¦YJiLIE'WMWIEI&Sflinf'' • iLniBiB^sy - Bought with the income ofthe Addin Lewis Fund THE PEASANT STATE. AN ACCOUNT OF BULGARIA IN 1894. By EDWARD DICEY, CB. LONDON: JOHN MURRAY, ALBEMARLE STREET. 1894. LONDON t PRINTED BY WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, LIMITED STAMFORD STREET AND CHARING CROSS. CONTENTS. THE PEASANT STATE. CHAPTER PAGE I. Introduction ... ... ... ... ... i HISTORY OF THE PEASANT STATE. II. The Bulgarian Nationality ... ... ... 9 III. The Genesis of Modern Bulgaria ... ... 14 IV. The Era of Turkish Rjjle ... ... ... 29 ORGANIZA TION. V. The Land Tenure ... ... ... ... ... 37 VI. Aspect of the People ... ... ... ... 45 VII. Village Life ... ... ... ... ... 56 INSTITUTIONS. VIII. The Bulgarian Church ... ... ... ... 72 IX. The Law of the Realm ... ... ... 83 X. Public Education ... ... ... ... ... 93 XI. The Public Service ... ... ... ... 105 XII. The Army ... ... ... ... ... ... 113 GO VERNMENT. XIII. The Constitution ... ... ... ... ... 120 XIV. The Prince ... ... ... ... ... 128 XV. The Estates of the Realm ... ... ... 142 XVI. The Ministry ... ... ... ... ... 152 iv CONTENTS. FINANCES. PAGE CHAPTER XVII. The Budget of 1894 ... ••¦ ¦•¦ ••¦ l63 XVIII. The Bank of Bulgaria ¦•• ¦•• ••¦ '77 TRADE. XIX. Commerce and Industry ... ••• •¦¦ ••¦ *°4 XX. Railways IQ9 SOCIAL LIFE. XXI. The Capital 213 XXII. The Court 220 XXIII. Sofiote Society ... ... ... ... ••• 230 POLICY. XXIV. National Policy ... ... ... ... ••¦ 246 XXV. Attitude towards Russia ... ... ... 262 PROVINCES. XXVI. Rustschuk ... ... ... ... ••¦ ¦•• 270 XXVII. Varna 281 XXVIII. Bourgas ... ... ... ••• ••¦ •-• 290 XXIX. Philippopolis ... ... ... ... ... 3°° NEIGHBOURS OF THE PEASANT STATE. XXX. Roumania and Servia ... ... ... ... 310 XXXI. Postscript 329 THE PEASANT STATE. CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION. For myself, as for all persons whose tastes or pursuits or occupations have led them to devote much attention to foreign affairs, the Eastern Question has always possessed a peculiar fascination. Whatever view you may take in respect of European politics, and of England's relation towards them ; whether you are a Philo-Russ or Russo phobe ; whether you are an Imperial Federationist, or a disciple of the " Little England " school ; whether your sympathies are Liberal or Conservative, Progressive or Reactionary, you cannot, I think, escape the conclusion that the organization of Europe, as it has been known to us since the close of the Napoleonic Wars, must suffer a radical change whenever the fate of Turkey in Europe,, is definitely determined. In common, I fancy, with every man who has ever studied the subject attentively, I have long ago come to the conclusion that the days of Turkey, at any rate as a European Power, are numbered. Threat ened men, as we all know, live long ; but a period which is long in the life of an individual is a mere moment in the life of a nation ; and it seems to me well-nigh a certainty that before the generation which is now entering B 2 THE PEASANT STATE. [Chap. on its public career has passed away into the unknown, the Turks will no longer be the masters of Constantinople. I have no occasion to discuss the question whether this change, when it occurs, will be one for the better or the worse. All I am concerned with is the fact — for such I believe it to be — that the change is certain and imminent. Holding these views, I have long taken great interest in speculations as to what will happen after the expulsion of the Turks from Europe as a dominant race. My original impression had been that there were only two possible solutions of the Eastern Question. The first, the most probable, and to my mind the least desirable, is the substitution of Russia for Turkey as the possessor of Constantinople ; the second, the least probable, but to my thinking the most desirable, is the substitution in place of Turkey of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. The idea of a revival by Greece of the old Byzantine Monarchy does not, I think, come within the domain of practicable politics. I may add that all my observation of the Christian races subject to Moslem rule had rendered me hitherto extremely sceptical as to the possibility of their ever being able to supply the place of Turkey in Europe, or to form an effective barrier against Russian aggrandize ment. On the other hand, I knew that in this latter respect my views were not altogether shared by persons who had exceptional means of acquaintance with the conditions of the Eastern Question. Amongst others, Sir William White had frequently assured me that the States of the Balkan Peninsula, if they were allowed time to develop themselves and consolidate their resources, might prove formidable obstacles to any advance of Russia towards I-] INTRODUCTION. 3 the Bosphorus. He had often expressed to me his con viction that Bulgaria was a country with a future before her not unlike that under which Piedmont had become the centre of a united Italy. I may here, too, recall the fact that on the last occasion, if I remember rightly, when I saw my old friend Mr. W. E. Forster, before his death, I found him keenly excited about the war between Bulgaria and Servia, which was then imminent. To some casual remark of mine, that I did not think it mattered much to anybody beyond the parties imme diately concerned, whether the Serbs beat the Bulgars, or the Bulgars the Serbs, he remarked, as far as I can recall his words, " I am sure that you are wrong in this. If ever you travel through Bulgaria and see the people, as I have done myself, you will feel very differently, and will be convinced, as I am, that the independent existence of Bulgaria is a matter of European importance." These, and many similar utterances on the part of acquaintances of mine, whose minds were unbiassed by any sentimental or theological sympathies with the Chris tian races under Turkish rule, and who knew what they were talking about, had long caused me to desire to visit Bulgaria, and to form my own judgment as to whether the Bulgarians really did differ in any material respect from other Christian communities, governed or mis governed, as the case may be, under Moslem dominion ; and if such a difference existed, what were the causes and the main characteristics of its existence. At the commencement of this year circumstances enabled me to fulfil this long-cherished wish, and the result of my researches is contained in the following pages. Here, at the outset, perhaps, better than elsewhere, 4 THE PEASANT STATE. [Chap. I may say something as to the extent to which my study of Bulgaria has modified my previous opinion as to the possibility of her playing an important part in the cata clysm which must ensue upon the downfall of the Ottoman Empire. I have come with great reluctance to the con clusion that the creation of the Dual Monarchy in Austria, or, in other words, the concession of Home Rule to Hungary, has paralyzed Austria as a European Power just as the concession of Home Rule in Ireland would paralyze the United Kingdom. There is, therefore, little likelihood of Austria's being able to step into the place of Turkey. The removal of Austria as a possible candidate for the inheritance of " The Sick Man of Europe " cannot but favour the prospects of Russia. If this is so, there is clearly a distinct increase of probability that the ulti mate solution of the Eastern Question will prove to be the acquisition of Constantinople by Russia, a contingency which must in all human likelihood entail the gradual conversion of all the States of the Balkan Peninsula into Russian Provinces. Fortunately, the " Unspeakable Turk " dies hard and dies slowly ; and the longer the Crescent rules at Con stantinople, the greater chance there is of the Balkan States consolidating their independence. I am doubtful about Servia, and not confident as to Roumania. But I am now convinced that Bulgaria contains the main elements required to constitute a powerful nationality. All that is needed for the development of these elements is time ; and if Turkey in Europe can only hold together for another generation, Bulgaria may possibly become so potent a factor in the Oriental Problem as to alter the conditions under which the Eastern Question will have J-J INTRODUCTION. 5 ultimately to be solved. I do not say that Bulgaria is as yet an effective bulwark against Russian aggression ; but I do say that she is in a fair way of becoming such a bulwark, and that she therefore deserves the support and sympathy of all who, in common with myself, regard the possible Russification of Eastern Europe with dismay and dread. I have endeavoured, in the following chapters, to explain the peculiar and exceptional conditions which have rendered Bulgaria so utterly different from all the other Christian States which passed under the sway of Islam on the decline and fall of the Byzantine Empire. My investigations led me also to the — to me novel — conclusion, that Bulgaria is the most perfect specimen of a peasant State, either existing nowadays, or recorded in the annals of our present era. In all the works I have consulted on' Bulgaria, I have never seen this peculiar aspect of her internal organization dwelt upon with any fulness. I presume that during the troubled times, when Bulgaria attracted a large share of foreign notice, the attention of the outer world was chiefly turned to the vexed question of the genuineness or otherwise of the " Bulgarian atrocities," to the vicissitudes of the Russo-Turkish War, to the fall of Plevna, to the capture of the Shipka Pass, and later on, to the romantic reign of the hero of Slievnitza, to his abduction and subsequent abdication. It is only fair to add that, for many years after her liberation from Turkish rule, it seemed well-nigh certain that Bulgaria could have no permanent individual existence of her own ; and that, for good or evil, it was her manifest destiny to be absorbed in Russia, or, at the best, to revolve as a sort of minor planet in the orbit of the 6 THE PEASANT STATE. [Chap. Muscovite sun. Under these circumstances, her internal organization possessed but little interest for any one save her own people. Of late years, however, it has been seen to be possible, and even probable, that Bulgaria may take a permanent and independent place amidst the States of Europe. The question, therefore, of her internal organiza tion has become a matter of European concern. For Englishmen in particular, quite apart from their general interest in the Eastern Question, this aspect of Bulgaria possesses a special importance. Public attention in England has in our days been greatly attracted to the advantages of a peasant proprietary. The merits or demerits of such a system lie for the present beyond the range of party politics. Liberals and Conservatives are alike agreed to accept, as an axiom of political economy, the dictum that, in a well-regulated state, the mass of the community ought by rights to have a personal, individual stake in the land. Our public men seem to be coming round to the belief that the ideal State would be one best described by the saying attributed to Henry IV. of France, that he hoped to see the day when every French peasant would have a fowl in his pot. We have endeavoured, by legislation, to create a class of small peasant land-owners in Ireland ; we are contemplating tlie possibility of creating such a class in England. It needs no great political foresight to prophesy that " the three acres and a cow" theory, originated by Mr. Chamberlain, will soon become the recognized stock-in-trade of every political party which stands in need of the agricultural vote. Again, an important and increasing section of the Liberal party at home has taken up the view that large accumu lations of private fortune are an evil to be discouraged, if L] INTRODUCTION. 7 not prevented, by legislation ; and that, in the new era which it is hoped to inaugurate, capital and pauperism will be alike comparatively unknown quantities. I am not an ardent political economist. I am not, perhaps, much of a believer in any scheme for the reorganization of society on a new and a better basis. But my personal views as to the progress of humanity are of no great interest to myself, and of none at all to the world at large. I shall not, therefore, obtrude any views I may hold on this subject in these pages. My endeavour is confined to a wish to show that Bulgaria, as at present constituted, approaches as closely as is consistent with the imperfection of all human institutions to the ideal State of our latter- day social reformers, in which there are to be no poor and no rich, in which every citizen is to have a share, and to a considerable extent an equal share, in the land of the commonwealth, in which there are to be no privileged classes and no social distinctions, and in which the people, who in the case of Bulgaria are the peasants, are to govern themselves by themselves and for themselves. It has been my object, in forming my opinions as to the present condition of Bulgaria, to keep an open mind. I have tried to explain the general causes which have brought about the peculiar social and economical con ditions of Bulgaria. I have endeavoured to do justice to the peculiar qualities of race and character which are partly the cause, partly the effect, of her present system of government, and her existing social organization. I have also tried to indicate the defects inseparable from the state of things under which alone a peasant community is a possibility. Anybody acquainted with peasant life, as it exists in naked reality not in fiction, can fill in for 8 THE PEASANT STATE. [Chap. I. himself the various failings, social, physical, and intellectual, to which I have had cause to allude frequently. But I have made no attempt to strike a balance between the advantages and disadvantages of such a social fabric as the one I have sought to describe. In Bulgaria, as else where, my rule has been to take things very much as I find them, to describe these things as they are in fact, not as they ought to be in theory ; and to leave it to others to decide whether the things so described are in harmony with the abstract principles which govern, or are supposed to govern, the condition of humanity. Those who wish to find arguments or illustration, whether for or against the " three acres and a cow " school of political economy, may probably find both in what I have written. For my part, I have no theory to advocate one way or the other. I shall be content if I succeed in calling attention to a very exceptional social organization, which in all human like lihood must be transitory ; and I know of no better term under which to describe this organization than the title I have chosen for this book, that of " The Peasant State." HISTORY OF THE PEASANT STATE. CHAPTER II. THE BULGARIAN NATIONALITY. It is my object to deal with the present and future of Bulgaria, not with the past. But in order to understand the present it is necessary to recall the past ; and for this reason, I wish to show how Bulgaria, as now constituted, has a genuine claim to be called a nation. The Low Countries have been described as the cock pit of Europe. The Balkan Peninsula has a much better title to this historic appellation. Hordes of barbarians, one after another, moved by some unknown impulse, poured in endless succession from Central Asia into Europe during the decline of the Roman Empire, crossed the Balkans on their march southwards ; occupied the land, which is now called Bulgaria, for periods of indefinite duration ; and after years, or it may be centuries, of sojourn, moved further afield, either in search of new pastures, or because they were themselves driven onwards by the advance of some fresh horde of wanderers, following along the same track that their predecessors had pursued. This page of European history is so utterly obscure, that IO HISTORY OF THE PEASANT STATE. [Chap. it is matter of dispute whether the Sclav invasion first crossed the Danube three or six centuries after the birth of Christ. All that seems even approximately certain is that within the above-named limits the Sclavs occupied the various regions which we now know as Russia, Poland, Bohemia, Transylvania, Macedonia, Roumelia, and Bulgaria, and established themselves in these regions as masters, either destroying the original occupants or absorbing them in their own dominant nationality. The whole history of these remote times appears to me to be contained in the words of Scripture, that " when the strong man fully armed guardeth his own court, his goods are in peace : but when a stronger than he shall come upon him, and overcome him, he taketh from him his whole armour . . . and divideth his spoils." The Sclavs of the Balkan Peninsula met with their stronger man in the person of the Bulgars, a Tartar tribe, kindred in race to the Turks, who, towards the close of the seventh century, swept down across the Balkans, carrying all before them. I feel the utmost of diffidence in expressing any opinion of my own as to the history of this obscure and distant era. My knowledge on this subject is of the most super ficial kind, derived solely from what little I have read. But I give, for what it is worth, the impression left on my mind from cursory reading, and from local traditions, that the Bulgars, though they have bequeathed their name to the country over which they once ruled, never occupied it or settled themselves in it, in the same sense as their predecessors, the Sclavs, had done. In common with their kinsmen the Turks, the Bulgars were a ruling race, a tribe of predatory warriors ; but as their power and their vigour died away, they became II.] THE BULGARIAN NATIONALITY. 1 1 gradually merged in the subject race, over whom they had originally held mastery as conquerors, and adopted the Sclav language and the Sclav nationality. Since the era of the Bulgars, Greeks, Serbs, Turks, have in succession held sway over Bulgaria ; but for some twelve centuries the population of Bulgaria have remained Sclavs in race and language, and — though for a period of less duration — Sclavs in religion. The Bulgarians, in fact, claim upwards of a thousand years of distinct nationality ; and if this claim is not sufficient to constitute a nation, few of the peoples of Europe have any ground to consider them selves an historic nationality. Personally, I attach more importance to the fact that the Bulgarians have held long and uninterrupted possession of the soil on which they dwell, than I do to their traditions of bygone greatness. The whole history of the Balkan Peninsula, from the establishment of the Byzantine Empire down to the capture of Constantinople by the Turks, is one long unintelligible and confused record of internecine wars between Greeks, Turks, Serbs, Wallachs, and Bulgarians. Sometimes one race got the upper hand, sometimes the other. Ever and anon a powerful chief arose in this remote quarter of Europe ; made war successfully upon his neighbours ; extended his dominions over the surrounding states ; and called himself King, Csesar, Czar, Emperor, as the case might be. The Bulgarians had their fair share of these ephemeral dynasties. In the ninth century, there was a certain Boris, the national hero of Bulgaria, after whom the infant son of Prince Ferdinand has just been named. Boris founded the first Bulgarian Monarchy ; made himself lord and master of the whole Balkan Peninsula, 12 HISTORY OF THE PEASANT STATE. [Chap. almost down to the shores of the ^Egean Sea ; negotiated with Rome ; and finally became a convert, and forced his people to become converts, to the faith of the orthodox Eastern Church. His son, Simian, another of the national legendary heroes, made war against the Greek Empire; besieged Constantinople with his armies, and actually captured Adrianople ; and assumed the proud title of Czar of the Bulgarians, and Autocrat of the Greeks. Later on, the Russians invaded Bulgaria for the first time ; and in order to repel the invaders, the then Czar, Simian, had to call in the aid of the Greek Emperor, who, in return, deposed him from his throne, and converted Bulgaria into a province of the empire. Again, some two centuries after the overthrow of the Boris dynasty, a Bulgarian of the name of Asen induced his fellow-country men to rise in insurrection against the tyranny of Con stantinople, and declared himself the Czar of Bulgaria. The story of the Asen dynasty, in as far as it is known, is one of continued warfare, waged with fluctuating fortunes against the Greek Empire. The only difference between the dynasties of Boris and of the Aseni is that, while both were always at war with their neighbours, and always sided with one or the other of the Powers who were engaged in breaking up the Byzantine Empire, the latter dynasty devoted great energy to the development of its own dominions. Asen and his successors established industries, encouraged trade, availed themselves of foreign teachers in arts and commerce, and succeeded for a brief period in making Bulgaria a prosperous and progressive country. After this, the Golden Age of Bulgaria, the country fell for a time under the sway of Servia. Finally, at the II. THE BULGARIAN NATIONALITY. 13, close of the fourteenth century, the Turks made their appearance on the scene. From that time till the other day Bulgaria remained a province of European Turkey. Such, in the shadowest of outlines, is the general history of the State which, within the last twenty years, has recovered its national existence. 14 HISTORY OF THE PEASANT STATE. [Chap. CHAPTER III. THE GENESIS OF MODERN BULGARIA. It, is not my purpose, as I have said before, to write a history of Bulgaria. But of all periods of time, the ones with which the generation of the day are most imperfectly acquainted, are those which record events that occurred long enough ago to get blurred in men's memories, and yet are of too recent date to be enshrined in history. I feel convinced that there are a hundred educated Englishmen who, if pressed, could give a fair account of the Wars of the Roses, or of the American Declaration of Independence, for one who could supply an intelligible version of the events which led up to our occupation of Egypt during the decade that preceded the battle of Tel-el-Kebir. In the same way, I fancy, a very consider able proportion of my countrymen and countrywomen, even amongst the classes who take an intelligent interest in foreign affairs, would find it extremely difficult to recall the sequence of events, which, in a period of less than twenty years, has converted Bulgaria from an obscure Turkish Pashalik into an independent State. Yet a general knowledge of these events is absolutely essential to realize the progress already made by Bulgaria, and still more that which she is likely to make in the near future. In order, therefore, to render intelligible what I shall have III.] THE GENESIS OF MODERN BULGARIA. 1 5 to say later on, let me endeavour to tell, as briefly as I can, the outline of the story which records the genesis of the Bulgaria of to-day. Bulgaria owes her independence to the Russian invasion of Turkey in 1877. The motives which prompted Russia to take up arms for the liberation of the Bulgars may not have been disinterested ; the obligations imposed on the Bulgars by this intervention may have been more than cancelled by the subsequent conduct of their liberators. Still the fact remains that, but for Russia, Bulgaria would to-day be a Turkish Province, ruled by Turkish officials in the same way as Macedonia is now. No doubt, for many years past — in fact, ever since the Greek War of Independence — there had been an intermittent agitation in Bulgaria, as in all the other Christian provinces of the Ottoman Empire, against the domination of the Turks. I fancy, however, from all I can learn, that this agitation was less active and less general in Bulgaria than it was elsewhere. The Bulgars are a far less excitable race than the bulk of their Sclav fellow-kinsmen ; their religion is not fanatical ; their minds are mainly taken up with the tillage of their farms ; they are not, like the Greeks, born politicians and agitators ; their great desire is to be let alone to look after their own affairs. A country of small peasant farmers, with no wealthy and educated class, and with no natural leaders either by birth or tradition, is not a promising soil for the development of an armed insurrection against the powers that be. At any rate, I can see no evidence to show that, till Russia appeared on the scene, there was any formidable national agitation amongst the Bulgarians for the overthrow of Turkish rule. To admit this is not tantamount to saying that the Bulgarians were 16 HISTORY OF THE PEASANT STATE. [Chap. contented with their lot. The few traders and land owners who were in a position to afford the expense, sent their sons to be educated abroad ; and these sons returned home imbued with Western ideas and eager to see their country delivered from Moslem thraldom. I suspect there are few, if any, of the men, now occupying important positions in Bulgarian public life, who were not in their hot youths implicated in conspiracies and in secret associations for the emancipation of Bulgaria. They would all tell you, if they spoke the truth, that though at this period they had the sympathy and good wishes of their fellow-countrymen, they did not meet with the popular support which is required to make a revolution. They would, I think, also admit — though with reluctance — that their original idea was to effect a revolution by Russian aid ; that they were in constant communication with the agents of the Sclav propaganda in Russia ; and that they had most of them received not only instructions but active assistance from Russia. The Bulgars took little or no part in the Turko-Servian War in 1875 J DUt when the war ended in the virtual emancipation of the Serbs, the time had manifestly come when it was incumbent upon their neighbours to take action which might force the hand of the Czar, and thus necessitate Muscovite intervention. The whole story of the abortive Bulgarian rising in 1S76 is singularly obscure. What its intrinsic importance was, who were its leaders and instigators, and what, if any, was the programme of the insurgents, are all matters on which it is difficult to express any definite opinion. The one thing certain is that the rising was suppressed by the Turks with relentless severity. That it must have been so suppressed is evident III.] THE GENESIS OF MODERN BULGARIA. 1 7 a priori to any one acquainted with the Eastern system of administration. So long as the Giaour pays his taxes and respects the authority of Islam, he is allowed to do pretty much what he likes in other respects ; but, if he rises in rebellion against his rulers, the hand of his lord and master comes down with overwhelming force. Not to strike without necessity, but when you have to strike, to strike a knock-down blow, such is the principle of Oriental statesmanship. Less than a score of years ago, a village near Keneh, where English tourists now make halt daily during the Nile season, rose in insurrection against the authority of the then Khedive, partly in resentment of excessive taxation, partly in deference to religious fanaticism. A local Mahdi had taken it into his head to preach the duty of returning to the true faith of Islam, had denounced Ismail Pasha as one who con sorted with infidels, and had exhorted the faithful to refuse obedience to the officials of the Government. The appeal met with some response, and next time the tax collectors appeared at the village they were driven away with violence. On learning this, the Khedive sent down a body of troops under orders to surround the village with a cordon, and to kill every man, woman, child, and living thing within the precincts. The order was carried out literally, and no more was ever heard of the Keneh Mahdi or of the Keneh insurrection. And, what is more, I could never discover that this wholesale massacre offended in any way such public opinion as exists in Egypt. It was only the regular way in which insurrections had always been dealt with ; and, after all, it achieved its purpose. If the Turks act in this fashion towards men of their own faith, it is only natural they should have, if possible, still