BULGARIA, PAST AND PRESENT.* IN a former volume, published some
years ago under the title, _Roumania, Past and Present, Mr. Samuelson furnished us with what is perhaps the best English account of another newly admitted, or rather readmitted, member of the European family of nations. The study of Roumanian history, overlapping as it does that of Bulgaria. naturally suggested to the author's mind the publication of the present complementary work. and at the same time, the form in which it was to be written, although we remark that he has now adopted a more chrono- logical order than before, in dealing first with past history. and then describing the country and its inhabitants as he saw them in the course of his recent tour. If, as Mr. Samuelson says in his preface, he labours under some disadvantage so far as his sketch of Bulgarian history is concerned, by having already written that of Roumania, he may comfort himself with the re-
• Bulgaria, Past and Present. By James Samuelson. London : TrObner and Co. flection that he is himself practically his only competitor in this field; for in the twenty-four original and translated works on Bulgaria in the English language to which he alludes, we may look in vain for any trustworthy and consecutive historical in- formation that does not relate to the most recent events. In fact, Bulgaria might have been first discovered about the year 1876, for any information that could be obtained to the contrary from accessible English sources ; and we have reason to be grateful to Mr. Samuelson for having done something to acquaint us with Old Bulgaria in these pages, though he has confined himself on this head within the narrow limits of nine short chapters. Here the author is mainly indebted for his material to the History of Professor Jirecek, sometime Counsellor to the Education Department in Bulgaria, and now of the University of Prague, who may be regarded as the highest authority on a subject to which he has devoted many years of his life. It would be difficult to imagine a more hopeless task than that undertaken by the pioneer in this field, for the Vandalism of Turk and Phanariot has left little or nothing of monumental or documentary evidence to work upon ; but though we have to deplore great gaps in the story of the early Bulgarian Kings, and accept dates that can often be only approximative, yet this patient and erudite, if somewhat dry author, has managed to piece together, from a hundred different extraneous sources, the groundwork of the narrative which we have here presented to us in a concise and readable form. We could have wished, however, that instead of retaining the Czech spelling of many of the proper names, which is only misleading to the English reader, Mr. Samuelson had adopted English phonetic equivalents. [We cannot be expected to know that " Sisman." is pronounced " Shishman," or that an inverted circumflex over a " c " changes its sound to " dj " or " tch." We find also " Kafedzi " for Kafedji, and " Zivkoff " for Jivkoff, while on p. 53 the strange form of " Bydn " for Vdin (Widdin) can only be accounted for by a typographical error.] We should also like to know on what grounds Mr. Samuelson, on p. 55, speaks of " the Battle of Amsel (Kosovo Pole)." Jirecek, it is true, in the German edition of his work, translating Kosovo Pole into " Amsel Feld," commonly uses the latter name ; but that is no justification for a part of the German translation being adopted in English to replace so well known a name as Kosovo. It would have been more logical, and about equally confusing, to have translated directly into English, and surprised the reader by allusions to " the Battle of Blackbird."
Where Mr. Samuelson has followed the highest authorities, it only remains for us to consider whether he has made the best use of his materials. It is clear that in the limited space to which he has restricted himself, it was impossible for him to indulge in lengthy digressions, no matter how interesting the subject. This is probably why he has failed, in his interesting pages on the Bogoumil heresy, to point out how far-reaching it was in its consequences, as the direct forerunner of the earliest strivings of Albigenses and Vaudois after Church reform in Europe. In a more ambitious work, the Paulician sea, of Catholics should also have found a place, all the more that it is still represented by a remnant of so-called " Pavlikans " in Bulgaria, as well as by some 60,000 descendants of Bulgarian emigrants in the Banate. The ethnography of the country has also yet to be written, for even Jirecek is for ed to leave many of the most important problems unsolved. Are we to consider the " Schops," who people the districts forming nearly a sixth of Bulgaria, lying west of the Isker as far as Nisch, and south- wards to Kustendil, and who are distinguished by a peculiar type. dress, and dialect, as well as by their unconquerable obstinacy and conservatism, as the descendants of the Sapii, a presumably Thraco-Illyrian race described by later Roman writers as inhabiting those very districts ; or as Petchenegs ; or as full-blooded Finno-Bulgars ; for all these theorieS have found supporters ? What are we to think of the " Gagaous," the mixed race of Turkish-speaking Christians who are to be found on the Black Sea coast. and whom no one will own as kin ? And then, again, the extinct Saxon, Tartar, and Tcherkess colonies ; the privileged villages of Christian " Boinouks," who marched as auxiliaries with the Ottornith hosts ; and the Pomaks, those Bulgarian Mussulman moun- taineers who are so much more Turkish than the Turks, that in 1878 they waged a successful guerilla war with the Russians for months after the armistice had been signed, and in despite
of the Berlin Treaty, refused to form part of Eastern Ron- melia, maintaining perfect independence in their mountain fastnesses of the Rhodope until the retrocession of the district to the Porte in 1886,—all these are fresh and tempting sub- jects for whoever is interested in fragmentary nationalities.
To what extent the old Finno-Bulgars are responsible for some of the present peculiarities of the race to which they gave their name, is also fair ground for conjecture. Certain it is that they must have been very disagreeable neighbours, for they were redoubtable warriors, cruel and superstitious, with as Draconian a code as the Zulu for home use, and an insatiable appetite for the plunder and slaughter of every one else. Whether it is to that strain, or to centuries of contact with the Turk, that we are to attribute it, the fact remains that the Bulgarians, in character as well as in appearance, often present the strongest contrast to the other so-called Southern Slav races. Slow but steady of purpose, thrifty and phlegmatic, they have yet shown that centuries of suspended national animation have not de- stroyed their national feeling, nor quelled the martial spirit which so often carried their ancestors to the very gates of Constantinople, and after an endless series of cruel wars left them an exhausted prey to the Ottoman. Perhaps, too, those ancestors were not quite so black as they have been painted, for it must not be forgotten that in the absence of native sources, the blood-stained story of the old Kingdom has been largely drawn from the chronicles of their deadliest enemies, the Byzantines, who are about as likely to have done justice to the Bulgarians as their descendants of the Phanar or the Galata journalists are to-day. If, however, the modern Bulgarians have retained some most unamiable features, and are, as, indeed, they have some cause to be, jealous and in- tolerant of strangers, grasping and prone to unjust suspicions, yet that there are hopeful symptoms for the future in their new-born love of administrative and financial order, and passionate eagerness for educational improvement, the present author, as we shall see later, is a willing witness.
In dealing with the events of recent years, Mr. Samuelson had a much larger choice of authorities, which he was able to supplement by personal inquiry and the study of Parliamentary papers ; and here it must be admitted that however much we may differ from him in points of detail, on the broad lines of Bulgarian politics he gives proof of acuteness of observation and sympathy with his subject. Nor can it be said that his personal proclivities obtrude themselves disagreeably on the reader, though an occasional tirade of perhaps unnecessary violence against the Turk, repeated allusions indicative of a leaning towards Home-rile, and one or two rather uncharitable expressions of scepticism as to the recent adventure of a Con- servative M.P. with brigands, give us an inkling of his tendencies.
An important contribution to the internal history of Bul- garia, in the form of an anonymous pamphlet, entitled Les Causes Oceultes de la Question Bulgare, published last autumn in Paris, has been unfortunately disregarded by Mr. Samuelson, on the ground that it represents French views, although it is an open secret that it was inspired from authoritative national Bulgarian sources. From this he might have corrected his false impression that Zankoff and Karaveloff, when in office, were " then as at present, Russian tools and partisans," and have learnt that they really showed themselves bitter enemies of Russian intrigue and interference. It was only after they had been successively overthrown and driven into opposition, that they stooped to accept Russian aid in order that they might revenge themselves on their successful rivals.
The account of the Union movement of 1885, and of the Servian war which followed it, is but a confused and sketchy one, although the author had the spirited descriptions of Huhn to draw upon ; and it is to be regretted that to Huhn's occa- sional inaccuracies he has added not a few of his own. Thus, in two places (pp. 11 and 207) he describes the ringleaders of the plot against Prince Alexander—Gruff and Bendereff—as having been condemned to death, although they were never
put upon their trial at all. In enumerating the principal towns
of Bulgaria, he mentions (p. 51) in the same sentence Sofia and Sredec (Czech spelling for Sredetz), the latter being the old Bulgarian name for the former, thus emulating the achieve- ment of the writer who distinguished Jerome from Hieronymus. He states on p. 71 that the Treaty of San Stefano stipulated for the union under one Prince, of Bulgaria Proper and Eastern Roumelia, but omits to add that the Bulgaria of San Stefano was also to include all Macedonia and a good part of the Province of Adrianople Mr. Samuelson's account of the Bulgaria of to-day opens with a " geographical and physical" chapter, which is clear and good as far as it goes. The neat little map, however, which faces p. 111 is quite spoilt by a serious error in the Servian frontier-line, which gives the prefecture of Trn and the sub- prefecture of Tsaribrod to Servia, without any territorial com- pensation elsewhere. The description of Sofia and the life there, of Philippopolis, and the author's drive through the country to Roustchouk, proves him to be an intelligent observer, and especially appreciative of all educational pro- gress. He expresses a high opinion of Bulgarian schools, in particular of the Gabrova High School. But he should have told us something about Robert College, the great American school at Constantinople, where so many of the best Bulgars were educated, and which has done so much to consolidate their moral fibre. Chapters xix. and xx. give some useful information about trade, agriculture, and land-tenure, the latter being a simple matter where landlords are practically non-existent. But the abolition of dual owner- ship is attended by certain drawbacks in Bulgaria. The con- dition of the peasantry is so comfortable, land so easy to get, and population so scarce, that native manufacturing industries cannot flourish for want of hands, and are rapidly dying out. The Bulgars still make woollen cloth and serge at Slivno, but cannot compete with Austrian manufacturers for the large military clothing contracts. Carpets are still woven at Berko- vatz and Elena ; but that, to use a Germanism, is a " house industry," and entirely in the hands of the women. At Samakow, the famous magnetic iron-ore is now no longer worked, though formerly Samakow iron had the highest reputation and value throughout the Levant.
In discussing the Budget (and here let us remark parentheti- cally that no Bulgarian Budget is genuine : that canny nation has hitherto always made itself out to be poorer than it really is, in order to avoid being rated too highly when the tribute to Turkey and its share of the Ottoman Debt come to be assessed), Mr. Samuelson indulges in gratuitous and in- felicitous comparisons between Bulgarian and British military expenditure. He sets down the cost of the British Army and Navy at 39 millions yearly, instead of about 31. Again, taking the Bulgarian expenditure for 1887 at £720,000, and dividing it amongst a population of three millions, he arrives, by some inscrutable process, at 2s. 10d. a head. We make it about 4s. 9d. But this year (1888) the Budget gives over £900,000 for the Army—or, say, 6s. a head—so, considering that we avoid the conscription and they do not, the difference is not so great. On p. 200 he falls into another error of figures. He says the Bulgarian Civil List is covered by £24,000, whilst ours amounts to £543,000. As a matter of fact, the Bulgarian Civil List costs the nation about 236,000 ; and if one multiplies this by 12, in proportion to the differ- ence of population, we get £432,000, so that here also the comparison is not so unfavourable to us. Another mistake falling under this category is observable on p. 201, where Mr. Samuelson calls the Roumelian Tribute " a proportion of the interest on the Debt of the [Turkish] Empire," whereas it is quite a distinct item, and has nothing to do with the Debt, the Bulgarian and Roumelian share of which is not yet assessed.
The interviews with the two Princes, Alexander and Ferdi- nand, recorded in Chapter xxi., define very well the contrast of manner and method between Bulgaria's former and present ruler. Of Prince Alexander Mr. Samuelson expresses admira- tion, and is particularly struck by his frankness, modesty, and self-abnegation. The audience with Prince Ferdinand was of a purely formal nature, and does not throw much light on his personality, except in so far as it shows that he must rely upon other resources for gaining popularity than those commanded by his predecessor. We doubt if Prince Ferdinand, who is known to pride himself greatly on his Bourbon blood, would
feel flattered at being found to resemble a German student.
In his concluding chapter, on the Eastern Question, Mr. Samuelson reveals himself in the light of a strong partisan of the Balkan Federation, which, so far as Turkey, Bulgaria, and Roumania are concerned, will probably take shape as soon as a common danger from without becomes sufficiently pressing. For the adhesion of Greece and Servia we must wait until those two little States can reduce their ambitions to the pro- portion of their capabilities. The ultimate success of Austria's anti-Russian policy in the Balkans will depend on whether she can give proofs of real disinterestedness, and so overcome the instinctive dislike and distrust of the Bulgarians. As to Great Britain, Mr. Samuelson, unlike most of his congeners, would have her abandon her attitude of prudent reserve, and be the first to provoke the wrath of Russia, by recognising Prince Ferdinand on purely sentimental grounds. His closing pages contain some well-meant advice, including the most inopportune suggestion that the Bulgarians should now pro- claim Prince Ferdinand King, and rely upon the divinity which hedges a crown, in this case a very frail barrier. Such a proceeding would be a challenge to the Turks, whose suzerainty would thus be unceremoniously thrown off, and none of the Great Powers could decently stand by the little State, which has already given so much trouble, if by so ill-timed an act it disturbed the peace of Europe. We should rather wish for Bulgaria. that she should, for a term of years at least, realise Pericles' ideal of womanhood, and be as little talked of as possible.
Mr. Samuelson's style, straightforward and clear in the main, is disfigured by one or two very curious solecisms. Thus, on p. 4 he talks of the "third half " of the seventh century, recalling the old schoolboy's version of Caesar's sentence, " All Gaul is quartered into three halves." Does Mr. Samuelson mean the first half of the eighth, or merely the third section of the seventh P Even funnier is the descrip- tion, put into the mouth of Prince Ferdinand, of the peasants of the Balkan districts as " disingenuous and warm-hearted." A word of praise is due, in conclusion, to the very numerous and excellent illustrations with which the volume is em- bellished, notably the collotype reproductions of photographs by Karastojanoff and others.
Previous page
