THE BULGARIAN EXARCHATE AND THE PORTE
A difficult and little-understood problem—Bulgaria the “dark horse” of
the Peninsula—An explanation of the question between Bulgaria and
Turkey—The Bulgarian Church and the Imperial Firman—The present
position of the Exarchate—Europe should listen to the Bulgarian
demand—Chats with Macedonian orphans—Their terrible stories.
The question of the Bulgarian Exarchate and the Porte is of paramount
importance in Bulgaria at the present moment—a very difficult problem
which the Government have to face.
So little is it understood in England, even by those professing to be
_au courant_ with the Balkan question, that I may perhaps be pardoned if
I endeavour to render the situation intelligible. “What does Bulgaria
want?” is the question so very often asked. What she really wants, and
what are her aims, will, I hope, be shown in the following pages.
Bulgaria, it must always be remembered, is with Servia, the coming
mistress of the Balkans. She is the “dark horse” of the Peninsula. Her
power is admitted, but the extent of her force cannot be gauged. One
thing is certain, that the present Government being an essentially
strong one, and Dr. Stancioff, the Foreign Minister, a man of action,
Bulgaria will no longer sit still and allow her people in Macedonia to
be decimated as they now are daily.
In view of this, therefore, it will perhaps be of interest to explain
impartially at some little length the question which it is feared must,
ere long, bring Turkey and Bulgaria face to face.
Ever since the liberation of Bulgaria up to the present moment the
Bulgarian Exarchate has led a perturbed existence.
As long ago as the Russo-Turkish War it had to undergo serious trials,
the Exarch being obliged to recall the Bulgarian bishops from the
Macedonian diocese. When, after the Treaty of Berlin, he attempted to
restore them to their former sees and to complete the organisation of
the Bulgarian Church—in accordance with the Imperial Firman of May 16,
1870—by establishing a Synod and a Mixed Council, the Exarch received in
1883 from the Turkish Minister of Justice the following significant
answer:—
“When we determine to grant you a status in the _vilayets_, then only we
shall consider the matter of your administration.”
So that, after an existence of only three years, the Bulgarian Exarchate
found its right of having a status in the _vilayets_ put in question.
This, however, did not discourage the Exarch. On the contrary, he
redoubled his efforts. Relying upon the Imperial Firman, and assisted by
the Bulgarian Government, he succeeded in winning for the Exarchate an
official status in Macedonia, insisting at the same time on the
formation of a Synod and a Mixed Council, attached to the Exarchate.
At the present day the authority of the Exarchate in Macedonia extends
over seven dioceses, namely, Uskub, Ochrida, Debr, Monastir, Veless,
Nevrokop, and Stroumitza. In addition to these, there are still ten
bishoprics which, contrary to the Firman, remain vacant, because the
Sultan refuses to grant the indispensable _berats_. During the period
referred to, the Exarchate was also deprived of its right of
representation at Sketcha and Malgara (_vilayet_ of Adrianople), whose
religious communities were suspended in 1897 by the Grand Vizier Rifaat
Pasha. The Bulgarian chapel at Sketcha remains to this day under seals
placed by the Imperial authorities, and consequently inaccessible to the
spiritual needs of the Bulgarian population in that place.
The question of the Mixed Council and the Synod still remains open. The
solution of this question is of supreme moment to the Exarchate and to
the Bulgarian Government. This is due to the position and importance of
the religious communities in the Turkish Empire.
For the better understanding of the bearing of the issues involved, it
will be perhaps necessary to refer to the history of the Turkish Empire
and its attitude towards Bulgaria.
As is well known, instead of trying to assimilate the Christian nations
which they had conquered, the Turks always considered themselves masters
of those whom they had vanquished. Their system of government in this
respect is, of course, in perfect agreement with the spirit of their
religion. The Koran subdivides all countries into two distinct groups:
first those belonging to Islam, and secondly those under the domination
of the giaours (infidels), with whom Islam was in a state of permanent
war. The true believers, the followers of the Prophet, were declared
rulers of the infidels. These purely theocratic principles of State
organisation form, until this day, the basis of the Ottoman Empire.
As exponents of these principles, the Osmanlis did not attempt, after
the conquest of Byzantium, to impose on their new subjects the Turkish
State institutions or civil laws. Although despised and humiliated, the
_rayas_ continued to enjoy privileges which, in many respects, remind
one of those subsequently granted by the capitulations to the foreign
Christians. The place of the rulers of the conquered nations was now
occupied by the representatives of their Church. As an instance,
Mohammed II., conqueror of Constantinople, conferred upon the Patriarch
of Constantinople the title of Miletbashi (Chief of the Nation), and
entrusted to him the administration of the secular and spiritual
interests of his flock. These same prerogatives were also granted to the
Bulgarian Patriarchs of Tirnovo and Ochrida, as representatives of the
Bulgarian nation. The spiritual leaders of the conquered races
delegated, in their turn, part of their attributes to their
inferiors—bishops and priests.
[Illustration: Peasants at Vladaja: Bulgaria.]
[Illustration: Bulgarian Military Types.]
In this way, the clergy formed a body of functionaries invested with
large administrative and judicial powers. Every religious community was
entrusted with the repartition of the State taxes among the members of
the community, and was responsible for their payment into the State
Exchequer. In a word, the spiritual head of a Christian race was at the
same time its civil representative before the Turkish authorities. As
regards the Bulgarian nation, this mission was confided, down to the
year 1770, to its Patriarchs—at first, to the Patriarchs of Tirnovo and
Ochrida, and, later on, to that of the latter place—until the abolition
of the Patriarchate of Ochrida, which was brought about by the intrigues
of the Greeks.
The fact remains that during several centuries the Christians in the
Turkish Empire—and among them the Bulgarians—have, owing to this
peculiarity of the Turkish State policy, enjoyed a relative
independence, and in this way have been able to preserve their
nationality, language, and customs. These exceptional historical
circumstances explain at the same time why, among these Christians, the
sentiment of patriotism has been transformed into an attachment to their
religious communities and their national Church.
This sentiment of patriotism and spiritual consciousness, which, owing
to the oppression exercised by the Greek clergy, after the year 1770 had
weakened to the extent of national self-forgetfulness and identification
with the Greeks, awakened once more among the Bulgarians during the
second half of last century. It acquired great force in the course of
the struggle for the restoration of the ancient national Church. This
new struggle began at the time of the Tanzimat, a period when the Porte
had to fight against the growing omnipotence of the Patriarchate, which
was threatening the very foundations of the State. It had, as its legal
support, the Hatti-Houmayoun of 1856, which reverted to the historical
rights of all religious communities. The second part of Section II. of
this Act runs as follows:—
“Chaque communauté Chrétienne ou d’autre rite non-musulman sera tenue,
dans un délai fixé et avec le concours d’une commission formée _ad hoc_
dans son sein, de procéder, avec ma haute approbation et sous la
surveillance de ma Sublime Porte, à l’examen de ses immunités et
privilèges et d’y discuter et soumettre à ma Sublime Porte les réformes
exigées par le progrès des lumières et du temps.”
Progress, as well as the State interests of the Empire at that time,
required the administrative separation of the Bulgarian Church from the
Patriarchate, and its endowment with a special chief and clergy. It is
interesting to note that, in this struggle of the Sublime Porte with the
Patriarchate for the denationalisation of the Christian
communities—which had for its consequence the weakening of the
Patriarchate and the restriction of its privileges—the Bulgarian nation
acted as allies of the Empire, with “the high approval of the Sultan”
and “under the control of the Sublime Porte.” Thanks mainly to this
alliance and to this struggle against the Patriarchate in favour of the
Bulgarian nation, the Patriarchate was considerably weakened through the
Organic Statute of 1862, while the Bulgarian Church was restored in
virtue of the Firman of 1870.
With the Bulgarian Church restored, it was necessary, in accordance with
the Imperial Firman, that it should be organised after the pattern of
the Eastern Orthodox Church, of which it formed a branch, without in any
case departing from its canons. The Exarchate, as its highest
administrative body, was organised on such close lines with the
Patriarchate, that its Organic Statute is, in greater part, nothing but
a reproduction of that of the Patriarchate in 1862, which, in its turn,
is based on the principles laid down by the Hatti-Houmayoun.
[Illustration: Peasants near Tirnovo, Bulgaria.]
In view of all this, it must be admitted that to-day the struggle—or
rather the insistence of the Exarchate for the speedier organisation of
a Synod and a Mixed Council, forming part of itself—is only a just and
legal claim of the rights and privileges sanctioned by the Firman of
1870. It should be clearly understood that the Bulgarian Exarchate does
not ask for any new privileges; all that it demands is the restoration
of the Synod and the Mixed Council as they existed before the
Russo-Turkish War. Surely this is but a very natural demand! The
question concerns two administrative bodies, with attributes strictly
defined by the canons of the Church, as well as by the statute of the
Exarchate and the Imperial Firman, and which cannot be delegated to
anyone else, but must be exercised by the Synod and the Mixed Council.
To the Synod are reserved all questions of the _forum ecclesiasticum_,
while the mission of the Mixed Council is to look after the schools, the
civil administration, and the organisation of the Bulgarian nationality.
The Mixed Council forms at the same time the highest judicial body in
civil cases between Bulgarians—the mixed courts being reserved for civil
cases between Mohammedans and Christians, as well as for commercial and
criminal cases without any distinction of religion. This brief mention
of the attributes of the Synod and of the Mixed Council is surely
sufficient to show the very urgent need of their speedy restoration and
organisation.
The needs of the Church and of the community have greatly increased;
they are no longer what they used to be thirty years ago, and cannot be
left disregarded. The requirements of the population and of the times
give rise to fresh questions, while on the other hand the Imperial
Ottoman Government comes every day with fresh demands to the Exarchate,
which shares in the administration of the country, as an auxiliary
organ.
In these present-day times of trial the Bulgarian population in
Macedonia, broken up, persecuted, and outlawed as it is, turns for help
and protection to its legal head and protector, the Exarch. The Exarch
is, however, helpless, because personally he has no authority to decide
such questions as fall within the competence of the Mixed Council. His
only rôle in such matters is to act as an intermediary between the
Council and the Sublime Porte.
The present position of the Exarchate is an abnormal one. According to
the Firman, which has the force of law within the Empire, it has
well-defined rights and obligations as regards the Porte and the
Bulgarian nation in the _vilayets_, which, however, it cannot exercise
or fulfil because of its imperfect and irregular organisation. This
state of things provokes among the populations of the Empire complaints
both against the Exarchate and the Imperial authorities. Failing to find
help and protection at the hands of the legal authorities, the outraged
population is naturally tempted to look for such in illegal quarters,
and in its despair places its hopes in foreign intervention. This state
of affairs explains and fully justifies such tendencies among the
Macedonian population. The true interests of the Ottoman Empire demand
the preservation of its Christian inhabitants from similar hopes and
tendencies. The population ought to expect all improvements from
Constantinople. In this respect the formation of a Synod and of a Mixed
Council attached to the Exarchate is not only a just demand, admitted on
every hand outside Turkey, but is highly desirable and indispensable for
the pacification of public opinion both in the _vilayets_ and in
Bulgaria. By their very constitution, this Synod and the Mixed Council
would act as legal interpreters of the needs of the Bulgarian population
in Macedonia and the _vilayet_ of Adrianople, and would form a strong
link between the Bulgarians and the Sublime Porte.
It would surely be preferable both for the Powers and for Turkey if they
had to deal with a legally organised and responsible body, such as the
Bulgarian Exarchate. Indeed, this latter, if completed and fortified by
the creation of the Synod and the Mixed Council, would no doubt succeed
in attracting the attention of the Bulgarian population of the
_vilayets_ once more to Constantinople. The cause of the Macedonian
reforms would benefit considerably from such an organisation, while the
difficult task of the Powers would be greatly facilitated.
The just and legal measure I have outlined above would pacify public
opinion in the Principality of Bulgaria. That something must be done is
very plain. Matters in Macedonia cannot be allowed to remain as they
are—a blot upon the civilisation of Europe. Bulgaria is, as far as I
have been able to judge from personal inquiry, determined to take a
strong and definite line. She cannot remain indifferent to the injustice
of the Porte towards the Bulgarian Exarchate; neither can she overlook
the burning question. Even if she were inclined to adopt such a course,
she would not be in a position to do so. No Bulgarian Government could
follow such a policy without being accused of violating the
Constitution, according to which the Eastern Orthodox religion is the
State religion of the country.
In ecclesiastical matters the Principality is, according to Article 39
of the Bulgarian Constitution, placed under the control of the highest
spiritual authority of the Bulgarian Church, wherever that authority may
be found. This authority is the Bulgarian Exarchate. It must be
remembered, too, that this Constitution was ratified at the time, by the
Powers signatory of the Treaty of Berlin. The right of the Principality
to take an interest in the normal and regular working of the authority
in question now became even more indisputable. Besides, political
considerations of the very highest importance to the peace of Europe
place upon the Bulgarian Government the duty of reminding the Great
Powers, Turkey included, of the liabilities which they assumed towards
the Christian population of the vilayets by virtue of Articles 25 and 62
of the Treaty of Berlin.
Only natural is it, and in the cause of humanity, that Bulgaria should
seek to protect the Bulgarians in Macedonia. Never has the country been
in a worse state than at the present time, and never has European
interference been more needed than at this moment.
Europe should listen attentively to this Bulgarian complaint against
Turkey, for it is surely a just one, crying loudly for remedy. The blood
of the poor massacred thousands in Macedonia calls to-day to the Powers
for mercy and justice, and yet to-morrow, and still to-morrow, a hundred
more defenceless men and women and innocent children are put to the
sword, mutilated and murdered, and we in England hear nothing about it.
Macedonia is, alas! a country where God is high and Justice far away.
This question of the Bulgarian Exarchate and the Porte is, I know, an
abstruse one, neglected by most writers on the subject. However, it is
one of the highest importance—one which is inseparable from the future
policy of Bulgaria.
Things cannot remain long in Macedonia as I myself saw them. Europe
holds up her hands in virtuous horror at the so-called Congo scandals
and seeks out every detail of maladministration, yet she turns a deaf
ear to the piteous cry of the Macedonians, whose homes are daily burned
and pillaged, and whose villages are often completely wiped out—both
dwellings and inhabitants—in the course of a few hours by fiends filled
with the lust of blood.
If you doubt that there are horrible atrocities daily committed in
Macedonia by Greeks and Turks alike, you need go no farther than Sofia.
Visit the Orphanage for Macedonian boys established three years ago by
Mr. Pierce O’Mahony, an Irish philanthropist, of Grange Con, County
Wicklow. This gentleman was living in Sofia, and hearing terrible
stories of massacres across the frontier, established an institution for
the education of orphans whose parents had been killed in the raids.
When I visited the place, I found it neat, orderly, and doing a most
charitable and excellent work under the care of two English nursing
sisters. In a large commodious house on the outskirts of the capital
were thirty lads ranging in age from seven to fifteen, all dressed in
their white woollen and black-braided national costume of Macedonia.
When the boys were assembled in the large classroom, I heard some of
their stories, and truly they were appalling, many of the details too
terrible to be placed here on record. As an instance, one lad I saw, a
bright, intelligent little fellow, was admitted to the Orphanage a few
months ago. He lived in the district of Ochrida, and was one day tending
his sheep as usual, when some Turkish soldiers came past.
“Have you seen a Bulgarian band pass along just now?” they inquired.
The lad declared that he had seen nobody. The soldiers doubted him, for
the Bulgarian band in question was protecting the villages in that
neighbourhood.
[Illustration: Tziganes on the Isker road.]
They asked again, and the boy denied having seen anybody, which was the
truth. Whereupon one of the Sultan’s soldiers smashed the little
fellow’s skull in with the butt end of his rifle, while another took a
knife and cut his throat from ear to ear. They then dug a rough hole in
the ground and buried him. Some hours after, a shepherd passing noticed
that his dog was scratching the earth, and on going to the spot, heard
moans. The lad was quickly exhumed, and found to be still living. For
many weeks he was in the hospital in Salonica, but was eventually
admitted to Mr. O’Mahony’s Home. When I saw him, the wound in the head
had only just healed, and the ugly scar across the throat was still red.
I have his photograph, but it is too ghastly to here reproduce.
Another little lad described to me how his father and mother had been
tortured by the Turks and afterwards burnt alive before his eyes, while
another related how he had been captured by the Turks, taken into
slavery, and afterwards escaped.
Each orphan boy had his own terrible story to tell, stories that were
full of horror and inhuman butchery, stories that made one wonder
whether such things could really happen in this enlightened century.
As to the institute and its general conduct, there is no doubt it is
performing a most humane and charitable work. There are thousands of the
homeless and fatherless in Macedonia, increasing thousands, and the
institute, which is purely a piece of private philanthropy, cannot
possibly admit one-tenth of the applicants for its charity. The founder
hopes, if private subscribers or donors come forward, to extend his
work, and Lady Buchanan of the British Legation, Sofia, who takes a
great interest in it, told me that she would be very pleased to
acknowledge any subscriptions sent to her.
Certainly it is most deserving of support, for already it has sent
Macedonian lads into the Bulgarian Agricultural School at Kustendil; two
others are in the Cadet School in Sofia, and will become officers;
others have been taught trades and are earning their living; and one has
been sent to England. Though the founder is a member of the Church of
England, the lads are allowed to retain their own religion, the
Orthodox.
Every right-minded man must, after investigating the complaint of
Bulgaria against the Porte regarding the Exarchate, take the part of
Bulgaria. Macedonia is to-day and every day being decimated by Greek
bands who raid under the protection and with the connivance of the
Turks, and assuredly Bulgaria has just cause for reprisals. At present,
however, her bands are inactive, and she is endeavouring to adjust the
difficulty by diplomatic channels. Bulgaria has no desire for war,
neither has Turkey.
But the question must ere long be faced boldly and fearlessly, and a
solution arrived at. Bulgaria has right on her side, and in the name of
humanity it is the duty of the Powers to support her.
[Illustration: Where I spent a comfortless night in Bulgaria.]
[Illustration: Bulgarian Laundresses.]