclusively from the Christian tribute-children. But in +1566 they extorted the privilege of legal marriage for themselves, and of +admittance into the corps for the sons of their wedlock. The next century +completed their transformation from a standing army into a hereditary urban +militia—an armed and privileged <i>bourgeoisie</i>, rapidly increasing in +numbers and correspondingly jealous of extraneous candidates for the coveted +vacancies in their ranks. They gradually succeeded in abolishing the enrolment +of Christian recruits altogether, and the last regular levy of children for +that purpose was made in 1676. Vested interests at Constantinople had freed the +helpless peasant from the most crushing burden of all. +</p> + +<p> +At the same moment the contemporary tendency in western Europe towards +bureaucratic centralization began to extend itself to the Ottoman Empire. Its +exponents were the brothers Achmet and Mustapha Köprili, who held the +grand-vizierate in succession. They laid the foundations of a centralized +administration, and, since the unadaptable Turk offered no promising material +for their policy, they sought their instruments in the subject race. The +continental Greeks were too effectively crushed to aspire beyond the +preservation of their own existence; but the islands had been less sorely +tried, and Khios, which had enjoyed over two centuries[1] of prosperity under +the rule of a Genoese chartered company, and exchanged it for Ottoman +sovereignty under peculiarly lenient conditions, could still supply Achmet a +century later with officials of the intelligence and education he required, +Khiots were the first to fill the new offices of ‘Dragoman of the +Porte’ (secretary of state) and ‘Dragoman of the Fleet’ +(civil complement of the Turkish capitan-pasha); and they took care in their +turn to staff the subordinate posts of their administration with a host of +pushing friends and dependants. The Dragoman of the Fleet wielded the fiscal, +and thereby in effect the political, authority over the Greek islands in the +Aegean; but this was not the highest power to which the new Greek bureaucracy +attained. Towards the beginning of the eighteenth century Moldavia and +Wallachia—the two ‘Danubian Provinces’ now united in the +kingdom of Rumania—were placed in charge of Greek officials with the rank +of voivode or prince, and with practically sovereign power within their +delegated dominions. A Danubian principality became the reward of a successful +dragoman’s career, and these high posts were rapidly monopolized by a +close ring of official families, who exercised their immense patronage in +favour of their race, and congregated round the Greek patriarch in the +‘Phanari’,[2] the Constantinopolitan slum assigned him for his +residence by Mohammed the Conqueror. +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: 1346-1566.] +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 2: ‘Lighthouse-quarter.’] +</p> + +<p> +The alliance of this parvenu ‘Phanariot’ aristocracy with the +conservative Orthodox Church was not unnatural, for the Church itself had +greatly extended its political power under Ottoman suzerainty. The Ottoman +Government hardly regarded its Christian subjects as integral members of the +state, and was content to leave their civil government in the hands of their +spiritual pastors to an extent the Romaic emperors would never have tolerated. +It allowed the Patriarchate at Constantinople to become its official +intermediary with the Greek race, and it further extended the Greek +patriarch’s authority over the other conquered populations of Orthodox +faith—Bulgars, Rumans, and Serbs—which had never been incorporated +in the ecclesiastical or political organization of the Romaic Empire, but which +learnt under Ottoman rule to receive their priests and bishops from the Greek +ecclesiastics of the capital, and even to call themselves by the Romaic name. +In 1691 Mustapha Köprili recognized and confirmed the rights of all Christian +subjects of the Sultan by a general organic law. +</p> + +<p> +Mustapha’s ‘New Ordinance’ was dictated by the reverses which +Christians beyond the frontier were inflicting upon the Ottoman arms, for +pressure from without had followed hard upon disintegration within. +Achmet’s pyrrhic triumph over Candia in 1669 was followed in 1683 by his +brother Mustapha’s disastrous discomfiture before the walls of Vienna, +and these two sieges marked the turn of the Ottoman tide. The ebb was slow, yet +the ascendancy henceforth lay with Turkey’s Christian neighbours, and +they began to cut short her frontiers on every side. +</p> + +<p> +The Venetians had never lost hold upon the ‘Ionian’ chain of +islands— Corfù, Cefalonia, Zante, and Cerigo—which flank the +western coast of Greece, and in 1685 they embarked on an offensive on the +mainland, which won them undisputed possession of Peloponnesos for twenty +years.[1] Venice was far nearer than Turkey to her dissolution, and spent the +last spasm of her energy on this ephemeral conquest. Yet she had maintained the +contact of the Greek race with western Europe during the two centuries of +despair, and the interlude of her rule in Peloponnesos was a fitting +culmination to her work; for, brief though it was, it effectively broke the +Ottoman tradition, and left behind it a system of communal self-government +among the Peloponnesian Greeks which the returning Turk was too feeble to sweep +away. The Turks gained nothing by the rapid downfall of Venice, for Austria as +rapidly stepped into her place, and pressed with fresh vigour the attack from +the north-west. North-eastward, too, a new enemy had arisen in Russia, which +had been reorganized towards the turn of the century by Peter the Great with a +radical energy undreamed of by any Turkish Köprili, and which found its destiny +in opposition to the Ottoman Empire. The new Orthodox power regarded itself as +the heir of the Romaic Empire from which it had received its first Christianity +and culture. It aspired to repay the Romaic race in adversity by championing it +against its Moslem oppressors, and sought its own reward in a maritime outlet +on the Black Sea. From the beginning of the eighteenth century Russia +repeatedly made war on Turkey, either with or without the co-operation of +Austria; but the decisive bout in the struggle was the war of 1769-74. A +Russian fleet appeared in the Mediterranean, raised an insurrection in +Peloponnesos, and destroyed the Turkish squadron in battle. The Russian armies +were still more successful on the steppes, and the Treaty of Kutchuk Kainardji +not only left the whole north coast of the Black Sea in Russia’s +possession, but contained an international sanction for the rights of the +sultan’s Orthodox subjects. In 1783 a supplementary commercial treaty +extorted for the Ottoman Greeks the right to trade under the Russian flag. The +territorial sovereignty of Turkey in the Aegean remained intact, but the +Russian guarantee gave the Greek race a more substantial security than the +shadowy ordinance of Mustapha Köprili. The paralysing prestige of the Porte was +broken, and Greek eyes were henceforth turned in hope towards Petersburg. +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: 1699-1718.] +</p> + +<p> +By the end of the eighteenth century the condition of the Greeks had in fact +changed remarkably for the better, and the French and English travellers who +now began to visit the Ottoman Empire brought away the impression that a +critical change in its internal equilibrium was at hand. The Napoleonic wars +had just extinguished the Venetian Republic and swept the Ionian Islands into +the struggle between England and France for the mastery of the Mediterranean. +England had fortified herself in Cefalonia and Zante, France in Corfù, and +interest centred on the opposite mainland, where Ali Pasha of Yannina +maintained a formidable neutrality towards either power. +</p> + +<p> +The career of Ali marked that phase in the decline of an Oriental empire when +the task of strong government becomes too difficult for the central authority +and is carried on by independent satraps with greater efficiency in their more +limited sphere. Ali governed the Adriatic hinterland with practically sovereign +power, and compelled the sultan for some years to invest his sons with the +pashaliks of Thessaly and Peloponnesos. The greater part of the Greek race thus +came in some degree under his control, and his policy towards it clearly +reflected the transition from the old to the new. He waged far more effective +war than the distant sultan upon local liberties, and, though the elimination +of the feudal Turkish landowner was pure gain to the Greeks, they suffered +themselves from the loss of traditional privileges which the original Ottoman +conquest had left intact. The Armatoli, a local Christian militia who kept +order in the mountainous mainland north of Peloponnesos where Turkish +feudatories were rare, were either dispersed by Ali or enrolled in his regular +army. And he was ruthless in the extermination of recalcitrant communities, +like Agrapha on the Aspropotarno, which had never been inscribed on the +taxation-rolls of the Romaic or the Ottoman treasury, or Suli, a robber clan +ensconced in the mountains Immediately west of Ali’s capital. On the +other hand, the administration of these pacified and consolidated dominions +became as essentially Greek in character as the Phanariot régime beyond the +Danube. Ali was a Moslem and an Albanian, but the Orthodox Greeks were in a +majority among his subjects, and he knew how to take advantage of their +abilities. His business was conducted by Greek secretaries in the Greek tongue, +and Yannina, his capital, was a Greek city. European visitors to Yannina (for +every one began the Levantine tour by paying his respects to Ali) were struck +by the enterprise and intelligence of its citizens. The doctors were competent, +because they had taken their education in Italy or France; the merchants were +prosperous, because they had established members of their family at Odessa, +Trieste, or even Hamburg, as permanent agents of their firm. A new Greek +<i>bourgeoisie</i> had arisen, in close contact with the professional life of +western Europe, and equally responsive to the new philosophical and political +ideas that were being propagated by the French Revolution. +</p> + +<p> +This intellectual ferment was the most striking change of all. Since the sack +of Constantinople in 1204, Greek culture had retired into the +monasteries—inaccessible fastnesses where the monks lived much the same +life as the clansmen of Suli or Agrapha. Megaspélaion, the great cave quarried +in the wall of a precipitous Peloponnesian ravine; Metéora, suspended on half a +dozen isolated pinnacles of rock in Thessaly, where the only access was by +pulley or rope-ladder; ‘Ayon Oros’, the confederation of +monasteries great and small upon the mountain-promontory of Athos—these +succeeded in preserving a shadow of the old tradition, at the cost of isolation +from all humane influences that might have kept their spiritual inheritance +alive. Their spirit was mediaeval, ecclesiastical, and as barren as their +sheltering rocks; and the new intellectual disciples of Europe turned to the +monasteries in vain. The biggest ruin on Athos is a boys’ school planned +in the eighteenth century to meet the educational needs of all the Orthodox in +the Ottoman Empire, and wrecked on the reefs of monastic obscurantism. But its +founder, the Corfiot scholar Evyénios Voulgáris, did not hesitate to break with +the past. He put his own educational ideas into practice at Yannina and +Constantinople, and contributed to the great achievement of his contemporary, +the Khiot Adhamandios Koráis, who settled in Paris and there evolved a literary +adaptation of the Romaic patois to supersede the lifeless travesty of Attic +style traditionally affected by ecclesiastical penmen. But the renaissance was +not confined to Greeks abroad. The school on Athos failed, but others +established themselves before the close of the eighteenth century in the +people’s midst, even in the smaller towns and the remoter villages. The +still flourishing secondary school of Dhimitzána, in the heart of Peloponnesos, +began its existence in this period, and the national revival found expression +in a new name. Its prophets repudiated the ‘Romaic’ name, with its +associations of ignorance and oppression, and taught their pupils to think of +themselves as ‘Hellenes’ and to claim in their own right the +intellectual and political liberty of the Ancient Greeks. +</p> + +<p> +This spiritual ‘Hellenism’, however, was only one manifestation of +returning vitality, and was ultimately due to the concrete economic development +with which it went hand in hand. The Greeks, who had found culture in western +Europe, had come there for trade, and their commercial no less than their +intellectual activity reacted in a penetrating way upon their countrymen at +home. A mountain village like Ambelakia in Thessaly found a regular market for +its dyed goods in Germany, and the commercial treaty of 1783 between Turkey and +Russia encouraged communities which could make nothing of the land to turn +their attention to the sea. Galaxhidi, a village on the northern shore of the +Korinthian Gulf, whose only asset was its natural harbour, and Hydhra, Spetza, +and Psarà, three barren little islands in the Aegean, had begun to lay the +foundations of a merchant marine, when Napoleon’s boycott and the British +blockade, which left no neutral flag but the Ottoman in the Mediterranean, +presented the Greek shipmen that sailed under it with an opportunity they +exploited to the full. The whitewashed houses of solid stone, rising tier above +tier up the naked limestone mountainside, still testify to the prosperity which +chance thus suddenly brought to the Hydhriots and their fellow islanders, and +did not withdraw again till it had enabled them to play a decisive part in +their nation’s history. +</p> + +<p> +Their ships were small, but they were home-built, skilfully navigated, and +profitably employed in the carrying trade of the Mediterranean ports. Their +economic life was based on co-operation, for the sailors, as well as the +captain and owner of the ship, who were generally the same person, took shares +in the outlay and profit of each voyage; but their political organization was +oligarchical—an executive council elected by and from the owners of the +shipping. Feud and intrigue were rife between family and family, class and +class, and between the native community and the resident aliens, without +seriously affecting the vigour and enterprise of the commonwealth as a whole. +These seafaring islands on the eve of the modern Greek Revolution were an exact +reproduction of the Aigina, Korinth, and Athens which repelled the Persian from +Ancient Greece. The germs of a new national life were thus springing up among +the Greeks in every direction— in mercantile colonies scattered over the +world from Odessa to Alexandria and from Smyrna to Trieste; among Phanariot +princes in the Danubian Provinces and their ecclesiastical colleagues at +Constantinople; in the islands of the Aegean and the Ionian chain, and upon the +mountains of Suli and Agrapha. But the ambitions this national revival aroused +were even greater than the reality itself. The leaders of the movement did not +merely aspire to liberate the Greek nation from the Turkish yoke. They were +conscious of the assimilative power their nationality possessed. The Suliots, +for example, were an immigrant Albanian tribe, who had learnt to speak Greek +from the Greek peasants over whom they tyrannized. The Hydhriot and Spetziot +islanders were Albanians too, who had even clung to their primitive language +during the two generations since they took up their present abode, but had +become none the less firmly linked to their Greek-speaking neighbours in +Peloponnesos by their common fellowship in the Orthodox Church. The numerous +Albanian colonies settled up and down the Greek continent were at least as +Greek in feeling as they. And why should not the same prove true of the +Bulgarian population, in the Balkans, who had belonged from the beginning to +the Orthodox Church, and had latterly been brought by improvident Ottoman +policy within the Greek patriarch’s fold? Or why should not the Greek +administrators beyond the Danube imbue their Ruman subjects with a sound +Hellenic sentiment? In fact, the prophets of Hellenism did not so much desire +to extricate the Greek nation from the Ottoman Empire as to make it the ruling +element in the empire itself by ejecting the Moslem Turks from their privileged +position and assimilating all populations of Orthodox faith. These dreams took +shape in the foundation of a secret society—the ‘Philikì +Hetairía’ or ‘League of Friends’—which established +itself at Odessa in 1814 with the connivence of the Russian police, and opened +a campaign of propaganda in anticipation of an opportunity to strike. +</p> + +<p> +The initiative came from the Ottoman Government itself. At the weakest moment +in its history the empire found in Sultan Mahmud a ruler of peculiar strength, +who saw that the only hope of overcoming his dangers lay in meeting them +half-way. The national movement of Hellenism was gathering momentum in the +background, but it was screened by the personal ambitions of Ali of Yannina, +and Mahmud reckoned to forestall both enemies by quickly striking Ali down. +</p> + +<p> +In the winter of 1819-20 Ali was outlawed, and in the spring the invasion of +his territories began. Both the Moslem combatants enlisted Christian Armatoli, +and all continental Greece was under arms. By the end of the summer Ali’s +outlying strongholds had fallen, his armies were driven in, and he himself was +closely invested in Yannina; but with autumn a deadlock set in, and the +sultan’s reckoning was thrown out. In November 1820 the veteran soldier +Khurshid was appointed to the pashalik of Peloponnesos to hold the Greeks in +check and close accounts with Ali. In March 1821, after five months spent in +organizing his province, Khurshid felt secure enough to leave it for the +Yannina lines. But he was mistaken; for within a month of his departure +Peloponnesos was ablaze. +</p> + +<p> +The ‘Philikì Hetairía’ had decided to act, and the Peloponnesians +responded enthusiastically to the signal. In the north Germanòs, metropolitan +bishop of Patras, rallied the insurgents at the monastery of Megaspélaion, and +unfurled the monastic altar-cloth as a national standard. In the south the +peninsula of Maina, which had been the latest refuge of ancient Hellenism, was +now the first to welcome the new, and to throw off the shadowy allegiance it +had paid for a thousand years to Romaic archonts and Ottoman capitan-pashas. +Led by Petros Mavromichalis, the chief of the leading clan, the Mainates issued +from their mountains. This was in April, and by the middle of May all the open +country had been swept clear, and the hosts joined hands before Tripolitza, +which was the seat of Ottoman government at the central point of the province. +The Turkish garrison attacked, but was heavily defeated at Valtetzi by the +tactical skill of Theodore Kolokotrónis the ‘klepht’, who had +become experienced in guerrilla warfare through his alternate professions of +brigand and gendarme—a career that had increased its possibilities as the +Ottoman system decayed. After Kolokotrónis’s victory, the Greeks kept +Tripolitza under a close blockade. Early in October it fell amid frightful +scenes of pillage and massacre, and Ottoman dominion in the Peloponnesos fell +with it. On January 22, 1822, Korinth, the key to the isthmus, passed into the +Greeks’ hands, and only four fortresses—Nauplia, Patras, Koron, and +Modhon—still held out within it against Greek investment. Not a Turk +survived in the Peloponnesos beyond their walls, for the slaughter at +Tripolitza was only the most terrible instance of what happened wherever a +Moslem colony was found. In Peloponnesos, at any rate, the revolution had been +grimly successful. +</p> + +<p> +There had also been successes at sea. The merchant marine of the Greek islands +had suffered grievously from the fall of Napoleon and the settlement at Vienna, +which, by restoring normal conditions of trade, had destroyed their abnormal +monopoly. The revolution offered new opportunities for profitable venture, and +in April 1821 Hydhra, Spetza and Psarà hastened to send a privateering fleet to +sea. As soon as the fleet crossed the Aegean, Samos rid itself of the Turks. At +the beginning of June the rickety Ottoman squadron issued from the Dardanelles, +but it was chased back by the islanders under the lee of Mitylini. Memories of +Russian naval tactics in 1770 led the Psariots to experiment in fire-ships, and +one of the two Turkish ships of the line fell a victim to this attack. Within a +week of setting sail, the diminished Turkish squadron was back again in the +Dardanelles, and the islanders were left with the command of the sea. +</p> + +<p> +The general Christian revolution thus seemed fairly launched, and in the first +panic the threatened Moslems began reprisals of an equally general kind. In the +larger Turkish cities there were massacres of Christian minorities, and the +Government lent countenance to them by murdering its own principal Christian +official Gregorios, the Greek patriarch at Constantinople, on April 22, 1821. +But Sultan Mahmud quickly recovered himself. He saw that his empire could not +survive a racial war, and determined to prevent the present revolt from +assuming such a character. His plan was to localize it by stamping out the more +distant sparks with all his energy, before concentrating his force at leisure +upon the main conflagration. +</p> + +<p> +This policy was justified by the event. On March 6 the ‘Philikì +Hetairia’ at Odessa had opened its own operations in grandiose style by +sending a filibustering expedition across the Russo-Turkish frontier under +command of Prince Alexander Hypsilantis, a Phanariot in the Russian service. +Hypsilantis played for a general revolt of the Ruman population in the Danubian +Principalities and a declaration of war against Turkey on the part of Russia. +But the Rumans had no desire to assist the Greek bureaucrats who oppressed +them, and the Tsar Alexander had been converted by the experiences of 1812-13 +to a pacifistic respect for the <i>status quo</i>. Prince Hypsilantis was +driven ignominiously to internment across the Austrian frontier, little more +than a hundred days after his expedition began; and his fiasco assured the +Ottoman Government of two encouraging facts—that the revolution would not +carry away the whole Orthodox population but would at any rate confine itself +to the Greeks; and that the struggle against it would be fought out for the +present, at least, without foreign intervention. +</p> + +<p> +In the other direction, however, rebellion was spreading northward from +Peloponnesos to continental Greece. Galaxídhi revolted in April, and was +followed in June by Mesolonghi—a prosperous town of fishermen, +impregnably situated in the midst of the lagoons at the mouth of the +Aspropotamo, beyond the narrows of the Korinthian Gulf. By the end of the +month, north-western Greece was free as far as the outposts of Khurshid Pasha +beyond the Gulf of Arta. +</p> + +<p> +Further eastward, again, in the mountains between the Gulf of Korinth and the +river Elládha (Sperkheiòs), the Armatoli of Ali’s faction had held their +ground, and gladly joined the revolution on the initiative of their captains +Dhiakos and Odhyssèvs. But the movement found its limits. The Turkish garrison +of Athens obstinately held out during the winter of 1821-2, and the Moslems of +Negrepont (Euboía) maintained their mastery in the island. In Agrapha they +likewise held their own, and, after one severely punished raid, the Agraphiot +Armatoli were induced to re-enter the sultan’s service on liberal terms. +The Vlachs in the gorges of the Aspropotamo were pacified with equal success; +and Dramali, Khurshid’s lieutenant, who guarded the communications +between the army investing Yannina and its base at Constantinople, was easily +able to crush all symptoms of revolt in Thessaly from his head-quarters at +Lárissa. Still further east, the autonomous Greek villages on the mountainous +promontories of Khalkidhiki had revolted in May, in conjunction with the +well-supplied and massively fortified monasteries of the ‘Ayon +Oros’; but the Pasha of Salonika called down the South Slavonic Moslem +landowners from the interior, sacked the villages, and amnestied the monastic +confederation on condition of establishing a Turkish garrison in their midst +and confiscating their arms. The monks’ compliance was assisted by the +excommunication under which the new patriarch at Constantinople had placed all +the insurgents by the sultan’s command. +</p> + +<p> +The movement was thus successfully localised on the European continent, and +further afield it was still more easily cut short. After the withdrawal of the +Turkish squadron, the Greek fleet had to look on at the systematic destruction +of Kydhonies,[1] a flourishing Greek industrial town on the mainland opposite +Mitylini which had been founded under the sultan’s auspices only forty +years before. All that the islanders could do was to take off the survivors in +their boats; and when they dispersed to their ports in autumn, the Ottoman +ships came out again from the Dardanelles, sailed round Peloponnesos into the +Korinthian Gulf, and destroyed Galaxídhi. A still greater catastrophe followed +the reopening of naval operations next spring. In March 1822 the Samians landed +a force on Khios and besieged the Turkish garrison, which was relieved after +three weeks by the arrival of the Ottoman fleet. A month later the Greek fleet +likewise appeared on the scene, and on June 18 a Psariot captain, Constantine +Kanaris, actually destroyed the Ottoman flag-ship by a daring fire-ship attack. +Upon this the Ottoman fleet fled back as usual to the Dardanelles; yet the only +consequence was the complete devastation, in revenge, of helpless Khios. The +long-shielded prosperity of the island was remorselessly destroyed, the people +were either enslaved or massacred, and the victorious fleet had to stand by as +passively this time as at the destruction of Kydhonies the season before. In +the following summer, again, the same fate befell Trikéri, a maritime community +on the Gulf of Volo which had gained its freedom when the rest of Thessaly +stirred in vain; and so in 1823 the revolution found itself confined on sea, as +well as on land, to the focus where it had originated in April 1821. +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: Turkish Aivali.] +</p> + +<p> +This isolation was a practical triumph for Sultan Mahmud. The maintenance of +the Ottoman Empire on the basis of Moslem ascendancy was thereby assured; but +it remained to be seen whether the isolated area could now be restored to the +<i>status quo</i> in which the rest of his dominions had been retained. +</p> + +<p> +During the whole season of 1821 the army of Khurshid had been held before +Yannina. But in February 1822 Yannina fell, Ali was slain, his treasure seized, +and his troops disbanded. The Ottoman forces were liberated for a counterattack +on Peloponnesos. Already in April Khurshid broke up his camp at Lárissa, and +his lieutenant Dramali was given command of the new expedition towards the +south. He crossed the Sperkheiòs at the beginning of July with an army of +twenty thousand men.[1] Athens had capitulated to Odhyssèvs ten days before; +but it had kept open the road for Dramali, and north-eastern Greece fell +without resistance into his hands. The citadel of Korinth surrendered as tamely +as the open country, and he was master of the isthmus before the end of the +month. Nauplia meanwhile had been treating with its besiegers for terms, and +would have surrendered to the Greeks already if they had not driven their +bargain so hard. Dramali hurried on southward into the plain to the +fortress’s relief, raised the siege, occupied the town of Argos, and +scattered the Greek forces into the hills. But the citadel of Argos held out +against him, and the positions were rapidly reversed. Under the experienced +direction of Kolokotrónis, the Greeks from their hill-fastnesses ringed round +the plain of Argos and scaled up every issue. Dramali’s supplies ran out. +An attempt of his vanguard to break through again towards the north was +bloodily repulsed, and he barely succeeded two days later in extricating the +main body in a demoralized condition, with the loss of all his baggage-train. +The Turkish army melted away, Dramali was happy to die at Korinth, and Khurshid +was executed by the sultan’s command. The invasion of Peloponnesos had +broken down, and nothing could avert the fall of Nauplia. The Ottoman fleet +hovered for one September week in the offing, but Kanaris’s fire-ships +took another ship of the line in toll at the roadsteads of Tenedos before it +safely regained the Dardanelles. The garrison of Nauplia capitulated in +December, on condition of personal security and liberty, and the captain of a +British frigate, which arrived on the spot, took measures that the compact +should be observed instead of being broken by the customary massacre. But the +strongest fortress in Peloponnesos was now in Greek hands. +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: Including a strong contingent of Moslem Slavs—Bulgarian +Pomaks from the Aegean hinterland and Serbian Bosniaks from the Adriatic.] +</p> + +<p> +In the north-west the season had not passed so well. When the Turks invested +Ali in Yannina, they repatriated the Suliot exiles in their native mountains. +But a strong sultan was just as formidable to the Suliots as a strong pasha, so +they swelled their ranks by enfranchising their peasant-serfs, and made common +cause with their old enemy in his adversity. Now that Ali was destroyed, the +Suliots found themselves in a precarious position, and turned to the Greeks for +aid. But on July 16 the Greek advance was checked by a severe defeat at Petta +in the plain of Arta. In September the Suliots evacuated their impregnable +fortresses in return for a subsidy and a safe-conduct, and Omer Vrioni, the +Ottoman commander in the west,[1] was free to advance in turn towards the +south. On November 6 he actually laid siege to Mesolonghi, but here his +experiences were as discomfiting as Dramali’s. He could not keep open his +communications, and after heavy losses retreated again to Arta in January 1823. +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: He was a renegade officer of Ali’s.] +</p> + +<p> +In 1823 the struggle seemed to be lapsing into stalemate. The liberated +Peloponnesos had failed to propagate the revolution through the remainder of +the Ottoman Empire; the Ottoman Government had equally failed to reconquer the +Peloponnesos by military invasion. This season’s operations only seemed +to emphasize the deadlock. The Ottoman commander in the west raised an +auxiliary force of Moslem and Catholic clansmen from northern Albania, and +attempted to reach Mesolonghi once more. But he penetrated no further than +Anatolikòn—the Mesolonghiots’ outpost village at the head of the +lagoons—and the campaign was only memorable for the heroic death of Marko +Botzaris the Suliot in a night attack upon the Ottoman camp. At sea, the two +fleets indulged in desultory cruises without an encounter, for the Turks were +still timid and incompetent, while the growing insubordination and dissension +on the Greek ships made concerted action there, too, impossible. By the end of +the season it was clear that the struggle could only definitively be decided by +the intervention of a third party on one side or the other—unless the +Greeks brought their own ruin upon themselves. +</p> + +<p> +This indeed was not unlikely to happen; for the new house of Hellenism had +hardly arisen before it became desperately divided against itself. The vitality +of the national movement resided entirely in the local communes. It was they +that had found the fighting men, kept them armed and supplied, and by +spontaneous co-operation expelled the Turk from Peloponnesos. But if the +co-operation was to be permanent it must have a central organization, and with +the erection of this superstructure the troubles began. As early as June 1821 a +‘Peloponnesian Senate’ was constituted and at once monopolized by +the ‘Primates’, the propertied class that had been responsible for +the communal taxes under the Romaic and Ottoman régimes and was allowed to +control the communal government in return. About the same time two Phanariot +princes threw in their lot with the revolution— Alexander Mavrokordatos +and Demetrius, the more estimable brother of the futile Alexander Hypsilantis. +Both were saturated with the most recent European political theory, and they +committed the peasants and seamen of the liberated districts to an ambitious +constitutionalism. In December 1821 a ‘National Assembly’ met at +Epidauros, passed an elaborate organic law, and elected Mavrokordatos first +president of the Hellenic Republic. +</p> + +<p> +The struggle for life and death in 1822 had staved off the internal crisis, but +the Peloponnesian Senate remained obstinately recalcitrant towards the National +Government in defence of its own vested interests; and the insubordination of +the fleet in 1823 was of one piece with the political faction which broke out +as soon as the immediate danger from without was removed. +</p> + +<p> +Towards the end of 1823 European ‘Philhellenes’ began to arrive in +Greece. In those dark days of reaction that followed Waterloo, self-liberated +Hellas seemed the one bright spot on the continent; but the idealists who came +to offer her their services were confronted with a sorry spectacle. The people +were indifferent to their leaders, and the leaders at variance among +themselves. The gentlemanly Phanariots had fallen into the background. +Mavrokordatos only retained influence in north-western Greece. In Peloponnesos +the Primates were all-powerful, and Kolokotrónis the klepht was meditating a +popular dictatorship at their expense. In the north-east the adventurer +Odhyssévs had won a virtual dictatorship already, and was suspected of intrigue +with the Turks; and all this factious dissension rankled into civil war as soon +as the contraction of a loan in Great Britain had invested the political +control of the Hellenic Republic with a prospective value in cash. The first +civil war was fought between Kolokotrónis on the one side and the Primates of +Hydhra and Peloponnesos on the other; but the issue was decided against +Kolokotrónis by the adhesion to the coalition of Kolettis the Vlach, once +physician to Mukhtar Pasha, the son of Ali, and now political agent for all the +northern Armatoli in the national service. The fighting lasted from November +1823 to June 1824, and was followed by another outbreak in November of the +latter year, when the victors quarrelled over the spoils, and the Primates were +worsted in turn by the islanders and the Armatoli. The nonentity Kondouriottis +of Hydhra finally emerged as President of Greece, with the sharp-witted +Kolettis as his principal wire-puller, but the disturbances did not cease till +the last instalment of the loan had been received and squandered and there was +no more spoil to fight for. +</p> + +<p> +Meanwhile, Sultan Mahmud had been better employed. Resolved to avert stalemate +by the only possible means, he had applied in the course of 1823 to Mohammed +Ali Pasha of Egypt, a more formidable, though more distant, satrap than Ali of +Yannina himself. Mohammed Ali had a standing army and navy organized on the +European model. He had also a son Ibrahim, who knew how to manoeuvre them, and +was ambitious of a kingdom. Mahmud hired the father’s troops and the +son’s generalship for the re-conquest of Peloponnesos, under engagement +to invest Ibrahim with the pashalik as soon as he should effectively make it +his own. By this stroke of diplomacy a potential rebel was turned into a +willing ally, and the preparations for the Egyptian expedition went forward +busily through the winter of 1823-4. +</p> + +<p> +The plan of campaign was systematically carried out. During the season of +respite the Greek islanders had harried the coasts and commerce of Anatolia and +Syria at will. The first task was to deprive them of their outposts in the +Aegean, and an advanced squadron of the Egyptian fleet accordingly destroyed +the community of Kasos in June 1824, while the Ottoman squadron sallied out of +the Dardanelles a month later and dealt out equal measure to Psarà. The two +main flotillas then effected a junction off Rhodes; and, though the crippled +Greek fleet still ventured pluckily to confront them, it could not prevent +Ibrahim from casting anchor safely in Soudha Bay and landing his army to winter +in Krete. In February 1825 he transferred these troops with equal impunity to +the fortress of Modhon, which was still held for the sultan by an Ottoman +garrison. The fire-ships of Hydhra came to harry his fleet too late, and on +land the Greek forces were impotent against his trained soldiers. The +Government in vain promoted Kolokotrónis from captivity to +commandership-in-chief. The whole south-western half of Peloponnesos passed +into Ibrahim’s hands, and in June 1825 he even penetrated as far as the +mills of Lerna on the eastern coast, a few miles south of Argos itself. +</p> + +<p> +At the same time the Ottoman army of the west moved south again under a new +commander, Rashid Pasha of Yannina, and laid final siege on April 27 to +Mesolonghi, just a year after Byron had died of fever within its walls. The +Greeks were magnificent in their defence of these frail mud-bastions, and they +more than held their own in the amphibious warfare of the lagoons. The struggle +was chequered by the continual coming and going of the Greek and Ottoman +fleets. They were indeed the decisive factor; for without the supporting +squadron Rashid would have found himself in the same straits as his +predecessors at the approach of autumn, while the slackness of the islanders in +keeping the sea allowed Mesolonghi to be isolated in January 1826. The rest was +accomplished by the arrival of Ibrahim on the scene. His heavy batteries opened +fire in February; his gunboats secured command of the lagoons, and forced +Anatolikòn to capitulate in March. In April provisions in Mesolonghi itself +gave out, and, scorning surrender, the garrison—men, women, and children +together— made a general sortie on the night of April 22. Four thousand +fell, three thousand were taken, and two thousand won through. It was a +glorious end for Mesolonghi, but it left the enemy in possession of all +north-western Greece. +</p> + +<p> +The situation was going from bad to worse. Ibrahim returned to Peloponnesos, +and steadily pushed forward his front, ravaging as steadily as he went. Rashid, +after pacifying the north-west, moved on to the north-eastern districts, where +the national cause had been shaken by the final treachery and speedy +assassination of Odhyssèvs. Siege was laid to Athens in June, and the Greek +Government enlisted in vain the military experience of its Philhellenes. +Fabvier held the Akropolis, but Generalissimo Sir Richard Church was heavily +defeated in the spring of 1827 in an attempt to relieve him from the Attic +coast; Grand Admiral Cochrane saw his fleet sail home for want of payment in +advance, when he summoned it for review at Poros; and Karaiskakis, the Greek +captain of Armatoli, was killed in a skirmish during his more successful +efforts to harass Rashid’s communications by land. On June 5, 1827, the +Greek garrison of the Akropolis marched out on terms. +</p> + +<p> +It looked as if the Greek effort after independence would be completely +crushed, and as if Sultan Mahmud would succeed in getting his empire under +control. In September 1826 he had rid it at last of the mischief at its centre +by blowing up the janissaries in their barracks at Constantinople. Turkey +seemed almost to have weathered the storm when she was suddenly overborne by +further intervention on the other side. +</p> + +<p> +Tsar Alexander, the vaccillator, died in November 1825, and was succeeded by +his son Nicholas I, as strong a character and as active a will as Sultan Mahmud +himself. Nicholas approached the Greek question without any disinclination +towards a Turkish war; and both Great Britain and France found an immediate +interest in removing a ground of provocation which might lead to such a rude +disturbance of the European ‘Balance of Power’. On July 6, 1827, a +month after Athens surrendered, the three powers concluded a treaty for the +pacification of Greece, in which they bound over both belligerent parties to +accept an armistice under pain of military coercion. An allied squadron +appeared off Navarino Bay to enforce this policy upon the Ottoman and Egyptian +fleet which lay united there, and the intrusion of the allied admirals into the +bay itself precipitated on October 20 a violent naval battle in which the +Moslem flotilla was destroyed. The die was cast; and in April 1828 the Russian +and Ottoman Governments drifted into a formal war, which brought Russian armies +across the Danube as far as Adrianople, and set the Ottoman Empire at bay for +the defence of its capital. Thanks to Mahmud’s reorganization, the empire +did not succumb to this assault; but it had no more strength to spare for the +subjugation of Greece. The Greeks had no longer to reckon with the sultan as a +military factor; and in August 1828 they wore relieved of Ibrahim’s +presence as well, by the disembarkation of 14,000 French troops in Peloponnesos +to superintend the withdrawal of the Egyptian forces. In March 1829 the three +powers delimited the Greek frontier. The line ran east and west from the Gulf +of Volo to the Gulf of Arta, and assigned to the new state no more and no less +territory than the districts that had effectively asserted their independence +against the sultan in 1821. This settlement was the only one possible under the +circumstances; but it was essentially transitory, for it neglected the natural +line of nationality altogether, and left a numerical majority of the Greek +race, as well as the most important centres of its life, under the old régime +of servitude. +</p> + +<p> +Even the liberated area was not at the end of its troubles. In the spring of +1827, when they committed themselves into the hands of their foreign patrons, +the Greeks had found a new president for the republic in John Kapodistrias, an +intimate of Alexander the tsar. Kapodistrias was a Corfiote count, with a +Venetian education and a career in the Russian diplomatic service, and no one +could have been more fantastically unsuitable for the task of reconstructing +the country to which he was called. Kapodistrias’ ideal was the +<i>fin-de-siècle</i> ‘police-state’; but ‘official +circles’ did not exist in Greece, and he had no acquaintance with the +peasants and sailors whom he hoped to redeem by bureaucracy. He instituted a +hierarchically centralized administration which made the abortive constitution +of Mavrokordatos seem sober by comparison; he trampled on the liberty of the +rising press, which was the most hopeful educational influence in the country; +and he created superfluous ministerial portfolios for his untalented brothers. +In fact he reglamented Greece from his palace at Aigina like a divinely +appointed autocrat, from his arrival in January 1828 till the summer of 1831, +when he provoked the Hydhriots to open rebellion, and commissioned the Russian +squadron in attendance to quell them by a naval action, with the result that +Poros was sacked by the President’s regular army and the national fleet +was completely destroyed. After that, he attempted to rule as a military +dictator, and fell foul of the Mavromichalis of Maina. The Mainates knew better +how to deal with the ‘police-state’ than the Hydhriots; and on +October 9, 1831, Kapodistrias was assassinated in Nauplia, at the church door, +by two representatives of the Mavromichalis clan. +</p> + +<p> +The country lapsed into utter anarchy. Peloponnesians and Armatoli, +Kolokotronists and Kolettists, alternately appointed and deposed subservient +national assemblies and governing commissions by naked violence, which +culminated in a gratuitous and disastrous attack upon the French troops +stationed in Peloponnesos for their common protection. The three powers +realized that it was idle to liberate Greece from Ottoman government unless +they found her another in its place. They decided on monarchy, and offered the +crown, in February 1832, to Prince Otto, a younger son of the King of Bavaria. +The negotiations dragged on many months longer than Greece could afford to +wait. But in July 1832 the sultan recognized the sovereign independence of the +kingdom of Hellas in consideration of a cash indemnity; and in February 1833, +just a year after the first overtures had been made, the appointed king arrived +at Nauplia with a decorative Bavarian staff and a substantial loan from the +allies. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="chap23"></a>3<br/> +<i>The Consolidation of the State</i></h2> + +<p> +Half the story of Greece is told. We have watched the nation awake and put +forth its newly-found strength in a great war of independence, and we have +followed the course of the struggle to its result—the foundation of the +kingdom of Hellas. +</p> + +<p> +It is impossible to close this chapter of Greek history without a sense of +disappointment. The spirit of Greece had travailed, and only a principality was +born, which gathered within its frontiers scarcely one-third of the race, and +turned for its government to a foreign administration which had no bond of +tradition or affinity with the population it was to rule. And yet something had +been achieved. An oasis had been wrested from the Turkish wilderness, in which +Hellenism could henceforth work out its own salvation untrammelled, and extend +its borders little by little, until it brought within them at last the whole of +its destined heritage. The fleeting glamour of dawn had passed, but it had +brought the steady light of day, in which the work begun could be carried out +soberly and indefatigably to its conclusion. The new kingdom, in fact, if it +fulfilled its mission, might become the political nucleus and the spiritual +ensample of a permanently awakened nation—an ‘education of +Hellas’ such as Pericles hoped to see Athens become in the greatest days +of Ancient Greece. +</p> + +<p> +When, therefore, we turn to the history of the kingdom, our disappointment is +all the more intense, for in the first fifty years of its existence there is +little development to record. In 1882 King Otto’s principality presented +much the same melancholy spectacle as it did in 1833, when he landed in Nauplia +Bay, except that Otto himself had left the scene. His Bavarian staff belonged +to that reactionary generation that followed the overthrow of Napoleon in +Europe, and attempted, heedless of Kapodistrias’ fiasco, to impose on +Greece the bureaucracy of the <i>ancien régime</i>. The Bavarians’ work +was entirely destructive. The local liberties which had grown up under the +Ottoman dominion and been the very life of the national revival, were +effectively repressed. Hydhriot and Spetziot, Suliot and Mainate, forfeited +their characteristic individuality, but none of the benefits of orderly and +uniform government were realized. The canker of brigandage defied all efforts +to root it out, and in spite of the loans with which the royal government was +supplied by the protecting powers, the public finance was subject to periodical +breakdowns. In 1837 King Otto, now of age, took the government into his own +hands, only to have it taken out of them again by a revolution in 1843. +Thereafter he reigned as a constitutional monarch, but he never reconciled +himself to the position, and in 1862 a second revolution drove him into exile, +a scapegoat for the afflictions of his kingdom. Bavarian then gave place to +Dane, yet the afflictions continued. In 1882 King George had been nineteen +years on the throne[1] without any happier fortune than his +predecessor’s. It is true that the frontiers of the kingdom had been +somewhat extended. Great Britain had presented the new sovereign with the +Ionian Islands as an inaugural gift, and the Berlin Conference had recently +added the province of Thessaly. Yet the major part of the Greek race still +awaited liberation from the Turkish yoke, and regarded the national kingdom, +chronically incapacitated by the twin plagues of brigandage and bankruptcy, +with increasing disillusionment. The kingdom of Hellas seemed to have failed in +its mission altogether. +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: King George, like King Otto, was only seventeen years old when he +received his crown.] +</p> + +<p> +What was the explanation of this failure? It was that the very nature of the +mission paralysed the state from taking the steps essential to its +accomplishment. The phenomenon has been, unhappily, only too familiar in the +Nearer East, and any one who travelled in the Balkans in 1882, or even so +recently as 1912, must at once have become aware of it. +</p> + +<p> +Until a nation has completely vindicated its right to exist, it is hard for it +to settle down and make its life worth living. We nations of western Europe +(before disaster fell upon us) had learnt to take our existence for granted, +and ‘Politics’ for us had come to mean an organized effort to +improve the internal economy of our community. But a foreigner who picked up a +Greek newspaper would have found in it none of the matter with which he was +familiar in his own, no discussion of financial policy, economic development, +or social reconstruction. The news-columns would have been monopolized by +foreign politics, and in the cafes he would have heard the latest oscillation +in the international balance of power canvassed with the same intense and +minute interest that Englishmen in a railway-carriage would have been devoting +to Old Age Pensions, National Health Insurance, or Land Valuation. He would +have been amazed by a display of intimate knowledge such as no British quidnunc +could have mustered if he had happened to stumble across these intricacies of +international competition, and the conversation would always have terminated in +the same unanswered but inconscionable challenge to the future: ‘When +will the oppressed majority of our race escape the Turkish yoke? If the Ottoman +dominion is destroyed, what redistribution of its provinces will follow? Shall +we then achieve our national unity, or will our Balkan neighbours encroach upon +the inheritance which is justly ours?’ +</p> + +<p> +This preoccupation with events beyond the frontiers was not caused by any lack +of vital problems within them. The army was the most conspicuous object of +public activity, but it was not an aggressive speculation, or an investment of +national profits deliberately calculated to bring in one day a larger return. +It was a necessity of life, and its efficiency was barely maintained out of the +national poverty. In fact, it was almost the only public utility with which the +nation could afford to provide itself, and the traveller from Great Britain +would have been amazed again at the miserable state of all reproductive public +works. The railways were few and far between, their routes roundabout, and +their rolling-stock scanty, so that trains were both rare and slow. Wheel-roads +were no commoner a feature in Greece than railways are here, and such stretches +as had been constructed had often never come into use, because they had just +failed to reach their goal or were still waiting for their bridges, so that +they were simply falling into decay and converting the outlay of capital upon +them into a dead loss. The Peiraeus was the only port in the country where +steamers could come alongside a quay, and discharge their cargoes directly on +shore. Elsewhere, the vessel must anchor many cables’ lengths out, and +depend on the slow and expensive services of lighters, for lack of pier +construction and dredging operations. For example, Kalamata, the economic +outlet for the richest part of Peloponnesos, and the fifth largest port in the +kingdom,[1] was and still remains a mere open roadstead, where all ships that +call are kept at a distance by the silt from a mountain torrent, and so placed +in imminent danger of being driven, by the first storm, upon the rocks of a +neighbouring peninsula. +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: The four chief ports being Peiraeus, Patras, Syra, and Volos.] +</p> + +<p> +These grave shortcomings were doubtless due in part to the geographical +character of the country, though it was clear, from what had actually been +accomplished, that it would have been both possible and profitable to attempt +much more, if the nation’s energy could have been secured for the work. +But it is hard to tinker at details when you are kept in a perpetual fever by a +question of life and death, and the great preliminary questions of national +unity and self-government remained still unsettled. +</p> + +<p> +Before these supreme problems all other interests paled, for they were no +will-o’-the-wisps of theoretical politics. It needs a long political +education to appreciate abstract ideas, and the Greeks were still in their +political infancy, but the realization of Greater Greece implied for them the +satisfaction of all their concrete needs at once. +</p> + +<p> +So long as the <i>status quo</i> endured, they were isolated from the rest of +Europe by an unbroken band of Turkish territory, stretching from the Aegean to +the Adriatic Sea. What was the use of overcoming great engineering difficulties +to build a line of European gauge from Athens right up to the northern +frontier, if Turkey refused to sanction the construction of the tiny section +that must pass through her territory between the Greek railhead and the actual +terminus of the European system at Salonika? Or if, even supposing she withdrew +her veto, she would have it in her power to bring pressure on Greece at any +moment by threatening to sever communications along this vital artery? So long +as Turkey was there, Greece was practically an island, and her only +communication with continental Europe lay through her ports. But what use to +improve the ports, when the recovery of Salonika, the fairest object of the +national dreams, would ultimately change the country’s economic centre of +gravity, and make her maritime as well as her overland commerce flow along +quite other channels than the present? +</p> + +<p> +Thus the Greek nation’s present was overshadowed by its future, and its +actions paralysed by its hopes. Perhaps a nation with more power of application +and less of imagination would have schooled itself to the thought that these +sordid, obtrusive details were the key to the splendours of the future, and +would have devoted itself to the systematic amelioration of the cramped area +which it had already secured for its own. This is what Bulgaria managed to do +during her short but wonderful period of internal growth between the Berlin +Treaty of 1878 and the declaration of war against Turkey in 1912. But Bulgaria, +thanks to her geographical situation, was from the outset freer from the +tentacles of the Turkish octopus than Greece had contrived to make herself by +her fifty years’ start, while her temperamentally sober ambitions were +not inflamed by such past traditions as Greece had inherited, not altogether to +her advantage. Be that as it may, Greece, whether by fault or misfortune, had +failed during this half-century to apply herself successfully to the cure of +her defects and the exploitation of her assets, though she did not lack leaders +strong-minded enough to summon her to the dull business of the present. Her +history during the succeeding generation was a struggle between the parties of +the Present and the Future, and the unceasing discomfiture of the former is +typified in the tragedy of Trikoupis, the greatest modern Greek statesman +before the advent of Venezelos. +</p> + +<p> +Trikoupis came into power in 1882, just after the acquisition of the rich +agricultural province of Thessaly under the Treaty of Berlin had given the +kingdom a fresh start. There were no such continuous areas of good arable land +within the original frontiers, and such rare patches as there were had been +desolated by those eight years of savage warfare[1] which had been the price of +liberty. The population had been swept away by wholesale massacres of racial +minorities in every district; the dearth of industrious hands had allowed the +torrents to play havoc with the cultivation-terraces on the mountain slopes; +and the spectre of malaria, always lying in wait for its opportunity, had +claimed the waterlogged plains for its own. During the fifty years of +stagnation little attempt had been made to cope with the evil, until now it +seemed almost past remedy. +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: 1821-28] +</p> + +<p> +If, however, the surface of the land offered little prospect of wealth for the +moment, there were considerable treasures to be found beneath it. A +metalliferous bolt runs down the whole east coast of the Greek mainland, +cropping up again in many of the Aegean islands, and some of the ores, of which +there is a great variety, are rare and valuable. The lack of transit facilities +is partly remedied by the fact that workable veins often lie near enough to the +sea for the produce to be carried straight from mine to ship, by an +endless-chain system of overhead trolleys; so that, once capital is secured for +installing the plant and opening the mine, profitable operations can be carried +on irrespective of the general economic condition of the country. Trikoupis saw +how much potential wealth was locked up in these mineral seams. The problem was +how to attract the capital necessary to tap it. The nucleus round which have +accumulated those immense masses of mobilised capital that are the life-blood +of modern European industry and commerce, was originally derived from the +surplus profits of agriculture. But a country that finds itself reduced, like +Greece in the nineteenth century, to a state of agricultural bankruptcy, has +obviously failed to save any surplus in the process, so that it is unable to +provide from its own pocket the minimum outlay it so urgently needs in order to +open for itself some new activity. If it is to obtain a fresh start on other +lines, it must secure the co-operation of the foreign investor, and the +capitalist with a ready market for his money will only put it into enterprises +where he has some guarantee of its safety. There was little doubt that the +minerals of Greece would well repay extraction; the uncertain element was the +Greek nation itself. The burning question of national unity might break out at +any moment into a blaze of war, and, in the probable case of disaster, involve +the whole country and all interests connected with it in economic as well as +political ruin. Western Europe would not commit itself to Greek mining +enterprise, unless it felt confident that the statesman responsible for the +government of Greece would and could restrain his country from its instinctive +impulse towards political adventure. +</p> + +<p> +The great merit of Trikoupis was that he managed to inspire this confidence. +Greece owes most of the wheelroads, railways, and mines of which she can now +boast to the dozen years of his more or less consecutive administration. But +the roads are unfinished, the railway-network incomplete, the mines exploited +only to a fraction of their capacity, because the forces against Trikoupis were +in the end too strong for him. It may be that his eye too rigidly followed the +foreign investor’s point of view, and that by adopting a more +conciliatory attitude towards the national ideal, he might have strengthened +his position at home without impairing his reputation abroad; but his position +was really made impossible by a force quite beyond his control, the +irresponsible and often intolerable behaviour which Turkey, under whatever +régime, has always practised towards foreign powers, and especially towards +those Balkan states which have won their freedom in her despite, while perforce +abandoning a large proportion of their race to the protracted outrage of +Turkish misgovernment. +</p> + +<p> +Several times over the Porte, by wanton insults to Greece, wrecked the efforts +of Trikoupis to establish good relations between the two governments, and +played the game of the chauvinist party led by Trikoupis’ rival, +Deliyannis. Deliyannis’ tenures of office were always brief, but during +them he contrived to undo most of the work accomplished by Trikoupis in the +previous intervals. A particularly tense ‘incident’ with Turkey put +him in power in 1893, with a strong enough backing from the country to warrant +a general mobilization. The sole result was the ruin of Greek credit. Trikoupis +was hastily recalled to office by the king, but too late. He found himself +unable to retrieve the ruin, and retired altogether from politics in 1895, +dying abroad next year in voluntary exile and enforced disillusionment. +</p> + +<p> +With the removal of Trikoupis from the helm, Greece ran straight upon the +rocks. A disastrous war with Turkey was precipitated in 1897 by events in +Krete. It brought the immediate <i>débâcle</i> of the army and the reoccupation +of Thessaly for a year by Turkish troops, while its final penalties were the +cession of the chief strategical positions along the northern frontier and the +imposition of an international commission of control over the Greek finances, +in view of the complete national bankruptcy entailed by the war. The fifteen +years that followed 1895 were almost the blackest period in modern Greek +history; yet the time was not altogether lost, and such events as the draining +of the Kopais-basin by a British company, and its conversion from a malarious +swamp into a rich agricultural area, marked a perceptible economic advance. +</p> + +<p> +This comparative stagnation was broken at last by the Young Turk +<i>pronunciamiento</i> at Salonika in 1908, which produced such momentous +repercussions all through the Nearer East. The Young Turks had struck in order +to forestall the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire, but the opportunity was +seized by every restive element within it to extricate itself, if possible, +from the Turkish coils. Now, just as in 1897, Greece was directly affected by +the action of the Greek population in Krete. As a result of the revolt of +1896-7, Krete had been constituted an autonomous state subject to Ottoman +suzerainty, autonomy and suzerainty alike being guaranteed by four great +powers. Prince George of Greece, a son of the King of the Hellenes, had been +placed at the head of the autonomous government as high commissioner; but his +autocratic tendency caused great discontent among the free-spirited Kretans, +who had not rid themselves of the Turkish régime in order to forfeit their +independence again in another fashion. Dissension culminated in 1906, when the +leaders of the opposition took to the mountains, and obtained such support and +success in the guerrilla fighting that followed, that they forced Prince George +to tender his resignation. He was succeeded as high commissioner by Zaimis, +another citizen of the Greek kingdom, who inaugurated a more constitutional +régime, and in 1908 the Kretans believed that the moment for realizing the +national ideal had come. They proclaimed their union with Greece, and elected +deputies to the Parliament at Athens. But the guarantor powers carried out +their obligations by promptly sending a combined naval expedition, which hauled +down the Greek flag at Canea, and prevented the deputies from embarking for +Peiraeus. This apparently pedantic insistence upon the <i>status quo</i> was +extremely exasperating to Greek nationalism. It produced a ferment in the +kingdom, which grew steadily for nine months, and vented itself in July 1909 in +the <i>coup d’état</i> of the ‘Military League’, a +second-hand imitation of the Turkish ‘Committee of Union and +Progress’. The royal family was cavalierly treated, and constitutional +government superseded by a junta of officers. But at this point the policy of +the four powers towards Krete was justified. Turkey knew well that she had lost +Krete in 1897, but she could still exploit her suzerainty to prevent Greece +from gaining new strength by the annexation of the island. The Young Turks had +seized the reins of government, not to modify the policy of the Porte, but to +intensify its chauvinism, and they accordingly intimated that they would +consider any violation of their suzerain rights over Krete a <i>casus belli</i> +against Greece. Greece, without army or allies, was obviously not in a position +to incur another war, and the ‘Military League’ thus found that it +had reached the end of its tether. There ensued a deadlock of another eight +months, only enlivened by a naval mutiny, during which the country lay +paralysed, with no programme whatsoever before it. +</p> + +<p> +Then the man demanded by the situation appeared unexpectedly from the centre of +disturbance, Krete. Venezelos started life as a successful advocate at Canea. +He entered Kretan politics in the struggle for constitutionalism, and +distinguished himself in the successful revolution of 1906, of which he was the +soul. Naturally, he became one of the leading statesmen under Zaimis’ +régime, and he further distinguished himself by resolutely opposing the +‘Unionist’ agitation as premature, and yet retaining his hold over +a people whose paramount political preoccupation was their national unity. The +crisis of 1908-9 brought him into close relations with the government of the +Greek kingdom; and the king, who had gauged his calibre, now took the patriotic +step of calling in the man who had expelled his son from Krete, to put his own +house in order. It speaks much for both men that they worked together in +harmony from the beginning. Upon the royal invitation Venezelos exchanged +Kretan for Greek citizenship, and took in hand the ‘Military +League’. After short negotiations, he persuaded it to dissolve in favour +of a national convention, which was able to meet in March 1910. +</p> + +<p> +Thus Greece became a constitutional country once more, and Venezelos the first +premier of the new era. During five years of continuous office he was to prove +himself the good genius of his country. When he resigned his post in April +1915, he left the work of consolidating the national state on the verge of +completion, and it will be his country’s loss if he is baulked of +achievement. Results speak for themselves, and the remainder of this pamphlet +will be little more than a record of his statesmanship; but before we pass on +to review his deeds, we must say a word about the character to which they are +due. In March 1912 the time came for the first general election since Venezelos +had taken office. Two years’ experience of his administration had already +won him such popularity and prestige, that the old party groups, purely +personal followings infected with all the corruption, jingoism, and insincerity +of the dark fifteen years, leagued themselves in a desperate effort to cast him +out. Corruption on a grand scale was attempted, but Venezelos’ success at +the polls was sweeping. The writer happened to be spending that month in Krete. +The Kretans had, of course, elected deputies in good time to the parliament at +Athens, and once more the foreign warships stopped them in the act of boarding +the steamer for Peiraeus, while Venezelos, who was still responsible for the +Greek Government till the new parliament met, had declared with characteristic +frankness that the attendance of the Kretan deputies could not possibly be +sanctioned, an opening of which his opponents did not fail to take advantage. +Meanwhile, every one in Krete was awaiting news of the polling in the kingdom. +They might have been expected to feel, at any rate, lukewarmly towards a man +who had actually taken office on the programme of deferring their cherished +‘union’ indefinitely; but, on the contrary, they greeted his +triumph with enormous enthusiasm. Their feeling was explained by the comment of +an innkeeper. ‘Venezelos!’ he said: ‘Why, he is a man who can +say “No”. He won’t stand any nonsense. If you try to get +round him, he’ll put you in irons.’ And clearly he had hit the +mark. Venezelos would in any case have done well, because he is a clever man +with an excellent power of judgement; but acuteness is a common Greek virtue, +and if he has done brilliantly, it is because he has the added touch of genius +required to make the Greek take ‘No’ for an answer, a quality, very +rare indeed in the nation, which explains the dramatic contrast between his +success and Trikoupis’ failure. Greece has been fortunate indeed in +finding the right man at the crucial hour. +</p> + +<p> +In the winter of 1911-12 and the succeeding summer, the foreign traveller met +innumerable results of Venezelos’ activity in every part of the country, +and all gave evidence of the same thing: a sane judgement and its inflexible +execution. For instance, a resident in Greece had needed an escort of soldiers +four years before, when he made an expedition into the wild country north-west +of the Gulf of Patras, on account of the number of criminals +‘wanted’ by the government who were lurking in that region as +outlaws. In August 1912 an inquiry concerning this danger was met with a smile: +‘Oh, yes, it was so,’ said the gendarme, ‘but since then +Venezelos has come. He amnestied every one “out” for minor +offences, and then caught the “really bad ones”, so there are no +outlaws in Akarnania now.’ And he spoke the truth. You could wander all +about the forests and mountains without molestation. +</p> + +<p> +So far Venezelos had devoted himself to internal reconstruction, after the +precedent of Trikoupis, but he was not the man to desert the national idea. The +army and navy were reorganized by French and British missions, and when the +opportunity appeared, he was ready to take full advantage of it. In the autumn +of 1912, Turkey had been for a year at war with Italy; her finances had +suffered a heavy drain, and the Italian command of the sea not only locked up +her best troops in Tripoli, but interrupted such important lines of +communication between her Asiatic and European provinces as the direct route by +sea from Smyrna to Salonika, and the devious sea-passage thence round Greece to +Scutari, which was the only alternative for Turkish troops to running the +gauntlet of the Albanian mountaineers. Clearly the Balkan nations could find no +better moment for striking the blow to settle that implacable +‘preliminary question.’ of national unity which had dogged them all +since their birth. Their only chance of success, however, was to strike in +concert, for Turkey, handicapped though she was, could still easily outmatch +them singly. Unless they could compromise between their conflicting claims, +they would have to let this common opportunity for making them good slip by +altogether. +</p> + +<p> +Of the four states concerned, two, Serbia and Montenegro, were of the same +South-Slavonic nationality, and had been drawn into complete accord with each +other since the formal annexation of Bosnia by Austria-Hungary in 1908, which +struck a hard blow at their common national idea, while neither of them had any +conflicting claims with Greece, since the Greek and South-Slavonic +nationalities are at no point geographically in contact. With Bulgaria, a +nation of Slavonic speech and culture, though not wholly Slavonic in origin, +Serbia had quarrelled for years over the ultimate destiny of the Üsküb district +in north-western Macedonia, which was still subject to Turkey; but in the +summer of 1912 the two states compromised in a secret treaty upon their +respective territorial ambitions, and agreed to refer the fate of one debatable +strip to the arbitration of Russia, after their already projected war with +Turkey had been carried through. There was a more formidable conflict of +interests between Bulgaria and Greece. These two nationalities are conterminous +over a very wide extent of territory, stretching from the Black Sea on the east +to the inland Lake of Okhrida on the west, and there is at no point a sharp +dividing line between them. The Greek element tends to predominate towards the +coast and the Bulgar towards the interior, but there are broad zones where +Greek and Bulgar villages are inextricably interspersed, while purely Greek +towns are often isolated in the midst of purely Bulgar rural districts. Even if +the racial areas could be plotted out on a large-scale map, it was clear that +no political frontier could be drawn to follow their convolutions, and that +Greece and Bulgaria could only divide the spoils by both making up their minds +to give and take. The actual lines this necessary compromise would follow, +obviously depended on the degree of the allies’ success against Turkey in +the common war that was yet to be fought, and Venezelos rose to the occasion. +He had the courage to offer Bulgaria the Greek alliance without stipulating for +any definite minimum share in the common conquests, and the tact to induce her +to accept it on the same terms. Greece and Bulgaria agreed to shelve all +territorial questions till the war had been brought to a successful close; and +with the negotiation of this understanding (another case in which Venezelos +achieved what Trikoupis had attempted only to fail) the Balkan League was +complete. +</p> + +<p> +The events that followed are common knowledge. The Balkan allies opened the +campaign in October, and the Turks collapsed before an impetuous attack. The +Bulgarians crumpled up the Ottoman field armies in Thrace at the terrific +battle of Lule Burgas; the Serbians disposed of the forces in the Macedonian +interior, while the Greeks effected a junction with the Serbians from the +south, and cut their way through to Salonika. Within two months of the +declaration of war, the Turks on land had been driven out of the open +altogether behind the shelter of the Chataldja and Gallipoli lines, and only +three fortresses—Adrianople, Yannina, and Scutari—held out further +to the west. Their navy, closely blockaded by the Greek fleet within the +Dardanelles, had to look on passively at the successive occupation of the +Aegean Islands by Greek landing-parties. With the winter came negotiations, +during which an armistice reigned at Adrianople and Scutari, while the Greeks +pursued the siege of Yannina and the Dardanelles blockade. The negotiations +proved abortive, and the result of the renewed hostilities justified the action +of the Balkan plenipotentiaries in breaking them off. By the spring of 1913 the +three fortresses had fallen, and, under the treaty finally signed at London, +Turkey ceded to the Balkan League, as a whole, all her European territories +west of a line drawn from Ainos on the Aegean to Midía on the Black Sea, +including Adrianople and the lower basin of the river Maritsa. +</p> + +<p> +The time had now come for Greece and Bulgaria to settle their account, and the +unexpected extent of the common gains ought to have facilitated their division. +The territory in question included the whole north coast of the Aegean and its +immediate hinterland, and Venezelos proposed to consider it in two sections. +(1) The eastern section, conveniently known as Thrace, consisted of the lower +basin of the Maritsa. As far as Adrianople the population was Bulgar, but south +of that city it was succeeded by a Greek element, with a considerable +sprinkling of Turkish settlements, as far as the sea. Geographically, however, +the whole district is intimately connected with Bulgaria, and the railway that +follows the course of the Maritsa down to the port of Dedeagatch offers a +much-needed economic outlet for large regions already within the Bulgarian +frontier. Venezelos, then, was prepared to resign all Greek claims to the +eastern section, in return for a corresponding concession by Bulgaria in the +west. (2) The western section, consisting of the lower basins of the Vardar and +Struma, lay in the immediate neighbourhood of the former frontier of Greece; +but the Greek population of Salonika,[1] and the coast-districts east of it, +could not be brought within the Greek frontier without including as well a +certain hinterland inhabited mainly by Bulgarians. The cession of this was the +return asked for by Venezelos, and he reduced it to a minimum by abstaining +from pressing the quite well-founded claims of Greece in the Monastir district, +which lay further inland still. +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: The predominant element within the walls of Salonika itself is +neither Greek nor Bulgarian, but consists of about 80,000 of those +Spanish-speaking Jews who settled in Turkey as refugees during the sixteenth +century.] +</p> + +<p> +But Venezelos’ conciliatory proposals met with no response from the +Bulgarian Government, which was in an ‘all or nothing’ mood. It +swallowed Venezelos’ gift of Thrace, and then proceeded to exploit the +Bulgar hinterland of Salonika as a pretext for demanding the latter city as +well. This uncompromising attitude made agreement impossible, and it was +aggravated by the aggressive action of the Bulgarian troops in the occupied +territory, who persistently endeavoured to steal ground from the Greek forces +facing them. In May there was serious fighting to the east of the Struma, and +peace was only restored with difficulty. Bulgarian relations with Serbia were +becoming strained at the same time, though in this case Bulgaria had more +justice on her side. Serbia maintained that the veto imposed by Austria upon +her expansion to the Adriatic, in coincidence with Bulgaria’s unexpected +gains on the Maritsa to which Serbian arms had contributed, invalidated the +secret treaty of the previous summer, and she announced her intention of +retaining the Monastir district and the line of the Salonika railway as far as +the future frontier of Greece. Bulgaria, on the other hand, shut her eyes to +Serbia’s necessity for an untrammelled economic outlet to one sea-board +or the other, and took her stand on her strictly legal treaty-rights. However +the balance of justice inclined, a lasting settlement could only have been +reached by mutual forbearance and goodwill; but Bulgaria put herself hopelessly +in the wrong towards both her allies by a treacherous night-attack upon them +all along the line, at the end of June 1913. This disastrous act was the work +of a single political party, which has since been condemned by most sections of +Bulgarian public opinion; but the punishment, if not the responsibility for the +crime, fell upon the whole nation. Greece and Serbia had already been drawn +into an understanding by their common danger. They now declared war against +Bulgaria in concert. The counter-strokes of their armies met with success, and +the intervention of Rumania made Bulgaria’s discomfiture certain. +</p> + +<p> +The results of the one month’s war were registered in the Treaty of +Bucarest. Many of its provisions were unhappily, though naturally, inspired by +the spirit of revenge; but the Greek premier, at any rate, showed a +statesmanlike self-restraint in the negotiations. Venezelos advocated the +course of taking no more after the war than had been demanded before it. He +desired to leave Bulgaria a broad zone of Aegean littoral between the Struma +and Maritsa rivers, including ports capable of satisfying Bulgaria’s +pressing need for an outlet towards the south. But, in the exasperated state of +public feeling, even Venezelos’ prestige failed to carry through his +policy in its full moderation. King George had just been assassinated in his +year of jubilee, in the streets of the long-desired Salonika; and King +Constantine, his son, flushed by the victory of Kilkish and encouraged by the +Machiavellian diplomacy of his Hohenzollern brother-in-law, insisted on +carrying the new Greek frontier as far east as the river Mesta, and depriving +Bulgaria of Kavala, the natural harbour for the whole Bulgarian hinterland in +the upper basins of the Mesta and Struma. +</p> + +<p> +It is true that Greece did not exact as much as she might have done. Bulgaria +was still allowed to possess herself of a coastal strip east of the Mesta, +containing the tolerable harbours of Porto Lagos and Dedeagatch, which had been +occupied during hostilities by the Greek fleet, and thus her need for an Aegean +outlet was not left unsatisfied altogether; while Greece on her part was +cleverly shielded for the future from those drawbacks involved in immediate +contact with Turkish territory, which she had so often experienced in the past. +It is also true that the Kavala district is of great economic value in +itself—it produces the better part of the Turkish Régie tobacco +crop—and that on grounds of nationality alone Bulgaria has no claim to +this prize, since the tobacco-growing peasantry is almost exclusively Greek or +Turk, while the Greek element has been extensively reinforced during the last +two years by refugees from Anatolia and Thrace. +</p> + +<p> +Nevertheless, it is already clear that Venezelos’ judgement was the +better. The settlement at the close of the present war may even yet bring +Bulgaria reparation in many quarters. If the Ruman and South Slavonic +populations at present included in the complexus of Austria-Hungary are freed +from their imprisonment and united with the Serbian and Rumanian national +states, Bulgaria may conceivably recover from the latter those Bulgarian lands +which the Treaty of Bucarest made over to them in central Macedonia and the +Dobrudja, while it would be still more feasible to oust the Turk again from +Adrianople, where he slipped back in the hour of Bulgaria’s prostration +and has succeeded in maintaining himself ever since. Yet no amount of +compensation in other directions and no abstract consideration for the national +principle will induce Bulgaria to renounce her claim on Greek Kavala. Access to +this district is vital to Bulgaria from the geographical point of view, and she +will not be satisfied here with such rights as Serbia enjoys at +Salonika—free use of the port and free traffic along a railway connecting +it with her own hinterland. Her heart is set on complete territorial ownership, +and she will not compose her feud with Greece until she has had her way. +</p> + +<p> +So long, therefore, as the question of Kavala remains unsettled, Greece will +not be able to put the preliminary problem of ‘national +consolidation’ behind her, and enter upon the long-deferred chapter of +‘internal development’. To accomplish once for all this vital +transition, Venezelos is taking the helm again into his hands, and it is his +evident intention to close the Greek account with Bulgaria just as Serbia and +Rumania hope to close theirs with the same state—by a bold territorial +concession conditional upon adequate territorial compensation elsewhere.[1] +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: The above paragraph betrays its own date; for, since it was +written, the intervention of Bulgaria on the side of the Central Powers has +deferred indefinitely the hope of a settlement based upon mutual agreement.] +</p> + +<p> +The possibility of such compensation is offered by certain outstanding problems +directly dependent upon the issue of the European conflict, and we must glance +briefly at these before passing on to consider the new chapter of internal +history that is opening for the Greek nation. +</p> + +<p> +The problems in question are principally concerned with the ownership of +islands. +</p> + +<p> +The integrity of a land-frontier is guaranteed by the whole strength of the +nation included within it, and can only be modified by a struggle for existence +with the neighbor on whom it borders; but islands by their geographical nature +constitute independent political units, easily detached from or incorporated +with larger domains, according to the momentary fluctuation in the balance of +sea-power. Thus it happened that the arrival of the <i>Goeben</i> and +<i>Breslau</i> at the Dardanelles in August 1914 led Turkey to reopen promptly +certain questions concerning the Aegean. The islands in this sea are uniformly +Greek in population, but their respective geographical positions and political +fortunes differentiate them into several groups. +</p> + +<p> +1. The Cyclades in the south-west, half submerged vanguards of mountain ranges +in continental Greece, have formed part of the modern kingdom from its birth, +and their status has never since been called into question. +</p> + +<p> +2. Krete, the largest of all Greek islands, has been dealt with already. She +enjoyed autonomy under Turkish suzerainty for fifteen years before the Balkan +War, and at its outbreak she once more proclaimed her union with Greece. This +time at last her action was legalized, when Turkey expressly abandoned her +suzerain rights by a clause in the Treaty of London. +</p> + +<p> +3. During the war itself, the Greek navy occupied a number of islands which had +remained till then under the more direct government of Turkey, The parties to +the Treaty of London agreed to leave their destiny to the decision of the +powers, and the latter assigned them all to Greece, with the exception of +Imbros and Tenedos which command strategically the mouth of the Dardanelles. +</p> + +<p> +The islands thus secured to Greece fall in turn into several sub-groups. +</p> + +<p> +Two of these are <i>(a)</i> Thasos, Samothraki, and Lemnos, off the European +coast, and <i>(b)</i> Samos and its satellite Nikarià, immediately off the west +coast of Anatolia; and these five islands seem definitely to have been given up +by Turkey for lost. The European group is well beyond the range of her present +frontiers; while Samos, though it adjoins the Turkish mainland, does not mask +the outlet from any considerable port, and had moreover for many years +possessed the same privileged autonomy as Krete, so that the Ottoman Government +did not acutely feel its final severance. +</p> + +<p> +<i>(c)</i> A third group consists of Mitylini and Khios,[1] and concerning this +pair Greece and Turkey have so far come to no understanding. The Turks pointed +out that the littoral off which these islands lie contains not only the most +indispensable ports of Anatolia but also the largest enclaves of Greek +population on the Asiatic mainland, and they declared that the occupation of +this group by Greece menaced the sovereignty of the Porte in its home +territory. ‘See’, they said, ‘how the two islands flank both +sides of the sea-passage to Smyrna, the terminus of all the railways which +penetrate the Anatolian interior, while Mitylini barricades Aivali and Edremid +as well. As soon as the Greek Government has converted the harbours of these +islands into naval bases, Anatolia will be subject to a perpetual Greek +blockade, and this violent intimidation of the Turkish people will be +reinforced by an insidious propaganda among the disloyal Greek elements in our +midst.’ Accordingly the Turks refused to recognize the award of the +powers, and demanded the re-establishment of Ottoman sovereignty in Mitylini +and Khios, under guarantee of an autonomy after the precedent of Krete and +Samos. +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: Including its famous satellite Psarà.] +</p> + +<p> +To these arguments and demands the Greeks replied that, next to Krete; these +are the two largest, most wealthy, and most populous Greek islands in the +Aegean; that their inhabitants ardently desire union with the national kingdom; +and that the Greek Government would hesitate to use them as a basis for +economic coercion and nationalistic propaganda against Turkey, if only because +the commerce of western Anatolia is almost exclusively in the hands of the +Greek element on the Asiatic continent. Greek interests were presumably bound +up with the economic prosperity and political consolidation of Turkey in Asia, +and the Anatolian Greeks would merely have been alienated from their +compatriots by any such impolitic machinations. ‘Greek sovereignty in +Mitylini and Khios’, the Greeks maintained, ‘does not threaten +Turkish sovereignty on the Continent. But the restoration of Turkish suzerainty +over the islands would most seriously endanger the liberty of their +inhabitants; for Turkish promises are notoriously valueless, except when they +are endorsed by the guarantee of some physically stronger power.’ +</p> + +<p> +Negotiations were conducted between Greece and Turkey from these respective +points of view without leading to any result, and the two standpoints were in +fact irreconcilable, since either power required the other to leave vital +national interests at the mercy of an ancient enemy, without undertaking to +make corresponding sacrifices itself. The problem probably would never have +been solved by compromise; but meanwhile the situation has been entirely +transformed by the participation of Turkey in the European War, and the issue +between Greece and Turkey, like the issue between Greece and Bulgaria, has been +merged in the general problem of the European settlement. +</p> + +<p> +The Balkan War of 1912 doomed the Ottoman power in Europe, but left its Asiatic +future unimpaired. By making war against the Quadruple Entente, Turkey has +staked her existence on both continents, and is threatened with political +extinction if the Central Powers succumb in the struggle. In this event Greece +will no longer have to accommodate her régime in the liberated islands to the +susceptibilities of a Turkey consolidated on the opposite mainland, but will be +able to stretch out her hand over the Anatolian coast and its hinterland, and +compensate herself richly in this quarter for the territorial sacrifices which +may still be necessary to a lasting understanding with her Bulgarian neighbour. +</p> + +<p> +The shores that dominate the Dardanelles will naturally remain beyond her +grasp, but she may expect to establish herself on the western littoral from a +point as far north as Mount Ida and the plain of Edremid. The Greek coast-town +of Aivali will be hers, and the still more important focus of Greek commerce +and civilization at Smyrna; while she will push her dominion along the railways +that radiate from Smyrna towards the interior. South-eastward, Aidin will be +hers in the valley of the Mendere (Maiandros). Due eastward she will re-baptize +the glistening city of Ala Shehr with its ancient name of Philadelphia, under +which it held out heroically for Hellenism many years after Aidin had become +the capital of a Moslem principality and the Turkish avalanche had rolled past +it to the sea. Maybe she will follow the railway still further inland, and +plant her flag on the Black Castle of Afiun, the natural railway-centre of +Anatolia high up on the innermost plateau. All this and more was once Hellenic +ground, and the Turkish incomer, for all his vitality, has never been able here +to obliterate the older culture or assimilate the earlier population. In this +western region Turkish villages are still interspersed with Greek, and under +the government of compatriots the unconquerable minority would inevitably +reassert itself by the peaceful weapons of its superior energy and +intelligence. +</p> + +<p> +4. If Greece realizes these aspirations through Venezelos’ statesmanship, +she will have settled in conjunction her outstanding accounts with both +Bulgaria and Turkey; but a fourth group of islands still remains for +consideration, and these, though formerly the property of Turkey, are now in +the hands of other European powers. +</p> + +<p> +<i>(a)</i> The first of those in question are the Sporades, a chain of islands +off the Anatolian coast which continues the line of Mitylini, Khios, and Samos +towards the south-east, and includes Kos, Patmos, Astypalià, Karpathos, Kasos, +and, above all, Rhodes. The Sporades were occupied by Italy during her war with +Turkey in 1911-12, and she stipulated in the Peace of Lausanne that she should +retain them as a pledge until the last Ottoman soldier in Tripoli had been +withdrawn, after which she would make them over again to the Porte. The +continued unrest in Tripoli may or may not have been due to Turkish intrigues, +but in any case it deferred the evacuation of the islands by Italy until the +situation was transformed here also by the successive intervention of both +powers in the European War. The consequent lapse of the Treaty of Lausanne +simplifies the status of the Sporades, but it is doubtful what effect it will +have upon their destiny. In language and political sympathy their inhabitants +are as completely Greek as all the other islanders of the Aegean, and if the +Quadruple Entente has made the principle of nationality its own, Italy is +morally bound, now that the Sporades are at her free disposal, to satisfy their +national aspirations by consenting to their union with the kingdom of Greece. +On the other hand, the prospective dissolution of the Ottoman Empire has +increased Italy’s stake in this quarter. In the event of a partition, the +whole southern littoral of Anatolia will probably fall within the Italian +sphere, which will start from the Gulf of Iskanderun, include the districts of +Adana and Adalia, and march with the new Anatolian provinces of Greece along +the line of the river Mendere. This continental domain and the adjacent islands +are geographically complementary to one another, and it is possible that Italy +may for strategical reasons insist on retaining the Sporades in perpetuity if +she realizes her ambitions on the continent. This solution would be less ideal +than the other, but Greece would be wise to reconcile herself to it, as Italy +has reconciled herself to the incorporation of Corsica in France; for by +submitting frankly to this detraction from her national unity she would give +her brethren in the Sporades the best opportunity of developing their national +individuality untrammelled under a friendly Italian suzerainty. +</p> + +<p> +<i>(b)</i> The advance-guard of the Greek race that inhabits the great island +of Cyprus has been subject to British government since 1878, when the +provisional occupation of the island by Great Britain under a contract similar +to that of Lausanne was negotiated in a secret agreement between Great Britain +and Turkey on the eve of the Conference at Berlin. The condition of evacuation +was in this case the withdrawal of Russia from Kars, and here likewise it never +became operative till it was abrogated by the outbreak of war. Cyprus, like the +Sporades, is now at the disposal of its <i>de facto</i> possessor, and on +November 5, 1914, it was annexed to the British Empire. But whatever decision +Italy may take, it is to be hoped that our own government at any rate will not +be influenced exclusively by strategical considerations, but will proclaim an +intention of allowing Cyprus ultimately to realize its national aspirations by +union with Greece.[1] +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: Since the above was written, this intention, under a certain +condition, has definitely been expressed.] +</p> + +<p> +The whole population of the island is Greek in language, while under an +excellent British administration its political consciousness has been awakened, +and has expressed itself in a growing desire for national unity among the +Christian majority. It is true that in Cyprus, as in Krete, there is a +considerable Greek-speaking minority of Moslems[1] who prefer the <i>status +quo</i>; but, since the barrier of language is absent, their antipathy to union +may not prove permanent. However important the retention of Cyprus may be to +Great Britain from the strategical point of view, we shall find that even in +the balance of material interests it is not worth the price of alienating the +sympathy of an awakened and otherwise consolidated nation. +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: In Cyprus about 22 per cent.] +</p> + +<p> +This rather detailed review of problems in the islands and Anatolia brings out +the fact that Greek nationalism is not an artificial conception of theorists, +but a real force which impels the most scattered and down-trodden populations +of Greek speech to travail unceasingly for political unity within the national +state. Yet by far the most striking example of this attractive power in +Hellenism is the history of it in ‘Epirus’.[1] +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: The name coined to include the districts of Himarra, Argyrokastro, +and Koritsà.] +</p> + +<p> +The Epirots are a population of Albanian race, and they still speak an Albanian +dialect in their homes; while the women and children, at any rate, often know +no other language. But somewhat over a century ago the political organism +created by the remarkable personality of Ali Pasha in the hinterland of the +Adriatic coast, and the relations of Great Britain and France with this new +principality in the course of their struggle for the Mediterranean, began to +awaken in the Epirots a desire for civilization. Their Albanian origin opened +to them no prospects, for the race had neither a literature nor a common +historical tradition; and they accordingly turned to the Greeks, with whom they +were linked in religion by membership of the Orthodox Church, and in politics +by subjection to Ali’s Government at Yannina, which had adopted Greek as +its official language. +</p> + +<p> +They had appealed to the right quarter; for we have seen how Greek culture +accumulated a store of latent energy under the Turkish yoke, and was expending +it at this very period in a vigorous national revival. The partially successful +War of Liberation in the ‘twenties of the nineteenth century was only the +political manifestation of the new life. It has expressed itself more typically +in a steady and universal enthusiasm for education, which throughout the +subsequent generations of political stagnation has always opened to individual +Greeks commercial and professional careers of the greatest brilliance, and +often led them to spend the fortunes so acquired in endowing the nation with +further educational opportunities. Public spirit is a Greek virtue. There are +few villages which do not possess monuments of their successful sons, and a +school is an even commoner gift than a church; while the State has supplemented +the individual benefactor to an extent remarkable where public resources are so +slender. The school-house, in fact, is generally the most prominent and +substantial building in a Greek village, and the advantage offered to the +Epirots by a <i>rapprochement</i> with the Greeks is concretely symbolized by +the Greek schools established to-day in generous numbers throughout their +country. +</p> + +<p> +For the Epirot boy the school is the door to the future. The language he learns +there makes him the member of a nation, and opens to him a world wide enough to +employ all the talent and energy he may possess, if he seeks his fortune at +Patras or Peiraeus, or in the great Greek commercial communities of Alexandria +and Constantinople; while, if he stays at home, it still affords him a link +with the life of civilized Europe through the medium of the ubiquitous Greek +newspaper.[1] The Epirot has thus become Greek in soul, for he has reached the +conception of a national life more liberal than the isolated existence of his +native village through the avenue of Greek culture. ‘Hellenism’ and +nationality have become for him identical ideas; and when at last the hour of +deliverance struck, he welcomed the Greek armies that marched into his country +from the south and the east, after the fall of Yannina in the spring of 1913, +with the same enthusiasm with which all the enslaved populations of native +Greek dialect greeted the consummation of a century’s hopes. +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: There is still practically no literature printed in the Albanian +language.] +</p> + +<p> +The Greek troops arrived only just in time, for the ‘Hellenism’ of +the Epirots had been terribly proved by murderous attacks from their Moslem +neighbours on the north. The latter speak a variety of the same Albanian +tongue, but were differentiated by a creed which assimilated them to the ruling +race. They had been superior to their Christian kinsmen by the weight of +numbers and the possession of arms, which under the Ottoman régime were the +monopoly of the Moslem. At last, however, the yoke of oppression was broken and +the Greek occupation seemed a harbinger of security for the future. Unluckily, +however, Epirus was of interest to others besides its own inhabitants. It +occupies an important geographical position facing the extreme heel of Italy, +just below the narrowest point in the neck of the Adriatic, and the Italian +Government insisted that the country should be included in the newly erected +principality of Albania, which the powers had reserved the right to delimit in +concert by a provision in the Treaty of London. +</p> + +<p> +Italy gave two reasons for her demand. First, she declared it incompatible with +her own vital interests that both shores of the strait between Corfù and the +mainland should pass into the hands of the same power, because the combination +of both coasts and the channel between them offered a site for a naval base +that might dominate the mouth of the Adriatic. Secondly, she maintained that +the native Albanian speech of the Epirots proved their Albanian nationality, +and that it was unjust to the new Albanian state to exclude from it the most +prosperous and civilized branch of the Albanian nation. Neither argument is +cogent. +</p> + +<p> +The first argument could easily be met by the neutralization of the Corfù +straits,[1] and it is also considerably weakened by the fact that the position +which really commands the mouth of the Adriatic from the eastern side is not +the Corfù channel beyond it but the magnificent bay of Avlona just within its +narrowest section, and this is a Moslem district to which the Epirots have +never laid claim, and which would therefore in any case fall within the +Albanian frontier. The second argument is almost ludicrous. The destiny of +Epirus is not primarily the concern of the other Albanians, of for that matter +of the Greeks, but of the Epirots themselves, and it is hard to see how their +nationality can be defined except in terms of their own conscious and expressed +desire; for a nation is simply a group of men inspired by a common will to +co-operate for certain purposes, and cannot be brought into existence by the +external manipulation of any specific objective factors, but solely by the +inward subjective impulse of its constituents. It was a travesty of justice to +put the Orthodox Epirots at the mercy of a Moslem majority (which had been +massacring them the year before) on the ground that they happened to speak the +same language. The hardship was aggravated by the fact that all the routes +connecting Epirus with the outer world run through Yannina and Salonika, from +which the new frontier sundered her; while great natural barriers separate her +from Avlona and Durazzo, with which the same frontier so ironically signalled +her union. +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: Corfù itself is neutralized already by the agreement under which +Great Britain transferred the Ionian Islands to Greece in 1863.] +</p> + +<p> +The award of the powers roused great indignation in Greece, but Venezelos was +strong enough to secure that it should scrupulously be respected; and the +‘correct attitude’ which he inflexibly maintained has finally won +its reward. As soon as the decision of the powers was announced, the Epirots +determined to help themselves. They raised a militia, and asserted their +independence so successfully, that they compelled the Prince of Wied, the first +(and perhaps the last) ruler of the new ‘Albania’, to give them +home rule in matters of police and education, and to recognise Greek as the +official language for their local administration. They ensured observance of +this compact by the maintenance of their troops under arms. So matters +continued, until a rebellion among his Moslem subjects and the outbreak of the +European War in the summer of 1914 obliged the prince to depart, leaving +Albania to its natural state of anarchy. The anarchy might have restored every +canton and village to the old state of contented isolation, had it not been for +the religious hatred between the Moslems and the Epirots, which, with the +removal of all external control, began to vent itself in an aggressive assault +of the former upon the latter, and entailed much needless misery in the autumn +months. +</p> + +<p> +The reoccupation of Epirus by Greek troops had now become a matter of life and +death to its inhabitants, and in October 1914 Venezelos took the inevitable +step, after serving due notice upon all the signatories to the Treaty of +London. Thanks in part to the absorption of the powers in more momentous +business, but perhaps even in a greater degree to the confidence which the +Greek premier had justly won by his previous handling of the question, this +action was accomplished without protest or opposition. Since then Epirus has +remained sheltered from the vicissitudes of civil war within and punitive +expeditions from without, to which the unhappy remnant of Albania has been +incessantly exposed; and we may prophesy that the Epiroi, unlike their +repudiated brethren of Moslem or Catholic faith, have really seen the last of +their troubles. Even Italy, from whom they had most to fear, has obtained such +a satisfactory material guarantee by the occupation on her own part of Avlona, +that she is as unlikely to demand the evacuation of Epirus by Greece as she is +to withdraw her own force from her long coveted strategical base on the eastern +shore of the Adriatic. In Avlona and Epirus the former rivals are settling down +to a neighbourly contact, and there is no reason to doubt that the <i>de +facto</i> line of demarcation between them will develop into a permanent and +officially recognized frontier. The problem of Epirus, though not, +unfortunately, that of Albania, may be regarded as definitely closed. +</p> + +<p> +The reclamation of Epirus is perhaps the most honourable achievement of the +Greek national revival, but it is by no means an isolated phenomenon. Western +Europe is apt to depreciate modern ‘Hellenism’, chiefly because its +ambitious denomination rather ludicrously challenges comparison with a vanished +glory, while any one who has studied its rise must perceive that it has little +more claim than western Europe itself to be the peculiar heir of ancient Greek +culture. And yet this Hellenism of recent growth has a genuine vitality of its +own. It displays a remarkable power of assimilating alien elements and +inspiring them to an active pursuit of its ideals, and its allegiance supplants +all others in the hearts of those exposed to its charm. The Epirots are not the +only Albanians who have been Hellenized. In the heart of central Greece and +Peloponnesus, on the plain of Argos, and in the suburbs of Athens, there are +still Albanian enclaves, derived from those successive migrations between the +fourteenth and the eighteenth centuries; but they have so entirely forgotten +their origin that the villagers, when questioned, can only repeat: ‘We +can’t say why we happen to speak “Arvanitikà”, but we are +Greeks like everybody else.’ The Vlachs again, a Romance-speaking tribe +of nomadic shepherds who have wandered as far south as Akarnania and the shores +of the Korinthian Gulf, are settling down there to the agricultural life of the +Greek village, so that Hellenism stands to them for the transition to a higher +social phase. Their still migratory brethren in the northern ranges of Pindus +are already ‘Hellenes’ in political sympathy,[1] and are moving +under Greek influence towards the same social evolution. In distant Cappadocia, +at the root of the Anatolian peninsula, the Orthodox Greek population, +submerged beneath the Turkish flood more than eight centuries ago, has retained +little individuality except in its religion, and nothing of its native speech +but a garbled vocabulary embedded in a Turkified syntax. Yet even this +dwindling rear-guard has been overtaken just in time by the returning current +of national life, bringing with it the Greek school, and with the school a +community of outlook with Hellenism the world over. Whatever the fate of +eastern Anatolia may be, the Greek element is now assured a prominent part in +its future. +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: Greece owed her naval supremacy in 1912-13 to the new cruiser +<i>Georgios Averof</i>, named after a Vlach millionaire who made his fortune in +the Greek colony at Alexandria and left a legacy for the ship’s +construction at his death.] +</p> + +<p> +These, moreover, are the peripheries of the Greek world; and at its centre the +impulse towards union in the national state readies a passionate intensity. +‘Aren’t you better off as you are?’ travellers used to ask in +Krete during the era of autonomy. ‘If you get your “Union”, +you will have to do two years’ military service instead of one +year’s training in the militia, and will be taxed up to half as much +again.’ ‘We have thought of that,’ the Kretans would reply, +‘but what does it matter, if we are united with Greece?’ +</p> + +<p> +On this unity modern Hellenism has concentrated its efforts, and after nearly a +century of ineffective endeavour it has been brought by the statesmanship of +Venezelos within sight of its goal. Our review of outstanding problems reveals +indeed the inconclusiveness of the settlement imposed at Bucarest; but this +only witnesses to the wisdom of the Greek nation in reaffirming its confidence +in Venezelos at the present juncture, and recalling him to power to crown the +work which he has so brilliantly carried through. Under Venezelos’ +guidance we cannot doubt that the heart’s desire of Hellenism will be +accomplished at the impending European settlement by the final consolidation of +the Hellenic national state.[1] +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: This paragraph, again, has been superseded by the dramatic turn of +events; but the writer has left it unaltered, for the end is not yet.] +</p> + +<p> +Yet however attractive the sincerity of such nationalism may be, political +unity is only a negative achievement. The history of a nation must be judged +rather by the positive content of its ideals and the positive results which it +attains, and herein the Hellenic revival displays certain grave shortcomings. +The internal paralysis of social and economic life has already been noted and +ascribed to the urgency of the ‘preliminary question’; but we must +now add to this the growing embitterment which has poisoned the relations of +Greece with her Balkan neighbours during the crises through which the +‘preliminary question’ has been worked out to its solution. Now +that this solution is at hand, will Hellenism prove capable of casting out +these two evils, and adapt itself with strength renewed to the new phase of +development that lies before it? +</p> + +<p> +The northern territories acquired in 1913 will give a much greater impetus to +economic progress than Thessaly gave a generation ago; for the Macedonian +littoral west as well as east of the Struma produces a considerable proportion +of the Turkish Régie tobacco, while the pine-forests of Pindus, if judiciously +exploited, will go far to remedy the present deficiency of home-grown timber, +even if they do not provide quantities sufficient for export abroad. If we take +into account the currant-crop of the Peloponnesian plain-lands which already +almost monopolizes the world-market, the rare ores of the south-eastern +mountains and the Archipelago, and the vintages which scientific treatment +might bring into competition with the wines of the Peninsula and France, we can +see that Greece has many sources of material prosperity within her reach, if +only she applies her liberated energy to their development. Yet these are all +of them specialized products, and Greece will never export any staple commodity +to rival the grain which Rumania sends in such quantities to central Europe +already, and which Bulgaria will begin to send within a few years’ time. +Even the consolidated Greek kingdom will be too small in area and too little +compact in geographical outline to constitute an independent economic unit, and +the ultimate economic interests of the country demand co-operation in some +organization more comprehensive than the political molecule of the national +state. +</p> + +<p> +Such an association should embrace the Balkans in their widest extent— +from the Black Sea to the Adriatic and from the Carpathians to the Aegean; for, +in sharp contrast to the inextricable chaos of its linguistic and +ecclesiastical divisions, the region constitutes economically a homogeneous and +indivisible whole, in which none of the parts can divest themselves of their +mutual interdependence. Greece, for example, has secured at last her direct +link with the railway system of the European continent, but for free transit +beyond her own frontier she still depends on Serbia’s good-will, just, as +Serbia depends on hers for an outlet to the Aegean at Salonika. The two states +have provided for their respective interests by a joint proprietorship of the +section of railway between Salonika and Belgrade; and similar railway problems +will doubtless bring Rumania to terms with Serbia for access to the Adriatic, +and both with Bulgaria for rights of way to Constantinople and the Anatolian +hinterland beyond. These common commercial arteries of the Balkans take no +account of racial or political frontiers, but link the region as a whole with +other regions in a common economic relation. +</p> + +<p> +South-eastern and central Europe are complementary economic areas in a special +degree. The industries of central Europe will draw upon the raw products of the +south-east to an increasing extent, and the south-east will absorb in turn +increasing quantities of manufactured plant from central Europe for the +development of its own natural resources. The two areas will become parties in +a vast economic nexus, and, as in all business transactions, each will try to +get the best of the continually intensified bargaining. This is why +co-operation is so essential to the future well-being of the Balkan States. +Isolated individually and mutually competitive as they are at present, they +must succumb to the economic ascendancy of Vienna and Berlin as inevitably as +unorganized, unskilled labourers fall under the thraldom of a well-equipped +capitalist. Central Europe will have in any event an enormous initial +superiority over the Balkans in wealth, population, and business experience; +and the Balkan peoples can only hope to hold their own in this perilous but +essential intercourse with a stronger neighbour, if they take more active and +deliberate steps towards co-operation among themselves, and find in railway +conventions the basis for a Balkan zollverein. A zollverein should be the first +goal of Balkan statesmanship in the new phase of history that is opening for +Europe; but economic relations on this scale involve the political factor, and +the Balkans will not be able to deal with their great neighbours on equal terms +till the zollverein has ripened into a federation. The alternative is +subjection, both political and economic; and neither the exhaustion of the +Central Powers in the present struggle nor the individual consolidation of the +Balkan States in the subsequent settlement will suffice by themselves to avert +it in the end. +</p> + +<p> +The awakening of the nation and the consolidation of the state, which we have +traced in these pages, must accordingly lead on to the confederation of the +Balkans, if all that has been so painfully won is not to perish again without +result; and we are confronted with the question: Will Balkan nationalism rise +to the occasion and transcend itself? +</p> + +<p> +Many spectators of recent history will dismiss the suggestion as Utopian. +‘Nationality’, they will say, ‘revealed itself first as a +constructive force, and Europe staked its future upon it; but now that we are +committed to it, it has developed a sinister destructiveness which we cannot +remedy. Nationality brought the Balkan States into being and led them to final +victory over the Turk in 1912, only to set them tearing one another to pieces +again in 1913. In the present catastrophe the curse of the Balkans has +descended upon the whole of Europe, and laid bare unsuspected depths of chaotic +hatred; yet Balkan antagonisms still remain more ineradicable than ours. The +cure for nationality is forgetfulness, but Balkan nationalism is rooted +altogether in the past. The Balkan peoples have suffered one shattering +experience in common—the Turk, and the waters of Ottoman oppression that +have gone over their souls have not been waters of Lethe. They have endured +long centuries of spiritual exile by the passionate remembrance of their Sion, +and when they have vindicated their heritage at last, and returned to build up +the walls of their city and the temple of their national god, they have +resented each other’s neighbourhood as the repatriated Jew resented the +Samaritan. The Greek dreams with sullen intensity of a golden age before the +Bulgar was found in the land, and the challenge implied in the revival of the +Hellenic name, so far from being a superficial vanity, is the dominant +characteristic of the nationalism which has adopted it for its title. Modern +Hellenism breathes the inconscionable spirit of the <i>émigré</i>.’ +</p> + +<p> +This is only too true. The faith that has carried them to national unity will +suffice neither the Greeks nor any other Balkan people for the new era that has +dawned upon them, and the future would look dark indeed, but for a strange and +incalculable leaven, which is already potently at work in the land. +</p> + +<p> +Since the opening of the present century, the chaotic, unneighbourly races of +south-eastern Europe, whom nothing had united before but the common impress of +the Turk, have begun to share another experience in common— America. From +the Slovak villages in the Carpathians to the Greek villages in the Laconian +hills they have been crossing the Atlantic in their thousands, to become +dockers and navvies, boot-blacks and waiters, confectioners and barbers in +Chicago, St. Louis, Omaha, and all the other cities that have sprung up like +magic to welcome the immigrant to the hospitable plains of the Middle West. The +intoxication of his new environment stimulates all the latent industry and +vitality of the Balkan peasant, and he abandons himself whole-heartedly to +American life; yet he does not relinquish the national tradition in which he +grew up. In America work brings wealth, and the Greek or Slovak soon worships +his God in a finer church and reads his language in a better-printed newspaper +than he ever enjoyed in his native village. The surplus flows home in +remittances of such abundance that they are steadily raising the cost of living +in the Balkans themselves, or, in other words, the standard of material +civilization; and sooner or later the immigrant goes the way of his money +orders, for home-sickness, if not a mobilization order, exerts its compulsion +before half a dozen years are out. +</p> + +<p> +It is a strange experience to spend a night in some remote mountain-village of +Greece, and see Americanism and Hellenism face to face. Hellenism is +represented by the village schoolmaster. He wears a black coat, talks a little +French, and can probably read Homer; but his longest journey has been to the +normal school at Athens, and it has not altered his belief that the ikon in the +neighbouring monastery was made by St. Luke and the Bulgar beyond the mountains +by the Devil. On the other side of you sits the returned emigrant, chattering +irrepressibly in his queer version of the ‘American language’, and +showing you the newspapers which are mailed to him every fortnight from the +States. His clean linen collar and his well-made American boots are conspicuous +upon him, and he will deprecate on your behalf and his own the discomfort and +squalor of his native surroundings. His home-coming has been a disillusionment, +but it is a creative phenomenon; and if any one can set Greece upon a new path +it is he. He is transforming her material life by his American savings, for +they are accumulating into a capital widely distributed in native hands, which +will dispense the nation from pawning its richest mines and vineyards to the +European exploiter, and enable it to carry on their development on its own +account at this critical juncture when European sources of capital are cut off +for an indefinite period by the disaster of the European War. The emigrant will +give Greece all Trikoupis dreamed of, but his greatest gift to his country will +be his American point of view. In the West he has learnt that men of every +language and religion can live in the same city and work at the same shops and +sheds and mills and switch-yards without desecrating each other’s +churches or even suppressing each other’s newspapers, not to speak of +cutting each other’s throats; and when next he meets Albanian or Bulgar +on Balkan ground, he may remember that he has once dwelt with him in fraternity +at Omaha or St. Louis or Chicago. This is the gospel of Americanism, and unlike +Hellenism, which spread downwards from the patriarch’s residence and the +merchant’s counting-house, it is being preached in all the villages of +the land by the least prejudiced and most enterprising of their sons (for it is +these who answer America’s call); and spreading upward from the peasant +towards the professor in the university and the politician in parliament. +</p> + +<p> +Will this new leaven conquer, and cast out the stale leaven of Hellenism before +it sours the loaf? Common sense is mighty, but whether it shall prevail in +Greece and the Balkans and Europe lies on the knees of the gods. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="part05"></a>RUMANIA: HER HISTORY AND POLITICS</h2> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="chap24"></a>1<br/> +<i>Introduction</i></h2> + +<p> +The problem of the origin and formation of the Rumanian nation has always +provided matter for keen disputation among historians, and the theories which +have been advanced are widely divergent. Some of these discussions have been +undertaken solely for political reasons, and in such cases existing data prove +conveniently adaptable. This elastic treatment of the historical data is +facilitated by the fact that a long and important period affecting the +formation and the development of the Rumanian nation (270-1220) has bequeathed +practically no contemporary evidence. By linking up, however, what is known +antecedent to that period with the precise data available regarding the +following it, and by checking the inferred results with what little evidence +exists respecting the obscure epoch of Rumanian history, it has been possible +to reconstruct, almost to a certainty, the evolution of the Rumanians during +the Middle Ages. +</p> + +<p> +A discussion of the varying theories would be out of proportion, and out of +place, in this essay. Nor is it possible to give to any extent a detailed +description of the epic struggle which the Rumanians carried on for centuries +against the Turks. I shall have to deal, therefore, on broad lines, with the +historical facts—laying greater stress only upon the three fundamental +epochs of Rumanian history: the formation of the Rumanian nation; its initial +casting into a national polity (foundation of the Rumanian principalities); and +its final evolution into the actual unitary State; and shall then pass on to +consider the more recent internal and external development of Rumania, and her +present attitude. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="chap25"></a>2<br/> +<i>Formation of the Rumanian Nation</i></h2> + +<p> +About the fifth century B.C., when the population of the Balkan-Carpathian +region consisted of various tribes belonging to the Indo-European family, the +northern portion of the Balkan peninsula was conquered by the Thracians and the +Illyrians. The Thracians spread north and south, and a branch of their race, +the Dacians, crossed the Danube. The latter established themselves on both +sides of the Carpathian ranges, in the region which now comprises the provinces +of Oltenia (Rumania), and Banat and Transylvania (Hungary). The Dacian Empire +expanded till its boundaries touched upon those of the Roman Empire. The Roman +province of Moesia (between the Danube and the Balkans) fell before its armies, +and the campaign that ensued was so successful that the Dacians were able to +compel Rome to an alliance. +</p> + +<p> +Two expeditions undertaken against Dacia by the Emperor Trajan (98-117) +released Rome from these ignominious obligations, and brought Dacia under Roman +rule (A.D. 106). Before his second expedition Trajan erected a stone bridge +over the Danube, the remains of which can still be seen at Turnu-Severin, a +short distance below the point where the Danube enters Rumanian territory. +Trajan celebrated his victory by erecting at Adam Klissi (in the province of +Dobrogea) the recently discovered <i>Tropaeum Traiani</i>, and in Rome the +celebrated ‘Trajan’s Column’, depicting in marble reliefs +various episodes of the Dacian wars. +</p> + +<p> +The new Roman province was limited to the regions originally inhabited by the +Dacians, and a strong garrison, estimated by historians at 25,000 men, was left +to guard it. Numerous colonists from all parts of the Roman Empire were brought +here as settlers, and what remained of the Dacian population completely +amalgamated with them. The new province quickly developed under the impulse of +Roman civilization, of which numerous inscriptions and other archaeological +remains are evidence. It became one of the most flourishing dependencies of the +Roman Empire, and was spoken of as <i>Dacia Felix</i>. +</p> + +<p> +About a century and a half later hordes of barbarian invaders, coming from the +north and east, swept over the country. Under the strain of those incursions +the Roman legions withdrew by degrees into Moesia, and in A.D. 271 Dacia was +finally evacuated. But the colonists remained, retiring into the Carpathians, +where they lived forgotten of history. +</p> + +<p> +The most powerful of these invaders were the Goths (271-375), who, coming from +the shores of the Baltic, had shortly before settled north of the Black Sea. +Unaccustomed to mountain life, they did not penetrate beyond the plains between +the Carpathians and the Dnjester. They had consequently but little intercourse +with the Daco-Roman population, and the total absence in the Rumanian language +and in Rumanian place-names of words of Gothic origin indicates that their stay +had no influence upon country or population. Material evidence of their +occupation is afforded, however, by a number of articles made of gold found in +1837 at Petroasa (Moldavia), and now in the National Museum at Bucarest. +</p> + +<p> +After the Goths came the Huns (375-453), under Attila, the Avars (566-799), +both of Mongolian race, and the Gepidae (453-566), of Gothic race—all +savage, bloodthirsty raiders, passing and repassing over the Rumanian regions, +pillaging and burning everywhere. To avoid destruction the Daco-Roman +population withdrew more and more into the inaccessible wooded regions of the +mountains, and as a result were in no wise influenced by contact with the +invaders. +</p> + +<p> +But with the coming of the Slavs, who settled in the Balkan peninsula about the +beginning of the seventh century, certain fundamental changes took place in the +ethnical conditions prevailing on the Danube. The Rumanians were separated from +the Romans, following the occupation by the Slavs of the Roman provinces +between the Adriatic and the Black Sea. Such part of the population as was not +annihilated during the raids of the Avars was taken into captivity, or +compelled to retire southwards towards modern Macedonia and northwards towards +the Dacian regions. +</p> + +<p> +Parts of the Rumanian country became dependent upon the new state founded +between the Balkans and the Danube in 679 by the Bulgarians, a people of +Turanian origin, who formerly inhabited the regions north of the Black Sea +between the Volga and the mouth of the Danube. +</p> + +<p> +After the conversion of the Bulgarians to Christianity (864) the Slovenian +language was introduced into their Church, and afterwards also into the Church +of the already politically dependent Rumanian provinces.[1] This finally +severed the Daco-Rumanians from the Latin world. The former remained for a long +time under Slav influence, the extent of which is shown by the large number of +words of Slav origin contained in the Rumanian language, especially in +geographical and agricultural terminology. +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: The Rumanians north and south of the Danube embraced the Christian +faith after its introduction into the Roman Empire by Constantine the Great +(325), with Latin as religious language and their church organization under the +rule of Rome. A Christian basilica, dating from that period, has been +discovered by the Rumanian; archaeologist, Tocilescu, at Adam Klissi +(Dobrogea).] +</p> + +<p> +The coming of the Hungarians (a people of Mongolian race) about the end of the +ninth century put an end to the Bulgarian domination in Dacia. While a few of +the existing Rumanian duchies were subdued by Stephen the Saint, the first King +of Hungary (995-1038), the ‘land of the Vlakhs’ (<i>Terra +Blacorum</i>), in the south-eastern part of Transylvania, enjoyed under the +Hungarian kings a certain degree of national autonomy. The Hungarian chronicles +speak of the Vlakhs as ‘former colonists of the Romans’. The +ethnological influence of the Hungarians upon the Rumanian population has been +practically nil. They found the Rumanian nation firmly established, race and +language, and the latter remained pure of Magyarisms, even in Transylvania. +Indeed, it is easy to prove—and it is only what might be expected, seeing +that the Rumanians had attained a higher state of civilization than the +Hungarian invaders—that the Hungarians were largely influenced by the +Daco-Romans. They adopted Latin as their official language, they copied many of +the institutions and customs of the Rumanians, and recruited a large number of +their nobles from among the Rumanian nobility, which was already established on +a feudal basis when the Hungarians arrived. +</p> + +<p> +A great number of the Rumanian nobles and freemen were, however, inimical to +the new masters, and migrated to the regions across the mountains. This the +Hungarians used as a pretext for bringing parts of Rumania under their +domination, and they were only prevented from further extending it by the +coming of the Tartars (1241), the last people of Mongolian origin to harry +these regions. The Hungarians maintained themselves, however, in the parts +which they had already occupied, until the latter were united into the +principality of the ‘Rumanian land’. +</p> + +<p> +To sum up: ‘The Rumanians are living to-day where fifteen centuries ago +their ancestors were living. The possession of the regions on the Lower Danube +passed from one nation to another, but none endangered the Rumanian nation as a +national entity. “The water passes, the stones remain”; the hordes +of the migration period, detached from their native soil, disappeared as mist +before the sun. But the Roman element bent their heads while the storm passed +over them, clinging to the old places until the advent of happier days, when +they were able to stand up and stretch their limbs.’[1] +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: Traugott Tamm, <i>Über den Ursprung der Rumänen,</i>, Bonn, 1891.] +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="chap26"></a>3<br/> +<i>The Foundation and Development of the Rumanian Principalities</i></h2> + +<p> +The first attempt to organize itself into a political entity was made by the +Rumanian nation in the thirteenth century, when, under the impulse of the +disaffected nobles coming from Hungary, the two principalities of +‘Muntenia’ (Mountain Land), commonly known as Wallachia and +‘Moldavia’, came into being. The existence of Rumanians on both +sides of the Carpathians long before Wallachia was founded is corroborated by +contemporary chroniclers. We find evidence of it in as distant a source as the +<i>History of the Mongols,</i> of the Persian chronicler, Rashid Al-Din, who, +describing the invasion of the Tartars, says: ‘In the middle of spring +(1240) the princes (Mongols or Tartars) crossed the mountains in order to enter +the country of the Bulares (Bulgarians) and of the Bashguirds (Hungarians). +Orda, who was marching to the right, passed through the country of the Haute +(Olt), where Bazarambam met him with an army, but was beaten. Boudgek crossed +the mountains to enter the Kara-Ulak, and defeated the Ulak (Vlakh) +people.’[1] Kara-Ulak means Black Wallachia; Bazarambam is certainly the +corrupted name of the Ban Bassarab, who ruled as vassal of Hungary over the +province of Oltenia, and whose dynasty founded the principality of Muntenia. +The early history of this principality was marked by efforts to free it from +Hungarian domination, a natural development of the desire for emancipation +which impelled the Rumanians to migrate from the subdued provinces in Hungary. +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: Xenopol, <i>Histoire des Roumains,</i> Paris, 1896, i, 168.] +</p> + +<p> +The foundation of Moldavia dates from after the retreat of the Tartars, who had +occupied the country for a century (1241-1345). They were driven out by an +expedition under Hungarian leadership, with the aid of Rumanians from the +province of Maramuresh. It was the latter who then founded the principality of +Moldavia under the suzerainty of Hungary, the chroniclers mentioning as its +first ruler the Voivod Dragosh.[1] +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: The legend as to the foundation of Moldavia tells us that Dragosh, +when hunting one day in the mountains, was pursuing a bison through the dense +forest. Towards sunset, just when a successful shot from his bow had struck and +killed the animal, he emerged at a point from which the whole panorama of +Moldavia was unfolded before his astonished eyes. Deeply moved by the beauty of +this fair country, he resolved to found a state there. It is in commemoration +of this event that Moldavia bears the head of a wild bison on her banner.] +</p> + +<p> +The rudimentary political formations which already existed before the +foundation of the principalities were swept away by the invasion of the +Tartars, who destroyed all trace of constituted authority in the plains below +the Carpathians. In consequence the immigrants from Transylvania did not +encounter any resistance, and were even able to impose obedience upon the +native population, though coming rather as refugees than as conquerors. These +new-comers were mostly nobles (boyards). Their emigration deprived the masses +of the Rumanian population of Transylvania of all moral and political +support—especially as a part of the nobility had already been won over by +their Hungarian masters—and with time the masses fell into servitude. On +the other hand the immigrating nobles strengthened and secured the predominance +of their class in the states which were to be founded. In both cases the +situation of the peasantry became worse, and we have, curiously enough, the +same social fact brought about by apparently contrary causes. +</p> + +<p> +Though the Rumanians seem to have contributed but little, up to the nineteenth +century, to the advance of civilization, their part in European history is +nevertheless a glorious one, and if less apparent, perhaps of more fundamental +importance. By shedding their blood in the struggle against the Ottoman +invasion, they, together with the other peoples of Oriental Europe, procured +that security which alone made possible the development of western +civilization. Their merit, like that of all with whom they fought, ‘is +not to have vanquished time and again the followers of Mohammed, who always +ended by gaining the upper hand, but rather to have resisted with unparalleled +energy, perseverance, and bravery the terrible Ottoman invaders, making them +pay for each step advanced such a heavy price, that their resources were +drained, they were unable to carry on the fight, and thus their power came to +an end’.[1] +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: Xenopol, op. cit., i. 266.] +</p> + +<p> +From the phalanx of Christian warriors stand out the names of a few who were +the bravest of a time when bravery was common; but while it is at least due +that more tribute than a mere mention of their names should be paid to the +patriot princes who fought in life-long conflict against Turkish domination, +space does not permit me to give more than the briefest summary of the wars +which for centuries troubled the country. +</p> + +<p> +It was in 1389, when Mircea the Old was Prince of Wallachia, that the united +Balkan nations attempted for the first time to check Ottoman invasion. The +battle of Kosovo, however, was lost, and Mircea had to consent to pay tribute +to the Turks. For a short space after the battle of Rovine (1398), where Mircea +defeated an invading Turkish army, the country had peace, until Turkish +victories under the Sultan Mohammed resulted, in 1411, in further submissions +to tribute. +</p> + +<p> +It is worthy of mention that it was on the basis of tribute that the relations +between Turkey and Rumania rested until 1877, the Rumanian provinces becoming +at no time what Hungary was for a century and a half, namely, a Turkish +province. +</p> + +<p> +In a battle arising following his frustration—by means not unconnected +with his name—of a Turkish plot against his person, Vlad the Impaler +(1458-62) completely defeated the Turks under Mohammed II; but an unfortunate +feud against Stephen the Great, Prince of Moldavia, put an end to the reign of +Vlad—a fierce but just prince. +</p> + +<p> +A period of the most lamentable decadence followed, during which Turkish +domination prevailed more and more in the country. During an interval of +twenty-five years (1521-46) no less than eleven princes succeeded one another +on the throne of Muntenia, whilst of the nineteen princes who ruled during the +last three-quarters of the sixteenth century, only two died a natural death +while still reigning. +</p> + +<p> +In Moldavia also internal struggles were weakening the country. Not powerful +enough to do away with one another, the various aspirants to the throne +contented themselves with occupying and ruling over parts of the province. +Between 1443-7 there were no less than three princes reigning simultaneously, +whilst one of them, Peter III, lost and regained the throne three times. +</p> + +<p> +For forty-seven years (1457-1504) Stephen the Great fought for the independence +of Moldavia. At Racova, in 1475, he annihilated an Ottoman army in a victory +considered the greatest ever secured by the Cross against Islam. The Shah of +Persia, Uzun Hasan, who was also fighting the Turks, offered him an alliance, +urging him at the same time to induce all the Christian princes to unite with +the Persians against the common foe. These princes, as well as Pope Sixtus IV, +gave him great praise; but when Stephen asked from them assistance in men and +money, not only did he receive none, but Vladislav, King of Hungary, conspired +with his brother Albert, King of Poland, to conquer and divide Moldavia between +them. A Polish army entered the country, but was utterly destroyed by Stephen +in the forest of Kosmin. +</p> + +<p> +Having had the opportunity of judging at its right value the friendship of the +Christian princes, on his death-bed Stephen advised his son Bogdan to make +voluntary submission to the Turks. Thus Moldavia, like Wallachia, came under +Turkish suzerainty. +</p> + +<p> +For many years after Stephen’s death the Turks exploited the Rumanian +countries shamelessly, the very candidates for the throne having to pay great +sums for Turkish support. The country groaned under the resultant taxation and +the promiscuousness of the tribute exacted till, in 1572, John the Terrible +ascended the Moldavian throne. This prince refused to pay tribute, and +repeatedly defeated the Turks. An army of 100,000 men advanced against John; +but his cavalry, composed of nobles not over-loyal to a prince having the +peasant cause so much at heart, deserted to the enemy, with the result that, +after a gallant and prolonged resistance, he suffered defeat. +</p> + +<p> +Michael the Brave, Prince of Muntenia (1593-1601), was the last of the Vlakhs +to stand up against Turkish aggression. This prince not only succeeded in +crushing a Turkish army sent against him, but he invaded Transylvania, whose +prince had leanings towards Turkey, pushed further into Moldavia, and succeeded +in bringing the three Rumanian countries under his rule. Michael is described +in the documents of the time as ‘Prince of the whole land of +Hungro-Wallachia, of Transylvania, and of Moldavia’. He ruled for eight +years. ‘It was not the Turkish sword which put an end to the exploits of +Michael the Brave. The Magyars of Transylvania betrayed him; the German emperor +condemned him; and a Greek in Austria’s service, General Basta, had him +sabred: as though it were fated that all the enemies of the Rumanian race, the +Magyar, the German, and the Greek, should unite to dip their hands in the blood +of the Latin hero.’[1] The union of the Rumanian lands which he realized +did not last long; but it gave form and substance to the idea which was from +that day onward to be the ideal of the Rumanian nation. +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: Alfred Rumbaud, Introduction to Xenopol, op, cit., i. xix.] +</p> + +<p> +The fundamental cause of all the sufferings of the Rumanian principalities was +the hybrid ‘hereditary-elective’ system of succession to the +throne, which prevailed also in most of the neighbouring countries. All members +of the princely family were eligible for the succession; but the right of +selecting among them lay with an assembly composed of the higher nobility and +clergy. All was well if a prince left only one successor. But if there were +several, even if illegitimate children, claiming the right to rule, then each +endeavoured to gain over the nobility with promises, sometimes, moreover, +seeking the support of neighbouring countries. This system rendered easier and +hastened the establishment of Turkish domination; and corruption and intrigues, +in which the Sultan’s harem had a share, became capital factors in the +choice and election of the ruler. +</p> + +<p> +Economically and intellectually all this was disastrous. The Rumanians were an +agricultural people. The numerous class of small freeholders (moshneni and +razeshi), not being able to pay the exorbitant taxes, often had their lands +confiscated by the princes. Often, too, not being able to support themselves, +they sold their property and their very selves to the big landowners. Nor did +the nobles fare better. Formerly free, quasi-feudal warriors, seeking fortune +in reward for services rendered to their prince, they were often subjected to +coercive treatment on his part now that the throne depended upon the goodwill +of influential personages at Constantinople. Various civil offices were created +at court, either necessitated by the extension of the relations of the country +or intended to satisfy some favourite of the prince. Sources of social position +and great material benefit, these offices were coveted greedily by the boyards, +and those who obtained none could only hope to cheat fortune by doing their +best to undermine the position of the prince. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="chap27"></a>4<br/> +<i>The Phanariote Rule</i></h2> + +<p> +These offices very presently fell to the lot of the Phanariotes (Greek +merchants and bankers inhabiting the quarter of Phanar), who had in some way or +another assisted the princes to their thrones, these being now practically put +up to auction in Constantinople. As a natural consequence of such a state of +affairs the thoughts of the Rumanian princes turned to Russia as a possible +supporter against Ottoman oppression. A formal alliance was entered into in +1711 with Tsar Peter the Great, but a joint military action against the Turks +failed, the Tsar returned to Russia, and the Porte threatened to transform +Moldavia, in order to secure her against incipient Russian influence, into a +Turkish province with a pasha as administrator. The nobles were preparing to +leave the country, and the people to retire into the mountains, as their +ancestors had done in times of danger. It is not to be wondered at that, under +the menace of losing their autonomy, the Rumanians ‘welcomed the +nomination of the dragoman of the Porte, Nicholas Mavrocordato, though he was a +Greek. The people greeted with joy the accession of the first Phanariote to the +throne of the principality of Moldavia’[1] (1711). +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: Xenopol, op. cit., ii. 138] +</p> + +<p> +Knowledge of foreign languages had enabled the Phanariotes to obtain important +diplomatic positions at Constantinople, and they ended by acquiring the thrones +of the Rumanian principalities as a recompense for their services. But they had +to pay for it, and to make matters more profitable the Turks devised the +ingenious method of transferring the princes from one province to another, each +transference being considered as a new nomination. From 1730 to 1741 the two +reigning princes interchanged thrones in this way three times. They acquired +the throne by gold, and they could only keep it by gold. All depended upon how +much they wore able to squeeze out of the country. The princes soon became past +masters in the art of spoliation. They put taxes upon chimneys, and the +starving peasants pulled their cottages down and went to live in mountain +caves; they taxed the animals, and the peasants preferred to kill the few +beasts they possessed. But this often proved no remedy, for we are told that +the Prince Constantin Mavrocordato, having prescribed a tax on domestic animals +at a time when an epidemic had broken out amongst them, ordered the tax to be +levied on the carcasses. ‘The Administrative régime during the Phanariote +period was, in general, little else than organized brigandage,’ says +Xenopol[1]. In fact the Phanariote rule was instinct with corruption, luxury, +and intrigue. Though individually some of them may not deserve blame, yet +considering what the Phanariotes took out of the country, what they introduced +into it, and to what extent they prevented its development, their era was the +most calamitous in Rumanian history. +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: Ibid, op. cit., ii. 308] +</p> + +<p> +The war of 1768 between Russia and Turkey gave the former power a vague +protectorate over the Rumanian provinces (Treaty of Kutchuk Kainardji). In 1774 +Austria acquired from the Turks, by false promises, the northern part of +Moldavia, the pleasant land of Bucovina. During the new conflict between Turkey +and Russia, the Russian armies occupied and battened upon the Rumanian +provinces for six years. Though they had again to abandon their intention of +making the Danube the southern boundary of their empire—to which Napoleon +had agreed by the secret treaty with Tsar Alexander (Erfurt, September 27, +1808)—they obtained from Turkey the cession of Bessarabia (Treaty of +Bucarest, May 28, 1812), together with that part of Moldavia lying between the +Dnjester and the Pruth, the Russians afterwards giving to the whole region the +name of Bessarabia. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="chap28"></a>5<br/> +<i>Modern Period to 1866</i></h2> + +<p> +In 1821 the Greek revolution, striving to create an independent Greece, broke +out on Rumanian ground, supported by the princes of Moldavia and Muntenia. Of +this support the Rumanians strongly disapproved, for, if successful, the +movement would have strengthened the obnoxious Greek domination; If +unsuccessful, the Turks were sure to take a terrible revenge for the assistance +given by the Rumanian countries. The movement, which was started about the same +time by the ennobled peasant, Tudor Vladimirescu, for the emancipation of the +lower classes, soon acquired, therefore, an anti-Greek tendency. Vladimirescu +was assassinated at the instigation of the Greeks; the latter were completely +checked by the Turks, who, grown suspicious after the Greek rising and +confronted with the energetic attitude of the Rumanian nobility, consented in +1822 to the nomination of two native boyards, Jonitza Sturdza and Gregory +Ghica, recommended by their countrymen, as princes of Moldavia and Wallachia. +The iniquitous system of ‘the throne to the highest bidder’ had +come to an end. +</p> + +<p> +The period which marks the decline of Greek influence in the Rumanian +principalities also marks the growth of Russian influence; the first meant +economic exploitation, the second was a serious menace to the very existence of +the Rumanian nation. But if Russia seemed a possible future danger, Turkey with +its Phanariote following was a certain and immediate menace. When, therefore, +at the outbreak of the conflict with Turkey in 1828 the Russians once more +passed the Pruth, the country welcomed them. Indeed, the Rumanian boyards, who +after the rising of 1821 and the Turkish occupation had taken refuge in +Transylvania, had even more than once invited Russian intervention.[1] Hopes +and fears alike were realized. By the Treaty of Adrianople (1829) the rights of +Turkey as suzerain were limited to the exaction of a monetary tribute and the +right of investiture of the princes, one important innovation being that these +last were to be elected by national assemblies for life. But, on the other +hand, a Russian protectorate was established, and the provinces remained in +Russian military occupation up to 1834, pending the payment of the war +indemnity by Turkey. The ultimate aim of Russia may be open to discussion. Her +immediate aim was to make Russian influence paramount in the principalities; +this being the only possible explanation of the anomalous fact that, pending +the payment of the war indemnity, Russia herself was occupying the provinces +whose autonomy she had but now forcibly retrieved from Turkey. The <i>Règlement +Organique</i>, the new constitutional law given to the principalities by their +Russian governor, Count Kisseleff, truly reflected the tendency. From the +administrative point of view it was meant to make for progress; from the +political point of view it was meant to bind the two principalities to the will +of the Tsar. The personal charm of Count Kisseleff seemed to have established +as it were an unbreakable link between Russians and Rumanians. But when he left +the country in 1834 ‘the liking for Russia passed away to be replaced +finally by the two sentiments which always most swayed the Rumanian heart: love +for their country, and affection towards France’. +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: Sec P. Eliade, <i>Histoire de l’Esprit Public en +Roumanie</i>, i, p. 167 et seq.] +</p> + +<p> +French culture had been introduced into the principalities by the Phanariote +princes who, as dragomans of the Porte, had to know the language, and usually +employed French secretaries for themselves and French tutors for their +children. With the Russian occupation a fresh impetus was given to French +culture, which was pre-eminent in Russia at the time; and the Russian +officials, not speaking the language of the country, generally employed French +in their relations with the Rumanian authorities, French being already widely +spoken in Rumania. The contact with French civilization, at an epoch when the +Rumanians were striving to free themselves from Turkish, Greek, and Russian +political influence, roused in them the sleeping Latin spirit, and the younger +generation, in constantly increasing numbers, flocked to Paris in search of new +forms of civilization and political life. At this turning-point in their +history the Rumanians felt themselves drawn towards France, no less by racial +affinity than by the liberal ideas to which that country had so passionately +given herself during several decades. +</p> + +<p> +By the Treaty of Adrianople the Black Sea was opened to the commercial vessels +of all nations. This made for the rapid economic development of the +principalities by providing an outlet for their agricultural produce, the chief +source of their wealth. It also brought them nearer to western Europe, which +began to be interested in a nation whose spirit centuries of sufferings had +failed to break. Political, literary, and economic events thus prepared the +ground for the Rumanian Renascence, and when in 1848 the great revolution broke +out, it spread at once over the Rumanian countries, where the dawn of freedom +had been struggling to break since 1821. The Rumanians of Transylvania rose +against the tyranny of the Magyars; those of Moldavia and Muntenia against the +oppressive influence of Russia. The movement under the gallant, but +inexperienced, leadership of a few patriots, who, significantly enough, had +almost all been educated in France, was, however, soon checked in the +principalities by the joint action of Russian and Turkish forces which remained +in occupation of the country. Many privileges were lost (Convention of Balta +Liman, May 1, 1849); but the revolution had quickened the national sentiment of +the younger generation in all classes of society, and the expatriated leaders, +dispersed throughout the great capitals of Europe, strenuously set to work to +publish abroad the righteous cause of their country. In this they received the +enthusiastic and invaluable assistance of Edgar Quinet, Michelet, Saint-Marc +Girardin, and others. +</p> + +<p> +This propaganda had the fortune to be contemporaneous and in agreement with the +political events leading to the Crimean War, which was entered upon to check +the designs of Russia. A logical consequence was the idea, raised at the Paris +Congress of 1856, of the union of the Rumanian principalities as a barrier to +Russian expansion. This idea found a powerful supporter in Napoleon III, ever a +staunch upholder of the principle of nationality. But at the Congress the +unexpected happened. Russia favoured the idea of union, ‘to swallow the +two principalities at a gulp,’ as a contemporary diplomatist maliciously +suggested; while Austria opposed it strongly. So, inconceivably enough, did +Turkey, whose attitude, as the French ambassador at Constantinople, Thouvenel, +put it, ‘was less influenced by the opposition of Austria than by the +approval of Russia’.[1] Great Britain also threw in her weight with the +powers which opposed the idea of union, following her traditional policy of +preserving the European equilibrium. The treaty of March 30, 1856, +re-incorporated with Moldavia the southern part of Bessarabia, including the +delta of the Danube, abolished the Russian protectorate, but confirmed the +suzerainty of Turkey—not unnaturally, since the integrity of the Ottoman +Empire had been the prime motive of the war. By prohibiting Turkey, however, +from entering Rumanian territory, save with the consent of the great powers, it +was recognized indirectly that the suzerainty was merely a nominal one. Article +23 of the treaty, by providing that the administration of the principalities +was to be on a national basis, implicitly pointed to the idea of union, as the +organization of one principality independently of the other would not have been +national. But as the main argument of Turkey and Austria was that the Rumanians +themselves did not desire the union, it was decided to convene in both +principalities special assemblies (divans <i>ad hoc</i>) representing all +classes of the population, whose wishes were to be embodied, by a European +commission, in a report for consideration by the Congress. +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: A. Xenopol, <i>Unionistii si Separatistii</i> (Paper read before +the Rumanian Academy), 1909.] +</p> + +<p> +To understand the argument of the two powers concerned and the decision to +which it led, it must be borne in mind that the principalities were in the +occupation of an Austrian army, which had replaced the Russian armies withdrawn +in 1854, and that the elections for the assemblies were to be presided over by +Turkish commissaries. Indeed, the latter, in collaboration with the Austrian +consuls, so successfully doctored the election lists,[1] that the idea of union +might once more have fallen through, had it not been for the invaluable +assistance which Napoleon III gave the Rumanian countries. As Turkish policy +was relying mainly on England’s support, Napoleon brought about a +personal meeting with Queen Victoria and Prince Albert, at Osborne (August +1857), the result of which was a compromise: Napoleon agreed to defer for the +time being the idea of an effective union of the two principalities, England +undertaking, on the other hand, to make the Porte cancel the previous +elections, and proceed to new ones after revision of the electoral lists. The +corrupt Austrian and Turkish influence on the old elections was best +demonstrated by the fact that only three of the total of eighty-four old +members succeeded in securing re-election. The assemblies met and proclaimed as +imperatively necessary to the future welfare of the provinces, their union, +‘for no frontier divides us, and everything tends to bring us closer, and +nothing to separate us, save the ill-will of those who desire to see us +disunited and weak’; further, a foreign hereditary dynasty, because +‘the accession to the throne of princes chosen from amongst us has been a +constant pretext for foreign interference, and the throne has been the cause of +unending feud among the great families of this country’. Moreover, if the +union of the two principalities was to be accomplished under a native prince, +it is obvious that the competition would have become doubly keen; not to speak +of the jealousies likely to be arousal between Moldavians and Muntenians. +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: The edifying correspondence between the Porte and its commissary +Vorgoridès regarding the arrangements for the Rumanian elections fell into the +hands of Rumanian politicians, and caused a great sensation when it appeared in +<i>L’Etoile du Danube</i>, published in Brussels by Rumanian +<i>émigrés</i>.] +</p> + +<p> +Such were the indisputable wishes of the Rumanians, based on knowledge of men +and facts, and arising out of the desire to see their country well started on +the high road of progress. But Europe had called for the expression of these +wishes only to get the question shelved for the moment, as in 1856 everybody +was anxious for a peace which should at all costs be speedy. Consequently, when +a second Congress met in Paris, in May 1858, three months of discussion and the +sincere efforts of France only resulted in a hybrid structure entitled the +‘United Principalities’. These were to have a common legislation, a +common army, and a central committee composed of representatives of both +assemblies for the discussion of common affairs; but were to continue to form +two separate states, with independent legislative and executive institutions, +each having to elect a prince of Rumanian descent for life. +</p> + +<p> +Disappointed in their hopes and reasonable expectations, the Rumanians adopted +the principle of ‘help yourself and God will help you’, and +proceeded to the election of their rulers. Several candidates competed in +Moldavia. To avoid a split vote the name of an outsider was put forward the day +before the election, and on January 17, 1859, Colonel Alexander Ioan Cuza was +unanimously elected. In Wallachia the outlook was very uncertain when the +assembly met, amid great popular excitement, on February 5. The few patriots +who had realized that the powers, seeking only their own interests, were +consciously and of set purpose hampering the emancipation of a long-suffering +nation, put forth and urged the election of Cuza, and the assembly unanimously +adopted this spirited suggestion. By this master-stroke the Rumanians had +quietly accomplished the reform which was an indispensable condition towards +assuring a better future. The political moment was propitious. Italy’s +military preparation prevented Austria from intervening, and, as usual when +confronted with an accomplished fact, the great powers and Turkey finished by +officially recognizing the action of the principalities in December 1861. The +central commission was at once abolished, the two assemblies and cabinets +merged into one, and Bucarest became the capital of the new state +‘Rumania’. +</p> + +<p> +If the unsympathetic attitude of the powers had any good result, it was to +bring home for the moment to the Rumanians the necessity for national unity. +When the danger passed, however, the wisdom which it had evoked followed suit. +Cuza cherished the hope of realizing various ideal reforms. Confronted with +strong opposition, he did not hesitate to override the constitution by +dissolving the National Assembly (May 2, 1864) and arrogating to himself the +right, till the formation of a new Chamber, to issue decrees which had all the +force of law. He thus gave a dangerous example to the budding constitutional +polity; political passions were let loose, and a plot organized by the +Opposition led to the forced abdication of Cuza on February 23, 1866. The +prince left the country for ever a few days later. No disturbance whatever took +place, not one drop of blood was shed. +</p> + +<p> +A series of laws, mostly adapted from French models, was introduced by Cuza. +Under the Education Act of 1864 all degrees of education were free, and +elementary education compulsory. A large number of special and technical +schools were founded, as well as two universities, one at Jassy (1860) and one +at Bucarest (1864). After the <i>coup d’état</i> of 1864 universal +suffrage was introduced, largely as an attempt to ‘swamp’ the +fractious political parties with the peasant vote; while at the same time a +‘senate’ was created as a ‘moderating assembly’ which, +composed as it was of members by right and members nominated by the prince, by +its very nature increased the influence of the crown. The chief reforms +concerned the rural question. Firstly, Cuza and his minister, Cogalniceanu, +secularized and converted to the state the domains of the monasteries, which +during the long period of Greek influence had acquired one-fifth of the total +area of the land, and were completely in the hands of the Greek clergy (Law of +December 13, 1863). More important still, as affecting fundamentally the social +structure of the country, was the Rural Law (promulgated on August 26, 1864), +which had been the cause of the conflict between Cuza and the various political +factions, the Liberals clamouring for more thorough reforms, the Conservatives +denouncing Cuza’s project as revolutionary. As the peasant question is +the most important problem left for Rumania to solve, and as I believe that, in +a broad sense, it has a considerable bearing upon the present political +situation in that country, it may not be out of place here to devote a little +space to its consideration. +</p> + +<p> +Originally the peasant lived in the village community as a free land-owner. He +paid a certain due (one-tenth of his produce and three days’ labour +yearly) to his leader (<i>cneaz</i>) as recompense for his leadership in peace +and war. The latter, moreover, solely enjoyed the privilege of carrying on the +occupations of miller and innkeeper, and the peasant was compelled to mill with +him. When after the foundation of the principalities the upper class was +established on a feudal basis, the peasantry were subjected to constantly +increasing burdens. Impoverished and having in many cases lost their land, the +peasants were also deprived at the end of the sixteenth century of their +freedom of movement. By that time the cneaz, from being the leader of the +community, had become the actual lord of the village, and his wealth was +estimated by the number of villages he possessed. The peasant owners paid their +dues to him in labour and in kind. Those peasants who owned no land were his +serfs, passing with the land from master to master. +</p> + +<p> +Under the Turkish domination the Rumanian provinces became the granary of the +Ottoman Empire. The value of land rose quickly, as did also the taxes. To meet +these taxes—from the payment of which the boyards (the descendants of the +cneazi) were exempt—the peasant owners had frequently to sacrifice their +lands; while, greedy after the increased benefits, the boyards used all +possible means to acquire more land for themselves. With the increase of their +lands they needed more labour, and they obtained permission from the ruler not +only to exact increased labour dues from the peasantry, but also to determine +the amount of work that should be done in a day. This was effected in such a +way that the peasants had, in fact, to serve three and four times the number of +days due. +</p> + +<p> +The power to acquire more land from the freeholders, and to increase the amount +of labour due by the peasants, was characteristic of the legislation of the +eighteenth century. By a decree of Prince Moruzi, in 1805, the lords were for +the first time empowered to reserve to their own use part of the estate, +namely, one-fourth of the meadow land, and this privilege was extended in 1828 +to the use of one-third of the arable land. The remaining two-thirds were +reserved for the peasants, every young married couple being entitled to a +certain amount of land, in proportion to the number of traction animals they +owned. When the Treaty of Adrianople of 1829 opened the western markets to +Rumanian corn, in which markets far higher prices were obtainable than from the +Turks, Rumanian agriculture received an extraordinary impetus. Henceforth the +efforts of the boyards were directed towards lessening the amount of land to +which the peasants were entitled. By the <i>Règlement Organique</i> they +succeeded in reducing such land to half its previous area, at the same time +maintaining and exacting from the peasant his dues in full. It is in the same +Act that there appears for the first time the fraudulent title ‘lords of +the land’, though the boyards had no exclusive right of property; they +had the use of one-third of the estate, and a right to a due in labour and in +kind from the peasant holders, present or prospective, of the other two-thirds. +</p> + +<p> +With a view to ensuring, on the one hand, greater economic freedom to the +land-owners, and, on the other, security for the peasants from the enslaving +domination of the upper class, the rural law of 1864 proclaimed the +peasant-tenants full proprietors of their holdings, and the land-owners full +proprietors of the remainder of the estate. The original intention of creating +common land was not carried out in the Bill. The peasant’s holding in +arable land being small, he not infrequently ploughed his pasture, and, as a +consequence, had either to give up keeping beasts, or pay a high price to the +land-owners for pasturage. Dues in labour and in kind were abolished, the +land-owners receiving an indemnity which was to be refunded to the state by the +peasants in instalments within a period of fifteen years. This reform is +characteristic of much of the legislation of Cuza: despotically pursuing the +realization of some ideal reform, without adequate study of and adaptation to +social circumstances, his laws provided no practical solution of the problem +with which they dealt. In this case, for example, the reform benefited the +upper class solely, although generally considered a boon to the peasantry. Of +ancient right two-thirds of the estate were reserved for the peasants; but the +new law gave them possession of no more than the strip they were holding, which +barely sufficed to provide them with the mere necessaries of life. The +remainder up to two-thirds of the estate went as a gift, with full +proprietorship; to the boyard. For the exemption of their dues in kind and in +labour, the peasants had to pay an indemnity, whereas the right of their sons +to receive at their marriage a piece of land in proportion to the number of +traction animals they possessed was lost without compensation. Consequently, +the younger peasants had to sell their labour, contracting for periods of a +year and upwards, and became a much easier prey to the spoliation of the upper +class than when they had at least a strip of land on which to build a hut, and +from which to procure their daily bread; the more so as the country had no +industry which could compete with agriculture in the labour market. An +investigation undertaken by the Home Office showed that out of 1,265 labour +contracts for 1906, chosen at random, only 39.7 per cent, were concluded at +customary wages; the others were lower in varying degrees, 13.2 per cent. of +the cases showing wages upwards of 75 per cent. below the usual rates. +</p> + +<p> +Under these conditions of poverty and economic serfdom the peasantry was not +able to participate in the enormous development of Rumanian agriculture, which +had resulted from increased political security and the establishment of an +extensive network of railways. While the boyards found an increasing attraction +in politics, a new class of middlemen came into existence, renting the land +from the boyards for periods varying generally from three to five years. Owing +to the resultant competition, rents increased considerably, while conservative +methods of cultivation kept production stationary. Whereas the big cultivator +obtained higher prices to balance the increased cost of production, the +peasant, who produced for his own consumption, could only face such increase by +a corresponding decrease in the amount of food consumed. To show how much alive +the rural question is, it is enough to state that peasant risings occurred in +1888, 1889, 1894, 1900, and 1907; that new distributions of land took place in +1881 and 1889; that land was promised to the peasants as well at the time of +the campaign of 1877 as at that of 1913; and that more or less happily +conceived measures concerning rural questions have been passed in almost every +parliamentary session. The general tendency of such legislation partook of the +‘free contract’ nature, though owing to the social condition of the +peasantry the acts in question had to embody protective measures providing for +a maximum rent for arable and pasture land, and a minimum wage for the peasant +labourer. +</p> + +<p> +Solutions have been suggested in profusion. That a solution is possible no one +can doubt. One writer, basing his arguments on official statistics which show +that the days of employment in 1905 averaged only ninety-one for each peasant, +claims that only the introduction of circulating capital and the creation of +new branches of activity can bring about a change. The suggested remedy may be +open to discussion; but our author is undoubtedly right when, asking himself +why this solution has not yet been attempted, he says: ‘Our country is +governed at present by an agrarian class…. Her whole power rests in her +ownership of the land, our only wealth. The introduction of circulating capital +would result in the disintegration of that wealth, in the loss of its unique +quality, and, as a consequence, in the social decline of its +possessors.’[1] This is the fundamental evil which prevents any solution +of the rural question. A small class of politicians, with the complicity of a +large army of covetous and unscrupulous officials, live in oriental indolence +out of the sufferings of four-fifths of the Rumanian nation. Though elementary +education is compulsory, more than 60 per cent. of the population are still +illiterate, mainly on account of the inadequacy of the educational budget. +Justice is a myth for the peasant. Of political rights he is, in fact, +absolutely deprived. The large majority, and by far the sanest part of the +Rumanian nation, are thus fraudulently kept outside the political and social +life of the country. It is not surmising too much, therefore, to say that the +opportunity of emancipating the Transylvanians would not have been wilfully +neglected, had that part of the Rumanian nation in which the old spirit still +survives had any choice in the determination of their own fate. +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: St. Antim, <i>Cbestiunea Socială în România,</i> 1908, p. 214.] +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="chap29"></a>6<br/> +<i>Contemporary Period: Internal Development</i></h2> + +<p> +In order to obviate internal disturbances or external interference, the leaders +of the movement which had dethroned Prince Cuza caused parliament to proclaim, +on the day of Cuza’s abdication, Count Philip of Flanders— the +father of King Albert of Belgium—Prince of Rumania. The offer was, +however, not accepted, as neither France nor Russia favoured the proposal. +Meanwhile a conference had met again in Paris at the instance of Turkey and +vetoed the election of a foreign prince. But events of deeper importance were +ripening in Europe, and the Rumanian politicians rightly surmised that the +powers would not enforce their protests if a candidate were found who was +likely to secure the support of Napoleon III, then ‘schoolmaster’ +of European diplomacy. This candidate was found in the person of Prince Carol +of Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen, second son of the head of the elder branch of the +Hohenzollerns (Catholic and non-reigning). Prince Carol was cousin to the King +of Prussia, and related through his grandmother to the Bonaparte family. He +could consequently count upon the support of France and Prussia, while the +political situation fortunately secured him from the opposition of Russia, +whose relations with Prussia were at the time friendly, and also from that of +Austria, whom Bismarck proposed to ‘keep busy for some time to +come’. The latter must have viewed with no little satisfaction the +prospect of a Hohenzollern occupying the throne of Rumania at this juncture; +and Prince Carol, allowing himself to be influenced by the Iron +Chancellor’s advice, answered the call of the Rumanian nation, which had +proclaimed him as ‘Carol I, Hereditary Prince of Rumania’. +Travelling secretly with a small retinue, the prince second class, his suite +first, Prince Carol descended the Danube on an Austrian steamer, and landed on +May 8 at Turnu-Severin, the very place where, nearly eighteen centuries before, +the Emperor Trajan had alighted and founded the Rumanian nation. +</p> + +<p> +By independent and energetic action, by a conscious neglect of the will of the +powers, which only a young constitutional polity would have dared, by an active +and unselfish patriotism, Rumania had at last chosen and secured as her ruler +the foreign prince who alone had a chance of putting a stop to intrigues from +within and from without. And the Rumanians had been extremely fortunate in +their hasty and not quite independent choice. A prince of Latin origin would +probably have been more warmly welcomed to the hearts of the Rumanian people; +but after so many years of political disorder, corrupt administration, and +arbitrary rule, a prince possessed of the German spirit of discipline and order +was best fitted to command respect and impose obedience and sobriety of +principle upon the Rumanian politicians. +</p> + +<p> +Prince Carol’s task was no easy one. The journal compiled by the +provisional government, which held the reins for the period elapsing between +the abdication of Cuza and the accession of Prince Carol, depicts in the +darkest colours the economic situation to which the faults, the waste, the +negligence, and short-sightedness of the previous régime had reduced the +country, ‘the government being in the humiliating position of having +brought disastrous and intolerable hardship alike upon its creditors, its +servants, its pensioners, and its soldiers’.[1] Reforms were badly +needed, and the treasury had nothing in hand but debts. To increase the income +of the state was difficult, for the country was poor and not economically +independent. Under the Paris Convention of 1858, Rumania remained bound, to her +detriment, by the commercial treaties of her suzerain, Turkey, the powers not +being willing to lose the privileges they enjoyed under the Turkish +capitulations. Moreover, she was specially excluded from the arrangement of +1860, which allowed Turkey to increase her import taxes. The inheritance of +ultra-liberal measures from the previous regime made it difficult to cope with +the unruly spirit of the nation. Any attempt at change in this direction would +have savoured of despotism to the people, who, having at last won the right to +speak aloud, believed that to clamour against anything that meant +‘rule’ was the only real and full assertion of liberty. And the +dissatisfied were always certain of finding a sympathetic ear and an open purse +in the Chancellories of Vienna and St. Petersburg. +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: D.A. Sturdza, <i>Treizeci de ani de Domnie ai Regelui Carol,</i> +1900, i.82.] +</p> + +<p> +Prince Carol, not being sufficiently well acquainted with the conditions of the +country nor possessing as yet much influence with the governing class, had not +been in a position to influence at their inception the provisions of the +extremely liberal constitution passed only a few weeks after his accession to +the throne. The new constitution, which resembled that of Belgium more nearly +than any other, was framed by a constituent assembly elected on universal +suffrage, and, except for slight modifications introduced in 1879 and 1884, is +in vigour to-day. It entrusts the executive to the king and his ministers, the +latter alone being responsible for the acts of the government.[1] The +legislative power is vested in the king and two assemblies—a senate and a +chamber—the initiative resting with any one of the three.[2] The budget +and the yearly bills fixing the strength of the army, however, must first be +passed by the Chamber. The agreement of the two Chambers and the sanction of +the king are necessary before any bill becomes law. The king convenes, +adjourns, and dissolves parliament. He promulgates the laws and is invested +with the right of absolute veto. The constitution proclaims the inviolability +of domicile, the liberty of the press and of assembly, and absolute liberty of +creed and religion, in so far as its forms of celebration do not come into +conflict with public order and decency. It recognizes no distinction of class +and privilege; all the citizens share equally rights and duties within the law. +Education is free in the state schools, and elementary education compulsory +wherever state schools exist. Individual liberty and property are guaranteed; +but only Rumanian citizens can acquire rural property. Military service is +compulsory, entailing two years in the infantry, three years in the cavalry and +artillery, one year in all arms for those having completed their studies as far +as the university stage. Capital punishment does not exist, except for military +offences in time of war. +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: There are at present nine departments: Interior, Foreign Affairs, +Finance, War, Education and Religion, Domains and Agriculture, Public Works, +Justice, and Industry and Commerce. The President of the Cabinet is Prime +Minister, with or without portfolio.] +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 2: All citizens of full age paying taxes, with various exemptions, +are electors, voting according to districts and census. In the case of the +illiterate country inhabitants, with an income from land of less than £12 a +year, fifty of them choose one delegate having one vote in the parliamentary +election. The professorial council of the two universities of Jassy and +Bucarest send one member each to the Senate, the heir to the throne and the +eight bishops being members by right.] +</p> + +<p> +The state religion is Greek Orthodox. Up to 1864 the Rumanian Church was +subordinate to the Patriarchate of Constantinople. In that year it was +proclaimed independent, national, and autocephalous, though this change was not +recognized by the Patriarchate till 1885, while the secularization of the +property of the monasteries put an end <i>de facto</i> to the influence of the +Greek clergy. Religious questions of a dogmatic nature are settled by the Holy +Synod of Bucarest, composed of the two metropolitans of Bucarest and Jassy and +the eight bishops; the Minister for Education, with whom the administrative +part of the Church rests, having only a deliberative vote. The maintenance of +the Church and of the clergy is included in the general budget of the country, +the ministers being state officials (Law of 1893). +</p> + +<p> +Religion has never played an important part in Rumanian national life, and was +generally limited to merely external practices. This may be attributed largely +to the fact that as the Slavonic language had been used in the Church since the +ninth century and then was superseded by Greek up to the nineteenth century, +the clergy was foreign, and was neither in a position nor did it endeavour to +acquire a spiritual influence over the Rumanian peasant. There is no record +whatever in Rumanian history of any religious feuds or dissensions. The +religious passivity remained unstirred even during the domination of the Turks, +who contented themselves with treating the unbelievers with contempt, and +squeezing as much money as possible out of them. Cuza having made no provision +for the clergy when he converted the wealth of the monasteries to the state, +they were left for thirty years in complete destitution, and remained as a +consequence outside the general intellectual development of the country. Though +the situation has much improved since the Law of 1893, which incorporated the +priests with the other officials of the Government, the clergy, recruited +largely from among the rural population, are still greatly inferior to the +Rumanian priests of Bucovina and Transylvania. Most of them take up Holy orders +as a profession: ‘I have known several country parsons who were thorough +atheists.’[1] +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: R. Rosetti, <i>Pentru ce s-au răsculat țăranii</i>, 1907, p. 600] +</p> + +<p> +However difficult his task, Prince Carol never deviated from the strictly +constitutional path: his opponents were free to condemn the prince’s +opinions; he never gave them the chance of questioning his integrity. +</p> + +<p> +Prince Carol relied upon the position in which his origin and family alliances +placed him in his relations with foreign rulers to secure him the respect of +his new subjects. Such considerations impressed the Rumanians. Nor could they +fail to be aware of ‘the differences between the previously elected +princes and the present dynasty, and the improved position which the country +owed to the latter’.[1] +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: Augenzeuge, <i>Aus dem Leben König Karls von Rumănien, +1894-1900,</i> iii. 177.] +</p> + +<p> +To inculcate the Rumanians with the spirit of discipline the prince took in +hand with energy and pursued untiringly, in spite of all obstacles, the +organization of the army. A reliable and well-organized armed force was the +best security against internal trouble-mongers, and the best argument in +international relations, as subsequent events amply proved. +</p> + +<p> +The Rumanian political parties were at the outset personal parties, supporting +one or other of the candidates to the throne. When Greek influence, emanating +from Constantinople, began to make itself felt, in the seventeenth century, a +national party arose for the purpose of opposing it. This party counted upon +the support of one of the neighbouring powers, and its various groups were +known accordingly as the Austrian, the Russian, &c., parties. With the +election of Cuza the external danger diminished, and the politicians divided +upon principles of internal reform. Cuza not being in agreement with either +party, they united to depose him, keeping truce during the period preceding the +accession of Prince Carol, when grave external dangers wore threatening, and +presiding in a coalition ministry at the introduction of the new constitution +of 1866. But this done, the truce was broken. Political strife again awoke with +all the more vigour for having been temporarily suppressed. +</p> + +<p> +The reforms which it became needful to introduce gave opportunity for the +development of strong divergence of views between the political parties. The +Liberals—the Red Party, as they were called at the time—(led by +C.A. Rosetti and Ioan Bratianu, both strong Mazzinists, both having taken an +important part in the revolutionary movements of 1848 and in that which led to +the deposition of Cuza) were advocating reforms hardly practicable even in an +established democracy; the Conservatives (led by Lascar Catargiu) were striving +to stem the flood of ideal liberal measures on which all sense of reality was +being carried away.[1] In little more than a year there were four different +Cabinets, not to mention numerous changes in individual ministers. +‘Between the two extreme tendencies Prince Carol had to strive constantly +to preserve unity of direction, he himself being the only stable element in +that ever unstable country.’ It was not without many untoward incidents +that he succeeded. His person was the subject of more than one unscrupulous +attack by politicians in opposition, who did not hesitate to exploit the German +origin and the German sympathies of the prince in order to inflame the masses. +These internal conflicts entered upon an acute phase at the time of the +Franco-German conflict of 1870. Whilst, to satisfy public opinion, the Foreign +Secretary of the time, M.P.P. Carp, had to declare in parliament, that +‘wherever the colours of France are waving, there are our interests and +sympathies’, the prince wrote to the King of Prussia assuring him that +‘his sympathies will always be where the black and white banner is +waving’. In these so strained circumstances a section of the population +of Bucarest allowed itself to be drawn into anti-German street riots. +Disheartened and despairing of ever being able to do anything for that +‘beautiful country’, whose people ‘neither know how to govern +themselves nor will allow themselves to be governed’, the prince decided +to abdicate. +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: A few years ago a group of politicians, mainly of the old +Conservative party, detached themselves and became the Conservative-Democratic +party under the leadership of M. Take Ionescu.] +</p> + +<p> +So strong was the feeling in parliament roused by the prince’s decision +that one of his most inveterate opponents now declared that it would be an act +of high treason for the prince to desert the country at such a crisis. We have +an inkling of what might have resulted in the letter written by the Emperor of +Austria to Prince Carol at the time, assuring him that ‘my Government +will eagerly seize any opportunity which presents itself to prove by deeds the +interest it takes in a country connected by so many bonds to my empire’. +Nothing but the efforts of Lascar Catargiu and the sound patriotism of a few +statesmen saved the country from what would have been a real misfortune. The +people were well aware of this, and cheers lasting several minutes greeted that +portion of the message from the throne which conveyed to the new parliament the +decision of the prince to continue reigning. +</p> + +<p> +The situation was considerably strengthened during a period of five +years’ Conservative rule. Prince Carol’s high principles and the +dignified example of his private life secured for him the increasing respect of +politicians of all colours; while his statesmanlike qualities, his patience and +perseverance, soon procured him an unlimited influence in the affairs of the +state. This was made the more possible from the fact that, on account of the +political ignorance of the masses, and of the varied influence exercised on the +electorate by the highly centralized administration, no Rumanian Government +ever fails to obtain a majority at an election. Any statesman can undertake to +form a Cabinet if the king assents to a dissolution of parliament. Between the +German system, where the emperor chooses the ministers independently of +parliament, and the English system, where the members of the executive are +indicated by the electorate through the medium of parliament, independently of +the Crown, the Rumanian system takes a middle path. Neither the crown, nor the +electorate, nor parliament possesses exclusive power in this direction. The +Government is not, generally speaking, defeated either by the electorate or by +parliament. It is the Crown which has the final decision in the changes of +régime, and upon the king falls the delicate task of interpreting the +significance of political or popular movements. The system—which comes +nearest to that of Spain—undoubtedly has its advantages in a young and +turbulent polity, by enabling its most stable element, the king, to ensure a +continuous and harmonious policy. But it also makes the results dangerously +dependent on the quality of that same element. Under the leadership of King +Carol it was an undoubted success; the progress made by the country from an +economic, financial, and military point of view during the last half-century is +really enormous. Its position was furthermore strengthened by the proclamation +of its independence, by the final settlement of the dynastic question,[1] and +by its elevation on May 10, 1881, to the rank of kingdom, when upon the head of +the first King of Rumania was placed a crown of steel made from one of the guns +captured before Plevna from an enemy centuries old. +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: In the absence of direct descendants and according to the +constitution, Prince Ferdinand (born 1865), second son of King Carol’s +elder brother, was named Heir Apparent to the Rumanian throne. He married in +1892 Princess Marie of Coburg, and following the death of King Carol in 1914, +he acceded to the throne as Ferdinand I.] +</p> + +<p> +From the point of view of internal politics progress has been less +satisfactory. The various reforms once achieved, the differences of principle +between the political parties degenerated into mere opportunism, the Opposition +opposing, the Government disposing. The parties, and especially the various +groups within the parties, are generally known by the names of their leaders, +these denominations not implying any definite political principle or Government +programme. It is, moreover, far from edifying that the personal element should +so frequently distort political discussion. ‘The introduction of modern +forms of state organization has not been followed by the democratization of all +social institutions…. The masses of the people have remained all but completely +outside political life. Not only are we yet far from government of the people +by the people, but our liberties, though deeply graven on the facade of our +constitution, have not permeated everyday life nor even stirred in the +consciousness of the people.’[1] +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: C. Stere, <i>Social-democratizm sau Poporanizm</i>, Jassy.] +</p> + +<p> +It is strange that King Carol, who had the welfare of the people sincerely at +heart, should not have used his influence to bring about a solution of the +rural question; but this may perhaps be explained by the fact that, from +Cuza’s experience, he anticipated opposition from all political factions. +It would almost seem as if, by a tacit understanding, and anxious to establish +Rumania’s international position, King Carol gave his ministers a free +hand in the rural question, reserving for himself an equally free hand in +foreign affairs. This seems borne out by the fact that, in the four volumes in +which an ‘eyewitness’, making use of the king’s private +correspondence and personal notes, has minutely described the first fifteen +years of the reign, the peasant question is entirely ignored.[1] +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: The ‘eyewitness’ was Dr. Schaeffer, formerly tutor to +Prince Carol.] +</p> + +<p> +Addressing himself, in 1871, to the Rumanian representative at the Porte, the +Austrian ambassador, von Prokesch-Osten, remarked: ‘If Prince Carol +manages to pull through without outside help, and make Rumania governable, it +will be the greatest <i>tour de force</i> I have ever witnessed in my +diplomatic career of more than half a century. It will be nothing less than a +conjuring trick.’ King Carol succeeded; and only those acquainted with +Rumanian affairs can appreciate the truth of the ambassador’s words. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="chap30"></a>7<br/> +<i>Contemporary Period: Foreign Affairs</i></h2> + +<p> +Up to 1866 Rumanian foreign politics may be said to have been non-existent. The +offensive or defensive alliances against the Turks concluded by the Rumanian +rulers with neighbouring princes during the Middle Ages were not made in +pursuance of any definite policy, but merely to meet the moment’s need. +With the establishment of Turkish suzerainty Rumania became a pawn in the +foreign politics of the neighbouring empires, and we find her repeatedly +included in their projects of acquisition, partition, or compensation (as, for +instance, when she was put forward as eventual compensation to Poland for the +territories lost by that country in the first partition).[1] Rumania may be +considered fortunate in not having lost more than Bucovina to Austria (1775), +Bessarabia to Russia (1812), and, temporarily, to Austria the region between +the Danube and the Aluta, called Oltenia (lost by the Treaty of Passarowitz, +1718; recovered by the Treaty of Belgrade, 1739). +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: See Albert Sorel, <i>The Eastern Question in the Eighteenth +Century</i> (Engl. ed.), 1898, pp. 141, 147 &c.] +</p> + +<p> +While her geographical position made of Rumania the cynosure of many covetous +eyes, it at the same time saved her from individual attack by exciting +countervailing jealousies. Moreover, the powers came at last to consider her a +necessary rampart to the Ottoman Empire, whose dissolution all desired but none +dared attempt. Austria and Russia, looking to the future, were continually +competing for paramount influence in Rumania, though it is not possible to +determine where their policy of acquisition ended and that of influence began. +</p> + +<p> +The position of the principalities became more secure after the Paris Congress +of 1858, which placed them under the collective guarantee of the great powers; +but this fact, and the maintenance of Turkish suzerainty, coupled with their +own weakness, debarred them from any independence in their foreign relations. +</p> + +<p> +A sudden change took place with the accession of Prince Carol; a Hohenzollern +prince related to the King of Prussia and to Napoleon III could not be treated +like one of the native boyards. The situation called for the more delicacy of +treatment by the powers in view of the possibility of his being able to better +those internal conditions which made Rumania ‘uninteresting’ as a +factor in international politics. In fact, the prince’s personality +assured for Rumania a status which she could otherwise have attained only with +time, by a political, economic, and military consolidation of her home affairs; +and the prince does not fail to remark in his notes that the attentions +lavished upon him by other sovereigns were meant rather for the Hohenzollern +prince than for the Prince of Rumania. Many years later even, after the war of +1878, while the Russians were still south of the Danube with their lines of +communication running through Rumania, Bratianu begged of the prince to give up +a projected journey on account of the difficulties which might at any moment +arise, and said: ‘Only the presence of your Royal Highness keeps them +[the Russians] at a respectful distance.’ It was but natural under these +circumstances that the conduct of foreign affairs should have devolved almost +exclusively on the prince. The ascendancy which his high personal character, +his political and diplomatic skill, his military capacity procured for him over +the Rumanian statesmen made this situation a lasting one; indeed it became +almost a tradition. Rumania’s foreign policy since 1866 may be said, +therefore, to have been King Carol’s policy. Whether one agrees with it +or not, no one can deny with any sincerity that it was inspired by the +interests of the country, as the monarch saw them. Rebuking Bismarck’s +unfair attitude towards Rumania in a question concerning German investors, +Prince Carol writes to his father in 1875: ‘I have to put Rumania’s +interests above those of Germany. My path is plainly mapped out, and I must +follow It unflinchingly, whatever the weather.’ +</p> + +<p> +Prince Carol was a thorough German, and as such naturally favoured the +expansion of German influence among his new subjects. But if he desired Rumania +to follow in the wake of German foreign policy, it was because of his unshaken +faith in the future of his native country, because he considered that Rumania +had nothing to fear from Germany, whilst it was all in the interest of that +country to see Rumania strong and firmly established. At the same time, acting +on the advice of Bismarck, he did not fail to work toward a better +understanding with Russia, ‘who might become as well a reliable friend as +a dangerous enemy to the Rumanian state’. The sympathy shown him by +Napoleon III was not always shared by the French statesmen,[1] and the +unfriendly attitude of the French ambassador in Constantinople caused Prince +Carol to remark that ‘M. de Moustier is considered a better Turk than the +Grand Turk himself’. Under the circumstances a possible alliance between +France and Russia, giving the latter a free hand in the Near East, would have +proved a grave danger to Rumania; ‘it was, consequently, a skilful, if +imperious act, to enter voluntarily, and without detriment to the existing +friendly relations with France, within the Russian sphere of influence, and not +to wait till compelled to do so.’ +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: See <i>Revue des Deux Mondes</i>, June 15, 1866, article by Eugène +Forcade.] +</p> + +<p> +The campaigns of 1866 and 1870 having finally established Prussia’s +supremacy in the German world, Bismarck modified his attitude towards Austria. +In an interview with the Austrian Foreign Secretary, Count Beust (Gastein, +October 1871), he broached for the first time the question of an alliance and, +touching upon the eventual dissolution of the Ottoman Empire, ‘obligingly +remarked that one could not conceive of a great power not making of its faculty +for expansion a vital question’.[2] Quite in keeping with that change +were the counsels henceforth tendered to Prince Carol. Early that year Bismarck +wrote of his sorrow at having been forced to the conclusion that Rumania had +nothing to expect from Russia, while Prince Anthony, Prince Carol’s +father and faithful adviser, wrote soon after the above interview (November +1871), that ‘under certain circumstances it would seem a sound policy for +Rumania to rely upon the support of Austria’. Persevering in this +crescendo of suggestion, Austria’s new foreign secretary, Count Andrassy, +drifted at length to the point by plainly declaring not long afterwards that +‘Rumania is not so unimportant that one should deprecate an alliance with +her’. +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 2: Gabriel Hanotaux, <i>La Guerre des Balkans et l’Europe</i> +(Beust, Mémoires), Paris, 1914, p. 297.] +</p> + +<p> +Prince Carol had accepted the throne with the firm intention of shaking off the +Turkish suzerainty at the first opportunity, and not unnaturally he counted +upon Germany’s support to that end. He and his country were bitterly +disappointed, therefore, when Bismarck appealed directly to the Porte for the +settlement of a difference between the Rumanian Government and a German company +entrusted with the construction of the Rumanian railways; the more so as the +Paris Convention had expressly forbidden any Turkish interference in +Rumania’s internal affairs. It thus became increasingly evident that +Rumania could not break away from Russia, the coming power in the East. The +eyes of Russia were steadfastly fixed on Constantinople: by joining her, +Rumania had the best chance of gaining her independence; by not doing so, she +ran the risk of being trodden upon by Russia on her way to Byzantium. But +though resolved to co-operate with Russia in any eventual action in the +Balkans, Prince Carol skilfully avoided delivering himself blindfold into her +hands by deliberately cutting himself away from the other guaranteeing powers. +To the conference which met in Constantinople at the end of 1876 to settle +Balkan affairs he addressed the demand that ‘should war break out between +one of the guaranteeing powers and Turkey, Rumania’s line of conduct +should be dictated, and her neutrality and rights guaranteed, by the other +powers’. This <i>démarche</i> failed. The powers had accepted the +invitation to the conference as one accepts an invitation to visit a dying man. +Nobody had any illusions on the possibility of averting war, least of all the +two powers principally interested. In November 1876 Ali Bey and M. de Nelidov +arrived simultaneously and secretly in Bucarest to sound Rumania as to an +arrangement with their respective countries, Turkey and Russia. In opposition +to his father and Count Andrassy, who counselled neutrality and the withdrawal +of the Rumanian army into the mountains, and in sympathy with Bismarck’s +advice, Prince Carol concluded a Convention with Russia on April 16, 1877. +Rumania promised to the Russian army ‘free passage through Rumanian +territory and the treatment due to a friendly army’; whilst Russia +undertook to respect Rumania’s political rights, as well as ‘to +maintain and defend her actual integrity’. ‘It is pretty +certain’, wrote Prince Carol to his father, ‘that this will not be +to the liking of most of the great powers; but as they neither can nor will +offer us anything, we cannot do otherwise than pass them by. A successful +Russian campaign will free us from the nominal dependency upon Turkey, and +Europe will never allow Russia to take her place.’ +</p> + +<p> +On April 23 the Russian armies passed the Pruth. An offer of active +participation by the Rumanian forces in the forthcoming campaign was rejected +by the Tsar, who haughtily declared that ‘Russia had no need for the +cooperation of the Rumanian army’, and that ‘it was only under the +auspices of the Russian forces that the foundation of Rumania’s future +destinies could be laid’. Rumania was to keep quiet and accept in the end +what Russia would deign to give her, or, to be more correct, take from her. +After a few successful encounters, however, the Tsar’s soldiers met with +serious defeats before Plevna, and persistent appeals were now urged for the +participation of the Rumanian army in the military operations. The moment had +come for Rumania to bargain for her interests. But Prince Carol refused to make +capital out of the serious position of the Russians; he led his army across the +Danube and, at the express desire of the Tsar, took over the supreme command of +the united forces before Plevna. After a glorious but terrible struggle Plevna, +followed at short intervals by other strongholds, fell, the peace preliminaries +were signed, and Prince Carol returned to Bucarest at the head of his +victorious army. +</p> + +<p> +Notwithstanding the flattering words in which the Tsar spoke of the Rumanian +share in the success of the campaign, Russia did not admit Rumania to the Peace +Conference. By the Treaty of San Stefano (March 3,1878) Rumania’s +independence was recognized; Russia obtained from Turkey the Dobrudja and the +delta of the Danube, reserving for herself the right to exchange these +territories against the three southern districts of Bessarabia, restored to +Rumania by the Treaty of Paris, 1856. This stipulation was by no means a +surprise to Rumania, Russia’s intention to recover Bessarabia was well +known to the Government, who hoped, however, that the demand would not be +pressed after the effective assistance rendered by the Rumanian army. ‘If +this be not a ground for the extension of our territory, it is surely none for +its diminution,’ remarked Cogalniceanu at the Berlin Congress. Moreover, +besides the promises of the Tsar, there was the Convention of the previous +year, which, in exchange for nothing more than free passage for the Russian +armies, guaranteed Rumania’s integrity. But upon this stipulation +Gorchakov put the jesuitical construction that, the Convention being concluded +in view of a war to be waged against Turkey, it was only against Turkey that +Russia undertook to guarantee Rumania’s integrity; as to herself, she was +not in the least bound by that arrangement. And should Rumania dare to protest +against, or oppose the action of the Russian Government, ‘the Tsar will +order that Rumania be occupied and the Rumanian army disarmed’. +‘The army which fought at Plevna’, replied Prince Carol through his +minister, ‘may well be destroyed, but never disarmed.’ +</p> + +<p> +There was one last hope left to Rumania: that the Congress which met in Berlin +in June 1878 for the purpose of revising the Treaty of San Stefano, would +prevent such an injustice. But Bismarck was anxious that no ‘sentiment de +dignité blessée’ should rankle in Russia’s future policy; the +French representative, Waddington, was ‘above all a practical man’; +Corti, the Italian delegate, was ‘nearly rude’ to the Rumanian +delegates; while Lord Beaconsfield, England’s envoy, receiving the +Rumanian delegates privately, had nothing to say but that ‘in politics +the best services are often rewarded with ingratitude’. Russia strongly +opposed even the idea that the Rumanian delegates should be allowed to put +their case before the Congress, and consent was obtained only with difficulty +after Lord Salisbury had ironically remarked that ‘having heard the +representatives of Greece, which was claiming foreign provinces, it would be +but fair to listen also to the representatives of a country which was only +seeking to retain what was its own’. Shortly before, Lord Salisbury, +speaking in London to the Rumanian special envoy, Callimaki Catargiu, had +assured him of England’s sympathy and of her effective assistance in case +either of war or of a Congress. ‘But to be quite candid he must add that +there are questions of more concern to England, and should she be able to come +to an understanding with Russia with regard to them, she would not wage war for +the sake of Rumania.’ Indeed, an understanding came about, and an +indiscretion enabled the <i>Globe</i> to make its tenor public early in June +1878. ‘The Government of her Britannic Majesty’, it said, +‘considers that it will feel itself bound to express its deep regret +should Russia persist in demanding the retrocession of Bessarabia…. +England’s interest in this question is not such, however, as to justify +her taking upon herself alone the responsibility of opposing the intended +exchange.’ So Bessarabia was lost, Rumania receiving instead Dobrudja +with the delta of the Danube. But as the newly created state of Bulgaria was at +the time little else than a detached Russian province, Russia, alone amongst +the powers, opposed and succeeded in preventing the demarcation to the new +Rumanian province of a strategically sound frontier. Finally, to the +exasperation of the Rumanians, the Congress made the recognition of +Rumania’s independence contingent upon the abolition of Article 7 of the +Constitution—which denied to non-Christians the right of becoming +Rumanian citizens—and the emancipation of the Rumanian Jews.[1] +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: Rumania only partially gave way to this intrusion of the powers +into her internal affairs. The prohibition was abolished; but only individual +naturalization was made possible, and that by special Act of Parliament. Only a +very small proportion of the Jewish population has since been naturalized. The +Jewish question in Rumania is undoubtedly a very serious one; but the matter is +too controversial to be dealt with in a few lines without risking +misrepresentation or doing an injustice to one or other of the parties. For +which reason it has not been included in this essay.] +</p> + +<p> +It was only after innumerable difficulties and hardships that, at the beginning +of 1880, Rumania secured recognition of an independence which she owed to +nobody but herself. Whilst Russia was opposing Rumania at every opportunity in +the European conferences and commissions, she was at pains to show herself more +amenable in <i>tête-à-tête</i>, and approached Rumania with favourable +proposals. ‘Rather Russia as foe than guardian,’ wrote Prince Carol +to his father; and these words indicate an important turning-point in +Rumania’s foreign policy. +</p> + +<p> +In wresting Bessarabia from Rumania merely as a sop to her own pride, and to +make an end of all that was enacted by the Treaty of Paris, 1856, Russia made a +serious political blunder. By insisting that Austria should share in the +partition of Poland, Frederick the Great had skilfully prevented her from +remaining the one country towards which the Poles would naturally have turned +for deliverance. Such an opportunity was lost by Russia through her +short-sighted policy in Bessarabia—that of remaining the natural ally of +Rumania against Rumania’s natural foe, Austria-Hungary. +</p> + +<p> +Rumania had neither historical, geographical, nor any important ethnographical +points of contact with the region south of the Danube; the aims of a future +policy could only have embraced neighbouring tracts of foreign territory +inhabited by Rumanians. Whereas up to the date of the Berlin Congress such +tracts were confined to Austria-Hungary, by that Congress a similar sphere of +attraction for Rumanian aspirations was created in Russia.[1] The interests of +a peaceful development demanded that Rumania should maintain friendly relations +with both the powers striving for domination in the Near East; it was a vital +necessity for her, however, to be able to rely upon the effective support of at +least one of them in a case of emergency. Russia’s conduct had aroused a +deep feeling of bitterness and mistrust in Rumania, and every lessening of her +influence was a step in Austria’s favour. Secondary considerations tended +to intensify this: on the one hand lay the fact that through Russia’s +interposition Rumania had no defendable frontier against Bulgaria; on the other +hand was the greatly strengthened position created for Austria by her alliance +with Germany, in whose future Prince Carol had the utmost confidence. +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: It is probable that this confederation had much to do with the +readiness with which Bismarck supported the demands of his good friend, +Gorchakov.] +</p> + +<p> +Germany’s attitude towards Rumania had been curiously hostile during +these events; but when Prince Carol’s father spoke of this to the German +Emperor, the latter showed genuine astonishment: Bismarck had obviously not +taken the emperor completely into his confidence. When, a few days later, +Sturdza had an interview with Bismarck at the latter’s invitation, the +German Chancellor discovered once more that Rumania had nothing to expect from +Russia. Indeed, Rumania’s position between Russia and the new Slav state +south of the Danube might prove dangerous, were she not to seek protection and +assistance from her two ‘natural friends’, France and Germany. And, +with his usual liberality when baiting his policy with false hopes, Bismarck +went on to say that ‘Turkey is falling to pieces; nobody can resuscitate +her; Rumania has an important role to fulfil, but for this she must be wise, +cautious, and strong’. This new attitude was the natural counterpart of +the change which was at that time making itself felt in Russo-German relations. +While a Franco-Russian alliance was propounded by Gorchakov in an interview +with a French journalist, Bismarck and Andrassy signed in Gastein the treaty +which allied Austria to Germany (September 1879). As Rumania’s interests +were identical with those of Austria—wrote Count Andrassy privately to +Prince Carol a few months later—namely, to prevent the fusion of the +northern and the southern Slavs, she had only to express her willingness to +become at a given moment the third party in the compact. In 1883 King Carol +accepted a secret treaty of defensive alliance from Austria. In return for +promises relating to future political partitions in the Balkans, the monarch +pledged himself to oppose all developments likely to speed the democratic +evolution, of Rumania. Though the treaty was never submitted to parliament for +ratification, and notwithstanding a tariff war and a serious difference with +Austria on the question of control of the Danube navigation, Rumania was, till +the Balkan wars, a faithful ‘sleeping partner’ of the Triple +Alliance. +</p> + +<p> +All through that externally quiet period a marked discrepancy existed and +developed between that line of policy and the trend of public opinion. The +interest of the Rumanians within the kingdom centred increasingly on their +brethren in Transylvania, the solution of whose hard case inspired most of the +popular national movements. Not on account of the political despotism of the +Magyars, for that of the Russians was in no way behind it. But whilst the +Rumanians of Bessarabia were, with few exceptions, illiterate peasants, in +Transylvania there was a solidly established and spirited middle class, whose +protests kept pace with the oppressive measures. Many of them—and of +necessity the more turbulent—migrated to Rumania, and there kept alive +the ‘Transylvanian Question’. That the country’s foreign +policy has nevertheless constantly supported the Central Powers is due, to some +extent, to the fact that the generation most deeply impressed by the events of +1878 came gradually to the leadership of the country; to a greater extent to +the increasing influence of German education,[1] and the economic and financial +supremacy which the benevolent passivity of England and France enabled Germany +to acquire; but above all to the personal influence of King Carol. Germany, he +considered, was at the beginning of her development and needed, above all, +peace; as Rumania was in the same position the wisest policy was to follow +Germany, neglecting impracticable national ideals. King Carol outlined his +views clearly in an interview which he had in Vienna with the Emperor Franz +Joseph in 1883: ‘No nation consents to be bereaved of its political +aspirations, and those of the Rumanians are constantly kept at fever heat by +Magyar oppression. But this was no real obstacle to a friendly understanding +between the two neighbouring states.’ +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: Many prominent statesmen like Sturdza, Maiorescu, Carp, &c. +were educated in Germany, whereas the school established by the German +community (<i>Evangelische Knaben und Realschule</i>), and which it under the +direct control of the German Ministry of Education, is attended by more pupils +than any other school in Bucarest.] +</p> + +<p> +Such was the position when the Balkan peoples rose in 1912 to sever the last +ties which bound them to the decadent Turkish Empire. King Carol, who had, +sword in hand, won the independence of his country, could have no objection to +such a desire for emancipation. Nor to the Balkan League itself, unfortunately +so ephemeral; for by the first year of his reign he had already approached the +Greek Government with proposals toward such a league, and toward freeing the +Balkans from the undesirable interference of the powers.[1] It is true that +Rumania, like all the other states, had not foreseen the radical changes which +were to take place, and which considerably affected her position in the Near +East. But she was safe as long as the situation was one of stable equilibrium +and the league remained in existence. ‘Rumania will only be menaced by a +real danger when a Great Bulgaria comes into existence,’ remarked Prince +Carol to Bismarck in 1880, and Bulgaria had done nothing since to allay +Rumanian suspicions. On the contrary, the proviso of the Berlin Convention that +all fortifications along the Rumania frontier should be razed to the ground had +not been carried out by the Bulgarian Government. Bulgarian official +publications regarded the Dobrudja as a ‘Bulgaria Irredenta’, and +at the outset of the first Balkan war a certain section of the Bulgarian press +speculated upon the Bulgarian character of the Dobrudja. +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: See Augenzeuge, op. cit., i. 178] +</p> + +<p> +The Balkan League having proclaimed, however, that their action did not involve +any territorial changes, and the maintenance of the <i>status quo</i> having +been insisted upon by the European Concert, Rumania declared that she would +remain neutral. All this jugglery of mutual assurances broke down with the +unexpected rout of the Turks; the formula ‘the Balkans to the Balkan +peoples’ made its appearance, upon which Bulgaria was at once notified +that Rumania would insist upon the question of the Dobrudja frontier being +included in any fundamental alteration of the Berlin Convention. The Bulgarian +Premier, M. Danev, concurred in this point of view, but his conduct of the +subsequent London negotiations was so ‘diplomatic’ that their only +result was to strain the patience of the Rumanian Government and public opinion +to breaking point. Nevertheless, the Rumanian Government agreed that the point +in dispute should be submitted to a conference of the representatives of the +great powers in St. Petersburg, and later accepted the decision of that +conference, though the country considered it highly unsatisfactory. +</p> + +<p> +The formation of the Balkan League, and especially the collapse of Turkey, had +meant a serious blow to the Central Powers’ policy of peaceful +penetration. Moreover, ‘for a century men have been labouring to solve +the Eastern. Question. On the day when it shall be considered solved, Europe +will inevitably witness the propounding of the Austrian Question.’[1] To +prevent this and to keep open a route to the East Austro-German diplomacy set +to work, and having engineered the creation of Albania succeeded in barring +Serbia’s way to the Adriatic; Serbia was thus forced to seek an outlet in +the south, where her interests were doomed to clash with Bulgarian aspirations. +The atmosphere grew threatening. In anticipation of a conflict with Bulgaria, +Greece and Serbia sought an alliance with Rumania. The offer was declined; but, +in accordance with the policy which Bucarest had already made quite clear to +Sofia, the Rumanian army was ordered to enter Bulgaria immediately that country +attacked her former allies. The Rumanians advanced unopposed to within a few +miles of Sofia, and in order to save the capital Bulgaria declared her +willingness to comply with their claims. Rumania having refused, however, to +conclude a separate peace, Bulgaria had to give way, and the Balkan premiers +met in conference at Bucarest to discuss terms. The circumstances were not +auspicious. The way in which Bulgaria had conducted previous negotiations, and +especially the attack upon her former allies, had exasperated the Rumanians and +the Balkan peoples, and the pressure of public opinion hindered from the outset +a fair consideration of the Bulgarian point of view. Moreover, cholera was +making great ravages in the ranks of the various armies, and, what threatened +to be even more destructive, several great powers were looking for a crack in +the door to put their tails through, as the Rumanian saying runs. So anxious +were the Balkan statesmen to avoid any such interference that they agreed +between themselves to a short time limit: on a certain day, and by a certain +hour, peace was to be concluded, or hostilities were to start afresh. The +treaty was signed on August 10, 1913, Rumania obtaining the line +Turtukai-Dobrich-Balchik, this being the line already demanded by her at the +time of the London negotiations. The demand was put forth originally as a +security against the avowed ambitions of Bulgaria; it was a strategical +necessity, but at the same time a political mistake from the point of view of +future relations. The Treaty of Bucarest, imperfect arrangement as it was, had +nevertheless a great historical significance. ‘Without complicating the +discussion of our interests, which we are best in a position to understand, by +the consideration of other foreign, interests,’ remarked the President of +the Conference, ‘we shall have established for the first time by +ourselves peace and harmony amongst our peoples.’ Dynastic interests and +impatient ambitions, however, completely subverted this momentous step towards +a satisfactory solution of the Eastern Question. +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: Albert Sorel, op, cit., p. 266.] +</p> + +<p> +The natural counter-effect of the diplomatic activity of the Central Powers was +a change in Rumanian policy. Rumania considered the maintenance of the Balkan +equilibrium a vital question, and as she had entered upon a closer union with +Germany against a Bulgaria subjected to Russian influence, so she now turned to +Russia as a guard against a Bulgaria under German influence. This breaking away +from the ‘traditional’ policy of adjutancy-in-waiting to the +Central Powers was indicated by the visit of Prince Ferdinand—now King of +Rumania—to St. Petersburg, and the even more significant visit which Tsar +Nicholas afterwards paid to the late King Carol at Constanza. Time has been too +short, however, for those new relations so to shape themselves as to exercise a +notable influence upon Rumania’s present attitude. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="chap31"></a>8<br/> +<i>Rumania and the Present War</i></h2> + +<p> +<i>(a) The Rumanians outside the Kingdom</i> +</p> + +<p> +The axis on which Rumanian foreign policy ought naturally to revolve is the +circumstance that almost half the Rumanian nation lives outside Rumanian +territory. As the available official statistics generally show political bias +it is not possible to give precise figures; but roughly speaking there are +about one million Rumanians in Bessarabia, a quarter of a million in Bucovina, +three and a half millions in Hungary, while something above half a million form +scattered colonies in Bulgaria, Serbia, and Macedonia. All these live in more +or less close proximity to the Rumanian frontiers. +</p> + +<p> +That these Rumanian elements have maintained their nationality is due to purely +intrinsic causes. We have seen that the independence of Rumania in her foreign +relations had only recently been established, since when the king, the factor +most influential in foreign politics, had discouraged nationalist tendencies, +lest the country’s internal development might be compromised by friction +with neighbouring states. The Government exerted its influence against any +active expression of the national feeling, and the few +‘nationalists’ and the ‘League for the cultural unity of all +Rumanians’ had been, as a consequence, driven to seek a justification for +their existence in antisemitic agitation. +</p> + +<p> +The above circumstances had little influence upon the situation in Bucovina. +This province forms an integral part of the Habsburg monarchy, with which it +was incorporated as early as 1775. The political situation of the Rumanian +principalities at the time, and the absence of a national cultural movement, +left the detached population exposed to Germanization, and later to the Slav +influence of the rapidly expanding Ruthene element. That language and national +characteristics have, nevertheless, not been lost is due to the fact that the +Rumanian population of Bucovina is peasant almost to a man—a class little +amenable to changes of civilization. +</p> + +<p> +This also applies largely to Bessarabia, which, first lost in 1812, was +incorporated with Rumania in 1856, and finally detached in 1878. The few +Rumanians belonging to the landed class were won over by the new masters. But +while the Rumanian population was denied any cultural and literary activities +of its own, the reactionary attitude of the Russian Government towards +education has enabled the Rumanian peasants to preserve their customs and their +language. At the same time their resultant ignorance has kept them outside the +sphere of intellectual influence of the mother country. +</p> + +<p> +The Rumanians who live in scattered colonies south of the Danube are the +descendants of those who took refuge in these regions during the ninth and +tenth centuries from the invasions of the Huns. Generally known as +Kutzo-Vlakhs, or, among themselves, as Aromuni, they are—as even Weigand, +who undoubtedly has Bulgarophil leanings, recognizes—the most intelligent +and best educated of the inhabitants of Macedonia. In 1905 the Rumanian +Government secured from the Porte official recognition of their separate +cultural and religious organizations on a national basis. Exposed as they are +to Greek influence, it will be difficult to prevent their final assimilation +with that people. The interest taken in them of late by the Rumanian Government +arose out of the necessity to secure them against pan-Hellenic propaganda, and +to preserve one of the factors entitling Rumania to participate in the +settlement of Balkan affairs. +</p> + +<p> +I have sketched elsewhere the early history of the Rumanians of Transylvania, +the cradle of the Rumanian nation. As already mentioned, part of the Rumanian +nobility of Hungary went over to the Magyars, the remainder migrating over the +mountains. Debarred from the support of the noble class, the Rumanian peasantry +lost its state of autonomy, which changed into one of serfdom to the soil upon +which they toiled. Desperate risings in 1324, 1437, 1514, 1600, and 1784 tended +to case the Hungarian oppression, which up to the nineteenth century strove +primarily after a political and religious hegemony. But the Magyars having +failed in 1848 in their attempt to free themselves from Austrian domination +(defeated with the assistance of a Russian army at Villagos, 1849), mainly on +account of the fidelity of the other nationalities to the Austrian Crown, they +henceforth directed their efforts towards strengthening their own position by +forcible assimilation of those nationalities. This they were able to do, +however, only after Königgrätz, when a weakened Austria had to give way to +Hungarian demands. In 1867 the Dual Monarchy was established, and Transylvania, +which up to then formed a separate duchy enjoying full political rights, was +incorporated with the new Hungarian kingdom. The Magyars were handicapped in +their imperialist ambitions by their numerical inferiority. As the next best +means to their end, therefore, they resorted to political and national +oppression, class despotism, and a complete disregard of the principles of +liberty and humanity.[1] Hungarian was made compulsory in the administration, +even in districts where the bulk of the population did not understand that +language. In villages completely inhabited by Rumanians so-called +‘State’ schools were founded, in which only Hungarian was to be +spoken, and all children upwards of three years of age had to attend them. The +electoral regulations were drawn up in such a manner that the Rumanians of +Transylvania, though ten times more numerous than the Magyars, sent a far +smaller number than do the latter to the National Assembly. To quash all +protest a special press law was introduced for Transylvania. But the Rumanian +journalists being usually acquitted by the juries a new regulation prescribed +that press offences should be tried only at Kluj (Klausenburg)—the sole +Transylvanian town with a predominating Hungarian population—a measure +which was in fundamental contradiction to the principles of justice.[2] In 1892 +the Rumanian grievances were embodied in a memorandum which was to have been +presented to the emperor by a deputation. An audience was, however, refused, +and at the instance of the Hungarian Government the members of the deputation +were sentenced to long terms of imprisonment for having plotted against the +unity of the Magyar state. +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: The Rumanians inhabit mainly the province of Transylvania, Banat, +Crishiana, and Maramuresh. They represent 46.2 per cent. of the total +population of these provinces, the Magyars 32.5 per cent., the Germans 11.5 per +cent., and the Serbs 4.5 per cent. These figured are taken from official +Hungarian statistics, and it may therefore be assumed that the Rumanian +percentage represents a minimum.] +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 2: Over a period of 22 years (1886-1908) 850 journalists were +charged, 367 of whom were Rumanians; the sentences totalling 216 years of +imprisonment, the fines amounting to Fcs. 138,000.] +</p> + +<p> +Notwithstanding these disabilities the Rumanians of Transylvania enjoyed a long +period of comparative social and economic liberty at a time when Turkish and +Phanariote domination was hampering all progress in Rumania. Office under the +Government growing increasingly difficult to obtain, the Rumanians in +Transylvania turned largely to commercial and the open professions, and, as a +result, a powerful middle class now exists. In their clergy, both of the +Orthodox and the Uniate Church—which last, while conducting its ritual in +the vernacular, recognizes papal supremacy— the Rumanians have always +found strong moral support, while the national struggle tends to unite the +various classes. The Rumanians of Hungary form by far the sanest element in the +Rumanian nation. From the Rumanians within the kingdom they have received +little beside sympathy. The important part played by the country at the Peace +of Bucarest, and her detachment from Austria-Hungary, must necessarily have +stimulated the national consciousness of the Transylvanians; while at the same +time all hope for betterment from within must have ceased at the death of +Archduke Francis Ferdinand, an avowed friend of the long-suffering +nationalities. It is, therefore, no mere matter of conjecture that the passive +attitude of the Rumanian Government at the beginning of the present conflict +must have been a bitter disappointment to them. +</p> + +<p> +<i>(b) Rumania’s Attitude</i> +</p> + +<p> +The tragic development of the crisis in the summer of 1914 threw Rumania into a +vortex of unexpected hopes and fears. Aspirations till then considered little +else than Utopian became tangible possibilities, while, as suddenly, dangers +deemed far off loomed large and near. Not only was such a situation quite +unforeseen, nor had any plan of action been preconceived to meet it, but it was +in Rumania’s case a situation unique from the number of conflicting +considerations and influences at work within it. Still under the waning +influence of the thirty years quasi-alliance with Austria, Rumania was not yet +acclimatized to her new relations with Russia. Notwithstanding the inborn +sympathy with and admiration for France, the Rumanians could not be blind to +Germany’s military power. The enthusiasm that would have sided with +France for France’s sake was faced by the influence of German finance. +Sympathy with Serbia existed side by side with suspicion of Bulgaria. Popular +sentiment clashed with the views of the king; and the bright vision of the +‘principle of nationality’ was darkened by the shadow of Russia as +despot of the Near East. +</p> + +<p> +One fact in the situation stood out from the rest, namely, the unexpected +opportunity of redeeming that half of the Rumanian nation which was still under +foreign rule; the more so as one of the parties in the conflict had given the +‘principle of nationality’ a prominent place in its programme. But +the fact that both Austria-Hungary and Russia had a large Rumanian population +among their subjects rendered a purely national policy impossible, and Rumania +could do nothing but weigh which issue offered her the greater advantage. +</p> + +<p> +Three ways lay open: complete neutrality, active participation on the side of +the Central Powers, or common cause with the Triple Entente. Complete +neutrality was advocated by a few who had the country’s material security +most at heart, and also, as a <i>pis aller</i>, by those who realized that +their opinion that Rumania should make common cause with the Central Powers had +no prospect of being acted upon. +</p> + +<p> +That King Carol favoured the idea of a joint action with Germany is likely +enough, for such a policy was in keeping with his faith in the power of the +German Empire. Moreover, he undoubtedly viewed with satisfaction the +possibility of regaining Bessarabia, the loss of which must have been bitterly +felt by the victor of Plevna. Such a policy would have met with the approval of +many Rumanian statesmen, notably of M. Sturdza, sometime leader of the Liberal +party and Prime Minister; of M. Carp, sometime leader of the Conservative party +and Prime Minister; of M. Maiorescu, ex-Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary, +who presided at the Bucarest Conference of 1913; of M. Marghiloman, till +recently leader of the Conservative party, to name only the more important. M. +Sturdza, the old statesman who had been one of King Carol’s chief +coadjutors in the making of modern Rumania, and who had severed for many years +his connexion with active politics, again took up his pen to raise a word of +warning. M. Carp, the political aristocrat who had retired from public life a +few years previously, and had professed a lifelong contempt for the +‘Press and all its works’, himself started a daily paper +(<i>Moldova</i>) which, he intended should expound his views. Well-known +writers like M. Radu Rosetti wrote[1] espousing the cause favoured by the king, +though not for the king’s reasons: Carol had faith in Germany, the +Rumanians mistrusted Russia. They saw no advantage in the dismemberment of +Austria, the most powerful check to Russia’s plans in the Near East. They +dreaded the idea of seeing Russia on the Bosphorus, as rendering illusory +Rumania’s splendid position at the mouth of the Danube. For not only is a +cheap waterway absolutely necessary for the bulky products forming the chief +exports of Rumania; but these very products, corn, petroleum, and timber, also +form the chief exports of Russia, who, by a stroke of the pen, may rule Rumania +out of competition, should she fail to appreciate the political leadership of +Petrograd. Paris and Rome were, no doubt, beloved sisters; but Sofia, Moscow, +and Budapest were next-door neighbours to be reckoned with. +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: See R. Rosetti, <i>Russian Politics at Work in the Rumanian +Countries</i>, facts compiled from French official documents, Bucarest, 1914.] +</p> + +<p> +Those who held views opposed to those, confident in the righteousness of the +Allies’ cause and in their final victory, advocated immediate +intervention, and to that end made the most of the two sentiments which +animated public opinion: interest in the fate of the Transylvanians, and +sympathy with France. They contended that though a purely national policy was +not possible, the difference between Transylvania and Bessarabia in area and in +number and quality of the population was such that no hesitation was +admissible. The possession of Transylvania was assured if the Allies were +successful; whereas Russia would soon recover if defeated, and would regain +Bessarabia by force of arms, or have it once more presented to her by a +Congress anxious to soothe her ‘sentiment de dignité blessée’. A +Rumania enlarged in size and population had a better chance of successfully +withstanding any eventual pressure from the north, and it was clear that any +attempt against her independence would be bound to develop into a European +question. Rumania could not forget what she owed to France; and if +circumstances had made the Transylvanian question one ‘à laquelle on +pense toujours et dont on ne parle jamais’, the greater was the duty, now +that a favourable opportunity had arisen, to help the brethren across the +mountains. It was also a duty to fight for right and civilization, proclaimed +M. Take Ionescu, the exponent of progressive ideas in Rumanian politics; and +he, together with the prominent Conservative statesman, M. Filipescu, who +loathes the idea of the Rumanians being dominated by the inferior Magyars, are +the leaders of the interventionist movement. It was due to M. Filipescu’s +activity, especially, that M. Marghiloman was forced by his own party to resign +his position as leader on account of his Austrophil sentiments—an event +unparalleled in Rumanian politics. +</p> + +<p> +These were the two main currents of opinion which met in conflict at the Crown +Council—a committee <i>ad hoc</i> consisting of the Cabinet and the +leaders of the Opposition—summoned by the king early in August 1914, when +Rumania’s neutrality was decided upon. The great influence which the +Crown can always wield under the Rumanian political system was rendered the +more potent in the present case by the fact that the Premier, M. Bratianu, is +above all a practical man, and the Liberal Cabinet over which he presides one +of the most colourless the country ever had: a Cabinet weak to the point of +being incapable of realizing its own weakness and the imperative necessity at +this fateful moment of placing the helm in the hands of a national ministry. M. +Bratianu considered that Rumania was too exposed, and had suffered too much in +the past for the sake of other countries, to enter now upon such an adventure +without ample guarantees. There would always be time for her to come in. This +policy of opportunism he was able to justify by powerful argument. The supply +of war material for the Rumanian army had been completely in the hands of +German and Austrian arsenals, and especially in those of Krupp. For obvious +reasons Rumania could no longer rely upon that source; indeed, Germany was +actually detaining contracts for war and sanitary material placed with her +before the outbreak of the war. There was the further consideration that, owing +to the nature of Rumania’s foreign policy in the past, no due attention +had been given to the defence of the Carpathians, nor to those branches of the +service dealing with mountain warfare. On the other hand, a continuous line of +fortifications running from Galatz to Focshani formed, together with the lower +reaches of the Danube, a strong barrier against attack from the north. +Rumania’s geographical position is such that a successful offensive from +Hungary could soon penetrate to the capital, and by cutting the country in two +could completely paralyse its organization. Such arguments acquired a magnified +importance in the light of the failure of the negotiations with Bulgaria, and +found many a willing ear in a country governed by a heavily involved landed +class, and depending almost exclusively in its banking organization upon German +and Austrian capital. +</p> + +<p> +From the point of view of practical politics only the issue of the conflict +will determine the wisdom or otherwise of Rumania’s attitude. But, though +it is perhaps out of place to enlarge upon it here, it is impossible not to +speak of the moral aspect of the course adopted. By giving heed to the unspoken +appeal from Transylvania the Rumanian national spirit would have been +quickened, and the people braced to a wholesome sacrifice. Many were the +wistful glances cast towards the Carpathians by the subject Rumanians, as they +were being led away to fight for their oppressors; but, wilfully unmindful, the +leaders of the Rumanian state buried their noses in their ledgers, oblivious of +the fact that in these times of internationalism a will in common, with +aspirations in common, is the very life-blood of nationality. That sentiment +ought not to enter into politics is an argument untenable in a country which +has yet to see its national aspirations fulfilled, and which makes of these +aspirations definite claims. No Rumanian statesman can contend that possession +of Transylvania is necessary to the existence of the Rumanian state. What they +can maintain is that deliverance from Magyar oppression is vital to the +existence of the Transylvanians. The right to advance such a claim grows out of +their very duty of watching over the safety of the subject Rumanians. +‘When there are squabbles in the household of my brother-in-law,’ +said the late Ioan Bratianu when speaking on the Transylvanian question, +‘it is no affair of mine; but when he raises a knife against his wife, it +is not merely my right to intervene, it is my duty.’ It is difficult to +account for the obliquity of vision shown by so many Rumanian politicians. +‘The whole policy of such a state [having a large compatriot population +living in close proximity under foreign domination] must be primarily +influenced by anxiety as to the fate of their brothers, and by the duty of +emancipating them,’ affirms one of the most ardent of Rumanian +nationalist orators; and he goes on to assure us that ‘if Rumania waits, +it is not from hesitation as to her duty, but simply in order that she may +discharge it more completely’.[1] Meantime, while Rumania waits, +regiments composed almost completely of Transylvanians have been repeatedly and +of set purpose placed in the forefront of the battle, and as often annihilated. +Such could never be the simple-hearted Rumanian peasant’s conception of +his duty, and here, as in so many other cases in the present conflict, the +nation at large must not be judged by the policy of the few who hold the reins. +</p> + +<p> +[Footnote 1: <i>Quarterly Review</i>, London, April, 1915, pp. 449-50.] +</p> + +<p> +Rumania’s claims to Transylvania are not of an historical nature. They +are founded upon the numerical superiority of the subject Rumanians in +Transylvania, that is upon the ‘principle of nationality’, and are +morally strengthened by the treatment the Transylvanians suffer at the hands of +the Magyars. By its passivity, however, the Rumanian Government has sacrificed +the prime factor of the ‘principle of nationality’ to the +attainment of an object in itself subordinate to that factor; that is, it has +sacrificed the ‘people’ in order to make more sure of the +‘land’. In this way the Rumanian Government has entered upon a +policy of acquisition; a policy which Rumania is too weak to pursue save under +the patronage of one or a group of great powers; a policy unfortunate inasmuch +as it will deprive her of freedom of action in her external politics. Her +policy will, in its consequences, certainly react to the detriment of the +position acquired by the country two years ago, when independent action made +her arbiter not only among the smaller Balkan States, but also among those and +her late suzerain, Turkey. +</p> + +<p> +Such, indeed, must inevitably be the fate of Balkan politics in general. +Passing from Turkish domination to nominal Turkish suzerainty, and thence to +independence within the sphere of influence of a power or group of powers, this +gradual emancipation of the states of south-eastern Europe found its highest +expression in the Balkan League. The war against Turkey was in effect a +rebellion against the political tutelage of the powers. But this emancipation +was short-lived. By their greed the Balkan States again opened up a way to the +intrusion of foreign diplomacy, and even, as we now see, of foreign troops. The +first Balkan war marked the zenith of Balkan political emancipation; the second +Balkan war was the first act in the tragic <i>débâcle</i> out of which the +present situation developed. The interval between August 1913 (Peace of +Bucarest) and August 1914 was merely an armistice during which Bulgaria and +Turkey recovered their breath, and German and Austrian diplomacy had time to +find a pretext for war on its own account. +</p> + +<p> +‘Exhausted but not vanquished we have had to furl our glorious standards +in order to await better days,’ said Ferdinand of Bulgaria to his +soldiers after the conclusion of the Peace of Bucarest; and Budapest, Vienna, +and Berlin have no doubt done their best to keep this spirit of revenge alive +and to prevent a renascence of the Balkan Alliance. They have succeeded. They +have done more: they have succeeded in causing the ‘principle of +nationality’—that idea which involves the disruption of +Austria—to be stifled by the very people whom it was meant to save. For +whilst the German peoples are united in this conflict, the majority of the +southern Slavs, in fighting the German battles, are fighting to perpetuate the +political servitude of the subject races of Austria-Hungary. +</p> + +<p> +However suspicious Rumania may be of Russia, however bitter the quarrels +between Bulgars, Greeks, and Serbs, it is not, nor can it ever be natural, that +peoples who have groaned under Turkish despotism for centuries should, after +only one year of complete liberation, join hands with an old and dreaded enemy +not only against their fellow sufferers, but even against those who came +‘to die that they may live’. These are the Dead Sea fruits of +dynastic policy. Called to the thrones of the small states of the Near East for +the purpose of creating order and peace, the German dynasties have overstepped +their function and abused the power entrusted to them. As long as, in normal +times, political activities were confined to the diplomatic arena there was no +peril of rousing the masses out of their ignorant indolence; but, when times +are abnormal, it is a different and a dangerous thing to march these peoples +against their most intimate feelings. When, as the outcome of the present false +situation, sooner or later the dynastic power breaks, it will then be for the +powers who are now fighting for better principles not to impose their own views +upon the peoples, or to place their own princes upon the vacant thrones. Rather +must they see that the small nations of the Near East are given a chance to +develop in peace and according to their proper ideals; that they be not again +subjected to the disintegrating influence of European diplomacy; and that, +above all, to the nations in common, irrespective of their present attitude, +there should be a just application of the ‘principle of +nationality’. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="part06"></a>TURKEY</h2> + +<p> +Turkey is no better name for the Osmanli dominion or any part of it than +Normandy would be for Great Britain. It is a mediaeval error of nomenclature +sanctioned by long usage in foreign mouths, but without any equivalent in the +vernacular of the Osmanlis themselves. The real ‘Turkey’ is +Turkestan, and the real Turks are the Turcomans. The Osmanlis are the least +typical Turks surviving. Only a very small proportion of them have any strain +of Turkish blood, and this is diluted till it is rarely perceptible in their +physiognomy: and if environment rather than blood is to be held responsible for +racial features, it can only be said that the territory occupied by the +Osmanlis is as unlike the homeland of the true Turks as it can well be, and is +quite unsuited to typically Turkish life and manners. +</p> + +<p> +While of course it would be absurd to propose at this time of day any change in +the terms by which the civilized world unanimously designates the Osmanlis and +their dominion, it is well to insist on their incorrectness, because, like most +erroneous names, they have bred erroneous beliefs. Thanks in the main to them, +the Ottoman power is supposed to have originated in an overwhelming invasion of +Asia Minor by immense numbers of Central Asiatic migrants, who, intent, like +the early Arab armies, on offering to Asia first and Europe second the choice +of apostasy or death, absorbed or annihilated almost all the previous +populations, and swept forward into the Balkans as single-minded apostles of +Islam. If the composition and the aims of the Osmanlis had been these, it would +pass all understanding how they contrived, within a century of their appearance +on the western scene, to establish in North-west Asia and South-east Europe the +most civilized and best-ordered state of their time. Who, then, are the +Osmanlis in reality? What have they to do with true Turks? and in virtue of +what innate qualities did they found and consolidate their power? +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="chap32"></a>1<br/> +<i>Origin of the Osmanlis</i></h2> + +<p> +We hear of Turks first from Chinese sources. They were then the inhabitants, +strong and predatory, of the Altai plains and valleys: but later on, about the +sixth century A.D., they are found firmly established in what is still called +Turkestan, and pushing westwards towards the Caspian Sea. Somewhat more than +another century passes, and, reached by a missionary faith of West Asia, they +come out of the Far Eastern darkness into a dim light of western history. One +Boja, lord of Kashgar and Khan of what the Chinese knew as the people of +Thu-Kiu—probably the same name as ‘Turk’—embraced Islam +and forced it on his Mazdeist subjects; but other Turkish tribes, notably the +powerful Uighurs, remained intolerant of the new dispensation, and expelled the +Thu-Kiu <i>en masse</i> from their holding in Turkestan into Persia. Here they +distributed themselves in detached hordes over the north and centre. At this +day, in some parts of Persia, e.g. Azerbaijan, Turks make the bulk of the +population besides supplying the reigning dynasty of the whole kingdom. For the +Shahs of the Kajar house are not Iranian, but purely Turkish. +</p> + +<p> +This, it should be observed, was the western limit of Turkish expansion in the +mass. Azerbaijan is the nearest region to us in which Turki blood predominates, +and the westernmost province of the true Turk homeland. All Turks who have +passed thence into Hither Asia have come in comparatively small detachments, as +minorities to alien majorities. They have invaded as groups of nomads seeking +vacant pasturage, or as bands of military adventurers who, first offering their +swords to princes of the elder peoples, have subsequently, on several occasions +and in several localities, imposed themselves on their former masters. To the +first category belong all those Turcoman, Avshar, Yuruk, and other Turki +tribes, which filtered over the Euphrates into unoccupied or sparsely inhabited +parts of Syria and Asia Minor from the seventh century onwards, and survive to +this day in isolated patches, distinguished from the mass of the local +populations, partly by an ineradicable instinct for nomadic life, partly by +retention of the pre-Islamic beliefs and practices of the first immigrants. In +the second category—military adventurers—fall, for example, the +Turkish praetorians who made and unmade not less than four caliphs at Bagdad in +the ninth century, and that bold <i>condottiere</i>, Ahmed ibn Tulun, who +captured a throne at Cairo. Even Christian emperors availed themselves of these +stout fighters. Theophilus of Constantinople anticipated the Ottoman invasion +of Europe by some five hundred years when he established Vardariote Turks in +Macedonia. +</p> + +<p> +The most important members of the second category, however, were the Seljuks. +Like the earlier Thu-Kiu, they were pushed out of Turkestan late in the tenth +century to found a power in Persia. Here, in Khorasan, the mass of the horde +settled and remained: and it was only a comparatively small section which went +on westward as military adventurers to fall upon Bagdad, Syria, Egypt, and Asia +Minor. This first conquest was little better than a raid, so brief was the +resultant tenure; but a century later two dispossessed nephews of Melek Shah of +Persia set out on a military adventure which had more lasting consequences. +Penetrating with, a small following into Asia Minor, they seized Konia, and +instituted there a kingdom nominally feudatory to the Grand Seljuk of Persia, +but in reality independent and destined to last about two centuries. Though +numerically weak, their forces, recruited from the professional soldier class +which had bolstered up the Abbasid Empire and formed the Seljukian kingdoms of +Persia and Syria, were superior to any Byzantine troops that could be arrayed +in southern or central Asia Minor. They constituted indeed the only compact +body of fighting men seen in these regions for some generations. It found +reinforcement from the scattered Turki groups introduced already, as we have +seen, into the country; and even from native Christians, who, descended from +the Iconoclasts of two centuries before, found the rule of Moslem image-haters +more congenial, as it was certainly more effective, than that of Byzantine +emperors. The creed of the Seljuks was Islam of an Iranian type. Of +Incarnationist colour, it repudiated the dour illiberal spirit of the early +Arabian apostles which latter-day Sunnite orthodoxy has revived. Accordingly +its professors, backed by an effective force and offering security and +privilege, quickly won over the aborigines—Lycaonians, Phrygians, +Cappadocians, and Cilicians—and welded them into a nation, leaving only a +few detached communities here and there to cherish allegiance to Byzantine +Christianity. In the event, the population of quite two-thirds of the Anatolian +peninsula had already identified itself with a ruling Turki caste before, early +in the thirteenth century, fresh Turks appeared on the scene—those Turks +who were to found the Ottoman Empire. +</p> + +<p> +They entered Asia Minor much as the earlier Turcomans had entered it—a +small body of nomadic adventurers, thrown off by the larger body of Turks +settled in Persia to seek new pastures west of the Euphrates. There are divers +legends about the first appearance and establishment of these particular Turks: +but all agree that they were of inconsiderable number— not above four +hundred families at most. Drifting in by way of Armenia, they pressed gradually +westward from Erzerum in hope of finding some unoccupied country which would +prove both element and fertile. Byzantine influence was then at a very low ebb. +With Constantinople itself in Latin hands, the Greek writ ran only along the +north Anatolian coast, ruled from two separate centres, Isnik (Nicaea) and +Trebizond: and the Seljuk kingdom was run in reality much more vigorous. Though +apparently without a rival, it was subsisting by consent, on the prestige of +its past, rather than on actual power. The moment of its dissolution was +approaching, and the Anatolian peninsula, two-thirds Islamized, but +ill-organised and very loosely knit, was becoming once more a fair field for +any adventurer able to command a small compact force. +</p> + +<p> +The newly come Turks were invited finally to settle on the extreme +north-western fringe of the Seljuk territory—in a region so near Nicaea +that their sword would be a better title to it than any which the feudal +authority of Konia could confer. In fact it was a debatable land, an angle +pushed up between the lake plain of Nicaea on the one hand and the plain of +Brusa on the other, and divided from each by not lofty heights, Yenishehr, its +chief town, which became the Osmanli chief Ertogrul’s residence, lies, as +the crow flies, a good deal less than fifty miles from the Sea of Marmora, and +not a hundred miles from Constantinople itself. Here Ertogrul was to be a +Warden of the Marches, to hold his territory for the Seljuk and extend it for +himself at the expense of Nicaea if he could. If he won through, so much the +better for Sultan Alaeddin; if he failed, <i>vile damnum!</i> +</p> + +<p> +Hardly were his tribesmen settled, however, among the Bithynians and Greeks of +Yenishehr, before the Seljuk collapse became a fact. The Tartar storm, ridden +by Jenghis Khan, which had overwhelmed Central Asia, spent its last force on +the kingdom of Konia, and, withdrawing, left the Seljuks bankrupt of force and +prestige and Anatolia without an overlord. The feudatories were free everywhere +to make or mar themselves, and they spent the last half of the thirteenth +century in fighting for whatever might be saved from the Seljuk wreck before it +foundered for ever about 1300 A.D. In the south, the centre, and the east of +the peninsula, where Islam had long rooted itself as the popular social system, +various Turki emirates established themselves on a purely Moslem +basis—certain of these, like the Danishmand emirate of Cappadocia, being +restorations of tribal jurisdictions which had existed before the imposition of +Seljuk overlordship. +</p> + +<p> +In the extreme north-west, however, where the mass of society was still +Christian and held itself Greek, no Turkish, potentate could either revive a +pre-Seljukian status or simply carry on a Seljukian system in miniature. If he +was to preserve independence at all, he must rely on a society which was not +yet Moslem and form a coalition with the ‘Greeks’, into whom the +recent recovery of Constantinople from the Latins had put fresh heart. Osman, +who had succeeded Ertogrul in 1288, recognized where his only possible chance +of continued dominion and future aggrandizement lay. He turned to the Greeks, +as an element of vitality and numerical strength to be absorbed into his +nascent state, and applied himself unremittingly to winning over and +identifying with himself the Greek feudal seigneurs in his territory or about +its frontiers. Some of these, like Michael, lord of Harmankaya, readily enough +stood in with the vigorous Turk and became Moslems. Others, as the new state +gained momentum, found themselves obliged to accept it or be crushed. There are +to this day Greek communities in the Brusa district jealously guarding +privileges which date from compacts made with their seigneurs by Osman and his +son Orkhan. +</p> + +<p> +It was not till the Seljuk kingdom was finally extinguished, in or about 1300 +A.D. that Osman assumed at Yenishehr the style and title of a sultan. +Acknowledged from Afium Kara Hissar, in northern Phrygia, to the Bithynian +coast of the Marmora, beside whose waters his standards had already been +displayed, he lived on to see Brusa fall to his son Orkhan, in 1326, and become +the new capital. Though Nicaea still held out, Osman died virtual lord of the +Asiatic Greeks; and marrying his son to a Christian girl, the famous Nilufer, +after whom the river of Brusa is still named, he laid on Christian foundations +the strength of his dynasty and his state. The first regiment of professional +Ottoman soldiery was recruited by him and embodied later by Orkhan, his son, +from Greek and other Christian-born youths, who, forced to apostatize, were +educated as Imperial slaves in imitation of the Mamelukes, constituted more +than a century earlier in Egypt, and now masters where they had been bondmen. +It is not indeed for nothing that Osman’s latest successor, and all who +hold by him, distinguish themselves from other peoples by his name. They are +Osmanlis (or by a European use of the more correct form Othman, +‘Ottomans’), because they derived their being as a nation and +derive their national strength, not so much from central Asia as from the blend +of Turk and Greek which Osman promoted among his people. This Greek strain has +often been reinforced since his day and mingled with other Caucasian strains. +</p> + +<p> +It was left to Orkhan to round off this Turco-Grecian realm in Byzantine Asia +by the capture first of Ismid (Nicomedia) and then of Isnik (Nicaea); and with +this last acquisition the nucleus of a self-sufficient sovereign state was +complete. After the peaceful absorption of the emirate of Karasi, which added +west central Asia Minor almost as far south as the Hermus, the Osmanli ruled in +1338 a dominion of greater area than that of the Greek emperor, whose capital +and coasts now looked across to Ottoman shores all the way from the Bosphorus +to the Hellespont. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="chap33"></a>2<br/> +<i>Expansion of the Osmanli Kingdom</i></h2> + +<p> +If the new state was to expand by conquest, its line of advance was already +foreshadowed. For the present, it could hardly break back into Asia Minor, +occupied as this was by Moslem principalities sanctioned by the same tradition +as itself, namely, the prestige of the Seljuks. To attack these would be to sin +against Islam. But in front lay a rich but weak Christian state, the centre of +the civilization to which the popular element in the Osmanli society belonged. +As inevitably as the state of Nicaea had desired, won, and transferred itself +to, Constantinople, so did the Osmanli state of Brusa yearn towards the same +goal; and it needed no invitation from a Greek to dispose an Ottoman sultan to +push over to the European shore. +</p> + +<p> +Such an invitation, however, did in fact precede the first Osmanli crossing in +force. In 1345 John Cantacuzene solicited help of Orkhan against the menace of +Dushan, the Serb. Twelve years later came a second invitation. Orkhan’s +son, Suleiman, this time ferried a large army over the Hellespont, and, by +taking and holding Gallipoli and Rodosto, secured a passage from continent to +continent, which the Ottomans would never again let go. +</p> + +<p> +Such invitations, though they neither prompted the extension of the Osmanli +realm into Europe nor sensibly precipitated it, did nevertheless divert the +course of the Ottoman arms and reprieve the Greek empire till Timur and his +Tartars could come on the scene and, all unconsciously, secure it a further +respite. But for these diversions there is little doubt Constantinople would +have passed into Ottoman hands nearly a century earlier than the historic date +of its fall. The Osmanli armies, thus led aside to make the Serbs and not the +Greeks of Europe their first objective, became involved at once in a tangle of +Balkan affairs from which they only extricated themselves after forty years of +incessant fighting in almost every part of the peninsula except the domain of +the Greek emperor. This warfare, which in no way advanced the proper aims of +the lords of Brusa and Nicaea, not only profited the Greek emperor by relieving +him of concern about his land frontier but also used up strength which might +have made head against the Tartars. Constantinople then, as now, was detached +from the Balkans. The Osmanlis, had they possessed themselves of it, might well +have let the latter be for a long time to come. Instead, they had to battle, +with the help now of one section of the Balkan peoples, now of another, till +forced to make an end of all their feuds and treacheries by annexations after +the victories of Kosovo in 1389 and Nikopolis in 1396. +</p> + +<p> +Nor was this all. They became involved also with certain peoples of the main +continent of Europe, whose interests or sympathies had been affected by those +long and sanguinary Balkan wars. There was already bad blood and to spare +between the Osmanlis on the one hand, and Hungarians, Poles, and Italian +Venetians on the other, long before any second opportunity to attack +Constantinople occurred: and the Osmanlis were in for that age-long struggle to +secure a ‘scientific frontier’ beyond the Danube, whence the +Adriatic on the one flank and the Euxine on the other could be commanded, which +was to make Ottoman history down to the eighteenth century and spell ruin in +the end. +</p> + +<p> +It is a vulgar error to suppose that the Osmanlis set out for Europe, in the +spirit of Arab apostles, to force their creed and dominion on all the world. +Both in Asia and Europe, from first to last, their expeditions and conquests +have been inspired palpably by motives similar to those active among the +Christian powers, namely, desire for political security and the command of +commercial areas. Such wars as the Ottoman sultans, once they were established +at Constantinople, did wage again and again with knightly orders or with +Italian republics would have been undertaken, and fought with the same +persistence, by any Greek emperor who felt himself strong enough. Even the +Asiatic campaigns, which Selim I and some of his successors, down to the end of +the seventeenth century, would undertake, were planned and carried out from +similar motives. Their object was to secure the eastern basin of the +Mediterranean by the establishment of some strong frontier against Iran, out of +which had come more than once forces threatening the destruction of Ottoman +power. It does not, of course, in any respect disprove their purpose that, in +the event, this object was never attained, and that an unsatisfactory +Turco-Persian border still illustrates at this day the failures of Selim I and +Mohammed IV. +</p> + +<p> +By the opening of the fifteenth century, when, all unlooked for, a most +terrible Tartar storm was about to break upon western Asia, the Osmanli realm +had grown considerably, not only in Europe by conquest, but also in Asia by the +peaceful effect of marriages and heritages. Indeed it now comprised scarcely +less of the Anatolian peninsula than the last Seljuks had held, that is to say, +the whole of the north as far as the Halys river beyond Angora, the central +plateau to beyond Konia, and all the western coast-lands. The only emirs not +tributary were those of Karamania, Cappadocia, and Pontus, that is of the +southern and eastern fringes; and one detached fragment of Greek power survived +in the last-named country, the kingdom of Trebizond. As for Europe, it had +become the main scene of Osmanli operations, and now contained the +administrative capital, Adrianople, though Brusu kept a sentimental primacy. +Sultan Murad, who some years after his succession in 1359 had definitely +transferred the centre of political gravity to Thrace, was nevertheless carried +to the Bithynian capital for burial, Bulgaria, Serbia, and districts of both +Bosnia and Macedonia were now integral parts of an empire which had come to +number at least as many Christian as Moslem subjects, and to depend as much on +the first as on the last. Not only had the professional Osmanli soldiery, the +Janissaries, continued to be recruited from the children of native Christian +races, but contingents of adult native warriors, who still professed +Christianity, had been invited or had offered themselves to fight Osmanli +battles—even those waged against men of the True Faith in Asia. A +considerable body of Christian Serbs had stood up in Murad’s line at the +battle of Konia in 1381, before the treachery of another body of the same race +gave him the victory eight years later at Kosovo. So little did the Osmanli +state model itself on the earlier caliphial empires and so naturally did it +lean towards the Roman or Byzantine imperial type. +</p> + +<p> +And just because it had come to be in Europe and of Europe, it was able to +survive the terrible disaster of Angora in 1402. Though the Osmanli army was +annihilated by Timur, and an Osmanli sultan, for the first and last time in +history, remained in the hands of the foe, the administrative machinery of the +Osmanli state was not paralysed. A new ruler was proclaimed at Adrianople, and +the European part of the realm held firm. The moment that the Tartars began to +give ground, the Osmanlis began to recover it. In less than twenty years they +stood again in Asia as they were before Timur’s attack, and secure for +the time on the east, could return to restore their prestige in the west, where +the Tartar victory had bred unrest and brought both the Hungarians and the +Venetians on the Balkan scene. Their success was once more rapid and +astonishing: Salonika passed once and for all into Ottoman hands: the Frank +seigneurs and the despots of Greece were alike humbled; and although Murad II +failed to crush the Albanian, Skanderbey, he worsted his most dangerous foe, +John Hunyadi, with the help of Wallach treachery at the second battle of +Kosovo. At his death, three years later, he left the Balkans quiet and the +field clear for his successor to proceed with the long deferred but inevitable +enterprise of attacking all that was left of Greek empire, the district and +city of Constantinople. +</p> + +<p> +The doom of New Rome was fulfilled within two years. In the end it passed +easily enough into the hands of those who already had been in possession of its +proper empire for a century or more. Historians have made more of this fall of +Constantinople in 1453 than contemporary opinion seems to have made of it. No +prince in Europe was moved to any action by its peril, except, very +half-heartedly, the Doge. Venice could not feel quite indifferent to the +prospect of the main part of that empire, which, while in Greek hands, had been +her most serious commercial competitor, passing into the stronger hands of the +Osmanlis. Once in Constantinople, the latter, long a land power only, would be +bound to concern themselves with the sea also. The Venetians made no effort +worthy of their apprehensions, though these were indeed exceedingly well +founded; for, as all the world knows, to the sea the Osmanlis did at once +betake themselves. In less than thirty years they were ranging all the eastern +Mediterranean and laying siege to Rhodes, the stronghold of one of their most +dangerous competitors, the Knights Hospitallers. +</p> + +<p> +In this consequence consists the chief historic importance of the Osmanli +capture of Constantinople. For no other reason can it he called an +epoch-marking event. If it guaranteed the Empire of the East against passing +into any western hands, for example, those of Venice or Genoa, it did not +affect the balance of power between Christendom and Islam; for the strength of +the former had long ceased to reside at all in Constantinople. The last Greek +emperor died a martyr, but not a champion. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="chap34"></a>3<br/> +<i>Heritage and Expansion of Byzantine Empire</i></h2> + +<p> +On the morrow of his victory, Mohammed the Conqueror took pains to make it +clear that his introduction of a new heaven did not entail a new earth. As +little as might be would be changed. He had displaced a Palaeologus by an +Osmanli only in order that an empire long in fact Osmanli should henceforth be +so also <i>de jure</i>. Therefore he confirmed the pre-existing Oecumenical +patriarch in his functions and the Byzantine Greeks in their privileges, +renewed the rights secured to Christian foreigners by the Greek emperors, and +proclaimed that, for his accession to the throne, there should not be made a +Moslem the more or a Christian the less. Moreover, during the thirty years left +to him of life, Mohammed devoted himself to precisely those tasks which would +have fallen to a Greek emperor desirous of restoring Byzantine power. He thrust +back Latins wherever they were encroaching on the Greek sphere, as were the +Venetians of the Morea, the Hospitallers of Rhodes, and the Genoese of the +Crimea: and he rounded off the proper Byzantine holding by annexing, in Europe, +all the Balkan peninsula except the impracticable Black Mountain, the Albanian +highlands, and the Hungarian fortress of Belgrade; and, in Asia, what had +remained independent in the Anatolian peninsula, the emirates of Karamania and +Cappadocia. +</p> + +<p> +Before Mohammed died in 1481 the Osmanli Turco-Grecian nation may be said to +have come into its own. It was lord <i>de facto et de jure belli</i> of the +eastern or Greek Empire, that is of all territories and seas grouped +geographically round Constantinople as a centre, with only a few exceptions +unredeemed, of which the most notable were the islands of Cyprus, Rhodes, and +Krete, still in Latin hands. Needless to say, the Osmanlis themselves differed +greatly from their imperial predecessors. Their official speech, their official +creed, their family system were all foreign to Europe, and many of their ideas +of government had been learned in the past from Persia and China, or were +derived from the original tribal organization of the true Turks. But if they +were neither more nor less Asiatics than the contemporary Russians, they were +quite as much Europeans as many of the Greek emperors had been—those of +the Isaurian dynasty, for instance. They had given no evidence as yet of a +fanatical Moslem spirit—this was to be bred in them by subsequent +experiences—and their official creed had governed their policy hardly +more than does ours in India or Egypt. Mohammed the Conqueror had not only +shown marked favour to Christians, whether his <i>rayas</i> or not, but +encouraged letters and the arts in a very un-Arabian spirit. Did he not have +himself portrayed by Gentile Bellini? The higher offices of state, both civil +and military, were confided (and would continue so to be for a century to come) +almost exclusively to men of Christian origin. Commerce was encouraged, and +western traders recognized that their facilities were greater now than they had +been under Greek rule. The Venetians, for example, enjoyed in perfect liberty a +virtual monopoly of the Aegean and Euxine trade. The social condition of the +peasantry seems to have been better than it had been under Greek seigneurs, +whether in Europe or in Asia, and better than it was at the moment in feudal +Christendom. The Osmanli military organization was reputed the best in the +world, and its fame attracted adventurous spirits from all over Europe to learn +war in the first school of the age. Ottoman armies, it is worth while to +remember, were the only ones then attended by efficient medical and +commissariat services, and may be said to have introduced to Europe these +alleviations of the horrors of war. +</p> + +<p> +Had the immediate successors of Mohammed been content—or, rather, had +they been able—to remain within his boundaries, they would have robbed +Ottoman history of one century of sinister brilliance, but might have postponed +for many centuries the subsequent sordid decay; for the seeds of this were +undoubtedly sown by the three great sultans who followed the taker of +Constantinople. Their ambitions or their necessities led to a great increase of +the professional army which would entail many evils in time to come. Among +these were praetorianism in the capital and the great provincial towns; +subjection of land and peasantry to military seigneurs, who gradually detached +themselves from the central control; wars undertaken abroad for no better +reason than the employment of soldiery feared at home; consequent expansion of +the territorial empire beyond the administrative capacity of the central +government; development of the ‘tribute-children’ system of +recruiting into a scourge of the <i>rayas</i> and a continual offence to +neighbouring states, and the supplementing of that system by acceptance of any +and every alien outlaw who might offer himself for service: lastly, revival of +the dormant crusading spirit of Europe, which reacted on the Osmanlis, +begetting in them an Arabian fanaticism and disposing them to revert to the +obscurantist spirit of the earliest Moslems. To sum the matter up in other +words: the omnipotence and indiscipline of the Janissaries; the contumacy of +‘Dere Beys’ (‘Lords of the Valleys,’ who maintained a +feudal independence) and of provincial governors; the concentration of the +official mind on things military and religious, to the exclusion of other +interests; the degradation and embitterment of the Christian elements in the +empire; the perpetual financial embarrassment of the government with its +inevitable consequence of oppression and neglect of the governed; and the +constant provocation in Christendom of a hostility which was always latent and +recurrently active— all these evils, which combined to push the empire +nearer and nearer to ruin from the seventeenth century onwards, can be traced +to the brilliant epoch of Osmanli history associated with the names of Bayezid +II, Selim I, and Suleiman the Magnificent. +</p> + +<p> +At the same time Fate, rather than any sultan, must be blamed. It was +impossible to forgo some further extension of the empire, and very difficult to +arrest extension at any satisfactory static point. For one thing, as has been +pointed out already, there were important territories in the proper Byzantine +sphere still unredeemed at the death of Mohammed. Rhodes, Krete, and Cyprus, +whose possession carried with it something like superior control of the +Levantine trade, were in Latin hands. Austrian as well as Venetian occupation +of the best harbours was virtually closing the Adriatic to the masters of the +Balkans. Nor could the inner lands of the Peninsula be quite securely held +while the great fortress of Belgrade, with the passage of the Danube, remained +in Hungarian keeping, Furthermore, the Black Sea, which all masters of the +Bosphorus have desired to make a Byzantine lake, was in dispute with the +Wallachs and the Poles; and, in the reign of Mohammed’s successor, a +cloud no bigger than a man’s hand came up above its northern +horizon—the harbinger of the Muscovite. +</p> + +<p> +As for the Asiatic part of the Byzantine sphere, there was only one little +corner in the south-east to be rounded off to bring all the Anatolian peninsula +under the Osmanli. But that corner, the Cilician plain, promised trouble, since +it was held by another Islamic power, that of the Egyptian Mamelukes, which, +claiming to be at least equal to the Osmanli, possessed vitality much below its +pretensions. The temptation to poach on it was strong, and any lord of +Constantinople who once gave way to this, would find himself led on to assume +control of all coasts of the easternmost Levant, and then to push into inland +Asia in quest of a scientific frontier at their back—perilous and costly +enterprise which Rome had essayed again and again and had to renounce in the +end. Bayezid II took the first step by summoning the Mameluke to evacuate +certain forts near Tarsus, and expelling his garrisons <i>vi et armis</i>. +Cilicia passed to the Osmanli; but for the moment he pushed no farther. +Bayezid, who was under the obligation always to lead his army in person, could +make but one campaign at a time; and a need in Europe was the more pressing. In +quitting Cilicia, however, he left open a new question in Ottoman +politics—the Asiatic continental question—and indicated to his +successor a line of least resistance on which to advance. Nor would this be his +only dangerous legacy. The prolonged and repeated raids into Adriatic lands, as +far north as Carniola and Carinthia, with which the rest of Bayezid’s +reign was occupied, brought Ottoman militarism at last to a point, whose +eventual attainment might have been foreseen any time in the past +century— the point at which, strong in the possession of a new arm, +artillery, it would assume control of the state. +</p> + +<p> +Bayezid’s seed was harvested by Selim. First in a long series of +praetorian creatures which would end only with the destroyer of the praetorians +themselves three centuries later, he owed his elevation to a Janissary revolt, +and all the eight bloody years of his reign were to be punctuated by Janissary +tumults. To keep his creators in any sort of order and contentment he had no +choice but to make war from his first year to his last. When he died, in 1520, +the Ottoman Empire had been swelled to almost as wide limits in Asia and Africa +as it has ever attained since his day. Syria, Armenia, great part of Kurdistan, +northern Mesopotamia, part of Arabia, and last, but not least, Egypt, were +forced to acknowledge Osmanli suzerainty, and for the first time an Osmanli +sultan had proclaimed himself caliph. True that neither by his birth nor by the +manner of his appointment did Selim satisfy the orthodox caliphial tradition; +but, besides his acquisition of certain venerated relics of the Prophet, such +as the <i>Sanjak i-sherif</i> or holy standard, and besides a yet more +important acquisition—the control of the holy cities of the faith— +he could base a claim on the unquestioned fact that the office was vacant, and +the equally certain fact that he was the most powerful Moslem prince in the +world. Purists might deny him if they dared: the vulgar Sunni mind was +impressed and disposed to accept. The main importance, however, of +Selim’s assumption of the caliphate was that it consecrated Osmanli +militarism to a religious end—to the original programme of Islam. This +was a new thing, fraught with dire possibilities from that day forward. It +marked the supersession of the Byzantine or European ideal by the Asiatic in +Osmanli policy, and introduced a phase of Ottoman history which has endured to +our own time. +</p> + +<p> +The inevitable process was continued in the next reign. Almost all the military +glories of Suleiman—known to contemporary Europe as ‘the +Magnificent’ and often held by historians the greatest of Osmanli +sultans— made for weakening, not strengthening, the empire. His earliest +operations indeed, the captures of Rhodes from the Knights and of Belgrade and +Šabac from the Hungarians, expressed a legitimate Byzantine policy; and the +siege of Malta, one of his latest ventures, might also be defended as a measure +taken in the true interests of Byzantine commerce. But the most brilliant and +momentous of his achievements bred evils for which military prestige and the +material profits to be gained from the oppression of an irreconcilable +population were inadequate compensation. This was the conquest of Hungary. It +would result in Buda and its kingdom remaining Ottoman territory for a century +and a half, and in the principalities of Wallachia and Moldavia abiding under +the Ottoman shadow even longer, and passing for all time out of the central +European into the Balkan sphere; but also it would result in the Osmanli power +finding itself on a weak frontier face to face at last with a really strong +Christian race, the Germanic, before which, since it could not advance, it +would have ultimately to withdraw; and in the rousing of Europe to a sense of +its common danger from Moslem activity. Suleiman’s failure to take Vienna +more than made good the panic which had followed on his victory at Mohacs. It +was felt that the Moslem, now that he had failed against the bulwark of central +Europe, was to go no farther, and that the hour of revenge was near. +</p> + +<p> +[Illustration: The Ottoman Empire (Except the Arabian and African provinces)] +</p> + +<p> +It was nearer than perhaps was expected. Ottoman capacity to administer the +overgrown empire in Europe and Asia was strained already almost to +breaking-point, and it was in recognition of this fact that Suleiman made the +great effort to reorganize his imperial system, which has earned him his +honourable title of <i>El Kanun</i>, the Regulator. But if he could reset and +cleanse the wheels of the administrative machine, he could not increase its +capacity. New blood was beginning to fail for the governing class just as the +demands on it became greater. No longer could it be manned exclusively from the +Christian born. Two centuries of recruiting in the Balkans and West Asia had +sapped their resources. Even the Janissaries were not now all +‘tribute-children’. Their own sons, free men Moslem born, began to +be admitted to the ranks. This change was a vital infringement of the old +principle of Osmanli rule, that all the higher administrative and military +functions should be vested in slaves of the imperial household, directly +dependent on the sultan himself; and once breached, this principle could not +but give way more and more. The descendants of imperial slaves, free-born +Moslems, but barred from the glory and profits of their fathers’ +function, had gradually become a very numerous class of country gentlemen +distributed over all parts of the empire, and a very malcontent one. Though it +was still subservient, its dissatisfaction at exclusion from the central +administration was soon to show itself partly in assaults on the time-honoured +system, partly in assumption of local jurisdiction, which would develop into +provincial independence. +</p> + +<p> +The overgrowth of his empire further compelled Suleiman to divide the standing +army, in order that more than one imperial force might take the field at a +time. Unable to lead all his armies in person, he elected, in the latter part +of his reign, to lead none, and for the first time left the Janissaries to +march without a sultan to war. Remaining himself at the centre, he initiated a +fashion which would encourage Osmanli sultans to lapse into half-hidden beings, +whom their subjects would gradually invest with religious character. Under +these conditions the ruler, the governing class (its power grew with this +devolution), the dominant population of the state, and the state itself all +grew more fanatically Moslem. +</p> + +<p> +In the early years of the seventeenth century, Ahmed I being on the throne, the +Ottoman Empire embraced the widest territorial area which it was ever to cover +at any one moment. In what may be called the proper Byzantine field, Cyprus had +been recovered and Krete alone stood out. Outside that field, Hungary on the +north and Yemen (since Selim’s conquest in 1516) on the south were the +frontier provinces, and the Ottoman flag had been carried not only to the +Persian Gulf but also far upon the Iranian plateau, in the long wars of Murad +III, which culminated in 1588 with the occupation of Tabriz and half +Azerbaijan. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="chap35"></a>4<br/> +<i>Shrinkage and Retreat</i></h2> + +<p> +The fringes of this vast empire, however, none too surely held, were already +involving it in insoluble difficulties and imminent dangers. On the one hand, +in Asia, it had been found impossible to establish military fiefs in Arabia, +Kurdistan, or anywhere east of it, on the system which had secured the Osmanli +tenure elsewhere. On the other hand, in Europe, as we have seen, the empire had +a very unsatisfactory frontier, beyond which a strong people not only set +limits to further progress but was prepared to dispute the ground already +gained. In a treaty signed at Sitvatorok, in 1606, the Osmanli sultan was +forced to acknowledge definitely the absolute and equal sovereignty of his +northern neighbour, Austria; and although, less than a century later, Vienna +would be attacked once more, there was never again to be serious prospect of an +extension of the empire in the direction of central Europe. +</p> + +<p> +Moreover, however appearances might be maintained on the frontiers, the heart +of the empire had begun patently to fail. The history of the next two +centuries, the seventeenth and eighteenth, is one long record of praetorian +tumults at home; and ever more rarely will these be compensated by military +successes abroad. The first of these centuries had not half elapsed ere the +Janissaries had taken the lives of two sultans, and brought the Grand Vizierate +to such a perilous pass that no ordinary holder of it, unless backed by some +very powerful Albanian or other tribal influence, could hope to save his credit +or even his life. During this period indeed no Osmanli of the older stocks ever +exercised real control of affairs. It was only among the more recently +assimilated elements, such as the Albanian, the Slavonic, or the Greek, that +men of the requisite character and vigour could be found. The rally which +marked the latter half of the seventeenth century was entirely the work of +Albanians or of other generals and admirals, none of whom had had a Moslem +grandfather. Marked by the last Osmanli conquest made at the expense of +Europe—that of Krete; by the definite subjugation of Wallachia; by the +second siege of Vienna; by the recovery of the Morea from Venice; and finally +by an honourable arrangement with Austria about the Danube frontier—it is +all to be credited to the Kuprili ‘dynasty’ of Albanian viziers, +which conspicuously outshone the contemporary sovereigns of the dynasty of +Osman, the best of them, Mohammed IV, not excepted. It was, however, no more +than a rally; for greater danger already threatened from another quarter. +Agreement had not been reached with Austria at Carlowitz, in 1699, before a new +and baleful planet swam into the Osmanli sky. +</p> + +<p> +It was, this time, no central European power, to which, at the worst, all that +lay north of the proper Byzantine sphere might be abandoned; but a claimant for +part of that sphere itself, perhaps even for the very heart of it. Russia, +seeking an economic outlet, had sapped her way south to the Euxine shore, and +was on the point of challenging the Osmanli right to that sea. The contest +would involve a vital issue; and if the Porte did not yet grasp this fact, +others had grasped it. The famous ‘Testament of Peter the Great’ +may or may not be a genuine document; but, in either case, it proves that +certain views about the necessary policy of Russia in the Byzantine area, which +became commonplaces of western political thinkers as the eighteenth century +advanced, were already familiar to east European minds in the earlier part of +that century. +</p> + +<p> +Battle was not long in being joined. In the event, it would cost Russia about +sixty years of strenuous effort to reduce the Byzantine power of the Osmanlis +to a condition little better than that in which Osman had found the Byzantine +power of the Greeks four centuries before. During the first two-thirds of this +period the contest was waged not unequally. By the Treaty of Belgrade, in 1739, +Sultan Mahmud I appeared for a moment even to have gained the whole issue, +Russia agreeing to her own exclusion from the Black Sea, and from interference +in the Danubian principalities. But the success could not be sustained. +Repeated effort was rapidly exhausting Osmanli strength, sapped as it was by +increasing internal disease: and when a crisis arrived with the accession of +the Empress Catherine, it proved too weak to meet it. During the ten years +following 1764 Osmanli hold on the Black Sea was lost irretrievably. After the +destruction of the fleet at Chesme the Crimea became untenable and was +abandoned to the brief mercies of Russia: and with a veiled Russian +protectorate established in the Danubian principalities, and an open Russian +occupation in Morean ports, Constantinople had lost once more her own seas. +When Selim III was set on a tottering throne, in 1787, the wheel of Byzantine +destiny seemed to have come again almost full circle: and the world was +expecting a Muscovite succession to that empire which had acknowledged already +the Roman, the Greek, and the Osmanli. +</p> + +<p> +Certainly history looked like repeating itself. As in the fourteenth century, +so in the eighteenth, the imperial provinces, having shaken off almost all +control of the capital, were administering themselves, and happier for doing +so. Mesopotamia, Syria, Egypt, and Trebizond acknowledged adventurers as +virtually independent lords. Asia Minor, in general, was being controlled, in +like disregard of imperial majesty, by a group of ‘Dere Beys’, +descended, in different districts, from tribal chieftains or privileged +tax-farmers, or, often, from both. The latter part of the eighteenth century +was the heyday of the Anatolian feudal families—of such as the +Chapanoghlus of Yuzgad, whose sway stretched from Pontus to Cilicia, right +across the base of the peninsula, or the Karamanoghlus of Magnesia, Bergama, +and Aidin, who ruled as much territory as the former emirs of Karasi and +Sarukhan, and were recognized by the representatives of the great trading +companies as wielding the only effective authority in Smyrna. The wide and rich +regions controlled by such families usually contributed neither an <i>asper</i> +to the sultan’s treasury nor a man to the imperial armies. +</p> + +<p> +On no mountain of either Europe or Asia—and mountains formed a large part +of the Ottoman empire in both—did the imperial writ run. Macedonia and +Albania were obedient only to their local beys, and so far had gone the +devolution of Serbia and Bosnia to Janissary aghas, feudal beys, and the +Beylerbey of Rumili, that these provinces hardly concerned themselves more with +the capital. The late sultan, Mustapha III, had lost almost the last remnant of +his subjects’ respect, not so much by the ill success of his mutinous +armies as by his depreciation of the imperial coinage. He had died bankrupt of +prestige, leaving no visible assets to his successor. What might become of the +latter no one in the empire appeared to care. As in 1453, it waited other +lords. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="chap36"></a>5<br/> +<i>Revival</i></h2> + +<p> +It has been waiting, nevertheless, ever since—waiting for much more than +a century; and perhaps the end is not even yet. Why, then, have expectations +not only within but without the empire been so greatly at fault? How came +Montesquieu, Burke, and other confident prophets since their time to be so +signally mistaken? There were several co-operating causes, but one paramount. +Constantinople was no longer, as in 1453, a matter of concern only to itself, +its immediate neighbours, and certain trading republics of Italy. It had become +involved with the commercial interests of a far wider circle, in particular of +the great trading peoples of western Europe, the British, the French, and the +Dutch, and with the political interests of the Germanic and Russian nations. +None of these could be indifferent to a revolution in its fortunes, and least +of all to its passing, not to a power out of Asia, but to a rival power among +themselves. Europe was already in labour with the doctrine of the Balance of +Power. The bantling would not be born at Vienna till early in the century to +come: but even before the end of the eighteenth century it could be foreseen +that its life would be bound up with the maintenance of Constantinople in +independence of any one of the parent powers—that is, with the +prolongation of the Osmanli phase of its imperial fortunes. This doctrine, +consistently acted upon by Europe, has been the sheet anchor of the Ottoman +empire for a century. Even to this day its Moslem dynasty has never been +without one powerful Christian champion or another. +</p> + +<p> +There were, however, some thirty years still to elapse after Selim’s +accession before that doctrine was fully born: and had her hands been free, +Russia might well have been in secure possession of the Byzantine throne long +before 1815. For, internally, the Osmanli state went from bad to worse. The +tumultuous insubordination of the Janissaries became an ever greater scandal. +Never in all the long history of their riots was their record for the years +1807-9 equalled or even approached. Never before, also, had the provinces been +so utterly out of hand. This was the era of Jezzar the Butcher at Acre, of the +rise of Mehemet Ali in Egypt, of Ali Pasha in Epirus, and of Pasvanoghlu at +Vidin. When Mahmud II was thrust on to the throne in 1809, he certainly began +his reign with no more personal authority and no more imperial prestige or +jurisdiction than the last Greek emperor had enjoyed on his accession in 1448. +</p> + +<p> +The great European war, however, which had been raging intermittently for +nearly twenty years, had saved Mahmud an empire to which he could succeed in +name and try to give substance. Whatever the Osmanlis suffered during that war, +it undoubtedly kept them in Constantinople. Temporary loss of Egypt and the +small damage done by the British attack on Constantinople in 1807 were a small +price to pay for the diversion of Russia’s main energies to other than +Byzantine fields, and for the assurance, made doubly sure when the great enemy +did again attack, that she would not be allowed to settle the account alone. +Whatever Napoleon may have planned and signed at Tilsit, the aegis of France +was consistently opposed to the enemies of the Osmanlis down to the close of +the Napoleonic age. +</p> + +<p> +Thus it came about that those thirty perilous years passed without the expected +catastrophe. There was still a successor of Osman reigning in Constantinople +when the great Christian powers, met in conclave at Vienna, half unconsciously +guaranteed the continued existence of the Osmanli Empire simply by leaving it +out of account in striking a Balance of Power in Europe. Its European +territory, with the capital within it, was of quite enough importance to +disturb seriously the nice adjustment agreed at Vienna; and, therefore, while +any one’s henceforth to take or leave, it would become always some +one’s to guard. A few years had yet to pass before the phrase, the +Maintenance of the Integrity of the Ottoman Empire, would be a watchword of +European diplomacy: but, whether formulated thus or not, that principle became +a sure rock of defence for the Osmanli Empire on the birthday of the doctrine +of the Balance of Power. +</p> + +<p> +Secure from destruction by any foes but those of his own household, as none +knew better than he, the reigning Osmanli was scheming to regain the +independence and dignity of his forefathers. Himself a creature of the +Janissaries, Mahmud had plotted the abolition of his creators from the first +year of his reign, but making a too precipitate effort after the conclusion of +peace with Russia, had ignominiously failed and fallen into worse bondage than +ever. Now, better assured of his imperial position and supported by leading men +of all classes among his subjects, he returned not only to his original +enterprise but to schemes for removing other checks on the power of the +sovereign which had come into being in the last two centuries—notably the +feudal independence of the Dere Beys, and the irresponsibility of provincial +governors. +</p> + +<p> +Probably Mahmud II—if he is to be credited with personal initiation of +the reforms always associated with his name—was not conscious of any +purpose more revolutionary than that of becoming master in his own house, as +his ancestors had been. What he ultimately accomplished, however, was something +of much greater and more lasting moment to the Osmanli state. It was nothing +less than the elimination of the most Byzantine features in its constitution +and government. The substitution of national forces for mercenary praetorians: +the substitution of direct imperial government of the provinces for devolution +to seigneurs, tribal chiefs, and irresponsible officers: the substitution of +direct collection for tax-farming: and the substitution of administration by +bureaucrats for administration by household officers—these, the chief +reforms carried through under Mahmud, were all anti-Byzantine. They did not +cause the Osmanli state to be born anew, but, at least, they went far to purge +it of original sin. +</p> + +<p> +That Mahmud and his advisers could carry through such reforms at all in so old +a body politic is remarkable: that they carried them through amid the events of +his reign is almost miraculous. One affront after another was put on the +Sultan, one blow after another was struck at his empire. Inspired by echoes of +the French Revolution and by Napoleon’s recognition of the rights of +nationalities, first the Serbs and then the Greeks seized moments of Ottoman +disorder to rise in revolt against their local lords. The first, who had risen +under Selim III, achieved, under Mahmud, autonomy, but not independence, +nothing remaining to the sultan as before except the fortress of Belgrade with +five other strongholds. The second, who began with no higher hopes than the +Serbs, were encouraged, by the better acquaintance and keener sympathy of +Europe, to fight their way out to complete freedom. The Morea and central +Greece passed out of the empire, the first provinces so to pass since the +Osmanli loss of Hungary. Yet it was in the middle of that fatal struggle that +Mahmud settled for ever with the Janissaries, and during all its course he was +settling one after another with the Dere Beys! +</p> + +<p> +When he had thus sacrificed the flower of his professional troops and had +hardly had time to replace the local governments of the provinces by anything +much better than general anarchy, he found himself faced by a Russian assault. +His raw levies fought as no other raw levies than the Turkish can, and, helped +by manifestations of jealousy by the other powers, staved off the capture of +Constantinople, which, at one moment, seemed about to take place at last. But +he had to accept humiliating terms, amounting virtually, to a cession of the +Black Sea. Mahmud recognized that such a price he must pay for crossing the +broad stream between Byzantinism and Nationalism, and kept on his way. +</p> + +<p> +Finally came a blow at the hands of one of his own household and creed. Mehemet +Ali of Egypt, who had faithfully fought his sovereign’s battles in Arabia +and the Morea, held his services ill requited and his claim to be increased +beyond other pashas ignored, and proceeded to take what had not been granted. +He went farther than he had intended—more than half-way across Asia +Minor—after the imperial armies had suffered three signal defeats, before +he extorted what he had desired at first: and in the end, after very brief +enjoyment, he had to resign all again to the mandate, not of his sovereign, but +of certain European powers who commanded his seas. Mahmud, however, who lived +neither to see himself saved by the <i>giaur</i> fleets, nor even to hear of +his latest defeat, had gone forward with the reorganization of the central and +provincial administration, undismayed by Mehemet Ali’s contumacy or the +insistence of Russia at the gate of the Bosphorus. +</p> + +<p> +As news arrived from time to time in the west of Mahmud’s disasters, it +was customary to prophesy the imminent dissolution of his empire. We, however, +looking backward now, can see that by its losses the Osmanli state in reality +grew stronger. Each of its humiliations pledged some power or group of powers +more deeply to support it: and before Mahmud died, he had reason to believe +that, so long as the European Concert should ensue the Balance of Power, his +dynasty would not be expelled from Constantinople. His belief has been +justified. At every fresh crisis of Ottoman fortunes, and especially after +every fresh Russian attack, foreign protection has unfailingly been extended to +his successors. +</p> + +<p> +It was not, however, only in virtue of the increasing solicitude of the powers +on its behalf that during the nineteenth century the empire was growing and +would grow stronger, but also in virtue of certain assets within itself. First +among these ranked the resources of its Asiatic territories, which, as the +European lands diminished, became more and more nearly identified with the +empire. When, having got rid of the old army, Mahmud imposed service on all his +Moslem subjects, in theory, but in effect only on the Osmanlis (not the Arabs, +Kurds, or other half assimilated nomads and hillmen), it meant more than a +similar measure would have meant in a Christian empire. For, the life of Islam +being war, military service binds Moslems together and to their chiefs as it +binds men under no other dispensation; therefore Mahmud, so far as he was able +to enforce his decree, created not merely a national army but a nation. His +success was most immediate and complete in Anatolia, the homeland of the +Osmanlis. There, however, it was attained only by the previous reduction of +those feudal families which, for many generations, had arrogated to themselves +the levying and control of local forces. Hence, as in Constantinople with the +Janissaries, so in the provinces with the Dere Beys, destruction of a drastic +order had to precede construction, and more of Mahmud’s reign had to be +devoted to the former than remained for the latter. +</p> + +<p> +He did, however, live to see not only the germ of a nation emerge from chaos, +but also the framework of an organization for governing it well or ill. The +centralized bureaucracy which he succeeded in initiating was, of course, +wretchedly imperfect both in constitution and equipment. But it promised to +promote the end he had in view and no other, inasmuch as, being the only +existent machine of government, it derived any effective power it had from +himself alone. Dependent on Stambul, it served to turn thither the eyes and +prayers of the provincials. The naturally submissive and peaceful population of +Asia Minor quickly accustomed itself to look beyond the dismantled strongholds +of its fallen beys. As for the rest— contumacious and bellicose beys and +sheikhs of Kurdish hills and Syrian steppes—their hour of surrender was +yet to come. +</p> + +<p> +The eventual product of Mahmud’s persistency was the ‘Turkey’ +we have seen in our own time—that Turkey irretrievably Asiatic in spirit +under a semi-European system of administration, which has governed despotically +in the interests of one creed and one class, with slipshod, makeshift methods, +but has always governed, and little by little has extended its range. Knowing +its imperfections and its weakness, we have watched with amazement its hand +feeling forward none the less towards one remote frontier district after +another, painfully but surely getting its grip, and at last closing on Turcoman +chiefs and Kurdish beys, first in the Anatolian and Cilician hills, then in the +mountains of Armenia, finally in the wildest Alps of the Persian borderland. We +have marked its stealthy movement into the steppes and deserts of Syria, +Mesopotamia, and Arabia— now drawn back, now pushed farther till it has +reached and held regions over which Mahmud could claim nothing but a suzerainty +in name. To judge how far the shrinkage of the Osmanli European empire has been +compensated by expansion of its Asiatic, one has only to compare the political +state of Kurdistan, as it was at the end of the eighteenth century, and as it +has been in our own time. +</p> + +<p> +It is impossible to believe that the Greek Empire, however buttressed and +protected by foreign powers, could ever have reconstituted itself after falling +so low as it fell in the fourteenth century and as the Osmanli Empire fell in +the eighteenth; and it is clear that the latter must still have possessed +latent springs of vitality, deficient in the former. What can these have been? +It is worth while to try to answer this question at the present juncture, since +those springs, if they existed a hundred years ago, can hardly now be dry. +</p> + +<p> +In the first place it had its predominant creed. This had acted as Islam acts +everywhere, as a very strong social bond, uniting the vast majority of subjects +in all districts except certain parts of the European empire, in instinctive +loyalty to the person of the padishah, whatever might be felt about his +government. Thus had it acted with special efficacy in Asia Minor, whose +inhabitants the Osmanli emperors, unlike the Greek, had always been at some +pains to attach to themselves. The sultan, therefore, could still count on +general support from the population of his empire’s heart, and had at his +disposal the resources of a country which no administration, however +improvident or malign, has ever been able to exhaust. +</p> + +<p> +In the second place the Osmanli ‘Turks’, however fallen away from +the virtues of their ancestors, had not lost either ‘the will to +power’ or their capacity for governing under military law. If they had +never succeeded in learning to rule as civilians they had not forgotten how to +rule as soldiers. +</p> + +<p> +In the third place the sultanate of Stambul had retained a vague but valuable +prestige, based partly on past history, partly on its pretension to religious +influence throughout a much larger area than its proper dominions; and the +conservative population of the latter was in great measure very imperfectly +informed of its sovereign’s actual position. +</p> + +<p> +In the fourth and last place, among the populations on whose loyalty the +Osmanli sultan could make good his claim, were several strong unexhausted +elements, especially in Anatolia. There are few more vigorous and enduring +peoples than the peasants of the central plateau of Asia Minor, north, east, +and south. With this rock of defence to stand upon, the sultan could draw also +on the strength of other more distant races, less firmly attached to himself, +but not less vigorous, such, for example, as the Albanians of his European +mountains and the Kurds of his Asiatic. However decadent might be the +Turco-Grecian Osmanli (he, unfortunately, had the lion’s share of +office), those other elements had suffered no decline in physical or mental +development. Indeed, one cannot be among them now without feeling that their +day is not only not gone, but is still, for the most part, yet to be. +</p> + +<p> +Such were latent assets of the Osmanli Empire, appreciated imperfectly by the +prophets of its dissolution. Thanks to them, that empire continued not only to +hold together throughout the nineteenth century but, in some measure, to +consolidate itself. Even when the protective fence, set up by European powers +about it, was violated, as by Russia several times—in 1829, in 1854, and +in 1877—the nation, which Mahmud had made, always proved capable of stout +enough resistance to delay the enemy till European diplomacy, however slow of +movement, could come to its aid, and ultimately to dispose the victor to accept +terms consistent with its continued existence. It was an existence, of course, +of sufferance, but one which grew better assured the longer it lasted. By an +irony of the Osmanli position, the worse the empire was administered, the +stronger became its international guarantee. No better example can be cited +than the effect of its financial follies. When national bankruptcy, long +contemplated by its Government, supervened at last, the sultan had nothing more +to fear from Europe. He became, <i>ipso facto</i>, the cherished protégé of +every power whose nationals had lent his country money. +</p> + +<p> +Considering the magnitude of the change which Mahmud instituted, the stage at +which he left it, and the character of the society in which it had to be +carried out, it was unfortunate that he should have been followed on the throne +by two well-meaning weaklings, of whom the first was a voluptuary, the second a +fantastic spendthrift of doubtful sanity. Mahmud, as has been said, being +occupied for the greater part of his reign in destroying the old order, had +been able to reconstruct little more than a framework. His operations had been +almost entirely forcible—of a kind understood by and congenial to the +Osmanli character—and partly by circumstances but more by his natural +sympathies, he had been identified from first to last with military +enterprises. Though he was known to contemplate the eventual supremacy of civil +law, and the equality of all sorts and conditions of his subjects before it, he +did nothing to open this vista to public view. Consequently he encountered +little or no factious opposition. Very few held briefs for either the +Janissaries or the Dere Beys; and fewer regretted them when they were gone. +Osmanli society identified itself with the new army and accepted the consequent +reform of the central or provincial administration. Nothing in these changes +seemed to affect Islam or the privileged position of Moslems in the empire. +</p> + +<p> +It was quite another matter when Abdul Mejid, in the beginning of his reign, +promulgated an imperial decree—the famous Tanzimat or Hatti Sherif of +Gulkhaneh—which, amid many excellent and popular provisions for the +continued reform of the administration, proclaimed the equality of Christian +and Moslem subjects in service, in reward, and before the law. The new sultan, +essentially a civilian and a man of easy-going temperament, had been induced to +believe that the end of an evolution, which had only just begun, could be +anticipated <i>per saltum</i>, and that he and all his subjects would live +happily together ever after. His counsellors had been partly politicians, who +for various reasons, good and bad, wished to gain West European sympathy for +their country, involved in potential bondage to Russia since the Treaty of +Unkiar Skelessi (1833), and recently afflicted by Ibrahim Pasha’s victory +at Nizib; and they looked to Great Britain to get them out of the Syrian mess. +Partly also Abdul Mejid had been influenced by enthusiasts, who set more store +by ideas or the phrases in which they were expressed, than by the evidence of +facts. There were then, as since, ‘young men in a hurry’ among the +more Europeanized Osmanlis. The net result of the sultan’s precipitancy +was to set against himself and his policy all who wished that such it +consummation of the reform process might never come and all who knew it would +never come, if snatched at thus—that is, both the ‘Old Turks’ +and the moderate Liberals; and, further, to change for the worse the spirit in +which the new machine of government was being worked and in which fresh +developments of it would be accepted. +</p> + +<p> +To his credit, however, Abdul Mejid went on with administrative reform. The +organization of the army into corps—the foundation of the existing +system—and the imposition of five years’ service on all subjects of +the empire (in theory which an Albanian rising caused to be imperfectly +realized in fact), belong to the early part of his reign; as do also, on the +civil side, the institution of responsible councils of state and formation of +ministries, and much provision for secondary education. To his latest years is +to be credited the codification of the civil law. He had the advantage of some +dozen initial years of comparative security from external foes, after the +Syrian question had been settled in his favour by Great Britain and her allied +powers at the cheap price of a guarantee of hereditary succession to the house +of Mehemet Ali. Thanks to the same support, war with Persia was avoided and war +with Russia postponed. +</p> + +<p> +But the provinces, even if quiet (which some of them, e.g. the Lebanon in the +early ‘forties’, were not), proved far from content. If the form of +Osmanli government had changed greatly, its spirit had changed little, and +defective communications militated against the responsibility of officials to +the centre. Money was scarce, and the paper currency—an ill-omened device +of Mahmud’s—was depreciated, distrusted, and regarded as an +imperial betrayal of confidence. Finally, the hostility of Russia, notoriously +unabated, and the encouragement of aspiring <i>rayas</i> credited to her and +other foreign powers made bad blood between creeds and encouraged opposition to +the execution of the pro-Christian Tanzimat. When Christian turbulence at last +brought on, in 1854, the Russian attack which developed into the Crimean War, +and Christian allies, though they frustrated that attack, made a peace by which +the Osmanlis gained nothing, the latter were in no mood to welcome the +repetition of the Tanzimat, which Abdul Mejid consented to embody in the Treaty +of Paris. The reign closed amid turbulence and humiliations—massacre and +bombardment at Jidda, massacre and Franco-British coercion in Syria—from +all of which the sultan took refuge with women and wine, to meet in 1861 a +drunkard’s end. +</p> + +<p> +His successor, Abdul Aziz, had much the same intentions, the same civilian +sympathies, the same policy of Europeanization, and a different, but more +fatal, weakness of character. He was, perhaps, never wholly sane; but his +aberration, at first attested only by an exalted conviction of his divine +character and inability to do wrong, excited little attention until it began to +issue in fantastic expenditure. By an irony of history, he is the one Osmanli +sultan upon the roll of our Order of the Garter, the right to place a banner in +St, George’s Chapel having been offered to this Allah-possessed caliph on +the occasion of his visit to the West in 1867. +</p> + +<p> +Despite the good intentions of Abdul Aziz himself—as sincere as can be +credited to a disordered brain—-and despite more than one minister of +outstanding ability, reform and almost everything else in the empire went to +the bad in this unhappy reign. The administration settled down to lifeless +routine and lapsed into corruption: the national army was starved: the +depreciation of the currency grew worse as the revenue declined and the +sultan’s household and personal extravagance increased. Encouraged by the +inertia of the imperial Government, the Christians of the European provinces +waxed bold. Though Montenegro was severely handled for contumacy, the Serbs +were able to cover their penultimate stage towards freedom by forcing in 1867 +the withdrawal of the last Ottoman garrisons from their fortresses. Krete stood +at bay for three years and all but won her liberty. Bosnia rose in arms, but +divided against herself. Pregnant with graver trouble than these, Bulgaria +showed signs of waking from long sleep. In 1870 she obtained recognition as a +nationality in the Ottoman Empire, her Church being detached from the control +of the Oecumenical Patriarch of the Greeks and placed under an Exarch. +Presently, her peasantry growing ever more restive, passed from protest to +revolt against the Circassian refugee-colonists with whom the Porte was +flooding the land. The sultan, in an evil hour, for lack of trained troops, let +loose irregulars on the villages, and the Bulgarian atrocities, which they +committed in 1875, sowed a fatal harvest for his successor to reap. His own +time was almost fulfilled. The following spring a dozen high officials, with +the assent of the Sheikh-ul-Islam and the active dissent of no one, took Abdul +Aziz from his throne to a prison, wherein two days later he perished, probably +by his own hand. A puppet reigned three months as Murad V, and then, at the +bidding of the same king-makers whom his uncle had obeyed, left the throne free +for his brother Abdul Hamid, a man of affairs and ability, who was to be the +most conspicuous, or rather, the most notorious Osmanli sultan since Suleiman. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="chap37"></a>6<br/> +<i>Relapse</i></h2> + +<p> +The new sultan, who had not expected his throne, found his realm in perilous +case. Nominally sovereign and a member of the Concert of Europe, he was in +reality a semi-neutralized dependant, existing, as an undischarged bankrupt, on +sufferance of the powers. Should the Concert be dissolved, or even divided, and +any one of its members be left free to foreclose its Ottoman mortgages, the +empire would be at an end. Internally it was in many parts in open revolt, in +all the rest stagnant and slowly rotting. The thrice-foiled claimant to its +succession, who six years before had denounced the Black Sea clause of the +Treaty of Paris and so freed its hands for offence, was manifestly preparing a +fresh assault. Something drastic must be done; but what? +</p> + +<p> +This danger of the empire’s international situation, and also the +disgrace of it, had been evident for some time past to those who had any just +appreciation of affairs; and in the educated class, at any rate, something like +a public opinion, very apprehensive and very much ashamed, had struggled into +being. The discovery of a leader in Midhat Pasha, former governor-general of +Bagdad, and a king-maker of recent notoriety, induced the party of this opinion +to take precipitate action. Murad had been deposed in August. Before the year +was out Midhat presented himself before Abdul Hamid with a formal demand for +the promulgation of a Constitution, proposing not only to put into execution +the pious hopes of the two Hatti Sherifs of Abdul Mejid but also to limit the +sovereign and govern the empire by representative institutions. The new sultan, +hardly settled on his uneasy throne, could not deny those who had deposed his +two predecessors, and, shrewdly aware that ripe facts would not be long in +getting the better of immature ideas, accepted. A parliament was summoned; an +electorate, with only the haziest notions of what it was about, went through +the form of sending representatives to Constantinople; and the sittings were +inaugurated by a speech from the throne, framed on the most approved Britannic +model, the deputies, it is said, jostling and crowding the while to sit, as +many as possible, on the right, which they understood was always the side of +powers that be. +</p> + +<p> +It is true this extemporized chamber never had a chance. The Russians crossed +the Pruth before it had done much more than verify its powers, and the thoughts +and energies of the Osmanlis were soon occupied with the most severe and +disastrous struggle in which the empire had ever engaged. But it is equally +certain that it could not have turned to account any chance it might have had. +Once more the ‘young men in a hurry’ had snatched at the end of an +evolution hardly begun, without taking into account the immaturity of Osmanli +society in political education and political capacity. After suspension during +the war, the parliament was dissolved unregretted, and its creator was tried +for his life, and banished. In failing, however, Midhat left bad to become so +much worse that the next reformers would inevitably have a more convinced +public opinion behind them, and he had virtually destroyed the power of +Mahmud’s bureaucracy. If the only immediate effect was the substitution +of an unlimited autocracy, the Osmanli peoples would be able thenceforward to +ascribe their misfortunes to a single person, meditate attack, on a single +position, and dream of realizing some day an ideal which had been definitely +formulated. +</p> + +<p> +The Russian onslaught, which began in both Europe and Asia in the spring of +1877, had been brought on, after a fashion become customary, by movements in +the Slavonic provinces of the Ottoman Empire and in Rumania; and the latter +province, now independent in all but name and, in defiance of Ottoman protests, +disposing of a regular army, joined the invader. In campaigns lasting a little +less than a year, the Osmanli Empire was brought nearer to passing than ever +before, and it was in a suburb of Constantinople itself that the final +armistice was arranged. But action by rival powers, both before the peace and +in the revision of it at Berlin, gave fresh assurance that the end would not be +suffered to come yet; and, moreover, through the long series of disasters, much +latent strength of the empire and its peoples had been revealed. +</p> + +<p> +When that empire had emerged, shorn of several provinces—in Europe, of +Rumania, Serbia, and northern Greece, with Bulgaria also well on the road they +had travelled to emancipation, and in Asia, of a broad slice of +Caucasia—Abdul Hamid cut his losses, and, under the new guarantee of the +Berlin Treaty, took heart to try his hand at reviving Osmanli power. He and his +advisers had their idea, the contrary of the idea of Midhat and all the sultans +since Mahmud. The empire must be made, not more European, but more Asiatic. In +the development of Islamic spirit to pan-Islamic unity it would find new +strength; and towards this end in the early eighties, while he was yet +comparatively young, with intelligence unclouded and courage sufficient, Abdul +Hamid patiently set himself. In Asia, naturally sympathetic to autocracy, and +the home of the faith of his fathers, he set on foot a pan-Islamic propaganda. +He exalted his caliphate; he wooed the Arabs, and he plotted with extraneous +Moslems against whatever foreign government they might have to endure. +</p> + +<p> +It cannot be denied that this idea was based on the logic of facts, and, if it +could be realized, promised better than Midhat’s for escape from shameful +dependence. Indeed, Abdul Hamid, an autocrat bent on remaining one, could +hardly have acted upon any other. By far the greater part of the territorial +empire remaining to him lay in Asia. The little left in Europe would obviously +soon be reduced to less. The Balkan lands were waking, or already awake, to a +sense of separate nationality, and what chance did the Osmanli element, less +progressive than any, stand in them? The acceptance of the Ottoman power into +the Concert of Europe, though formally notified to Abdul Mejid, had proved an +empty thing. In that galley there was no place for a sultan except as a +dependent or a slave. As an Asiatic power, however, exerting temporal sway over +some eighteen million bodies and religious influence over many times more +souls, the Osmanli caliph might command a place in the sun. +</p> + +<p> +The result belied these hopes. Abdul Hamid’s failure was owed in the main +to facts independent of his personality or statecraft. The expansion of Islam +over an immense geographical area and among peoples living in incompatible +stages of sophistication, under most diverse political and social conditions, +has probably made any universal caliphial authority for ever impossible. The +original idea of the caliphate, like that of the <i>jehad</i> or holy war of +the faithful, presupposed that all Moslems were under governments of their own +creed, and, perhaps, under one government. Moreover, if such a caliph were ever +to be again, an Osmanli sultan would not be a strong candidate. Apart from the +disqualification of his blood, he being not of the Prophet’s tribe nor +even an Arab, he is lord of a state irretrievably compromised in purist eyes +(as Wahabis and Senussis have testified once and again) by its Byzantine +heritage of necessary relations with infidels. Abdul Hamid’s predecessors +for two centuries or more had been at no pains to infuse reality into their +nominal leadership of the faithful. To call a real caliphate out of so long +abeyance could hardly have been effected even by a bold soldier, who appealed +to the general imagination of Moslems; and certainly was beyond the power of a +timid civilian. +</p> + +<p> +When Abdul Hamid had played this card and failed, he had no other; and his +natural pusillanimity and shiftiness induced him to withdraw ever more into the +depths of his palace, and there use his intelligence in exploiting this +shameful dependence of his country on foreign powers. Unable or unwilling to +encourage national resistance, he consoled himself, as a weak malcontent will, +by setting one power against another, pin-pricking the stronger and blustering +to the weaker. The history of his reign is a long record of protests and +surrenders to the great in big matters, as to Great Britain in the matter of +Egypt in 1881, to Russia in that of Eastern Rumelia in 1885, to France on the +question of the Constantinople quays and other claims, and to all the powers in +1881 in the matter of the financial control. Between times he put in such +pin-pricks as he could, removing his neighbours’ landmarks in the Aden +<i>hinterland</i> or the Sinaitic peninsula. He succeeded, however, in keeping +his empire out of a foreign war with any power for about thirty years, with the +single exception of a brief conflict with Greece in 1897. While in the first +half of his reign he was at pains to make no European friend, in the latter he +fell more and more under the influence of Germany, which, almost from the +accession of Kaiser Wilhelm II, began to prepare a southward way for future +use, and alone of the powers, never browbeat the sultan. +</p> + +<p> +Internally, the empire passed more and more under the government of the +imperial household. Defeated by the sheer geographical difficulty of +controlling directly an area so vast and inadequately equipped with means of +communication, Abdul Hamid soon relaxed the spasmodic efforts of his early +years to better the condition of his subjects; and, uncontrolled and +demoralized by the national disgrace, the administration went from bad to much +worse. Ministers irresponsible; officials without sense of public obligation; +venality in all ranks; universal suspicion and delation; violent remedies, such +as the Armenian massacres of 1894, for diseases due to neglect; the peasantry, +whether Moslem or Christian, but especially Christian, forced ultimately to +liquidate all accounts; impoverishment of the whole empire by the improvidence +and oppression of the central power— such phrasing of the conventional +results of ‘Palace’ government expresses inadequately the fruits of +Yildiz under Abdul Hamid II. +</p> + +<p> +<i>Pari passu</i> with this disorder of central and provincial administration +increased the foreign encroachments on the empire. The nation saw not only +rapid multiplication of concessions and hypothecations to aliens, and of alien +persons themselves installed in its midst under extra-territorial immunity from +its laws, secured by the capitulations, but also whole provinces sequestered, +administered independently of the sultan’s government, and prepared for +eventual alienation. Egypt, Tunisia, Eastern Rumelia, Krete—these had all +been withdrawn from Ottoman control since the Berlin settlement, and now +Macedonia seemed to be going the same way. Bitter to swallow as the other +losses had been—pills thinly sugared with a guarantee of +suzerainty—the loss of Macedonia would be more bitter still; for, if it +were withdrawn from Ottoman use and profit, Albania would follow and so would +the command of the north Aegean and the Adriatic shores; while an ancient +Moslem population would remain at Christian mercy. +</p> + +<p> +It was partly Ottoman fault, partly the fault of circumstances beyond Ottoman +control, that this district had become a scandal and a reproach. In the days of +Osmanli greatness Macedonia had been neglected in favour of provinces to the +north, which were richer and more nearly related to the ways into central +Europe. When more attention began to be paid to it by the Government, it had +already become a cockpit for the new-born Christian nationalities, which had +been developed on the north, east, and south. These were using every weapon, +material and spiritual, to secure preponderance in its society, and had created +chronic disorder which the Ottoman administration now weakly encouraged to save +itself trouble, now violently dragooned. Already the powers had not only +proposed autonomy for it, but begun to control its police and its finance. This +was the last straw. The public opinion which had slowly been forming for thirty +years gained the army, and Midhat’s seed came to fruit. +</p> + +<p> +By an irony of fate Macedonia not only supplied the spectacle which exasperated +the army to revolt, but by its very disorder made the preparation of that +revolt possible; for it was due to local limitations of Ottoman sovereignty +that the chief promoters of revolution were able to conspire in safety. By +another irony, two of the few progressive measures ever encouraged by Abdul +Hamid contributed to his undoing. If he had not sent young officers to be +trained abroad, the army, the one Ottoman institution never allowed wholly to +decay, would have remained outside the conspiracy. If he had never promoted the +construction of railways, as he began to do after 1897, the Salonika army could +have had no such influence on affairs in Constantinople as it exerted in 1908 +and again in 1909. As it was, the sultan, at a mandate from Resna in Macedonia, +re-enacted Midhat’s Constitution, and, a year later, saw an army from +Salonika arrive to uphold that Constitution against the reaction he had +fostered, and to send him, dethroned and captive, to the place whence itself +had come. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="chap38"></a>7<br/> +<i>Revolution</i></h2> + +<p> +Looking back on this revolution across seven years of its consequences, we see +plainly enough that it was inspired far less by desire for humane progress than +by shame of Osmanli military decline. The ‘Liberty, Equality, +Fraternity’ programme which its authors put forward (a civilian minority +among them, sincerely enough), Europe accepted, and the populace of the empire +acted upon for a moment, did not express the motive of the movement or +eventually guide its course. The essence of that movement was militant +nationalism. The empire was to be regenerated, not by humanizing it but by +Ottomanizing it. The Osmanli, the man of the sword, was the type to which all +others, who wished to be of the nation, were to conform. Such as did not so +wish must be eliminated by the rest. +</p> + +<p> +The revolutionary Committee in Salonika, called ‘of Union and +Progress’, held up its cards at first, but by 1910 events had forced its +hand on the table. The definite annexation of Bosnia and Hercegovina by +Austria-Hungary in 1908, and the declaration of independence and assumption of +the title Tsar by the ruler of Bulgaria, since they were the price to be paid +by the revolutionaries for a success largely made in Germany, were opposed +officially only <i>pro forma</i>; but when uninformed opinion in the empire was +exasperated thereby against Christendom, the Committee, to appease +reactionaries, had to give premature proof of pan-Osmanli and pro-Moslem +intentions by taking drastic action against <i>rayas</i>. The Greeks of the +empire, never without suspicions, had failed to testify the same enthusiasm for +Ottoman fraternity which others, e.g. the Armenians, had shown; now they +resumed their separatist attitude, and made it clear that they still aspired, +not to Ottoman, but to Hellenic nationality. Nor were even the Moslems of the +empire unanimous for fraternity among themselves. The Arab-speaking societies +complained of under-representation in the councils and offices of the state, +and made no secret of their intention not to be assimilated by the +Turk-speaking Osmanlis. To all suggestions, however, of local home-rule and +conciliation of particularist societies in the empire, the Committee was deaf. +Without union, it believed in no progress, and by union it understood the +assimilation of all societies in the empire to the Osmanli. +</p> + +<p> +Logic was on the side of the Committee in its choice of both end and means. In +pan-Ottomanism, if it could be effected, lay certainly the single chance of +restoring Osmanli independence and power to anything like the position they had +once held. In rule by a militarist oligarchy for some generations to come, lay +the one hope of realizing the pan-Ottoman idea and educating the resultant +nation to self-government. That end, however, it was impossible to realize +under the circumstances in which past history had involved the Ottoman Empire. +There was too much bad blood between different elements of its society which +Osmanli rulers had been labouring for centuries rather to keep apart than to +unite; and certain important elements, both Moslem and Christian, had already +developed too mature ideas of separate nationality. With all its defects, +however, the new order did undoubtedly rest on a wider basis than the old, and +its organization was better conceived and executed. It retained some of the +sympathy of Europe which its beginnings had excited, and the western powers, +regarding its representative institutions as earnests of good government, +however ill they might work at the first, were disposed to give it every +chance. +</p> + +<p> +Unfortunately the Young Turks were in a hurry to bring on their millennium, and +careless of certain neighbouring powers, not formidable individually but to be +reckoned with if united, to whom the prospect of regenerated Osmanlis +assimilating their nationals could not be welcome. Had the Young Turks been +content to put their policy of Ottomanization in the background for awhile, had +they made no more than a show of accepting local distinctions of creed and +politics, keeping in the meantime a tight rein on the Old Turks, they might +long have avoided the union of those neighbours, and been in a better position +to resist, should that union eventually be arrayed against themselves. +</p> + +<p> +But a considerable and energetic element among them belonged to the nervous +Levantine type of Osmanli, which is as little minded to compromise as any Old +Turk, though from a different motive. It elected to deal drastically and at +once with Macedonia, the peculiar object not only of European solicitude but +also of the interest of Bulgaria, Serbia, and Greece. If ever a province +required delicate handling it was this. It did not get it. The interested +neighbours, each beset by fugitives of its oppressed nationals, protested only +to be ignored or browbeaten. They drew towards one another; old feuds and +jealousies were put on one side; and at last, in the summer of 1912, a Holy +League of Balkan States, inspired by Venezelos, the new Kretan Prime Minister +of Greece, and by Ferdinand of Bulgaria, was formed with a view to common +action against the oppressor of Greek, Serbian, and Bulgarian nationals in +Macedonia. Montenegro, always spoiling for a fight, was deputed to fire the +train, and at the approach of autumn the first Balkan war blazed up. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="chap39"></a>8<br/> +<i>Balkan War</i></h2> + +<p> +The course of the struggle is described elsewhere in this volume. Its event +illustrates the danger of an alliance succeeding beyond the expectations in +which it was formed. The constituent powers had looked for a stiff struggle +with the Ottoman armies, but for final success sufficient to enable them, at +the best, to divide Macedonia among themselves, at the worst, to secure its +autonomy under international guarantee. Neither they nor any one else expected +such an Ottoman collapse as was in store. Their moment of attack was better +chosen than they knew. The Osmanli War Office was caught fairly in the middle +of the stream. Fighting during the revolution, subsequently against Albanians +and other recalcitrant provincials, and latterly against the Italians, who had +snatched at Tripoli the year before, had reduced the <i>Nizam</i>, the first +line of troops, far below strength. The <i>Redif</i>, the second line, had +received hardly more training, thanks to the disorganization of Abdul +Hamid’s last years and of the first years of the new order, than the +<i>Mustafuz</i>, the third and last line. Armament, auxiliary services, and the +like had been disorganized preparatory to a scheme for thorough reorganization, +which had been carried, as yet, but a very little way. A foreign (German) +element, introduced into the command, had had time to impair the old spirit of +Ottoman soldiers, but not to create a new one. The armies sent against the +Bulgarians in Thrace were so many mobs of various arms; those which met the +Serbs, a little better; those which opposed the Greeks, a little worse. +</p> + +<p> +It followed that the Bulgarians, who had proposed to do no more in Thrace than +block Adrianople and immobilize the Constantinople forces, were carried by +their own momentum right down to Chataldja, and there and at Adrianople had to +prosecute siege operations when they ought to have been marching to Kavala and +Salonika. The Serbs, after hard fighting, broke through not only into Macedonia +but into Albania, and reached the Adriatic, but warned off this by the powers, +consoled themselves with the occupation of much more Macedonian territory than +the concerted plans of the allies had foreseen. The Greeks, instead of hard +contests for the Haliacmon Valley and Epirus—their proper +Irredenta—pushed such weak forces before them that they got through to +Salonika just in time to forestall a Bulgarian column. Ottoman collapse was +complete everywhere, except on the Chataldja front. It remained to divide the +spoil. Serbia might not have Adriatic Albania, and therefore wanted as much +Macedonia as she had actually overrun. Greece wanted the rest of Macedonia and +had virtually got it. Remained Bulgaria who, with more of Thrace than she +wanted, found herself almost entirely crowded out of Macedonia, the common +objective of all. +</p> + +<p> +Faced with division <i>ex post facto</i>, the allies found their <i>a +priori</i> agreement would not resolve the situation. Bulgaria, the predominant +partner and the most aggrieved, would neither recognize the others’ +rights of possession nor honestly submit her claims to the only possible +arbiter, the Tsar of Russia. Finding herself one against two, she tried a +<i>coup de main</i> on both fronts, failed, and brought on a second Balkan war, +in which a new determining factor, Rumania, intervened at a critical moment to +decide the issue against her. The Ottoman armies recovered nearly all they had +lost in eastern and central Thrace, including Adrianople, almost without firing +a shot, and were not ill pleased to be quit of a desperate situation at the +price of Macedonia, Albania, and western Thrace. +</p> + +<p> +Defeated and impoverished, the Ottoman power came out of the war clinging to a +mere remnant of its European empire—one single mutilated province which +did not pay its way. With the lost territories had gone about one-eighth of the +whole population and one-tenth of the total imperial revenue. But when these +heavy losses had been cut, there was nothing more of a serious nature to put to +debit, but a little even to credit. Ottoman prestige had suffered but slightly +in the eyes of the people. The obstinate and successful defence of the +Chataldja lines and the subsequent recovery of eastern Thrace with Adrianople, +the first European seat of the Osmanlis, had almost effaced the sense of +Osmanli disgrace, and stood to the general credit of the Committee and the +individual credit of its military leader, Enver Bey. The loss of some thousands +of soldiers and much material was compensated by an invaluable lesson in the +faultiness of the military system, and especially the <i>Redif</i> +organization. The way was now clearer than before for re-making the army on the +best European model, the German. The campaign had not been long, nor, as wars +go, costly to wage. In the peace Turkey gained a new lease of life from the +powers, and, profligate that she was, the promise of more millions of foreign +money. +</p> + +<p> +Over and above all this an advantage, which she rated above international +guarantees, was secured to her—the prospective support of the strongest +military power in Europe. The success of Serbia so menaced Germano-Austrian +plans for the penetration of the Balkans, that the Central Powers were bound to +woo Turkey even more lavishly than before, and to seek alliance where they had +been content with influence. In a strong Turkey resided all their hope of +saving from the Slavs the way to the Mediterranean. They had kept this policy +in view for more than twenty years, and in a hundred ways, by introduction of +Germans into the military organization, promotion of German financial +enterprise, pushing of German commerce, pressure on behalf of German +concessions which would entail provincial influence (for example, the +construction of a transcontinental railway in Asia), those powers had been +manifesting their interest in Turkey with ever-increasing solicitude. Now they +must attach her to themselves with hoops of steel and, with her help, as soon +as might be, try to recast the Balkan situation. +</p> + +<p> +The experience of the recent war and the prospect in the future made +continuance and accentuation of military government in the Ottoman Empire +inevitable. The Committee, which had made its way back to power by violent +methods, now suppressed its own Constitution almost as completely as Abdul +Hamid had suppressed Midhat’s parliament. Re-organization of the military +personnel, accumulation of war material, strengthening of defences, provision +of arsenals, dockyards, and ships, together with devices for obtaining money to +pay for all these things, make Ottoman history for the years 1912-14. The bond +with Germany was drawn lighter. More German instructors were invited, more +German engineers commissioned, more munitions of war paid for in French gold. +By 1914 it had become so evident that the Osmanlis must array themselves with +Austro-Germany in any European war, that one wonders why a moment’s +credit was ever given to their protestations of neutrality when that war came +at last in August 1914. Turkey then needed other three months to complete her +first line of defences and mobilize. These were allowed to her, and in the late +autumn she entered the field against Great Britain, France, and Russia, armed +with German guns, led by German officers, and fed with German gold. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="chap40"></a>9<br/> +<i>The Future</i></h2> + +<p> +Turkey’s situation, therefore, in general terms has become this. With the +dissolution of the Concert of Europe the Ottoman Empire has lost what had been +for a century its chief security for continued existence. Its fate now depends +on that of two European powers which are at war with the rest of the former +Concert. Among the last named are Turkey’s two principal creditors, +holding together about seventy-five per cent. of her public debt. In the event +of the defeat of her friends, these creditors will be free to foreclose, the +debtor being certainly in no position to meet her obligations. Allied with +Christian powers, the Osmanli caliph has proved no more able than his +predecessors to unite Islam in his defence; but, for what his title is worth, +Mohammed V is still caliph, no rival claim having been put forward. The loyalty +of the empire remains where it was, pending victory or defeat, the provinces +being slow to realize, and still slower to resent, the disastrous economic +state to which the war is reducing them. +</p> + +<p> +The present struggle may leave the Osmanli Empire in one of three situations: +(1) member of a victorious alliance, reinforced, enlarged, and lightened of +financial burdens, as the wages of its sin; (2) member of a defeated alliance, +bound to pay the price of blood in loss of territory, or independence, or even +existence; (3) party to a compromise under which its territorial empire might +conceivably remain Ottoman, but under even stricter European tutelage than of +old. +</p> + +<p> +The first alternative it would be idle to discuss, for the result of conditions +so novel are impossible to foresee. Nor, indeed, when immediate events are so +doubtful an at the present moment, is it profitable to attempt to forecast the +ultimate result of any of the alternatives. Should, however, either the second +or the third become fact, certain general truths about the Osmanlis will govern +the consequences; and these must be borne in mind by any in whose hands the +disposal of the empire may lie. +</p> + +<p> +The influence of the Osmanlis in their empire to-day resides in three things: +first, in their possession of Constantinople; second, in the sultan’s +caliphate and his guardianship of the holy cities of Islam; third, in certain +qualities of Osmanli character, notably ‘will to power’ and courage +in the field. +</p> + +<p> +What Constantinople means for the Osmanlis is implied in that name <i>Roum</i> +by which the western dominions of the Turks have been known ever since the +Seljuks won Asia Minor. Apart from the prestige of their own early conquests, +the Osmanlis inherited, and in a measure retain in the Near East, the +traditional prestige of the greatest empire which ever held it. They stand not +only for their own past but also for whatever still lives of the prestige of +Rome. Theirs is still the repute of the imperial people <i>par excellence</i>, +chosen and called to rule. +</p> + +<p> +That this repute should continue, after the sweeping victories of Semites and +subsequent centuries of Ottoman retreat before other heirs of Rome, is a +paradox to be explained only by the fact that a large part of the population of +the Near East remains at this day in about the same stage of civilization and +knowledge as in the time of, say, Heraclius. The Osmanlis, be it remembered, +were and are foreigners in a great part of their Asiatic empire equally with +the Greeks of Byzantium or the Romans of Italy; and their establishment in +Constantinople nearly five centuries ago did not mean to the indigenous peoples +of the Near East what it meant to Europe—a victory of the East over the +West—so much as a continuation of immemorial ‘Roman’ dominion +still exercised from the same imperial centre. Since Rome first spread its +shadow over the Near East, many men of many races, whose variety was +imperfectly realised, if realised at all, by the peasants of Asia Minor, Syria, +Mesopotamia, and Egypt, have ruled in its name; the Osmanlis, whose +governmental system was in part the Byzantine, made but one more change which +meant the same old thing. The peasants know, of course, about those Semitic +victories; but they know also that if the Semite has had his day of triumph and +imposed, as was right and proper, his God and his Prophet on Roum—even on +all mankind as many believed, and some may be found in remoter regions who +still believe—he has returned to his own place south of Taurus; and still +Roum is Roum, natural indefeasible Lord of the World. +</p> + +<p> +Such a belief is dying now, of course; but it dies slowly and hard. It still +constitutes a real asset of the Osmanlis, and will not cease to have value +until they lose Constantinople. On the possession of the old imperial city it +depends for whatever vitality it has. You may demonstrate, as you will, and as +many publicists have done since the Balkan War and before, what and how great +economic, political, and social advantages would accrue to the Osmanlis, if +they could bring themselves to transfer their capital to Asia. Here they would +be rid of Rumelia, which costs, and will always cost them, more than it yields. +Here they could concentrate Moslems where their co-religionists are already the +great majority, and so have done with the everlasting friction and weakness +entailed in jurisdiction over preponderant Christian elements. Here they might +throw off the remnants of their Byzantinism as a garment and, no longer forced +to face two ways, live and govern with single minds as the Asiatics they are. +</p> + +<p> +Vain illusion, as Osmanli imperialists know! It is their empire that would fall +away as a garment so soon as the Near East realized that they no longer ruled +in the Imperial City. Enver Pasha and the Committee were amply justified in +straining the resources of the Ottoman Empire to cracking-point, not merely to +retain Constantinople but also to recover Adrianople and a territory in Europe +large enough to bulk as Roum. Nothing that happened in that war made so greatly +for the continuation of the old order in Asiatic Turkey as the reoccupation of +Adrianople. The one occasion on which Europeans in Syria had reason to expect a +general explosion was when premature rumours of the entry of the Bulgarian army +into Stambul gained currency for a few hours. That explosion, had the news +proved true or not been contradicted in time, would have been a panic-stricken, +ungovernable impulse of anarchy—of men conscious that an old world had +passed away and ignorant what conceivable new world could come to be. +</p> + +<p> +But the perilous moment passed, to be succeeded by general diffusion of a +belief that the inevitable catastrophe was only postponed. In the +breathing-time allowed, Arabs, Kurds, and Armenians discussed and planned +together revolt from the moribund Osmanli, and, separately, the mutual massacre +and plundering of one another. Arab national organizations and nationalist +journals sprang to life at Beirut and elsewhere. The revival of Arab empire was +talked of, and names of possible capitals and kings were bandied about. One +Arab province, the Hasa, actually broke away. Then men began to say that the +Bulgarians would not advance beyond Chataldja: the Balkan States were at war +among themselves: finally, Adrianople had been re-occupied. And all was as in +the beginning. Budding life withered in the Arab movement, and the Near East +settled down once more in the persistent shadow of Roum. +</p> + +<p> +Such is the first element in Osmanli prestige, doomed to disappear the moment +that the Ottoman state relinquishes Europe. Meanwhile there it is for what it +is worth; and it is actually worth a tradition of submission, natural and +honourable, to a race of superior destiny, which is instinctive in some +millions of savage simple hearts. +</p> + +<hr /> + +<p> +What of the second element? The religious prestige of the Ottoman power as the +repository of caliphial authority and trustee for Islam in the Holy Land of +Arabia, is an asset almost impossible to estimate. Would a death struggle of +the Osmanlis in Europe rouse the Sunni world? Would the Moslems of India, +Afghanistan, Turkestan, China, and Malaya take up arms for the Ottoman sultan +as caliph? Nothing but the event will prove that they would. Jehad, or Holy +War, is an obsolescent weapon difficult and dangerous for Young Turks to wield: +difficult because their own Islamic sincerity is suspect and they are taking +the field now as clients of <i>giaur</i> peoples; dangerous because the Ottoman +nation itself includes numerous Christian elements, indispensable to its +economy. +</p> + +<p> +Undoubtedly, however, the Ottoman sultanate can count on its religious prestige +appealing widely, overriding counteracting sentiments, and, if it rouses to +action, rousing the most dangerous temper of all. It is futile to ignore the +caliph because he is not of the Koreish, and owes his dignity to a +sixteenth-century transfer. These facts are either unknown or not borne in mind +by half the Sunnites on whom he might call, and weigh far less with the other +half than his hereditary dominion over the Holy Cities, sanctioned by the +prescription of nearly four centuries. +</p> + +<p> +One thing can be foretold with certainty. The religious prestige of an Ottoman +sultan, who had definitely lost control of the Holy Places, would cease as +quickly and utterly as the secular prestige of one who had evacuated +Constantinople: and since the loss of the latter would probably precipitate an +Arab revolt, and cut off the Hejaz, the religious element in Ottoman prestige +may be said to depend on Constantinople as much as the secular. All the more +reason why the Committee of Union and Progress should not have accepted that +well-meant advice of European publicists! A successful revolt of the +Arab-speaking provinces would indeed sound the death-knell of the Ottoman +Empire. No other event would be so immediately and surely catastrophic. +</p> + +<hr /> + +<p> +The third element in Osmanli prestige, inherent qualities of the Osmanli +‘Turk’ himself, will be admitted by every one who knows him and his +history. To say that he has the ‘will to power’ is not, however, to +say that he has an aptitude for government. He wishes to govern others; his +will to do so imposes itself on peoples who have not the same will; they give +way to him and he governs them indifferently, though often better than they can +govern themselves. For example, bad as, according to our standards, Turkish +government is, native Arab government, when not in tutelage to Europeans, has +generally proved itself worse, when tried in the Ottoman area in modern times. +Where it is of a purely Bedawi barbaric type, as in the emirates of central +Arabia, it does well enough; but if the population be contaminated ever so +little with non-Arab elements, practices, or ideas, Arab administration seems +incapable of producing effective government. It has had chances in the Holy +Cities at intervals, and for longer periods in the Yemen. But a European, long +resident in the latter country, who has groaned under Turkish administration, +where it has always been most oppressive, bore witness that the rule of the +native Imam only served to replace oppressive government by oppressive anarchy. +</p> + +<p> +As for the Osmanli’s courage as a fighting man, that has often been +exemplified, and never better than in the Gallipoli peninsula. It is admitted. +The European and Anatolian Osmanlis yield little one to the other in this +virtue; but the palm, if awarded at all, must be given to the levies from +northern and central Asia Minor. +</p> + +<hr /> + +<p> +If Constantinople should be lost, the Arab-speaking parts of the empire would +in all likelihood break away, carrying the Holy Cities with them. When the +constant risk of this consummation, with the cataclysmic nature of its +consequences is considered, one marvels why the Committee, which has shown no +mean understanding of some conditions essential to Osmanli empire, should have +done so little hitherto to conciliate Arab susceptibilities. Neither in the +constitution of the parliament nor in the higher commands of the army have the +Arab-speaking peoples been given anything like their fair share; and loudly and +insistently have they protested. Perhaps the Committee, whose leading members +are of a markedly Europeanized type, understands Asia less well than Europe. +Certainly its programme of Ottomanization, elaborated by military ex-attachés, +by Jew bankers and officials from Salonika, and by doctors, lawyers, and other +<i>intellectuels</i> fresh from Paris, was conceived on lines which offered the +pure Asiatic very little scope. The free and equal Osmanlis were all to take +their cue from men of the Byzantine sort which the European provinces, and +especially the city of Constantinople, breed. After the revolution, nothing in +Turkey struck one so much as the apparition on the top of things everywhere of +a type of Osmanli who has the characteristic qualities of the Levantine Greek. +Young officers, controlling their elders, only needed a change of uniform to +pass in an Athenian crowd. Spare and dapper officials, presiding in seats of +authority over Kurds and Arabs, reminded one of Greek journalists. Osmanli +journalists themselves treated one to rhodomontades punctuated with restless +gesticulation, which revived memories of Athenian cafés in war-time. It was the +Byzantine triumphing over the Asiatic; and the most Asiatic elements in the +empire were the least likely to meet with the appreciation or sympathy of the +Byzantines. +</p> + +<p> +Are the Arab-speaking peoples, therefore, likely to revolt, or be successful in +splitting the Ottoman Empire, if they do? The present writer would like to say, +in parenthesis, that, in his opinion, this consummation of the empire is not +devoutly to be wished. The substitution of Arab administration for Osmanli +would necessarily entail European tutelage of the parts of the Arab-speaking +area in which powers, like ourselves, have vital interests—Syria, for +example, southern Mesopotamia, and, probably, Hejaz. The last named, in +particular, would involve us in so ticklish and thankless a task, that one can +only be thankful for the Turkish caretaker there to-day, and loth to see him +dismissed. +</p> + +<p> +An Arab revolt, however, might break out whether the Triple Entente desired its +success or not. What chance of success would it have? The peoples of the Arab +part of the Ottoman Empire are a congeries of differing races, creeds, sects, +and social systems, with no common bond except language. The physical character +of their land compels a good third of them to be nomadic, predatory barbarians, +feared by the other two-thirds. The settled folk are divided into Moslem and +Christian (not to mention a large Jewish element), the cleavage being more +abrupt than in western Turkey and the tradition and actual spirit of mutual +enmity more separative. Further, each of those main creed-divisions is +subdivided. Even Islam in this region includes a number of incompatible sects, +such as the Ansariye, the Metawali, and the Druses in the Syrian mountains, +Shiite Arabs on the Gulf coast and the Persian border, with pagan Kurds and +Yezidis in the latter region and north Mesopotamia. As for the Christians, +their divisions are notorious, most of these being subdivided again into two or +more hostile communions apiece. It is almost impossible to imagine the +inhabitants of Syria concerting a common plan or taking common action. The only +elements among them which have shown any political sense or capacity for +political organization are Christian. The Maronites of the Lebanon are most +conspicuous among these; but neither their numbers nor their traditional +relations with their neighbours qualify them to form the nucleus of a free +united Syria. The ‘Arab Movement’ up to the present has consisted +in little more than talk and journalese. It has not developed any considerable +organization to meet that stable efficient organization which the Committee of +Union and Progress has directed throughout the Ottoman dominions. +</p> + +<p> +As for the rest of the empire, Asia Minor will stand by the Osmanli cause, even +if Europe and Constantinople, and even if the Holy Places and all the +Arab-speaking provinces be lost. Its allegiance does not depend on either the +tradition of Roum or the caliphate, but on essential unity with the Osmanli +nation. Asia Minor is the nation. There, prepared equally by Byzantine +domination and by Seljukian influence, the great mass of the people long ago +identified itself insensibly and completely with the tradition and hope of the +Osmanlis. The subsequent occupation of the Byzantine capital by the heirs of +the Byzantine system, and their still later assumption of caliphial +responsibility, were not needed to cement the union. Even a military occupation +by Russia or by another strong power would not detach Anatolia from the Osmanli +unity; for a thing cannot be detached from itself. But, of course, that +occupation might after long years cause the unity itself to cease to be. +</p> + +<p> +Such an occupation, however, would probably not be seriously resisted or +subsequently rebelled against by the Moslem majority in Asia Minor, supposing +Osmanli armaments to have been crushed. The Anatolian population is a sober, +labouring peasantry, essentially agricultural and wedded to the soil. The +levies for Yemen and Europe, which have gone far to deplete and exhaust it of +recent years, were composed of men who fought to order and without imagination, +steadily and faithfully, as their fathers had fought. They have no lust for +war, no Arabian tradition of fighting for its own sake, and little, if any, +fanaticism. Attempts to inspire Anatolian troops with religious rage in the +Balkan War were failures. They were asked to fight in too modern a way under +too many Teutonic officers. The result illustrated a prophecy ascribed to +Ghasri Mukhtar Pasha. When German instructors were first introduced into +Turkey, he foretold that they would be the end of the Ottoman army. No, these +Anatolians desire nothing better than to follow their plough-oxen, and live +their common village life, under any master who will let them be. +</p> + +<p> +Elements of the Christian minority, however, Armenian and Greek, would give +trouble with their developed ideas of nationality and irrepressible tendency to +‘Europize’. They would present, indeed, problems of which at +present one cannot foresee the solution. It seems inevitable that an autonomous +Armenia, like an autonomous Poland, must be constituted ere long; but where? +There is no geographical unit of the Ottoman area in which Armenians are the +majority. If they cluster more thickly in the vilayets of Angora, Sivas, +Erzerum, Kharput, and Van, i.e. in easternmost Asia Minor, than elsewhere, and +form a village people of the soil, they are consistently a minority in any +large administrative district. Numerous, too, in the trans-Tauric vilayets of +Adana and Aleppo, the seat of their most recent independence, they are townsmen +in the main, and not an essential element of the agricultural population. Even +if a considerable proportion of the Armenians, now dispersed through towns of +western Asia Minor and in Constantinople, could be induced to concentrate in a +reconstituted Armenia (which is doubtful, seeing how addicted they are to +general commerce and what may be called parasitic life), they could not fill +out both the Greater and the Lesser Armenias of history, in sufficient strength +to overbear the Osmanli and Kurdish elements. The widest area which might he +constituted an autonomous Armenia with good prospect of self-sufficiency would +be the present Russian province, where the head-quarters of the national +religion lie, with the addition of the provinces of Erzerum, Van, and Kharput. +</p> + +<p> +But, if Russia had brought herself to make a self-denying ordinance, she would +have to police her new Armenia very strongly for some years; for an acute +Kurdish problem would confront it, and no concentration of nationals could be +looked for from the Armenia Irredenta of Diarbekr, Urfa, Aleppo, Aintab, +Marash, Adana, Kaisariyeh, Sivas, Angora, and Trebizond (not to mention farther +and more foreign towns), until public security was assured in what for +generations has been a cockpit. The Kurd is, of course, an Indo-European as +much as the Armenian, and rarely a true Moslem; but it would be a very long +time indeed before these facts reconciled him to the domination of the race +which he has plundered for three centuries. Most of the Osmanlis of eastern +Asia Minor are descendants of converted Armenians; but their assimilation would +be slow and doubtful. Islam, more rapidly and completely than any other creed, +extinguishes racial sympathies and groups its adherents anew. +</p> + +<p> +The Anatolian Greeks are less numerous but not less difficult to provide for. +The scattered groups of them on the plateau—in Cappadocia, Pontus, the +Konia district—and on the eastward coast-lands would offer no serious +difficulty to a lord of the interior. But those in the western river-basins +from Isbarta to the Marmora, and those on the western and north-western +littorals, are of a more advanced and cohesive political character, imbued with +nationalism, intimate with their independent nationals, and actively interested +in Hellenic national politics. What happens at Athens has long concerned them +more than what happens at Constantinople; and with Greece occupying the islands +in the daily view of many of them, they are coming to regard themselves more +and more every day as citizens of Graecia Irredenta. What is to be done with +these? What, in particular, with Smyrna, the second city of the Ottoman Empire +and the first of ‘Magna Graecia’? Its three and a half hundred +thousand souls include the largest Greek urban population resident in any one +city. Shall it be united to Greece? Greece herself might well hesitate. It +would prove a very irksome possession, involving her in all sorts of +continental difficulties and risks. There is no good frontier inland for such +an <i>enclave</i>. It could hardly be held without the rest of westernmost +Asia, from Caria to the Dardanelles, and in this region the great majority of +the population is Moslem of old stocks, devotedly attached both to their faith +and to the Osmanli tradition. +</p> + +<p> +The present writer, however, is not among the prophets. He has but tried to set +forth what may delay and what may precipitate the collapse of an empire, whose +doom has been long foreseen, often planned, invariably postponed; and, further, +to indicate some difficulties which, being bound to confront heirs of the +Osmanlis, will be better met the better they are understood before the final +agony—If this is, indeed, to be! +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="chap41"></a>INDEX</h2> + +<p> +Abbasid Empire,<br/> +Abdul Aziz, Sultan,<br/> +Abdul Hamid, Sultan,<br/> +Abdul Mejid, Sultan,<br/> +Achaia,<br/> +Achmet III: <i>see</i> Ahmed III.<br/> +Adalia,<br/> +Adana,<br/> +Aden,<br/> +Adhamandios Koráis,<br/> +Adrianople,<br/> + captured by the Turks (1361),<br/> + captured by Serbians and Bulgarians (1913),<br/> + first European seat of the Osmanlis,<br/> + foundation of,<br/> + Peace and Treaty of (1829),<br/> + restored to Turkey (1913),<br/> + Russians before (1878),<br/> + siege of (1912-13),<br/> +Adriatic, the,<br/> +Aegean, the,<br/> + islands of,<br/> + trade of,<br/> +Aehrenthal, Baron and Count,<br/> +Afium Kara Hissar,<br/> +Agram (Zagreb), capital of Croatia,<br/> +Agram high treason trial, the,<br/> +Agrapha, clansmen of,<br/> +Ahiolu (Anchialo),<br/> +Ahmed I, Sultan,<br/> +Ahmed III, Sultan,<br/> +Ahmed ibn Tulun,<br/> +Aidin,<br/> +Aintab,<br/> +Aigina,<br/> +Ainos, <i>See also</i> Enos.<br/> +Aivali, <i>See also</i> Kydhonies.<br/> +Akarnania,<br/> +Akerman, Convention of (1826),<br/> +Alaeddin, Sultan,<br/> +Ala Shehr (Philadelphia),<br/> +Albania,<br/> + and the Macedonian question,<br/> + conquest of, by the Turks,<br/> + during the Slav immigration,<br/> + in classical times,<br/> + made independent,<br/> + revolts against Young Turks,<br/> + under the Turks,<br/> +Albanian language, the,<br/> +Albanians, the,<br/> + migrations of,<br/> +Aleppo,<br/> +Alexander the Great,<br/> +Alexander I, King of Serbia (1889-1903),<br/> +Alexander I, Emperor of Russia,<br/> +Alexander II, Emperor of Russia,<br/> +Alexander III, Emperor of Russia,<br/> +Alexander, Crown Prince of Serbia,<br/> +Alexander of Battenberg, Prince of Bulgaria (1879-85),<br/> +Alexander Karagjorgjević, Prince of Serbia (1843-58),<br/> +Alexandria,<br/> +Alexis Comnenus, the Emperor,<br/> +Ali Pasha,<br/> +Ambelakia,<br/> +America, effect of emigration from south-eastern Europe to,<br/> +Anatolia, the Turks and,<br/> + character of the population,<br/> + feudal families,<br/> +Anatolikón,<br/> + captured by the Turks (1825),<br/> +Andrassy, Count,<br/> +Angora,<br/> + battle of (1402),<br/> +Arabia, Turkish prestige in,<br/> + and the Turks,<br/> + movement of, in the direction of revolt,<br/> +Arabs and Anatolia,<br/> + and Bulgars,<br/> + and Islam,<br/> +Arcadiopolis: <i>see</i> Lule-Burgas.<br/> +Argos,<br/> +Arian controversy, the,<br/> +Armatoli, or Christian militia,<br/> +Armenians, the,<br/> + character of the,<br/> + massacres of (1894),<br/> +Arnauts: <i>see</i> Albanians.<br/> +Arta, Gulf of,<br/> + plain of,<br/> +Asen dynasty, the,<br/> +Asia Minor, Turks in,<br/> +Asparukh (Bulgar prince),<br/> +Aspropotamo, the,<br/> +Astypalià,<br/> +Athens,<br/> + Duchy of,<br/> + University of,<br/> + siege of (1821-2),<br/> + (1827),<br/> +Athos, Mount,<br/> +Attila,<br/> +Austerlitz, battle of (1805),<br/> +Austria-Hungary and the Adriatic,<br/> + and the Macedonian question,<br/> + and Serbia, relations between,<br/> + and the Serbs,<br/> + and the Treaty of Berlin,<br/> + and Turkey, relations between,<br/> + wars between,<br/> + annexation of Bosnia and Hercegovina by,<br/> + occupation of Bosnia and Hercegovina by,<br/> + relations with the Balkan League,<br/> + relations with Rumania,<br/> + Ruman and South Slavonic populations in,<br/> +Austrian politics in Rumania,<br/> +Austrians and Serbs, relations between,<br/> + and Turks,<br/> +Avars, the: their invasion of the Balkan peninsula with the Slavs,<br/> + their war with the Bulgars,<br/> +Avlona,<br/> + bay of,<br/> +Avshar tribe,<br/> +‘Ayon Oros’,<br/> +Azerbaijan, +</p> + +<p> +Bačka,<br/> +Bagdad,<br/> +‘Balance of Power’, the,<br/> +Balkan League, the,<br/> + formation of the,<br/> + dissolution of the,<br/> +Balkan peninsula, the, annexation of, by Mohammed II,<br/> + control of,<br/> + economic unity of,<br/> + German policy in,<br/> + nationalism in,<br/> + Slav inhabitants of,<br/> + Turkish power in,<br/> + under Roman rule,<br/> +Balkan States, relations between the,<br/> + zollverein,<br/> +Balkan war, the first (1912-13),<br/> + the second (June 1913),<br/> +Banat, the,<br/> +Baranya,<br/> +Basil I, the Emperor,<br/> +Basil II, the Emperor,<br/> + ‘Slayer of the Bulgars’,<br/> +Bassarab, dynasty of,<br/> +Bayezid I, Sultan,<br/> +Bayezid II, Sultan,<br/> +Beaconsfield, Earl of,<br/> +Beirut,<br/> +Belgrade,<br/> + capital of Serbia,<br/> + captured by the Serbs (1807),<br/> + captured by the Turks (1521),<br/> + (1813),<br/> + its Celtic name,<br/> + Treaty of (1739),<br/> +Belisarius,<br/> +Berchtold, Count,<br/> +Bergama,<br/> +Berlin,<br/> + Congress of (1878),<br/> + Treaty of (1878),<br/> +Bessarabia, Bulgars in, 25,<br/> + lost(1812),<br/> + regained (1856),<br/> + lost again (1878),<br/> + importance with regard to present situation,<br/> +Bieberstein, Duron Marschall von,<br/> +Bismarck,<br/> +Bitolj: <i>see</i> Monastir.<br/> +Black Castle of Afiun,<br/> +Black Sea,<br/> + Russian exclusion from,<br/> +Bogomil heresy, the,<br/> +Boja, lord of Kashgar,<br/> +Boris, Bulgar prince (852-88),<br/> +Boris, Crown Prince of Bulgaria,<br/> +Bosnia, annexation of,<br/> + independence of, and conquest of, by the Turks,<br/> + in relation to the other Serb territories,<br/> + its Slavonic population,<br/> + relations of, with Hungary,<br/> + revolts in, against Turkey,<br/> + under Austro-Hungarian rule,<br/> + under Turkish rule,<br/> +Bosphorus, the,<br/> +Botzaris, Marko,<br/> +Branković, George,<br/> +Branković, Vuk,<br/> +Bratianu, Ioan (father),<br/> + (son),<br/> +Bregalnica, battle of the (1913),<br/> +Brusa,<br/> +Bucarest, Committee of,<br/> + Peace Conference (1913),<br/> + Treaty of (1812),<br/> + (1913),<br/> +Bucovina, acquisition by Austria,<br/> + Rumanians in,<br/> +Buda,<br/> +Budapest, in relation to the Serbo-Croats,<br/> +Budua,<br/> +Bulgaria, declaration of independence by, and assumption of title Tsar by its +ruler,<br/> + conflicting interests with Greece,<br/> + early wars between, and the Greeks,<br/> + geographical position of,<br/> + growth of,<br/> + intervention on the side of the Central Powers in the European War,<br/> + its division into eastern and western,<br/> + extent of western,<br/> + in the two Balkan wars (1912-13),<br/> + its early relations with Rome,<br/> + its relations with Russia,<br/> + obtains recognition as a nationality in the Ottoman Empire,<br/> + of Slav speech and culture,<br/> + place of, in the Balkan peninsula,<br/> + Turkish atrocities in,<br/> +Bulgaria and Rumania,<br/> +Bulgaria and Serbia, contrasted,<br/> + the agreement between,<br/> + wars between (1885, 1913),<br/> +Bulgaria and Turkey, relations between,<br/> +Bulgarian bishoprics in Macedonia,<br/> + Church, early vicissitudes of the,<br/> + claims and propaganda in Macedonia,<br/> + Exarchist Church, the,<br/> + literature,<br/> + monarchy, origins of the,<br/> +Bulgarians, general distribution of,<br/> + their attitude to the Slavs and the Germans,<br/> +Bulgarians and Serbians, contrast between,<br/> +Bulgars, the, their origin,<br/> + their advance westwards and then southwards into the Balkan peninsula,<br/> + their absorption by the Slavs,<br/> + north of the Danube,<br/> + adherents of the Orthodox Church,<br/> +Burke, Edmund,<br/> +Byron, Lord,<br/> +Byzantine Christianity,<br/> + commerce,<br/> + diplomacy, its attitude towards the Slav and other invaders,<br/> + Empire,<br/> + heritage and expansion of, by the Turks,<br/> +Byzantium, ascendancy of, over Bulgaria,<br/> + decline of,<br/> + Greek colony of,<br/> + Roman administrative centre, +</p> + +<p> +Cairo,<br/> +Caliphate, the,<br/> +Campo Formio, Treaty of (1797),<br/> +Candia, siege of,<br/> +Canea,<br/> +Cantucuzene, John,<br/> +Cape Malea,<br/> +Cappadocia,<br/> +Caria,<br/> +Carinthia,<br/> +Carlowitz, Treaty of (1699),<br/> +Carniola,<br/> +Carol, Prince of Rumania,<br/> + his accession,<br/> + joins Russia against Turkey,<br/> + intention to abdicate,<br/> + proclaimed king,<br/> + King,<br/> + and the Balkans,<br/> + personal points,<br/> +Carp, P.P.,<br/> +Carpathian mountains, the,<br/> +Catargiu, Lascar,<br/> +Catherine, Empress,<br/> +Cattaro, Bocche di,<br/> +Caucasia,<br/> +Cefalonia,<br/> +Celts, the, in the Balkan peninsula,<br/> +Cerigo,<br/> +Cetina river (Dalmatia),<br/> +Cetinje,<br/> +Chaeronea,<br/> +Charlemagne, crushes the Avars,<br/> +Charles VI, Emperor of Austria,<br/> +Charles, Prince and King of Rumania: <i>see</i> Carol.<br/> +Časlav, revolts against Bulgars,<br/> +Chataldja, lines of,<br/> +Chesme, destruction of Turkish fleet in,<br/> +Chios: <i>see</i> Khios.<br/> +Christianity,<br/> + in the Balkan peninsula in classical times,<br/> + introduced into Bulgaria,<br/> + introduced amongst the Serbs,<br/> +Christians, their treatment by the Turks,<br/> +Church, division of the, affects the Serbs and Croats,<br/> +Church, Generalissimo Sir Richard,<br/> +Churches, rivalry of the eastern and western,<br/> +Cilicia,<br/> +Claudius, the Emperor,<br/> +Coalition, Serbo-Croat or Croato-Serb, the,<br/> +Cochrane, Grand Admiral,<br/> +Cogalniceanu, M.,<br/> +Comnenus: <i>see</i> Alexis <i>and</i> Manuel.<br/> +Concert of Europe,<br/> +Constantine the Great,<br/> +Constantine, King of Greece,<br/> +Constantine, ruler of Bulgaria,<br/> +Constantinople,<br/> + and the Serbian Church,<br/> + ascendancy of, over Bulgaria,<br/> + cathedral of Aya Sophia,<br/> + commercial interests of,<br/> + decline of,<br/> + defences of,<br/> + ecclesiastical influence of,<br/> + fall of (1204),<br/> + (1453),<br/> + its position at the beginning of the barbarian invasions,<br/> + made an imperial city,<br/> + Patriarchate at,<br/> + ‘Phanari’, the,<br/> + spiritual rivalry of, with Rome,<br/> +Constitution, Rumanian,<br/> +Corfù,<br/> +Corinth: <i>see</i> Korinth.<br/> +Crete: <i>see</i> Krete.<br/> +Crimea, abandoned to Russia,<br/> +Crimean War, the,<br/> +Croatia,<br/> + absorbed by Hungary,<br/> + position of, in relation to the Serb territories,<br/> +Croato-Serb unity, movement in favour of,<br/> +Croats, Crotians,<br/> + general distribution of,<br/> + their origin,<br/> +Croats and Serbs, difference between,<br/> +Crusaders, the, in the Balkan peninsula,<br/> +Crusades; the first; the fourth,<br/> +Cuza, Prince of Rumania,<br/> +Cyclades, the,<br/> +Cyprus,<br/> + in Latin hands,<br/> + in Ottoman hands,<br/> + under the British,<br/> +Cyrenaica,<br/> +Cyril, St.,<br/> +Cyrillic alphabet, the, +</p> + +<p> +Dacia,<br/> + subjection to, and abandonment by, the Romans,<br/> +Dacians,<br/> + settlement in Carpathian regions,<br/> + wars with Rome,<br/> +Dalmatia,<br/> + acquired by Austria-Hungary,<br/> + and Venice,<br/> + in classical times,<br/> + in relation to other Serb territories,<br/> + its Slavonic population,<br/> + relations of, with Hungary,<br/> +Daniel, Prince-Bishop of Montenegro,<br/> +Danilo, Prince of Montenegro,<br/> +Danube, the,<br/> + as frontier of Roman Empire,<br/> +Danube <i>(continued)</i>:<br/> + Bulgars cross the,<br/> + Slavs cross the,<br/> +Danubian principalities, Russian protectorate in,<br/> +Dardanelles, the,<br/> +Decius, the Emperor,<br/> +Dedeagach,<br/> +Deliyannis,<br/> +Demotika,<br/> +Dhimitzána,<br/> +Diocletian, the Emperor, his redistribution of the imperial provinces,<br/> +Dnieper, the,<br/> +Dniester, the,<br/> +Dobrudja,<br/> + acquisition by Rumania,<br/> + Bulgarian aspirations in regard to,<br/> +Draga, Queen-Consort of Serbia,<br/> +Dramali,<br/> +Drave, the,<br/> +Drina, the,<br/> +Dubrovnik: <i>see</i> Ragusa.<br/> +Dulcigno (Ulcinj),<br/> +Durazzo,<br/> +Durostorum: <i>see</i> Silistria.<br/> +Dushan: <i>see</i> Stephen Dušan. +</p> + +<p> +Eastern Church, the,<br/> +Eastern Slavs; <i>see</i> Russians.<br/> +Edremid,<br/> +Egypt,<br/> +Egyptian expedition (1823-4),<br/> +Enos-Midia line, the,<br/> +Enver Bey,<br/> +Epirus,<br/> + power of Hellenism in,<br/> +Ertogrul, Osmanli chief,<br/> +Erzerum,<br/> +Eugen, Prince, of Savoy,<br/> +Euphrates, the,<br/> +Euxine trade,<br/> +Evyénios Voulgáris,<br/> +Exarchist Church, the, +</p> + +<p> +Fabvier,<br/> +Ferdinand, Prince and King of Bulgaria (1886-),<br/> + his relations with foreign powers,<br/> +Ferdinand, King of Rumania,<br/> +Filipescu, Nicholas,<br/> +Fiume (Rjeka),<br/> +France,<br/> + and the Macedonian question,<br/> + and the struggle for Greek independence,<br/> + and the struggle for the Mediterranean,<br/> + and the Turks,<br/> + relations with Rumania,<br/> +French, the,<br/> + in the Balkan peninsula,<br/> + in Dalmatia,<br/> + in Morocco,<br/> + influence in Rumania,<br/> +French Revolution<br/> + and the rights of nationalities,<br/> +Friedjung, Dr., and the accusation against Serbia, +</p> + +<p> +Galaxidhi,<br/> +Galicia,<br/> +Gallipoli,<br/> +Genoese,<br/> +George, Crown Prince of Serbia,<br/> +George,<br/> + King of Greece,<br/> + assassination of,<br/> +George, Prince of Greece,<br/> +German diplomacy at Constantinople,<br/> + influence in the Near East,<br/> + influence in Rumania,<br/> + influence in Turkey,<br/> +German Empire, restlessness of,<br/> +German hierarchy, early struggles of, against Slavonic liturgy,<br/> +Germanic peoples, southward movement of,<br/> +Germanòs, metropolitan bishop of Patrae,<br/> +Germany and the Turkish frontier,<br/> + efforts to reach the Adriatic,<br/> + its expansion eastward,<br/> + and the Macedonian question,<br/> + and Russia, relations between,<br/> + and the Treaty of Berlin,<br/> + relations with Rumania,<br/> + revolutions promoted by,<br/> +Gjorgjević, Dr. V.,<br/> +Golden Horn,<br/> +Goluchowski, Count,<br/> +Gorazd,<br/> +Gorchakov, Prince,<br/> +Goths, invasion of the,<br/> +Great Britain and the Balkan States, relations between,<br/> + and Egypt,<br/> + and Rumania,<br/> + and Syria,<br/> + and the Ionian Islands,<br/> + and the Macedonian question,<br/> + and the struggle for Greek independence,<br/> + and the struggle for the Mediterranean,<br/> + and the Treaty of Berlin,<br/> + loan to Greece,<br/> + occupation of Cyprus,<br/> +Greece, anarchy in,<br/> + ancient,<br/> + and Macedonia,<br/> + and Russia,<br/> + and Serbia,<br/> + and the adjacent islands,<br/> + and the Christian religion,<br/> + and the first Balkan war,<br/> + and the Ionian Islands,<br/> + and the Orthodox Church,<br/> + and the Slav migration,<br/> + brigandage in,<br/> + conflict of interests with Bulgaria,<br/> + conquest of, by the Turks,<br/> + delimitation of the frontier (1829),<br/> + dispute with Italy as to possession of Epirus,<br/> + effect of the French Revolution on,<br/> + invasion of, by Goths,<br/> + land-tax,<br/> + loans to,<br/> + local liberties,<br/> + ‘Military League’ of 1909,<br/> + minerals of,<br/> + monarchy established, and its results,<br/> + ‘National Assembly’,<br/> + oppressive relations with Turkey, and efforts for liberation,<br/> + revolutions in 1843 and 1862.<br/> + territorial contact with Turkey.<br/> + ‘tribute-children’ for Turkish army from.<br/> + war with Turkey (1828); (1897); (1912).<br/> +Greek agriculture.<br/> + anti-Greek movement in Rumania.<br/> + army.<br/> + art and architecture.<br/> + ascendancy in Bulgaria.<br/> + <i>bourgeoisie</i>.<br/> + claims and propaganda in Macedonia.<br/> + coalition with the Seljuks.<br/> + commerce and economic progress.<br/> + dialects of Ancient Greece.<br/> + education.<br/> + influence in the Balkan peninsula.<br/> + influence in Bulgaria.<br/> + influence in Rumania.<br/> + language in Rumanian Church.<br/> + literature.<br/> + monastic culture.<br/> + nationalism.<br/> + national religion.<br/> + navy.<br/> + officials tinder the Turks.<br/> + Patriarch.<br/> + public finance.<br/> + public spirit.<br/> + public works.<br/> + railways.<br/> + renaissance.<br/> + shipping.<br/> + unity.<br/> +Greek Empire, decline of.<br/> +Greek hierarchy, in Bulgaria, the.<br/> +Greeks, Anatolian.<br/> + Byzantine.<br/> + general distribution of.<br/> + Ottoman.<br/> + their attitude with regard to the barbarian invasions.<br/> +Gregorios, Greek Patriarch at Constantinople.<br/> +Gulkhaneh. +</p> + +<p> +Hadrian, the Emperor.<br/> +Haliacmon Valley.<br/> +Halys river.<br/> +Hasa.<br/> +Hatti Sherif.<br/> +Hejaz.<br/> +Hellenic culture and civilization.<br/> +Hellenic Republic.<br/> +Hellespont, the.<br/> +Hercegovina.<br/> + annexation of, by Austria-Hungary.<br/> + its Slavonic population.<br/> + origin and independence of, and conquest of, by the Turks.<br/> + revolts in, against Turkey.<br/> + under Austro-Hungarian rule.<br/> + under Turkish rule.<br/> +Hilmi Pasha.<br/> +Hungarians.<br/> + and the Turks.<br/> + invade the Balkan peninsula.<br/> +Hungary,<br/> + and the Balkan peninsula,<br/> + and the Serbo-Croats,<br/> + and the Serbs,<br/> + and Turkey, wars between,<br/> + conquest of, by Suleiman I,<br/> + growth of,<br/> + loss of, by the Turks,<br/> + Slavs in,<br/> +Huns, arrival of the, in Europe,<br/> + their origin,<br/> + settled in Hungary,<br/> +Hunyadi, John,<br/> +Hydhra and the Hydhriots,<br/> +Hypsilantis, Prince Alexander,<br/> + Prince Demetrius, +</p> + +<p> +Ibar, the,<br/> +Ibrahim Pasha,<br/> +Ida, Mount,<br/> +Ignatiyev, Count,<br/> +Illyria, Celtic invasion of,<br/> + prefecture of,<br/> + Roman conquest of,<br/> +Illyrians, the,<br/> +Imbros,<br/> +Ionescu, Take,<br/> +Ionian islands,<br/> + presented to Greece by Great Britain,<br/> +Ipek: <i>see</i> Peć<br/> +Iran,<br/> +Iskanderoun, Gulf of,<br/> +Italian influence in the Balkan peninsula,<br/> + trading cities,<br/> +Italy, and the Macedonian question,<br/> + and the possession of Epirus,<br/> + diocese of,<br/> + prefecture of,<br/> + war with Turkey (1911-12),<br/> +Ivan III, Tsar of Russia,<br/> +Ivan IV, Tsar of Russia, +</p> + +<p> +Jehad, or Holy War,<br/> +Jenghis Khan,<br/> +Jerusalem,<br/> +Jews, at Constantinople,<br/> + in Rumania,<br/> + in Turkey,<br/> +Jezzar the Butcher,<br/> +Jidda,<br/> +John Alexander, ruler of Bulgaria,<br/> +John Asen I, Bulgar Tsar (1186-96),<br/> +John Asen II, Bulgar Tsar (1218-41),<br/> +John Tzimisces, the Emperor,<br/> +John the Terrible, Prince of Moldavia,<br/> +Joseph II, Emperor of Austria,<br/> +Judah,<br/> +Jugo-Slav(ia),<br/> +Justin I, the Emperor,<br/> +Justinian I, the Emperor, +</p> + +<p> +Kaisariyeh,<br/> +Kalamata,<br/> +Kaloian, Bulgar Tsar (1196-1207),<br/> +Kama, Bulgars on the,<br/> +Kanaris, Constantine,<br/> +Kapodistrias, John,<br/> +Kara-George (Petrović),<br/> +Karagjorgjević (sc. family of Kara-George) dynasty, the,<br/> +Karaiskakis,<br/> +Karamania,<br/> +Karasi,<br/> +Karlovci (Carlowitz, Karlowitz),<br/> +Karpathos,<br/> +Kasos;<br/> + destruction of (1824),<br/> +Kavala,<br/> +Kazan,<br/> +Khalkidhiki,<br/> +Kharput,<br/> + siege of (1822),<br/> +Khorasan,<br/> +Khurshid Pasha,<br/> +Kiev,<br/> +Kilkish, Greek victory at,<br/> +Kirk-Kilissé, battle of,<br/> +Kisseleff, Count,<br/> +Kladovo,<br/> +Knights Hospitallers of St. John,<br/> +Kochana,<br/> +Kolettis,<br/> +Kolokotrónis, Theodore,<br/> +Kondouriottis,<br/> +Konia,<br/> + battle of,<br/> +Kopais basin, draining of,<br/> +Korinth,<br/> + surrender of (1822),<br/> +Korinthian Gulf,<br/> +Kos,<br/> +Kosovo, vilayet of,<br/> +Kosovo Polje, battle of,<br/> +Kraljević, Marko: <i>see</i> Marko K.<br/> +Krete,<br/> + conquest of, by Turks,<br/> + intervention of the powers and constituted an autonomous state,<br/> + speech of,<br/> +Krum (Bulgar prince),<br/> +Kruševac,<br/> +Kubrat (Bulgar prince),<br/> +Kumanovo, battle of (1912),<br/> +Kumans, the Tartar,<br/> +Kurdistan,<br/> +Kurds, the,<br/> +Kutchuk Kainardji, Treaty of,<br/> +Kydhonies, destruction of, +</p> + +<p> +Laibach (Ljubljana),<br/> +Lansdowne, Marquess of,<br/> +Lárissa,<br/> +Latin Empire at Constantinople, the,<br/> + influence in the Balkan peninsula,<br/> +Lausanne, Treaty of (1912),<br/> +Lazar (Serbian Prince),<br/> +‘League of Friends’,<br/> +Leipsic, battle of (1813),<br/> +Lemnos,<br/> +Leo, the Emperor,<br/> +Leopold II, Emperor of Austria,<br/> +Lepanto, battle of (1571),<br/> +Lerna,<br/> +Leskovac,<br/> +Levant, the,<br/> + commerce of,<br/> +Libyan war (1911-12),<br/> +Lombards, the,<br/> +London, Conference of (1912-13),<br/> + Treaty of (1913),<br/> +Louis, conquers the Serbs,<br/> +Lule-Burgas,<br/> + battle of (1912), +</p> + +<p> +Macedonia,<br/> + anarchy in,<br/> + defeat of the Turks by the Serbians in,<br/> + establishment of Turks in,<br/> + general characteristics of, in classical times,<br/> + inhabitants of,<br/> + revolt in,<br/> + place-names in,<br/> +Macedonian question, the,<br/> + Slavs, the,<br/> +Magnesia,<br/> +Magyars, the,<br/> + their irruption into Europe,<br/> + growing power and ambitions of the,<br/> + influence upon the Rumanians,<br/> +Mahmud I, Sultan,<br/> +Mahmud II, Sultan,<br/> +Maina,<br/> +Maiorescu, Titu<br/> +Malasgerd, battle of,<br/> +Malta, siege of,<br/> +Mamelukes, Egyptian,<br/> +Manichaean heresy, the,<br/> +Manuel Comnenus, the Emperor,<br/> +Marash,<br/> +Marcus Aurelius, the Emperor,<br/> +Marghiloman, Alexander,<br/> +Maria Theresa, Empress of Austria,<br/> +Maritsa, the,<br/> + battle of,<br/> +Marko Kraljević,<br/> +Marmora, Sea of,<br/> +Mavrokordatos, Alexander,<br/> +Mavromichalis clan,<br/> +Mavromichalis, Petros,<br/> +Mediterranean, the,<br/> +Megaspélaion,<br/> +Mehemet Ali: <i>see</i> Mohammed Ali.<br/> +Melek Shah, of Persia,<br/> +Mendere (Maiandros),<br/> +Mesolonghi,<br/> +Mesopotamia,<br/> +Messenia,<br/> +Mesta,<br/> +Metéora,<br/> +Methodius, St.,<br/> +Michael Obrenović III, Prince of Serbia (1840-2, 1860-8),<br/> +Michael III, the Emperor,<br/> +Michael the Brave, Prince of Wallachia,<br/> +Midhat Pasha and representative institutions in Turkey,<br/> +Media,<br/> +Milan Obrenović II, Prince of Serbia (1839),<br/> +Milan Obrenović IV, Prince and King of Serbia (1868-89),<br/> +Mileševo, monastery of,<br/> +Milica, Princess,<br/> +Military colonies, Austro-Hungarian, of Serbs against Turkey,<br/> +Miloš Obrenović I, Prince of Serbia (1817-39, 1858-60),<br/> +Milovanović, Dr.,<br/> +Mircea the Old, Prince of Wallachia,<br/> +Misivria (Mesembria),<br/> +Mitylini,<br/> +Modhon,<br/> +Mohacs, battle of,<br/> +Mohammed II, Sultan,<br/> +Mohammed IV, Sultan,<br/> +Mohammed V, Sultan,<br/> +Mohammed Ali Pasha, of Egypt,<br/> +Mohammedan influence in the Balkan peninsula,<br/> +Mohammedan Serbs, of Bosnia and Hercegovina, the,<br/> +Moldavia,<br/> + foundation of,<br/> +Monastir (Bitolj, in Serbian),<br/> + battle of (1912),<br/> +Montenegro,<br/> + achieves its independence,<br/> + and the Balkan League,<br/> + autonomous,<br/> + becomes a kingdom,<br/> + conquered by the Turks,<br/> + during the Napoleonic wars,<br/> + in the Balkan war (1912-13),<br/> + position of, amongst the other Serb territories,<br/> + relations with Russia,<br/> + revolt in,<br/> + under Turkish rule,<br/> + war with Turkey,<br/> +Montesquieu,<br/> +Morava, the,<br/> +Moravia, its conversion to Christianity,<br/> +Morea: <i>see</i> Peloponnesos.<br/> +Morocco crisis, the,<br/> +Moslems,<br/> +Mukhtar Pasha,<br/> +Muntenia (Wallachia), foundation of,<br/> +Murad I, Sultan, murder of,<br/> +Murad II, Sultan,<br/> +Murad III, Sultan,<br/> +Murad V, Sultan,<br/> +Murzsteg programme of reforms, the,<br/> +Mustapha II, Sultan,<br/> +Mustapha III, Sultan, +</p> + +<p> +Naissus: <i>see</i> Nish.<br/> +Napoleon I,<br/> +Napoleon III, and Rumania,<br/> +Natalie, Queen-Consort of Serbia,<br/> +Nationalism,<br/> +Nauplia,<br/> + fall of (1822),<br/> +Nauplia Bay,<br/> +Navarino, battle of (1827),<br/> +Negrepont,<br/> +Nemanja dynasty, the,<br/> +Nicaea,<br/> +Nicholas I, Prince and King of Montenegro (1860-),<br/> +Nicholas I, Emperor of Russia,<br/> +Nicholas II, Emperor of Russia,<br/> +Nicomedia,<br/> +Nikarià, 230.<br/> +Nikiphóros Phokas, the Emperor,<br/> +Nikopolis,<br/> + battle of,<br/> +Nikšić,<br/> +Nilufer,<br/> +Nish (Naissus, Niš),<br/> + Celtic origin,<br/> + Goths defeated at,<br/> + Bulgarians march on,<br/> + geographical position of,<br/> +Nish-Salonika railway,<br/> +Nizib,<br/> +Normans, the,<br/> +Novae: <i>see</i> Svishtov.<br/> +Novi Pazar, Sandjak of,<br/> + occupied by Austria-Hungary,<br/> + evacuated by Austria-Hungary,<br/> + occupied by Serbia and Montenegro, +</p> + +<p> +Obilić, Miloš,<br/> +Obrenović dynasty, the,<br/> +Odessa,<br/> + Committee of,<br/> +Odhyssèus,<br/> +Oecumenical Patriarch, the,<br/> +Okhrida,<br/> + Archbishopric and Patriarchate of,<br/> + Lake of,<br/> +Old Serbia (northern Macedonia),<br/> +Orient, prefecture of the,<br/> +Orkhan,<br/> +Orthodox Church: <i>see</i> Eastern Church.<br/> +Osman (Othman), Sultan,<br/> +Osmanli: <i>see</i> Turkey <i>and</i> Turks.<br/> +Ostrogoths, the,<br/> +Otranto, straits of,<br/> +Otto, Prince, of Bavaria, King of Greece,<br/> + driven into exile,<br/> +Ottoman Empire: <i>see</i> Turkey.<br/> +Ouchy, Treaty of: <i>see</i> Lausanne, Treaty of.<br/> +Oxus, +</p> + +<p> +Palaiologos, Romaic dynasty of,<br/> +Pannonia,<br/> + Bulgars in,<br/> +Pan-Serb movement, the<br/> +Pan-Slavism,<br/> +Paris, Congress of (1856),<br/> + Convention (1858),<br/> + Treaty of (1856),<br/> +Paša, M,<br/> +Passarowitz, Treaty of,<br/> +Pasvanoghlu,<br/> +Patmos,<br/> +Patras,<br/> + Gulf of,<br/> +Paul, Emperor of Russia,<br/> +Paulicians, the,<br/> +Peć (Ipek, in Turkish), patriarchate of,<br/> +Pechenegs, the Tartar,<br/> +Petraeus,<br/> +‘Peloponnesian Senate’,<br/> +Peloponnesos (Morea),<br/> +Pera,<br/> +Persia and the Turks,<br/> + at war with Constantinople,<br/> + Grand Seljuk of,<br/> +Persian Gulf,<br/> +Peter the Great,<br/> + ‘Testament’ of,<br/> +Peter, Bulgar Tsar (927-69)<br/> +Peter I, King of Serbia (1903),<br/> +Peter I, Prince-Bishop of Montenegro,<br/> +Petrović-Njegoš, dynasty of,<br/> +Petta, battle of,<br/> +Phanariote Greeks, the, <i>See</i> Greek officials under the<br/> + Turks, <i>and</i> Turkey, Phanariot régime.<br/> +‘Philhellenes’,<br/> +‘Philikì Hetairia’,<br/> +Philip, Count of Flanders,<br/> +Philip of Macedonia,<br/> +Philippopolis, Bogomil centre,<br/> + foundation of,<br/> + revolts against Turks,<br/> +Pindus,<br/> +Pirot,<br/> +Place-names, the distribution of classical, indigenous, and<br/> + Slavonic, in the Balkan peninsula,<br/> +Plevna, siege of,<br/> +Podgorica,<br/> +Poland,<br/> +Pontus,<br/> +Popes, attitude of the, towards the Slavonic liturgy,<br/> +Poros,<br/> +Porto Lagos,<br/> +Požarevac,<br/> +Preslav, Bulgarian capital,<br/> +Prespa,<br/> +Pressburg, Treaty of (1805),<br/> +Prilep, battle of (1912),<br/> +‘Primates’, the,<br/> +Prizren,<br/> +Prussia and Austria, war between (1866),<br/> +Psarà, +</p> + +<p> +Radowitz, Baron von,<br/> +Ragusa (Dubrovnik, in Serbian), its relations with the Serbian<br/> +state,<br/> + prosperity of, under Turkish rule,<br/> + decline of,<br/> +Railways in the Balkan peninsula,<br/> +Rashid Pasha,<br/> +Raška, centre of Serb state,<br/> +Règlement Organique,<br/> +Religious divisions in the Balkan peninsula,<br/> +Resna, in Macedonia,<br/> +Rhodes,<br/> + siege of,<br/> +Ristić, M.,<br/> +Rodosto,<br/> +Romaic architecture,<br/> + government,<br/> + language,<br/> +‘Romaioi’,<br/> +Roman Catholicism in the Balkan peninsula,<br/> +Roman Empire,<br/> +Roman law,<br/> +Rome, its conquest of the Balkan peninsula,<br/> + relations of, with Bulgaria,<br/> + relations of, with Serbia,<br/> + spiritual rivalry of, with Constantinople,<br/> +Rosetti, C.A.,<br/> +Rovine, battle of,<br/> +Rumania and the Balkan peninsula,<br/> + and the second Balkan war(1913),<br/> + and Bulgaria,<br/> + and the Russo-Turkish war (1877),<br/> + anti-Greek movement in,<br/> + anti-Russian revolution in,<br/> + commerce of,<br/> + convention with Russia (1877),<br/> + dynastic question in,<br/> + education in,<br/> + influences at work in,<br/> + military situation,<br/> + nationalist activity in,<br/> + neutrality of,<br/> + origins of,<br/> + Patriarch’s authority in,<br/> + peasantry of,<br/> + Phanariotes in,<br/> + political parties in,<br/> + politics of, internal,<br/> + relations with Russia,<br/> + religion and Church in,<br/> + Roman civilization, influence in,<br/> + rural question in,<br/> + Russian influence in; politics in,<br/> + struggle for independence,<br/> + territorial gains,<br/> + territorial losses,<br/> + Turkish rule in,<br/> + Upper class in (cneazi, boyards),<br/> + origins of,<br/> + social evolution of,<br/> + economic and political supremacy,<br/> +Rumanian army,<br/> + claims in Macedonia,<br/> + principalities, foundation of,<br/> + union of,<br/> + revolt (1822),<br/> +Rumanians, early evidences of,<br/> + in Bessarabia,<br/> + in Bucovina,<br/> + in Hungary,<br/> + in Macedonia,<br/> +Rumelia, Eastern,<br/> +Russia and Bulgaria,<br/> + and Greece,<br/> + and Montenegro,<br/> + and Rumania,<br/> + and Serbia,<br/> + and Turkey,<br/> + and the Macedonian question,<br/> + and the struggle for Greek independence,<br/> + Bulgars in,<br/> + commercial treaty with Turkey (1783),<br/> + convention with Rumania (1877),<br/> + conversion to Christianity,<br/> + occupation of Kars,<br/> + re-organization under Peter the Great,<br/> + wars with Turkey (1769-84),<br/> + (1787),<br/> + (1807),<br/> + (1828),<br/> + (1877-8),<br/> + (1914-15),<br/> +Russian diplomacy at Constantinople,<br/> + influence in Bulgaria,<br/> + invasion of Balkan peninsula,<br/> + relations with the Balkan Christians,<br/> + relations with the Balkan League,<br/> +Russians, the, comparison of,<br/> + with the Southern Slavs,<br/> + <i>see</i> Slavs, the Eastern, +</p> + +<p> +Šabac (Shabatz),<br/> +Salisbury, Lord,<br/> +Salonika,<br/> +Salonika-Nish railway, the,<br/> +Samos,<br/> +Samothraki,<br/> +Samuel, Tsar of western Bulgaria (977-1014),<br/> +San Stefano, Treaty of (1878),<br/> +Saracens, the,<br/> +Sarajevo, capital of Bosnia,<br/> +Sava, St.,<br/> +Save, the,<br/> +Scutari (di Albania), Skodra,<br/> +Selim I, Sultan,<br/> +Selim III, Sultan,<br/> +Seljuks, the,<br/> +Semendria: <i>see</i> Smederevo.<br/> +Semites, the,<br/> +Serb migrations,<br/> + national life, centres of,<br/> + political centres,<br/> + race, home of the,<br/> + territories, divisions of the,<br/> +Serbia and Austria-Hungary, relations between,<br/> + and Bulgaria, contrasted,<br/> + the agreement between,<br/> + and Macedonia,<br/> + and Russia, relations between,<br/> + and the annexation of Bosnia and Hercegovina,<br/> + and the Balkan League,<br/> + and Turkey,<br/> + dissensions in,<br/> + geography of,<br/> + Patriarch’s authority in,<br/> + the barrier to German expansion eastwards,<br/> + Turkish conquest of,<br/> + wars with Turkey (1875-7),<br/> +Serbian Church, the,<br/> + claims and propaganda in Macedonia,<br/> + Empire, its extent under Stephen Dušan,<br/> + literature,<br/> + nation, centre of gravity of,<br/> + principality, its extent in 1830,<br/> +Serbo-Bulgarian war (1885),<br/> + (1913),<br/> +Serbo-Croat nationality, formation of the,<br/> +Serbo-Croat unity, movement in favour of,<br/> +Serbo-Croats, general distribution of,<br/> +Serbs, defeat Bulgars and Greeks,<br/> + distribution of the, in the Balkan peninsula,<br/> + general distribution of the,<br/> + north of the Danube,<br/> + outside the boundaries of the Serb state,<br/> + religious persecution of,<br/> + revolt against Bulgaria,<br/> + revolt against the Magyars,<br/> + revolts against Turkey,<br/> + their attitude towards the Germans,<br/> +Serbs and Croats, difference between,<br/> +Shabatz: <i>see</i> Šabac.<br/> +Shipka Pass,<br/> +Shishman, revolts against Bulgaria,<br/> +Sicily,<br/> +Silistria,<br/> +Simeon the Great, Bulgar Tsar (893-927),<br/> +Singidunum: <i>see</i> Belgrade.<br/> +Sitvatorok, Treaty of,<br/> +Sivas,<br/> +Skanderbey,<br/> +Skodra: <i>see</i> Scutari.<br/> +Skoplje (Üsküb, in Turkish),<br/> +Slav influence in Rumania,<br/> +Slavonia,<br/> + absorbed by Hungary,<br/> +Slavonic immigration, the streams of, in the Balkan peninsula,<br/> + languages, the, use of, in Rumanian Church,<br/> + liturgy, the, southern, nationalities,<br/> +Slavs, maritime,<br/> + method of their migration southwards into the Balkan peninsula<br/> + migration, in the seventh century,<br/> + their lack of cohesion,<br/> + their attacks on Salonika and Constantinople with the Avars,<br/> + their original home,<br/> + their settlement south of the Danube,<br/> + the Balkan, their attitude towards the Church, under Turkish rule,<br/> + the Eastern (Russians),<br/> + the Southern, general distribution of,<br/> + the Western,<br/> +Slivnitsa, battle of (1885),<br/> +Slovenes, the,<br/> +Smederevo (Semendria),<br/> +Smyrna,<br/> +Sofia, captured by the Bulgars from the Greeks, captured by the Turks,<br/> +Soudha Bay,<br/> +Southern Slav nationalities, the,<br/> +Spain, Jews expelled from,<br/> +Spalajković, Dr.,<br/> +Spetza,<br/> +Sporades, the,<br/> +Srem: <i>see</i> Syrmia.<br/> +Stambul,<br/> +Sultanate of,<br/> +Stambulov,<br/> +Stephen Dragutin,<br/> +Stephen Dušan, King of Serbia(1331-45), Tsar of Serbs, Bulgars, and Greeks +(1345-55),<br/> +Stephen (Lazarević), Serbian Prince,<br/> +Stephen Nemanja, <i>veliki župan</i>,<br/> +Stephen Nemanjić, King of Serbia (1196-1223), the First-Crowned,<br/> +Stephen Radoslav, King of Serbia (1223-33),<br/> +Stephen Uroš I, King of Serbia (1242-76),<br/> +Stephen Uroš II (Milutin), King of Serbia (1282-1321),<br/> +Stephen Uroš III (Dećanski), King of Serbia (1321-31),<br/> +Stephen Vladislav, King of Serbia (1233-42),<br/> +Stephen the Great, Prince of Moldavia,<br/> +Struma, the,<br/> +Suleiman I, Sultan (the Magnificent),<br/> +Suli, clansmen of,<br/> +Šumadija,<br/> +Svetoslav, ruler of Bulgaria,<br/> +Svishtov,<br/> +Svyatoslav, Prince of Kiev,<br/> +Syria,<br/> +Syrian question, the,<br/> +Syrmia, +</p> + +<p> +Tabriz,<br/> +Tanzimat, the,<br/> +Taraboš, Mount,<br/> +Tarsus,<br/> +Tartar invasion, the,<br/> +Tartars of the Golden Horde,<br/> +Tenedos,<br/> +Teutons, the,<br/> +Thasos,<br/> +Theodore Lascaris, the Emperor,<br/> +Theodoric,<br/> +Theodosius, the Emperor,<br/> +Theophilus of Constantinople,<br/> +Thessaly,<br/> +Thrace,<br/> +Thu-Kiu, people of,<br/> +Tilsit, peace of (1807),<br/> +Timok, the,<br/> +Timur,<br/> +Tirnovo, centre and capital of second Bulgarian empire,<br/> +Trajan, the Emperor, in the Balkan peninsula,<br/> + his conquest of Dacia,<br/> +Transylvania,<br/> +Trebizond,<br/> +Trieste,<br/> +Trikéri, destruction of,<br/> +Trikoupis, Greek statesman,<br/> +Tripoli,<br/> +Tripolitza,<br/> +Tunisia,<br/> +Turcomans, the,<br/> +Turkestan,<br/> +Turkey: administrative systems,<br/> + and the Armenian massacres (1894),<br/> + and the Balkans,<br/> + and Bulgaria,<br/> + and the Bulgarian atrocities,<br/> + and Greece,<br/> + and the islands of southeastern Europe,<br/> + and Rumania,<br/> + and Russia,<br/> + and Serbia,<br/> + and the struggle for Greek independence,<br/> + and the suzerainty of Krete,<br/> + Christians in, position of,<br/> + codification of the civil law,<br/> + commercial treaties,<br/> + Committee of Union and Progress,<br/> + conquests in Europe,<br/> + in Asia,<br/> + of the Balkan peninsula,<br/> + decline and losses of territory in Europe and Asia,<br/> + ‘Dere Beys’,<br/> + Dragoman, office of, 184, 185,<br/> + expansion: of the Osmanli kingdom,<br/> + of the Byzantine Empire,<br/> + extent of the empire in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries,<br/> + territorial expansion in Asia,<br/> + feudal aristocracy of,<br/> + financial embarrassments and public debt,<br/> + frontier beyond the Danube,<br/> + German influence in,<br/> + Grand Vizierate,<br/> + military organization,<br/> + soldiery recruited from Christian races,<br/> + ‘tribute-children’ system of recruiting,<br/> + name of,<br/> + pan-Islamic propaganda under Abdul Hamul,<br/> + pan-Ottomanism,<br/> + Phanariot régime,<br/> + praetorians,<br/> + railway construction, effect of,<br/> + reforms in,<br/> + representative institutions inaugurated,<br/> + revival and relapse in the nineteenth century,<br/> + revolution of 1910,<br/> + war in the Balkans (1912),<br/> + war with Great Britain, France, and Russia (1914-15),<br/> + wars with Greece (1821),<br/> + (1897),<br/> + (1912),<br/> + war with Italy (1911-12),<br/> + wars with Russia (1769-74),<br/> + (1787),<br/> + (1807),<br/> + (1828),<br/> + (1877-8),<br/> + (1914-15),<br/> + wars with Serbia (1875-7),<br/> + Young Turks, the,<br/> +Turkish conquests in Europe,<br/> + fleet,<br/> + janissaries,<br/> +Turks (Osmanlis), entry into Europe,<br/> + general distribution of,<br/> + nomadic tribes of,<br/> + origin of,<br/> + vitality and inherent qualities of the,<br/> +Tzakonia, +</p> + +<p> +Uighurs, Turkish tribe,<br/> +Unkiar Skelessi, Treaty of (1833),<br/> +Uroš, King of Serbia: <i>see</i> Stephen Uroš.<br/> +Uroš, Serbian Tsar (1355-71),<br/> +Üskub: <i>see</i> Skoplje, +</p> + +<p> +Valens, the Emperor,<br/> +Valtetzi, battle of,<br/> +Van,<br/> +Vardar, the,<br/> +Varna,<br/> + battle of (1444),<br/> + captured by the Bulgars,<br/> +Venezelos, E., Kretan and Greek statesman,<br/> + his part in the Kretan revolution,<br/> + becomes premier of Greece,<br/> + work as a constructive statesman,<br/> + the formation of the Balkan League,<br/> + his proposals to Bulgaria for settlement of claims,<br/> + his handling of the problem of Epirus,<br/> + results of his statesmanship,<br/> +Venice and the Venetian Republic,<br/> +Victoria, Queen of England,<br/> +Vienna,<br/> + besieged by the Turks (1526),<br/> + (1683),<br/> + Congress of (1814),<br/> + in relation to the Serbo-Croats: <i>see</i> Budapest.<br/> +Visigoths, the,<br/> +Vlad the Impaler, Prince of Wallachia,<br/> +Vlakhs, the,<br/> +Volga, Bulgars of the,<br/> +Volo, Gulf of,<br/> +Vranja,<br/> +Vrioni, Omer, +</p> + +<p> +Wallachia,<br/> + advent of the Turks in,<br/> + subjugation of, by the Turks,<br/> +Wied, Prince of,<br/> +William II, German Emperor, +</p> + +<p> +Yannina,<br/> +Yantra, the,<br/> +Yemen,<br/> +Yenishehr,<br/> +Yuruk tribe,<br/> +Yuzgad, +</p> + +<p> +Zabergan,<br/> +Zaimis, high commissioner of Krete,<br/> +Zante,<br/> +Zeta, the, river and district, +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div>*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 11716 ***</div> +</body> + +</html> + |