Macedonian State-National Concepts and Programmes up to the End of the First World War

Macedonian State-National Concepts and Programmes up to the End of the First World War The programmes and concepts for the establishment of a nation are always and basically the work of the intelligentsia of a people, even though their accomplish- ment is the result of the broad masses of the people. Owing to the structure of Macedonian society in the last quarter of the 19th century, the Macedonian intelligentsia was not great in number. The bulk of this class consisted of teachers and priests, which were the only social groups allowed to develop freely under the Shariah law of Turkey, but always under the wing of existing and already estab- lished nationalistic propaganda machines in Macedonia. There were also some rare representatives of the intelligentsia among the classes of tradesmen and craftsmen (mainly in the towns) as well as among some free professions, such as physicians or bankers. All other intellectuals, immediately after their schooling abroad, were forced to emigrate, chiefly to the neighbouring free countries of the Balkans, and most of them had to serve the national and political aspirations of those societies. In this way, two types of Macedonian intelligentsia gradually developed: (1) the intelligentsia that was active within the land, which felt the pulse of the people and thought about and worked on changing the oppressive circumstances, and (2) the intelligentsia that lived in the free Balkan and other European or non-European countries, usually living in decent economic conditions, but cut off from their homeland and most frequently serving foreign interests. While the people from the first group were (for the most part) directly dependent on the church-educational institutions of neighbouring propaganda and limited by the constraints of the social and political system of the Sultan’s Empire, without any significant economic base which would allow them a stronger national orientation and without any opportunities for free and public articulation of national ideas and aspirations, the second group was largely heterogeneous in composition, and yet, in spite of their fairly good financial situation, they were nationally divided and most often dependent on the political and national concepts that the host countries promulgated with regard to Macedonia. Hence it was the intelligentsia within the land that became the ideological force drawing the masses to the revolutionary movement for the liberation of Macedonia from Ottoman domination and from the terror of propaganda, actively and fully participating within the ranks of the 235 Macedonian Revolutionary Organization, and building the vision of the future of this people and their homeland upon concepts and programmes of their own. The intelligentsia among the Macedonians abroad can also be divided into two basic types: those who were brought up in neighbouring countries, which aspired to the legacy remaining after the disintegration of Turkey in the Balkans, and those who lived and worked in other European and non-European countries, where they had better opportunities and greater freedom to develop their ideas and actions concerning Macedonian national liberation. Owing to all these circumstances, it is difficult to speak of the Macedonian intelligentsia as a homogeneous class in Macedonian society, and even less as a united national-political section of the people with a joint ideological and national liberation platform. The stratification in the united body of the Macedonian people could especially be felt following the Russo-Turkish War of 1877-1878 and the Congress of Berlin, and following the unsuccessful Kresna Uprising and the quenching of the hopes aroused in the liberation mission of the Russian army. Religious division of the people also encouraged ethnic confrontation, strongly instigated by the propaganda machines and tolerated by the Turks. Hence of particular significance were the manifestations of Macedonian consciousness expressed through the activity of various societies, committees and circles in Macedonia in the 1880s and 1890s, and especially among the émigrés, where a large number of Macedonian associa- tions were founded, trying to help and be of service to their homeland and their people. 1. Macedonian national thought emerged in the 1840s, and in the 1870s the main points of the national programme of the Macedonians were already formulated. Even though it tried to base its concept on the ancient Macedonian state-constitu- tional tradition and culture, the Macedonian movement could not but rely on Slavic history and envisaged its prospects as part of the Slavic world. Hence the strong anti-Hellenic disposition in Macedonia and the interest in the Slavophile tenden- cies launched by Russia. Slavic thought in Macedonia had a long tradition and was connected with the Slavonic and Orthodox Middle Ages, with the Archbishopric of Ohrid and in particular with Mount Athos, as well as with the permanent strengthening of the power and influence of Orthodox and Slavic Russia, which directed its interests towards the Bosphorus and the Balkans. This orientation was further intensified after the liberation of Serbia, Greece, Romania and Bulgaria (with the invariable 236 active involvement of Russia), and was substantially aided by the development of Slavonic studies as a scholarly discipline and Pan-Slavism and Slavophilism as a policy. Rhigas’s former (basically greater-Greek) exaltation was replaced in Macedo- nia by an anti-Hellenic tendency which invigorated the Slavic feeling to the utmost extent. At the same time various combinations were made in the joint struggle against the Ottoman Empire, but the hopes in Serbia and Russia and the signals coming from there were also taken into consideration. The Serbo-Croatian agreement in Vienna (1850) as regards the common literary language led to the emergence of similar ideas among the Slavs who were still under Turkish domination. This was the reason for the rise of the ideology proposing a common literary language for the Macedonians and Bulgarians, which would also involve a common future, in line with the concept which later developed of the Austro-Hungarian dual monarchy. Partenija Zografski became the ideologist of this movement which attempted to be based on scholarly foundations with his articles published in the Constantinopolitan and Moscow press. The Miladinov brothers, Kuzman Šapkarev, Dimitar Makedonski and Venijamin MaÌukovski took significant practical steps in this direction. This gave rise to a movement which was to have some disastrous consequences for the further development of the liberation struggle. The more developed cultural and national centres of Bulgarian expatriates in Russia, Romania and, above all, in Constantinople, using their economic power and means of propaganda (periodicals and other publications, church-school organizations, etc.), showed a considerably greater and more effective activity and announced their serious aspirations to take the lead in the common struggle for affirmation. This met with visible resistance, mainly in the form of what appeared as religious movements in Macedonia (1858-1875). This was a time when the Macedonian national programme was built, most accurately understood and best expounded by the most prominent Bulgarian revivalist, Petko Slavejkov, in his articles (1871) and particularly in his letters to the Exarch from Salonika (1874). The Uniate movement and Protestantism were only the means for the attainment of higher goals. Hence it is not surprising that this was a period which saw the publication in Belgrade of ÏorÒi Pulevski’s second dictionary, where he so strongly insisted on the Slavic orientation and national individuality of the Mace- donians (1875). The Razlovci Uprising (1876), the Conference of Constantinople (1877), the Russo-Turkish War (1877-1878) and the Congress of Berlin (1878) also introduced new elements into the Macedonian national liberation ideology. It was not by chance that the advance guards of the Russian army infiltrating into Bulgaria consisted of Macedonian voluntary detachments and commanders who, deceived by Russian policy and strategy, believed in the liberation mission of 237 Russia, and came to Macedonia as far as the Pijanec region. But the Adrianople truce and the preliminary San Stefano peace treaty halted the armed offensive of the Macedonian military formations because the liberation of the whole of Mace- donia was envisaged. And when in Berlin Macedonia was once again returned to Turkey, this resulted in the strongest and most important Macedonian insurrection in the 19th century, incorporating the concept of liberation from Ottoman domination, establishment of a Macedonian state, and also unification with its neigh- bours. Emulating the Austro-Hungarian Act of 1876 and relying on the decisions of the Conference of Constantinople in early 1877, the Macedonians demanded “a Macedonian kingdom”, based on the concept of a dual monarchy with Bulgaria. When this attempt, too, failed (due to the strong reactions in both Bulgaria and Serbia), the Macedonians founded the significant Macedonian League with an impressive armed force and worked out the first Constitution for the State Organization of Macedonia (1880). With coordinated efforts a National Assem- bly of Macedonia was convened in southern Macedonia, headed by commanders from the Kresna Uprising, and the first Provisional Government of Macedonia was formed, whose acts were sent and made known to European diplomacy and the wider public.

Load more