Autonomy for Macedonia and Adrianople regions

Last updated
Excerpt from the statute of the Bulgarian Macedonian-Adrianople Revolutionary Committees
Art. 1. The goal of BMARC is to secure political autonomy for the Macedonia and Adrianople regions. Ustavmakodr.jpg
Excerpt from the statute of the Bulgarian Macedonian-Adrianople Revolutionary Committees
Art. 1. The goal of BMARC is to secure political autonomy for the Macedonia and Adrianople regions.
Excerpt from the statute of the Supreme Macedonian-Adrianople Organization.
Art. 1. The goal of SMAO is to secure political autonomy for the Macedonia and Adrianople regions. Macedonian-Adrianopolitan-Organization-Statutes.jpg
Excerpt from the statute of the Supreme Macedonian-Adrianople Organization.
Art. 1. The goal of SMAO is to secure political autonomy for the Macedonia and Adrianople regions.
Receipt of the External Representation of the IMARO. in Sofia, depicting a map of the territories of Macedonia and Adrianople Thrace. IMARO Representation Abroad Receipt.jpg
Receipt of the External Representation of the IMARO. in Sofia, depicting a map of the territories of Macedonia and Adrianople Thrace.

Autonomy for the region of Macedonia and Adrianople Thrace within the Ottoman Empire was a concept that arose in the late 19th century and was popular until ca. 1920. The plan was developed among Macedonian and Thracian Bulgarian emigres in Sofia and covered several meanings. Serbia and Greece were totally opposed to that set of ideas while Bulgaria was ambivalent to them. [1] In fact Sofia advocated granting such autonomy as a prelude to the annexation of both areas, as for many Bulgarian emigres it was seen in the same way. [2]

Contents

History

The idea of autonomy was promoted during the 1880s, by diverse political parties in Bulgaria and in Eastern Rumelia, aimed at "national unification of Bulgarian people". [3] This scenario was partially facilitated by the Treaty of Berlin (1878), according to which Eastern Rumelia, Macedonia and Adrianople areas were given back from Bulgaria to the Ottomans, but especially by its unrealized 23rd article, which promised future autonomy for unspecified territories in then European Turkey, settled with Christian population. [4] This trend emphasized the principle of popular sovereignty, and appealed for a democratic constitution and further decentralization and local autonomy within the Ottoman Empire. In general, an autonomous status was presumed to imply a special kind of constitution of the region, a reorganization of gendarmerie, broader representation of the local Christians in all the administration, etc.

However, there was not a clear political agenda behind this idea and its final outcome, after the expected dissolution of the Ottoman Empire. [3] :114 By many activists the autonomy was seen as a transitional step towards possible unification of both areas with Bulgaria. [5] [6] This outcome was based on the example of short-lived Eastern Rumelia. The successful unification between the Principality of Bulgaria and this Ottoman province in 1885 was to be followed. The second possible option for the development of the autonomy was as a first step towards a future inclusion into an imagined Balkan Federation.

The concept was popularized in 1894 by the first statute of the Internal Macedonian-Adrianople Revolutionary Organization with its demand for political autonomy of these areas. [3] Initially its membership was open only for Bulgarians. It was active in Macedonia, but also in Thrace (the Vilayet of Adrianople). [7] At the eve of the 20th century, it changed its exclusively Bulgarian character and opened it to all Macedonians and Thracians regardless of their nationality. [8] The Organization gave a guarantee for the preservation of the rights of all national communities there. Those revolutionaries saw the future autonomous Macedono-Adrianople Ottoman province as a multinational polity. [9] Another Bulgarian organisation called Supreme Macedonian-Adrianople Revolutionary Committee also had as its official aim the struggle for autonomy of Macedonia and Adrianople regions. Its earliest documents referring to the autonomy of Macedonia were the Decisions of the First Macedonian Congress in Sofia in 1895. [10]

Shumen Macedonian-Adrianopolitan Society's flag with inscription on it: Autonomy for Macedonia and Adrianople regions. Shumen SMAC flag.jpg
Shumen Macedonian-Adrianopolitan Society's flag with inscription on it: Autonomy for Macedonia and Adrianople regions.

During the Balkan Wars (1912–1913) and the First World War (1914–1918) the organizations supported the Bulgarian army and joined to Bulgarian war-time authorities when they took control over parts of Thrace and Macedonia. In this period autonomist ideas were abandoned and the direct incorporation of occupied areas into Bulgaria was supported. [11] These wars left both areas divided mainly between Greece, Serbia (later Yugoslavia), and the Ottoman Empire (later Turkey). That resulted in the final decline of the autonomist concept. After that the combined Macedonian-Adrianopolitan revolutionary movement split into two detached organizations – the Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organisation and the Internal Thracian Revolutionary Organisation.

In 1919 the so-called Temporary representation of the former United Internal Revolutionary Organization founded by former members of the IMARO, issued a memorandum and send it to the representatives of the Great Powers on the Peace conference in Paris. They advocated for autonomy of Macedonia as a part of a future Balkan Federation. Following the signing of the Treaty of Neuilly and the partition of Macedonia, the activity of the Temporary representation faded and in 1920 it was dissolved. The former IMRO revolutionary and member of the Temporary representation Dimo Hadzhidimov wrote in his brochure "Back to the Autonomy" in 1919:

"This idea, nevertheless, remained a Bulgarian idea until it disappeared even among the Bulgarians. Neither the Greeks, nor the Turks, nor any other nationality in Macedonia accepted that slogan... The idea of autonomous Macedonia was developed most significantly after the creation of the Internal Macedonan revolutionary Organization which was Bulgarian in respect of its members and proved to be well decided, of great military might and power of resistance. The leadership of the Macedonian Greeks could not rally under the banner of such an organization which would not, under any circumstances, serve Hellenism as a national ideal... Undoubtedly, since the Greeks of Macedonia, the second largest group following the Bulgarians, had a position like this vis-a-vis the idea of autonomy, the latter could hardly anticipate success." [12] [13]

See also

Notes

  1. David Turnock, The Economy of East Central Europe, 1815–1989: Stages of Transformation in a Peripheral Region, Routledge, 2004, ISBN   1134678762, p. 43.
  2. Andre Gerolymatos, The Balkan Wars, Hachette UK, 2008, ISBN   0786724579, p. 210.
  3. 1 2 3 Marinov, Tchavdar (2009). "We, the Macedonians: The Paths of Macedonian Supra-Nationalism (1878–1912)". In Diana Mishkova (ed.). We, the People: Politics of National Peculiarity in Southeastern Europe. Budapest, Hungary: Central European University Press. pp. 107–138. doi:10.1515/9786155211669-004. ISBN   978-9639776289.
  4. Edward J. Erickson (2003). Defeat in detail: the Ottoman Army in the Balkans, 1912–1913. Greenwood Publishing Group. pp. 39–43. ISBN   0-275-97888-5.
  5. Karakasidou, Anastasia (2009). Fields of Wheat, Hills of Blood: Passages to Nationhood in Greek Macedonia, 1870–1990. University of Chicago Press. p. 100. ISBN   0226424995.
  6. İpek Yosmaoğlu, Blood Ties: Religion, Violence and the Politics of Nationhood in Ottoman Macedonia, 1878–1908, Cornell University Press, 2013, ISBN   0801469791, p. 16.
  7. Brunnbauer, Ulf (2004). "Historiography, Myths and the Nation in the Republic of Macedonia". In Ulf Brunnbauer (ed.). (Re)Writing History: Historiography in Southeast Europe after Socialism. Studies on South East Europe, vol. 4. Münster: LIT. pp. 165–200. ISBN   382587365X.
  8. Ivo Banac (1984). The National Question in Yugoslavia: Origins, History, Politics. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press. p. 315. ISBN   978-0-8014-9493-2 . Retrieved March 30, 2019.
  9. Bechev, Dimitar. Historical Dictionary of the Republic of Macedonia. Historical Dictionaries of Europe, Scarecrow Press, 2009, ISBN   0810862956, Introduction.
  10. Бурилкова, Ива; Цочо Билярски [in Bulgarian] (2003). "chapter 6". От София до Костур: Освободителните борби на българите от Македония в спомени на дейци на Върховния македоно-одрински комитет (in Bulgarian). Sofia: Синева.
  11. Frusetta, James Walter (2006). Bulgaria's Macedonia: Nation-building and state-building, centralization and autonomy in Pirin Macedonia, 1903–1952. University of Maryland, College Park. pp. 137–140. ISBN   0-542-96184-9.
  12. Hadjidimov, Dimo. "Назад към автономията" [Back to the Autonomy]. Promacedonia.org (in Bulgarian). Sofia. Retrieved 2017-02-15.
  13. Marinov, Tchavdar (2013). "Famous Macedonia, the Land of Alexander: Macedonian Identity at the Crossroads of Greek, Bulgarian and Serbian Nationalism". In Daskalov, Roumen; Marinov, Tchavdar (eds.). Entangled Histories of the Balkans, Vol. 1: National Ideologies and Language Policies. Balkan Studies Library, vol. 9. Leiden, Netherlands: Brill. p. 305. doi:10.1163/9789004250765_007. ISBN   9789004250765.

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Balkan League</span> 1912 anti-Ottoman military alliance

The League of the Balkans was a quadruple alliance formed by a series of bilateral treaties concluded in 1912 between the Eastern Orthodox kingdoms of Greece, Bulgaria, Serbia and Montenegro, and directed against the Ottoman Empire, which at the time still controlled much of Southeastern Europe.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization</span> Secret revolutionary society (1893–1934)

The Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization, was a secret revolutionary society founded in the Ottoman territories in Europe, that operated in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ilinden–Preobrazhenie Uprising</span> Anti-Ottoman revolt in the Balkans (1903)

The Ilinden–Preobrazhenie Uprising, or simply the Ilinden Uprising, of August–October 1903, was an organized revolt against the Ottoman Empire, which was prepared and carried out by the Internal Macedonian-Adrianople Revolutionary Organization, with the support of the Supreme Macedonian-Adrianople Committee, which included mostly Bulgarian military personnel. The name of the uprising refers to Ilinden, a name for Elijah's day, and to Preobrazhenie which means Feast of the Transfiguration. Some historians describe the rebellion in the Serres revolutionary district as a separate uprising, calling it the Krastovden Uprising, because on September 14 the revolutionaries there also rebelled. The revolt lasted from the beginning of August to the end of October and covered a vast territory from the western Black Sea coast in the east to the shores of Lake Ohrid in the west.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Gotse Delchev</span> Macedonian Bulgarian revolutionary (1872–1903)

Georgi Nikolov Delchev, known as Gotse Delchev or Goce Delčev, was an important Macedonian Bulgarian revolutionary (komitadji), active in the Ottoman-ruled Macedonia and Adrianople regions at the turn of the 20th century. He was the most prominent leader of what is known today as the Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization (IMRO), a secret revolutionary society that was active in Ottoman territories in the Balkans at the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th century. Delchev was its representative in Sofia, the capital of the Principality of Bulgaria. As such, he was also a member of the Supreme Macedonian-Adrianople Committee (SMAC), participating in the work of its governing body. He was killed in a skirmish with an Ottoman unit on the eve of the Ilinden-Preobrazhenie uprising.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Dame Gruev</span> Bulgarian revolutionary in Macedonia (1871–1906)

Damyan Yovanov Gruev was а Bulgarian teacher, revolutionary and insurgent leader in the Ottoman regions of Macedonia and Thrace. He was one of the six founders of the Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Gyorche Petrov</span> Bulgarian teacher and revolutionary (1865–1921)

Gyorche Petrov Nikolov born Georgi Petrov Nikolov, was a Bulgarian teacher and revolutionary, one of the leaders of the Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization (IMRO). He was its representative in Sofia, the capital of Principality of Bulgaria. As such he was also a member of the Supreme Macedonian-Adrianople Committee (SMAC), participating in the work of its governing body. During the Balkan Wars, Petrov was a Bulgarian army volunteer, and during the First World War, he was involved in the activity of the Bulgarian occupation authorities in Serbia and Greece. Subsequently, he participated in Bulgarian politics, but was eventually killed by the rivaling IMRO right-wing faction. According to the Macedonian historiography, he was an ethnic Macedonian.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Todor Aleksandrov</span> Bulgarian revolutionary (1881–1924)

Todor Aleksandrov Poporushov, best known as Todor Alexandrov, also spelt as Alexandroff, was a Macedonian Bulgarian revolutionary, Bulgarian army officer, politician and teacher. He favored initially the annexation of Macedonia to Bulgaria, but later switched to the idea of an Independent Macedonia as a second Bulgarian state on the Balkans. Alexandrov was a member of the Internal Macedonian-Adrianople Revolutionary Organisation (IMARO) and later of the Central Committee of the Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organisation (IMRO).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Yane Sandanski</span> Macedonian Bulgarian revolutionary (1872–1915)

Yane Sandanski was a Macedonian Bulgarian revolutionary. He is recognized as a national hero in both Bulgaria and North Macedonia.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Petar Poparsov</span> Bulgarian educator and revolutionary

Petar Poparsov or Petar Pop Arsov was a Macedonian Bulgarian revolutionary, educator and one of the founders of the Internal Macedonian Adrianople Revolutionary Organization (IMARO). He is regarded as an ethnic Macedonian by the historiography in North Macedonia.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Dimo Hadzhidimov</span> Bulgarian teacher, politician, and revolutionary

Dimo Hadzhidimov was a 20th-century Bulgarian teacher, revolutionary and politician from Ottoman Macedonia. He was among the leaders of the left wing of Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization (IMRO), which he considered a Bulgarian creation.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">People's Federative Party (Bulgarian Section)</span> Political party in the Ottoman Empire

The People's Federative Party (Bulgarian Section) (Bulgarian: Народна федеративна партия (българска секция)) was a Bulgarian political party in the Ottoman Empire, created after the Young Turk Revolution, by members of the left wing of the Internal Macedonian Adrianople Revolutionary Organization (IMARO). The party functioned for one year from August 1909 until August 1910. The Party decided to name itself Bulgarian Section, since it was hoped that other nationalities from European Turkey would adopt its program and form their own ethnic sections, but this didn't happen. Its main political rival was the Union of the Bulgarian Constitutional Clubs.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Miss Stone Affair</span>

The Miss Stone Affair was the kidnapping of American Protestant missionary Ellen Maria Stone and her pregnant Bulgarian fellow missionary and friend Katerina Cilka by the pro-Bulgarian Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization.

The "May Manifesto" of May 6, 1924 was a paper in which the objectives of the unified Macedonian liberation movement were presented: independence and unification of partitioned region of Macedonia, fighting all the neighbouring Balkan monarchies, supporting the Balkan Communist Federation and cooperation with the Soviet Union.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Independent Macedonia (IMRO)</span> Conceptual project by the Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization

Independent Macedonia was a conceptual project of the Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization (IMRO) to create an independent Macedonia, during the interwar period.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Bulgarian Millet</span>

Bulgarian Millet was an ethno-religious and linguistic community within the Ottoman Empire from the mid-19th to early 20th century.

The Day of the Macedonian Revolutionary Struggle is a national holiday which is celebrated on October 23 in North Macedonia. In 2007 the holiday was voted into law as a new national holiday. It is a non-working day.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Macedonia for the Macedonians</span> Macedonian-Bulgarian political slogan

Macedonia for the Macedonians is a slogan and political concept used during the first half of the 20th century in the region of Macedonia. It aimed to encompass all the nationalities in the area, into a separate supranational entity.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Katerina Cilka</span>

Katerina Cilka was a Bulgarian Protestant missionary from Bansko, abducted for ransom by a detachment of the pro-Bulgarian Inner Macedonian Revolutionary Organization (IMRO) in 1901 and released in 1902.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Macedonian-Adrianople Social Democratic Group</span>

The Macedonian-Adrianople Social Democratic Group was a regional faction of the Bulgarian Workers' Social Democratic Party in the Ottoman Empire. According to Macedonian historians, most of its activists were ethnic Macedonians.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">First statute of the IMRO</span>

Due to the lack of original protocol documentation, and the fact its early organic statutes were not dated, the first statute of the clandestine Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization (IMRO) is uncertain and is a subject to dispute among researchers. The dispute also includes its first name and ethnic character, as well as the authenticity, dating, validity, and authorship of its supposed first statute. Certain contradictions and even mutually exclusive statements, along with inconsistencies exist in the testimonies of the founding and other early members of the Organization, which further complicates the solution of the problem. It is not yet clear whether the earliest statutory documents of the Organization have been discovered. Its earliest basic documents discovered for now, became known to the historical community during the early 1960s.