Carigradski Glasnik Carigradski

CEU eTD Collection

CarigradskiGlasnik In partial fulfilment of the requirements forArts fulfilment ofthe partial thedegreeofMaster of Serviceof Ottoman Serbs, 1895 SecondLévy Noémi Reader: Professor Supervisor: Professor Tolga Esmer : A: Forgotten Istanbul Central European University DepartmentHistory of Budapest, Hungary Klara Volarić Submitted to 2014 By

- basedPaper thein - Aksu

- 1909

CEU eTD Collection such with instructions may permissionmade ofthe thewritten Author.” without not be accordance in made copies Further made. copies such any of part a form must t from obtained maybe Library. Details European Central the lodgedin and Author the by given instructions the with accordance in only made be may part, or full “Copyright in the text of this thesis rests with the Author. Copies by any process, either in either process, any by Copies Author. the with rests thesis this of text the in “Copyright ii

he librarian. This page page This librarian. he

CEU eTD Collection enti substantial a as defined: practice. is nationhood how on this depends Rather, suggest. generally studies as nationhood, of lack the imply necessarily not does a exhibited population Serbs show Macedonia were they knew Serbs Ottoman Macedo Ottoman in population local the among nationhood and editors its Serbia propagating above, from nationhood inducing was it essentially propa Slavic local campaigns irredentist Balkan of aim main The this for and regionOttoman Macedoniaborders. Ottoman within the in position its consolidate to had latecomer remain Macedonia that interest best its Serbia it, annex Bulgaria, eventually and Empire Ottoman the from Macedonia Unlike re it. the with in accordance activities revolutionary in fostered act which to rather but sovereignty Ottoman undermine di Serb Serbian Greek, of intention respective their of population at aimed campaigns propaganda national spreading nati own their as claimed countries audiences at aimed glasnik Carigradski pl I thesis this In Abstract ae Srin ainod n fuh fr h es the for fought and nationhood Serbian gated

- speaking population. This was also the goal of of goal the also was This population. speaking Serbian diplomats. Serbian , nationhood in Otto in nationhood an to analyze Serbian Serbian analyze to an

in Ottoman Macedonia, a region which Greek, Bulgarian and Serbian Serbian and Bulgarian Greek, which region a Macedonia, Ottoman in ( osatnpes Messenger Constantinople’s - ainl n fud dniis Nevertheless, identities. fluid and national lmtc ice, n teeoe of therefore and circles, plomatic F onal territory and which soon became a political arena fo arena political a became soon which and territory onal or man Macedonia was far from well from far was Macedonia man Carigradski glasnik Carigradski . within oee, s ay coal wrs n Ottoman on works scholarly many as However, reets actions irredentist

a, r ugra nationhood. Bulgarian or ian, iii

was to induce a sense of a nation a of sense a induce to was

in rm 85 n re t sever to order in 1895 from gion h Otmn mie Nml, eba s a as Serbia Namely, Empire. Ottoman the

) convincing the Slavic the convincing , n Istanbul an alsmn o a eba mle and millet Serbian a of tablishment

the presence and sense and presence the airdk glasnik Carigradski Carigradski glasnik Carigradski i ws well was nia

through ty or a changeable form of of form changeable a or ty -

based based age ht hs fluidity this that argue I

calculated that it was in in was it that calculated needed an ally to keep keep to ally an needed n - ness as envisioned by envisioned as ness h etbihet of establishment the defined - speaking Orthodox speaking eba periodical Serbian - defined. Namely, Namely, defined.

oee, t However,

hood ws o to not was , and th and . This paper paper This . of Serbian of

Ottoman Ottoman into the into e local local e he he r

CEU eTD Collection Bibliography Conclusion Chapter IV. Carigradski glasnik, Serbian nationh Chapter III. Chapter II. Ottoman periodicals during Hamidian and early Y Chapter I.LiteratureR Introduction Contents 2.1. Ottoman2.1. Periodicals and s M Theoretical1.2. considerat 1.1. Conclusion Facts4.2. theon ground: “reckless” Serbian pro Carigradski4.1. glasnik a Conclusion Carigradski3.2. glasnik: the “pen” Serbian3.1. diplomaticactivit Conclusion 2.3. Periodicals and readers ethodological considerations 4.1.2. 4.1.2. Carigradski glasnik and Serbian nation 4.1.1. Carigradski glasnik and Serbian natio 2.2. Periodicals 2.1.3. Ottoman periodicals and state regulations: early Young Turkperi 2.1.2. Ottoman periodicals and state regulations: The 2.1.1. Ottoman periodicals and state regulations: The Literature review

...... Carigradski glasnik

......

...... -

staterelationship duringHamidian the eview,Theory and Methodology

...... nd Serbian nationhood during Hamidian and early Young Turk ions

...... andSerbian the strugglefor the Ottoman Macedon ...... ies inthe Ottoman Macedonia ...... tate regulations tate (1831

...... fight er for the Ottoman Macedonia ...... ood, and facts theon ground nhood during Hamidian period hood du iv paganda and fluid nationhood ......

......

...... - 1909) ring early Young Turkperiod

Hamidian period (1878 Tanzimatperiod (1 oung Turk

and early Young Turk period

......

...... Period (1876 ......

...... od (1908od

...... 831

......

...... - - ...... 1878) ia ...... 1908) - ......

...... 1909) - 1909)

......

period ......

......

...... 105 100 . 98 88 82 76 76 75 74 61 50 48 45 41 36 32 27 22 22 20 17 12

8 8 1

CEU eTD Collection v

CEU eTD Collection 1908. 3 Balkans the in Loyalties Conflicting 2 1 millet “Greek” the from separation the nationalism, Serbian and Bulgarian rising of context inf schools Greek essence in were Balkans materials.” instructional of control schools, parish in education especially and “education, the perceive a to as started Patriarchate Ecumenical elites national Serbian and Bulgarian Specifically, privileges millet importance. of question the nationalism, of era this In line ofsolidarity expressiona of loyalty new and new a identification, of waynew a mobilization, of motive new “abecame nationalism stated, members Serbs, its or Bulgarians, as Greeks, Orthodox Christians became Orthodox the of consist just not did Patriarchate Ecumenical affilia religious of terms in subjects system. century, education 19th the or in ideas juridical national of emergence a the with example Nevertheless, for affairs, communal independent to right governments supposedly privileges of set a within operated institutions cut clear within communities religious into divided mainstream to According Introduction

See Stanford J. Shaw, Kemal Karpat, and Roderic H. Davison in whose works this notion is present. notion this whose works in Davison H. Roderic and Karpat, Kemal Shaw, J. See Stanford İpek Nathalie Clayer, “The Dimension of Confessionalisation in the Ottoman Balkans at the Time of Nationalisms”, Nationalisms”, of Time the at Balkans Ottoman the in Confessionalisation of Dimension “The Clayer, Nathalie

Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2013, 51. Press, 2013, University Cornell Ithaca: K.

Yosmaoğlu the . This set of privileges, the cornerstone of the millet system, essentially system,theprivileges, millet meant ofthe thecornerstone . Thisset of Patriarchate, which appointed the teachers and also provided the curriculum and and curriculumthe provided also teachersthe andappointed which Patriarchate, ,

Blood Ties: Religion, Violence, and the Politics of Nationhood in Ottoman Macedonia, 1878 Macedonia, Ottoman in Politics Nationhood of the and Violence, Religion, Ties: Blood

co 3 mmunities, that is to say, to is that mmunities,

hs en ta te cmncl col al vr h Ottoman the over all schools Ecumenical the that meant This itrorpy Otmn oit ws o uie but united not was society Ottoman historiography, (H. Grandi (H. -

lines and defined religious identities; a system where religious religious where system a identities; religious defined and lines Greek tion was no longer adequate longer no was tion

ts et al., eds.), London eds.), tsal., et Patriarchate, Patriarchate,

une b Gek ainl rpgna I the In propaganda. national Greek by luenced 1

in in just just millets Ottoman society.” n as and o mentio to - New York: I.B. Tauris, 2011, 89. Tauris, New I.B. York: . 1

had traditionally been under the the under been traditionally had

rne t te b te Ottom the by them to granted This interpretation sees religious sees interpretation This pk . omol points Yosmaoğlu K. İpek

n a few. As Nathalie Clayer Clayer Nathalie As few. a n became one of the utmost utmost the of one became . The Rum millet under the the under millet Rum The . 2

defining Ottoman Ottoman defining a strictly was

out, an - CEU eTD Collection 4 where published called periodical Macedonia, and Bulgarian Serbs into population the of part significant not did and Macedonia Ottoman these counter to attempts Serbian persuasion through region the in identities national respective their instill to attempts and irredentism Bulgarian Otto in specializing scholars the of most show, will I BulgarianGreek, nationhood. As respective Serbian, populationoftheirspeaking or Orthodox propagandas national spreading for arena political a became territo national own their as claimed countries Serbian and Bulgarian based through propaganda Serbian analyze to plan I thesis this In Patriarchate the until esta secured Bulgarians the While Slavic respective, their in campaigns propaganda national own their launch could where affairs religious and educational own their lead to right the meant i millet their for of plead recognition to elites Serbian and Bulgarian led nation, a with associated be to began which

Ottoman Macedonia territorially co territorially Macedonia Ottoman blished, the Serbs living in the Ottoman Balkans Ottoman the in living Serbs the blished,

Serbian periodical Serbian Ottoman Serbs mainly livedof (the parts Ottoman Macedonia). northern rm 85 ni 10 ad a dsge to designed was and 1909 until 1895 from I focus primarily on one aspect, one on primarily focus

vn toa action. Ottoman even airdk glasnik Carigradski and

very coercion (e.g. guerilla groups) alike, thereby completely overlooking completely thereby alike, groups) guerilla (e.g. coercion aimed at audiences at aimed

end of theend Ottoman state of .e. national status in the Ottoman Empire. This recognition also also recognition This Empire. Ottoman the in status national .e.

rresponded to three vilayets/provinces: Kosovo, Bitola, and Salonika. Salonika. and Bitola, Kosovo, threevilayets/provinces: to rresponded millet claim the entire region, but their “official” their but region, entire the claim

activities status in 1870 when the Bulgarian Exarchate was was Exarchate Bulgarian the when 1870 in status

( I Constantinople’ n It . the founding and founding the in Ottoman Macedonia Ottoman in 2 netgtn Srin activities Serbian investigating

after

s re ht h Srs were Serbs the that true is

in the Balkan W

1885,

remained under the the under remained

a Mcdna ou o focus Macedonia man rmt Se promote

s influenced the course of Greek, Greek, of course the influenced

the establishment of an Istanbul an of establishment the

aimed at aimed Messenger operation of an Istanbul an of operation ars. ba ntoho i parts in nationhood rbian 4 , a region which Greek, Greek, which region a ,

convincing the Slavic the convincing ). This paper was was paper This ). y n wih soon which and ry Bulgaria and Serbia Serbia and Bulgaria jurisdiction of the of jurisdiction

efforts to mold a a mold to efforts

a latecomer in in latecomer a

n Greek and and Greek n n Ottoman in

languages. - based based

- - CEU eTD Collection M Ottoman in population local the for However, etc. culture language, celebrations, education, Orthodoxy, Serbian to dedicated were articles many above, from nationhood inducing Serbia was propagating it essentially millet; Serbian a of establishment of goal the Slavic local the into chapter) theoretical the see problems and definitions (for nationhood a of sense a induce to was propaganda Balkan of aim main the mentioned, already As Macedonia.Ottoman in nationhood concerns argument second The plans inthe actua was paper the that believe to hard was it occasions Since demonstrate loyalt to utmost Serbs’ ways Ottoman their of out went staff editorial the therefore and surveillance censors, strict Ottoman the under Istanbul, in published was it Moreover, regulations. Empire. both why reason the was This Macedonia Ottoman keep to ally an needed this for and region the within Serbia it, annex eventually re the in activities revolutionary fostered which Bulgaria, Unlike it. with accordance in act to rather and circles, thesis this In these countries had the same aim same the had countries these in rm 85i re o sever to order in 1895 from gion

airdk glasnik Carigradski the Ottoman Empire. Namely, Serbia as a latecomer had to consolidate its position in position its consolidate to had latecomer a as Serbia Namely, Empire. Ottoman the

For this reason, this For Carigradski glasnik Carigradski

region therefore of of therefore peet w piay ruet. First, arguments. primary two present I . Carigradski glasnik Carigradski

n ness as envisioned by its editors editors its by envisioned as ness Carigradski glasnik Carigradski Carigradski glasnik Carigradski the Serbian state supported state Serbian the

diligently propagated the image of the Ottoman state, on some some on state, Ottoman the of image the propagated diligently calculated that it was in its best interest that Macedonia remain remain Macedonia that interest best its in was it that calculated y, commitment and and commitment y, . This paper propagated Serbian nationhood and fought for the for fought and nationhood Serbian propagated paper This . acedo

– the presence and sense of Serbian nationhood among nationhood Serbian of sense and presence the

nia was well defined. N defined. well was nia Ottoman Macedonia from the Ottoman Empir Ottoman the from Macedonia Ottoman to preserve Ottoman Macedonia within the Ottoman the within Macedonia Ottoman preserve to

, was not to undermine Ottoman sovereignty but sovereignty Ottoman undermine to not was , operated fully in accordance with Ottoman press press Ottoman with accordance in fully operated 3

“honest” intentions “honest”

and acted within within acted and and

the intention of Serbian diplomatic diplomatic Serbian of intention the - lly a product of Serbian irredentist Serbian of product a lly speaking po speaking Serbian diplomats. In this res this In diplomats. Serbian amely,

within Ottoman borders. Ottoman within

pulation. This was also also was This pulation. towards the Sultanate the towards Ottoma Ottoman Serbs knew Serbs Ottoman n sovereignty: sovereignty: n

of the the of e and e pect, pect, .

CEU eTD Collection 5 revolution Turk Young the after started only this and as phase second this with and Wars Balkan the in resulted pro population local the which (to religion and education through solved be not would question Macedonian the that obvious became it when 1903 in uprising Ilinden the after place took e to pertains and religion through above from nationhood impose to describe I phase first The for struggle overall The as a nationhood peasants. of workers national educated ( show to is intention r the among nationhood of defined. well from far was Macedonia show Macedonia Ottoman on works scholarly many as However, Patriarchate to right the therefore in nation Serbs. were they

See Literature review section in the firstchapter. the in section review See Literature airdk glasnik Carigradski ved to be immune), but through but immune), be to ved

substantial entity or a changeablesubstantial of entity form practice. or

more of a of more n diin I ru ta ti fudt de nt eesrl ipy h lc of lack the imply necessarily not does fluidity this that argue I addition, In the this phase this , as ,

sals eba col n o euerlgos independence religious secure to and schools Serbian establish

toa Empire, Ottoman studies n Serbian In practical nature: practical

n i i rte overlooked rather is it and The second phase, which can be best described as the “guerilla” phase, phase, “guerilla” the as described best be can which phase, second The generally soe ti fudt cmol atiue t Otmn Macedonian Ottoman to attributed commonly fluidity this showed ,

nationhood in Ottoman Macedonia can be divided into two pha two into divided be can Macedonia Ottoman in nationhood

as the “book and pen” phase, when all the Balkan states were trying trying were states Balkan the all when phase, pen” and “book the as

ural population because this is this because population ural whose duty was to propagate Serbian nationhood, like the editors the like nationhood, Serbian propagate to was duty whose airdk glasnik Carigradski

ilmtc circles, diplomatic

suggest. the the nw as known

violence and coercion. As is well understood well is As coercion. and violence Ot partition of Ottoman Macedonia. I do not plan to d to plan not do I Macedonia. Ottoman of partition

5 toman Serbs wanted to enjoy to wanted Serbs toman

In this aspect, I do not plan to show the fluid notions fluid the show to plan not do I aspect, this In

ather, this ather, the the 4

nyocsoal rfre o gu to referred occasionally only

уисо питанје нуфијско e tuge o rcgiin f h Serbi the of recognition for struggle he n h literatu the in

depen

in 1908 when 1908 in

already shown in these works. My works. these in shown already ds

ducation. ducation. on how nationhood is defined is nationhood how on e ta ee the even that re) , millet millet ainod n Ot in nationhood

rs rgltos were regulations press ( üü question nüfüs airdk glasnik Carigradski privileges, namely namely privileges,

from the Greek Greek the from erilla bands erilla , this phase this , urban and and urban , was ), toman ses. ses. eal eal an an : ,

CEU eTD Collection eds.) Nationalism Serbian and Bulgarian Greek, 7 Balka the in Loyalties 6 and nationhood of notion this challenges who Brubaker Rogers with agree I aspect this In to tend scholars th the In touched onlyoccasionall and briefly to comes framework nationhood Yosmaoğlu’s and t contributions Serbian and Bulgarian Greek, propaganda school on Lory Bernard of studies published rare is propaganda Serbian with dealing concretely Literature work. the and Serbia of Archive the from extracted information smaller addition, In scholars. Serbian various by published and prepared were which reports up built I library, digital from Aside sources. analy the on based largely is thesis this literature, and sources the Regarding phase. irredentism Balkan Ottoman for fight pen” and “book the about is thesis this Thus, aside. topic this leave I thesis, the of coherence and length the of sake the For all. violence,whereas Greek and Bulgarian loosened.

Bernard Lory Bernard cadr Marinov, Tchavdar , Vol. 1, Leiden: Brill, Leiden: 1, Vol.

oeia catr I analyze I chapter, eoretical Greek and Bulgarian propaganda campaigns. propaganda Bulgarian and Greek Thi for s ,

, ultimate “Schools for the Destruction of Society: School Propaganda in Bitola 1860 Bitola in Propaganda School Society: of Destruction the for “Schools ws las oe rm h perspective the from done always was s

use this term this use eln wt contested with dealing

“ new aos aeoi, h Ln o Alexander: of Land the Macedonia, Famous

(H. Grandits et. al., eds.), London eds.), al., et. Grandits (H. mlyd atr 190 after employed; by replaced became and failed ly

2013, 2013, airdk glasnik Carigradski

ok n o rlgo ad e and religion how on book

an understanding of understanding an pp. 273 pp.

causally - 333. ”, y, tobegin aims thesis this

nage Hsois f h Balk the of Histories Entangled without referring without

notion Serbian revolutionaryactiv Serbian region i eitd n aall ih h scn “guerilla” second the with parallel in existed it 3

hs vlms r acce are volumes whose

s 5 te mrec o Mcdna nationalism Macedonian of emergence the o Serbian irredentist activities irredentist Serbian

as s

- f nationhood of New York: I.B. Tauris, 2011, pp. 46 pp. 2011, Tauris, I.B. New York:

Ottoman Macedonia, especially when it it when especially Macedonia, Ottoman uain the ducation, Macedonia;

Ottom orin hs tde rsn good present studies These coercion. to However, sinc However, of Ottoman Serbs’ being victims of of victims being Serbs’ Ottoman of Macedonian Identity at the the at Identity Macedonian

what nationhood actual nationhood what n Bitola in an state archives are archives state an

fill relevant to my study. Many Many study. my to relevant ans ing this ities were not mentioned at at mentioned werenot ities

ao tos n imposing in tools major (R. Daskalov and T. Marinov, Marinov, T. and Daskalov (R. 6 sbe nie in online ssible

this gap.this Thva Mrnv on Marinov Tchavdar ,

e Serbian campaign Serbian e was the main tool that tool main the was ,

based on consular consular on based but I use recently recently use I but - 63. -

1912” sis of primary primary of sis

Crossroads of of Crossroads ly presents ly

, present in present Conflicting Conflicting

Serbian Serbian

is is 7 . , CEU eTD Collection propaganda Balkan all not paradoxically, in cont Macedonia Ottoman to on literature hope existing I respect, this In Empire. Ottoman the within recognition national glasnik analyze to Second, borders. Ottoman within Macedonia Ottoman preserve to sovereigntyit Ottomanbecause within acted recognizedand that Firs goals. main two has thesis this summation, In content which seem occasions special in just nationhood title Billig when paper national “banal the of reproduction the the mentioned, directly not is nationhood of content weekly the analyzing when addition, In literature. secondary glasnik Carigradski this In endeavors. diplomatic Serbian found gran for taken be not should circles. diplomatic Serbian the of operation into insight good provide literature, secondary with accompanied reports, consular Serbian glasnik Carigradski From creating a ofbelonging. sense add In term. this of usefulness the questions Brubaker Europe, Western in nationhood “good” and civic to comparison in “bad” and ethnic as Balkans the in nationhood describes and division civic/ethn its rejects ition, I also analyze the importance of the press in disseminating national ideas and in in and ideas national disseminating in press the of importance the analyze also I ition, it a as part of this action this of part as necessary to place this periodical within the context of the Ottoman press, as well as well as press, Ottoman the of context the within periodical this place to necessary methodolo d it, is more than obvious. Namely obvious. than more is it, d ingly reproduced ordinary only ingly a ia pit f iw I attempt I view, of point gical , I confronted these findings with the one found in consular reports and and reports consular in found one the with findings these confronted I , within the diplomatic, political an political diplomatic, the within c iiin Wie oe hoit lk Ens Glnr mhsz this emphasize Gellner Ernest like theorists some While division. ic ted regarding the plausibility of the provided information. Thus, I Thus, information. provided the of plausibility the regarding ted

whose main aim was to cultivate Serbian nationhood and seek and nationhood Serbian cultivate to was aim main whose

like public celebrations, but this was was this but celebrations, public like respect, when dealing with dealing when respect, Carigradski glasnik Carigradski apin atd uvriey gis Ottoman against subversively acted campaigns

, 6 at least two ways. First, to show that, perhaps that, show to First, ways. two least at Carigradski glasnik Carigradski

t, to present Serbia as an actor in the region the in actor an as Serbia present to t, -

n ational news. d cultural contexts of the time the of contexts cultural d o anal to yze my main primary source source primary main my yze

itself is primary source which which source primary is itself

was in Serbia’s best interestsbest Serbia’s in was nationhood on the pages of pages the on nationhood

did not propagate Serbian Serbian propagate not did ism”, as Michael as ism”, also

Carigradski Carigradski done . Various Various . iue to ribute

in the the in

CEU eTD Collection the pagesglasnik, basicallywhat notion ofCarigradski andthis onthe grou meant glasnik. establ the was which of part Macedonia, Ottoman in propaganda national of conductance and preparations Serbian the discusses chapter third The operated. it which within context the know to essential is it periodical, Ottoman an all after was glasnik Carigradski Since operated. periodicals Ottoman which under conditions and regulations theoretical divided is thesis This region. glasnik Carigradski w position this other, the on but region, the in as described best be can Macedonia in Empire Ottoman the and Serbia between relationship words, other In onl the not were Macedonia sovereignty

The fourth and last chapter focuses on Serbian nationhood, how it was propagated in in propagated was it how nationhood, Serbian on focuses chapter last and fourth The

and methodological and Scn, o on ot ht col, hrhs n finally and churches schools, that out point to Second, . a symbiosis. symbiosis. promoted Serbian nationhood, but it also promoted Ottoman image in the the in imageOttoman promoted also it but nationhood, Serbianpromoted into four chapters. In the first chapter I provide literature review and review literature provide I chapter first the In chapters. four into y means in promoting nationhood: promoting in means y On the one hand, Ottomans hand, one the On

considerations. In t In considerations. 7

as built under Ottoman control. For instance For control. Ottoman under built as he second chapter I present present I chapter second he allowed Serbia to build its position its build to Serbia allowed

but there were periodicals too. periodicals were there but ishment

violence in Ottoman Ottoman in violence

f Carigradski of Ottoman press press Ottoman nd.

CEU eTD Collection 8 self and distinctiveness Serbian Orthodox for Serbian the of importance the argued stresses Petrovich Michael Similarly determination. Ćirković, Sima and Dedijer Vladimir Yugoslavia of History th for problems pose not did nevertheless this Patriarchate, were Christians Orthodox all Although Church. Orthodox the through preserved nationhood Serbian their in certain were Macedonia Macedonia Ottoman historio with dealing when take specifically be to need not o emphasized does Macedonia Ottoman regarding literature of bulk The 1.1. on whatBillig Michael dubbed has when c methodological present I end, appropriate the At Macedonia. Ottoman with dealing is definition what and theorists different for means nation/nationhood proc this in press the of importance and nationhood of in employed states Balkan that tools the on theories analyze I second section theoretical the In propaganda. national different of “battlefield” a as Macedonia Ottoman of on fluidity regional the stress works asnationhood inthe region well as anthropological the of most While Macedonia. this In ChapterLiteratureI. Revie

Vladimir Dedijer et al., etal., Vladimir Dedijer Literature r

rpis like graphies, is scin aaye liter analyze I section first r discussed here. discussed r eview History of Yugoslavia, Yugoslavia, of History

h Se the 8 ,

ulse i 17 i Egih n eie b Srin itras like historians Serbian by edited and English in 1974 in published ba case rbian

The stances that traditional nationalist and revisionist literature revisionist and nationalist traditional that stances The

its “banal nat tr ta contributes that ature w, Theory w, and Methodology

multicul New York: McGraw New edao t poe ht h Srs iig n Ottoman in living Serbs the that prove to endeavor , at f h same the of part ionalism”. 8 tural character, and multiethnic

s imtial opsd National opposed. diametrically is - Hill, 1974. Hill,

o u udrtnig n Ottoman on understanding our to ess. Furthermore, I analyze what what analyze I Furthermore, ess. eir nationhood. For instance, For nationhood. eir millet

ne te Ecumenical the under onsiderations, based based onsiderations,

historians focus historians focus

the

creation

the - CEU eTD Collection 2000. Monographs, 12 11 Pres Chicago of University Chicago: 10 Religion: The Popular 9 this on population local of responses the investigate to was intention main abov from population local the on nationhood impose to tools r how on context valuable a presents activities propaganda national Bulgarian Ottoman in Nationhood of Politics the and recent A Macedoniaand issueswithGreeks, its etc. Albanians o most state, independent an presents now Wars Balkan the in conquered Macedonia Ottoman of part Serbian the since addition, In all. at mentioned not were region the in endeavors Serbian the while Macedonia, Politics Difference Cowan’s Jane 2000: in published books edited two Greeksnot 1870 Macedonia, Karakasidou’s Anastasia ne to prone and fluid rather but fixed and clear not most hand, other the On exist. keep the as Church

For more information on Serbian national historiography see Peter T. Alter, Alter, T. Peter see historiography national Serbian on information more For Macedonia: Macedonia: The Macedonian Question: Culture, Historiography, Politics Historiography, Culture, Question: Macedonian The Anastasia Karakasidou’s Karakasidou’s Anastasia 9

. 12

boo

sd ad ouig n ree n Blai a te ags paes Yosmaoğlu players, largest the as Bulgaria and Greece on focusing and aside 11

oh f hs wrs concen works these of Both but have a multi a have but , and Victor Roudometof’s Victor and , The Politics of Identity and Difference and Identity of Politics The ks

on Ottoman Macedonia Ottoman on

- 1990 Millet Millet er of the nation, although as said, the Serbian Serbian the said, as although nation, the of er

10 System and Syncretism”, Syncretism”, and System ils f ha, il o Bod Psae t Nationho to Passages Blood: of Hills Wheat, of Fields , where the author argues that contemporary G contemporary that argues author the where , f the scholars focus on difficulties regarding nationhood in the FYR the in nationhood regarding difficulties on focus scholars the f Fields of Wheat, Hills of Blood: Passages to Nationhood in Greek in Nationhood to Passages Blood: of Hills Wheat, of Fields revisionist - ethnic and multicultural andethnic s, 1997.

campaigns

literature underlines literature eligion and education, and later coercion later and education, and eligion The Macedonian Question: Culture, Historiography, Culture, Question: Macedonian The is trate

İpek in Ottoman Macedonia. Ottoman in

( Macedonia, 1878 Macedonia, Jane Cowan, ed. Jane Cowan, Serbian Studies Serbian

9 n re ad o ls etn o Bulgarian on extent less a to and Greek on

Yosmaoğlu’s

(

Victor Roudometof, ed. Roudometof, Victor

background. A similar thesis i thesis similar A background. Macedonia: gotiation. For example, this this example, For gotiation.

, Vol. 9, 1995, 88 1995, 9, Vol. , ), how nationhood in this region was was region this in nationhood how London: Pluto Press, Pluto 2000. London: - Blood Ties: Religion, Violence, Violence, Religion, Ties: Blood 1908 e. Nevertheless, e.

The Politics of Identity and Identity of Politics The millet A It . “Nineteenth lt

hough leaving Serbian Serbian leaving hough focuses on Greek and Greek on focuses - reek Macedonians are Macedonians reek od in Greek Macedonia, Macedonia, Greek in od ), Boulder: East European European East Boulder: ), 94. and Church did not did Church and

imposition, based imposition, , w , - Century Yosmaoğlu

ere used as as used ere s argued in argued s is

n in one Serbian Serbian ’s ’s

CEU eTD Collection 13 of position the briefon extensively wrote who Jagodić Miloš is exceptions the of One introduction. with accompanied diplomats Serbian of letters private and reports consular publish analysis into go not do scholars Serbian historiography. Serbian in interest limited received have Macedonia in activities national Serbian Moreover, propaganda themselves. ho l educat and urban of nationhood fluid the to out points prop Serbian and Greek, Bulgarian arguesthat propaganda.BulgarianGreek He and with propaganda entangled religion. educ on focused is work Lory’s phase “guerilla” the phase pen” and “book first teac labeling propaganda, national disseminating upon touches Lory Macedonia. Ottoman in propaganda “ the for “Schools Lory’s Yosmaoğlu, to addition In fixed.” free render would that process the in catalyst ultimate “the as gospelwhich thecouldbe preached toaskeptical ofnationalism audience” how shows she Rather, ground. the on appropriated was above from imposed nationhood exactly how on information Ot in findings on trtr i uuly trbtd o the to attributed usually is iterature Famous Macedonia, the Land of Alexander of Land the Macedonia, Famous

Yosmaoğlu tee akn propaganda Balkan these w 13

On the other hand, Marinov presents valuable insights into the working of Serbian Serbian of working the into insights valuable presents Marinov hand, other the On , Blood Ties…, Blood aganda contributed to the creation of Macedonian nationalism. Marinov also also Marinov nationalism. Macedonian of creation the to contributed aganda toman archives. Yet, it is doubtful in what extent the state elites can provide can elites state the extent what in doubtful is it Yet, archives. toman

schools 5.

education and religion, and education

disseminated national propaganda, while propaganda, national disseminated

recruited students for revolutionary national cause. However, However, cause. national revolutionary for students recruited

to, thus ation, efforts rural

nlec Mcdna ntoaim rte ta on than rather nationalism, Macedonian influence h ois omnay on commentary omits he , ouain Hwvr Marinov However, population. ” provide useful frameworksuseful provide” 10

used as used es s poesoa ptit” h i the in who patriots” “professional as hers Destruction of Society” and Marinov’s Marinov’s and Society” of Destruction d toa Mcdnas which Macedonians, Ottoman ed of the sources. Most of them rather them of Most sources. the of h otefciemdu throu medium effective most the h iprac of importance the - floating allegiances hard and and hard allegiances floating

he also addresses how addresses also he

other other

connected to Balkan Balkan to connected ,

turned to violence s oe ou on focus more is aspects such as as such aspects

education in in education

gh in in in

CEU eTD Collection зборник, Новопазарски century) 20th the of beginning and 19th the of end the at surroundings and Pazar Novi on glasnik' ('Carigradski 17 glasnik 16 15 часопис, ( 14 Empire. commu Serbian sparse among belonging of sense a and nationhood glasnik competitors Bulgarian and Greek its of policies determined region the in M Serbian ago. century a half than more published literature to nature: in descriptive surroundin glasnik Carigradski by published him after paper the discussed who scholars all for basis a as served period this on account extensive glasnik Carigradski Serbian fashion, stereotypical the in presented are Ottomans the Macedonia Ottoman in engaging before shortly policy the N

Dragana Dragana “ PetarMitropan, üf Miloš Jagodić, “ Jagodić, Miloš ldn Virijević, Vladan y plan is to present Serbian propaganda not as a minor player, but as pla as but player, minor a as not propaganda Serbian present to is plan y ü Serbian nation in the Ottoman the in nation Serbian Qeto: rbe o ofca rcgiin f h Srin ain n uky 1894 Turkey, in nation Serbian the of recognition official of Problem Question: s ) ,

http://www.riznicasrpska.net/muzika/index.php?topic=629.0 Vol. 57, 2008, pp. 343 2008, pp. 57, Vol. lyd n motn role important an played irredentist nation.

Stojanović Novičić Stojanović s s ecie in described as gs

Dragana Stojanović Novičić who wrote on musical articles articles musical on wrote who Novičić Stojanović Dragana 14 Нуфуско питанје: проблем званичног признавања српске нације у Турској, 1894 Турској, у нације српске признавања званичног проблем питанје: Нуфуско Цариградски

“ 'Цариградски глсник' о Новом Пазару и околици крајем 19. и почетком 20. 20. почетком и 19. крајем околици и Пазару Новом о глсник' 'Цариградски

activities remai 16

lo received also Vol. 2010, 111 33,

it consists of consists it and , Napisi o muzici u Carigradskom glasniku glasniku Carigradskom u muzici o Napisi

- h ftr cus o eet i Otmn Macedonia Ottoman in events of course future the 54. Vladan Virijević Virijević Vladan

гласник

h pgs f hs paper this of pages the ical

ns uninvestigated s n Ottoman an as “(Carigradski glasnik), glasnik), “(Carigradski

Empire, and also presented detailed outline of the Serbian Serbian the of outline detailed presented also and Empire, a the

was 23. compilation of compilation

limited attention of the Serbian scholars. The most most The scholars. Serbian the of attention limited

provided who 11

- wrote on the position of Novi Pazar and Pazar Novi of position the on wrote eba periodical Serbian I addition, In .

, by

so Iso plan Carigradski glasnik Carigradski Јужни

. Petar Mitropan in 1936 in Mitropan Petar 17

in 1885 in

The role of of role The oee, h apoc th approach the However, “destroy” to want who those as

. Last accessed: May 30, 2014. 30, May accessed: Last . преглед ( Articles about Music in Carigradski Carigradski in Music Articles about to fill this gap. fill this to . However, even in his works his in even However, . the overlooked overlooked the , Vol. 5, 1928 5, Vol. .

15 – airdk glasnik Carigradski

Recently, works were works Recently, it propagated Serbian Serbian propagated it iy n h Ottoman the in nity ’ s articles and refers and articles s yer whose policies policies whose yer

- 1910 .

, and this work this and ,

alongside the the alongside ulse in published ) Carigradski , Историјски Историјски y s is use ey

- 1910“ века“

the the its in ,

CEU eTD Collection HistoryQuarterly, European 18 Balkan period Ottoman the In guidance. spiritual provided leaders religious while affairs t leading while symphony in acted leaders religious and political roots, Byzantine term’s this to According “symphonia”. in leaders political with acting were which Churches autocephalous had states Ottoman the during nation the of keepers as Churches Orthodox respective their present myths These state. the to legitimacy provided thus and present, and past connected which nationhood, and Orthodoxy combine sta Balkan all how described Leustean Lucian nation building process,Balkanmilestoneincreation as it a took of states nationhood. the in Thus affiliation. religious their was citizens national future these about thing certain ways.” alternative of number a in evolved have might definition originally devised ‘vanguards’whose by intellectual imprinteduponsocial ethnic groups were observed, has Kitromilides Paschalis As nationhood. shaping in tools main as education and Orthodoxy, i.e. religion primarily employed countries three these so, doing In citizens. national into subjects Orthodox from transformed be to had states or Bulgarian Greek, the within living Populations programs. expansionist of creation co these of all statuses, (Bulgaria) until wait to had others the while Empire, Ottoman the from status independent gained that first with and simultaneously from transition The 1.2.

Paschalis M. Kitromilides, “’Imagined Communities’ and the Origins of the national Questi national the of Origins the and Communities’ “’Imagined Kitromilides, M. Paschalis Theoreticalconsiderations the Berlin Congress Berlin the o ban n needn status independent an obtain to esaetgte.Nml,pltcl edr eei hreo administrative of charge in were leaders political Namely, together. state he millet millet

untries were engaged in conflicting nation conflicting in engaged were untries Vol. 19, 1989, 19, Vol.

the

to nation was a gradual and dynamic process which did not develop develop not did which process dynamicand gradual awas nation to (Serbia, Montenegro, and Romania) and Montenegro, (Serbia,

same intensity throughout the Balkans. For instance, Greece was was Greece instance, For Balkans. the throughout intensity same

period. Namely, during the “glorious” medieval past these these past medieval “glorious” the during Namely, period. 159

- 60.

12 es

tes created and fostered political myths that that myths political fostered and created tes Nvrhls, ept (semi despite Nevertheless, .

“c or the Young Turk revolution Turk Young the or oncepts of national identity identity national of oncepts - 18 building processes building

hs s o a, h only the say, to is This on in the Balkans”, Balkans”, the in on - )independent

Serbian and the the and

CEU eTD Collection andHistory, Society 23 22 so Heaven. of Kingdom and chose death is myth the of heart the In state. Serbian the In Empire. Ottoman the and Serbia between 21 ageis associated. golden Serbian whose reign 20 421 2008, No.4,, 19 and religion, as such collectivity, of pea markers existing of reappropriation the the through together and elites Macedonia, Ottoman “in out, pointed Yosmaoğlu communities” imagined stable very old, very for basis “the AndersonBenedictfor was religionwhichground.the Eventhe on accepted and implemented impo because and create to enough Education not were religion failed. ultimately citizens national into population Macedonian Ottoman el national Serbian and Bulgarian, Greek, that process building national this However, Macedonia. Ottoman in nationhood the shaping in in used building nation “domestic” the in used just not were myths political These current in order political affairs.” previous the of actualization an presuppose myths “political time same remind that politics and Orthodoxy of cohesion perfect Sava, Saint of cult the dynasty, Nemanjić past support. gain and cohesion enhance nations. within intact le political

Ibid, 25. Ibid, Cited in Sumit Guha “The Polit “The Guha Sumit in Cited was Sava Leustean, N. Lucian Kosovo myth is based on the battle at the Kosovo polje (Field of the Blackbirds) that took place in 1389 1389 in place took that Blackbirds) the of (Field polje Kosovo the at battle the on based is myth Kosovo s ntoa hre etc. heroes national , expansi 19

the founder of the autocephalous autocephalous the of founder the Balkan dr wr rpae wt Otmn ns N ones. Ottoman with replaced were aders - the 25. did above from notion this sing onist programs too. Greece, Bulgaria and later Serbia employed the same tools tools same the employed Serbia later andBulgaria Greece, too. programs onist 22 Vol. 45, No. 1, 2003, 149. 1, No. 45, Vol.

political elites regularly used regularly elites political millet

“Orthodoxy and political myths in Balkan national identities”, identities”, national Balkan in myths political and “Orthodoxy

and Orthodoxy thus preserved the Greek, Bulgarian and Serbian Serbian and Bulgarian Greek, the preserved thus Orthodoxy and o isac, eba myths Serbian instance, For ics of Identity and Enumeration in India c. 1600 c. India in Enumeration and Identity of ics

These myths usually revolve around revolve usually myths These

Serbian mythology this battle marked the beginning of an end for end an of beginning the marked battle this mythology Serbian Slavic the in nationhood of sense Serbian Orthodox Church and third son of Stefan Nemanja, with with Nemanja, Stefan of son third and Church Orthodox Serbian - called Prince Lazar’s Last Supper where Prince deliberately deliberately Prince where Supper Last Lazar’s Prince called 20 13 ites envisioned as a viable viable a as envisioned ites

and

and in fact still use this imagery in order to order in imagery this use still fact in and

n the t eesrl ma ta it that mean necessarily ot

the ooo myth Kosovo evertheless ar

23 e based on the golden age of the the of age golden the on based e nation of nation

could not assure nationhood. As nationhood. assure not could , -

1990”, 1990”,

a eiiu laes staye leaders religious 21

past glory, while at the the at while glory, past National Identities, Identities, National

- plan to turn the turn to plan hc peetd the presented which speaking population population speaking at wr brought were sants Comparative Studies in Studies Comparative

process, but where where but process, glorious medieval medieval glorious

would Vol.10, Vol.10,

local local

be d

CEU eTD Collection 1997, 527. 3, no. 26 25 24 daily their lived they which in worlds public local the with that identify larger vastly to were that came communities individuals newspapers, and literature schools, in nation communi same that of part as themselves imagine to and community, certain a to belonging of sense a develop conduit modern this Anderson c were and revolutions French and Industrial the during spread which construct European Western the is nationhood that argue theorists the of Most it. on theories are there as nation/nationhood on definitions endless the narrativ to and realities these reduce realities to attempts historical of fluidity cultural the both exemplifies nationalism nationhood. Therefore, Lloyd nationhood? is what Kramer that about writing “historical stated The crucial notion religious affil nationalized r the words, other In religious. communi distinction religious of other towards sense a preserved which institution supranational a was Church Orthodox Church buildin for basis stable a such not was religion violence.” through differences reworked those of politicization the through

Kitromilides, “’Imagined Communities’ and…”, 178 and…”, Communities’ “’Imagined Kitromilides, Yosmaoğlu Lloyd Kramer, “Historical Narratives and the Meaning of Nationalism”, of Meaning the and Narratives “Historical Kramer, Lloyd es

as the keeper of the of keeper the as , Blood Ties… Blood

different versions of the of versions different iation into national iation into

around which all revolves around ty. In other words, other In ty.

, 4. , ruae ad ovyd hog mdr communi modern through conveyed and irculated

nation were precisely this preciselythis were nation

one. setv sae i te is of midst the in states espective was the press. Concretely, periodicals allowed people to to people allowed periodicals Concretely, press. the was ties, but in essence this distinction was not national but but national not was distinction this essence in but ties, 25

Orthodox Chu Orthodox

the press creates a nation a creates press -

179. order.” e propaganda 14 g nationhood, and Balkan myths on Orthodox on myths Balkan and nationhood, g

rch and used them used and rch 26

– According to this, there are as many as are there this, to According

campaigns

myths. Journal of the History of Ideas of History the of Journal :

As Kitromilides noticed, thenoticed, Kitromilides As “reading the stories of their their of stories the “reading

ain ulig process building nation

in Ottoman Macedonia is in

in order to transform to order in ain en. For means. cation 24

In other words, other In , Vol. 58, Vol. , es

CEU eTD Collection 30 29 28 27 n Therefore, and practice state to accordance in institutionalized is which form cultural and not and practice, T conductinganalysis concerning essentially are wrong: nationalism Reframed. Nationalism T of national ideas. call should nationalist.” less still and national necessarily not are of terms in above from nation/nationhood as perceived being indust from away far were which states Balkan the in nationalism growing industrializat and structure economic with novelties ofworld themodern l Additionally ives.”

udrtn ntoho, rbkr asserts, Brubaker nationhood, understand o cr was above from nationhood studying in approach his Rogers Brubaker, Brubaker, Rogers Cited in 530. Ibid, Ibid

as communities, as substantial, enduring collectivities. collectivities. although enduring substantial, as communities, as of discussions are nationhood of discussions Most national , 529. , rial and capitalistic center capitalistic and rial 27

not only refer to ordinary people like peasants, but it also has to be applied on applied be to has also it but peasants, like people ordinary to refer only not

Rogers Brubaker, Brubaker, Rogers In this context, nationhood could be defined as a sense of belongin of sense a as defined be could nationhood context, this In

how how the assumptions, hopes, needs, longings and interests of ordinary people, which people, ordinary of interests and longings needs, hopes, assumptions, the

ation/natio workers , Ernest Gellner and Eric Hobsbawm see the origins of national ideas connected connected ideas national of origins the see Hobsbawm Eric and Gellner Ernest , they exist exist they Nationalism Reframed Nationalism

substantive entity. In this respect, nationhood has to be seen as seen be to has nationhood respect, this In entity. substantive

–

nhood depends on the pra the on depends nhood urban and educated middle and upper class upper and middle educated and urban Ethnicity without Groups without Ethnicity – According to Brubaker, the foundations which theorists use when when use theorists which foundations the Brubaker, to According

and how they came to exist exist cameto they how and

“cannot be understood unless also analyzed fr analyzed also unless understood be “cannot s .

Hobsbawm rightly noticed that this approach in studying studying in approach this that noticed rightly Hobsbawm , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996, 13. 1996, Press, University Cambridge Cambridge: , ion. , Cambridge , 15 nations. nations.

28 the

–

ctice of the state and state the of ctice

oee, hs oin os o epan the explain not does notion this However, is muchdisputed. is

nation should be seen as a category of of category a as seen be should nation That That Nations a Nations - London: Harvard University Press, 2004, 2. Press, 2004, University Harvard London: 29

they exist is taken for granted, granted, for taken is exist they wud d ta ti appropriation this that add would I iticized re understood as real entities, entities, as real understood re 30

also

–

who act as actwho

by Rogers Brubaker in in Brubaker Rogers by is subjected to change: to subjected is om below, that is that below, om g fostered with fostered g

disseminators state system. state

political political

what I what

CEU eTD Collection 36 35 34 33 32 31 individual be can someone that possibility counte Serbs as themselves categorize who based nationhood, state ambiguities. avoid work.” highly problematic is distinction such that assertsBrubaker on based commonly is which nationhood with dealing when instance, analyzing of ways develop to case. this in means identity collective what providing respect this defini without etc. ethnicities confronting nationhood, fluid wher Macedonia Ottoman on literature existence. and meaning their questioning without groups” “bounded language reality social not are groups”, “bounded calls he which etc., race ethnicity, nation, like terms Brubaker substantive enti n ationhood is applied and appropriated differently. For this reason, this For differently. appropriated and applied is ationhood

Brubaker, Brubaker, 16 Ibid, Ibid, 144 Ibid, 146. Ibid, Brubaker, Yosmaoğlu r 35 - state nationhood. state

- 21.

For this reason, he proposes state proposes he reason, this For

46. used in such analysis is often taken often is analysis such in used further elaborated t elaborated further s Ethnicity Ethnicity without..., Ethnicity ,

Blood Ties... Blood n h Otmn aeoi cud have could Macedonia Ottoman the in

and should not be used as a basis when basis a as used be not should and omol rfr t ntoho a “ as nationhood to refers Yosmaoğlu tyBrubaker with, butrather as without... Although Brubaker does not elaborate in detail state detail in elaborate not does Brubaker Although

, 4. ,

on 36 , 4. ,

2 Nevertheless, if Nevertheless, the -

3. his statement his

few examples he provided, it could be concluded that those that concluded be could it provided, he examples few

nationalism a

Serb and Serb

n nt Ottomans not and shlr oewemnl ue olcie identities, collective use overwhelmingly scholars e in - Ottomanism

framed an 16

ihu rfrig to referring without Ethnicity without Groups without Ethnicity said,

for gra for

Ottoman at the same time same the at Ottoman

and counter and

state a

33 changeable analyzing nationalism. analyzing nted. In other words, other In nted.

ai fr olcie identity” collective for basis In order to avoid it, avoid to In order

as state ideology state as n h Otmn state Ottoman the in - rmd counter framed; and “it is expected to do too much much too do to expected is “it and ng it and taking it for granted. In granted. for it taking and it ng -

form of practice.form state nationhood in order to order in nationhood state

budd groups “bounded we are not dealing with dealing not are we civic/ethnic distinction, distinction, civic/ethnic - where he argued he where 32 framed and counter and framed - did not exclude the exclude not did

, this suggests that that suggests this ,

state; and as third third as and state; Brubaker suggests Brubaker ntcd hs in this noticed I

This implies that implies This scholars

r expressing are 31 expressing

. without without refer to refer ” 34

that For a -

CEU eTD Collection nat of forms banal 1995 In It Church.of the Orthodox autocephalous wasordinary Serbian also on propagated days. they when celebrations Sava Saint in like stressed, directly was it when be to meant it it N ground. the on facts than states these both of thinking wishful more represented hand, other the On thelocalinto population. agenda More Macedonia. consular propaganda, Unlike Macedonia. Ottoman pro which Affairs Foreign of Ministry Serbian the and consulates between correspondence private of consisted Ottoman the in community Serbian the promote to was aim whose Ottoman in activities Serbian and Macedonia understanding for grounds provide literature secondary comprised materials archival bas is thesis My 1.3. say on nationhood itself,except can that it much be defined inmany ways. possibility still provides still

Methodological considerations Methodological

Billig published a study on what he called “banal nationalism”, i.e. on common and common on i.e. nationalism”, “banal called he what on study a published Billig interplays be interplays state

an usef - framed and counter and framed ed on ed h rltd rcs o establishing of process related the ionalism that became part of daily of part became that ionalism Nati Serb. Ottoman concretely, ie nih it polm ta Srin reets atvte faced activities irredentist Serbian that problems into insight vide ul commentary ul Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski tween Ottoman and Bal and Ottoman tween eot rva a agr ra o dvriis ht xse i Ottoman in existed that diversities of array larger a reveal reports the primary source primary the

hy ihihe chronic highlighted they airdk glasnik Carigradski f oslr eot. hs tps of types These reports. consular of

on how Serbian intellectuals defined nationhood, and whatand definednationhood, intellectuals Serbian how on - state nationhood at the same time. time. same the at nationhood state nod a nt ut rpgtd o propagated just not was onhood s both as Carigradski glasnik Carigradski

kan states, kan 17

wh n Ottoman an Ottoman and Serbian propaganda tool tool propaganda Serbian and Ottoman life and p and life

c had ich and rbes ih iognzd Serbian disorganized with problems

the inability the , accompanied with additional with accompanied ,

enetrated into routines: thus, routines: into enetrated a -

eba ppr n Istanbul in paper Serbian province pcfc oe n Serbian in role specific

ore tgte with together sources

glorified the founder the glorified This again does not does again This to imbed to

seil occasions special n . Consular reports Consular . evertheless Serbianess

in in ,

CEU eTD Collection Pacific, Contemporary 40 39 38 press”, 37 used; regularly was discourse connect primarily topics covered periodical this of Authors chapters, next in shown be will As people a to came and stories life inspiring on columns examined Connell nationhood. Times conducted Connell John addition, In of the nation/country,theemphasis and on praise ‘them’, and ‘us’ of classifications and forms language nationalist both via reproduced being despite that revealed analysis Their Turkey. so, doing n “banal Turkey, in this how examined Yılmaz Mustafa and in reproduced was nationalism” Köse Aynur study this by Inspired nationhood people waved consciously contin reminded but unnoticed are ationalism” and examined the content of content the examined and ationalism”

desired Fiji nationhood. Fiji desired Ibid, 909. Ibid, 910. Ibid, Aynur Köse and Mustafa Yılmaz Mustafa and Köse Aynur John Connell, “The “The Connell, John Ulk Tre, ii represents Fiji Turkey, Unlike . Nationalities Papers, Papers, Nationalities

entailed how ideal Fiji nationhood should Fiji nationhoodshould entailedbe how ideal got

they came to conclusion that 94% of the exam the of 94% that conclusion to came they

February 3, 2010 when there were no holidays or festivals that reproduced “direct “direct reproduced that festivals or holidays no were there when 2010 3, February without evenwithout beingaware ofit. accustomed ; Vol. 19, No. 1, 2007, pp. 85 2007, pp. 1, No. 19, Vol. ii Times Fiji

it is rather a flag attached to public to attached flag a rather is it

Vol. 40, No. 6, 2012, 909 6, No. 40, Vol.

o t to

In other words, words, other In

and the Good Citizen: Constructing Modernity and Nationhood in Fiji”, Fiji”, in Nationhood and Modernity Constructing Citizen: Good the and , hem

“Flagging Turkishness: the reproduction of banal nationalism in the Turkish Turkish the in nationalism banal of reproduction the Turkishness: “Flagging

the Turkish daily press. These authors These press. daily Turkish the the the the Hne epe are people Hence . u

ously.” Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski Serbian nation was constantly praised; predominantly predominantly praised; constantly was nation Serbian conclusion that this periodical engaged in engaged periodical this that conclusion a iia cs suy n ii eaiig h daily the examining Fiji, in study case similar a -

109.

38 Fiji Time Fiji common interests orcommon 37 36 daily Turkish papers Turkish daily 36 very diverse society without without society diverse very the

As Billig stated, it is not a flag which has been has which flag a not is it stated, Billig As 18

everyday lives of ordinary citizens who have have who citizens ordinary of lives everyday s’ c s’ constructed.

olumns on brave and determined local local determined and brave on olumns constantly reminded on symbols of of symbols on reminded constantly buildings that pass unnoticed pass that buildings an also employed “banal nationalism”. “banal employed also ined material was in connection to to connection in was material ined ed with Serbs; “we” and “others” and “we” Serbs; with ed riay a, “nationhood day, ordinary 40

published on this day this on published chos history.” a e an ordinary day day ordinary an e clearly defined defined clearly the 39 creation of of creation

because because

was Fiji . The The In CEU eTD Collection and press Ottoman it. propagate own its had that certain also is It nationalism”. “banal on study his in shown w nationhood, state his but counter clashes, ethnic/civic avoid to alternative proposes He it. avoid problematic be to provedwhich recent conclude, To was cultivatingeven nationhood wh analyzed Connell etc. articles in covered were culture and tradition writers, Serbian the - Sultan tt nat state eiiin of definition As we will see in the next chapter, same mechanism was employed in the the in employed was mechanism same chapter, next the in see will we As . e have t havee ,

where readers where ionho , “banal nationalism” in nationalism” “banal ,

theorists on nationalism on theorists o accept that nationhood is part of the everyday discourses everydaythe of part is nationhood that accept o d lo do also od

ainod etniey sd drc” n “aa” ainls to nationalism “banal” and “direct” used extensively nationhood,

were constantly were term

en there was no wasen there o provide not . N . evertheless, as Brubaker is also aware, it is difficult to difficult is it aware, also Brubakeris as evertheless, the

like Brubaker like 19 press is press reminded on the presence of presence the on reminded

uh I sie h dfiute t define to difficulties the spite In much. explicit a dominant discourse whose main aim aim main whose discourse dominant

question the notion of nationhood of notion the question

cause and for need it Carigradski glasnik Carigradski Thus, s Thus, s

Köse, the

Ottoman state Ottoman , as Billighasas , . -

framed and and framed Yılmaz and Yılmaz , which , ,

CEU eTD Collection esrhp rcie n usa Cruas f h Drcoae f esrhp 1865 Censorship of Directorate the of Circulars Russia: 2014. in http://web.princeton.edu/sites/english/csbm/papers/censorship/censorship_russia.pdf Practice the with Censorship case the was which press the r of Turk freedom Young complete bring not did revolution 1905 the addition, In censors. the of arbitrariness for room no almost left that issues particular on circulars of hundreds and statute Ru the arbitrary, was censorship whose Ottomans the unlike was that, difference major only The 1864. in issued regulation press Ottoman the with case the was it as model French same the on based censors the first appeared, the as periodicals soon as private Namely, affairs. press the to comes it when Empire Ottoman the as path identical almost 42 For legislation. Ottoman Sansür Döneminde Abdülhamid from exempted were offices foreign post capitulations to due because control under it put to able never were Ottomans the However, abroad. regulations 41 that public periodicals words, other the In rumors. “capture of providers persecute and to than information rather opinion” collect to order in spies sent state the and banned, coffeehous 19 the In fire. with destroyedthem IV even successor laterMurat his occasions,while several coffeehousesin the the to threat potential a as seen was rumors Spreading curtailed. be to needed that threat a as coffeehouses as such spaces public perceived Ottomans the when periods earlier the in clear was This Ottomans. the for of freedom the of notion whole the that clear was it processes different through passed important. most the being censorship periodicals, monitoring with associated already had Europe appeared, newspaper Turkish when 1831 In late. quite newspapers, especially periodicals, of publication the introduced Empire Ottoman the states, European leading the to comparison In

For instance, the Russian Empire that resembled to the Ottoman Empire in many ways passed earlier through through earlier passed ways many in Empire Ottoman the to resembled that Empire Russian the instance, For ChapterI In this part the press coming from abroad will not be dissussed. Foreign press was also subjected to to subjected also was press Foreign dissussed. be not will abroad from coming press the part this In

and examinations that was conducted by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Ottoman embasies embasies Ottoman and Affairs Foreign of Ministry the by conducted was that examinations and e vlto a wl. o cnie nomto o te rs i te usa Epr see Empire Russian the in press the on information concise For well. as evolution - tt rltosi ws ruh t a ifrn lvl Cfehue wr rarely were Coffeehouses level. different a to brought was relationship state I .Ottoman periodicals during Hamidian and earlyYoung

etr, ih h apaac o te is Otmn eidcl, the periodicals, Ottoman first the of appearance the with century,

(Censorship during the period of Abdülhamid II) Abdülhamid of period the during (Censorship TurkPeriod (1876

social order so it was not surprising that Süleyman I banned banned I Süleyman that surprising not was it so order social hip was immediatelly introduced. Moreover, 1865 press law was was law press 1865 Moreover, introduced. immediatelly was hip 20

the press would be quite abstract concept abstract quite be would press the - oe nomto see information more 1909) 41

h frt fiil Ottoman official first the . Istanbul: Ba Istanbul: . ssians issued censorship censorship issued ssians . Last accessed May 21, May accessed Last . Fatmagül Demirel’s II. II. Demirel’s Fatmagül 42 ğ

lam From the start the From , 2007. , Paul Foote, Foote, Paul

- were were 1904, 1904, - CEU eTD Collection 44 Nineteenth the coffeehouses the on details Turkey 43 the on regulations state the to reduced be cannot relationship this of nature real the where d’Abdul jours derniers aux Constantinople Fesch’s historiographyconventionalPaul(e.g. in suggested oftenwas aspress, the freedomof whe censorship strict by marked period a simply not was era Hamidian The press. Ottoman the in case isolated an as seen be can periods these of neither that is argument My regime. Turk I chapter this In criticism oftheir regimeas thatfreedom. fallingwithin consider not did apparently Turks Young the but 1908, in regime the by granted was press sta vulgar most the with up Ottoman the in differently very seen are put morals “public replied ambassador the lampooning,” to had politicians British that meant press the of freedom s generalOttoman this The govern. illustrates London to in ambassador way Ottoman the and best politician British the a between conversation for looking still was that regime Turk Young new the for historical than an context actual inte specific the of consequence a more was introduced was press the of freedom when period only The ideas. and news subversive disseminating not were houses publishing that insure to regulatio state the evolved, they As periodicals. with deal to way best the for looking was state Ottoman the centuries, 20th and 19th the Throughout the authorities. of eyes the in rumors than threat larger became coffeehouses in commented and read

Selim Deringil,Selim Uğur te, and attacks on the August Person are very dangerous.” very are Person August the on attacks and te, proias ee u t sep ad h ery on Tr rgm dd o hv full have not did regime Turk Young early the and sleep, to put were periodicals n , Unp , Kömeçoğlu, Kömeçoğlu, ublished Ph.D. Dissertation, B Dissertation, Ph.D. ublished 43

- Century Ottoman Empire“, Empire“, Ottoman Century Well

Historical and Sociological Approach to Public Space: The Case of Islamic Coffeehouses in in Coffeehouses Islamic of Case The Space: Public to Approach Sociological and Historical will deal with Ottoman periodicals during the Hamidian and early Young Young early and Hamidian the during periodicals Ottoman with deal will - Protected Domains, Domains, Protected

tance. When a British politician told the ambassador that “in Britain the Britain“in that ambassador the told politician British a tance. When - state relations in the 19th century see Cengiz Kirli, Cengiz see century 19th the in relations state

oğaziçi oğaziçi London nt, since 1908 Public Islam and the Common Good. Good. Common the and Islam Public University: Institute of Social Sciences, 2001, 63 2001, Sciences, Social of Institute University: - New York: I.B. Tauris, 1998, Tauris, 1998, I.B. New York: - Hamid 21

- 1909 could be seen as an experimental year experimental an 1909 could beseenas ). It was a complex state complex a was It ).

ns tried to curb their evolution so as as so evolution their curb to tried ns 44

In this light the freedom of the of freedom the light this In 143. “ Leiden: Leiden: Brill,2004. Coffehouses: Public Opinion in in Opinion Public Coffehouses:

- press

relationship - more For 74. CEU eTD Collection That closed. was embassy French the and Egypt occupied Napoleon when 1798 in end an to Nouvelles de Bulletin periodica publishing in interested introd 15 only was periodicals, particularly late press, Muslim the Spain, the from emigrated Jews by from onwards Empire Ottoman the in founded were houses printing While 2 Ottoman Periodicals2.1. state and r the periodwhole. as a not, is andperiod the of politics the with do to more regimehas latter the in press the of freedom complete or former the of censorship strict to them reducing periodicals both of but post publications, of and content themselves the to intervention state the of result hav as Namely, period. that delegitimize to tool a as post Hamidian the of oppression the of notion the perpetuated initial actually which press the Ottoman the on that scholarship out pointing by period this deconstructs which literature recent on build I Ottoman audience, consumer the state on Tanzimat the through regulations state ac into taken be to needs also periodicals and Sultan the between collaboration the but press, .1. count. Thus I divided this chapter this divided I Thus count. e argued, the well the argued, e 1. - Hamidian period where anything that was connected with Abdülhamid’s rule was used used was rule Abdülhamid’s with connected was that anything where period Hamidian

cd o h Otmn Empire Ottoman the to uced Ottoman periodicals and stateOttoman periodicalsand regulations: - press relations behin relations press

regime and the freedom of the early Young Turk regime, was created in the the in created was regime, Turk Young early the of freedom the and regime , published by the French embassy in 1795. This French endeavor came came endeavor French This 1795. in embassy French the by published ,

- - known portrayal of the vagaries of Hamidian censorship were not the the not were censorship Hamidian of vagaries the of portrayal known aiin ieaue Teeoe prahn tee w periods two these approaching Therefore literature. Hamidian d the official regulation scene, regulation official the d s of the Ottoman presss ofthewhompublications were to Ottoman targeted. ls, the first to appear to first the ls,

into three main part main three into n h 19 the in , Hamidian, and Young Turk eras, Turk Young and Hamidian, , egulations(1831 22 th

Donald

etr. eas te toas ee not were Ottomans the Because century.

The

on Ottoman soi Ottoman on

Tanzimat (1831 period Cioeta, Yosmaoğlu, and Yosmaoğlu, Cioeta, s: the first presents the evolution of of evolution the presents first the s:

and the third part focuses on the the on focuses part third the and - 1909)

therefore, a good approach to approach gooda therefore,

l was the French paper paper French the was l

the second focuses second the - 1878) Ebru Ebru th

century

Boyar Boyar

CEU eTD Collection 46 45 dangerous as classified were that Venues materials. als publishing monitored and whichfor permission Education, of Council the from license a obtain to had house printing a open to wanted who anyone regulation, this to According publications. of content the control Ott the books, and periodicals of both 1840s, the in activity publishing of increase an Following Empire. non among and Europe in readership larger attraction enjoy Ottoman government t believed paper published privately Englishman’s an convert discretely also to decided Ottomans the therefore, attention; desired Bulgarian. and Greek, Armenian, Events) of Calendar (The Vekayi multi first the II, Mahmud Sultan of initiation the officia own theircreate decidedto Ottomans the goal, servethis that could periodical existing no was there Since state. Ottoman the of image the bolster would their of policy the re with accordance in survive only could periodicals of kind this Since the to appealed which embassy French capitulations downthe asgrounds shut to paper. the from pressure of because paper Ottoman para were Ottomans The cause. Greek the supported paper, French pro a propagated the when independence for war Greek the w time same the at dangerous and useful be can press the

Ibid, 29 Ibid, Demirel, spective states, so the Ottomans began to entertain the idea of establishing a periodical that periodical a establishing of idea the entertain to began Ottomans the so states, spective oman state implemented the 1857 printing house regulation (Matbaa Nizamnamesi) to to Nizamnamesi) (Matbaa regulation house printing 1857 the implemented state oman 46 - 31. II. Abdülhamid Döneminde Sansür Döneminde Abdülhamid II.

- Ottoman stance contrary to the mainstream flow of the European press that that press European the of flow mainstream the to contrary stance Ottoman

Ceride

hat since the periodical’s owner was a foreign citizen, it would it foreigncitizen, wasa owner theperiodical’s hat since -

Hvds Rgse o News) of (Register Havadis i Because it was an o an was it Because , 26 , was published in French, Turkish, Arabic, Persian, Persian, Arabic, Turkish, French, in published was - 28.

23 45

- lingual Ottoman periodical called periodical Ottoman lingual fficial periodical it did not receive the the receive not did it periodical fficial oial fre t coe hs pro this close to forced doxically as realized by the Ottomans during during Ottomans the by realized as - ulm omnte i the in communities Muslim

pcaer Oriental, Spectateur no sae eidcl The periodical. state a into l publication. In 1831 at at In1831 publication. l Takvim gave o which - - i

CEU eTD Collection press. foreign with dealt Affairs of Foreign plac central became 48 1 No. 27, Vol. Journal, Association Turkish Studies 47 rep was it when 1909 until active remained regulation press this that note to important is It imprisonment. even or periodical the of suspension fine, a in result could that penalty a to subjected were t state, the against anything published issued were periodical the if governor provincial the to or Istanbul in office press the to given be to had director or owner the by signed periodical a of licena issue officewould pressthe bodies, respectiveinquiry the of After cover. would periodical the content of sort what disclose to had also Applicants Affairs. an if whereas, publication, of language the of regardless Education of Ministry the to application act printing censored and Int of Ministry the to transferred was but Education, of Ministry the of part was Müdürlüğü), (Matbuat 1862 in established office, press the regulation this to According 1864. in issued was model, French 1852 the re press serious first The periodicals. concerning regulations and measures first the impose to started latter the government, the of actions the criticize to tended and state a by issued not were periodicals these of some Because appear. per owned privately of series first the 1860 in material, publish and houses printing open cannot persons private that imply not did regulation house printing the Since printingclosed,be house andfineimposed. would be awould were materials coll would Ifpolice the council, the of permission the without published publishing. and printing for permission obtain not would harmful and

During the Hamidian period the censorship office was scattered through three Ministries. Ministry of Interior Interior of Ministry threeMinistries. through scattered was office censorship the period Hamidian the During İ pek K. Yosmao K. pek applicant were a foreign citizen, he had to submit an application the Ministry of Foreign of Ministry the application an submit to had he citizen, foreign a were applicant ğ laced by the press law (Matbuat Kanunu). This means that the widely known known widely the that means This Kanunu). (Matbuat law press the by laced lu, “Chasing the Printed Word: Word: Printed the “Chasing lu, e for the domestic periodicals. Ministry of Education was in charge of books, while Ministry Ministry while books, of charge in was Education of Ministry periodicals. domestic the for e

ivity. If an applicant were an O an were applicant an If ivity.

erior in 1888, in erior

he Sultan, the Sultan’s family or Ottoman allies, they they allies, Ottoman or family Sultan’s the Sultan, he - 2, 2003, 2, Press Censorship in the Ottoman Empire, 1876 Empire, Ottoman the in Censorship Press 24 48

gulation (Matbuat Nizamnamesi), inspired by inspired Nizamnamesi), (Matbuat gulation

and became the crucial body that monitored that body crucial the became and 15 - 17.

ttoman citizen, he had to submit an an submit to had he citizen, ttoman

47 usd Istanbul. outside

se. In addition, everyIn copy addition, se. ect the publications, the publications, the ect iodicals began to began iodicals

f periodicals If - 1913 ”, The The ”, CEU eTD Collection 52 51 50 49 likely Arabicpublished thatthis an offence paper of source a as Reuters is it Empire Ottoman the criticized often press foreignthe Since through houses. printing for problems news foreign to access easy the consequently and War tel the of introduction the cites Cioeta regulation. press the to prior even 1856, in banned paper Arabic an was Empire Ottoman the in periodical banned first 1865. in closed periodicalwas This paper Ladino the mentions fortress. Belgrade the of concession the on Suavi) Ali editor chief was Informer) it states Yosmaoğlu dispute. of matter a is happened it when although decision arbitrary o were texts of kind what state concretely not did it However, fined. and closed being risked so did that houses printing and periodical both that and punished be would Sultan the and state the criticized that texts that stated only wid quite was regulation press 1864 the that notice to hard not is It the European in world. periodicals with dealing when exception being that from suggests far This was model. censorship French Hamidian same the on based was Empire Russian the in issued law press 1865 the Moreover, model. French the on based was interestingly, more and before, long issued was which regulation press the on based was period Hamidian the of censorship

Demirel, Donald J. Cioeta, “Ottoman Censorship in Lebanon and Syria, 1876 Syria, and Lebanon in Censorship “Ottoman J.Cioeta, Donald Borovaya, Olga Yosmao ğ lu, lu, II. Abdülhamid Döneminde Sansür, Sansür, Döneminde Abdülhamid II. that was c was that “Chasing the Printed Word...” Printed the “Chasing Modern Ladino Culture, Culture, Ladino Modern 49 -

making. It is not surprising that the first periodicals were closed quite soon, soon, quite closed were periodicals first the that surprising not is It making. losed in 1867 because of a reader’s letter (that was actually written by the the by written actually was (that letter reader’s a of because 1867 in losed

El Lunar Lunar El

Bloomington 51 , 18 ,

Cioeta on the other hand states that it is possible that thethat possible is it that states handother the on Cioeta as the first known victim of the 1864 press regulation. regulation. press 1864 the of victim known first the as 30 - 19. - 34; 43

fnie o h sae s ti ld o censorship’s to led this so state, the to ffensive 25 - Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 2012, 62. 2012, Press, University Indiana Indianapolis: - 44; Foote, Foote, 44;

piece Reuters. from Censorship Practice in Russia..., Russia..., in Practice Censorship - 1908”, 168 1908”, egraph during the Crimean the during egraph - 169. 52 ely defined. Namely, it it Namely, defined. ely 50

Yet, Yet, Olga ubr (The Muhbir 4. Borovaya

CEU eTD Collection durum bu adına devlet üzere Çakır, olunur.”, şimdiden ilan bilinmek herkesçe yanlışlar alınacağı tedbirlerin çıkan kanuni şiddetli ortaya gereken a yüzden karşı yazanlara icraatı Bu Hükümetin sanıyor. gerçek önemlidir. tümüyle çok herkes eskiden da yazıları çıkan Gazetelerde yayınlıyor. 54 2002, Kitabevi, Siyasal 53 withthe following it explained where also hisresistance words, can tothebedetected: press ex into sent be would writers the but closed, be critical just not would and periodicals offensive which by issued was decree government new a abolished. 1877 was in process Moreover, whole the regulations, press loose on keen not was Abdülhamid Russo the once However, press. the liberalize and regulations the change to ready was constitution, the of father the as known also Paşa, Midhat vizier, t essence in Because law. the of limits the in free be would press the that stated constitution (Kanun constitution novel a proclaimed II Abdülhamid Sultan p of surveillance the under put and examined be had publishing before periodical every now and established, pre decree this Byissued. was decreegovernment another 1876 in after Even abroad. publications their continue and country the leave to forced were introduced was decree a such after who Kemal, Namık like Ottomans, Young against directed particularly was This regulation. press 1864 reaso providing without immediately periodical suspect any close to right the reserved government the which in Paşa, Ali vizier, grand current by issued Kararname) (Ali decree government a by supplemented was regulation press 1867 In hese limits were the 1864 press regulation and government decrees following it, the grand the it, following decrees government and regulation press 1864 the were limits hese

“ Demirel, Eskiden gazeteler yokken dedikodular yalnızca ağızlarda dolaşırdı. Şimdi herkes geleni birer gerçekmiş gibi gibi gerçekmiş birer geleni herkes Şimdi dolaşırdı. ağızlarda yalnızca dedikodular yokken gazeteler Eskiden very important. On the behalf of the state, the following government actions are are actions government legal measures. severe necessary following taken be will texts the such of writers against state, and plotters as counted the of use who Those behalf advance. in public the to announced the On are past important. the in up very came that fallacies that, of Because true. are periodicals the in Everyone appear fact. a as these published In is orally. rumor only coming circulated the rumors days, the periodicals, no were there when past, the In I Adlai Dönemi Abdülhamid II. 54 ress office. A few months later, in December 1876, the newly inaugurated inaugurated newly the 1876, December in later, months few A office. ress

- 53.

Osmanlıda Basın Osmanlıda nde Sansür, Sansür, nde

the death of Ali Paşa, the strict measures continued and continued measures strict the Paşa, Ali of death the leyhine dil kullananların fesatçı sayılacağı ve bu çeşit yazıları yazıları çeşit bu ve sayılacağı fesatçı kullananların dil leyhine - İktidar İlişkileri, İlişkileri, İktidar 34 - 39; 39; 26 Hamza Çakır, Çakır, Hamza

language against government will be be will government against language 54 - 55. n and following the procedure of the of procedure the following and n

assumes that all the texts that that texts the all that assumes

sald Basın Osmanlıda - - - ı Esasi). Article 12 of the the of 12 Article Esasi). ı publication censorship was was censorship publication toa Wr s War Ottoman - İktidar İlişkileri, İlişkileri, İktidar ile. 53

Abdülhamid tarted and and tarted Ankara: Ankara:

CEU eTD Collection parts. all in similar was procedure the probably structures, state provincial and censor the on province the between differences worked.Although censorship Ottoman how of example good a provides Beirut, from namely provinces, Arab the from case A not. was what and state the to harmful was what of interpretation their and depe censors Periodicals position. difficult a into periodicals of editors and owners placed hand other the on but banned, being of possibility the reduced hand one the on that organization administrative systematic a into office press Ottoman the transformed This werecensorship todouble examination. subjected pre introduced that post supposed which regulation press 1864 the decrees on based However, government regime. this previous during valid all and were periodicals regarding law press 1864 The directly. y periodicals 30 concerned this during place took regulations press few a only that note to surprising is it Thus proportions. gigantic took literature the in that censorship the was Turks, Young the successors his from and debatable), is Tanzimat the of end the meant in regi Hamidian him the if distinguishes (although period what Tanzimat previous However, the from press. historiography the over control state strict impose to last, Abd sense this In followed. immediately regulations state emerged, papers independent first the as soon As development. their of beginning the at only wereperiodicals because regulation press were measures State process. gradual a was periodicals over control state of establishment the that obvious It’s 2 embarkedaautocra path of on Russo the after Soon . 1. 2. Ottoman periodicals and state2. Ottoman periodicalsand regulations: ülhamid was not the first, and as will be seen in the example of the Young Turks not the the not Turks Young the of example the in seen be will as and first, the not was ülhamid - publication censorship, Ottoman periodicals during the Hamidian period period Hamidian the during periodicals Ottoman censorship, publication - ad hoc ad Ottoman War, the parliamentary regime was abolished and the Sultan the and abolished was regime parliamentary the War, Ottoman , adapting to each new situation. Before the 1860s there was no no was there 1860s the Before situation. new each to adapting , tic rule. - publication censorship, censorship, publication

The The Hamidian period(1878 and on the 1876 government decree government 1876 the on and ear regime and none of them them of none and regime ear s and politics varieddependingpolitics and s dd niey n the on entirely nded - 1908) e really me

CEU eTD Collection 56 55 post the in lies reason One pre Although through periodicals went time wereresponsibilities orthisinformation was exaggerated. ontime As month. a for suspendedbe would paperthe otherwise publication daythe of the on a.m. 9 procedurebefore wer parts criticized the whether check to order in day next the again then censors, the to publication of director the case the of because w that it regulations assumed press rigorous who establishers its from move wise a was This Istanbul. for valid was procedure same The publication censorship procedure. subm was it where Istanbul to forwarded then was issue same This case). the if editors additionally someadded partscensorship afterthe (which wasoccasionally was over issue the When approved. was issue whole the until again over and over repeated was procedure whole The office. press the to them sent and copies the printed again they changes, suggested made p the to returned was copy one that, After marks. clerk’s the rejecting or approving for provinces) the in censor (main mektupçu the to sent were copies reviewed these Then rewritten. or deleted be to whether and printed official were An office. press issue the to periodical delivered coming the of copies two publication before Hence,

Petar Mitropan, Mitropan, Petar Cioet - publication censorship did not guarantee that periodicals were safe from being banned. banned. being from safe were periodicals that guarantee not did censorship publication a, “Ottoman Censorship in…”, 170 in…”, Censorship “Ottoman a, was published, a few copies were sent again to the press office for comparison to see see to comparison for office press the to againsent were fewcopies a published, was rwitn r eoe. ial, h eios ee ocd o iaie h whole the finalize to forced were editors the Finally, removed. or rewritten e “ Цариградски гласник Цариградски Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski

Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski - roia, n te te ws et o cmaio. hn editors When comparison. for kept was other the and eriodical, publication process in which Istanbul censors could detect some detect could censors Istanbul which in process publication

ould be better if the paper was published in Istanbul. In this this In Istanbul. in published was paper the if better be ould 55 - “ 172. Carigradski glasnik Carigradski

(Carigradski glasnik), glasnik), (Carigradski a pbihd eual w mgt sue ht all that assume might we regularly published was

- consuming and rigorous ofcontent, examinations consuming and this had to present the periodical two days before the the before days two periodical the present to had ol ra te oy n mr qetoal parts questionable mark and copy the read would 28

Јужни преглед which was nevertheless published in published nevertheless was which 56 , Vol. 5, 1928, 23. 1928, 5, Vol. itted for post for itted

its its - CEU eTD Collection 58 57 ever the so of mood imminent, current and day the of as context the on both depended perceived periodicals the of functioning they what on based regulations interpreted censors The arbitrary. remained procedure censorship the that means This specified. not were importa well. asperiodicals the of publication the theyindirectly so touched work, houses printing out set regulations These decrees. and regulations existing clarify to supposed 1 new the issued Sultan the when even remedied not was procedure censorship the in situation arbitrary The usual. than stricter state. of Forexample,inthe situation state crisis war, or censorship machinery had tobemuch censorship controlled who officials ranking higher other or valis also but censors just (not officials state these on depended process censorship complete the banned, be not should and should what determine not did regulations since principle, In censorship prev post exercised Empire Russian Nevertheless, fine. and suspension to subjected were periodicals such where Empire pre the through going without paper a publishing risk could editors seen, As censorship. and regulations state the to obedient completely were periodicals that assumption general the refutes This censor. materia contained or censorship for submitted not were periodicals because banned were 46 which of out issued, were suspensions and warnings 97 Beirut in 1908 and 1876 between period the in example, For advice. censors’ the follow not o disobedience actual the is reason other The provinces. the colleaguesin pre their by dangerous as characterized or perceived not were which fallacies

Foote, Foote, 178. Ibid, Censorship Practice in in Russia Practice Censorship nt element nt

ailed. - censorship proc censorship -

procedures that censorship should follow in determining dangerous texts, dangerous determining in follow should censorship that procedures

- publication censorship rarely and throughout the period preliminary preliminary period the throughout and rarely censorship publication

…, ess. 5. 888 and later 1894 printing house regulations which were which regulations house printing 1894 later and 888

This sort of disobedience was also present in Russian Russian in present also was disobedience of sort This 29

l that was deleted by the provincial provincial the by deleted was that l , n te al rnig f the of running daily the and ), f the editors who did who editors the f

However, the most the However, - publication yday CEU eTD Collection 62 61 60 1876 59 welcomed euphorically reportedly was which present, memorable a him handing and honor periodical Greek the of director me above the service of years twenty After censor. their and not was censors and periodicals wanted. he what publish not could nevertheless he paper the and owner the was he although that fact the with disappointment his expressed the of owner second the Grupčević, Kosta process. the towa and Serbian both for attitudehis register interestingbeto would reasonit Forthis Istanbul. in Bulgarianperiodicals responsible was who Rumelia Eastern from Bulgarian Islamized hand, other the On moody. so were censors their becauserejected be would which and approved be would texts which predict even not could they that stated editors some Furthermore, brain. his in were al censor the side, safe the on be to just guidelines concrete for askedfinally editors desperate When warning. a just issue would other the while periodical, a suspend could censor one text certain a For cope. to had editors which of example the using Again on particular issues. circulars numerous and statute censorship issue to assured state the context, everyday although and Censorship of Directorate the by controlled constantly censor main the

Arhiv Srbije Cioet 5 Russia..., Practicein Censorship Foote, bu oa, Te rs ad h Plc: h Two the Palace: the and Press “The Boyar, Ebru - 1908”, 1908”, in role a played Bulgarian Islamized an was he that fact the whether and Bulgarians, rd a, “Ottoman Censorship in…”, 173. in…”, Censorship “Ottoman a, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies African and Oriental of School the of Bulletin

(AS), SN, 1285, Letter of Kosta Grupčević to Stojan Novaković, 1902. Novaković, Stojan to Grupčević of Kosta Letter 1285, SN, (AS), .

59 This arbitrary censorship was nonexistent in Russia. in was censorship nonexistent This arbitrary

However Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski

, this was not the case with the Russian Empire. Censors were were Censors Empire. Russian the with case the not was this , Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski

sine qua non, qua sine Amalthea

- 15.

legedly tapped his head and replied that the guidelines the that replied and head his tapped legedly olbrtdwt tecno h a algdy an allegedly was who censor the with collaborated

- Way Relationship between Abdülhamid II and the Press, Press, the and II Abdülhamid between Relationship Way censor’s the in banquet a organizing suggested 30

as demonstrated by Greek periodicals in Izmir in periodicals Greek by demonstrated as

and Beirut we see e see we Beirut and , Vol. 69, No. 3, 2006, 3, No. 69, Vol. , Carigradski glasnik, Carigradski 62

ntioned censor retired, so the the so retired, censor ntioned However, animosity between animosity However, censorship also varied on on varied also censorship 60

veryday situations with situations veryday

422 -

23 in one occasion occasion one in

main editor of editor main 61

CEU eTD Collection “ See Bulgarians. or Serbs were Macedonians Slavic whether on topics discussed even it when revolution region. this in pretensions Bulgarian 66 65 face. Sultan’s readers the to 64 63 it. of fear Abdülhamid’s not of because assassination constantly word the was was 1880s, late the which after least at word press, the in only mentioned The period. Hamidian whole the during banned spe during undesirable became indeed words certain However, delegitimized. was Sultan the when revolution where Turk Young lists the these after of published some Moreover, examples. concrete the by backed are words these ho reform, insanity, assassination, bomb, Herzegovina, and liberty,revolution,wordsconstitution,Macedonia,like Bosnia of Armenia, lists endless Thus, journalists. by lists in down written was it banned, was sentence or word particular a as soon censors with experiences writers’ the on based were lists informal these Supposedly, censors. with problems avoid to wanted who writers by conducted list informal an as began enter state the believe to hard is it so censors to instructions clear provide not did and ambiguous very were regulations state the that seen have We censors. changeable their with had they experiences not was censorship this Abdü by that introduced was that something suggests scholarship recent However, whole. a as regime Hamidian the of but censorship, the of absurdity the and severity the just not represent they “nose” as such phrases and words the were world publishing Ottoman the in topics repeated most the of one Finally, censor al Khalil by case Asimilar could in betracked journalists.

Cioeta, “Ottoman Censorship in…”, 172. in…”, Censorship Cioeta, “Ottoman Ibid, 174 Ibid, Macedonian name was not mentioned during Hamidian period because it reportedly associated readers on on readers associated reportedly it because period Hamidian during mentioned not was name Macedonian Abdülhamid had distinctive nose so allegedly censors forbade using this word because it could could it because word this using forbade censors allegedly so nose distinctive had Abdülhamid - 178.

tained making such official lists. It is likely that forbidden words and phrases and words forbidden that likely is It lists. official such making tained - Khuri and ArabicKhuri and papers successfully collaborated.

which were supposedly f supposedly were which In

Carigradski Carigradski Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski

lhamid himself but rather by the periodicals based on on based periodicals the by rather but himself lhamid glasnik glasnik 31

Beirut as well, where for a period of time the a timeBeirutas the for period well, where of tre t ue h nm ol atr the after only name the use to started we can track words like Macedonia like words track can we orbidden by Abdülhamid II. Accordingly, II. Abdülhamid by orbidden cific periods of time, but they were not were they but time, of periods cific meland 63

etc. surfaced, but none of of none but surfaced, etc.

Young Turk Turk Young associate associate 66 and as as and

(after Јесу Јесу CEU eTD Collection 70 69 68 “ language. Serbian of authors the for which language, Bosnian the of book grammar published on notification see example, publishing question, Armenian on reported lengthily occasion one on example, 67 ( (CG), glasnik Бугари?“ или Срби Словени Македонски ли difficult see to way. inevery howthe ofcontrol periodicalslack couldusethis possible t Given established. was parties and group opposition of array counter a collapsed, governments five time, of period short this in period: interregnum an of sort a represents revolution the after year first hu the power, three these between boundaries cut clear no were there Since authority. of crisis as through, passing was Empire Ottoman the that evident is it top, on cen two these to Adding Istanbul. in government old the control to tried it which from Salonika in remained seize not did (CUP) Progress and Union of Committee Centralthe because of aftermath the Nevertheless, re the for fighting years 20 almost spent Turks Young the after place took finally revolution Turk Young The 2. was described as unusual ifnothing happened. Prayer Friday the while published, was notification official the only 1905, in Prayers Friday followed. that events on 1903 in assassinated was Serbia of King the When mentioned. not was assassination word the but bomb even and reforms, Herzegovina, and Bosnia Armenians, revolution) Turk Young the

H “ “ 1.3. Ottoman periodicals and state1.3. Ottoman periodicalsand regulation Most of these allegedly forbidden words were used in in used were words forbidden allegedly these of Most Селамлик“ ( Селамлик“ ( Србији“ послови у јавни и Двор asan Carigradski glasnik Carigradski

Kayal no. 52, 1908, 2. 52, no. ı, CG, Friday Prayer Friday Arabs and Young Turks, Young Arabs and ters of power was a third one, namely the palace with Sultan Abdülhamid still Abdülhamid Sultan with palace the namely one, third a was power of ters o 4, 85 Bsi ad ezgvn ws lo eual mnind Fr xml, see example, For mentioned. regularly also was Herzegovina and Bosnia 1895. 44, no. Босански 'Турски учитељ'“ 'Турски Босански - proclamation of the constitution and parliament in opposition to the Sultan. Sultan. the to opposition in parliament and constitution the of proclamation

68 CG CG )

CG, CG,

Similarly with the attempted assassination of Abdülhamid II during II Abdülhamid of assassination attempted the with Similarly simp informed that Armenians who set the bombs were arrested. Generally Generally arrested. were bombs the set who Armenians that informed no. 29, 1905, 1. 29, no. The court and public affairsSerbia in public and The court ly informed that King Aleksandar died and focused attention focused and died Aleksandar King that informed ly the revolution brought much instability and strife mainly mainly strife and instability much brought revolution the Berkeley (Bosnian 'Turkish teacher'), no. 21, 1896, 4. 21, no. teacher'), 'Turkish (Bosnian - Los Angeles:

r Sai Mcdnas eb o Bulgarians? or Serbs Macedonians Slavic Are news from other periodicals and official notifications. For For notifications. official and periodicals other from news 32 69

Carigradski glasnik Carigradski s: earlyperiod(1908 Turk Young

University of California Press, 199 Press, California of University - revolution took place and a wide wide a and place took revolution )

CG,

throughout Hamidian regime. For For regime. Hamidian throughout e icmtne, t s not is it circumstances, he no. 24, no.

Hasan

1903, 1. 1903, de facto de

Glasni

Kayalı called it, it, called Kayalı 7,

k )

, 56.

was actually actually was power but power Carigradski Carigradski -

1909) 70

s of bs CG CG 67

CEU eTD Collection 2000, Press, York New of University 74 Modernization)”, and of Freedom Instrument Empire asan 73 72 71 deliberations…it’s tosleep!” impossible bor exceedingly and lazy as presented were deputies where parliament new the or government) the in position most difficult the held (who finance of minister the to either related was target favorite A regime. relation regime, Hamidian former the from individuals expectedly were periodicals, satirical of targets favorite the press, revolutionary As power. new the to favorable be means mea not did regime new the of act generous this However, number the year, increased upto377. the of beginning the at periodicals 52 of point starting a from Istanbul numb that revolution the after and Empire Ottoman entire the in published were periodicals 120 granted. were licenses new 200 and publıshed revival. new a i through only went Reportedly, periodicals more, is What free. set prisoners political and announced, parliament for elections abolished, was censorship mentioned, As expectations. process the in were parliament the for elections the since legislated not was this however, well; as Turks Young the by proclaimed was press the of Freedom review. for periodicals submit to refusing by true,be to provedparliamentary regime re the of news the after Shortly

Kayal Yosmao Yasemin Doğaner, “Hürriyet ve Modernleşme Enstümanı Olarak Osmanlı’da Basın” Basın” Osmanlı’da Olarak Enstümanı Modernleşme ve “Hürriyet Doğaner, Yasemin Palmira Brummett, Brummett, Palmira er increased to 730 (in the first seven months of the Young Turk regime). Similarly in Similarly regime). Turk Young the of months seven first the (in 730 to increased er ı, Arabs and Young Turks, Young Arabs and ğ lu, “Chasing the Printed Word...” Printed the “Chasing lu, Image and Imperialism Imperialism and Image te is mnh olwn te eouin n sabl 5 periodicals 353 Istanbul in revolution the following month first the n 73

The first months of the new Young Turk period met public public met period Turk Young new the of months first The d niiul wo re t tesle “ec ( “Mercy themselves to cried who individuals ed 55.

141.

- rcaain f h cnttto ad h itouto o a of introduction the and constitution the of proclamation

, 32 , n h Otmn eouinr Pes 1908 Press, Revolutionary Ottoman the in - 74 journalists gathered and decided to abolish censorship abolish gathereddecidedjournaliststo and 33.

s with the Great Powers and, of course, the new new the course, of and, Powers Great the with s Palmira 33 72

This is to say, at the beginning of the year the of beginning the at say, to is This Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi Fakültesi Edebiyat Brummett showed in her book on the the on book her in showed Brummett n that the periodicals would by any any by would periodicals the that n , Vol. 29, No.1, 2012, No.1, 29, Vol. , (The Press in the Ottoman Ottoman the in Press (The - 1911 Aman , Albany: State State Albany: ), these these ),

119.

CEU eTD Collection XXXVIII Journal Faculty Science 75 fir regime’s the as viewed generally was It law. press 1909 new the by confirmed was this later months pre the words, other In process. publication wou periodicals the Namely, added. was clause another this to but valid, still was law the of limits the under free was press the that stated which clause The 12. Article mentioned previously the them among c the 1909, April In resolved. be to were grandiose that issues first the among be the to came press the of question regarding the regime), new the of promises cynical public the (and deposed was Abdülhamid Sultan when after normalized state the in situation the as soon As of so organization elusive by out carried was work dirty their all because it of accused be not could k well was it Although 1909. in Istanbul in Bridge Galata the crossed he as murdered was who Fehmi of owner the of case the was Such street. the of middle the in assassinated journa were whom among a like regime, the of acted opponents the liquidated Progress who volunteers armed by and manned party paramilitary Union of Committee the scenes the behind but freedom, and occasion such on stealth preferring transparency, of lack a showed phase earliest its in even regime Turk Young the but public, in visibly them prosecutingor writers, critical of exiling or imprisoning bytransparently, namely contras of point veritable one is there but gracefully, critics their of tirades the receive to prone not were regime, Hamidian the like Turks, Young The

Fatma M Fatma - called volunteers. üge onta h U sodbhn teepltclymtvtd sasntos they assassinations, motivated politically these behind stood CUP the that nown t tp o rdal srnteig oto oe proias Ti lw covered law This periodicals. over control strengthening gradually to step st Göçek, “What is the Meaning of the 1908 Young Turk Revolution?”, Revolution?”, Turk Young 1908 the of Meaning the is “What Göçek,

d o ogr e ujce t te xmntos ht neee the anteceded that examinations the to subjected be longer no ld 75

, 2008, , lists who wrote under the proclaimed freedom of the press but were were but press the of freedom proclaimed the under wrote who lists

204 - s. On the surface everyone enjoyed the fruits of revolution revolution of fruits the enjoyed everyone surface the On s. 06.

nttto pse truh eea modifications, several through passed onstitution 34 - publication censorship was abolished. A few few A abolished. was censorship publication

h counter the t. The Hamidian regime acted acted regime Hamidian The t. - eouin n pi 1909 April in revolution Istanbul University Political Political University Istanbul Serbesti

Hasan CEU eTD Collection 76 press the of freedom Once regime. new the with case the not was This nature. in arbitrary and of case the in censorship Only periods. Hamidian and Tanzimat the in case the was than apparatus administrative successful a creating in decisive more much were Turks Young the general, In issue wouldnotbewithdrawn. be might circulation periodica the for to costs high incurring risked This recalled. left and published once publications say, to is That periodicals. pre essentially newsboys, constitutional the following Hence reader. the except anyone the and printers including process, publication the in participated who anyone on was it writers; and editors on just not was periodical the for responsibility the regime, Hamidian the Despite statesmen. the of integrity personal the attack and offenses commit not did they as long as tolerated were Critics punishable. also was government the publishi ethnicity,and information publishing or religion any against like offences sessions), closed from information as (such courts to contrary categories named the of any to related offense the if follow press the regarding questions any so issues press the to related institution centralized a became Interior of Ministry The provided. be to had periodical the of focus and location language, title, as well as editor, of data personal the i certain application, license the of granting the Regarding record. criminal no have to had and publication, the of language the in fluent age, of years 21 over citizen, beca editor every the it, name to to had According periodical descriptions. penal and requirements legal as such areas several

Yosmao - publication censorship was abolished, which was not necessarily a good thing for for thing good a necessarily not was which abolished, was censorship publication me the main person responsible in the command chain. This editor had to be an Ottoman an be to had editor This chain. command the in responsible person main the me ğ lu, “Chasing the Printed Word...”, 34 Word...”, Printed the “Chasing lu,

was it clear that despite the regulations both systems were more or less flexible flexible less or more were systems both regulations the despite that clear it was

ng false information. In addition, provoking or supporting crime against against crimesupportingprovokingor Inaddition, information.false ng

- in - he wo a t me cran odtos n who and conditions certain meet to had who chief - 36.

were processed here. Further, penalties were to were penalties Further, here. processed were 35

ls, since no one guaranteed that the the that guaranteed one no since ls,

modification s and the press law, press the and s nformation such as such nformation

CEU eTD Collection 77 the like dates important the of coverage the to attention meticulous paying meant This Sultan. the opposite do to way good a as seen also was periodicals, the especially state’s press, The Ottoman legitimation. the undermining were which ideas subversive disseminating for perfect ju not was press the period, Hamidian the During goingactuallythe state regulations. onbehind otherwise. suggest periodicals the and Sultan the that mean not did press mot the were periodicals on put restrictions the Namely, period. Hamidian the for valid was same The thoughts. of expression their concerning free entirely not were writers t of freedom the on restrictions legal no been have might there words, other In story. the of side another provided regime Turk Young the criticize to dared who writers the of assassinations political earlier, mentioned fre absolutely were periodicals the power, seize to began Turks Young the when 1909 April to up and revolution Turk Young the after hand, other the on while consent,censors’ the without move to allowed not were regime Hamidian the during tha suggest only can regulations press The periods. Turk Young early and Hamidian the during state the and press the between was relationship actual the what reveal not do they story; the of side one us provide only can decrees related and regulation Press 2.2. censorship regulations. the increased gradually years following the in which regime impersonal and stricter much counter the after end an to came

Ibid, 37 Ibid, period Periodicals - 38. –

to bolster the state’s legitim state’s the bolster to

state relationship during the Hamidian and early Young Turk Young early and Hamidian the during relationship state ionless for 30 years. The reports on the complex relations between the between relations complex the on reports The years. 30 for ionless 77

- eouin n 99 proias ee ae wit faced were periodicals 1909, in revolution he press, but the political assassinations suggest that that suggest assassinations political the but press, he ation by propagating a good image of the state and the and state the of image good a propagating by ation 36

Thus, it is worth investigating what was was what investigating worth is it Thus, t en s dneos ol hc was which tool dangerous a as seen st e from any restrictions. However, as as However, restrictions. any from e te periodicals the t h the new, new, the h CEU eTD Collection 80 79 style. pompous in covered were these events Naturally, attention. special was devoted throne the to of celebrations to and covered, not was Prayer Friday which in week single 78 shut were that periodicals of subsidies the more, is What well. as languagesother in published Ottoman on published that those just not periodicals, the subsidies. higher by supported therefore be should pointed some while tax, stamp pr high the about complained owners Other destroyed. be to needed consequently now that issues the printed already had machines when notifications brought government i For strategies. various employing were owners periodical’s help, financial these all obtaining In support. technical even and grants, occasional jobs, printing governmental state, the from c other the against market the on position their invigorate and survive to order in Sultan the and state the from money extract to means various also were There state. the from gift a as medals received journalists generously F as such days also important on example, were For awarded. they attitude an such For it. against than rather flow the with went they so living their earn to had machinery press the in working individuals hand, other the On that were tothe state’s respond critics to meant coming from materials own its provided or journalists the from texts ordered it public, the inform or with communicate to way a as periodicals the to notifications official sent state the Namely, press. t with dealing when Abdülhamid by employed means subtle more through but censorship through just not press, the control to means various were There controlled. were they as long legitim state’s the of representation when Prayers Friday and celebrations inauguration birthday, Sultan’s nstance, owners sought assistance sought owners nstance,

Ibid, 428 Ibid, 424 Palace...”, the Pressand “The Boyar, How these days were extremely important can be seen on the pages of pages the on seen be can important extremely were days these How - 31.

ation was at its height. its at was ation

ompeting periodicals. These means were mainly receiving subsidies subsidies receiving mainly were means These periodicals. ompeting

out

- from 26. ht hy a te igs proia cruain which circulation periodical biggest the had they that 78

Hence for the Sultan the periodicals were perfect as perfect were periodicals the Sultan the for Hence

the state to cover publication expenses because the the because expenses publication cover to state the 37

80 riday Prayers the periodical’s owners and owners periodical’s the Prayers riday

Subsidies were indeed given to most of most to given indeed were Subsidies - Turkish the foreign press. Carigradski glasnik. glasnik. Carigradski Sultan’s birthday and inauguration and birthday Sultan’s

issues but to those that were that those to but issues 79

There was not a a not was There

ice of the the of ice

he CEU eTD Collection 83 82 81 Su towards the loyalty continuously the express to was in do to had person politically a that thing only survive the regime Hamidian to Namely, loyalty. was subsidies, granting for or suspension The state. app the that from strategies money narrative more extract to order the in of numbers costs circulation the or exaggerated production also have might subsidies for applicants and suspensions, an strategies narrative various used Petitioners granted. for taken be not should documents these of content the course, Of so because theSultan. was he loyal to do to willing always was and state the about wrote favorably he because compatriots his from (Morning) state?” the to loyal now, who traitors as state the against years for working been have “we if wonders even One difficult. extremely processpublication the make to endeavor their and censors the of ignorance the of censorship, shou mistake unintentional small one that and long so for Sultan the to loyal been had they that claimed often Petitions living. a earn to had journalists because time long a for suspended be to afford not could periodicals their closed theywhenwereSultan the to petitions wrote even ownersThe whichFrench other periodicals received. subsidies the than more substantially was which kuruş, 000 100 got it 1890 In state. the from based paper French Istanbul the example, For editors. the to way its made still often state the by down

Demirel, Boyar, Basın Osmanlıda Çakır,

“The Press and the Palace…”, 428. Palace…”, the “The Pressand II. Abdülhamid Döneminde Sansür, Sansür, Döneminde Abdülhamid II. complained about the penalty even stating that he as an Armenian received threats received Armenian an as he that stating even penalty the about complained Levant Herald Levant ltan. As Yosmaoğlu states, the political environment was such that “earning the that“earning such was political environment the Yosmaoğlu states, ltan. As

having lost the opportunity to do harm thanks to the censors, have to be be to have censors, the to thanks harm do to opportunity the lost having 82

İktidar İlişkileri, 63. İlişkileri, İktidar The editor of one of the most popular Ottoman popular most the of one of editor The which was which eared in all these requests either asking for cancellation of of cancellation for asking either requests these all in eared

d ruses in order to convince the authorities to cancel cancel to authorities the convince to order in ruses d

83 34

81 m - 39;

ld be pardoned. Petitioners even complained about about complained even Petitioners pardoned. be ld ore often closed than open, still received subsidies subsidies received still open, than closed often ore

Çakır, Çakır, 38

Osmanlıda Basın Osmanlıda - İktidar İlişkileri, İlişkileri, İktidar . Usually they stated that that stated they Usually . - Turkish dailies Turkish 78 - 80.

Sabah CEU eTD Collection 87 86 85 84 censors and journalists ambitious especially of production the be might absurdities these that points Yosmaoğlu while regime, previous post of werecensorshipproductions of examples to associated was sugg Boyar it and Cioeta However, banned. was because name Abdülhamid’s AH=0) (e.g. H and A letters containing formula chemical any or Galata; quarter Istanbul the of inhabitants the offend might Galatians!” foolish you from phrase a because Bible the cited that piece a censoring as such phrases anecdotes Countless censors. the with work their ease to order Self framework as well. this within operate to had press the hence and doctrine Nationality” Autocracy, propagated “Orthodoxy, I, Nicholas of reign the during particularly Empire, Russian the instance, For especially other, in traced be could it but state Ottoman the for characteristic something not was position central the took loyalty which periodicals. and subjects loyal less threats, possible about palace were loyalty self imposing unconditional their of state the assuring while employed periodicals which i Thus loyalty. usual mechanisms political culture.this The adapt to theyto had survive periodicals to wanted was forward someone’s people to propelled way what only regime Hamidian the the as in seen promotion, officially) least (at was merit period Turk Young ambiguous morally this escape to possible compe not was it and loss, another’s mean would zero a as seen was sultan the of blessings and favor

For example,For lit Foote, Idem. 22. Word…”, Printed the “Chasing Yosmaoğlu, - censorship consisted of the aforementioned informal lists which periodicals compiled in compiled periodicals which lists informal aforementioned the of consisted censorship tition through neutrality; one was either with the sultan or against him.” against or sultan the with either was one neutrality; through tition

Censorship Practice in in 2 Russia..., Practice Censorship - esrhp n srig s h Sla’ sy ie providi i.e. spy, Sultan’s the as serving and censorship erature on the period of the Russian Russian the of period the erature on 86

- 3.

autocratic regimes, like Russia or Austria or Russia like regimes, autocratic who by banning any possible words that could be could that words possible any banning by who 39 Tsar

- Hamidian period in order to delegitimize thedelegitimize to order in periodHamidian Nicholas I was full of those press anecdotes. press of those full was I Nicholas - u gm, hr oe esns gain person’s one where game, sum 85 87

ested that these ridiculous ridiculous these that ested This type of discourse in discourse of type This n obde wrs and words forbidden on g nomto t the to information ng

Paul’s epistle “O epistle Paul’s 84

While in the in While - Hungary. Hungary.

f CEU eTD Collection свету.“ ономе на и тако овоме, на како казну последице 90 89 limited only with 88 but help financial of sort some for Interior of Ministry the petitioned regime so not were but period, previous the in common were subsidies state father a as described were period Hamidian the during relations The changed. regime Turk Young state While impersonal. and strict the formal, more much became press the with interaction in atmosphere political the hand, other the On single Empire. time inthe Ottoman m glasnik world. other the on as well as this in punishment in result to has subjects, his all of father the is who Sultan, Magnificence His of will the against is which behavior when state the of needed, When state. the to Serbs Ottoman the of were that articles offensive publi state Ottoman the for other many and massacres Armenian self regime Haimidian the in succeed to way Providing good a periodicals. was persons and competing actions subversive other possible on information discrediting as well as loyalty their expressed added be to had practice this atmosphere. political competing a such in survival simply higher or state, assuring the from subsidies promotion, career in chances their increased Sultan, the with connected

Boyar, “The Press and the Palace…”, 426 Palace…”, the Pressand “The Boyar, Yosmao “ Свако понашашње противно вољли Њ. Ц. В. Султана,који је отац свију свију јеотац Султана,који В. Ц. Њ. вољли противно понашашње Свако - censorship. Loyalty was continuously expressed especially during the times of unrest. unrest. of times the during especially expressed continuously was Loyalty censorship. - shed in the foreign press,foreign the in shed rs rltosi i te on Tr pro bcm bracai. o example, For bureaucratic. became period Turk Young the in relationship press . This certainly contributed to the shutdown of Carigradski glasnik. Many owners owners Many glasnik. Carigradski of shutdown the to contributed certainly This . ğ lu, “Chasing the Printed Word...” Printed the “Chasing lu, anaged to keep this discourse thro discourse this keepanaged to .

89 hy opeey a lat fiily are wi agreed officially) least (at completely they

Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski

the spying activities of owners and journalists who in this way way this in who journalists and owners of activities spying the Carigradski glasnik u glasnik Carigradski

- 27. , 23. ,

operated entirely within this official discourse of of discourse official this within entirely operated ughout, it is no wonder that it was not suspended asuspendedwas not it wonderthat no is it ughout, 40

, Glasnik

“ Проглас“ sed as a way to express enormous loyalty enormous express to waya as sed also published official published also

(Proclamation)

његових поданика, мора дати за за дати мора поданика, његових common in the in common - children relationship, the the relationship, children h hi content: their th , 90

CG,

Since

no . 49, 1895, 4. 49, .

notifications Young Turk Young Carigradski “Every - 88 press

To CEU eTD Collection Brill,2001, 92 91 veritable periodicals. audience Ottoman for th among increased literacy period Hamidian the during precisely zenith its experienced which modernization and discipline social of tool Accordi education. public non controlled strictly joint and through Muslim Ottomans educated and various loyal into them together transform and Empire bring the of communities to need the but subjects, enlighten 186 this Behind censorship. state to nevertheless, subjected, education public modern propagate to continued Abdülhamid model. secularist French the by inspired education public on regulation a issued state the 1869 In onwards. O the mind, in this With subversive any from protected as well as educated be to needed who children naive were who subjects their toward figures paternalistic as themselves presented Enlightenment 19 from other 18 insightnotdiffer did this subjectsactually andhow hisOttoman perceived everything not that p realize not did readers because state the and himself against used be 26 (seepage earlier previous the From 2.3. and measures strict these decisiveness administration, many in toexpressnostalgia started people theoldregime. for of Because time. of period appointed an for such as remained p the If paper. a of suspension the for valid was same The success. ublished in periodicals was periodicals in ublished

Yosmaoğlu, “Chasing the Printed Word…”, 40. Word…”, Printed the “Chasing Yosmaoğlu, Selçuk Somel, Somel, Selçuk th

Periodicals and readersPeriodicals and etr ipra sae. uoen uortc ues ne the under rulers autocratic European states. imperial century 4 - 13.

The Modernization of Public Education in the Ottoman Empir Ottoman the in Education Public of Modernization The . 92

), one can infer that the Sultan saw the press as a dangerous tool that couldthat tool dangerous a as press the saw Sultan the that infer can one ), Although the project ultimately failed to achieve this goal, the fact that fact the goal, this achieve to failed ultimately project the Although ttmn smaiig bühmds tne oad h p the toward stance Abdülhamid’s summarizing statement

tmn tt pooe euain mo education promoted state ttoman e Ottoman population is very important in terms of creating a a creating of terms in important very is population Ottoman e a priori a

correct. This quote provides insight into how the Sultan Sultan the how into insight provides quote This correct.

ng to Selçuk Somel, public schools were a were schools public Somel, Selçuk to ng 9 regulation was not just the need to to need the just not was regulation 9 re vigorously from the 1860s 1860s the from vigorously re e 1839 e aper were shut down, it it down, shut were aper - 1908,

influence of the the of influence Leiden ress I cited cited I ress - Boston - Muslim

ideas. th - Koln: Koln:

and 91

CEU eTD Collection Literatures, 94 Epoca 93 ha Jews Sephardi although instance, For much. reveal not does publication communities.” all within readership a attracted which works and transmission of channels many were there but language, single one with familiar only al were readers “many states, Strauss As well. as languages other knew citizens Ottoman of owners the of biographies instance, periodicals likely They tongues. mother their in periodicals only read to have not did lingual, multi mostly were who Serbs or Greeks, Jews, Ottoman educated example, For category. consu the another. lines, these one Along with mingled rather but divided, strictly not were communities that fact the blurs lines border and ethnic among Empire Ottoman the defining of problem The language? one where borders ethnic literacy along this divided is or literacy Ottoman of speak we Can readers? Ottoman the were who But and enlighten theirinthename and readers modernization. of progress the Hence we who periodicals, readers. the of owners of numbers increased in also but state, the of support financial the in decades. several for lasted which emerged periodicals some period the when onward 1870s the from started process This boom its Empire. Ottoman the in education experienced mass introduce to attempts serious first production the with precisely Periodical population. Ottoman modern and literate at aimed the which of ideals light state of in propagation seen and be modernization should periodicals, especially press, the of emergence the Thus

Yvette B oan tas, Wo Read “Who Strauss, Johann

and ü El Avenir”, European Judaism Avenir”, El rki, rki, Vol. 6, No. 1, 2003 1, No. 6, Vol. s el lk poiet Ottoman prominent like well, as “The Ottoman Press at the Dawn of the Twentieth Century Through the Salonica Newspapers Newspapers Salonica the Through Century Twentieth the of Dawn the at Press Ottoman “The

, 40. ,

ht n h Otmn mie (19 Empire Ottoman the in What mers of Ottoman periodicals did not have to fit into one single one into fit to have not did periodicals Ottoman of mers

, Vol. 43, No. 2, 2010, 103 2010, 2, No. 43, Vol. , re educated (some of them abroad) took the task to inform inform to task the took abroad) them of (some educated re Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski nto” rdcd n ra ol is w national own its only read and produced “nation” 42 -

uks diis r rnh eidcl. For periodicals. French or dailies Turkish - press managed to stabilize, and in this in and stabilize, to managed press 07.

th suggest that besides Serbian these Serbian besides that suggest - 20 94

th Thus the sole language of the the of language sole the Thus

centuries)?” centuries)?” fostering the creation of a a of creation the fostering

The reason lies not only not lies reason The 93

)?”, fw Ladino few d Middle Eastern Eastern Middle

read other read so La La - CEU eTD Collection 97 96 95 t in reflect higher to have not the did this presumably although were; costs and production circulation, the lower the community, the smaller the Thus, population andother periodicals rival themarket. available on 4 exceed not could periodicals their Consequently 70 around numbered each census, same the to according who, communities Armenian and Greek for true was same The copies. thousand a than more i owners some despite copies, of hundreds few than more had never 1910, from census official Ottoman the on based population Jewish the of number the account into taking periodicals, Ladino the that states instance for Borovaya popularity. their tha by and papers circulated of numbers concrete the estimate to hard is it hence so; do to it require not did state the becausecirculation on information contain not did periodicals t fact the Ottoman the that expected be might It consumed. most the were periodicals which predict to hard is s etc. merchants women, at aimed periodicals specialized also were There it. consuming audience of type the suggest might advertisements even and language, used themes, covered lists, subscription any), were there periodica the in found be can question this to answer the Partly profile? their was what periodicals, Ottoman the of audience the was then Who French schoolswere inmost sinceJewish theinstruction inthat language. performed probably were but press Ladino read to unable were they that meant he that By illiterate. were Salonika in living Jews Sephardi the of 50% than more 1898 of editor Lévy, Sam periodicals,

Borovaya, Borovaya, Brummett, Borovaya, - Turkish periodicals like periodicals Turkish a te wr amd t h euae ouain f h Epr. h Ottoman The Empire. the of population educate the at aimed were they hat Modern Ladino Culture, Culture, Ladino Modern Culture, Ladino Modern Image and Imperialism…, and Image

52 50. - 43

55. Sabah La Epoka La o it was clear they had a specific public specific a had they clear was it o - 46.

had the highest circulation, but this also depended on depended also this but circulation, highest the had and 43

Le Journal De Salonique De Journal Le - 5

ls’ content where the readers’ letters (if letters readers’ the where content ls’ 000 copies if we take into account the the account into take we if copies 000 - 0 0 ihbtns n Istanbul. in inhabitants 000 80 97 ndicating that their papers had had papers their that ndicating

he prices of the periodicals. periodicals. the of prices he able to read periodicals in in periodicals read to able 96 stated that around that stated

Unfortunately, it it Unfortunately, t estimate t 95

CEU eTD Collection 99 98 change. to prone were subscriptions especially and prices periodicals’ the why is This varied. regions thro only exclusively sent was of issue the from housesthe cost the periodicals’thehigher was. publishing oftransportation liv of place the even the subscribers, like copies, of factors of number few a sense on depended the periodicals of in prices The useful periodicals. the also of affordability was subscriptions Sharing consideration. into taken g usually people when evenings winter long the during periodicals, especially the of sharing and readings collective The backwardness. literacy, cultural low or of poverty terms in explained immediately be to have not does circulation low that T own. their on subscribing or issue an buying than rather neighbors and friends with subscriptions share to preferred readers masses, the for adjusted topics and education Literacy presumably have lowbutthat doesnotmean readers they didnot was circulation their Hence employees. more afford not could owner the because time same “director was he that stated running of especially One communities. venture, small business for periodicals successful a was periodicals of running the much how predict to hard is it However, copies. sold course, of and private advertisements subscriptions, be also could periodicals The Empire. Ottoman all for case the was This government. the from subsidy a received period Hamidian the during them of Most

Brummett, Brummett, Ibid ,

47 99 -

49. growth did not necessarily mean increased number of sold periodicals. Despite mass Despite periodicals. sold of number increased mean necessarily not did growth

Image and Imperialism…, and Image Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski

- Turkish periodicals and for most non most for and periodicals Turkish -

administrator ugh subscriptions. ugh 40 could only be bought in Istanbul; in Ottoman Macedonia it it Macedonia Ottoman in Istanbul; in bought be only could - 41.

accountant h eios f h Ldn periodical Ladino the of editors the 44

In addition, socioeconomic conditions in the in conditions socioeconomic addition, In ly sponsored and receive money from from money receive and sponsored ly ing because the further someone lived lived someone further the because ing - ertr ad dtr n he” t the at chief” in editor and secretary - Turkish ones published in the in published ones Turkish . 98 athered together, need to be be to need together, athered

For instance, For instance, his suggests his l Tiempo El

CEU eTD Collection 100 a propagating by attacks states' and press foreign the counter to possible means any used uprisin and wars humiliations, foreign by challenged Ot is which it in context sense the in a press In the that press. understandable foreign the by disseminated ideas subversive from them and educate protect to needs subjects, naive his for responsible is who father paternalis the as in Abdülhamid, censorship explaining by actions his justify to tend literature revisionist Hamidian present the in Many Sultan. the with lay responsibility main the end, the in because atmosphere political competitive the and censors moody and arbitrary pre both to subjected were periodicals since difficult extremely press the of operation made decree gover 1876 the fr differ fundamentally n with regulations existing supplementing ev press Ottoman The Conclusion many led reasons these All periodicals and cease certainly affectedthe to publication fate of circulate. to begun already had they after markets the from pre Furthermore, penalty. the canceling about negotiation for possibility the without banned were papers many gradually imposed, introduced. was censorship tobe Since started slowly press freedom ofthe counter the after deteriorated further situation The closed. were them of many consequently and competition market open to left were periodicalsthe subsidies, give to tendedlonger no state the sinceHowever, publications. I n the first few months after the revolution there was literally an explosion of the new the of explosion an literally was there revolution the after months few first the n

See

Boyar and and Boyar -

and post and

nment decree were issued before Abdülhamid's autocratic rule. However, 1876 However, rule. autocratic Abdülhamid's before issued were decree nment Yosmaoğlu - ulcto censorshi publication - publication procedure. Hamidian strict censorship could not be excused be not could censorship strict Hamidian procedure. publication

om the previous Tanzimat period because b becauseperiod Tanzimat previous the om olved gradually while adjusting itself to present circumstances and and circumstances present to itself adjusting while gradually olved ’s works. ’s

- revolution in April 1909 April in revolution p was abolished thus many papers were withdrawn withdrawn were papers many thus abolished was p w lue. T clauses. ew 45

s lyd cuil role. crucial a played gs oa lgtmto ws constantly was legitimation toman e aiin eid os not does period Hamidian he

when regulations limiting the limiting regulations when Carigradski glasnik. Carigradski oth the 1864 regulation and regulation 1864 the oth tic discourse in which which in discourse tic Abdülhamid 100

coming coming

by CEU eTD Collection image. positive Ottoman promote other words, wer periodicals double propaganda at aimed of functioning affected period Turk Young and Hamidian both from regulations press these how on focus I chapters following the In the state. there Thus eras. Hamidian and Tanzimat the in case the was than reforms Tanzimat applying and apparatus administrative successful a creating in decisive more much were Turks Young the simply, Put suspensions. imposed n generally which regime impersonal and stricter counter the after end an to came press the of freedom the Once state. the from aid financial without circumstances competitive such they however, market, the increased significantly periodicals press the of freedom lived short the during period Turk Young early the In awarded. graciously were the during profited press H Ottoman The state. the to servants to good licenses being grant for not periodicals did they However, too. control under press the put it power seized proclai by regime previous the from themselves distancing and delegitimizing by this accomplished they Firstly well. as rule their legitimize to attempting were Turks Young the hand, other the On another story. Wheth Empire. Ottoman the of image positive amidian period in the sense that helping to bolster the state’s image, owners and journalists journalists and owners image, state’s the bolster to helping that sense the in period amidian - esrhp xmnto. n h pltcl topee f h Hmda period, Hamidian the of atmosphere political the In examination. censorship

ming freedom of the press and other liberal measures. However, as soon as CUP CUP as soon as However, measures. liberal other and press the of freedom ming Ottoman Serbs. Namely, how the periodical, which was part of the Serbian Serbian the of part was which periodical, the how Namely, Serbs. Ottoman

campaign Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski

e forced to promote Ottoman interests and bolster the image of the state; in state; the of image the bolster and interests Ottoman promote to forced e

in Ottoman Macedonia, could successfully operate within Hamidian Hamidian within operate successfully could Macedonia, Ottoman in could only not alsohad Serbian conduct butit to propaganda On the other hand, during the early Young Turk period Turk Young early the during hand, other the On - revolution in 1909, periodicals were faced with a much a with faced wereperiodicals 1909, in revolution was not much room left for the press to bargain with bargain to press the for left room much not was

Carigradski glasnik, glasnik, Carigradski 46

r t a ol a aalbe pin r o is not or option available an only was it er ihr rne sbiis o cancelled nor subsidies granted either an Istanbul an could not survive in in survive not could - based periodical based

this this

CEU eTD Collection Serbian and Ottoman interests at time. the same periodical this could how understand to order in Macedonia Ottoman in propaganda glasnik were equality and freedom where in Thus, emphasized. discourse specific within operated also periodical

and its functioning under the press regulations press the under functioning its and

the next chapter, before focusing on the establishment of establishment the on focusing before chapter, next the 47

, it is essential to essential is it c ontextualize Carigradski

promote promote Serbian CEU eTD Collection this In weak. was position Serbia’s Bulgaria, circles and Greece diplomatic with comparison Its in that Empire. realized Ottoman the in action Serbian shaped certainly Bulgaria Macedo Ottoman in engagement Serbian immediate caused this and defeated, was Serbia which in Bulgaria with war a into Serbia led reasoning This Macedonia. Ottoman of annexation Bulgarian toward step a as interpreted circles Serbian in East autonomous annexed and Congress Berlin the violated Bulgaria 1885 in However, action. national for plans elaborating years few next spent it latecomer, a was SerbiaHerzegovina.Because and Bosnia of loss CongressandBerlin only afterit the to atte its turned northernparts, on Macedonian claims irredentist had whichSerbia, region; this over struggle intensified into engaged Bulgaria and Greece 1860s late from Although as well Serbi as Greece, Bulgaria, by claimed zone war virtual a was Macedonia Ottoman that knowing this imagine to harder even is It time. single a suspended being without years long are sensitive a that persecuted. and imprisoned even were journalists war, banne were rules these with accordance in not were which Periodicals state. the of interests the propagate and keep to intention the with precisely introduced was censorship and tolerated not was opposition the that obvious re the of rules the to conform to but option any have not did period, Hamidian during published those especially periodicals, that impression the get might one chapter, previous the in described press Ottoman the of condition general the on Based Chapter Carigradskiglasnik a whojoinedthe MacedoniaCongress. struggle over following the1878Berlin a like Ottoman Macedonia managed to survive Hamidian regime for fourteen for regime Hamidian survive to managed Macedonia Ottoman like a I II. Carigradskiglasnik , a periodical which was designed as a Serbian propaganda machine in machine propagandaSerbian a as designedwas periodicalwhich a , Ottoman d, and in special situations such as a state crises or crises state a as such situations special in and d, 48 Macedonia

and

the

For this reason, it is hard to imagine to hard is it reason, this For Serbianstruggle for the

i. h dfa i te a with war the in defeat The nia. gime in order to survive. It was was It survive. to order in gime ern Rumelia which was which Rumelia ern

ntion CEU eTD Collection glasnik Carigradski the in Greeks; and Bulgarians Macedonia between Ottoman for struggle advanced already Serbian the of with engage attempts to the circles present diplomatic I section first in parts: two into divided is chapter This events Ottoman Macedonia in period biggest Hamidian the of one during instance, For mentioned. never that almost were activities meant guerilla increasing This regulations. press and sovereignty Ottoman Nevertheless, region. the in activities guerrilla Serbian support to started circles diplomatic Serbian this, of Because coercion. through but pen,” and “book the through resolved be not would question th obvious became it bands guerilla of appearances increasing and uprising circles. diplomatic the of result p just not was state Ottoman the toward expressed periodical this that loyalty utmost the case a such In Istanbul. in namely surveillance, Ottoman strict under distributed collaboration withOtto through achieved best be could interests their that decided Serbs Since circles. diplomatic Serbianthe werewith connectedthem of and all population, local region and the with familiar Serbian of product owner direct The a Istanbul. in was circles glasnik diplomatic Carigradski that argue I chapter this in Thus, based Ottoman Serbs living Macedonia. periodical aimedto inOttoman th education and religion on based borders. Ottoman within it keep Macedonia Ottoman O the with collaborate to decided Serbia sense, olitical atmosphere and strict censorship, but it was also ultimate strategy of the Serbian Serbian the of strategy ultimate also was it but censorship, strict and atmosphere olitical Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski

h Srin tt kp ti sac utl 93 we atr h Ilinden the after when 1903, until stance this kept state Serbian The A mnind n h ltrtr rve, h shlrhp n Balkan on scholarship the review, literature the in mentioned As . –

man authorities, this meant that authorities,meant this man namely, to recognize Ottoman sovereignty in this region in order to order in region this in sovereignty Ottoman recognize to namely, –

the Ilindenthe upri

at was bolstered through bolstered was at For this reason it advocated rather peaceful propaganda propaganda peaceful rather advocated it reason this For eand “pen” a remained

ad dtr wr ntv Otmn Macedonians Ottoman native were editors and s eod eto I ou o te salsmn of establishment the on focus I section second 49 ttoman Empire and advocate the status quo in quo status the advocate and Empire ttoman sing in1903

Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski

ihe atn i acrac with accordance in acting fighter – Carigradski glasnik Carigradski

was not mentioned atwas all. mentioned not

at the Macedonian the at was and published , an Istanbul an ,

CEU eTD Collection Kosovo, of provinces 102 Croatia. of parts and Montenegro Macedonia, Serbia, Old Herzegovina, and Bosnia as such countries neighboring Includes 1844. in 101 very were 1878 to prior Macedonia was Ottoman in taken This actions the considering understandable 1885. until 1878 from region this in activities and politics Serbian on elabo projects in effort great expended nevertheless Affairs Foreign of Ministry its Macedonia, Ottoman immediatelyin action take not did state Serbian the though However, onward. period medieval the from right their be to claimed they which Macedonia northern the to namely south, the to attention their turned statesmen Austria since Her and Bosnia as known programexpansionist its put it hand other the on but state, Serbian the to independence official brought Congress Berlin 1878 The 3.1. Novaković Stojan located information.Serbia intheArchive of also providesuseful of materials addition, In diplomats. Serbian between correspondence betw connection glasnik the Thus historiography. Serbian old on reference and content periodical’s the of reproduction on based is and rare is periodical o this on scholarship section The Terzić. Slavenko or Jagodić glasnik Carigradski Miloš of those like scholars Serbian of works recent and reports consular Serbian on based entirely is propaganda Serbian on section campaigns propaganda Greek and Bulgarian around revolves usually Macedonia Ottoman in propaganda

Old Serbia, Serbia, Old Serbia, Greater S erbian diplomatic the activities in OttomanMacedonia ’s owners and editors is mentioned in Petar Mitropan’s work from 1930s and and 1930s from work Mitropan’s Petar in mentioned is editors and owners ’s laig eba a wl a Otmn ciiis sd. o ti rao, h first the reason, this For aside. activities Ottoman as well as Serbian leaving , region that was used to be part of medieval Serbia, now part of the Ottoman Empire. Includes Includes Empire. Ottoman the of part now Serbia, medieval of part be to used was that region - Hungary’s bid to occupy the province at the Congress was successful, Serbian Serbian successful, was Congress the at province the occupy to bid Hungary’s territorial expansionistic territorial zegovina represented one of the essential parts of this this of parts essential the of one represented zegovina

Metohija, Sandžak and northern Macedonia. and northern Sandžak Metohija,

s acrigy mil bsd on based mainly accordingly, is,

program officially created in Ilija Garašanin’s Garašanin’s Ilija in created officially program 50 Greater Serbia Greater

Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski Old Serbia Old 101

(

Velika Srbija Velika

102 rae Serbia Greater

( Начертаније ( Начертаније Stara Srbija Stara rating plans and and plans rating een ) into question. into ) itself. Serbian Serbian itself. Carigradski Carigradski ) Draft , but but , and n )

CEU eTD Collection (1878 Macedonia and Serbia Old Towards Policy Serbian 105 1897)) “ Terzić, политици. националној јединственијој и активнијој препрека биле су које трзавице унутрашње сопст заокупљеност њихова политичара, 104 Serbian 103 “a population local the in embed to order in conducted be should activities Austria even and Greek Bulgarian, because Macedonia Ottoman the in done be to needed something that warn to immediately started politicians Many Serbian Ottomanintheregion Serb populationpolitics thin andthusmaking its a an losing meant this state Serbian the For Serbia. southern homeland, ancestral its as fashion beganto Serbia what into Balkans the of parts comingother frompopulations Muslim man war the after and During Balkans. Ottoman the in remained schools Serbian few what over take to poised well were Bulgarians the that understood clearly Serbs the consequence, a as and operating develop well have not did 1878 after Serbia Therefore, migrate. to forced were teachers and closed; were schools abolished; were the in activities Serbian limited Ottoma the against war of declaration Serbian the After national united and active more to barriers politics.” all were which frictions, internal as well as parties political between fights vehement and property personal with preoccupied were thes of importance the misunderstood and neglected who politicians “leading in reasons the sees Terzić Slavenko there. living population local the about or region this either limited

A Miloš Jagodić, “ Jagodić, Miloš “ n exception was opening of the theological the of was opening exception n Томе су доприносили и небрига и неразумевање значаја ових земаља доброг дела водећих водећих дела доброг земаља ових значаја неразумевање и небрига и доприносили су Томе , Историјски часопис Историјски Конзулат Кралјевине Србије у битолју (1889 битолју у Србије Кралјевине Конзулат 103 104

and many Serbs, including politicians and intellectuals, did not know much about much know not did intellectuals, and politicians including Serbs, many and

Планови о Политици Србије према Старој Србији и Македонији (1878 Македонији и Србији Старој према Србије Политици о Планови y Ottoman Serbs Ottoman y

, Vol. 57, 2008, 328. 57, Vol.

l Serbia Old Old Serbia Old

migrated to Serbia, while the Ottomans deliberately settled settled deliberately Ottomans the while Serbia, to migrated ed starting points in the region from which it could start could it which from region the in points starting ed еи иекм аи жсои еутаак орчн и обрачуни међустраначки жестоки и али иметком, веним - ugr poaad. hy l are ta certain that agreed all They propaganda. Hungary - educational gymnasium in Prizren in 1871 in Prizren gymnasium in educational

n nrhr Mcdna became Macedonia northern and were nevertheless interrupted. Serbian societies Serbian interrupted. nevertheless were 51 - 1897)“ ( 1897)“ - 1885

) ), Consulate of Kingdom of Serbia in Bitola in Serbia of Kingdom of Consulate

Историјски Историјски Epr i 17, l o te very the of all 1876, in Empire n часопис

more difficult.more , Vol.436 , 2011, 60, .

- 1885)“ ( 1885)“ the focus of of focus the e areas, who who areas, e ” , 105 Slavenko Slavenko Plans on on Plans lready

- (1889 38.

- - CEU eTD Collection 107 106 points these all Namely, authorities. Ottoman of suspicions the arouse not to as so societies. implemented be should informal policy Serbian that by advocated them not of all Interestingly, and plan), Garašanin’s in accepted was (which state Serbian conducted In be to Serbs. has operation national Ottoman whole the that at required plans aimed some addition, periodical as well as bookstores, houses, printing Serbian Patriarc the from autonomy ecclesiastical of sort some gaining action; national coordinate would which consulates Serbian of establishment the to referred points common These Balkans. Ottoman the to according which, points common several had workers these All situation. present the with familiar well were who Serbia Old in workers national former the by proposed regularly were plans these All Minister madePrime plan, bythe only last the but made, beenhad proposals several period year seven this during Hence government. Serbian the for defeat humiliating declara Serbia’s by immediately Macedonia Ottoman in action directfollowed Rumelia Eastern autonomous with Bulgaria of unification the was take1885 in belatedly to Affairs Foreign of Ministry the led What viabl a launch to required funds of lack the by further exacerbated Serbia in situation political volatile the to due effect little with slowly very materialized Affairs Foreign of Ministry the of part the from Serbia.” with unite to desire and consciousness

Ibid, 441 Ibid, 439. Ibid, of Foreign Garašanin,Affairs Milutin accepted. was -

42. hate in order to lead independent religious and educational affairs; and to establish to and affairs; educational and religious independent lead to order in hate

e program which could effective could which program e

m, were necessary for forging a successful Serbian policy in the the in policy Serbian successful a forging for necessary were m,

tion of war against Bulgaria, a declaration that resulted in a a in resulted that declaration a Bulgaria, against war of tion 52 l y counter the irredentist campaign of its rivals. rivals. its of campaign irredentist the ycounter 106

However, proposed plans and plans proposed However, 107

- minister who was also thealsowas who minister , including the the including ,

elaborations by the the by CEU eTD Collection 109 108 Štip. in authorities the with smoothly so going not were things that mentioned Radenković 1908 August from dated letter a in However, Štip.” in positions our firm to us encouraging After (…) Bulgarians. with Štip, have we that in game cultural entirely this work against anything have cannot “they to that commenting teachers Serbian more or two for authorities Ottoman from permission vice time that at Rakić, ( organization revolutionary Serbian that the of leader the Radenković, 1908 Bogdan March from dated letter private a in mentioned was method this of success inchoate the the with dealing in strategy On successful states. successor Ottoman these in governments inexperienced a quite be to proved which method the applied Ottomans the Balkans, the in neighbors its of all by claimed Ot that Aware convention. the conclude to hurry no in naturally were Ottomans the as slow extremely was Ottomans the with collaboration the expected, was As Ottoman the that aware andintentions thatexpressed loyalty foraffections thesultanate suspect. toandwere was Serbia all, After well. as Greeks with even and Ottomans the with collaborate to was Bulgarians the curb to way best the opinion their in and Slavic southern their (especially parts Macedonian Ottoman the of much claimed it Greece, unlike because, enemy main the as described was Bulgaria documents several In Bulgaria. unlike r The Ottoman Empire. the with relations good advocated strongly Serbia below, mentioned be will As Ottoman state and law.with Ottoman inaccordance the of approval the with conducted be should periodical, Serb Ottoman an of establishment

Ibid, 448;457. Ibid, 458 Ibid,

populations). Serbian diplomatic circles were in constant fear of San Stefano Bulgaria Bulgaria Stefano San of fear constant in were circles diplomatic Serbian populations). - 460.

ao ws ht h Otmn mie a nt ecie a a eiu enemy, serious a as perceived not was Empire Ottoman the that was eason

- consul at Skopje. I Skopje. at consul

all, you also remember how two years ago Turks were were Turks ago years two how remember also you all, n the letter Radenković requested Rakić to ask for ask to Rakić requested Radenković letter the n 53

108

e of the best illustrations of illustrations best the of e toman Macedonia was was Macedonia toman čete iie t impera et divide ) sent to Milan to sent ) ke its knew s 109

CEU eTD Collection scholar. recognized also Jugoslavije was Novaković Wars. during Balkan reactivated He Petersburg. Saint prime became and again he Paris when crisis in annexation posts diplomatic obtained he 1905 in retirement Until f of minister became he Serbia, to return the After Istanbul in envoy as performed 1892 until 1885 from and affairs, internal 112 111 (1907 Ракићу 2008, 159. 29, Милану (1907 Rakić Milan to Radenković Штип.“, Раденковића Bogdan of на Letters Diplomat. a туткали Богдана to Intelligener године Писма две пре диполмати. још Турци обавештајца нас су како сећате сами и 110 job main The Bitola. and Pristina in two another 1889 in and Salonika, and Skopje in opened est to state Serbian the allow to Porte the persuade to managed who Istanbul in envoy mentioned above the was coordinator real the However, 1886. in Belgrade in mission this for especially Sain of Society the by implemented be will work cultural and educational the of most that expected was It Ottoman Empire. be to prove soon would appoi therefore was and project whole the well a Novaković, state. Serbian the of administration the under territories contested these in actions its coordinating for in exclusively strategies diplomatic designed branch special a established Affairs Foreign of Ministry The being. into came action for plan Garašanin’s 188 as soon as in and war Bulgarian began Macedonia Ottoman in activities Serbian case, any In betweenBulgarians.and Serbs rivalry economic peaceful the in wrong anything was there that understand not did authorities th forbade Ottomans The

Jagodić, Jagodić, “...они не би требали имати ма шта против ове наше сасвим културне утакмице са Бугарима. (...) Ви се се Ви (...) Бугарима. са утакмице културне сасвим наше ове против шта ма имати требали би не “...они Stojan Novaković Stojan were consulates two first the 1886 In territories. contested these in consulates ablish , Vol. 6, 1965. 6, Vol. , “ oreign affairs, and soon after prime after soon and affairs, oreign Планови о Политици Политици о Планови

Sv, eba non Serbian Sava, t 112 , active in politics from 1873 when became Minister of Education. In 1884 was minister of of minister was 1884 In Education. of Minister became when 1873 from politics in active - known Serbian intellectual and politician, was in charge of implementing implementing of charge in was politician, and intellectual Serbian known

l Serbia Old e opening of Serbian trade because, according to Radenković, the the Radenković, to according because, trade Serbian of opening e prts movens spiritus Србије према

110

n nrhr Macedonia, northern and - - - established was which organization governmental minister. From 1897 until 1900, he was again envoy in Istanbul. Istanbul. in envoy again he was 1900, until 1897 From minister. min ...“, 458. ...“, nted as the Serbian envoy in Istanbul. Novaković Istanbul. in envoy Serbian the as nted

ister. He also led Serbian delegation in London during the the during London in delegation Serbian led also He ister. ocrig h bidn Srin oiy n the in policy Serbian building the concerning 54

Extracted from “Stojan Novaković”, Novaković”, “Stojan from Extracted hs osldtn al f its of all consolidating thus - 1912)

ijn Vučetić Biljana , - Мешовита грађа Мешовита , fe te Serbo the after 5, 1912)“

(Report of an an of (Report , Enciklopedija Enciklopedija

“Извештаји “Извештаји 111

Stojan , Vol. - CEU eTD Collection Kosovo), and Bitola Salonika, of Vilayets the in Reform Action вилајету“ Косовском и Битољском 114 113 in 1885whichres region. this of that Rumelia annexation Eastern autonomous of annexation Bulgaria’s on argument this based Diplomats successful Bulgaria’s in result could that status autonomous diploma Serbian region. Ottoman this in reforms preserving nor autonomy, supported neither advocated Serbia borders. Ottoman strongly within Macedonia ones, earliest those least at circles, diplomatic or in 1895 in send to started pen” and “book the and action political rational through was region the in presence Serbian consolidate to way best the Novaković, a in not was it that and weak was Macedonia Serbo the After Ottomans. the with relations good maintain to was Empire Ottoman the in interests Serbian s general Serbian the previously, mentioned As Empire. of those unlike intentions, Austria in propaganda especially Bulgarian Powers, Great the convince to curb as well as Macedonia to Ottoman northern was Istanbul in mission Serbian the of goal main The Serbia the inorder to prepare Otto educating and periodicals, and books Serbian spreading religious establishing propaganda, Serbian spreading for agents and teachers finding schools, opening by Namely, Empire. Ottoman work educational and cultural Serbian coordinate to was consulates these of

Terzić, “ Ristović, Ristović, - Hungary who considered Ottoman Macedonia as a their zone ofSerbianinterests, that zone their a as Macedonia Ottoman considered Hungarywho Конзулат Кралјевине Србије Кралјевине Конзулат “ Реферат - ugra wr Sri bcm wl aae ht t psto i Ottoman in position its that aware well became Serbia war, Bulgarian ulted in a Serbianulted defeat in thewar. in

Јована Јовановића о односу Србије према реформској акцији у Солунском, Солунском, у акцији реформској према Србије односу о Јовановића Јована

ts feared that reforms in Ottoman Macedonia would lead to an an to lead would Macedonia Ottoman in reforms that feared ts

Bulgaria, did not jeopardize the territorial integrity of the Ottoman Ottoman the of integrity territorial the jeopardize not did Bulgaria, m for theirregion. work inthe

(Jovan Jovanović's Expert Opinion on the Position of Serbia Regarding the the Regarding Serbia of Position the on Opinion Expert Jovanović's (Jovan der to break Ottoman sovereignty in the region. Serbian Serbian region. the in sovereignty Ottoman break to der ...“, 328. ...“, –

- not through guerilla bands that the Bulgarian state state Bulgarian the that bands guerilla through not educational communities, opening bookstores and and bookstores opening communities, educational 55

oiin o xrie oe. codn to According power. exercise to position

Мешовита грађа Мешовита 114

tance was that the best way to secure secure to way best the that was tance 113

a Mcdna suet in students Macedonian man ,

Vol. 31, Vol. 2010, 340 in this part of the of part this in Russia and and Russia - 41.

CEU eTD Collection створи се да то, Ово последицу (...) као цркви. повлачи његовој и потребна шкоди тако њој је која Патријаршије Васељенске надмоћност, држање духовну своју одржава да моћи неће Грк Пизрену у Патријаршије је Васељенске стране од постављен Србин, је један да спора Нема јексархијом. сасвим бугарском са спору њеному Србина језику Цркву Матеру по по користи посредне од било Срба православних захтева и задовољење би да то, на пажња пореклу по митрополита имају ван обима јепархија та поштоје никога, не вређа Тажеља оправдана. да Срба, Жеља упечатак. непријатан 116 115 which granting on article an Crete published periodical one Greek view, of point pragmatic purely this From Patriarchate. Ecumenical the with case the was than interests Serbian meet to prone and pragmatic more much were circles dividing on negotiation Macedonia. Ottoman in interest entered of spheres Greece and Serbia once especially difficult, so not was cooperation close establishing Thus, Bulgaria.Stefano San creating towards aimed was which Bulgaria countering on working was diplomacy Greek and Serbian both that an Patriarchate Ecumenical the with negotiate to started commu religious Serbian establishing and schools Serbian the of opening the allow to as well as diocesesMacedonian in priests Serbian appoint Istanbulto in Patriarchate Ecumenical he Istanbul in stay diplomatic his Balkans.During Ottoman the in consulatesopen to permission government Serbian the giving in quickness Porte’s the in seen be can as Ottomans the with terms good on was Novaković

Terzić, “ “ Устручавање велике Матере велике Устручавање Carigradski glasnikCarigradski nities in order to bolster Serbian propaganda in these areas. For this reason, Novaković reason, Novaković For this areas. inthese propaganda bolster Serbian inorderto nities Конзулат Кралјевине Србије Кралјевине Конзулат might cause the creation of an independent Serbian Exarch Serbian independent ofan creation the might cause Ecumenica the of stance This (…) church. his to necessary the n his to Due else. someone than better much be would Prizren, in Patriarchate Ecumenical the by appointed Mother Serb, one that doubt the no is There for Exarchate. benefit direct of be would att pay to good It be interests. would Greek with collide not does eparchy this because especially anyone, offend b metropolitan own an cause Mother nation grand the of hesitation The Greek metropolitan would not be able to keep his spiritual superiority, which is so so is which superiority, spiritual his keep to able be not would metropolitan Greek

, бољи, него неко други. Својом народношћу као и својим језиком, митрополит митрополит језиком, својим и као народношћу Својом други. неко него бољи, ,

unpleasan y origin and by language by and origin y

also communicated to its audience.also communicated toits - Цркве да задовољи праведне захтеве српког народа, произвело је свуда свуда је произвело народа, српког захтеве праведне задовољи да Цркве ention to the fact that fact the to ention t impression everywhere. The everywhere. impression t also tried to solve the ecclesiastical matter and persuade the the persuade and matter ecclesiastical the solve to tried also ...“, 329 ...“, - - hrh o meet to Church 30.

115

As following quote w followingquote As 56

- is completely legitimate. This wish does not not does wish This legitimate. completely is Church in her dispute with the Bulgarian Bulgarian the with dispute her in Church

meeting meeting ecclesiastical positions to Ottoman Serbs, Ottoman to positions ecclesiastical d with Greek diplomatic circles, g circles, diplomatic Greek with d the

the the wish wish ate, like the Bulgarian one. like theBulgarian ate, justified l Patriarchate is harmful and harmful is Patriarchate l de of the Ser the of mands of Orthodox Serbs Serbs Orthodox of mands грчког. Добро би било да се обрати се обрати да било би Добро грчког.

ationhood and language, language, and ationhood

demand of Serbian Serbian of demand ill show, Greek diplomaticGreek show, ill bs bs to have their their have to n propaganda propaganda n

116 - educational

самостални самостални

- based based iven iven

CEU eTD Collection 118 бугарски. 117 постоји већ Patriarchate), Ecumenical што као јексархат, српски Serbs the mainlyKosovovilayetInaddition, was particularly ofthe lived. not Greek zone part Ottoman where areas the in only appointed were metropolitans Serbian that understandable so vilayet) Bitola the of part was which Debar of exception the (with vilayet Kosovo 1910. in Debar and Veles in and metro for appointed were Serbs and 1890, in Bitola in established therefore was commune educational Patriarchate. Ecumenical the as well as charge in metropolitan rel establishing and schools, Serbian opening positions, metropolitan on Serbs appointing of strategies Serbian the reason, this For demands. Serbian confirm to refused therefore which and claimed also case the especially was This ground. the on different quite was situation the efforts diplomatic Novaković’s despite however, path; easiest the seemed latter the Serbs, the For Church. Greek the of rubric the under schools p grant to Patriarchate Ecumenical the to apply to was religious abolish and education state enforce to efforts Ottoman given simple so not was which authorities, Ottoman to f apply to was ways one schools: two existed there state Serbian the for education, Regarding was dreamas considered morea reality. than as idea this Thus, Empire. Ottoman the in standing diplomatic overall their of aware well also a h Serbs that true establishing indeed Itis Exarchate. Serbian to possibility the the about to belief opposed unfounded as an reveals Serbs also it and but Greek Bulgarians, the of interests common the reveals passage This

Jagodić, Jagodić, Ibid ,

338

politans only years later: in the Raška the in later: years only politans “ - 40. Планови о Политици Србије према Политици о Планови

igious CG, No. 43, 1895, 1. 43, No. - dctoa cmue dpne o te esnl il f the of will personal the on depended communes educational 118

o hs hud e de ta al icss ee n the in were dioceses all that added be should this To

in the Bitola and Salonika vilayets, which the Greeks Greeks the which vilayets, Salonika and Bitola the in

...“, 459. ...“,

57 ”

ave entertained with such idea, but Serbs were Serbs but idea, such with entertainedave

Prizren diocese in 1896; in Skopje in 1897; in Skopje in 1896; in diocese Prizren “ ри Всљнк Патријаршија Васељенска и Срби - educational privileges; the other way way other the privileges; educational riso fr pnn te Serbian the opening for ermission

117

The first Serbian religious Serbian first The or opening Serbian Serbian opening or ” (Serbs and and (Serbs ”

it is is it -

CEU eTD Collection године“ 1901) 1901. in грађ Мешовита Pazar Novi and Пазару Kolašin Ibarski Mitrovica, Kosovska in Новом Maškov Viktor of Visitation и the on Radenković Колашину Ибарском Митровици, Косовској 120 119 not occasion, every in stressed was loyalty utmost although order, and peace enforce to authorities Ottoman on called rarely editors case,the this In censorship. Hamidian strict to subjected periodical public a alsowas it on reflected was view This region. the in order and peace keep to Ottomans the to appealed also it while state, Ottoman the of subjects loyal be to population local the to appealed diplomacy S reforms, necessary supporting of instead However, capitals. Balkan various the to loyalties own materialmultiple and disparateguerillamany interests had which bands, their of Serbia Old Serbs andAlbanians i.e. Christians, and Muslims violencebetween and enmityincreased deteriorating. were Macedonia Ottoman in conditions losing thus and population Serbian local potential the for conditions improve to nothing doing as region Jovanović bands. guerrilla Serbian Jovanović in served Jovan also who by diplomats criticized strongly was it example, For circles. diplomatic Serbian all among popular not was approach this However, Ottomans. the with sovereignty Ottoman advocating meant This 1903. until least at same, the remained generally Empire Ottoman the in policy Serbian south. the in interests Greek with conflicted also which aspirations Bulgarian the to counterbalance the positions to metropolitans Serbian appointing so interest, of

“ o isac, e Vsa akvć “ Zarković, Vesna see instance, For Carigradski glasnik Carigradski Срби и Васељенска патријаршиј Васељенска и Срби 119

wie h suhr aes ee ujc t cntn atc ad aaset by harassment and attack constant to subject were areas southern the while , , Vol. 33, 2012, 365 33, Vol.

iies h cud e ovne ta te wr Bulgarian were they that convinced be could who citizens

as well. Although the paper was a dire a was paper the Althoughwell. as

- Istanbul and who later contributed to the organization of the the of organization the to contributed later who and Istanbul 385. а“

just when it came to official celebrations such as Sultan’s Sultan’s as such celebrations official to came it when just

(Serbs and the Ecumenical Patriarchate) Ecumenical the and (Serbs зетј одн Рдноиа брву итр Мшоа у Машкова Виктора боравку о Раденковића Богдана Извештај

- Pižon considered supporting Ottoman sovereignty in the in sovereignty Ottoman supporting considered Pižon

in the Ottoman Balkans and bolstering good relations good bolstering and Balkans Ottoman the in 58

Many officials reported about about reported officials Many ct product of Serbian diplomats,Serbian of product ct re was a good Patriarchal Patriarchal good a was re ,

CG ,

no (The Report of Bogdan Bogdan of Report (The - . 43, 1895, 1. 1895, 43, . io, n o the of one Pižon, s

ie that given

erbian 120

in ,

CEU eTD Collection акција.“ национална запоставлјена Serbia in 1903 29, ofUpheaval May сасвим је да Višnjakov, а династије, учвршћиванја 123 122 1896, 1. 28, напретка.“, и просвете народне добротвора 121 called (so units guerilla s to began also 1904 in and Macedonia Ottoman in reforms for need the advocate strongly to began Karađorđević, Petar king new the under Serbia, Macedonia. Ottoman the toward organiz autonomous Macedonian the by uprising Ilinden the by followed assassination 1903 This was interests national for fighting whereas, completely neglected.” and dynasty, the strengthening at aimed Obrenović last the of endeavors “the Smrt ili Ujedinjenje assassination. his for point rallying 1903, of mismanagement March perceived King’s the in Indeed, Belgrade in demonstrations on. later months few a assassination his with culminated and escalated during which demonstrations peak a reached unpopularity policy confront asto Macedonia a wit inOttoman pretext state. Serbian the of situation the in reflected be OttomanMacedoniabeganto in situation centurydifficult the 20th the beginningof By the narrativessimilar andrepresentconstant manifestation were atypical of“banal nat progress.” and education national of benefactor great Sultan, the Magnificence “Serbia the whom to master enlightened an as praised was Abdülhamid schools, and education regarding articles all in instance, For well. as occasions everyday for but day inauguration or birthday

Ristović, “ Ristović, “ “ српски народ у Отоманској Царевини моли се толико Богу за дуг живот Њ. Ц. В. Султана, великог великог Султана, В. Ц. Њ. живот дуг за Богу толико се моли Царевини Отоманској у народ српски да је рад послједнјег Обреновића сведен исклјучиво на унутарнју политичку борбу, у цилју цилју у борбу, политичку унутарнју на исклјучиво сведен Обреновића послједнјег рад је да ation VMRO two months later, informed a veritable shift in official Serbian policy policy Serbian official in shift veritable a informed later, months two VMRO ation “ Македонски покрет и преврат у у преврат и покрет Македонски

Реферат Јована Јовановића о о Јовановића Јована Реферат n nation in [the] Ottoman Empire pray constantly to God for long life of His Royal His of life long for God constantlyto prayEmpire Ottoman [the] in nation n

(

Union or Death) or Union 123 četniks

)

, Tokovi istorije, istorije, Tokovi ) into region. In doing so Serbia emulated the tactics of the of tactics the emulated Serbia so doing In region. into ) односу Србије

Čeda Popović, one of the leaders of the organization organization the of leaders the of one Popović, Čeda that plotted and carried out the assassination stated that stated assassination the out carried and plotted that ee eue ecuiey n ne pltcl bickering political inner on exclusively reduced were “ рии 9 мј 1903 маја 29. Србији Српске школе у Турској“ у школе Српске Vol. 3, 2010, 21. 3, Vol. 59 122

...“, 336. ...“, Oppositional parties used the inert Serbian inert the used parties Oppositional l Ser Old

h King Obrenović whose Aleksandar

”

bia ( The Macedonian Movement and the the and Movement Macedonian The

( Serbian em t hv sre a a as served have to seems

Schools , Jaroslav Valerijanovič Valerijanovič Jaroslav ,

Turkey 121 ionalism”.

hs and This ) ,

CG , end end No

. CEU eTD Collection 128 victims. Serbs as representOttoman to only again guerill unofficial or official Serbian of mention no was there addition, In intervened. successfully authorities Ottoman when only 127 126 125 124 involved became priests and teachers like workers national how on example good provides it Nevertheless, successfully. reacted Ottomans the because only published were bandits on teacher the with along bandits the caught Inhigh case compensation. this reacted Ottoman authorities promptly we from child a them delivered bandits, the with teacher, agreement This in suits”. Albanian dressedin “bandits with connected closelyteacher Bulgarian a on Veles, from correspondences its of one from received column a published 1908 cause. national for boys school of recruiters as acted who bands guerilla resolved coercion be only could question Macedonian the that obvious became it as soon a reality in was community.” national it that them, employed that community denominational the convincing describes Lory Bernard guerillainto inthe region. action incorporated became they 1903 after although period, the throughout role important an play warfare. through only resolved be question would Macedonian the that obvious became it because Affairs Foreign the of Ministry the of preoccupation main the became organization revolutionary Serbian Empire. Ottoman Serbian in shift a also but state, Serbian the the in of politics shift internal a represent just not did 1903 way, this In governments. Greek and Bulgarian

“ 59 Ibid, Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski Valerijanovi Lory, Наши дописи, Велес“ Наши airdk glasnik Carigradski

“Schools for the Destruction…”, the for “Schools , -

63. the teachers as ‘professional patriots’ became participants and even leaders of the of leaders even and participants became patriots’ ‘professional as teachers the

č a activities in the region. As said, after 1908 these bandit activities were more mentioned but but mentioned more were activities bandit these 1908 after said, As region. the in activities a Vi š njakov up to 1908 occasionally mentioned guerilla activities in the region and this was the case case the was this and region the in activities guerilla mentioned occasionally 1908 to up

125 , “

(Our Correspondences, Veles), Veles), Correspondences, (Our Македонски покрет и преврат у Србији у преврат и покрет Македонски

ecesa “poesoa ptit’woere hi ieiod by livelihoods their earned who patriots’ “‘professional as teachers At first this was done through the through done was this first At aey eerd o urla ad i bands guerilla to referred rarely

124

53.

128 Nevertheless,

There is no doubt that this and similar columns similar and this that doubt no is There 60

CG, CG, althy parents from whom they would ask ask would they whom from parents althy No. 22, 1897, 3. 22, No.

“book and pen” tactics continued to to continued tactics pen” and “book ...“, 20 ...“, “book and pen”, but, he asserts he but, pen”, and “book - 21. te region the n

diplomacy conducted in the in conducted diplomacy

–

they found a child and they 126

Although prior to prior Although 127 ,

n 87 it 1897 in

through , as ,

CEU eTD Collection 129 came and plan Garašanin’s in accepted were proposals These schools. Serbian the in used be to supposed were which materials educational various and books the for valid was procedure aforementionedcostlythe cumbersomeand to subject not were Balkans Ottoman the in communities towards all targeted activities that published Serbian so must a were Ottomans the with relations good before, mentioned As Istanbul. and censo Macedonia; Ottoman the by Ottoman checked easily be to could it because distributed secondly, be could periodical the because firstly, place; convenient most the as Istanbul advocated Novaković although activities, these for proposed Serbian. standard to it adapting gradually before Macedonian” “Serbo in periodical a publish to was plan initial The state. Ottoman the of blessing the with in action Ott Serbian the for plans proposed the all section, previous the in demonstrated As 3.2. basedby and inSkopje led revolutionarycircles. Serbian repla was it circumstances, new to According exist. to Balkans, the to environment political new a brought that changes regime and revolution Turk Young the Following question. Macedonian the toward stance diplom Serbian new when 1903 after even mission this to faithful materials. printed and schools like endeavors “intellectual” and authorities Ottoman with collaboration on based action political through established be earliest those c regionthe in position firmSerbian believedthat Istanbulwho in diplomats Serbian of product direct a glasnik, Carigradski introduce will I section next the In “guerilla” phase. a how and bands guerilla into

More about this in the next next the this in More about oman Macedonia advocated the establishment of a Serbian printing house and a periodical, a and house printing Serbiana of establishment the advocated Macedoniaoman Carigradskiglasnik: fighter the “pen” fortheOttomanMacedonia

chapter.

fter 1903 first “book and pen” phase became integrated into into integrated became phase pen” and “book first 1903 fter

double

e by ced - censorship procedure. The same same procedure. The censorship Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski Vardar Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski 129 c to a oe radical more a took acy rship located directly in in directly located rship

Different

eba periodical Serbian

lcs were places

ould only only ould remained ceased -

CEU eTD Collection Affairs, 133 132 131 requested the fact, 130 In periodical. the start to permission their for bribe a wanted officials 1893 in Affairs Internal of Ministry Ottoman of editor main and owner first the Savić, Nikodim Although to designed bolster Serbianinthe Ottoman Balkans. nationhood was content its words, other In Macedonia. Ottoman in especially churches, bigg The etc. writers Serbian the from poetry and novels publishing days, saint of celebrations customs, Serbian emphasizing by tradition and folklore Serbian on appendix an contain should it that also, and on periodicals; based Istanbul, from primarily news daily bring should it French; and Serbian in bilingually and weekly published be periodical the that proposed Veselinović periodical. future the of program the composed Bitola, in consul later d Serbian a Veselinović, Milojko There 1892. in Istanbul in organized intellectuals Serbian of conference a at place took paper the regarding action serious first The than the smaller, less significant parts ofMacedonia. focused irredentism schools. Serbian because time that and at possible churches in language Greek on insistence its and Patriarchate periodical the like financ Serbian received even which periodicals Bulgarian many existed there 1860s the In existed. already region the in distributed periodicals Bulgarian and Greek Macedonia, Ottoman for competition irredentist the entering in late was state Serbian the As Istanbul.for Ottoman Serbs in Serbian when 1885 after fruition to

Mitropan, “ Mitropan, “ Mitropan, Petar Jagodić, abknı Omnı A Osmanlı Başbakanlık 1893. “ Планови о Политици Србије према Политици о Планови

Цариградски Цариградски Бјек (Vjek). Бјек

rşivi ...“, ...“,

BA, HMT 316 DH.MKT (BOA), 19. ...“

130 ,

This Slavic collaboration was aimed against the Ecumenical the against aimed was collaboration Slavic This 18.

est emphasis would, however, be on the Serbian schools and schools Serbian the on be however, would, emphasis est

officials realized that they needed to establish a periodicala establish to theyneeded that realized officials ...“, 450 ...“, - 38 5, Letter of Nikodim Savić to the Ministry of Internal Internal of Ministry the to Savić Nikodim of Letter 5, 38 62 133

- , the decision was delayed because Ottoman because delayed was decision the , 57. 132

h Ottoman the

on Bosnia and Herzegovina rather rather Herzegovina and Bosnia on

h eidcl peldt the to appealed periodical the - Turkish papers and other other and papers Turkish iplomat in Istanbul and Istanbul in iplomat a hl i Istanbul, in help ial 131

hs was This CEU eTD Collection 165. Serbs) Kosmet the of leader educational and National glasnik' ('Carigradski 136 (1894) Simić Svetislav eto G.Ristić Mihailo Constantinople 135 зборник, Новопазарски century) 20th the of beginning and 19th the of end the at surroundings and Pazar Novi on glasnik' ('Carigradski 134 period to subsidies providing mild relatively finance to convenient more it found it and 1903 following radical more t shifted eventually was help material because but paper, the to subsidies provided also circles diplomatic Serbian The control. their under was it and circles received editors The Istanbul. in mission diplomatic Serbian of board editorial the expected, glasnik rea these of Because paper. Serbian true a it considered not did scholars Serbian recent and traditional the of most Kosovo, of vilayet the of paper official the was I Empire. Ottoman the in periodical Serbian first the not was glasnik Carigradski Technically, waswhen settled only thefirstCarigradskiglasnik of in1895,issue printed. the was in still Ristić time, At that1894. in ForeignAffairs Ministry of IstanbulSerbian the inand mission Serbian the of glasnik small not was amount n 1871 n

Vladan Virijević, Virijević, Vladan ijn Vučetić, Biljana jlaa Čolić, Ljiljana

- was delayed. was was considered to be to considered was 72 the weekly publication publication weekly the 72 “ 'Цариградски гласник' национални и просветни путоводитељ путоводитељ просветни и национални гласник' 'Цариградски airdk glasnik Carigradski “ “ им и Цргаа иал Г Ристић Г. Михаило Цариграда из Писма Цргаси лнк о оо Пзр и клц кае 1. пчто 2. века“ 20. почетком и 19. крајем околици и Пазару Новом о глсник' 'Цариградски quired about the situation regarding the periodical, and the whole matter whole the and periodical, the regarding situation the about quired

134

Vol. 2010,33,

– This testifies the correspondence between Mihailo Ristić, an official an Ristić, Mihailo between correspondence the testifies This

0 gle lrs a liras, golden 400 airdk glasnik Carigradski

de facto de cl, s t a te ae n aiin eie Furthermore, regime. Hamidian in case the was it as icals,

111. Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski Prizren

. In addition, the new Young Turk regime stopped stopped regime Turk Young new the addition, In . o the Vardar

was published in that town. However, because this this because However, town. that in published was first Serbian paper in the Ottoman Empire. Ottoman the in paper Serbian first 63 d eas o ti, ulcto of publication this, of because nd

. As mentioned, Serbian diplomacy became became diplomacy Serbian mentioned, As . , had financial problems later, I assume this this assume I later, problems financial had Мешовита – okd n ls cneto wt the with connection close in worked

втсау ииу (1894) Симићу Светиславу

грађа,

content from Serbian diplomatic diplomatic Serbian from content , Косово и Метохија и Косово

Vol. 33, 2012, 339. 33, Vol. četnik sons,

омткх Срба“ Косметских

papers than the the than papers “ (Letters from from (Letters “ . Carigradski Carigradski Carigradski

Vol. 5, 2010, 2010, 5, Vol.

135

136

As ,

CEU eTD Collection Encyclopedia) of owner last the as well withas connected well i deputy was Serbian was he he revolution Turk Young where the After circles. Belgrade diplomatic Serbian to moved he Committee, Secret Macedonian mentioned ex eventually was he which Extrac 140 Novaković. Stojan with especially Mitropan, diplomacy, Serbian with connections close kept he where Istanbul, to moved he prison, Bulgarian from released was he After influence. Serbian under was which of editor and owner another with along where Sofia in time of period a spent he since chapter next the in mentioned be will life his about More 139 “ Метохије Cvetanović, Vladimir from Extracted with engaged became and circles diplomatic Serbian like is It affairs. commercial for papers the of one of editor an became and periodicals different for write to started he where Belgrade, in gymnasium the at spent i commerce and 138 twenty 137 Sava: Milojko of Saint saint, Serbian plan greatest the of day the on bilingual published was It failed). obviously Veselinović original (the script Cyrillic the with Serbian standard in only fin glasnik Carigradski of issue first The more thatnational the thelocalSerbian workersfrom state. population influence to expected were and region the in situation the with familiar were natives opinion, t as citizens Serbian than Macedonians Ottoman circles. diplomatic Serbian the with contacts established they where Belgrade in time of period certain a spent all they Grupčević while Peć, in (Savić Macedonia Ottoman the in born Grupčević Kosta we glasnik board, Carigradski editorial the comprised also who owners, three The also time on subscriptions their pay contributed tofinancial ofthe difficulties paper. not did who subscribers with problems constant

Temko Popov(ić) (1855 Popov(ić) Temko (1865 Savić S. Nikodim Kosta Grupčev( Kosta Aleksa

- fifth anniversary of the liberation of the South Serbia), Skopje, 1937, Skopje, Serbia), South the of liberation the of anniversary fifth

Први интелектуалци на југу интелектуалци на Први , Jovanovi Belgrade: Književna zajednice Zvezdara, 1992, 22 1992, Zvezdara, zajednice Belgrade: Književna , MANU, Skopje, 2009, 1189. Skopje, MANU, n Salonika, where he learned Greek, French and Italian language. One period of time he also also he time of period One language. Italian and French Greek, learned he where Salonika, n ić) (1848 ić) , “ ć, 139 пмнц даеептгдшјц ослобођењ двадесетпетогодишнјице Споменица

(1897

hogot hs ite ya ln pro: ioi Savić Nikodim period: long year fifteen this throughout - - 1897), born in Peć to a well a to Peć in born 1897), 29), born in Ohrid, educated in Athens, worked as teacher in Bulgarian schools from from schools Bulgarian in teacher as worked Athens, in educated Ohrid, in born 29), - 1907), born in Ohrid in a rich tailor family were he finished Greek finished he were family tailor rich a in Ohrid in born 1907), eld eas o pro of because pelled Carigradski glasnik. glasnik. Carigradski - 97,adTmo Popović Temko and 1907),

Namely, Serbian diplomatic circles would rather employ native native employ rather would circles diplomatic Serbian Namely, Carigradski glasn Carigradski

иои Савић Никодим

(First Intellectuals ta the South), Skopje: Južna Srbija, 1936, 4 1936, Srbija, Južna Skopje: South), the ta Intellectuals (First

ly aeilzd n aur 1/6 19, written 1895, 14/26, January on materialized ally Extracted from from Extracted ik ly that during the stay in Belgrade, he connected with the the with connected he Belgrade, in stay the during that ly - Serbian propaganda. In Sofia he participated in above above in participated he Sofia In propaganda. Serbian anti established - 64 known merchant family, finished Italian school for trade trade for school Italian finished family, merchant known Carigradski glasnik Carigradski 137

“ heir national workers in the region. In their their In region. the in workers national heir

(Nikodim Savić), Savić), (Nikodim - 28.

140 аеоса Енциклопедија Македонска

- (1908 Bulgarian Macedonian Secret Committee Committee Secret Macedonian Bulgarian . He died in 1897 from tuberculosis. tuberculosis. from 1897 in died He . јже Србије“ јужне а

- 892; Mitropan, 22. 892; Mitropan, 09). All three of them were them of three All 09). ее пиоеаа Кос приповедача Девет and Popović in Ohrid) and Ohrid) in Popović and e n hre f running of charge in re

n the Ottoman parliament, parliament, Ottoman the n (Memorial on the the on (Memorial - 138 speaking school. school. speaking

ted from Petar Petar from ted

(Macedonian (Macedonian (1895 - 18. в и ова -

97), the

CEU eTD Collection који, читатеља, од и но нас, од само зависи не 145 то (...) будућности. претпла са одазову се да штоизобилније лист,треба наш прихватајући срећној и великој напретку, Прем 144 143 142 1895, 4. на овде сунароници наши ( су торжанствен врло прославили листа, нашега број први света године угледао је ове кад је дан, који на Србина, баш православног пао једног и ма има год где свуда, прославља се који Немањића, 141 Austria or Germany from Ottoman press; especially press, international Ottoman the quoting and other, each in from articles borrowed periodicals practice common be to seems This periodicals. other from that articles usually were but researched, not were topics These page. front the on covered usuallywere topics political internal and International usefulit for their readers. other the on issues Political paper. everything the in and place its nature find would in fields similar and practical education economics, completely in progress was concerning paper the of aim the words, other will who just readers our on also not but us on does depend that but (…) future brighter a and progress towards strive subjects his help to strives who Sultan merciful our of will majestic the to respond to readers help and benefit th of aim the that claimed editors the statement, mission initial their to Master” Generous Padishah!” Great Our Live “Long stating letters large wi bedazzled page front official over flips one If Sultan. the to also given was tribute so Nevertheless,

Ibid, 1 Ibid, “ “ “.. “ наш Велкиодушни Господар“, наш Велкиодушни Падишах!“ Велики Живио Наш а пвг рсо повттљ и чтљ, а пвг риеикп спкг Светитеља српског архијепископа првог дан учитеља, и просветитеља српског првог Дан бити од стварне користи и да ће им бити искрени путевођа да одговоре узвишеној вољи нашега нашега вољи узвишеној одговоре да путевођа искрени бити им ће да и користи стварне од бити илостивога Султана, која се састоји у томе, да његови поданици греде оном стазом, која води води која стазом, оном греде поданици његови да томе, у састоји се која Султана, илостивога

- 3. one Orthodox Serb, this year was celebrated precisely on the day the first issue of our our of issue first the day pap the on precisely celebrated was year this Serb, Orthodox one where anywhere celebrated is whoseday Nemanjić, Sava Saint Serbian the of day The

er was published. Our Serbian compatriots celebrated it gloriously here. it gloriously celebrated compatriots OurSerbian was er published. Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski sic 143 ) начин.“Цариградске вести, вести, начин.“Цариградске ) ; one sees the much more interesting “Program of Our Paper.” According Paper.” Our of “Program interesting more much the sees one ;

first Serbian enlightener and teacher, the day of the first archbishop and and archbishop first the of day the teacher, and enlightener Serbian first 145 - Hungary, was also not an excep an not also was Hungary,

Ibid, 1895, 1. 1895, Ibid, , CG ,

No was also an Ottoman periodical published in Hamidian era Hamidian in published periodical Ottoman an also was hand were planned to be covered as much as editors found editors as much as covered be to planned were hand . 1, 1. 1, .

Свети Сава“ ( Сава“ Свети 65 embrace our paper and subscribe for it.” for subscribe and paper our embrace

Carigradski glasn Carigradski 142

News from Istanbul, Saint Sava Saint Istanbul, from News followed by flaming praise for “Our for praise flaming by followed tion. This meant playing it safe safe it playing meant This tion. том.“, том.“,

Ibid there ik eir publication was “to “to was publication eir summarized or copied or summarized 141 , 3

lives at least least at lives

- 4.

) , CG, CG, 144 No. 2, No. Саве Саве –

In in th CEU eTD Collection 146 official rulers from travels etc. their pro and appointments as such countries these on news dull brought abroad), from (News вести Стране disease. or fire, floods, as such disasters occasional officials, Ottoman of visits of consisting gene also was This Macedonia. Ottoman from news meant essentially news this and bring image. Sultan’s bolster to served column this the generosity, Sultan’s the Prayers, In word other notifications. state publishing Ottomanand officials, andpromotions of deaths Friday on informing meant This replacements. Istanbul) were glasnik Carigradski in appearing columns usual The years,forty believe was ishard now. soit that to it doing Glasnik, Prizren, glasnik Carigradski in conducted Patriarchate Ecumenical the that inquiry an on article an published info some negate frequent, were periodicals glasnik Ottoman Carigradski between discussions Although ones. Serbian also perio Armenian quoted like Empire, the in published dailies Ottoman other periodicals. in published already was that nature political on article an publish to was way safest the therefore ones, dangerous most the were issues political censorship Hamidian

“ Васељенска Патријаршија“ Васељенска

news from the Ottoman Empire. However, the Arab provinces were never mentioned mentioned never were provinces Arab the However, Empire. Ottoman the from news Sabah nw ta cnitd f h Sla’ atvte ad diitaie hne and changes administrative and activities Sultan’s the of consisted that news , the Ecumenical Patriarchate did not conduct any inquiries regarding its priests in past regardingPatriarchate anythe Ecumenicalconduct inquiries didnot priests inpast its Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski and rmation than to engage into discussion. For instance, when French French when instance, For discussion. into engage to than rmation

İkdam İkdam briefly stated that their French colleague was misinformed. According to According misinformed. was colleague French their that stated briefly

ey aey nae i te. o ti ppr t a mr cmo to common more was it paper this For them. in engaged rarely very dicals published in Turkish, then Greek and Bulgarian periodicals, and and periodicals, Bulgarian and Greek then Turkish, in published dicals ee ot utd ns Ohr wr mil Fec periodicals French mainly were Others ones. quoted most were

(The Ecumenical patriarchate), patriarchate), (The Ecumenical

Orient, Stamboul, Orient, use

d as reference a variety of periodicals: Ottoman periodicals: of variety a reference as d

la nw fo Rsi, eba n Mneer also Montenegro and Serbia Russia, from news alias 66 Домаће вести (Domestic News) (Domestic вести Домаће

and

Levant Herald. Levant CG, No. 26, 1895, 2. 26, No. 146 Цариградске вести Цариградске

motions of state officials, state of motions Editors also occasionally also Editors

was design to to design was

( News - ral news news ral Turkish Orient

from from s, CEU eTD Collection 148 147 generous compatrio less their of also but benefactors the of only not names the announced periodicals capital; social one’s to damage considerable cause might so do to failing and distinction, social of effort educational the out, to contributions pointed Yosmaoğlu As important. very was cause, national the for support namely students, poor and education Serbian for contributions and death advertisements, for reserved was glasnik Carigradski of page last The never signed. of especially articles, the correspondent the Who etc. trade agriculture, finances, concerning materials other with supplemented occasionally were which columns regular were These pedagogy. or with published were teachers for guidelines and to dedicated and Monastery HilandarAbdülhamid. mythical Serbian the at performed service a was col short these wherein nationalism” “banal of example perfect a were correspondences These city. specific a in place taking celebrations school or religious on news brought usually paper, (Correspondence), Empire. Ottoman the in published pieces French from mostly articles interesting were followed which columns Other

Yosmaoğlu “ umns comprised of the usual praises of both the Sultan and Ottoman Serbs. One such eventsuch One Ottoman Serbs. and the Sultan both of praisesthe usualof comprised umns Наши дописи, Хилендар Наши ан благодати Јавне , Blood Ties…, Blood 147

me ts to thecommunity.ts to кл и атв (col n education) and (School настава и Школа

aning news from the Ottoman Macedonia sent by correspondents of the the of correspondentsby sent Macedonia Ottoman the from news aning 62.

” (Our Correspondence), Correspondence), (Our ” ( Correspondence, ulc benefactions Public

in the region. Funding Bulgarian education was a work work a was education Bulgarian Funding region. the in ” рге штампе Преглед 148

were remains unknown remains were

67 CG, CG, ).

No. 34, 1906, 3. 34, No. Поука (Lesson) Поука ulc benefactions, Public “ omril uls ae important made guilds commercial

(Press outline) which provided provided which outline) (Press

ois ocrig education concerning topics

articles concerning religion religion concerning articles

because texts were almost were texts because concerning financial financial concerning s and authors of of authors and s

announcements Дописи Дописи CEU eTD Collection 150 need), in students друштва.“, и општине чланови корисни 149 1899 in note editorial An time. on pay not did obviously who subscribers with problems subscriptions, two needed married were who those even and f were Macedonia Ottoman in teachers Although permission. bi seeking authorities Ottoman the to applied they hope this in so week, per twice periodical the publish to subscribers enough attract to hoping obviously were owners The bi keep to order in also but survive to just not subscribers new find to readers their asked they everyissue in nevertheless circles, diplomatic A the although population, Macedonian information gathered paperfollowed concerning events inthe all theworld. around Serbs Ottoman the was audience target its mentioned, but pages four around had it considering Regularly format. folio a larger in published was it 1896 January from starting but pages, 12 had number first so format, smaller a in published was it week, a once on later or Thursday usuallyon house printing Zelić’s at or Gerard’s at published was glasnik Carigradski infuturewill be useful ofthe participants and community society.” fortunate: theschoo “helping less those for funds establish to compatriots wealthier and communities Serbian mobilize to more, Even etc. books provide aim which gatherings and parties about informed regularly Italso did. who those of names the emphasized nevertheless it contributions, give to expected were who Serbs those of names the announce not did glasnik Carigradski Although lthough it was mentioned that this periodical received material help from the Serbian Serbian the from help material received periodical this that mentioned was it lthough

“ “ Ожењеним учитељи Дајући у школски фонд знамо за извесно да потпомажемо сиротну децу, која ће, када одрасту бити бити одрасту када ће, која децу, сиротну потпомажемо да извесно за знамо фонд школски у Дајући

the amount of information it provided, it could have also six to eight pages. As pages. eight to six also have could it provided, it information of amount the CG, CG, No. 10, 1896, 1. 1896, 10, No.

ма“ ма“ (To married teachers), married (To l fund we know for sure that we are helping children in need who inneedchildren are helping thatwe sure for l fundwe know

Carigradski glasnik Carigradski Friday, although other days were not great exceptions. At first At exceptions. great not were daysother although Friday,

” Заснивање фонодва за сиротне ученике“ ученике“ сиротне за фонодва Заснивање

CG 68 , No , - weekly permission from O from permission weekly

. 1, 1908, 2. 1908, 1, . was socially engaged; this periodical tried periodical this engaged; socially was d o iacal spot or students, poor support financially to ed

orced to subscribe to the paper paper the to subscribe to orced 150

149 hs eidcl a major had periodical this

(Establishing a funds for for funds a (Establishing ttoman authorities. ttoman - weekly weekly

CEU eTD Collection 153 152 151 distributed was paper the Macedonia, Ottoman and Istanbul in Except same. the remained into converted was it countries other all for and market, Kuruş 10 for months 3 for were subscriptions Available priests. few of exception with teachers, mainly were subscribers and paper between also We Peć. and Berane Pljevlje, Prizren, Skopje, Salonika, in were points subscriber The list. subscriber a through distributed be to Ottoman other with keeping in completely Galata. in located stores tobacco two in and Gavrilović, N. of shop the in sons, of & Zelić A. of house printing in bookstore Krstić, a were places distributing These found. were periodicals Ottoman other ( Galata around mostly d so there, published was it Istanbul because in bought be could glasnik Carigradski of issue An additionalmaterialspublish otherwise permission for its this bi bi requested the granted Ottomans the Although termination. its Obviously the of three eighteen only the state, of this because from development subscribers financial positive a was Montenegro losing that claimed editors The stated). not were suspension for reasons (the Montenegro in suspension for was situation the desperate how describes istribution was istribution -

“ “ BOA, İ.DH 1374 İ.DH BOA, eky da ee materiali never idea weekly Напомена Напомена“

ihn h Otmn Empire. Ottoman the within Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski ” (Notification) ” (Announcement) - 19 2, Letter of Kosta Grupčević to the Ministry of Internal Affairs, 1898. Internal of Ministry the to of Grupčević Kosta Letter 19 2, not a financial a not

Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski 153 , CG

In Istanbul each issue cost 20 cost issue each Istanbul In , , No. 3, 1895, 12. 3, No. , CG,

did not obtain enough subscribers, so it remained weekly until until weekly remained it so subscribers, enough obtain not did burden there. It was distributed at a few locations in the town, the in locations few a at distributed was It there. burden zed; zed; No.1, 1901, No.1,

airdk glasnik Carigradski hs pie wr ajse to adjusted were prices These Kuruş 4.

- Turkish daily periodicals. All the other issues had had issues other the All periodicals. daily Turkish was located at Kule Kapı 2), in addition to where to addition in 2), Kapı Kule at located was

69 , 6 months for 20 for months 6 , know that the persons who were mediators mediators were who persons the that know

atal pi fr hi subscriptions. their for paid actually m Carigr adski glasnik glasnik adski

- 30 a fre fo tm t tm to time to time from forced was would become invalid. Paras Francs Kuruş, - weekly permission and this this and permission weekly , which was, surprisingly, was, which , , but the overall prices prices overall the but , Dinars Dinars while commenting the the commenting while

and 12 months for 40 for months 12 and

o te Serbian the for 152

151 L.

CEU eTD Collection 157 156 155 154 Austro the about Bulgarian of harassment the and of content the face to had Serbs/Macedonians Ottoman that issues about openly writing for visible was freedom certain period Constitutional Second the during in Only 1909. periodical October the of closure until continued and 1908 January in place took Kapetanović, S of editorship main and Popović Temko of ownership the under phase, third the Thus Grupčević’sassociate. close Popović, Temko became editor main and owner the Dimitrij, son Grupčević’s of agreement interv case this In owners. the of property private the as considered were papers the regulations,Ottoman to accordingNamely, 1907, January in death After Grupčević's eventually was theworld, introduced. around Serbsactivities of the named appendix new the from switched Serbia from news pro explicit more a editorship, Grupčević’s under and 1897 in death his after published, being started just had paper the because probably each pro entirely was phases, editorship Savić’s three While editor. the into of policy divided the on depending be could glasnik Carigradski censorship, the Despite and Herzegovina). Empire Ottoman the outside

“ “ 34. Ibid, The prices were l were The prices Наши дописи“Наши српске манастире на Насртај nin f h Srin diplomat Serbian the of ention

Carigradski glasnik Carigradski Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski

(Our Correspondence) (Our isted at the front page of each issue. of each page front the at isted - 154 ugra ocpto o Nv Pazar. Novi of occupation Hungarian

рк ганк Srin messanger) (Serbian гласник Срски Carigradski glasnik Carigradski 155

“ (Attack on Serbian monasteries), monasteries), Serbian on (Attack “ –

in Serbia, Montenegro, and Austria Montenegro,and Serbia, in komitadji

revolved around the difficult situation of Ottoman Serbs Serbs Ottoman of situation difficult the around revolved CG, CG, was closed for a year bec year a for closed was c circles ic News from abroad from News No. 52, 1908, 4. 52, No. in the Kosovo, Bitola and Skadar vilayets Skadar and Bitola Kosovo, the in - 70 Serbian perspective took shape. For instance, instance, For shape. took perspective Serbian

stayed within Grupčević’s family, but with the with but family, Grupčević’s stayed within

n rn o te toa atoiis n with and authorities Ottoman the of front in

157 to CG

, Domestic news Domestic

No. 7, 1909, 1. 7, No. oee, h mjr tr which stir major the However, which covered mainly cultural cultural mainly covered which ause of ownership difficulties. ownership of ause - Hungary (including Bosnia (including Hungary

with. In such cases such In with.

and in addition a addition in and - Ottoman 156 tojan

or , CEU eTD Collection коме на темељ је оно јер пажњу, нашег.“, напретка просветног достојну сву поклонити треба Њему општина. школских српских напретку и добру клони се што свега покретача и помоћника народних улози 161 160 159 158 and religious mobilizer: context, this In nationhood. Serbian or Bulgarian, propaganda Balkan that tools first the was education and religion said, As direction. that in readers the of correspondences and articles strug educational and religious a in engage would it hand other the On state. Ottoman the and Sultan the to loyalty utmost the express would that paper a as envisioned religion. and education about glasnik Carigradski published being articles of hundreds with Macedonia, Ottoman becaus Naturally, chapter.in the next Ottoman the in discussed be will representation This Serbs. Ottoman of position Serbian overall the with generally and parliament, the with Macedonia, Ottoman the in situation disillusionment showed discretely paper the in glasnik when Herzegovina and Bosnia of annexation the was months several for lasted

Čolić, “ “ CG, “ Неправда спрам Срба у Турској“ у Срба спрам Неправда Uчитељство сада постаје важна чињеница не само у просвећивању поверене му младежи, већ и у у и већ младежи, му поверене просвећивању у само не чињеница важна постаје сада Uчитељство no. 40, 1908, 1. 40, no. conducted anti conducted 'Цариградски гласник' 'Цариградски service in school and church, they have many other duties. They are almost the only only the almost are They duties. other many have they church, and school in service entrusted of performance devoted and mission special and main their of out even Hence, suita Teacher progress. educational and national our of building the rests which on foundation the are they because the teachers to prosper entrusted also but youth, the enlightening in just not players important becoming now are teachers The ble carriers of national characteristics and of our progress. ofour and nationalcharacteristics of carriers ble

and prog and e of the inability to write directly about the problems of the population in population the of problems the about directly write to inability the of e

159

n h tm o is salsmn dd o ne mr ta ta. t was It that. than more need not did establishment its of time the in

in the in Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski - Austrian propaganda. Austrian ress of Serbian school communities. All the attention should be devoted devoted be should attention the All communities. school Serbian of ress

“

role of national workers and initiators of initiators and workers national of role Искрена рећ“ Искрена …“, 221. …“,

( Injustice toward Serbs in Turkey), Turkey), in Serbs toward Injustice

ad ret ae h frt ms cmeet and competent, most first, the are priests and s

( Honest acquired an educational and religious character; character; religious and educational an acquired 158 71

word

By the end of 1908 the articles that appeared that articles the 1908 of end the By campaigns with the Young Turk revolution, with the the with revolution, Turk Young the with Carigradski ), CG , No . 26, 1897, 1. 26, . employed in spreading Greek, Greek, spreading in employed 161

everything that is aimed to to aimed is that everything CG,

glasnik glasnik

no. 50, 1908, 1. 1908, 50, no.

почива зграда народног и и народног зграда почива

acted as an educational educational an as acted gle, encouraging gle,

most most 160 Carigradski

n truth, In CEU eTD Collection нашем према верности поданичке велике своје са познат добро је милости који народности, својој и вери православној према љубави и привржености велике верности, поданичке велике своје са познат добро нас која пастве средину у Идемо задовољена. рашко народа српског потреба и на и излила се жеља и благодати, других обилно поред се Јер Царевини. великој разлике, Његовој у поданике најверније без Његове народ, поданике Његове све на в излевати почела предака, хана Хамида Абдула 163 областима.“, свим у народног живота назадку или унапређењу допринесу и утичу да много могу народом, с општењу и додиру непосредном у у дужности, других и много они имају цркви, у и школи 162 papers, glasnik new and flows new brought circumstances new face. the to since had However, population local that problems the and Macedonia Ottoman the in situation Only Ottoman Serbs are loyalOttoman sta themost subjectsthe in that speech his in asserted he 1896, in diocese Macedonian the in appointed being Dionisije metropolitan Serb Ottoman first the of occasion the on Even claims. irredentist no absolutely in texts the on solely premises the basing Indeed, borders. Ottoman the within say, could someone although culture, and g Byweretransferred. this speeches theirdescribed andweredioceses around tours metropolitans Serbian the of activities the to devoted was space of Lots Macedonia. too that events and happenings celebrations, Sava Saint the on texts with filled was paper the addition, In lasnik

“ “ Дакле, и ван круга њиховог главног, специјалног позива и савесног вршења поверене им службе у у службе им поверене вршења савесног и позива специјалног главног, њиховог круга ван и Дакле, иот ој и благовољ и Божја Милост

after the Young Turk revolution Turk Young the after вом Владару.“, Владару.“, вом continued to be perceived as a Hamidian paper, located in Istanbul and somehow cut somehow and Istanbul in located paper, Hamidian a as perceived be to continued created sense of belonging among the local population and fostered Serbian identity Serbian fostered and population local the among belonging of sense created also well also Ort towards love and well devotion is great which loyalty, nation this into know: we which and us met. know which is nationhood Serbian Empire. of great Archbishop an His have in to subjects loyal Ra in most nation Serbian of need His and wish the nation, benefactions, other Beside Serbian our on richly spread it diff without subjects His all on spread to started ancestors glorious His of Throne blessed on sat he when day happy that from Royal which II, His Han Hamid Master, Abdul Sultan enlightened Majesty most and divine our of will good and God of grace The spheres. all life in national ofthe decline or the improvement to contribute and wh educators national pae hogot eba religious Serbian throughout place k - known for its for known II , која се од онога срећнога дана, кад је Он сео на пресветли Престо Својих славних славних Својих Престо пресветли на сео Он је кад дана, срећнога онога од се која ,

“ Архипастирска посланица Архипастирска ење нашег узвишеног и високопросвећеног Господара, Љ. Ц. В. Султана Султана В. Ц. Љ. Господара, високопросвећеног и узвишеног нашег ење o, in direct touch and communication with nation, could influence influence could nation, with communication and touch direct in o,

humble loyalty towards our m our loyalty towards humble -

призренске јепархије, да има духовног архипастира своје народности, народности, своје архипастира духовног има да јепархије, призренске

“ airdk glasnik Carigradski Утувимо“ Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski познаје и коју познајемо: у средину овога народа, који је је који народа, овога средину у познајемо: коју и познаје

( Let

72 “ ( ’ hodox Church and its nationhood; its and Church hodox s Archbishop

remember улози скоро јединих народних васпитатеља, који, који, васпитатеља, народних јединих скоро улози erciful Master. erciful oe ol cnld that conclude could one ,

- We are going into into going are We dctoa cmue i Ottoman in communes educational ), ’ s

CG epistle wrote te: , No

), 1898, 1. 38, .

163 CG more openly on the overall overall the on openly more - known for its great great its for known ška

, No - Prizren diocese diocese Prizren . 9, 1896, 1. 9, . congregation congregation 162

which is is which erence; erence; Carigradski Carigradski

Serbs had had Serbs наш српски српски наш –

their CEU eTD Collection 165 being излазити“ престаје гласник “Цариградски покренути.“, поново може излажењне лист за коју има, дозволи по да, права свога одрекло није властима пред ЦАРИГРАДСКИ листа власништво уклоњене, се пошто буду тешкоће техничке те Кад уклонити. могле 164 Serbianproblems state alwaysthe budget. with had Thi organizations. revolutionary to turned and supported diplomacy Serbian that obvious was it fight, national the in education and religion of importance and Empire Ottoman the to loyalty too also state Serbian that saw we 1903 after addition, In subscription. paying stopped they even that likely is it revolutionaryorganization, the in involved became subsequently they and teachers, mai the that fact the Regarding regularly. glasnik Carigradski energetically and strongly more Macedonia Ottoman in interests surprise no was it hence and organization revolutionary called paper another 1908, September from Starting Empire. Ottoman the in paper Serbian only the in resulted market press Ottoman the of liberalization The revolution. Turk Young the after context overall the in lay probably most mentioned, as but nature, technical a of hardly were years fifteen long a after paper the closing for reasons The with the editors providing suspension: thefollowing reasons for 1909 10/23, October on published was issue last The reality. Macedonian Ottoman from off

Jovanović, Jovanović, “ mgt eutd ih h salr usde for subsidies smaller the with resulted might s Овим бројем обустављамо даље излажење нашега листа и то због техничких тешкоћа, које се нису нису се које тешкоћа, техничких због то и листа нашега излажење даље обустављамо бројем Овим

published Vardar different k of the state that, with permission that it had, the paper can be publish again. canbe the paper had, that it withpermission that, ofthe state glasnik diffic this With “ Споменица lis ht ol nt e eovd We w rsle hs difficulties these resolve we When resolved. be not could that ulties ) ,

CG will again be published since the paper ownership did not renounce its right in f in right its renounce not did ownership paper the since published be willagain was established in Skopje. It was founded by the leaders of the Serbian Serbian the of leaders the by founded was It Skopje. in established was , number we are suspending further publishing of our paper because of technical technical of because paper our of publishing further suspending are we number no . 42, . oiin towards position

had continuous problems with finances because subscribers did not pay pay not did subscribers because finances with problems continuous had …“, 893. …“, 1909, 1.

toa Mcdna ad lhuh t tl advocated still it although and Macedonia, Ottoman

sbcies f the of subscribers n 73

airdk glasnik Carigradski

Carigrads that this paper defended Serbian Serbian defended paper this that

. 165 Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski

ГЛАСНИК ће опет излазити, излазити, опет ће ГЛАСНИК In addition, we saw that saw we addition, In ki glasnik glasnik ki 164

( Carigradski

, knowing that the the that knowing , Carigradski Carigradski ceasing to be to ceasing ront ront

glasnik

were stops

CEU eTD Collection be examinedinthe next chapter. did namely, ground; will This nationhood. Serbian develop the Macedonia northern in located population Macedonian on exercised was paper, the in propagated much so was it which workers, national and thing propaganda important most the provide Serbian not did nevertheless the concerning problem the to alluded there and here Although Macedonia. Ottoman in nationhood Serbian the However, of goal concrete te the Serbian animating with religion and education Serbian on written were articles Many Serbianof thisSerbian nationalwasrole periodical. propaganda theprecise the with glasnik case the was This topics. cultural with mostly engaged periodicals many state, Ottoman the of interests the to reduced was news political Because Sultan. the express was state the to loyalty where atmosphere political the in operate to had periodical the Namely, regulations. press Ottoman the to conform definitely should paper the that meant This terms. legal completely in operating to addition in interests, Serbi advocate would which periodical Serbian establish primarily to curb and to propaganda, order Bulgarian in Ottomans with collaborate to need the emphasized was them in Gre and Bulgaria like Balkans, Ottoman the in position firm its establish to had and latecomer was it mainly because position, unfavorable struggle educational religious a existed already there when Macedonia Ottoman in engaged state Serbian The Conclusion

Ot toman Macedonia were proposed to the Serbian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and in all of all in and Affairs Foreign of Ministry Serbian the to were proposed Macedonia toman s well as Carigradski glasnik Carigradski

, although covering religious and educational subjects imbedded with the the with imbedded subjects educational and religious covering although

achers and priests to act as good national workers for the Serbian cause. Serbian the for workers national good as act to priests and achers ewe Gek ad ugras n ul wn. eba a i te most the in was Serbia swing. full in Bulgarians and Greeks between

only suggests Serbian wishful thinking, with the clear sense of sense clear the with thinking, wishful Serbian suggests only

c dd Mn pas o irredentist for plans Many did. ece –

an idea of how Serbian nationhood Serbian how of idea an ed through constant loyalty to to loyalty constant through ed Carigradski glasnik Carigradski

Carigradski Carigradski

action action an - CEU eTD Collection on scholarship recent the most unlike Nevertheless, population. local Macedonian the among which identity Serbian national of defined sense well fluid exhibited and rather strict but nationhood a such represent not did glasnik Carigradski of editors in Empire the nationhood, Serbian their to po celebrations specific and language like features shared that readers the convince to first from especially Empire, time from Ottoman the exists in nations other the all from nation Serbian which distinguishes which and immemorial entity clear and fixed stable, a as nationhood Serbian promoted Carigradski that argue I chapter this In implydid not their Greek necessarily nationhood. as language Greek accepted intellectuals These intellectuals. Bulgarian educat same this hand, other the on Macedonia, Ottoman the in population hellenized the in result could education Greek this As Macedonia. Ottoman in schools Greek Patriarchal in educated being while i one the like centers educational Serbian Ottoman few a in or Belgrade in system educational Serbian the through of promoted sense a shared already intelligentsia These nationhood. Serbian developing venueSerbian inwhichOttomanintelligentsia an a create to as well as culture, and language Serbian promote to was finally goal main periodical the started, the when 1895, In Macedonia. Ottoman in engaged circles diplomatic chapter previous the from seen As ChapterIV.

re t oti mle status. millet obtain to order Carigradskiglasnik, Serbiannationhood, ion could develop the feeling of the of feeling the develop could ion the Slavic Bulgarians. Thus, the main mission of this periodical was periodical this of mission main the Thus, Bulgarians. Slavic the

and second to point to the existence of the loyal Serbian nat Serbian loyal the of existence the to point to second and Pirn o te sml dvlpd sne of sense a developed simply they or Prizren; n Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski theground lsi, s h ppr f eba dpoai circles, diplomatic Serbian of paper the as glasnik, 75 utemr, age ht h to wes and owners two the that argue I Furthermore,

d elites could comebyandd together fostering

w otherness otherness as a direct product of Serbian Serbian of product direct a as among the Serbian and Serbian the among lingua franca lingua a qie common quite was andonfacts Serbiness Serbiness otherness but this but ion in ion int int CEU eTD Collection .. airdk gank n Srin ainod during nationhood Serbian and glasnik Carigradski 4.1. Greek the of context Yet affairs. educational and religious own its over jurisdiction complete them granting 1895, and in status Exarchate Serbs obtained Greeks, both of enemy worst the as characterized Bulgarians, that given circumstance educati and religious the of deprived were they as recognized being not Serbs, Ottoman the until remained they where Patriarchate Ecumenical Serbs Ottoman onwards, Patriarchate Peć the of abolishment a as recognized not were Serbs Ottoman glasnik nationhood4.1.1. Carigradski Serbian and Hamidianperiod during Ottoman Balkan Macedonia,and related spread state’s ofit. in nationhood of aspects some upon touch who others, the and Friedman Victor Kitromilides, works on mostly literature, secondary in findings my on built entirely of editors and owners two last the Popović, exhibite nationhood fluid on focus I section second the in periods, Turk Young early and Hamidian through nationhood Serbian propagated and define sections:I two intheThis chapterfirst section into Carigradski isdivided analyze how nationhood as a as nationhood, fixed and clear propagated that elite’s state of perspective the from is, that above, from it to approach on appropriate volumes was nationhood the edited how at Roudometof’s looking when even Victor who Macedonia) or Cowan’s Jane (e.g. Macedonia Ottoman Young Turk period Young Turk - national but ratherchangeableformnational as o - Bulgarian

Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski - Carigradski glasnik, glasnik, Carigradski Serbian war of statistics statistics of war Serbian

another problem which was especially serious in the the in serious especially was which problem another

rm cadr aio, enr Lr, Paschalis Lory, Bernard Marinov, Tchavdar from millet millet Carigradski glasnik Carigradski 76 presented certain difficulties in the sense that sense the in difficulties certain presented

i. n hs es, d nt nepe fluid interpret not do I sense, this In did. n h Otmn mie bt rm h 1776 the from but Empire, Ottoman the in onal autonomy. This was an aggravating aggravating an was This autonomy. onal while the second section is based on the on based is section second the while f practice. end of the Ottoman Empire. F Empire. Ottoman the of end -

d by Kosta Grupčević and Temko Temko and Grupčević Kosta by d

where nationhood quantity meant meant quantity nationhood where . The first section is almost is section first The .

gi bcm pr o the of part became again aiin n early and Hamidian

blw they below, d

glasnik glasnik or the or CEU eTD Collection часопис, ( 168 167 Quarterly, 166 have should it then nation, a as preservedbe to wants nation “Ifthe Empire: the in nationhood Serbian define and propagate to and state, Ottoman the in presence Serbian the emphasizing glasnik Carigradski problem. this solve to tried it occasions few a on and opinion this share not did government and schools, consulates, Serbian through Macedonia Ottoman the for struggle the in participate was nationhood Serbian results the perhaps and question the solving on insist to counterproductive even and useless was it thought Novaković, Serbian in two question) as seen (nüfüs was питанје scholarship, нуфијско as known problem, this Nevertheless, legitimate to right territorial claims intheregion. Serb’s the challenged Bulgarians and Greeks the tested, were claims Balk which upon basis the as seen were censuses these because addition, In Exarchate. BulgarianEcumenicalPatriarchate the eventhe or of part registeredas accordingly m m on i.e. denominations, Empir Ottoman the quality nationhood than more N at ht toa Srs ee o ofcal rcgie i te mie Rte te were they Rather Empire. the in recognized officially not were Serbs Ottoman that eant illet üf

Yosmaoğlu Miloš Jagodić, “ Jagodić, Miloš Basil C. C. Basil ü Qeto: rbe o ofca rcgiin f h Srin ain n uky 1894 Turkey, in nation Serbian the of recognition official of Problem Question: s hrhs ad hs a wa mtee t them to mattered what was this and churches, was seen as a basis for counting “collective consciousness”, as Yosmaoğlu states, this this states, Yosmaoğlu as consciousness”, “collective counting for basis a as seen was Vol. 57, 2008, 345 57, Vol.

1994 because it would result in the real number of the Ottoman Serbs would be revealed, revealed, be would Serbs Ottoman the of number real the in result would it because Gounaris, Gounaris, , Blood Ties..., Ties..., Blood , 5. ,

Нуфуско питанје: проблем званичног званичног проблем питанје: Нуфуско e. ‘Social Cleavages and National ‘Awakening’ in Ottoman Macedonia”, Macedonia”, Ottoman in ‘Awakening’ National and Cleavages ‘Social was employed in this matter too because it was charged with const with charged was it because too matter this in employed was

166 -

48. 149. millets.

This was the result of the 1881 and 1903 Ottoman censuses based on based censuses Ottoman 1903 and 1881 the of result the was This would not be in the interest of the Serbian state. In their opinion, opinion, their In state. Serbian the of interest the in be not would

e facto de

167 -

- s h Otmn eb wr nt eonzd s a as recognized not were Serbs Ottoman the As in exist not did officially Serbs Ottoman the that fact the was sided.

eonzd eas Sri cud oe r es equally less or more could Serbia because recognized Namely, many Serbian diplomats, including Stojan Stojan including diplomats, Serbian many Namely, 77

признавања српске нације у Турској, 1894 Турској, у нације српске признавања . 168

oee, eeal te Serbian the generally However, - 1910 an irredentist irredentist an East European European East ) , millet Историјски Историјски - nüfüs nüfüs , and and , 1910“ antly antly

CEU eTD Collection 172 1899, 1. 50, No. св Децембра“ “7. обасипље.“, Он Србе верне своје којима милостима, према и доброчинствима своју како изрази љубав да прилика указује приликом превелику овом њему се јер народа, спрског срцима у подгрева 171 1903.године“ август “19. пажњу.“, високу своју поклања њему и који Господара, свога здравље повољно за Свемогућем моли се топло прилици свакој у и свагда 170 пример“ “Леп народима.“, другим са друштву у живи народ где један 169 it that fact the Ottomans, publications.” well from t in found collection like publications in was Empire monitored Ottoman carefully the of image the of bolstering and Sultan the towards loyalty That followingwas usuallyexpressed inwords: sid by achieved be only could reali the to came also circles diplomatic Serbian but paper, this from behavior such demand state Ottoman the did only Not survive. to order in have must the was Sultan the to loyalty repeated constantly the years, publishing its of most spent which in period Hamidian During period. this of atmosphere political the as well as procedures and laws press Ottoman within mission its did periodical this Naturally, with other nations” w here, necessary especially is This school. and church own its

Deringil, “ “ “ Овај дан који у срцима свију верних поданика Османског престола побуђује велику радост, особито је је особито радост, велику побуђује престола Османског поданика верних свију срцима у данкоји Овај Народ ако хоће да се одржи као народ, треба да има своју цркву и школ и цркву своју има да треба народ, као одржи се да хоће ако Народ Српски народ у његовој пространој Царевини, који је добро познат са своје поданичке верности, верности, поданичке своје са познат добро је који Царевини, пространој његовој у народ Српски its greatest love towards its Divine Master, as well as gratitude for all the benefactions benefactions the all for and gratitude as well as Master, Divine its towards love greatest its for chance a is This nation. Serbian of heart the in especially day This Hissubjects. about cares also who for Lord Mighty to prays warmly occasion every in and The Well - nw pbiain like publications known

mercifulness with which He lavishes his faithful Serbs. faithful his lavishes He whichwith mercifulness

Serbian Serbian - 172 Protected Domains, Protected

oee, o atr o obscure how matter no However, in 169

nation in His vast Empire is well is Empire vast His in nation the

e ıdz aae rhv, hc, codn to according which, archive, Palace Yıldız he , Carigradski glasnik

hearts of all loyal subjects of the Ottoman Throne raises great joy, joy, great raises Throne Ottoman the of subjects loyal all of hearts

a nt ut read just not was ом Узвишеном Господару, тако исто и захвалност према свима свима према захвалност и исто тако Господару, Узвишеном ом

ing next to the Ottoman Empire. Ottoman the to next ing

136.

170

The Times Times The airdk glasnik Carigradski

stated. 78

n n nlmd toa Mcdna u also but Macedonia Ottoman inflamed an in

- known for known

(August Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski o osue eba o Bulgarian or Serbian “obscure to

19, 1903), 1903), 19,

the its humble loyalty, every time every loyalty, humble its 171 zation that Serbian national goals national Serbian that zation

t good health of its Master, Master, its of health good

( Serbian nation to express express to nation Serbian Nice The loyalty towards the Sultan Sultan the towards loyalty The

here one nation lives together together lives nation one here can be attested in the press press the in attested be can CG, CG,

example у. Особито је то нужно овде, овде, нужно то је Особито у.

No. 34, 1903, 1. 34, No. ei Drni, ranged Deringil, Selim Carigra ), CG ih b fr the for be might , (December 7), (December No . 6, 1899, 1. 6, . dski glasnik dski

CG, CG,

- CEU eTD Collection Њег мудрост божанствена величанство и ум високи извор не Његовој у поданике тога са владајући Он, је како година, двадесета 175 174 173 throne: accessi Sultan’s of anniversaries yearly commemorating like celebrations public to came it when especially period, this troublemakers. during portrayed was Abdülhamid the how of examples from population Armenian distancing Sultan, towards Armenian emphasized constantly 1896 during periodicals these where periodicals, glasnik Carigradski A the Sultan of subjects loyal most the as Serbs Ottoman about wrote usually paper this press Ottoman the of liberalization the consviolencewas period, Hamidian the Throughout good his of care the to loyalty utmost demandedthe whichsovereignty imperial and regulationsOttomanpress of bounds the within period Hamidian examinat meticulous the to Due that Deringil describespay content ofpaper. to attentionthis special tothe teams management image Ottoman the for enough grounds was Empire Ottoman the outside

“ Ottoman the on chapter See first the “ Јермени Да му том пригодом изрази своју превелику љубав, бескрајну одан бескрајну љубав, превелику своју изрази пригодом том му Да r

menian massacres. Oddly enough, Armenian publications did the same thing. thing. same the did publications Armenian enough, Oddly massacres. menian His Magnificence. Long Live His Magnificence SULTAN GAZI ABDÜLHAMID HAN HAN ABDÜLHAMID SECOND! THE GAZI SULTAN Magnificence His Live Long Magnificence. of wisdom His divine and mind great the is source which events, happy those of line a immense is year His in subjects numerous His fortune with lavish Throne, famous that from governing He, since years twenty been has It affection. loyalty true endless and love, enormous their express can inhabitants) (the occasion this in that So ” С

( УЛТАН ГАЗИ АБДУЛ ХАМИД ДРУГИ!“ ХАМИД АБДУЛ ГАЗИ УЛТАН Armenians

tant fact of life in Ottoman Macedonia, until the Young Turk revolution and revolution Turk Youngthe Macedonia, until Ottoman in life of fact tant - more resembled an Ottoman than Serbian propaganda paper. It operated operated It paper. propaganda Serbian than Ottoman an resembled more ere ad av cide i ppr ta trvd uig i reign. his during thrived that papers in children naïve and hearted измерној и моћној Царевини. Царевини. моћној и измерној did on few occasions published notes on articles appearing in Armenian in appearing articles on notes published occasions few on did

), Sultan who was lavishly portrayed as the benevolent father who took who father benevolent the as portrayed lavishly was who Sultan

175 CG

, No . 35, 1896, 1. 35, .

Abdülhamid. The paper particul paper The Abdülhamid. ions of Ottoman censorship, Carigradski glasnik during the the during glasnik Carigradski censorship, Ottoman of ions press, concretely the second and third sections, 15 third and second the press, concretely Glasnik

славног Престола, об Престола, славног , вг асо Величанства. Царског овог “19 Август “19 79 operated according to these rules. Although Although rules. these to according operated

Свака је година ниѕ тих сретних догађаја, којима је којима догађаја, сретних тих ниѕ година је Свака “ (August 19) (August “

n pwru Epr. Every Empire. powerful and а arly stressed its loyalty du loyalty its stressed arly сипље сречом Своје многобројне, многобројне, Своје сречом сипље ост и искрену приврженост искрену и ост , CG, CG, no. 31, 1895, 1. 1895, 31, no.

Живело Његово Царско Царско Његово Живело

- 20.

174

on to the the to on ee are Here loyalty loyalty . Ево је је Ево ring ring 173

CEU eTD Collection No време“ своје у “Реч Свето својом.“, и народночћу и Бога именом Господинапоносан а у Православље, вером живом те својој, судбини народ наклоњеној мало мало и одолевао тако, издржљивошћу исто Али, недаће. В. те биле колико И. и када Њ. су, чему здравље у знаће народа, свога живот и минули проучавао најповршније и ма је живот који Србин Сваки српскога. народа дуг за жеље топле своје 177 подноси престоле Август“ “19. Величанства“, царско А Султан В. пред И. приликом, Њ. никад предака није славних Турској својих у престолу народ на седи како од српски ужива их што права верности, и тековина просветних поданичке ово за Захвални народа. доказивању другин иза изостао у и радости у плива Царевина В И. Њ. 176 not is it reason, surprising that this For nationhood. bolstered education and religion were Macedonia battlefi as seen were which schools, Serbian the in it proclaim freely and nationhood their bolster the to contributors Expectedly, managedpreserve andand nationhood. theSerbian tosurvive name always they obstacles, their all despite but existence, its throughout fate bad endure and fight employed a as recognized be to as deserved themselves turn in represent who and subjects, Empire the of communities Christian disloyal other, the to Carigradski

. 2, 1898, 1. 2, . “ “ На данашњи дан је пуних тридесет година од како на славом увенчаном, отоманском престолу седи седи престолу отоманском увенчаном, славом на како од година тридесет пуних је дан данашњи На Нема ваљда да под капом небеском народа, који је пролазио кроз тежа и мучнија времена од од времена мучнија и тежа кроз пролазио је који народа, небеском капом под да ваљда Нема Hamidian reign that Ottoman Serbs finally met prosperity because they were allowed to to allowed were they because prosperity met finally Serbs Ottoman that reign Hamidian ls of elds Сла Адл аи Хн II. Хан ха,ид Абдул Султан . wishes for long life and h and life long for wishes warm its brings throne imperial of front in occasion this in nation Serbian ancestors, grand his of throne the saton Sultan Majesty Imperial His when time the from it enjoys rightsthat in nation loyal Serbian humble its express loyalty. to missed humble never Turkey express denominations and nations numerous and with filled joy is Empire vast entire His day, this Majesty on year, after Imperial Year throne. His Ottoman famous ago years thirty day this On and nationhood. and in faith great with fate; ill the addition, o life past the investigated minimally even has who Serb Every nation. Serbian the than times no is There

perpetuated the notion that Ottoman Serbs were one of the rare nations who had to to had who nations rare the of one were Serbs Ottoman that notion the perpetuated

Glasnik hs ain wl ko wa were what know will nation, his f

Carigradski glasnik Carigradski nations. Certainly, this alludes to to alludes this Certainly, nations.

re is not many nations like Serbian one, whic one, Serbian like nations many not is re nation under the sky which has passed through harder and more horrible horrible more and harder through passed has which sky the under nation

used every opportunity to praise devoted Ottoman Serbs in the contrast the in Serbs Ottoman devoted praise to opportunity every used 177 ( August

Carigradski glasnik Carigradski

ealth of His Imperial Majesty. ofHis Imperial ealth

19), the Lord and Ho and Lord the

CG з оие гдн, а аањ дн цл прос цела дан, данашњи на годину, у године Из ’s c , No all for school more resembleda all for school . 34, 1905, 1. 1905, 34, . , when, and how hard were these troubles. In In troubles. these were hard how and when, , ly Orthodoxy, and with great pride in its name name its in pride great with and Orthodoxy, ly 80

бдул Хамид, овамошњи српски народ , и овом овом и , народ српски овамошњи Хамид, бдул claimed that it was on was it that claimed ty too. Thankful for educational and other and educational for Thankful too. ty

the “book and pen” struggle in Ottoman Ottoman in struggle pen” and “book the utn bu Hmd a I st on sat II Han Hamid Abdul Sultan 176 millet

h have amazingly resisted their resisted amazingly have h Te sa toe wih were which tropes usual The . а који је, као српски, необичном необичном српски, као је, који а

call forcall war. ( Word ly during the years of of years the during ly

its

own трана Његова Његова трана

time ), CG , CEU eTD Collection “Слава“ лица.“, изглед сам и остал 181 време“ своје у “Реч разликују.“, народа time) its own in word других од оштро народ српски које одлика слава других нарочито много а обичаји, и песме језик, прошлост, штит је нам Народносни намеће. оно specifically a 180 be to considered is and Ages Middle tradition. Serbian the countries from present Orthodox was custom this other Serbia in Unlike celebrations, son. to father from is inherited that protector saint its has Every family family. of a protector chosen asa was who saint specific the 179 бити. може не Србин тога пратом“ Без срце. облагорађава и ум челичи се школи У културу. српск а показати, Српчићу. мораш ти хтео, и не хтео школу, ти, се коме на у пољу томе на хајде утакмицу и рад Па културни за спреми те школа. да задатак свети те тај је Школа спремиће уткамицу културну ту За народа. или појединца, коњ н се данас напретка културнога пољу На твоме. имену према дужности 178 from preserved and developed only but population local the upon imposed be to have not did F Macedonia. to meant Ottoman was in population local the Sava among nationhood Serbian of Saint preservation the to contribute like saints, Serbian exclusive of celebrations and existence” served notion This as something unchanging: timeless and how interesting is It

“ The “ “ А народност се у суштини не губи чак ни онда, кад заведени појединци друго им друго појединци заведени кад онда, ни чак губи не суштини у се народност А Стога по Стога Slava м ол ј бра мм бра кј ј олчиа а ио, а оп за живот, за одлучнија је која борба, умом, борба је дошла ем их нардоности словенскога стабла словенскога нардоности их

Slava Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski

( , In we differ from other Slavic nationhood. Language, customs, tradition, folklore, even even folklore, tradition, customs, Language, nationhood. Slavic from us them. differentiate what also is physhiognomy other from differ we o is this Slava, others. slavafrom the nation Serbian that distinguish characteristics all above and customs and songs folk language, when or names di different take individuals deceived when even lost be cannot Nationhood то је наче народно обележје. Слава је најистакнутија особина по којој се ми разликујемо од од разликујемо ми се којој по особина најистакнутија је Слава обележје. народно наче је то your mind and raise yourhea mind raise and your strengthen will you school In culture. for necessary are which requirements yourself. and abilities show to have not, or it want this is School Serb. little too for you you prepare will that school, duty sacred to go So game. cultural this for you will prepare that one the is School nation. the and individual the of decline or survival the upon cultural of field the of on Instead competing progress. are nations Nowadays name. your for is duties call divine This Serb! little you school, to Run

fferent names are imposed upon them for them upon imposed names are fferent front

хитај у школу, и ти Српче драго! Тебе се особито тиче тај позив јер те очекују велике и свете свете и велике очекују те јер позив тај тиче особито се Тебе драго! Српче ти и школу, у хитај is

of clear of a or

family of Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski

school , CG, CG,

religious -

excerpts from articles show how show articles from excerpts u lns between lines cut ur national characteristic. Slava is the most distinguished feature by which by feature distinguished most the is Slava characteristic. national ur no. 2, 189 2, no.

doors ( Slava a и народ је показао да има свих способности и услова који су потребни за потребни су који услова и способности свих има да показао је народ и

to separate the Serbian nationhood from all others. This “separate This others. all from nationhood Serbian the separate to ), celebration ate f wrs w have we swords, of battle CG

8, 1. 8, ), , CG No rt.

. Разликују нас од њих и језик, и обичаји, и предања, и ношња, па па ношња, и предања, и обичаји, и језик, и њих од нас Разликују . . 33, 1897, 1. 33, . No Without this one cannot be a Serb. a be cannot one Without this

Serbian nationhood in the Ottoman state was clear was state Ottoman the in nationhood Serbian . that

50, 1895, 1. 50, ethn cultural work and game on this field on which you, you, which on field this on game and work cultural

takes The The o c efully. The armor of our nationhood is our past, past, is our nationhood ofour armor The efully. - 81

religious communities of the Ottoman Empire Empire Ottoman the of communities religious

place aimed to you because you have great and and great have you because you to aimed Serbian nation showed that it has enough enough has it that showed nation Serbian

where saint days are not associated with family family with associated not are days saint where

battle of minds. This battle decides decides battle This minds. of battle

181 Glasnik’ Serbia 179

the service service the

180 and denotes celebrations on the day of of day the on celebrations denotes and

s writers discussed nationhood nationhood discussed writers s 178 адмећу народи. Место мачем и мачем Место народи. адмећу

станак или пропадање било било пропадање или станак –

and many other other many and е узимају, или им се се им или узимају, е ” , “Пред школским школским “Пред , –

служба служба

(The (The – –

it и CEU eTD Collection 1904, 1. славља“ светосавског очи у “Мисли спрске.“, нема око напретка; и просвете српске Србима највећим међу највећега препородитеља око имена, спрског и Православља св. браниоца око 183 182 the how to points passage following The him. to attributed entirely was constitution the of proclamation the and untouchable, remained Abdülhamid discourse: the in changed little I openly. more interests Serbian advocate to begin did regulations press looser and revolution Turk Young the after Only glasnik nationhood4.1.2. Carigradski Serbian and early Turk Young during period distance to order Ottoman Serbsothers,S from and thethat toshow in discourse “them” and “we” used it occasions these all In ascension. of anniversaries or birthday Sultan’s the as such occasions the on even nationhood Serbian stressed, where constantly be to had atmosphere Sultan the to loyalty political and censorship Hamidian within operating although Hence, occasions ofSaintSava like celebrations to comparison in nationhood Serbian of uniqueness clear the stress moreeven and bolster orderto in lived Serbs Ottoman the whereareas placethroughout of descriptions send to encouraged were subscribers The the occasions,like reason, Forthis natSerbian the denounceeven and to curb attempts Ottoman even Bulgarian,or Greekthe

Alter, “Nineteenth Century...“, 88 Century...“, Alter, “Nineteenth “ Цио раштр Цио

тога Србина који не био одао достојно поштовање ономе, који постави чврсти темељ просвете просвете темељ чврсти постави који ономе, поштовање достојно одао био не који Србина тога

the foundation of Serbian education ofSerbian thefoundation set who those to respect adequate pay not would who Serb no is there enlightener; his grand around name; concentr thoughts those all and thoughts, their in united day Sava’s on be will nation Serbian scattered entire The кани српски народ биће на Савин на биће народ српски кани est Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski

of the grandest among Serbs. There is no Serbian pupil who does not know know not does who pupil Serbian no is There Serbs. among grandest the of slava slava

the or Saint Sava as to the yearly inauguration celebrations of the Sultan.the of celebrations yearly inauguration the to asSava Saint or revivalist of Serbia of revivalist

–

- Св. Саве. Нема тога српског ђаћета које не зна за свога просвјетитеља; просвјетитеља; свога за зна не које ђаћета српског тога Нема Саве. Св. 91. ates around defender of the Hol the of defender around ates

paid pedantic attention equally to the celebrations of suchcelebrations of the equally to pedanticattention paid ’s day Serbian fosters community”: “imagined . 183 n education and progress; around saint Sava Sava saint around progress; and education n ( The

дан уједињен мислима, а све те мисли концентришу се се концентришу мисли те све а мислима, уједињен дан 82

thoughts

mmediately following the revolution very very revolution the following mmediately Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski

around these celebrations that were taking taking were that celebrations these erbs were separate y Orthodoxy and Orthodoxy y

Sain others Sava t ’ s .

182 managed to promote promote to managed celebration airdk glasnik Carigradski

the

vn oe such more, Even

Serbian Serbian millet -

the the of ),

indeed CG

, No ion. 2, . .

CEU eTD Collection 185 мо свим у Хан завичаја Хамид Абдул Султан Живео уставни нашега Васкрс почиње њим С сигурности. и слободе основи на Владавинидомовине у најславније је лето треће и Тридесет Османа. Престо на ступанја свог дан пут трећи и подмлаћеној тридесет по прославлја У Хамид Абдул Султан Турске! васкрсле подмлаћене, дан напретка, дан народне, слободе дан је јуна Једанаести сплеткама. вршању крај је учинио Владар узвишени наш Јула Једанаестог довели ив били до земљу готово су они неодговорности својој У народнога. општега од пречи био интерес лични је земљ спасе 184 demands, rebels’ the consideration into taken had Sultan the that was II Abdülhamid counter the in Sultan glasnik not Carigradski or whether know do we Namely, all. at mentioned not was events these in Sultan the of role the counterrevolution, the regarding events the on reported regularly Glasnik Although resurrectedafterrevolution Young tocriticize andstarted theSultan. Turk the but era Hamidian during banned was which press satirical the the like periodicals, until other some say, to be not is could That that 1909. April end, in deposition very Abdülhamid’s and the counterrevolution until remained Sultan the toward stance loyal and reserved the However, perceived. be not could Abdülhamid, regarding least at discourse, the in changes big some so revolution the following month a only written were lines These Young regime. Turk communities other and Serbs Ottoman

Brummett, Brummett, “ Медене месеце Његове Владавине пратила је теш је пратила Владавине Његове месеце Медене reo ad aey Wt hm eis h Rsreto o or aie ad n l possible all of in land protection native our the Live! Abdülhamid of II! Sultan LiveConstitutional directions. cultural Resurrection with the nationalities begins him Ottoman With safety. the rejuvenated and freedom all the of brotherhood In the on and based homeland equality Turkey! our of renaissance the of rejuvenated beginning the is That a Sultan. divine our of day com a thirty the celebrates progress, Abdülhamid Sultan the Turkey of free constitutionally day a freedom, our of Throne the reached people Almigh the of exhaustion and suffering of voice The doom. of edge the to country the brought they irresponsibility their In one. public the than important was the attempt This by outside. the stopped from threatening was that danger from country the save to had Turkey glorious Reformed fate. harsh by accompanied were Rule His of months Sweet у од опасности које јој с поља претиле. покушај је насео на злој вољи саветника Круне којима којима Круне саветника вољи злој на насео је покушај претиле. поља с јој које опасности од у ице пропасти. Глас напаћеног и измучченог народа измучченог и напаћеног Глас пропасти. ице Imag ing to the Ottoman Throne. This thirty This Throne. Ottoman the to ing ty. On June 11 our divine Ruler made an end to these intrigues. June 11 is a day of day a is 11 June intrigues. these to end an made Ruler divine our 11 June On ty. e and Imperialism… and e

даот и еднакости

ie wt te on Trs bt vn hi rprs on reports their even but Turks, Young the with sided - evil will of the Sultan’s advisors, whose personal interest was more more was interest personal whose advisors, Sultan’s the of will evil revolution remained quite ambiguous. The only report regarding regarding report only The ambiguous. quite remained revolution

66 братства свих народности Отоманске Империје уз заштиту личне личне заштиту уз Империје Отоманске народности свих братства -

67. II

! Живео!“ ! ае увшнг утн. н ј почетак је Оно Султана. узвишеног нашег

actually did expect meaningful changes from the the from changes meaningful expect did actually - , 83 third year is the most glorious in the reign of reign the in glorious most the is year third “19 Август“, Август“, “19

ка ко ка б. Реформисана славна Турска требала је да да је требала Турска славна Реформисана б. CG,

дорпо је и до престола Свемогућњега. Свемогућњега. престола до и је дорпо no. 34, 1908, 1. 34, no. 184

унм утри правцима. културним гућним

уставној слободној Турској Турској слободној уставној - third year of his of year third

рпрђј наше препорођаја 185 the role of the the of role the

civil

ad for said

CEU eTD Collection 11 regime, Turk Young early the on subsection chapter, first also See Responses…”. Orthodox Greek ‘Privileges’: Community the and Empire i documented well was 189 want прео и напретку води који пута, њ године 33 току у снашле От нашу су које недаће, и зла сва за и 'већ априла, 11 Цариграду у борбе крваве последице, њене 188 throne), у спасе да и устала Устава борбом до дошла Отаджбина наша г. 1908. 187 186 disappointment. with replaced was euphoria met, not were regime new the from desired expectations the When regime. Turk Young the from much too expected Serbs Ottoman the Empire, Ottoman the in communities only the became not did Sultan the revolution Turk Young the after that is however, more is What the rhetoric onAb years, fifteen after then, Only deal. done a became Abdülhamid that suggests got Empire Ottoman the which in re t but issues), earlier in mentioned was it (as Sultan the not was it time this So Abdülhamid was dethroned, punishment. any from them pardoning -

“ “ The euphoria about the new regime which was gradually replaced by the disappointment and discontent discontent and disappointment the by replaced gradually was which regime new the about euphoria The proclaimed the constitution. The dethronement of the Sultan was seen as an “historical act” “historical an asseen was Sultan the of dethronement The constitution. the proclaimed “ Велики догађаји у Царевини“ Царевини“ у Великидогађаји ...и отеран у изгнанство Абдул Хамида, интелектуалног кривца не само за к за само не кривца интелектуалног Хамида, Абдул изгнанство у отеран ...и Оно што се морало и требало догодити, догодило се. Војска, којој се има захвалити, што је у Јулу Јулу у је што захвалити, има се којој Војска, се. догодило догодити, требало и морало се што Оно

real monster; gradually the state was also portrayed as a monster as well. Like other other Like well. as monster a as portrayed also was state the gradually monster;

CG,

freedom to thank for the constitution and civil rights, again acted and by hard fight preserved the preserved fight hard by and co acted again rights, civil and constitution the for thank to has Fatherland our whom to army, The happened. happened, have must and should …what and prosperity of the Ottoman Empire, is removed from our way. from is removed our Empire, Ottoman ofthe prosperity and progress towards obstruction main the Hamid, Abdul governance. bloody and calamitous through passing was Fatherland our that misfortunes and evils 11 April the on in Istanbul in rebellion fight blood bloody the consequences, the its for and army just not culprit intellectual Hamid, Abdul exiled …and

no. 16, 1909, 1. 16, no. nstitution from the opposition. from nstitution the Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski

and dülhamid, transforming anadored from him adülhamid, into monster: patriarch

complete n the scholary works. For example, see Vangelis Kechriotis, Kechriotis, Vangelis see example, For works. scholary the n

егове несрећне несрећне егове твот д оуаа реакције.“ покушаја од ставност 14.

equality Glasnik бражају Отаџбине.“, “Хоћемо праву слободну и потпуну једнакост!“ једнакост!“ потпуну и слободну праву “Хоћемо Отаџбине.“, бражају

(Great events in the Empire), Empire), the in (Great events 189

This was because in the new circumstances when Hamidian when circumstances new the in because was This was playing it safe, waiting until the very dethronement of of dethronement very the until waiting safe, it playing was ! ), 187

commented dethronementas the i o a ept oprbe to comparable despot a of rid CG, CG,

и крваве владавине. Главна сметња Абдул хамид уклоњ хамид Абдул сметња Главна владавине. крваве и

186 No. 18, 1909, 1. 1909, 18, No.

However, when the outcome was know was outcome the when However, грађанских слобода, поново се је заложила и крвавом крвавом и заложила је се поново слобода, грађанских 84

CG “ П , no. 14, 1909, 1. 1909, 14, no. , оеа а престољ на ромена during the the during 188 Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski

–

but also for all the the all for also but

aiua r Nero or Caligula “The Modernization of the the of Modernization “The

33 yea 33 рваву војничку побуну и и побуну војничку рваву у“ rs of his his of rs

Atrto o the on (Alteration he army which army he n, i.e. n, changed

аџбину аџбину This .

ен је с с је ен when ( We

CEU eTD Collection будучности.“, дани лепши и бољи њему и синути ће да “ нади у увек сносио мирно све је он и попове, терали цркве, школе, му су Затварали осталима. и Бугарима Грцима, са случај било то је што као народност, своју има он њега да призна, да хтело није се му никако али егзархисте, у причама, убрајан делом народним у пасторче онам час како овамо, Као час народност. туткали ни призната била није му Раније друго. крај доћи једном том и ће и патио раније ико је Ако царства. народности остале и обузела су која осећаљима истим оним са дочекао елеменат је српски устава после дане Нове радосно. и одушевљено 190 two defended Prilep from Serbs Ottoman 1909 February in instance, For authorities. Ottoman mast the still were paper the Macedonia, Ottoman the to introduced were promises after soon Nevertheless, introd be will equality and liberty proclaimed the that expecting were they because changes Turk Young the salute to firsts the among certainly were Serbs Ottoman the that stressed paper The valid. always Nevertheless, be finallyrecognized inthe Ottoman Empire. would nationhood Serbian importantly,that more even and end, an to come would Macedonia anarchica the that believed Serbs Ottoman the because especially re the concerning news the wrote, As solved. be will problems their of part least at that expected everyone the with rights their in equal citizens Ottoman became Sultan the of subjects loyal by replaced was discourse patrimonial Српска нардоност после устава“ ( устава“ после нардоност Српска

“ На свима странама, где живи српска народност, васпостављење устава дочекано је и бурно и и бурно и је дочекано устава васпостављење народност, српска живи где странама, свима На prison, and it just patiently waited and hoping that the better and nicer days would would days nicer and better the that hoping and come. waited patiently just it and prison, priests and teachers closed, often were churches and schools Its population. no but Exarchate; the of part recognize was it sometimes Christians, the to then Pa the to added was it there; bit a here, bit a placed was it tales, folk in foster Ea else. anything if guaranteed, onc was it struggled, and suffered earlier anyone If Empire. with nation Serbian the by welcomed were exc welcomed In all the places were Serbian nation lives, lives, nation Serbian were places the all e this would come to an end, that the days of freedom would come when life would be be would when life come would freedom of that the days an end, would to come this e 190 Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski

t nto, as nation, its ers in the region, sometimes even backed by the representatives of the the of representatives the by backed even sometimes region, the in ers

eedingly, enthusiastically and gladly. The new days after the constitution constitution the after days new The gladly. and enthusiastically eedingly, , да ће доћи дани слободе кад ће бити сваком зајемчен бар живот, ако ништа ако живот, бар зајемчен сваком бити ће кад слободе дани доћи ће да , cd no rvne wee h Otmn eb mil lived. mainly Serbs Ottoman the where provinces into uced Glasnik о

те је придодаван патријаршистима, те придодаван хришћанима, неким неким хришћанима, придодаван те патријаршистима, придодаван је те

Serbian nationhood after the constitution the after nationhood Serbian was the case with Greeks, Bulgarians and the rest of of rest the and Bulgarians Greeks, with case the was

expressed disappointment with the fact that none of these of none that fact the with disappointment expressed - rcaain f h cnttto ws apl welcomed, happily was constitution the of proclamation rlier on elzd ht hs nw icmtne wr not were circumstances new these that realized soon

t nationhood its Ottomanism

85 same feelings as all the other nations in the the in nations other the all as feelings same

the the proclamation of the constitution was was constitution the of proclamation

, namely the Ottoman population from from population Ottoman the namely , a nt recognized not was

the

Serbian nation. It hoped that that hoped It nation. Serbian мучио, то је био он. Надао Надао он. био је то мучио, )

, warned that guerilla bands bands guerilla that warned CG, stain n Ottoman in situation l . As some little little some As . no. 31, 1908, 1. 1908, 31, no. - one wanted to to wanted one were sent to to sent were Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski triarchate, triarchate,

у апсане учитеље и и учитеље апсане у the the

others, се да да се су су CEU eTD Collection поредак. Бугарских села нема у околини оних манастира и толико је од њих далеко, те никаквог никаквог те далеко, њих од је толико и манастира оних околини у и ред нема завладао отаџбини села нашој у Бугарских је пошто поредак. имати, моћи ће нити немају, њих на права никаква Бугари непо и им су која српских, чисто села од су издржавани њихови манастири и Бугари власти стране сигурност веће ради жандарме, им и већ су од се државне су што што д негодовање Протестирају допустиле своје власти Изјављују имовине. имовину. његове и њихову народа српског штету на на протежирају насрћу Бугари да дозвољава, 191 freedomand equality. an loyalty within operating not were Serbs Ottoman regime: the of discourse “official” the accepted they Namely, authorities. Turk Young addressing while used they tropes what and themselves portrayed Serbs Ottoman how on example an provides s and communities, Ottoman the all to common was which regime new the with disillusion illustrates it first, because letter complete the provide I passage following the Ottoman author to letter a sent occasion this on and bands, Bulgarian from monasteries Serbian

“ ри салј и Пиеа ооие с околине, и Прилепа из Османлије Срби ities, including the parliament, in which they demanded the defense of their rights. In rights. their of defense the demanded they which in parliament, the including ities, The The be to villagers forcing and villages unarmed. he iswhen our even through tolerated not is Serb while Dabnica; and Dolman in armed case the was which Bulgarians, walk they when tolerated wh terror the against protesting are We these by near villages Bulgarian no are There claim them. to right legitimate no have order. Bulgarians therefore monasteries; and peace under is Fatherland with them provided also Bulgarian which estates. villages, Serbian entirely by financed are monasteries order and peace ofthe not and Slepče; and Zrze monasteries: Serbian distinctly into entrance Bulgarian the allowed authorities its protest and They nation tolerated. Serbian are p property authorities Serbian Ottoman on attacks because Bulgarian the that protest to assembly national the at today gathered surroundings and Prilep from Serbs Ottoman The theirs until the last breath until thelast theirs Fatherland; a happiness the for lives and Prilep from Serbs Ottoman The possession. intheir is illegitimately it now and monastery the took population Serbian the of middle the a kept also who in situated is it because Treskavac in monastery and Prizren from Serbs Ottoman The eve and forbidden, Gre while it treat authorities Ottoman eba nto i nation Serbian а Бугари уђу у чисто српске манастире Зрзе и Слепче, па не само што су их пустиле, пустиле, их су што само не па Слепче, и Зрзе манастире српске чисто у уђу Бугари а k ad ugras have Bulgarians and eks

hy o o wn wa i nt theirs, not is what want not do they

nd financed it. Bulgarians violently Bulgarians it. financed nd only that they all they that only s n police comes to take the bells down, as it was the case here in Prilep. in here was theit case as down, the bells take comes to npolice

hav

s deeply saddened when in the times of freedom and equality, equality, and freedom of times the in when saddened deeply s . Zrze and Slepče are villages inhabited by Ottoman Serbs and their their and Serbs by Ottoman inhabited villages are Slepče Zrze and .

e no rights on them, and will not have them because now our our now because them have not will and them, on rights no e

property. They express their dissatisfaction that that dissatisfaction their express They property. . 191 nd progress, as well as for the preservation of the Ottoman Ottoman the of preservation the for as well as progress, nd unjustly and separate it from the other nations. For example, example, For nations. other the from it separate and unjustly

rote owed it, but it, owed и

t ugras n teeoe cause therefore and Bulgarians ct , дале. Зрзе и Слепче села су насељена Србима Османлијама Османлијама Србима насељена су села Слепче и Зрзе дале. , the bells on the churches, to Serbs this is strictly strictly is this Serbs to churches, the on bells the its its

ich Bulgarian bands are exhibiting and which is is which and exhibiting are bands Bulgarian ich купљени данас на народном збору, протестују што се се што протестују збору, народном на данас купљени its surroundings are always prepared to give their their give to prepared always are surroundings

86 surroundings legitimately demand back the the back demand legitimately surroundings

that the the that

however, –

with the help of their bandit tropes bandit their of help the with gendarmerie offered it fo it offered gendarmerie

they

ymore; the key terms became terms key the ymore; will defend what it is is it what defend will кретна имања поклањала, те те поклањала, имања кретна

damage the the r the sake sake the r Ottoman Ottoman

to the the to cn, t also it econd, -

CEU eTD Collection 192 га бранити. данас и отели крви капи последне до ће своје а неће, туђе да изјављују: исто тако али жртвовали, све и живот Царевине манастир су очување, за и као напредак, и овај срећу за готови увек биће околини и Прилепу у Османлије Срби чета разбојничких њихових пригежавају. незаконито 'помоћу путем ман се насилним тај јер Трескавац, је Бугари манастир који преда живља се српског им средини да траже, у правом налази с околине и Призрена из Османлије Срби био. Прилепу овде у дотле подизати, звона слободно могу црквама по Грци и Бугари Док пр. на као одвајају, народности га других од и чине неправду власти једнакости и слободе времену у му и кад ожалошћен, се налази народ Српски наоружаном. не и стаје пут на се Србину српским по иду кад гледа прсте кроз Даб и Долману у био случај штоје скоро као се Бугари, буду да терају сељане и наоружани селима којима чете, бугарске врше који терора против Протестујемо сво да елемента. имати, могу не ослонца законског about the Ottoman Serbian inthe Empire. position n a as recognized be to going not were Serbs Ottoman the that signalized obviously This Serbs. Ottoman the except represented were communities the all Christians, those Among Christians. were rest the while Jew, was the by elected senators 40 of Namely, parliament. Golgotha); Glasnik Carigradski Herzegovina and Bosnia of annexation the about dissatisfaction the Although

“ Српска голгота Српска

се С се

” рбима и њиховим црквама забрањуј црквама њиховим и рбима , there are no Serbs in Turkey. (…) It is the duty of duty the is It (…) Turkey. in Serbs no are there vilaye Bitola and Kosovo T it. shown has deputies national the for election the Turkey, in are Serbs But Turkey? in recognized not is nationhood Serbian b themselves defended they Will Slav (because Turkey fro of parts other 200 have barely who Romanians in Epirus and Macedonian even Bulgarians) not as consider cannot and we vilayets Bitola and vilayet Kosovo Salonika, in Edirne Exarchists in although live represented, only are Bulgarians they colonies; trade as only but nation a as compactly Senat the in represented not is Turkey, in people million two of consists which nation, Serbian The coming are immemorial. the time since whichafteranother one injustices for but else anything for know not do We it! about writing Turke in nation Serbian to injustice last the be will it or first, the this Is new? so and horrible so this Is Turkey! in Serbs the toward Injustice issue in the parliament and to categorically insist on solving this injustice toward Serbs. Serbs. toward injustice this solving on insist categorically to and parliament the in issue

“ 192 Настрај на српске манастире“ српске на Настрај m the Government did not get not did mGovernment the

h mjr icnet culy ok lc atr h eetos f h snt and senate the of elections the after place took actually discontent major the “ (Serbian Golgotha), Golgotha), (Serbian “ e . On the other hand, Jews have their represen their have Jews hand, other the On .

published the article under the symbolic title title symbolic the under article the published

ts, have shown to the Bulgarians and all the others who say say who others the all and Bulgarians the to shown have ts, ation, which was accompanied with the general frustration frustration general the with accompanied was which ation, CG,

a single senator. senator. single a

(Attack on Serbian monasteries) Serbian on (Attack no. no. y saying that there are no Serbs in Turkey, or that that or Turkey, in Serbs no are there that saying y јину манастира себи протежавају, пошто ту немају свога свога немају ту пошто протежавају, себи манастира јину he three Serbs three he 13, 1909, 1. 13,

е да им силом чак полиција скида звона, као што је случај случај је што као звона, скида полиција чак силом им да е астир за толико стотина година чувао и издржавао. издржавао. и чувао година стотина толико за астир 87

government, 30 of them were Muslims, one Muslims, were them of 30 government,

these y so that we are now wondering and and wondering now are we that so y elected tatives although they do not li not do they although tatives

Serbian deputies to discuss this this discuss to deputies Serbian

000 people, only the Serbs Serbs theonly people, 000 national deputies from deputies national

, CG, CG, Српска голгота голгота Српска no. 7, 1909, 1. 1909, 7, no.

was expected was the the

ve ve ic ic –

Османске Османске ници, док (Serbian (Serbian -

CEU eTD Collection 194 CG, и неправду јету која Владе, то се ће Како санира. Србима, учињена неправда та се да траже категорички да изабрана и Скупштини у покрену питање ово да Србина, посланика народних Срба је Дужност (...) Три нема нас да веле који посланика. народних у избори призната то није су народност посланика показали народна српска турској, што или у Турској, има у Срба нема Али 'Срба Турској? што тиме бранити онда се ли Хоће за сматрати можемо не сенатора. ниједног Владе добилиод вилајету битољском и косовском, солунском, Бугаре) у егѕархисте Словене ми (јер трговачке као само него су народ, заступљени као колоније; компактно живе не нигде који Јевреји, су заступљени а Отаџбине, наше Парламента Дому Горњем у заступљен није душа, милијона два броји Турској у који народ, Српски ништа за знамо не се нижу и које неправде, за него само друго, Ми пишемо! томе о и ишчуђавамо сада се те Турксој, у народу српском неправда 193 glasnik studying from concluded be can What Empire. the in nation a as recognized th have educationalwere the fact religiousautonomy.Nor they didnot or that despite communities, Ottoman other the from separated and defined well were Serbs Ottoman was above sections the from noticed be could What diplomacy. Serbian by advocated framework allowed that tactic a just the by accompanied glasnik frameworks, Turk Young and Hamidian different within operating Although 4.2. favorite after motto Ottoman Serbian revolution. theYoung Turk Hungary. Austria to Herzegovina and Bosnia the of “sale” the and nationhood Serbian unrecognized arti frustrated the by replaced was regime new the about euphoria early the closed, when 1909 December until period interregnum this Throughout

“ “ Ми за Правду не знамо, а неправде смо сити. смо неправде не а знамо, Правду за Ми 1908, 1. 50, no. последња, ће бити или прва, јето ново?Зар тако и страшно тако јето Зар Турској! у Србима Неправда the clarity and decisiveness through which this paper discussed the Serbian nationhood. Serbian the discussed paper this which through decisiveness and clarity the Facts on the ground: fluidSerbian propaganda and “reckless” nationhood – nationhood Serbian of implementation the for fighting not were editors its that is aae t scesul poaae eba ntoho. hs rpgna was propaganda This nationhood. Serbian propagate successfully to managed заступљени су маћедонски и епирски Румуни којих једва има 200,000 душа, само С само душа, 200,000 има једва којих Румуни епирски и маћедонски су заступљени

injustice. How In short, “we do not know the justice, but we are tired of injusti of tired are we but justice, the know not do “we short, In is this g this is 193

из косовског и битољског вилајета, запушили су уста Бугарима и многим странцима странцима многим и Бугарима уста су запушили вилајета, битољског и косовског из

oing to be resolved resolved be to oing

utmost devotion to the Ottoman state considering this devotion was not was devotion this considering state Ottoman the to devotion utmost Бугари, који сем у једренском вилајету и нема у садашњим границама Турске Турске границама садашњим у нема и вилајету једренском у сем који Бугари,

учинила. Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski

“

, “ Неправда спрам Срба у турској“ у Срба спрам Неправда is the matter of the Government, who after all did this this did all after who Government, the of matter the is

једна за другом, од како насје. од како другом, за једна “ , Idem. 88 o e ulse cniuul, u ws lo a also was but continuously, published be to

(Injustice towards Serbs in Turkey) in Serbs towards (Injustice

Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski учинити, то је ствар Цар ствар је то учинити, ce” e Ottoman Serbs e Ottoman Serbs 194

Carigradski Carigradski Carigradski became the became рби нису нису рби cles on on cles was ске ске

- , CEU eTD Collection vice the Skopje, in like consulates, some vice consuls, of composed were that Macedonia w consulates Serbian Nušić, to According ineffectiveness. and sluggishness from suffered Empire As Ottoman the in reason. administration Serbian this the expected, for halted were projects many and budget, the about complained always mo of amounts excessive spending were institutions these more, Even year. per letters two than more exchange consulates that saying when exaggerating be even consul Serbian BranislavNušić, Forinstance, other. each barelyconsulatescommunicatedwith four these remarkably, Yet ground. the on education and religion through nationhood Serbian spreading Salonika, Pristina, in consulates four open to managed Affairs Foreign of Ministry Serbian the instance, For national workersacted smoothlygroundMacedonia. together inOttoman onthe local into o was nationhood population Serbian infuse would which action diplomatic Serbian elaborated and established of creation the reason this For Serbs. Ottoman the as themselves represented e Serbian the of recognition Stojan that saw We the against even was Empire, claimed. Ottoman in circles diplomatic Serbian of leader the Novaković, state Serbian the that regions both Macedonia, northern c have not did circles diplomatic Serbian otherwise. well not was Macedonia in ground the on nationhood Nevertheless, nationhood. this exercise to right the for fighting rather were but was it (because population Macedonian Ottoman local the within

in Pristina in a 1894 letter letter 1894 a in Pristina in f th f Bitola, and Skopje charged with implementing Serbian national action, i.e. action, national Serbian implementing with charged Skopje and Bitola, e utmost importance. However, i However, importance. utmost e eet n h Epr bcue no because Empire the in lement - lear idea who was actually living in living actually was who idea lear consul sat at home all day long because he did not not did he because long day all home at sat consul - wrote to the Serbian Ministry stated that he might might he that stated Ministry Serbian the to wrote defined, even if Carigradski glasnik suggested suggested glasnik Carigradski if even defined, 89

- osl, orsodnsadtasaos In translators. and correspondents consuls, neither Serbian diplomacy nor Serbian Serbian nor diplomacy Serbian neither r te ny ns n Ottoman in ones only the ere - one knew how many people people many how knew one obviously implemented), implemented), obviously ney even though Serbia Serbia though even ney Old Serbia Old

and the CEU eTD Collection је безумно свега, Пре допустити. сме не у пијанку се што народу штети владику шашавог и мрзи народ кога и Аврамовића конзула подржавати интриге ствара само она народа, сеје и народ срди стално она међутим 197 Цариграда разлог има штампа туђинска 196 1894) in Skadar to fromPristina journey on Nušić Branislav 195 consulRussian theSerbian policy in among popular but everything is Nićifor metropolitan Raška the that it informing Affairs Foreign of Ministry Serbian the to wrote consul such. as acted always not did teac describes Lory as propagandists, professional the how shows complaints Ristić’s and Nušić after years ten almost Prizren in consul Russian the by written report A d completely is country the demands, selfish most the of race a like looks today “Serbia that concluded Ristić region. the in Serbs for causeproblems Ottomans the if surprise no be would and printing like matters cultural of charge in was Ristić which Sava Saint year of Society same the that Belgrade that to reported letter another in instance, For rare. not were Macedonia Ottoman office. the in do to anythinghave isorganized tospeak justified foreignpress detest.” about and well Serbia the is with

Miloš Jagodić, “ Miloš Jagodić, “ “ Србија овде води пропаганду и траћи до 100.000 франака годишнје да би придобила љубав народа, народа, љубав придобила би да годишнје франака 100.000 до траћи и пропаганду води овде Србија Србија данас изгледа као тркалиште најсебичнијих прохтева, земља потпуно дезорганисана и и дезорганисана потпуно земља прохтева, најсебичнијих тркалиште као изгледа данас Србија

rather start rather such from them protect open to should times several me asked Prizren of municipality, the recognize not been longer no Peć in priest people the of demon evil an as but pastor, a m Gračanica Avramović the in orgy an organized they Recently it community, the co of interests the for dam and acting intrigues than Rather here. disunion ( populace the conducts here Serbia манастиру Грачаници при чему су Срби пребили Аврамовића, о чему је писано у „Штампи“. „Штампи“. у писано је чему о Аврамовића, пребили Срби су чему при Грачаници манастиру ...“, 341 ...“, sl vaoi wo pol loathe people whom Avramović nsul

in good relations with relations good in , defended Alb defended , Извештај Бранислава Нуши Бранислава Извештај - 42; 346. 42;

spreading books in Ottoman Macedonia did more harm than good, and it it and good, than harm more did Macedonia Ottoman in books spreading . This was even reported by “the press” wasreported even This . work Serbia Serbia narod

ing in consent with its people and with su and our withpeople its consent ingin i

age, which should not be tolerated not be should which age, nvite him to their homes their to him nvite eyes to its flawed policy here. It here. policy flawed its to eyes ). However, it However, ). anian criminals in front of Ottoman authorities, and as a result, people people result, a as and authorities, Ottoman of front in criminals anian

кд њј оои с презирањ с и говори њој о кад а propaganda and spends 100.000 F 100.000 spends and propaganda

Namely, on several occasions in 1903, the mentioned Russian mentioned the 1903, in occasions several on Namely,

their priest. However, Nićifor does not care. In Prizren he doe he Prizren In care. not does Nićifor However, priest. their 195

and he does not engage with national work. The population population The work. national with engage not does he and

Indeed, complaints about the conduct of Serbian policy inpolicy Serbian of conductthe about Indeed, complaints Ottoman Macedonia reckless: was међу нјима смутњу и раздор. Уместо да се усклади с бољом бољом с усклади се да Уместо раздор. и смутњу нјима међу

constantly angers them an them angers constantly ћа о путованју из Приштине у Скадар 1894. године“ 1894. Скадар у Приштине из путованју ћа о and , . In Đakovac f Đakovac In . 90 . In Peć t Peć In .

, the Мешовита Мешовита . Metropolitan Nićifor does not behave as as notbehave does Nićifor Metropolitan . . First of all, it is reckless to support support to reckless is it all, of First .

should should il mtooia ( metropolitan silly nsey hr Srs vn beat even Serbs where onastery he metropolitan’s regent, metropolitan’s he the local population. According to the the to According population. local the rancs per year to obtain the love of love the obtain to year per rancs or a long time the Serbs have not have Serbs the time long a or ем и с претњом.“, претњом.“, с и ем be forced to stop thinking, and and thinking, stop to forced be pport. d spreads embarrassme spreads d грађа

a Никифора. Недавно су направили направили су Недавно Никифора.

197 metropolitan. metropolitan. , Vol. 31, 2010, 31, Vol. ,

vladika

only creates creates only

Obrad Vučetić, Nićifor. ) Someone Someone hers and priests, priests, and hers 281 nt and and nt

the the 84. up - s “ Prizren’s 196 (Report of (Report

Писма из из Писма

CEU eTD Collection priests), дон допру да могу не други они јер свештенике, тамо пољопривреди, познато о добро чланчиће доносимо што неписмени они су пошто а сељаке: за доносимо их Ми не тичу. сеништа они кога грађанство, Ми са пољопривреде. упозна их да тога из осим а слично, новостима томе и врлинама грађанским о вери, о савет зрео који да гостима иде да нераз и наплати се да обред, сврши да само није Србина свештеника правог задатак да замишљамо, пак Ми бива. непрестано тако то И оде. па његово добије обреде, сврши нашом и народом с сагласности народау и 198 своју корист у ради даподршком. већ митингује, не да пута више је ме Натерати митрополита су таквог Призренци од намесник пословима. народним заштитим је се их бави да Пећи не молили и општину У признаје не народа. Призрену У ђаво то. на зли осврће не се Никифор Ипак, свештеником. с као односима добрим у нису одавно Срби већ Ђаковцу У себи. к пастир, као понаша га Пећанци властима. турским пред зликовце Арнауте заступао Обрад поп митрополита не се Никифор Митрополит that somemore teachers inthelocal than time spent inschools,orwere bars acting violently. the With and thenleavingafterwards. the villages immediately wages their taking ceremonies, mere performing with content rather were priests these them, national onlyreading and peasants the illiterate with engaging were of instead but priests workers, the established, not were schools where villages remote n lazy were of authors The

“ У приштинском, новопазарском и пећко и новопазарском приштинском, У двојно са свештениковом службом, да свештеник треба да стане, па да укућанима и њиховим њиховим и укућанима да па стане, да треба свештеник да службом, свештениковом са двојно CG other ones cannot reach as far as priests can. faras priests as reach ones cannot other the because priests on especially but teachers, and priests on counting are we and counting as and peasants, for it writing are their not is this because citizens are the for We not but agriculture. agriculture, on pieces regarding writing news the about peasants inform should priest the Further, that not is priest Serbian leave and charge true ceremonies, finish to just a of task the that imagine we hand, other the On continuously. finishe comes, In in most of the cases, they slaughter each other like yellow crazy ants, complaining against against complaining ants, yellowcrazy like other each slaughter they cases, most the of in brotherhood in together live should harmony community same the within that and school experience, same personal f the places from some it withinthe together working that teachers The teachers. the between know relations erodes suspicion fact we unpleasant and emphasize us, to inform have heartland we place, first the In ah te, osiig o itius o eto ec ohr i on in other; each destroy to intrigues low conspiring other, each teachers the situa the teachers , “, Jaroslav Valerijanovič Višnjakov, Višnjakov, Valerijanovič Jaroslav “, No the

ational workers. In an article dated from 1897 the periodical mentioned that in the in that mentioned periodical the 1897 from dated article an In workers. ational he should pause and educate villagers about religion, virtues and something similar. similar. something and virtues religion, about villagers educate and pause should he . 7, 1897, 1. 7, . rsia Nv Pzr and Pazar Novi Pristina, Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski -

like priests in the temples of education and like national intelligentsia; instead, instead, intelligentsia; national like and education of temples the in priests like –

ауаи м и ауао а вшеие н уиее аи аоио на нарочито али учитеље, на и свештенике на рачунамо и смо рачунали his his

ceremonies, takes what is his, and leaves. And this is repeated repeated is this And leaves. and his, is what takes ceremonies, tion was not much better, since better, much not was tion pieces likewise warned that even the lower Serbian clergy clergy Serbian lower the even that warned likewise pieces e snas hr i no is there sanjaks Peć they are illiterate illiterate are they “ Македонски покрет… Македонски м санцаку по селима нема никога. Осим тога, парох дође, дође, парох тога, Осим никога. нема селима по санцаку м

– . де докле могу свештеници.“, “Свештеницима“ (To the the (To “Свештеницима“ свештеници.“, могу докле де 198

91 no! We imagine, as this means being a priest, priest, a being means this as imagine, We no! Треба Србији отворити очи о њеној политици овде. овде. политици њеној о очи отворити Србији Треба

–

as we know we as - one in the villages. The priest priest The villages. the in one Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski ”,

19.

– very well very

не! Ми замишљамо, и то као као то и замишљамо, Ми не! wor e Carigradski gla Carigradski

concern; we concern; d, they are are they d, a – не доносимо их за за их доносимо не

worm of of worm we were we rom the the rom

више не позивају позивају невише again reported again

and and

–

то је нама нама је то snik to

CEU eTD Collection Србије односу о Јовановића Јована тамо преданије, послу и вештије раднике имали крајевима смо којим У мисао. народну српску представљају странама тим у који људе, на гледати положај свети њихов за 200 и зазорно је како CG онако раде речју, васпитача. народних као њихов положај једном и позив особни за и наставнички, скрхали, другога би један како би другарски, у да се, и они братски интелигенцији, не живе народној мрави, жути као као месту, кољу случајева просвете, једном већини храмовима у у школи, свештеницима као једној њима, у доликовало служе који учитељи да место у подгриза неслоге црв да знамо искуства сопственог из сами и а јављају, 199 p Slavic owners the for two characteristic was other which nationhood, the of Serb, understandings fluid a more exhibited like felt undoubtedly and owner first the was who Savić and educating in interested most were spreading who ones the were they that assume to natural developed.” cause national our will workers, national nat Serbian represent who workers national in trust have to start mass hermaphrodite nationally and “amorphous violent be not and needs should Serbia that asserted Empire Jovanović Jovan Macedonia. in population Christian local the among nationhood of sense a create to order in coercion el Serbian and Bulgarian same Greek, fact, the In faced problem. coercion and activities guerrilla employed which propaganda Bulgarian aggressive and elaborate more the even because activities Serbian with strictly associated of spread H ground. the on ineffective equally were nationhood the Serbian concerning results the propaganda, Serbian (dis)organized the with Along opulation ofOttomanMacedonians.

, “ “ No Морамо да на првоме месту истакнемо немилу чињеницу, како нам из неких места из унутрашњости унутрашњости из места неких из нам како чињеницу, немилу истакнемо месту првоме на да Морамо аморфна и у погледу националних осећања хермафродитска маса становништва почне с поверењем поверењем с почне становништва маса хермафродитска осећања националних погледу у и аморфна . 26, 1897, 1. 26, . workers. ho their disgracing “Serbian national thought” in Ottoman Macedonia. None Macedonia. Ottoman in thought” national “Serbian 199

ional thought there. Only in areas where we have devoted and skillful and devoted have we where areas in Only there. thought ional ly educational mission, as well as their positions as national national as positions their as well as mission, educational ly bt ahr ul f prcain Ol truh hs ol the would this through Only appreciation. of full rather but , - Pižon, who was in charge of the consular affairs in the Ottoman the in affairs consular the of charge in was who Pižon,

...“, 366. ...“, support the Slavic local population, be sensitive to sensitive be population, local Slavic the support

годују један против другога, прибјегавају ниским интригама, интригама, ниским прибјегавају другога, против један годују је наша народна ствар и напредовала.“, напредовала.“, и ствар народна наша је 92

ites had to apply many tools, including including tools, many apply to had ites 200

According to Jovanović to According owever, this was not something not was this owever, ”, неколико наше учитељство. У У учитељство. наше неколико

“ - Искрена реч Искрена the - less, unlike Nikodim unlike less, Ristović, Ristović, ” -

Pižon, it wasit Pižon, (Honest

“ Реферат Реферат

word

their their ),

CEU eTD Collection 205 Europe 204 Southeastern in 111. 2009, Press, University Peculiarity National of Politics 203 202 201 of Macedonia.” in influence Bulgarian be be much would it assumed concretelyNovaković to counterweight possible “a as circles diplomatic Serbian by used was which option Macedonian third the appeared them between and Serbian the between ‘floated’ largely identity Macedonia whose Ottoman from“thereAccordingare late Marinov, historical personalities to a different way,and Grupčević including Popović. Macedonianess same the is conclusion the examples these all from nevertheless, this how on examples few provides Marinov ideologies. groups.” national and Macedonianess confessional ethnic, different of members together bring to “intended of feeling vague education.” national of crusade a through cultivated to is that Kitromilides for feelingof the GrupčevićPopović and in infuse not manageto did Greekeducation ideologies, national spreading of charge in and states Balkans prof were teachers school that assertion Lory’s to Ottoman upper Macedonian represented and Ohrid in born were Popović Temko and Grupčević Kosta Both

Ibid, 317. Ibid, “ Marinov, 169. and…”, Communities’ “’Imagined Kitromilides, 53. destruction…”, the for “Schools Lory, Tchavdar Marinov, “We, the Macedonians: The Paths of Supra of Paths The Macedonians: the “We, Marinov, Tchavdar Macedonianess,

Famous Ma Famous means because means s iet osqec, o consequence, direct is - middle class intellectuals who were educated in Greek schools. According schools. Greek in educated were who intellectuals class middle and turn, harness and mold it to Serbian advantage in contrast to imposing to contrast in advantage Serbian to it mold and harness turn, and Macedonianess

cedonia

...“,

a “a say -

315. ne te omn eoiao o ‘aeoin people’ ‘Macedonian of denominator common the under all the Macedonian intellectuals defined it and expressed it in it expressed and it defined intellectuals Macedonian the all

outr ietfcto [that] identification voluntary hc Mrnv dniis s supra as identifies Marinov which bte t sy cntut f h cmeig Balkan competing the of construct say, to better r

essional propagandists in the service of the the of service the in propagandists essional

(D. Mishkova, ed.), Budapest: Central European European Central Budapest: ed.), Mishkova, (D. tter to use the already vaguesense presentthe use to tter 202

h Blain ainl option”, national Bulgarian the

Instead, Greek education developed a developed education Greek Instead, - Nationalism (1878 Nationalism Macedonianess Macedonianess 201 –

t s ut srrsn that surprising quite is it it is not quite clear what what clear quite not is it a t b isild and instilled be to had 203 - 1912)”, 1912)”,

- n te words, other In ainl identity national was exhibited; exhibited; was We, the People: People: the We, Greekness; 205

204 Stojan

and –

CEU eTD Collection 209 208 C Identity”, 207 206 to Despot he Badžović stated inwhich that, letter a sent Popović 1888 in that is certain is what but unkown, remains idea this abandoned or Serbian and anti the published 1887 in who Popović of Temko work the in idea this trace can we published, never was paper this Although language. Novako that confirms glasnik, Carigradski interests. Serbian promote would that Istanbul they However, so. do to permission got paper activities their discovered they because circles Serbian with contact in came anti the established Karajovov, Vasil and Evro Naum with along them, of both when 1886 from dated “state” Serbian official an or circles diplomatic Serbian with contact into came Popović and Grupčević precisely When Macedonianess of owners Macedonians. upon directly nationhood Serbian olumbia University Press, 2000, 185. 2000, Press, University olumbia

Marinov, “ Marinov, 1887. Ristić, to Novaković Letter from 128, SN, AS, 315 Ibid, Victor A. Friedman, Friedman, A. Victor Македонски глас Македонски - ugra sce Mcdna Cmite n oi. rbby rud hs ie they time this around Probably Sofia. in Committee Macedonian secret Bulgarian were to descend from heaven, could not convince a Macedonian that he is a Bulgarian or a or Bulgarian a is he that Macedonian a convince not could heaven, from descend to were such attained has Macedonia in spirit national …the The Macedonian Question: Culture, Historiography, Politics Politics Historiography, Culture, Question: Macedonian The - 317. Famous Macedonia Famous Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski

turned toSerbianturned nationhood. thography “The Modern Macedonian Standard Language and its Relation to Modern Macedonian Macedonian Modern to Relation its and Language Standard Macedonian Modern “The

was meant to be published in the Macedonian (probably Ohrid) dialect dialect Ohrid) (probably Macedonian the in published be to meant was vić intended to gradually bring that dialect closer to the Serbian Serbian the to closer dialect that bring gradually to intended vić

(Makedonski glas) in Istanbul in a Macedonian dialect but they never theynever but Macedonian dialect a in Istanbul glas)in (Makedonski . - . 209 207 agenda is unknown. The first trace of trace first The unknown. is agenda ...“, ...“,

hn i Gučvć n Ppvć aog ih Novaković, with along Popović, and Grupčević did When n 87 rpei ad oaoi wr tyn t pbih a publish to trying were Novaković and Grupčević 1887 In 318

w .

ho from received Greek education and vague sense of of sense vague and education Greek received from ho

clearly expressed their intention to start a paper in paper a start to intention their expressed clearly

208

206 - Bulgarian pamphlet on Macedonian dialect dialect Macedonian on pamphlet Bulgarian

h fc ta ti ppr te abne of harbinger the paper, this that fact The moved to Belgrade as soon as soon as Belgrade to moved two the with case the obviously was This

a state that Jesus Christ himself, if he if himself, Christ Jesus that state a (Victor Roudometof, ed.), New York: York: New ed.), Roudometof, (Victor their pro their - Serbian activities activities Serbian

Bulgarians Bulgarians CEU eTD Collection 212 211 17 May 210 in changes to linked strategies and discourses adopted which class’ ‘middle of kind a formed depen differentfactors a not alsowas it but fixed, not was nationhood their Thus, practice. of form different as nationhood represented they rather but and Grupčević a represent not did Popović sense this In circumstances. different to adapts and changes that practice of.” well certain a of members the all that identity’ national of sense ‘proper or ‘genuine’ some of existence “the a were persons these that mean necessarily no does the identities national multiple expressing However, under ideologies. Balkan the of created influence and shaped showed, Marinov as were, that identities fluid and blurred c same the with always Macedonia, on draws historiography recent that examples many the of one is This even urban intellectuals but Macedonia Ottoman the in peasants illiterate for reserved something not was nationhood ideas. Serbian advocated clearly their which Obviously and Serbian standard in published was which with involved were he and Grupčević later years ten However,

Ibid, 129. Ibid, 108. Macedonians…”, the “We, Marinov, Temko Popov Popov Temko 211 th

In Brubaker’s fashion we can rather say that they exhibited nationhood as a form of form a as nationhood exhibited they that say rather can we fashion Brubaker’s In , 2014. , Serb, except for those Macedonians in whom Bulgarian propaganda has already taken taken already has propaganda Bulgarian whom root. in Macedonians those for except Serb,

210

on cletvt o ‘ru’ r euly absolutely equally, are ‘group’ or collectivity bound - onclusions that Macedonians had no sense of nationhood but rather expressed expressed rather but nationhood of sense no had Macedonians that onclusions letter, letter, Macedonianess Macedonianess

http://documents ding on the current Macedonian context. Macedonian current the on ding

actingworkers asnational Serbian - national blur and fluid cha fluid and blur national

- national or fluid; rather, it was response to the interplay of interplayof the to response was it rather, fluid; or national turned into into turned

- mk.blogspot.hu/2011/01/temko - national simply because they did not represent represent not did they because simply national 95

Serbiness racter as studies on Macedoniasuggest; on studies as racter .

hc dmntae ta fluid that demonstrated which 212 Carigradski glasnik, Carigradski -

popov In other words, “theseelites Inwords, other

- letter.html and constantly aware aware constantly and . Last accessed accessed Last .

the paper the t

CEU eTD Collection 216 215 214 213 illness, as such deaths, fires.” or misfortunes life’s to and fluctuations economic to vulnerable very were peopl Trades offspring. their for strategies educational genuine any had merchants major of families the Only treated. were issues educational which with vision term short very the by struck are We education. free provided that in them, to conside they that programs propaganda the to rein free “gave Macedonia in interests. immediate their fulfil would thought rh religious on based not was members new for battle the population, Christian local the for problems. everyday their edu or religion through solved be not could nationhood of implementation the Jovanović and change. question Macedonian to prone discourse a as not and glasnik, enti substantial fixed as nationhood defining is, That perspective. “imperial” an from problem the to approach they ground, the on appropriatednationhood this investigating are scholars whenEven nationhood. po local how the and population, local the on it imposed states Balkan how i.e. above from researched be to tends nationhood how Namely, nationhood. of appropriation the of problem the to us brings case Popović’s and Grupčević remain inpower.” their or power for search their to as well as positioning, social and political their

trc u rte o te esnl eooi o sml pamtc ocrs oa peasants local concerns pragmatic simply or economic personal, the on rather but etoric

Lory, “Schools for the destruction…”, 54. destruction…”, the for “Schools Lory, Ristović, “Intorduction“, al., et Grandits Hannes Gou naris, “Social Cleavages…”, 5 Cleavages…”, “Social naris,

“ Реферат Јована Јов Јована Реферат ain eas ppltos ee okn fr lentvs hc wud solve would which alternatives for looking were populations because cation 216 213

y niind y tt eie ad ie t a peetd n Carigradski in presented was it like and elites state by envisioned ty 214

ановића о односу Србије односу о ановића As

- 7. Basil

Conlficting Loyalties..., Loyalties..., Conlficting

Gounaris has shown on the Patriarchate the on shown has Gounaris 96 pulation showed a fluid and a and fluid a showed pulation 215

...“, 345. ...“, inhabitants local the that stresses also Lory 10 e, who were more numerous in Bitola, Bitola, in numerous more were who e, -

11.

- Pižon noted well that the the that well noted Pižon - red advantageous advantageous red national sense of sense national - Exarchate race Exarchate efforts to efforts CEU eTD Collection 219 Србије посећују детета Поп два школу. основну а егзархијску мисије, католичке аустријске питомац бивши трећи Скопју, у учителј ехзархијски пито син један столу, на новине софијске подруму, у скривене кнјиге српске 218 ethnicity, Serbian of be claim to 217 national choices. as experienced and defined be thus can school language minority a to child one’s sending is options of universe the “ ( nationhood Serbian of characteris shared around people the allocating by community” “imagined created it that assume can still like we teachers, or propagandists priests professional to opposed as population local the among accepted was how discuss to difficult is it regarding pragmatic was and identities multiple Macedonian expressed population entire the that saying by generalizations make not should we Nevertheless, Slavic entirely village: one of population local the among yielded propaganda Serbian vice the Nušić, Branislav nationhood. determined factors idealistic not and pragmatic mainly words, other In nationhood is also implicated in the choices people make. People ‘choose’ the nation when when nation the ‘choose’ People make. people choices the in implicated also is nationhood

J “Црква је грчка, школа егархијска, два свештеника су “Србомани“...У кући свештеника свештеника кући “Србомани“...У су свештеника два егархијска, школа грчка, је “Црква Se on E. Fox and Cynthia Miller Cynthia and Fox E. on rboman ...“,

attending Exarchal elementary school. Рriest Vanđel holds in his house even a han. a househis even in holds Vanđel Рriest school. elementary Exarchal attending o student former a is son third the table; the on of “Serbomans” are priests two Exarchal, is school the Greek, is church The

338

Vanđel Vanđel is a pejorative term used by Bulgarians for Slavic for Bulgarians by used term pejorative a is - 39.

- ” c - 219 onsul in Bitola in 1892, vividly described what Greek, Bulgarian, and and Bulgarian, Greek, what described vividly 1892, in Bitola in onsul

the priest priest the

one son is is son one

e page see -

who supports Serbian national ideas or simply refuses Bulgarian national ideas. national Bulgarian refuses simply ideas or national Serbian supports who Idriss, “Everyday nationhood”, nationhood”, Idriss, “Everyday -

eie i ntoa trs Raig ntoait esae or newspaper nationalist a Reading terms. national in defined - a student in Belgrade; in student a Serbian Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski Ванђел држи у својој кући и хан“, хан“, и кући својој у држи Ванђел

books are hidden in a basement; a in hidden are books

tics which tics 81 te utin ahlc mission; Catholic Austrian the f . s o Fx n Cnha Miller Cynthia and Fox Jon As ). 97

the second son is is son second the Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski

was appropriated on the ground and how it it how and ground the on appropriated was Ethnicities - speaking person in (Ottoman) Macedonia who who Macedonia (Ottoman) in person speaking Slavenko , Vol. 8, No. 4, 542 2008, No. 8, Vol. , Exarchal teacher in Skopje; in teacher Exarchal

periodic

and and

мац српски у Београду, други други Београду, у српски мац Terzi described as the features features the as described als from Sofia are are Sofia from als 217 two children are are children two nationhood. Although Although nationhood. … In the house house the In … ć, “ ć, Конзулат Кралјевине Кралјевине Конзулат 218 -

– stated Idriss

поп Ванђела Ванђела поп

- speaking speaking

, –

CEU eTD Collection The attended. they schools the of efforts the despite loyalties shifting and multiple displayed the solving of terrified were circles diplomatic Serbian certain why reason a was This quality. than important more was quantity where it, called has Gounaris as statistics”, of “war a was it saw, we As intelligentsiait. envisioned glasnik Carigradski nationhood Serbian constituted glasnik Carigradski readers its bring to managed paper this facts, these of spite In into. buy not did simply readers local that regulati press Ottoman of because However, mission. its completed glasnikdiligently onlyCarigradski circumstancesthese in that It seems population was them, between distance manner, coordinated disorg wor to strategies these for unwieldy too far was ground the on situation the chapter, this in saw we as but paper, the on impressive seems indeed This regulations. press Ottoman of limits the within region the p Serbian a establishing finally and Macedonia, Ottoman in societies Serbian and schools opening positions, ecclesiastical higher into priests Serbian promoting consulates, Serbian opening goals: main its achieve to managed it later 1885, in only Macedonia for battle the in engaged Serbia Although Conclusion anized propaganda campaign, propaganda anized –

eba ntoa wres euae ad h iltrt pplto t whom to population illiterate the and educated workers, national Serbian not bridged well.

certainly propagated Serbian nationhood in a way how Serbian elites and and elites Serbian how way a in nationhood Serbian propagated certainly consulates were unaware of each other’s activities despite a rat a despite activities other’s each of unaware were consulates wa k effectively. The Serbian state spent a considerable budget on a rather a on budget considerable a spent state Serbian The effectively. k read s üü question. nüfüs

and a great gap between Serbian national workers and local local and workers national Serbian between gap great a and

– -

language, celebrations, folk songs and customs. In this sense Insense this customs. andsongs folk language,celebrations, oehr fcsn o tpc ta, codn t ti paper, this to according that, topics on focusing together,

national workers often did not work in a pro a in work not did often workers national

Th e urban intelligentsia from the region sometimes sometimes region the from intelligentsia urban e ons it was forced to present a euphemized reality euphemized a present to forced was it ons 98 aper that would propagate Serbian interests in interests Serbian propagate would that aper

approximately ten years ten approximately fessional or or fessional her clos her

much e CEU eTD Collection Balkans indeed. entangled an was It together. came propaganda different seemingly three family one in only kin what However, results. the yielded interests pragmatic or coercion Only nationhood. contemplate to time have not did population rural illiterate the hand, other the On Serbs. (Macedonian) did they schools Greek attended they Although well. this illustrates Popović Temko and Grupčević Kosta of case d of results this was, best illustrates the above quotation of Branislav Nušić. Namely, Nušić. Branislav of quotation above the illustrates best was, this results of d

not become hellenized Macedonians at best, they gradually became became gradually they best, at Macedonians hellenized become not 99

CEU eTD Collection two the led this hence, and Macedonia Ottoman of annexation the to closer step one meant annexation this Serbia, For 1885. in Rumelia Eastern of annexation was step first the and goal final the became Bulgaria Stefano San time. their waste not did Greece and Bulgaria although progress, the in still was elaboration Serbian Congress, Berlin the after years few A Macedonia. that northern claim to order program in position firm and its establish plan a elaborate to had it latecomer, a was state Serbian the As afterBosnia position its theHerzegovina, oftobuild loss and alsothere. decided Ottoman that fact Serbia, reformed; be the to needed that region beside and problem international an Namely, became Macedonia Macedonia. Ottoman in situation the affected Greek the territory, put 1878 national in Congress Berlin their the Nevertheless, nationhood. as their of region people by inhabited the asserting by Macedonia Ottoman in claims their nation the O with parallel intensified. Macedonia Ottoman for struggle the Exarchate, Bulgarian the of establishment the after 1870s, the From enough aggressive intheregion. politics toperform pow not was Serbia because borders Ottoman within Macedonia Ottoman in claimed it territory the keep to interests Serbia’s in was it Namely, sovereignty. Ottoman within acted these cir that diplomatic argued I Furthermore, Macedonia. Ottoman in nationhood Serbian promote to Istanbul created whichwas circles in diplomatic ofSerbian directproduct a Ottoman Serbs, as investigated I thesis this In Conclusion - ugra srgl it qeto bcue oe eiin md a ti Congress this at made decisions some because question into struggle Bulgarian - building process within its own borders. Each of these countries tried to legitimate to tried countries these of Each borders. own its within process building cles, the leaders of the Serbian state’s irredentist action in Ottoman Macedonia, Ottoman in action irredentist state’s Serbian the of leaders the cles, ttoman Macedonia where they promoted Bulgarian and Greek nationhood, led nationhood, Greek and Bulgarian promoted they where Macedonia ttoman

Bulgaria and Greece emerged as the most serious pretenders who, who, pretenders serious most the as emerged Greece and Bulgaria Carigradski glasnik, glasnik, Carigradski 100

n Istanbul an

of Bulgarian irredentist action, action, irredentist Bulgarian of - based periodical operated by by operated periodical based

would erful

CEU eTD Collection 220 in position Serbian the foster and legitimize to and others, and Serbs between difference the emphasize and define to order in nationalism “banal” and direct through nationhood Serbian founded circles diplomatic Serbian purpose this for and nationhood, disseminating for means perfect a were periodicals together.” population communication, the bringing mass basically and of readers to means information asserted, be Lory to As started periodicals. introduced, was once this “periodicals accomplishing of means other the churches, and schools from Aside population. local the onto nationhood imposing for means suitable a seen were religion and education as Greeks, and Bulgarians with competition religious and educational in engage to managed Serbia time of period short rather a In laws. thi In Ottomans usedSerbia Bulgarian against actionsand Ottoman Macedonia. Greek in the hand other the on tolerated, be could which point a to up nationhood Serbian promote on while Hence, Macedonia. Ottoman playerin aggressive dangerousand most the as both by seenwas which Bulgaria against collaborate to decided Ottomans the and Serbia Thus, realized. be not it that weak so was region the in position Serbian the that aware alsowas it region,the to claims irredentist Serbian of aware was Empire Ottoman the Although Macedonia. northern include not did interests of sphere Empi Ottoman the was ally this paradoxically, Rather claims alone, innorthernally. Macedonia itneeded an Bulgarian resist not could it that region the in weak so was power and position its that realize e Serbia that defeat The war. into countries

Lory, “Schools for the destruction…”, 52. destruction…”, the for “Schools Lory, s context, the earliest Serbian actions were performed within Ottoman sovereignty and and sovereignty Ottoman within performed were actions Serbian earliest the context, s

the one hand the Ottomans allowed Serbia to build its position in the region and and region the in position its build to Serbia allowed Ottomans the hand one the

Carigradski glasnik. glasnik. Carigradski

s irredentist claims in the current constellation of power could could power of constellation current the in claims irredentist s

xperienced was so humiliating that it was forced to forced was it that humiliating so was xperienced 101

hs eidcl w periodical This

re and to a lesser extent Greece, extent lesser a to and re as created to promote promote to created as 220

n te words, other In

s the most most the s providing providing

whose whose CEU eTD Collection 221 of nationhood above, imposedfrom butnationhooditself. recent R of works the reason, this For population. local the among understood and appropriated was nationhood Serbian or image Ottoman this how about anything say not does nevertheless this nat defined diplomats and intelligentsia Serbian how or periodicals; the through image state the bolster to planned Ottomans the how on information provide they because important are above summarized are that questions the of some are These of the local population? ideas national the to corresponded periodical this of pages the on defined was that nationhood that sure be we can How them? a affected direct nationhood Serbian the promoted more, which nationalism even that and community” “imagined Serbian the of part such. of readers the that sure be we can how as Namely, appropriated was it that mean not does this them, to connected intelligentsia the glasnik Carigradski lives.” daily their to according but designs elite to according circum specific these in above from imposed being nationhood Serbian envisioned elites state how was This irredentist could it contribute claims, but tothe creation of inthe theSerbianregion. nation state. Serbian the not and Ottoman, the within always promoted was Macedonia Ottoman in nationhood Serbian Sultan. the of image the bolster and interests Ottoman promote to forced also was it regulations, press and because Nevertheless, region. the

Fox and Miller and Fox ogers Brubaker are important because Brubaker does not just challenge this notion notion this challenge just not does Brubaker because important are Brubaker ogers - Idriss, “Everyday nationhood”, 553. nationhood”, “Everyday Idriss, stances, but as Fox and Miller and Fox as but stances,

reproduced nationhood as it was envisioned within Serbian circles and circles Serbian within envisioned was it as nationhood reproduced ionhood and through which means they planned to impose it “below”; it impose to planned they means which through and ionhood

Carigradski gla Carigradski Hence, Hence,

raised in the last chapter. Although the first chapters first the Although chapter. last the in raised

Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski 102 - Idriss note, “people reproduce nationhood not nationhood reproduce “people note, Idriss Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski

snik

operated within Ottoman sovereignty Ottoman within operated

221 could not advocate Serbian Serbian advocate not could

envisioned themselves as themselves envisioned n te wrs ee if even words, other In d “banal” nd

CEU eTD Collection nationhoodtheyexhibited as practice. changeable of forms a were Popović and Grupčević that mean not does of pages the on expressed was which nationhood supra this Gradually at propa professional like employed were which intelligentsia local among even differently developed and conceptualized was nationhood was differe situation the ground the on However, Macedonia. Ottoman in nationhood Bulgarian well a promoted Thus, that failed, through coercion. state when strict and education, and and religion through fixed so did propagandists with Balkan first nationhood At nationhood. of perceptions local replace to tried they rather na impose to try not did states Balkan the context, this In elites. state Balkan the within created nationhood fixed and strict from differed nationhood a on perception local Macedonian indeed Rather coercion. by them on were imposed be to had nationhood Macedonians that imply not does scholarship recent a the that notes effectively Marinov reasoning, this Following population. rural or intelligentsia th among nationhood of understanding the to correspond to have not does elites state within created was that nationhood So groups. different among understood and promoted, created, un that means This practice. of form a rather a but entity substantial a not is nationhood that asserts he short, In - national and fluid Macedonian nationhood which has become a repetitive repertoire among among repertoire repetitive a become has which nationhood Macedonian fluid and national is ehbtd aeoin ainod wih aio dsrbs s mini as describes Marinov which nationhood, Macedonian exhibited first t n I sd h eape o to wes of owners two of examples the used I and nt age ht eba dpoai crls ln wt Crgasi lsi cetd and created glasnik Carigradski with along circles diplomatic Serbian that argue I - defined and fixed Serbian nationhood which differed from Greek or or Greek from differed which nationhood Serbian fixed and defined iversal nationhood does not exist, but only nationhood that was differently was that nationhood only but exist, not does nationhood iversal - national national

Macedonianess 103 gandists

eeoe it te state the into developed Carigradski glasnik. glasnik. Carigradski - national but rather, as Brubaker asserts, asserts, Brubaker as rather, but national . Kosta Grupčević and Temko Popović Popović Temko and Grupčević Kosta . tionhood on a on tionhood Carigradski glasnik glasnik Carigradski

- national population, but population, national However, this fluidi this However, - na - created Serbian Serbian created inl n that and tional - that show to Ottomanism. Ottomanism. ty ty e

CEU eTD Collection Macedonia intheir Greek population toconvince local nationhood. same the use elites these enough, entity Interestingly Great. the fixed Alexander and II Philip and of time the from stable existed a as nationhood Macedonian that prove to order in antiquization visi especially is This day. present the to continued rather it but 1913, in wars Balkan the with finish not did Macedonia Ottoman in nationhood stable and fixed the of imposition the regarding problems the Second, Ottoman Macedonia. local the than “national” more was population local Bulgarian or Serbian the that assume scholars somehow, Yet territories. national own their within nationhood fixed appropriating with problems same the had elites’ state Balkan stated, the Marinov As in Balkans. exception an not was Macedonia Ottoman that consideration into take not do they a and fluid of example perfect a as Macedonia the in that scholarshi interesting is it First, points. two make to like would I end, the At

p on Ottoman Macedonia almost all scholars without exception point to Ottoman to point exception without scholars all almost Macedonia Ottoman on p

tools that almost one hundred years ago Greece employed in Ottoman Ottoman in employed Greece ago years hundred one almost that tools

ble in FYR Macedonia whose elites embarked on the process of of process the on embarked elites whose Macedonia FYR in ble 104 -

ainl dniis wie n h ohr hand other the on while identities, national

population living in living population

revisionist CEU eTD Collection glasnik Carigradski BOA,İ.DH 1374 BOA, Başbakanlık Osmanlı Arşivi Letter 1285, AS, SN, Kosta Grupčević Novaković, toStojan 1902. of AS, Arhiv Srbije (AS) sources Primary Bibliography              

SN, 128, Letter 128, SN, Novaković1887. from toRistić,

DH.MKT 316 DH.MKT 43, 1895. “ “19 Август “ “ “Цариградске Сава Свети вести, “ “Свештеницим “ “ “ need). ”Засни посланица “Архипастирска “Слава “ Јермени у школе Српске 'ТурскиучитељБосански Проглас патријаршија Васељенска и Срби Васељенска Патријаршија Напомена Наши дописи, ВелесНаши дописи,

No. 10,1896. ае оов з срте ученике сиротне за фонодва вање ”

( - ” ” Slava

19 2, Letterto the Ministry ofGrupčević19 2, Kosta

(Armenians). (Proclamation) “ ” (Notification) ”

- (August 19) 38 5, Letter5, totheMinistryInternal of38 Affairs, Savić of Nikodim 1893. ). ”

No (To thepriests).

Турској

. 50, 1895. . 50,

” (BOA)

(Our Correspondences, Veles).(Our Correspondences, No. 35,1896. . . N ” . No

’” No. 3,1895. o. 31,1895. (Serbian inTurkey) Schools ” ”

(Bosnian 'Turkish(Bosnian No. teacher'). 21,1896. (Thepatriarchate). Ecumenical No.26,1895. . 49,1895. (

Archbishop No. 7,1897. ”

( News ” 105

(

Serbs

from ’ s

” epistle

and (

salsig fns o suet in students for funds a Establishing Istanbul

the ). No

Ecumenical

No. 22,1897. , . . 9,1896.

Saint No. 28,1896. of Internal Affairs, 1898. of

Sava

Patriarchate ).

No. 2,1895.

), . No .

. CEU eTD Collection

                     

“ “19. Август“ “ No “ “19. август године 1903. 1903. “ “ “7. Децембра “Леп пример “ “Реч “Пред пратом школским “ “ “ “ “ or Bulgarians? “ “ “19 Август 31, “ “ Српска голгота Српска Настрајсрпске манастире на Наши дописи Маке ли Јесу Неправдауспрам Срба турској устава после нардоност Српска учитељимаОжењеним Хилендар”Наши дописи, ( Селамлик слављаусветосавског очи Мисли јавни и Двор Напомена Утувимо Искрена рећ Велики догађаји у догађајиВелики Царевини . 2,1904. 1908. увреме своје

” ”

” ” (Let’s No. remember). 38,1898.

( ( (Announcement) ” (August 19). (August 19). ” Friday Prayer August ” )

донски Словени Срби или Бугари? или Срби Словени донски

(Niceexample). No. 6,1899. . ” (December 7).No. 50,1899. (Honest word). No.26,1897. послови у Србији у послови

No (Our Correspondence) “

(Serbian Golgotha).(Serbian No. 13,1909. ” . 52,1908.

(The word owntime) inits (The

19). 19). ” ” ”

(

(August 1903). 19, ) No. 34,1905. To (In front(In ofschool doors). o. 34,1908. . N Our .

married o. 29, ” No.1, 1901. ”

(Great theEmpire). in events N (Attack on Serbian monasteries)(Attack onSerbian

Correspondence ” ” ”

(Injustice towards Serbs Turkey)(Injustice towards in

” ( ( 1905. 106 The court and public affairs in Serbia in affairs public and court The

eba ntoho atr h constitution the after nationhood Serbian (

. teachers The

. 52,1908. thoughts

No. 34,1903. No. ). . N No. 1,1908. ). o. 2,1898. No

”

around

( No. 33,1897. . 34,1906. Are Slavic Macedonians Serbs Macedonians Slavic Are

Sain

o t Sava’ t . . 14,1909.

N o. 7,1909.

. s N

celebration o. 50,1908.

) . No. 24, No. .

) . No. No. . ).

CEU eTD Collection Albany:of New University State York Palmira. Brummett, Brubaker, Rogers 2004. Rogers. Brubaker, No. 3,2006, 1876 Press, the and Two the Palace: the and Press “The Ebru. Boyar, Press, 2012. Olga. Borovaya, Syncretism.” T. Peter Alter, literatureSecondary Vol. 33,2012,pp. (1894). Simić Svetislav (Letters eto G.Ristić Mihailo Constantinople from “ Biljana. Vučetić, Radenković Rakić toMilan (1907 (1907 Ракићу Милану Biljana. Vučetić, accessed May 17 Temko Popov Bitola and Kosovo) Salonika, вилајету“of Vilayets the in Action Косовском Reform the Regarding Serbia of и Position the on Opinion Битољском Солунском, у акцији “ Aleksandar. Ristović, грађа године“ “ Miloš. Jagodić,   

, Vol. 31, 2010, pp. 259 , Vol.31,2010,pp. published “Царигр “ complete equality!) прав “Хоћемо

П (Report of Branislav Nušić on journey from Pristina to Skadar in 1894) in Skadar to Pristina journey from on Nušić Branislav of (Report ромена на престољ

pp. 417 Serbian Studies - letter дк ганк рсае излазити престаје гласник адски th ). Извештај Бранислава Нушића о путованју из Приштине у Скадар 1894. 1894. Скадар у Приштине из путованју о Нушића Бранислава Извештај “Nineteenth . Nationalism Reframed. Nationalism

oen aio utr. Culture. Ladino Modern , 2014. Писма

No 337 Ethnicity without Groups without Ethnicity “Извештаји обавештајца диполмати. Писма Богдана Раденковића Раденковића Богдана Писма диполмати. обавештајца “Извештаји

- Мешовита грађа Мешовита , - Image and Imperialism in the Ottoman Revolutionary Press, 1908 Press, Revolutionary Ottoman the in Imperialism and Image 1908.” 1908.” 432. http://documents . 42,1909. - у - 348.

Реферат Јована Јована Реферат 1912)”

лбду птуу једнакост! потпуну и слободну из Цариграда Михаило Г. Ристић Ристић Г. Михаило Цариграда из . No. 18, 1909. No.

, Vol.9,1995,pp.88 Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies African and Oriental of School the of Bulletin - - 288 etr Srin oua Re Popular Serbian Century у

” Rpr fa Itliee o ilmt Lteso Bogdan of Letters Diplomat. a to Intelligener an of (Report

(Alteration No. onthethrone). 16,1909. -

1912) - , Vol.31,

Press, 2000. mk.blogspot.hu/2011/01/temko

Мешовита грађа Мешовита . Cambridge:University Press, Cambridge 1996.

оаоиа онс Сбј пеа реформској према Србије односу о Јовановића . Cambr . 107 Bloomington

2010, pp.325 2010,

- - 103. Way Relationship between Abdülhamid II Abdülhamid between Relationship Way

idge ”

- ( Carigradski London: Harvard University Press, University Harvard London: , - Vol. 29,2008,pp.153 Indianapolis: Indiana University University Indiana Indianapolis: iin The ligion: ” -

– 386. (We want real freedom and and freedom real want (We

Светиславу Симићу (1894) Симићу Светиславу

Jvn oaoi' Expert Jovanović's (Jovan

popov glasnik

Millet

Мешовита грађа, - letter.html

stops System and and System

Мешовита - 169. , Vol. 69, Vol. ,

1911 . Last . being

“ .

CEU eTD Collection University Political ScienceJournal XXXVIII Faculty M Fatma Göçek, edited byVictor pp.173 University Roudometof. NewYork: Columbia 2000, Press, Identity.” Macedonian Modern A. Victor Friedman, East EuropeanQuarterly, C. Basil Gounaris, 2008, pp.536 Miller and E Jon Fox, Lastaccessed May 21,2014. 1904. Paul. Foote, LeksikografskiZavod, 1965. Jugoslavije Enciklopedija Modernization). and Freedom of Instrument Fakültesi Dergisi an as Empire Ottoman the in Press Ens Modernleşme ve “Hürriyet Yasemin. Doğaner, Deringil, Abdülhamid Fatmagül. Demirel, Serbs) “ Косметск Ljiljana. Čolić, Ankara: 2002 Siyasal Kitabevi, Hamza. Çakır, Метохије Cvetanovi Nationhood inFiji.” “The John. Connell, Clayer,London and Robert Pichler. Nationalisms”, of Time the at Balkans Ottoman the in Confessionalisation of Dimension “The Nathalie. Clayer, 102 Newspapers Salonica B ü k, Yvette rki, - 116. . Косово иМетохија

http://web.princeton.edu/sites/english/csbm/papers/censorship/censorship_russia.pdf Selim х Срба“ их ć, , Belgrade: zajednice Zvezdara, Književna 1992. ) Censorship Practice in Russia: Circulars of the Directorate of Censorship 1865 Censorship of Directorate the of Circulars Russia: in Practice Censorship Vladimir .

- . “The Ottoman Press at the Dawn of the Twentieth Century Through the the Through Century Twentieth the of Dawn the at Press Ottoman “The . Istanbul: Ba 563. Basın Osmanlıda . Well. üge. üge. ,

Vol. 29,No.1,2012,pp.109 Conflicting Loyalties in the Balkans the in Loyalties Conflicting

Цргаси лси' аинли повти путоводитељ просветни и национални гласник' 'Цариградски

‘Social Cleavages and National ‘Awakening’ in Ottoman Macedonia.” Macedonia.” Ottoman in ‘Awakening’ National and Cleavages ‘Social The Contemporary Pacific, I Adlai Dnmne Sansür Döneminde Abdülhamid II. 'airdk gank Ntoa ad dctoa lae o te Kosmet the of leader educational and National glasnik' ('Carigradski - . “Никодим Савић “Никодим . La Epoca La “ Protected Domains.Protected Te oen aeoin tnad agae n is eain to Relation its and Language Standard Macedonian Modern “The - What is the Meaning of the 1908 Young Turk Revolution?.” Revolution?.” Turk Young 1908 the of Meaning the is What ii Times Fiji dis Cnha “Ever Cynthia. Idriss, ğlam

1994, pp.409 ( . nylpda f Yugoslavia of Encyclopedia

Vol. 5,2010.

, 2007.

The Macedonian Question: Culture, Historiography, Politics, Politics, Historiography, Culture, Question: Macedonian The and - İktidar İlişkileri (Ottoman Press (Ottoman İlişkileri İktidar

- New York: I.B. Tauris, York: 2011,pp.89 New El Avenir.” European Judaism European Avenir.” El and the Good Citizen: Constructing Modernity and and Modernity Constructing Citizen: Good the and

- 427. “

London Nkdm Savić). (Nikodim 108

- dy nationhood.” yday 121. Vol. 19,No.1,2007,pp.85 Vol.

- New York: I.B.New 1998. Tauris, York:

üaı lrk sal’a Basın Osmanlı’da Olarak tümanı , 2008,pp.179 , edited by Hannes Grandits, Nathalie Nathalie Grandits, Hannes by edited ,

) Vl 6 Bord Jugoslavenski Beograd: 6. Vol. , (

esrhp uig h Pro of Period the during Censorship Девет приповедача Косова и Косова приповедача Девет - Government Relationship). Government Ethnicities , Vol. 43, No. 2, 2010, pp. pp. 2010, 2, No. 43, Vol. , - 214. - 10

9. - 109.

Vl 8 N. 4, No. 8, Vol. ,

201. Edebiyat Istanbul ”

( The The - .

CEU eTD Collection pp. 273 Balkans, CrossroadsBulgarian ofGreek, and Nati Serbian Marinov, Tchavdar. “ Македонска Енциклопедија Robert Pichler. 1912”, Lory,forBernard. “SchoolstheDestructionof Society: inBitola 1860 Propaganda School Identities, N. Lucian Leustean, Nationalism.” of Meaning the History ofIdeas and Narratives “Historical Lloyd Kramer, theTurkishnationalism press.” in Yılmaz and Aynur Köse, Institute 2001. ofSocial Sciences, Islamic Kömeçoğlu, in the Balkans.” Question thenationalOriginsof “’Imaginedthe andPaschalis Communities’ M. Kitromilides, Press, 1997. Kayal 1937. twenty the on (Memorial Jovanovi Историјски часопис 1885)“ “ Miloš. Jagodić, in Turkey, 1894 Турској, 1894 Jagodić, “ Miloš. Studies inSociety andHistory, 1600 c. India in Enumeration and Identity of Politics “The Sumit. Guha, the Balkans Grandits, ı,

Conflicting LoyaltiesConflicting intheBalkans - 333. Hasan. ( ofeoss n Turkey in Coffeehouses ć,

edited Daskalov,and by Roumen Tchavdar Marinov, ln o Srin oiy oad Od eba n Mcdna (1878 Macedonia and Serbia Old Towards Policy Serbian on Plans Hannes, Clayer, Nathalie, Pichler, Robert. Introduction to Introduction Robert. Pichler, Nathalie, Clayer, Hannes, Vol.10, No.4,2008,pp.421 . London.

Aleksa

Uğur -

1910“ 1910“ London - , Vol.58,no.3,1997,pp.525 rb ad on Trs Turks. Young and Arabs European History Quarterly,European 1910) Нуфуско проблем званичног питанје: признавањау српске нације Планови о Политици Србије према Старој Србији и Македонији (1878 Македонији и Србији Старој према Србије Политици о Планови . “пмнц даеептгдшјц ослобођења двадесетпетогодишнјице “Споменица . Historical and Sociological Approach to Public Space: The Case of of Case The Space: Public to Approach Sociological and Historical - “Orthodoxy and political myths in Balkan national identities.” identities.” national Balkan in myths political and “Orthodoxy New Famous Macedonia, ofAlexander:Famous the Land , Vol. 60,2011,pp.435 Vol. , (Nüf .

- Историјски часопис, New pp.46 I.B. York: 2011, Tauris,

- ü York: I.B.York: pp.1 Tauris, 2011, fifth anniversary of the liberation of the South Serbia). Skopje, Skopje, Serbia). South the of liberation the of anniversary fifth , s Question: Problemofofficialthe Serbian nation recognitionof

(Macedonian Encyclopedia) Mustafa. Vol. 45,No.1,2003,pp.148

Nationalities Papers, Nationalities B Dissertation. Ph.D. Unpublished , -

432. “Flagging Turkishness: the reproduction of banal banal of reproduction the Turkishness: “Flagging , edited by Clayer, Nathalie Hannesand Grandits,

Berkeley - 109 - 460. Vol. 19,1989,pp.149 Vol. 57,2008,pp.343 Vol. 545.

onalism”, onalism”,

- Los Angeles: University of California California of University Angeles: Los Vo - 13. . Skopje: MANU, 2009 MANU, Skopje: Entangled ofthe Histories pp.909 l. 40,No.6,2012,

- - 167. 63.

Vol. 1, Leiden: Brill,Vol. 1, 2013,

Macedonian Identity Macedonian at the - - 192. 54. Conflicting Loyalties in Loyalties Conflicting -

1990.” 1990.”

oğaziçi

ун Србије“ јужне ora o the of Journal Comparative Comparative

University: - National - 925. 1885 -

) ). -

CEU eTD Collection 1876 the “Chasing K. İpek Yosmaoğlu, Ottoman Macedonia, 1878 K. İpek Yosmaoğlu, Ibarski Mitrovica, Kosovska in Kolašin Maškov Viktor of Visitation the on Radenković Bogdan of године” 1901. Пазару Новом и Колашину Ибарском Митровици, Косовској “ Vesna. Zarković, Vol. 3,2010,pp. ( “ Valerijanovič. Jaroslav Višnjakov, 19th andbeginning 20th ofthe века 20. почетком “ Vladan. Virijević, Kingdom (1889 inBitola ofSerbia “ Slavenko. Terzić, Eastern Literatures, Joh Strauss, accessed: May 30, 2014. glasnik in Carigradski Novičić,Stojanović Dragana Leiden Selçuk. Somel, Srbija,1936. Južna Mitropan Mitropan, Petar. “ Mishkova. Budapest: Central EuropeanUniversityPress, 2009,pp.107 Nat of Politics People: the We, Supra of Paths The Macedonians: the “We, Tchavdar. Marinov, The Macedonian Movement and the Upheaval of May 29, 1903 in Serbia in 1903 29, May of Upheaval the and Movement Macedonian The - 1913. - Boston and NoviPazarin1901). , Petar ” n. Wo ed ht n h Otmn mie (19 Empire Ottoman the in What Read “Who ann. The Turkish Studies Association Journal, The TurkishStudies - Koln: Brill, 2001. Koln: Brill, Први . The Modernization of Public Education in the Ottoman Empire 1839 Empire Ottoman the in Education Public of Modernization The 6 Цариградски -

. 22. “ озлт рлеие рие бтлу (1889 битолју у Србије Кралјевине Конзулат Vol. 6,No.1,2003,pp.39 зетј одн Рдноиа брву итр Мшоа у Машкова Виктора боравку о Раденковића Богдана Извештај

('Carigradski glasnik' on Novi Pazar and surroundings at the end of the the of end the at surroundings and Pazar Novi on glasnik' ('Carigradski Цргаси лнк о оо Пзр и клц кае 1. и 19. крајем околици и Пазару Новом о глсник' 'Цариградски ).

lo Te: eiin Voec, n te oiis f ainod in Nationhood of Politics the and Violence, Religion, Ties: Blood http://www.riznicasrpska.net/muzika/index.php?topic=629.0 неетац н југу на интелектуалци

- 1908. . Napisi o . Napisi century)

гласник oa Pclaiy n otesen Europe, Southeastern in Peculiarity ional

Ithaca: CornellUniversity 2013. Press,

Мешовита грађ - 1897)) Printed Word: Press Censorship in the Ottoman Empire, Empire, Ottoman the in Censorship Press Word: Printed Македонски покрет и преврат у Србији 29. маја 1903 маја 29. уСрбији преврат и покрет Македонски

muzici u Carigradskom glasnikumuzici uCarigradskom .

“(Carigradski glasnik), Новопазарски зборник, .

Историјски часописИсторијски 110 - 76.

Frt nelcul t te ot) Skopje: South). the ta Intellectuals (First

, Vol. 33,2012,365

Vol. 27,No.1 Јужни ,

- Vol. 57,2008,pp.327 Vol. 33,2010,pp.111 th Nationalism (1878 Nationalism - 20 - 2, 2003, -

- th - преглед 1897)“ 138. ( 385.

Articles aboutMusic centuries)?”

)

. edited by Diana Diana by edited

pp. 15

Tokovi istorije, Tokovi , ( oslt of Consulate Vol. 5,1928.

(The Report Report (The - . Last. 49. - 1912).” 1912).” Middle - 1908, 1908,

- - 342. 23.

”